On 14 March 2025, Natural England announced the end of the ridiculous Hen Harrier brood meddling trial (see here).
For new blog readers, the hen harrier brood meddling trial was a conservation sham sanctioned by DEFRA as part of its ludicrous ‘Hen Harrier Action Plan‘ and carried out by Natural England between 2018 – 2024, in cahoots with the very industry responsible for the species’ catastrophic decline in England. In general terms, the plan involved the removal of hen harrier chicks from grouse moors, they were reared in captivity, then released back into the uplands just in time for the start of the grouse-shooting season where many were illegally killed. It was plainly bonkers. For more background see here and here.

The closure of the brood meddling sham was announced via a Natural England blog, attributed to John Holmes, NE Strategy Director.
In that blog, Holmes outlined the key results from the brood meddling trial which included a heavy reliance on two social science surveys of moorland managers:
These social science surveys/studies were intended to help Natural England ‘to evaluate any changes in social attitudes by those involved in upland management‘. In other words, did the availability of brood meddling stop the illegal killing of hen harriers on grouse moors? (The answer to that was a resounding NO – see here).
The first social science survey was undertaken as an interim study in 2021, in the middle of the brood meddling trial. This ‘study’ was hopelessly flawed in that it was limited to just 19 participants, and seven of those were NE employees and others were directly benefiting financially from their involvement in brood meddling. The findings of this ‘study’ were thus wholly unsuitable for assessing whether the attitudes of grouse moor owners had changed as a result of brood meddling – you can read my review of the ‘study’ here.
The second social science study, described by Holmes as a ‘wider survey’, was apparently conducted by National Centre for Social Research in 2024. Holmes referred to the findings of this study in his blog but Natural England didn’t publish the report to allow the public to draw its own conclusions.
Rather than rely upon Holmes’ interpretation of the study’s findings, I wanted to read it for myself so on 14 April 2025 I lodged an FoI request with Natural England, asking for a copy of the report:
‘Please provide a copy of the Natural England-commissioned report, undertaken by the National Centre for Social Research and completed in 2024 on grouse shooting industry attitudes to hen harrier brood management‘.
It was a simple, straightforward request that shouldn’t have posed any compliance issues for Natural England and I expected them to provide the report within the statutory time limit of 20 working days.
However, 20 working days later on 15 May 2025, Natural England wrote to me to tell me that a further 20 working days were needed “because of the complexity/voluminous nature of the request“.
Eh? There’s nothing ‘complex’ or ‘voluminous’ about asking for a copy of a report that had been written a year earlier!
Why will it take Natural England 40 working days to send it? Not only does this look like an abuse of process, but it also seems to me that Natural England has something to hide.
I did write back to Natural England and said, ‘You’re having a laugh – please send the report without further delay’.
So far, silence.
UPDATE 23 June 2025: Natural England still refusing to release social science report on Hen Harrier brood meddling (here)


