Further to the blog I wrote three days ago about a journalist digging around for a story on Chris Packham sniffing goshawks (yes, really – see here), well surprise, surprise, the Sunday Telegraph has published this pathetic piece today:
Here’s the text:
Presenter is referred to police after enthusiast claimed star disturbed rare goshawks on live TV
When Chris Packham appeared on The One Show with three goshawk chicks, the naturalist took great pride in showing how a bird of prey once near extinction in Britain is at last thriving.
But, that BBC recording is now at the centre of a police investigation over whether a wildlife crime – including the somewhat unusual practice of bird sniffing – was committed before the nation’s very eyes.
In the four minute and 30-second clip, Mr Packham, 62, took part in biometric tests on the woodland predators in the New Forest.
The Springwatch presenter sniffed one of three goshawks to detect their “characteristic scent or perfume” once they were weighed, sexed and ringed in line with a licence issued by the British Trust for Ornithology (BTO).
The clip, broadcast in June following a morning of filming, prompted a complaint to police that a filming licence may not have been obtained.
It was also suggested the time the birds were out of the nest and the “sniffing incident” amounted to a “disturbance” of a protected species.
Mr Packham has insisted no laws were broken, adding that those concerned about “goshawk welfare should worry less about a naturalist having an occasional sniff” and more about “widespread persecution” by some gamekeepers who have illegally killed goshawks.
The man who complained – a shooting enthusiast who does not want to be named for fear of reprisals – said: “I watched the programme and was struck by the way Mr Packham was handling and sniffing the birds. These birds are Schedule 1 protected and it is a crime to ‘intentionally or recklessly disturb at, on or near an active nest’.”
When the man contacted Natural England about a filming licence he was told: “I have checked our various systems and contacted potentially relevant groups within Natural England and have not been able to locate any relevant licences.”
Jemima Parry-Jones, a leading authority on birds of prey and conservation, said handling any wild bird must be done quickly, with the minimum of noise, numbers of people and interference to minimise the risk of harm.
“When the face of a human, effectively their only natural predator, appears over the edge of a nest it will cause them huge distress.
“There is absolutely no excuse for spending half a day filming like this.”
A Hampshire Police spokesman said: “We received a report on July 2 relating to an alleged offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and it is currently being reviewed by our Countrywatch team.”
Mr Packham told The Telegraph: “Raptor persecution is illegal yet every year a huge number of goshawks are killed by gamekeepers … not by scientists or people in the media. All three of these birds fledged the nest – lets hope they survive.”
A BBC spokesman said: “The One Show had permission to film and followed all protocols around filming wildlife.”
ENDS
It’s amusing that they used a quote from Jemima Parry Jones, instead of the response they received from a licensed goshawk ringer who they’d first approached for comment. You can imagine what he told them. It presumably didn’t fit the narrative so they went with Parry Jones – the woman who is running the hen harrier brood meddling trial in cahoots with the Moorland Association and who was quite happy to be filmed with the brood meddled hen harrier chicks for a Moorland Association propaganda video. Hypocritical? Yes, I think so.
I’d argue that there is “absolutely no excuse” for permanently removing entire broods of hen harrier chicks from their parents and holding them in captivity for several weeks and then releasing them back into the wild to be shot and killed by grouse moor gamekeepers, but that’s just my view. The irony of asking the brood-meddler-in-chief to comment on ‘disturbance’ to raptors won’t be lost on anyone.
The Sunday Telegraph article identifies the complainant as a ‘shooting enthusiast’, and that’s what’s key here. As I wrote a few days ago (here), if the shooting industry had the tiniest concern about goshawk welfare then they’d stop shooting, trapping and bludgeoning them to death.
Have they stopped? No, of course they haven’t. There’s even a forthcoming court case, in the next fortnight, of yet another gamekeeper accused of killing a goshawk.
It’s so obvious what the agenda is here – that this complaint was made by a member of the shooting industry as part of a long-running smear campaign against Chris Packham, in yet another feeble attempt to discredit him and/or have him sacked by the BBC. It’s no secret that the shooting industry despises Chris because he’s outspoken about their environmentally-damaging practices and also about their crimes, especially the continued illegal killing of birds of prey.
The shooting industry has taken a lot of hits recently and is floundering under the pressure, so its chosen course of action is to lash out. Chris Packham is an obvious target given his high profile and popularity amongst the British public, and his relentless campaigning for wildlife and the environment.
My interpretation is backed up by comments made on social media today by other ‘shooting enthusiasts’ in response to the article being published in the Sunday Telegraph:
This comment by Sarah Sullivan is particularly telling – I assume she’s referring to Chris winning his recent libel action but being left with mammoth costs as the two individuals he took action against immediately declared themselves bankrupt (although more on that in due course).
