Author: RaptorPersecutionUK

Commentary on the conviction of gamekeeper Thomas Munday (bludgeoned Buzzard to death on Hovingham Estate, North Yorkshire)

On Monday this week, former gamekeeper Thomas Munday appeared at Scarborough Magistrates’ Court where he was convicted of killing a Buzzard in March 2024 on land owned by the Hovingham Estate in North Yorkshire and was fined £1,215 (see RSPB press release here).

The case drew wide media attention, not least because it centered on disturbing footage captured on an RSPB covert camera showing Munday brutally beating to death the Buzzard that had been captured inside a Crow cage trap. The violence was appalling, and according to a piece on ITV news, even Munday’s solicitor told the court that his client had done “an incredibly cruel thing, it was a disgusting aberration“.

Thomas Munday (on the left) leaving court with his solicitor (screengrab from ITV News footage)

I said I’d return to this case to provide some commentary. I’m interested in three different aspects of the case: the charge against Munday, the sentence he received, and the location of the crime.

THE CHARGE

Munday was charged with intentionally killing a protected wild bird, a Buzzard. That’s an obvious offence and was clearly evidenced by the RSPB’s video footage. Munday pleaded guilty at the first available opportunity.

But to my mind there were other charges that could have been brought against Munday. For example, using a cage trap to kill or take a protected wild bird, possession of an article (the stick) capable of being used to commit an offence, and perhaps even going equipped (the ATV) to commit an offence.

However, the main additional charge I would have expected to see, based on the video footage, was that of causing unnecessary suffering to the Buzzard (Section 4 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006).

It’s beyond doubt, to me, (and apparently to Munday’s solicitor – see above) that that Buzzard suffered unnecessarily due to the two bouts of inhumane and cruel beating caused by Munday.

The courts are expected to treat animal cruelty seriously, as evidenced by the guidelines provided by the Sentencing Council – see here.

If you follow the step-by-step process outlined by the Sentencing Council, Munday’s actions could be determined as being of either High Culpability or Medium Culpability, and the harm caused (death) falls under Category 1 (the most serious level of harm caused).

Sentencing guidelines for offences determined to be High Culpability Category 1 start at two years’ custody. For Medium Culpability Category 1 offences, the starting point is 26 weeks’ custody.

I wonder why the CPS chose not to bring any charges other than that of intentionally killing a protected wild bird (the Buzzard)? Or maybe the CPS did bring other charges and there was a plea bargain? Along the lines of, ‘My client will plead guilty if the other charges are dropped’? That’s a common and legitimate feature of many criminal prosecutions but if that did happen in this case, why did the CPS accept? Was it a case of getting a quick and easy conviction in the bag and let’s move on to the next case?

This is all conjecture, of course, and until there’s better (any!) transparency about charging decisions then we’ll never know.

THE SENTENCE

Munday was fined a total of £1,215 for killing the Buzzard. This amount was broken down as follows:

£807 – fine

£323 – surcharge

£85 – costs

Some people, and I’m one of them, will consider that this level of fine does not reflect the seriousness of the offence and is at the lower end scale available to the courts. As the RSPB stated in its press release after Munday’s conviction, ‘This penalty provides little deterrent to others who may consider committing similar crimes and fails to reflect the casual and callous acts of cruelty involved‘.

I’ve seen some argue that the other consequences Munday faced (i.e. losing his firearms and shotgun certificates, losing his job, losing his home), in addition to the fine, is sufficient penalty for him. I disagree. Losing a job and home is no different to someone being made redundant, through no fault of their own, and having to relocate to find work.

According to media reports, Munday has re-trained (now a tree surgeon, apparently, so need for firearms/shotgun certs), is employed and has moved away from the house he was renting. Paying off a £1,215 fine shouldn’t be too much of a burden to him.

In addition, this case utilised forensic expertise (including examination of the bloodied stick to identify Buzzard DNA, and swabs taken from the vehicle in to which the bludgeoned Buzzard had been thrown). This work was conducted by the Wildlife DNA Forensic Unit at SASA in Scotland, paid for by the Forensic Analysis Fund (to which organisations like Wild Justice, Northern England Raptor Forum, Tayside & Fife Raptor Study Group, Devon Birds, Rare Bird Alert and many individual donors, including this blog’s readers, have contributed – see here).

