A couple of weeks ago we blogged about how Tim Weston, a Development Officer for the National Gamekeepers’ Organisation (NGO) had suggested that the suspicious disappearance of satellite-tagged hen harrier ‘Vulcan’ had been a “set-up” by the RSPB (see here).
At the same time, he argued that there was “zero wildlife crime” in the area where Vulcan vanished, even though the RSPB had already recorded 27 confirmed raptor persecution incidents since 2000, including 10 shot, 9 poisoned, 7 trapped and one nest destruction.
Tim’s not great with figures. Nor logic. In a letter he wrote for last week’s Countryman’s Weekly rag he suggests that as there are now fewer convictions for raptor persecution, it follows that there are fewer crimes. Good grief. Perhaps he missed the latest edition (2017) of the RSPB’s annual Birdcrime report, which says:
‘In 2017, there were 68 confirmed incidents of raptor persecution, but only four prosecutions relating to raptor crime. Of those, only one resulted in a conviction‘.
The main focus of Tim’s letter was on the NGO’s recent resignation (here, here and here) from the Raptor Persecution Priority Delivery Group (RPPDG), a group established to tackle illegal raptor persecution:
Check out that last paragraph:
“Although the NGO has left the [RPPDG] group it is still doing the very best of educating and encouraging peer pressure to halt any any raptor persecution and the results speak for themselves”.
Indeed, Tim, “the results do speak for themselves” because two days after your letter was published we were able to read those results in a top quality scientific paper that revealed that 72% of satellite tagged hen harriers were either confirmed as illegally killed or disappeared in circumstances in which illegal killing was the only plausible explanation, most of them on or close to grouse moors. The research results also revealed that the likelihood of an individual hen harrier dying, or disappearing, was ten times higher within areas predominantly covered by grouse moor, compared to areas with no grouse moors.
Sorry Tim, no cigar for you, although you do appear to have won a knife, what with your letter being deemed the ‘star letter’ of last week’s rag (which gives everyone a pretty good idea about the quality of the other letters published in Countryman’s Weekly).
And what of the National Gamekeepers’ Organisation’s formal response to the hen harrier satellite tag paper? Was it any more convincing than Tim’s grasp of the extent of raptor persecution?
Not really. This is from the NGO’s website:
Who ever wrote this response for the National Gamekeepers’ Org didn’t quite manage to include the information that was central to the research findings: that, er, the illegal killing of hen harriers is intrinsically linked to the distribution of grouse moors across northern England, which is, er, where gamekeepers work.
Raptor Persecution UK 
If the NGO has left the RPPDG of it’s own volition, one wonders which other stakeholders it has found to help it in its quest to wipe out raptor persecution.
It has not been a good couple of weeks for the organised criminal supporters, has it? At least we can be assured that the NGO is not one of them.
The first paragraph is an almost word for word cut and paste job from Giruth. I hope he gets paid double.
The countrymans weekly is known for xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx and is a tabloid exstradinaire for the blatent rubbish it prints. This being a classic example.
Weston and Bonner both remind me of Harry Enfield’s Conservative voting character ‘Tim, nice but dim’ but perhaps nice is stretching the point.
It is becoming increasingly difficult to think who these people expect to believe the tripe they write. More and more we are getting better evidence to show just what the level of persecution of our raptors must be. The recent Murgatroyd et al paper based on the satellite tagging data on Hen Harriers tagged by NE is devastating for the grouse cabal so they are saying nothing at all or trying to minimise the factual evidence it contains. The NGO constitution does indeed say they will expel all PROVEN wildlife criminals and this seems to be those who are convicted. The idea that raptor based crime must be declining because there are so few convictions is to most knowing conservationists laughable. One thought that defence had died sometime ago. The NGO as crime fighters is probably also a myth their membership probably includes most grouse keepers, so perhaps they are just wilfully blind like most of the rest of the shooting industry. We don’t buy it, one wonders how many of the country sports brigade still actually do. Put simply it is laughable tripe. Just because they all say it often doesn’t change that!
‘Although much is made of raptor persecution by the bird fanatics…..’ Rather ironic use of the term by someone from an organisation that is prepared to screw up a very large part of our uplands just so some other people can shoot lots and lots and lots of them for fun. So who are the real ‘bird fanatics’ then? Personally I would call the study and conservation of birds for their own sake an expression of intelligence and education….certainly compared to plonkers who reduce them to feathered clay pigeons.
The psychology behind all this is quite simple, put out that the RSPB have killed these raptors to smear the good name of gamekeepers and their lords and some might start to believe it. This character has obviously been picked for his lack of brain cells. next thing he will be standing as a candidate to become a Tory MP.
Tim has obviously got his head in the same sand pit as Amanda Anderson
The NGO represents the ugly end of a bad lot
There was 1 recorded incident in that area in 2017! Hardly a hotspot! #justsaying
That just about sums up the extent of your contribution to this issue. You should note that absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence; there have been 27 confirmed incidents since 2000, on an area described as having “zero wildlife crime” by the duplicitous Tim Weston. It’s clear you’re cut from the same cloth.
While many facts are available , it seems birds of prey are on the moors because they are the sites that are managed better for them , no talk of the lack of hawks and falcons on golf courses, race tracks etc or the other so called green areas managed by wildlife trusts. These have so many managed events , policed wildlife , controlled plants and trees to be seen by birds and mammals as no go areas
Grouse moors are managed to elevate the populations of red grouse to absurdly unnatural levels. With ground and avian predators eliminated the seasonally high levels of young grouse and, presumably voles, provide a banquet for predators moving in from outside. These are, of course, also eliminated. What you get is a “plughole” sucking in hen harriers, short eared owls etc. Golf courses and race tracks aren’t managed to produce a surplus of prey items, and nature reserves are managed to provide suitable habitat for wildlife at naturally occurring population levels. Birds of prey aren’t on the moors because they are the sites that are managed better for them. They are there for the same reason cormorants like to be around inland fisheries.
Utter tripe try taking the prejudice blinkers off!
Completely asinine logic. In one breath you’re saying that hen harriers ‘flourish’ on grouse moors, but the caveat being that they are then shot or poisoned, so the net result is ‘poor’ habitat. The rest of whatever point you were trying to make was just a poor attempt at deflection.
I still do not understand why gamekeepers aren’t registered. Anyone entering that role (Iet’s face it, it can’t call it a profession) should be. Gamekeepers have way too much power over life and death in the areas in which they operate and should all be registered. Then when can keep track of the buggers when they fail to be convicted of yet another wildlife crime.
I agree entirely I have Always thought that not only should shoots be licenced but that keepers should be too. Transgress and there should be real consequences.
Rather strange that just around the time that the Police have an amnesty for knives that they should be given out as prizes.