Even the main shooting organisations are brazenly encouraging their members to complain about Chris (and other high profile individuals, as well as the RSPB), as demonstrated in this excerpt from a BASC blog written by Dr Conor O’Gorman and published this week:
It’s nothing new – the shooting industry has been aggressively attacking Chris for years (e.g. see here, here). The irony of it is, is that it’s actually more damaging to their own reputation than it is to Chris’s but they’re mostly too stupid to see it. Although I did watch Patrick Galbraith, editor of Shooting Times, trying to make this point at the recent Game Fair – sadly without much success.
UPDATE 29th August 2023: ‘No case to answer’ – Hampshire Police close ridiculous ‘Chris Packham sniffed a goshawk’ investigation (here)
Raptor Persecution UK 
Certainly smells fishy! Seems gosshawk deaths are not really huge though, as Chris says. There was that one in a trapped cage in the North somewhere that they got on camera though Did anyone get done for that?
[Ed: Kurt, there are plenty of examples of goshawk persecution in the UK. See the list of incidents in this blog, and these are only the ones off the top of my head]:
Leave CP. alone we really need him
“hen harrier brood meddling trial”, move them or we’ll kill them attitude,how do they get away with meddling?,
Under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981, it is considered breaking the law if a person…
Intentionally kills, injures or takes wild birds
Intentionally takes, damages or destroy a wild bird’s nest while it’s being used or built
Intentionally takes or destroys a wild bird’s egg
Possesses, controls or transports live or dead wild birds, or parts of them, or their eggs
Sells wild birds or puts them on display for sale
Uses prohibited methods to kill or take wild birds
Intentionally or recklessly disturbs any wild bird listed on Schedule 1 while it is nest building, or at a nest containing eggs or young, or disturbs the dependent young of such a bird
Very poor journalism from the Telegraph, which I have noticed has become a mouthpiece for the Countryside Alliance. This is not news and looks like desperation from the shooting “community”.
So a un named shooter attacks Chris with a load of carp. 1 He hasn’t got the guts to say his name for fear of reprisals but he’ll name Chris. Coward is what I’d call him. 2 It looks like eating lead really does damage your brains.
I agree. It’s not dissimilar to: for example “Lawfare” in Latin America. The shooting lobby will evolve, and your responsibility is to evolve to meet the challenge. What I have learned over the years though, is that I trust your analysis.
Pathetic, these attempts to denegrate Chris P. What sort of troll is the supposed viewer.
Was the man a Spetator reading member of the Countryside Alliance by chance?
This is a non-story, and even a right-leaning paper such as the Telegraph should not give it space even if it thinks Mr Packham ill-deserving of ‘national treasure’ status.
I have seen TV film of osprey chicks being lowered in baskets from nests in Scotland and rung before being returned, which is no different from the One Show’s coverage, and all without complaint. So what is the big deal?
As for the ‘sniffing’… whatever floats your boat Mr Packham. Having been around hawks for over forty years I can attest to their strong odour. But then they are carnivores. You absolutely do not want to get in the way of their mutes which is one of the lesser reasons to stand on the right of a falconer carrying a hawk. What is equally interesting is that their castings are odour-free despite being regurgitated waste. However, i did have a friend who thought ferrets smelt wonderful and would sink her nose into my son’s ferret’s fur whenever at our house. As I say, whatever floats your boat.
However, this story proves some things. Firstly, both Facebook Twitter et al are a total menace and should be ignored. I refuse to pay them any attention, and I expect to have been the subject of keyboard warriors on a variety of subjects. Don’t use them, they add nothing to life. Secondly, August is the ‘silly season’ for the press when they become desperate for page-fillers. And finally, what sad git started this non-event?
My ferrets smelled of honey. I hope I wasn’t breaking the law sniffing them. I have become a great fan of Chris Packam since he has become a leading light in identifiying the real criminals of the countryside.
The Bitter Vegeance of the “Anti-Sniffing Liberation Front” rumoured to be Yorkshire based.
Sarah Sullivan.. You can try to cause Chris hardship by having to pay costs as much as you like…. there are plenty of us who will support him financially, as has already been shown.
The best thing about the Sunday Telegraph is that it’s printed on really good paper that burns well when you are trying to get your fire off to a good start. I was paid to read it for 20 years as it was my job to do so. You’d have to pay me a hell of a lot to read it now!
When they get this desperate you know you have got them on the ropes. Keep up the good work Chris, Ruth & Mark. From my experience, the vast majority of rural people are behind you.