One of the conditions of using the Forensic Fund for raptor persecution cases is that if the case progresses to court and costs are recoverable, an application must be made to the court to recover those costs, and any amounts recovered must be reimbursed back into the Forensic Fund to be used for other cases.

In this case, an application was made to the court to recover the costs of the forensics work but the magistrates said that a reimbursement wasn’t possible because the forensics work ‘wasn’t necessary’ to the case.

To explain – Munday committed his offence in March 2024. The RSPB passed on the video evidence to North Yorkshire Police who executed a search warrant (date unknown) at an address and retrieved several items for forensic examination. However, Munday wasn’t interviewed at that time (for reasons best known to North Yorkshire Police).

Munday was only interviewed by North Yorkshire Police in December 2025, some 21 months after the crime was committed. Had he been interviewed in 2024, Munday’s solicitor told the court that his client would have held up his hands and pleaded guilty. Hence, in the magistrates’ opinion, the forensics work wouldn’t have been needed.

THE LOCATION OF THE CRIME

If you’ve read a lot of the media reports about this case, including the RSPB’s press release and North Yorkshire Police’s press release, you might have noticed that the name of the estate where this crime took place has not been reported. It’s invariably been described as ‘near Hovingham’ and ‘near Malton’ – even the CPS charge apparently described the location as being ‘near Ripon’, which is unusual as typically the exact location is included in the charge. The exception was an article on the BBC’s website, which stated, ‘Thomas Munday was filmed killing the buzzard on land which is part of the Hovingham Estate, in North Yorkshire, in March 2024‘.

The court was told that Munday was employed by a ‘management company’ (un-named) who leased the land on an estate for a Pheasant shooting syndicate. According to an observer in court, Munday’s solicitor ‘spent a long time’ telling the court that the estate had nothing to do with the Pheasant shoot, and that as soon as the estate found out about the Buzzard being killed, it terminated the lease. Apparently he went as far as to say he hoped the press would report this sensitively. That’s bizarre – it’s almost as though the solicitor was acting for the estate.

I was intrigued by this apparent reluctance to name the estate and did some digging.

Hovingham Estate (also known as Hovingham Hall) has been in the ownership of the Worsley family for over 450 years. Sir William Worsley (6th Baronet) apparently resides there with his family. He’s big into forestry and conservation, according to Wikipedia, being the former Chairman of the National Forest Company, the former Government’s National Tree Champion, and is the current Chair of the Forestry Commission.

The estate has won awards for its woodland management, including winning a silver award in the 2023 Bede Howell Award for Excellence in Silviculture (the year before the Buzzard was beaten to death in the woods). The judges commented:

“We were impressed by the co-ordination achieved between the several estate departments. For example, the woodlands present an attractive landscape of high amenity and biodiversity character. They also host an important pheasant shoot by paying especially close attention to the character of woodland edges. The result is a profitable woodland enterprise containing excellent stands of timber. this integrates effectively with sporting and other estate priorities“.

I can see why a man of this standing would want to distance the estate from the disgusting and barbaric crime committed by gamekeeper Thomas Munday, and the estate deserves full credit for immediately terminating the shooting lease. I wish more landowners would follow this example and act so quickly and decisively when dealing with sporting agents.

But that Bede Howell awards committee statement about Hovingham Estate made me pause for thought. “They also host an important pheasant shoot….” (emphasis is mine).

If you look on the Hovingham Hall website, it includes a statement about what goes on at the estate:

It says the estate includes ‘a shoot’, which suggests to me that the estate may be more involved in Pheasant shooting than simply renting the land to a tenant sporting agent.

However, when I looked around the rest of the website, I couldn’t see any further mention of ‘a shoot’, until I looked at the estate’s privacy policy (dated 2024).

This privacy policy lays out how the estate handles its responsibilities under the Data Protection Act and how personal information is used. There’s an interesting entry under the header ‘Shoot’, which suggests the estate is involved in the administration of the ‘shoot syndicate and Let Days’.

Hmm.

I decided to phone the estate and ask them about their involvement in Pheasant shooting and whether they still had a Pheasant shoot after terminating the shoot lease in 2024.

