Public anger continues to grow over SNH’s recent decision to grant a raven cull licence to a bunch of grouse moor owners and gamekeepers (masquerading under the name Strathbraan Community Collaboration for Waders) ‘just to see what happens’.
The petition against the raven cull licence has now reached 134,000 signatures (see here).
So far, SNH has swerved some fundamental questions about this licence and the process taken to approve it (e.g. see here, here). It won’t be able to avoid answering the following Parliamentary questions, lodged on 5 May 2018 by Claudia Beamish MSP (South Scotland, Labour):
S5W-16445
To ask the Scottish Government how Scottish Natural Heritage will ensure that the number of ravens killed by the Strathbraan Community Collaboration for Waders does not exceed the figure set out in its lethal control licence.
S5W-16446
To ask the Scottish Government how many lethal control of raven licences have been issued by Scottish Natural Heritage in each year since 2016, broken down by the (a) reason for issue and (b) number of ravens covered by each licence.
S5W-16447
To ask the Scottish Government what non-lethal alternatives were considered prior to Scottish Natural Heritage granting the lethal control of ravens licence to the Strathbraan Community Collaboration for Waders.
S5W-16448
To ask the Scottish Government which stakeholders were consulted prior to Scottish Natural Heritage granting the lethal control of ravens licence to the Strathbraan Community Collaboration for Waders.
S5W-16449
To ask the Scottish Government when the review of the lethal control of ravens licence that was granted to the Strathbraan Community Collaboration for Waders will be completed; what aspects of the licence will be reviewed and whether the review will consider repealing the licence.
S5W-16450
To ask the Scottish Government what lethal methods Scottish Natural Heritage has allowed the Strathbraan Community Collaboration for Waders to use under its control of ravens licence.
The expected answer date for these questions is 21 May 2018.
Well done, Claudia, and thank you.
UPDATE 23 May 2018: Raven cull update: Scientific Advisory Committee not being asked to repeal licence (here)
UPDATE 23 May 2018: Raven cull: Parliamentary questions and answers (here)
Raptor Persecution UK 
It is an impressive and well informed list of question. Very good.
What will be next Badgers and Pine martins?
Well done Claudia … good for you. The SNP Government seems to be sitting on their hands caught between the bureaucratic and financial hegemony of the few and the welfare and interests of the many, both human and otherwise. Come on SNP, simply do the next right thing by stopping the cull and you’ll create a historical legacy for the whole country.
”The expected answer date for these questions is 21 May 2018.”…….by which time there may well be few Ravens left in the area. When in doubt, just stall and avoid answering any questions and jobs a good un !
Disgusting.
I’ve just emailed Claudia Beamish congratulations, which might help to balance the opprobrium she will be receiving from Strathbraan.
Last evening, I also emailed Nick Halfhide of SNH (nick.halfhide@snh.gov.uk) to balance the congratulations he will be receiving from Strathbraan.
And to balance the letters Mike Cantlay will have been receiving, I have emailed Roseanna:
Roseanna Cunningham MSP Cabinet Secretary for the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform
Regarding the issue of a licence to the Strathbraan Community Collaboration for Waders, to shoot ravens.
Dear Roseanna Cunningham,
I and many others wrote to Mike Cantlay, regarding the issuing of a Licence to cull ravens in Perthshire. We have all received unsatisfactory replies.
May I appeal to you to call in the Licence?
Firstly, can I say that I am not opposed to any culls. I am however reluctant to concede to any. I have read the RSPB’s policy several times and continue to pay my subscriptions.
The Perthshire Licence is presented as a concern for wader populations. However, if that were the purpose, then the Land Managers involved might have undertaken re-wetting land, by blocking drainage ditches and by other methods, which over two or three decades have been well tried and shown to be successful by the Forestry Commission and others. They could also have decided to stop shooting waders, particularly snipe and woodcock, which are Amber and Red listed (https://www.bto.org). Both practices would lead to increases in wader populations. Although people agree that ravens take some eggs and chicks, most experts, outside the shooting industry, believe the predation is marginal. Predation of grouse are of more interest to some land owners but the effect on them is also marginal (Spatial and temporal associations between recovering populations of common raven Corvus corax and British upland wader populations. Amar A et al 2010). SNH acknowledges there is no secure science that would justify shooting hundreds of ravens to protect waders or grouse. Hopefully the Scientific Advisory Committee will advise on these matters.
The review, Understanding Predation makes repeated pleas for joint research, on ravens, waders and other matters. Quite right too. As a matter of policy and prestige SNH ought to have taken a leading role in promoting joint research. Instead, apparently for two years, SNH has been in conversations with an anonymous group of people: Strathbraan Community Collaboration for Waders. Who are they and why are they anonymous? (Probably about four to six land owners and their impressed staff.) SNH has licensed them to kill hundreds of ravens, while wrapping the extirpation up in a diversion about waders. As mentioned above, if these people cared anything for waders, they could just stop shooting them for kicks. Does any sensible person believe this killing spree is about anything other than grouse? SNH should return to the basic message of Understanding Predation – the plea for joint research.