This is beyond ludicrous. Piss-poor journalism.[Apologies if that word is not allowed].
I feel so much sympathy for Chris that he is constantly bashed over the head for his kindness and love for nature. All he does is good. I, for one, am with him
Sarah Sullivan underestimates the support Chris has. Xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx. Decent ppl who are in the majority know who to trust, and it isn’t her and her ilk.
As a ringer licensed to monitor Barn Owls in the nest, everything that happens when I am doing my work is my responsibility, not anyone whom I have invited to join me, unless they ignore any direct instruction I might give them.
If I choose to allow them to photograph / film what is happening then that is my decision. If they decide to sniff their cloaca and I allow them, that is my responsibility.
This whole thing is farcical. The One Show producers will have arranged the entire thing with the licensed ringer in charge. Chris will have been shipped in to do his 5 minute slot. I have done two slots on Countryfile, showing bird ringing with, in the first case, a Help4Heroes beneficiary, and in the second, a participant in one of the Wiltshire Care Farms for vulnerable children and adults. In both I met the presenter just for the period that they were involved in the filming. Everything else, before, during and after, was managed by the production team. The presenter was just the familiar face for the audience and was certainly not responsible for any of the activities, arranging any licensing, etc.
The pathetic noise generated by these shooting organisations just highlights their unwillingness to deal with the criminal activities associated with too many of their members.
Thank you Simon. That’s good of you to tell us what happens when a film crew attends a ringing. It seems to be on TV more and more these days so it would be good if maybe greater clarification was given to viewers, some of whom may have genuine concerns for the handled wildlife
I am amazed that there is no empathy for the young goshawks that were hauled out of their nest, with parents no doubt alarming overhead, they were then surrounded by film crew, ringed, weighed and measured, leave aside the ‘sniffing’. These birds would have been highly stressed, however the sympathy appears to be given to Mr. Packham? Ringing should only be carried out when there is new and genuine information to be had, and completed as quickly and efficiently as is possible; I wonder what new information there was to be gleaned from the ringing of these goshawks?
Good morning Alastair. I would guess that Chris Packham has more empathy for goshawks in his little finger than the entire bloodsports community put together. Let’s be honest here, the person that reported this is not doing it out of any great concern for goshawks. They don’t like Chris, they want him silenced and they will stoop to any level to achieve this. Unfortunately for them, Chris has got a level of support they can only dream about, and we can see through their shenanigans.
They were ringed so they could be monitored in case some xxxxx gamekeeper clubbed them to death in a crow trap!
Mr Proud has been shown the licence criteria on another thread; I repeat it here…
“BTO can only permit disturbance of specially protected species for purposes of ringing and nest recording. Limited photography at the nest during these activities is covered by such a permit as is photograpy for the purpose of nest recording.”
https://www.bto.org/our-science/projects/bird-ringing-scheme/taking-part/protected-birds/england-s1
He has also been challenged to provide supporting evidence for his claim that…
“this disturbance appears to have been prolonged solely for the entertainment of the masses”
Thus far, he has failed to do so.
It is quite obvious that ringing, welfare, conservation or broadcasting aren’t really the issue for him. The one and only issue behind his faux concern is the identity of the presenter involved.
Bird ringing is essential for monitoring populations: ringers used to be prohibited from ringing House Sparrows, because they were so common, so the decline in their numbers was largely missed until it became catastrophic.
Ringing allows monitoring of changes in local populations of particular species. Work I do helps inform my local Wildlife Trust and Forestry England on the impact of their management of their land on key species. In my area the red-listed Marsh Tit has been made a priority species in Forestry England’s current 10 year plan for my area and my ringing activities provided them with information that encouraged them to make that inclusion, and now it keeps them informed on how well it is going (very well, if you are interested).
It provides important information on a wide range of other areas, so can I suggest you read up on the subject before making ill-informed and unwarranted assertions. Your “concerns” are purely anthropomorphic and have little to do with reality. Nobody knows what those Goshawk chicks were thinking, nor can they. What I do know is that the Barn Owl chicks I ringed last week barely woke up whilst they were being processed and went straight back to sleep when returned to the box.
This was an attempt to engage the public with a view to putting pressure on the criminal demographic that is systematically attempting to destroy the population of goshawks in our country. As has been stated high scientific standards appear to have been maintained at all times but presentational requirements required a human touch to reach the public and attempt to create a healthy interest in the species. There is no one better out there to create such a bond than Mr. Packham.