I spoke to a nice lady in the main office who gave me a prepared statement, as follows:

“Hovingham Estate is aware of an incident involving one of our tenant’s employees. We take a zero tolerance approach to issues of this kind and therefore we took immediate action to terminate the tenant’s lease. We must emphasise that none of our employees are involved in any way“.

That’s pretty clear, but didn’t answer my questions. I asked the questions again and the nice lady told me:

“I’m sorry, I’m not at liberty to comment“.

To be absolutely clear, there is no evidence to suggest that Hovingham Estate knew about the criminal activity of gamekeeper Thomas Munday, and when it did become aware, it acted responsibly and terminated the lease.

If this estate is still hosting Pheasant (or Partridge) shooting, whether leased to another tenant or managed by the estate, I hope that lessons have been learned and close attention is paid to what might be going on in those award-winning woodlands.

Kudos again to the RSPB’s Investigations Team for securing the evidence that led to this conviction.

RSPB asks for evidence of burning on peatlands across the UK

RSPB press release:

RSPB ASKS FOR EVIDENCE OF BURNING ON PEATLANDS

  • The RSPB is asking members of the public to report incidents of moorland burning on peatlands using their burning reporting app or through the RSPB’s website.  
  • The data collected will be passed on to the relevant authorities in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to help them to tackle illegal and unsustainable burning.   
  • Peatlands account for 12% of the UK’s land area and contain more carbon than the forests of the UK, France and Germany combined – an estimated 3.2 billion tonnes.  80% of our peatlands are in degraded condition and emitting, not sequestering carbon, as needed to help combat climate change due to historic, damaging land management including repeated burning.

UK uplands are home to some of our most at-risk wildlife including Hen Harriers, Ring Ouzel, Winchat and Large Heath butterfly and globally important upland habitats, such as blanket bogs, which have developed over millennia and store large amounts of carbon.

Illegal burning on Midhope Moor, Peak District National Park (Photo: RSPB)

Every year from October until April across the UK, upland vegetation is systematically burned in many places, and our peatlands are often damaged as a result. ‘Rotational burning’ is a practice used by shooting estates, deer managers and farmers to encourage the growth of young heather shoots and grass to provide food and grazing for red grouse, wild deer and livestock.

However, scientific evidence reviews show that regular burning has numerous harmful environmental impacts and has caused our peatlands to become a source of emissions.

Scorched earth – the charred ground and ash following a ‘management’ burn (Photo: RSPB)

Tom Aspinall for RSPB England said: “Defra extending the protection from burning to all peat over 30cms in 2025 has been a great step forward for nature, especially now it’s applied across all ‘Less Favoured Areas’ rather than just protected sites. This approach should better protect thousands of years’ worth of accumulated carbon.

“In support of keeping England on the right track, the RSPB burning app has been a great ‘citizen approach’ to assessing how well Land Managers are following these vital new rules – and it’s already been making a difference. We encourage as many people as possible to send in reports via the RSPB app, providing important evidence to pass forward to Defra, and helping to make sure action is taken to keep the English Uplands in better health.”

Duncan Orr-Ewing for RSPB Scotland said: “Welcome new legislation to licence all muirburn in Scotland will be introduced from autumn 2026 following a couple of delays. This legislation restricts burning on deep peatlands over 40cm, however, still makes provision for prescribed burning in some circumstances to reduce the risk of wildfires. Better information on the distribution and timing of burning activities is critical to make informed decisions around muirburn and to reduce wildfire risk”.

Arfon Williams for RSPB Cymru said:“The large number of uncontrolled fires across Wales in 2025 severely impacted important wildlife and habitats including our precious peatlands. Many of these fires were started deliberately.  To understand the extent of this threat to nature we urge the Welsh public to report upland fires via the RSPB app.  This information will be invaluable in supporting our calls to Welsh Government to do more to protect nature and especially peatlands.  This includes ensuring greater compliance with the Heather and Grass Burning Code for Wales.”

