The National Wildlife Crime Unit (NWCU) is recruiting for a senior police officer to Chair the Raptor Persecution Priority Delivery Group (RPPDG).
This is a poisoned chalice if ever there was one.
There are Priority Delivery Groups for the various National Wildlife Crime Priorities (e.g. raptor persecution, badger persecution, bat persecution, CITES, Freshwater pearl mussels, cyber-enabled wildlife crime and poaching) and the purpose of these delivery groups is ‘to progress the priority in relation to prevention, intelligence and enforcement’ (see here).
Some of these delivery groups are being quite effective – and that’s probably because all the members of the group share the same objective. For example, the badger persecution delivery group probably doesn’t have badger baiters sitting around the table ‘contributing’ to discussions about enforcement plans. And I’ll bet the CITES group doesn’t have international ivory traffickers in its membership, nor hare coursers in the poaching group.
But the raptor persecution group? Well, along with the likes of the RSPB and the Northern England Raptor Forum, the membership of this group also includes organisations like the Moorland Association, Countryside Alliance, BASC and the National Gamekeepers, some of whose members have been/are still under police investigation for alleged raptor persecution crimes. There are clear conflicts of interest and they don’t all share the same objective, no matter how hard some of the groups might pretend.
The RPPDG is, in my opinion, a partnership sham, designed to look as though efforts are being made to effectively tackle illegal raptor persecution in England and Wales. It’s been in existence since 2011 and the ‘delivery’ results speak for themselves – so far it has achieved absolutely sod all in terms of contributing towards the conservation of raptors in the UK and instead has frustrated the efforts of those organisations who are genuinely trying to stamp out persecution (e.g. see here).
Whoever takes on this role needs to be up for change. And that’s presumably why the NWCU is seeking a high-ranking officer for the position (Chief Inspector or Superintendent level). These groups need to be held to account and when they don’t deliver, or when they deliberately obstruct progress, they should be booted out.
Good luck to whoever gets the post.
Raptor Persecution UK 
If ever there was a poisoned chalice
They had better have a squeaky clean background so they cannot be kicked out if they start trying to actually make it work.
Given the hierarchial nature of our Institutions and the observations i have made over the years it is only the odd employee who has who might buck the interests of the current Establishment in opposition to the Board of virtually anonymous individuals who appoints them. Lets be frank here .. the current Conservative Government and it’s precedents have been recasting civil servants in their own ideological image and are unlikely to appoint anyone who goes against the interests of the shooting industry. THIS is where the real power lies … in appointing the “right people” for the “right job.”
Most informed people accept this but if they are not onboard but value their jobs then “mums the word.” They, the police, had their fingers burnt over their last appointment in an important raptor position and will ensure that the same issues will not occur again.
So, I’m not at all hopeful in this area but the fight goes on. The solution, in my estimation, is recuiting supporters in areas that have previously been neglected as when the less privileged wish change to happen under a right wing Government then numbers are the key.
A poisoned chalice indeed, the last incumbent tried to change things for the better. Any new person needs to do even better for me the first job would be to get rid of CA, MA and NGO, BASC might be able to justify being there this lot certainly cannot. Otherwise we need a new format involving NWCU/ Senior police representing all forces, NERF, protected landscapes, RSPB investigations and the wildlife Trusts.
I find that that recruitment “advert” somewhat cringe worthy. The writer’s composition skills are inadequate which is unprofessional.
Some of the document reads like the amusing “management speak” that David Brent used (and that many of us had to suffer at meetings chaired by people who did not have a grasp of the subject).
Ah Dougie!..liked your comment but Im afraid that ship sailed a long time ago…still, there may perhaps be room for a PhD to look into “the perceived inverse relationship between levels of opaque management speak and knowledge of the relevant issue”. Its certainly been my experience in conservation that the more frightened of conflict/incompetent any organisation is then the more garrulous and paper producing it becomes. The only hope for this post is that they appoint a completely naive senior officer [naive of conservation/landownership/land use], who then discovers what corruption and covering up of criminality has been taking place and gets so angered by it that he causes a public fuss. ..but I wont be holding my breath…