Since, this killing was announced, it has been attacked from many quarters. However, the only defences that have been make have come from SNH and the spokesperson for the Scottish Game Keepers Association on a radio show. No one has stood up and said, “I am the Chair of Strathbraan Community Collaboration for Waders and would like to explain . . .” Nor have any of the established land managers or sporting organisations. No one else has tried to defend the indefensible. Only SNH is exposed.
On a matter of SNH Policy and Reputation, when Robbie Kernahan of SNH, announced the cull, he said, “We understand the concerns over wildlife crime in Strathbraan, but we are also clear that the granting of this licence is wholly unconnected to the issues concerned”. Mike Cantlay has also commented on concerns around Aberfeldy and Strathbraan. Neither could resist making the connection between Strathbraan and crime. So many eagles and other birds of prey continue to disappear. It is not easy to keep up with the numbers. However, a recent reliable figure is that six eagles have disappeared in “very suspicious” circumstances, with two others rated “suspicious”; eight birds in all (Wendy Mattingley of Tayside Raptor Study Group, BBC Radio Scotland, Out of Doors, the 28 April.). As you know, 31% of tagged birds have been lost, which implies that about 31% of all eagles are probably killed. The real number of deaths around Strathbraan could be 6 or 8 x 3 = 18 to 24 killings. That is a startling figure but the arithmetic is inescapably simple. The RSPB’s Illegal Killing of Birds of Prey in Scotland 1994–2014 and Prof Des Thomson’s Analyses of the fates of satellite tracked golden eagles in Scotland, show that the Scottish Highlands are amongst the most dangerous places on Earth for birds of prey, with the Strathbraan area being one of the three most dangerous places in Scotland. Given that both the killings and the cull are in the same area, it is no wonder that first Robbie Kernahan and then Mike Cantlay could not stop themselves talking about these crimes. What is astonishing is that they still could not resist getting into bed with the likely perpetrators.
None of us know the names of who is shooting these birds or who is managing the shooters. Nor do most of us know who is in the Strathbraan Community Collaboration for Waders. So many bird disappeared on so many estates, it is likely that many people are involved in these disappearances. Many people have killed birds and disposed of their carcases. On estates, more people will know something of who, when and how. Now this Licence has been issued, to extirpate hundreds of ravens, it will involve many people who are in the SCCW. It is naïve to claim they “wholly unconnected”. There will be an overlap motive, shooters, managers and owners. The admixture will not only be by chance. The motivation of the two groups are magnetic.
Two MSPs have told me that police officers have told them, that they expect to make arrests. SNH managers have aligned themselves with people who might be on criminal charges.
By joining and aligning themselves with SCCW in this extirpation, Senior managers at SNH have done themselves reputational damage.
They have done SNH reputational damage.
They have done Scotland reputational damage.
[Ed: Great letter, Bill, thanks. Just one point to clarify – The golden eagle satellite tag review wasn’t undertaken by Des Thompson of SNH. It was done by Drs Whitfield & Fielding, commissioned by SNH]
I find it amazing there are any ravens left to cull on grouse moors given the proven levels of illegal persecution
Well done to the Labour MSP for South Scotland, Claudia Beamish. Thank you Claudia.
A comprehensive list of questions, but I would make two comments. The first question should have come last, as being the introductory question might, just might, allow SNH to assume that the justification for the cull is a foregone conclusion. One other question that should have been added is: Does SNH intend to review the decision to grant the licence, in the light of not only the public outrage as expressed in petitions, but also widespread criticism from expert scientists and distinguished bodies with an interest in the conservation of waders?
Iain, Have you considered emailing Claudia Beamish, introducing yourself and putting your points to her. I emailed her and received a rely an hour and thirty five minutes later.
I have sent an email to my MSP and all my list MSPs asking them to support the motion. I have one reply so far from Jamie Halcro-Johnston (Con) as follows:
“The Scottish Conservatives are committed to the highest standards of animal welfare. Unfortunately, farmers and landowners know all too well the damage that ravens can inflict on their livestock. Ravens often target and kill new born lambs by the barbaric removal of their eyes and tongues. As you are aware, Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) grant licences to permit the killing or taking of wild birds to prevent serious damage to crops, livestock and wader species.
We understand that SNH have now decided to review their decision to grant licences for raven culls.
We look forward to analysing the evidence put forward on licences during the review, and should you wish, we can keep you updated on any developments.”
First, it shows how the undocumented stories about lambs has currency. It also shows that certainly this MSP thinks the cull is about protecting livestock – there is no mention of waders! I’ve replied, using much of Iain Gibson’s comments about his 7-year study and pointed out that SNH have only said they will review the effects of the cull, not the decision itself.