Claire Barnett, Area Manager for RSPB NI said: “Peatlands are a vital habitat in Northern Ireland but each year, we see the devastating impact of fires here. Fires that pose a risk to nature, wildlife and local communities. At RSPB NI we will continue to call for a legal ban on peatland burning and you can play a vital role in showing how widespread the issue is by downloading our app and reporting evidence of burning across our uplands.” 

To anonymously report a burn, members of the public can visit the RSPB Burning website or download the My Survey123 app (available on iOS and Android).

By downloading our app and reporting evidence of burning you can play a vital role in helping to show our governments how much burning continues across our uplands and providing them with the evidence they need to act against those who are not following regulations and may be damaging peatlands and also risking wildfires. Ending burning on peatlands will be a key step in ensuring we can turn round the fate of this globally important habitat in the UK. 

ENDS

Unlawful release of gamebirds & breaches of Avian Flu biosecurity regulations next to protected site in Suffolk

The conservation campaign group Wild Justice has published a blog detailing the unlawful release of gamebirds (Pheasants & Red-legged Partridges) next to a protected site in Suffolk, along with multiple breaches of mandatory biosecurity legislation which was brought in to prevent the spread of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI, also known as Bird flu).

The release of non-native gamebirds on or within 500m of a Special Protected Area (SPA) currently requires an individual licence from Natural England, due to the very high risk of spreading HPAI.

A licence application was submitted to Natural England in April 2025 to release 2,450 non-native gamebirds (950 Pheasants + 1500 Red-legged Partridges) at Ramsholt, Suffolk, within the 500m boundary of the Deben Estuary SPA.

Ramsholt church, next to the Deben Estuary (photo Wild Justice)

Natural England refused the licence on the grounds that “It was not possible to rule out adverse effects to the integrity of the Special Protection Area (SPA) from the proposed gamebirds releases within the SPA boundary and/or its 500m buffer zone”.

The same licence applicant submitted a further application in May 2025, but Natural England rejected this one, too.

Guess what happened next?

The shoot operator went ahead and released gamebirds within the 500m SPA buffer zone at Ramsholt! This is a criminal offence.

One of the unlawful Red-legged Partridge release pens situated in a thin strip of Maize in front of Ramsholt church (photo Wild Justice)

Not only that, whoever was in charge of the gamebird releases failed to comply with mandatory biosecurity measures (this is also a criminal offence), thus increasing the risk of spreading HPAI.

Biosecurity risk – unclean water containers by the RLP release pen (photo Wild Justice)
Biosecurity risk – spilled food must be cleared daily (photo Wild Justice)
Biosecurity risk – spilled food inside & outside a Pheasant release pen (photo Wild Justice)

Suffolk Police investigated the unlawful releases and issued a Community Resolution Order (CRO) to the shoot operator. Gosh, that’ll learn ‘im!

Suffolk County Council Trading Standards department investigated the unlawful non-compliance with biosecurity regulations and issued the shoot operator with ‘verbal guidance’.

Apparently, the shooting days still went ahead.

Good grief.

The explanations provided to Wild Justice by the Police and by Trading Standards of why more serious enforcement measures weren’t pursued in this case are well worth reading on the WJ blog. They’re laughable, particularly the explanation provided by Suffolk Constabulary, who gave credence to the shoot operator’s claim that he was new to the shoot and was “not linked” to the licence applicant. I find that to be implausible, for all the reasons given on the WJ blog.

As well as uncovering criminal activity, this Wild Justice investigation has highlighted huge gaps in the regulatory approach. There’s no statutory monitoring of gamebird releases and compliance with biosecurity regulations at protected sites and no formal mechanism for detecting potentially harmful activities. This particular case was only uncovered thanks to an observant member of the public who noticed the gamebirds running around the site and had the knowledge and sufficient curiosity to notify Wild Justice.

How many more examples might there be across the country? I’m aware of several, not yet reported in the public domain (but watch this space).

Over the next few months, Defra will need to decide whether it will issue General Licence 45 for this year’s shooting season. This is the General Licence that permits the release of gamebirds on or within 500m of an SPA. Last year, Defra withdrew GL45 due to the high risk of spreading HPAI. Given the high number of reported HPAI outbreaks since Oct 2025 (84 at the time of writing), I anticipate Defra will not issue GL45 this year.