If exposing young goshawk chicks to a few sniffs, and whatever stress might arise from them, while pursuing the greater good of a more numerous and secure population of goshawks few would complain …. indeed few would agree that there was even grounds for a complaint …. except those supporting the shooting industry as they know how effective Mr. packham is when bringing the large number of crimes against birds of prey in or around shooting venues. More attention tends to lead to more effective policing. I doubt even the young goshawks would object to being sniffed if they could understand the object of the exercise.
Those whose income depends on the patronage of thosem associated with shooting estates as a part of their income stream might take up the cudgel however, even more so if social networking was also an important facet of how they saw their duties.
is it as bad as grown men standing around a nest of Hen Harriers chicks on a grouse moor with the intention of stamping on the chicks heads??,
Alastair,what about ringing these Barn Owls?,
https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=1455424254792023&set=pcb.1455427521458363
Alastair Proud- Wildlife Artist
3 July 2021 ·
Barn owls have been breeding in our open Dutch barn beside the house since 2015. The year is only relevant because that is when I put a box up for feral pigeons to use, pigeons moved in within a day and moved out again within a week as barn owls had moved in.
We had seen barn owls on only a few occasions locally during the 30 plus years that we have been living here, such is the barn owls secretive nature. At present we have 5 young barn owls still being fed by their parents but I have continued to leave some food for them to supplement the adults supply of rodents and avoid the young starving; this has happened in the past. The last small area of rough pasture, molinia grass and willow nearby was grubbed up a few years back and thus a prime hunting area for owls was lost. My painting is of young owls, hopefully this year our young owls will survive and find suitable habitat to feed and breed.
The second photo is of 2 of the 5 young waiting to be put back in their nest box after ringing
My suggestion to Chris would be (having made an excellent response) to put it on the back burner. But – seeing as these idiots have basically handed him the ammunition, when the next (known) goshawk persecution incident inevitably arises (and they are fairly regular), be sure if at all possible to accept any invitation from RSPB, Police or other conservation group to attend the scene in person to do a high-profile appeal for information to the media. In addition to a welcome raising of the profile of the systematic persecution of Goshawks (imo done on exactly the same scale & same vigour as with harriers and peregrines – “the big three” in England) we will also see in stark contrast the inactivity and excuse-making bullshit of the shooting worlds apologists.
Alastair Proud, by chance, was it you who painted this picture of a Buzzard cowering in the nest?
https://artuk.org/discover/artworks/young-buzzard-181307
Thank you for finding this image of my young buzzard painting as it perfectly shows how a young bird in the nest reacts to an intrusion. This was painted over 40 years ago and my visit to the nest was brief and under licence.
“This was painted over 40 years ago and my visit to the nest was brief and under licence.”
But it was’t necessary and – in your own words – this “bird would have been highly stressed”.
You are a bit of a hypocrite, aren’t you?
Laughable! The sort of nonsense you’d expect from a Tory supporting, biased rag.
Has anyone had a look on the moorland groups on Facebook. Keepers accompanying ringers to schedule 1 birds nests, filming up close with mobile phones etc I don’t recall seeing them complain about that.
Pathetic attempt to beseech Mr Packham, who is indeed a national treasure. Having been on the receiving end of similar vitriol for daring to voice anti hunting views,I’m with you Chris.
Thank you Simon Tucker for a very balanced view of what goes on when ringing birds. Some ill informed people on this blog so obviously haven’t got a clue!! Why are you constantly trying to make trouble? I personally can see through your very thin “smokescreen’!! Especially when experienced ringers detail is so clear.
Yeah pretty despicable guff and the hypocrisy from this shower is unbelievable. A few years ago some eejit with a camera posted a video on one of the Scottish moorland forums of them sneaking up on a golden eagle that was busy snacking on what I think was carrion rather than a kill. Of course at a certain point the eagle was disturbed and flew off – the muppet with the camera had never stopped they’d just kept going to see how close they could get. Impossible to know how much having its feeding disrupted affected the bird, but it certainly didn’t do it any favours. Not one comment was made on the post about how ridiculously selfish and stupid this had been, not one. I reported the incident to the RSPB, but I’m not sure they got to see the post before it was taken down. I’ve also seen nightjar chicks being held to be photographed by what I imagine was a keeper on a Yorkshire grouse moor – absolutely no mention that this was part of a ringing operation, that licensed professionals were at hand. At best very irresponsible not to point that out, but what are the chances this was just thoughtless behaviour by estate staff?
Film crews will accompany all gamekeepers from now on. Where ever they go, whatever they do. Gamekeepers should welcome this in order to ascertain and confirm their squeaky clean status. With unedited footage because all publicity is good.