If that happens, then it will fall to Natural England to make decisions about issuing individual licences to permit the release of gamebirds on/close to SPAs. Last year, Natural England took a sensible and precautionary approach and refused licences at many sites (see here), although as we’ve seen, some shoot operators might think the law doesn’t apply to them and the consequences are so minimal it’s probably worth them taking the risk.

Wild Justice relies entirely on donations to undertake its work. If you think what it does is important, please consider making a donation here. To sign up to Wild Justice’s free newsletter to be the first to hear about its latest campaigns and legal challenges, please click here.

Gamekeeper Thomas Munday convicted after brutally clubbing trapped Buzzard to death on a Pheasant shoot at Hovingham, North Yorkshire

Further to last week’s blog about a gamekeeper being due to appear in court charged with killing a Buzzard on a Pheasant shoot at Hovingham, North Yorkshire (here), the case was heard today at Scarborough Magistrates’ Court and Thomas Munday pleaded guilty.

Here is a press release from the RSPB:

GAMEKEEPER FILMED BRUTALLY KILLING PROTECTED BUZZARD

  • In March 2024, secret RSPB filming caught gamekeeper Thomas Munday brutally killing a protected Buzzard whilst it was caught in a cage trap on a pheasant shoot near Hovingham, North Yorkshire.
  • Today, at Scarborough Magistrates Court, Munday pleaded guilty to killing a Buzzard and was fined £1,215.
  • Although cage traps can be legally operated under government licences, they have a history of being repeatedly used in unlawful ways to catch and kill birds of prey on land managed for gamebird shooting. These incidents are generally related to attempts by the operator to remove any potential threat to gamebird stocks, reared for commercial shooting.
  • The RSPB is urging the UK Government to introduce a licensing scheme for all gamebird shooting to deter bird of prey persecution and to promote better practices.

On 30 March 2024, a covertly deployed RSPB camera caught a gamekeeper brutally beating a protected Buzzard to death inside a cage trap set in woodland near Hovingham, North Yorkshire.

Screengrab from the RSPB’s covert footage showing gamekeeper Thomas Munday clubbing the Buzzard to death, having already bludgeoned it inside the crow cage trap. The casual level of brutality and the suffering he caused is very disturbing.

The footage shows a Buzzard entering the crow cage trap. Four hours later, a masked and hooded individual arrives at the trap in an all-terrain vehicle. He enters the trap and is seen repeatedly striking the Buzzard with a stick. The injured and incapacitated Buzzard is then removed from the trap – clearly still alive – and beaten several more times with the same stick. The individual then picks up the bird by its wing and throws it into the vehicle before driving away from the site.

The RSPB shared the footage with North Yorkshire Police, who later identified the individual in the footage as Thomas Munday – employed as a gamekeeper.

Of all individuals convicted of bird of prey persecution-related offences between 2009 to 2023, 75% were connected to the gamebird shooting industry and 68% were gamekeepers.

A police-led search of the land, assisted by the National Wildlife Crime Unit (NWCU), resulted in a number of items being seized including the stick used to kill the Buzzard. Forensic testing by the Scottish Agricultural Science Agency (SASA) funded by the Partnership against Wildlife Crime (PAW) Forensic Analysis Fund found traces of Buzzard DNA on the stick. Munday was subsequently charged with the illegal killing of the Buzzard, an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. 

On 12 January 2026, at Scarborough Magistrates Court, Thomas Munday pleaded guilty to killing a Buzzard and was fined £1,215.

Crow cage traps can be legally used under Government General Licence, issued by Natural England, to control corvid species such as Carrion Crows or Magpies, on condition that licence conditions are adhered to. Under these conditions, if a bird of prey or any other non-target species is caught in the trap, on discovery the bird must be released at point of capture without undue delay.

Sadly, this method of targeted killing of birds of prey is a persistent problem in the UK particularly on land managed for gamebird shooting. In a period of ten-years (2015-2024), 30 confirmed incidents of birds of prey being caught and/or dying in unlawful crow cage traps were recorded in the UK. 97% of these incidents were associated with land managed for gamebird shooting. 34 birds of prey were involved in these crimes with Buzzards, Goshawks and Sparrowhawks the most common victims associated with these crimes.

Howard Jones, RSPB Senior Investigations Officer: “The casual and brutal killing of the Buzzard is extremely upsetting to watch and it’s clear that Munday has a complete disregard for the law, and the legislation that protects these birds. Frustratingly, this incident isn’t a one off but is just the latest example of the cruel and disturbing lengths some individuals will go to in order to illegally kill birds of prey.

“These crimes and the wider issue of bird of prey persecution is significantly linked to the gamebird shooting industry. Without long overdue regulation of gamebird shooting we expect to see these crimes continue.”

James Robinson, RSPB Chief Operating Officer said: “Although we welcome Defra’s recent announcement of a review of corvid traps, this latest incident underlines a far wider and deeply entrenched issue for our protected birds of prey.

“For decades, these species have been illegally killed on land managed for pheasant, partridge and grouse shooting. More than half of all 1,529 confirmed persecution incidents recorded from 2009-2023 were linked to gamebird shooting. These crimes will continue without meaningful legislative change.

“Through the introduction of a robust licensing system for all gamebird shooting across the UK, the illegal killing of birds of prey could be effectively deterred. Scotland took this welcome step in 2024 when it introduced licensing for grouse shooting. We need the Government to take action, now.”

Though we welcome the guilty verdict in today’s case, we are disappointed that the sentence imposed is at the lower end of the provisions available to the court. This penalty provides little deterrent to others who may consider committing similar crimes and fails to reflect the casual and callous acts of cruelty involved.

The RSPB thanks the North Yorkshire Police, the NWCU and the Crown Prosecution Service for their vital role in investigating and prosecuting this case.

Members of the public are urged to report any suspected incidents of bird of prey persecution by contacting the police on 101 and by submitting a report to the RSPB.

This can be done via the RSPB’s online reporting form at www.rspb.org.uk/report-crimes or by calling the RSPB’s confidential Raptor Crime Hotline on 0300 999 0101. Reports via the RSPB’s reporting form and Raptor Crime Hotline can be made anonymously.

ENDS

The RSPB covert footage can be viewed here, but BE WARNED, it includes animal cruelty, suffering and death.

My commentary:

I’ll keep this brief because I’m short of time today but I’ll be returning to this particular case later in the week as there are several important points that were not covered in the RSPB’s press release.

For now, the RSPB deserves huge credit for capturing this horrific crime on camera and ultimately securing a conviction. It’s interesting that the defence did not challenge the admissibility of the RSPB’s video footage and the court accepted it without question.

More soon…

UPDATE 16 January 2026: Commentary on the conviction of gamekeeper Thomas Munday (bludgeoned Buzzard to death on Hovingham Estate, North Yorkshire) here

Peregrine found with gunshot injuries – police appeal for information

The Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) has launched an investigation and an appeal for information after a Peregrine was found with gunshot injuries in County Tyrone.

Peregrine Falcon. Photo by Pete Walkden

The Peregrine was found in a garden on Station Road, Strabane on the evening of Friday 9th January 2026. According to an article on the BBC News website, the PSNI said it was found with a leg injury and that ‘the injury was consistent with a bullet wound, which would require specialist treatment‘.

I doubt very much whether it’s a ‘bullet’ injury – it would have taken the bird’s whole leg off – much more likely to have been caused by a shotgun or an air rifle, or perhaps a catapult. Without seeing an x-ray it’s difficult to know.

According to my sources the Peregrine has a broken leg and is currently receiving expert care from an experienced wildlife rehabilitator.

DEFRA publishes Animal Welfare Strategy – includes a ban on snares, trail hunting & a review on traps & gamebird rearing

Three days before Xmas, DEFRA published its Animal Welfare Strategy for England, laying out the Westminster Government’s priorities and a framework for the changes it seeks to achieve by 2030.

The policy paper is wide-ranging and covers farmed livestock, companion animals and wildlife.

Two Labour manifesto pledges are included – “We will ban trail hunting and snares“, and it’s encouraging to read, “We will also conduct a review of the use of other wildlife traps“.

The strategy document can be downloaded / read here:

DEFRA_Animal Welfare Strategy for England_Dec2025Download

The key ‘actions’, of interest to me, are as follows:

  1. We will put an end to trail hunting and consult in early 2026 on how to deliver a ban on trail hunting.
  2. We will deliver on the manifesto commitment to ban the use of snare traps in England.
  3. We will conduct a review of other traps used to catch wildlife in England for which welfare concerns have been raised and carefully consider any recommendations for further action. (E.g. Older spring traps, mole traps and live capture traps used to catch corvids).
  4. We will consider how to bring forward and introduce a close season for hares.
  5. We will review and look to strengthen penalties for cruelty against wildlife so that they are consistent with higher levels of sentencing available for animal welfare offences against pets and livestock.
  6. We will improve our understanding of the welfare issues on how gamebirds are reared in the gamebird sector through issuing a call for evidence.

Whilst a timeframe for the consultation on how to implement a ban on trail hunting has been given as ‘early 2026’ (good!), no timeline has been given on when the ban on snares will be implemented.

Given the indiscriminate level of cruelty and suffering caused by snares, this ban really needs to enacted without delay. Snares have already been banned in Wales (since October 2023) and Scotland (since November 2024).

YouGov polling commissioned by the League Against Cruel Sports last year showed 71% support for a snare ban in England (the figure rose to 80% among people living in rural areas) – see here.

Last month, in response to DEFRA’s animal welfare strategy, the independent and authoritative Wild Animal Welfare Committee (WAWC) published an excellent position paper on snares – well worth a read:

WAWC Position Paper No.5 Snaring in England_Dec2025Download

I’m especially pleased to see in the animal welfare strategy for England that a review on other wildlife traps will take place (although again, no timescale is given for this), and particularly pleased to see that it includes crow cage traps.

The use and mis-use of these traps have featured heavily on the pages of this blog over the years, especially on gamebird shooting estates. Apart from the appallingly low welfare standards they afford to both decoy and trapped birds, they are also frequently used to facilitate the illegal killing of birds of prey.

This Buzzard was caught in a crow cage trap on a grouse-shooting estate in Scotland. Instead of being released, in the dead of night ‘somebody’ arrived on a quad bike, entered the padlocked trap, appeared to strike at something on the ground, removed something from the trap, and then drove off. As the cameras continued to roll, at dawn it became apparent that the Buzzard was no longer in the trap. [Screengrab from video footage on an RSPB covert camera)

Sometimes the use of these traps for illegal persecution is targeted (i.e. by using decoys specifically to attract raptors, e.g. pigeons and doves) but it can also be non-targeted. When a raptor is caught, accidentally, inside one of these traps, by law the trap operator should release the bird, unharmed, at the earliest possible time. However, repeated evidence, usually provided by RSPB covert cameras, has shown gamekeepers taking the opportunity to kill the trapped raptor, typically by bludgeoning it to death with a big stick there and then, or in recent years, the trapped raptor has been bagged up and carried away from the location, presumably to be killed without the risk of it being filmed.

Any proposal to improve animal welfare standards is to be welcomed and I applaud the Westminster Government for acknowledging that measures are needed across the board.

There’s clearly a lot of work to do and we are fortunate to have some excellent animal welfare charities and organisations in the UK whose input will be crucial to ensure this strategy is implemented as comprehensively, robustly and quickly as possible.

‘Hundreds’ of UK Peregrines targeted for illegal falconry trade in Middle East

The illegal laundering of wild UK Peregrines for falconers in the Middle East has received wide media coverage in recent years.

A police-led multi-agency operation named Operation Tantallon, which began in 2021, resulted in two men being convicted in 2023 of laundering Scottish Peregrines (see here) and a Worcestershire man is currently facing 21 charges relating to the keeping and trading of wild Peregrines, alleged to have taken place between 2018 and 2022 (see here).

An article in The Guardian in February 2024 reported that Operation Tantallon had led to more than 3,000 active inquiries within the captive-trade of Peregrines across the UK, with 36 searches carried out. It is “the biggest UK wildlife crime police investigation to date in the UK”, said Chief Inspector Kevin Kelly, the head of the National Wildlife Crime Unit (NCWU). “When we get to the end of this year, we’ll really be able to show that this is a large-scale, national and international crime type.” The police believe this trade is worth £21m in undisclosed revenue to the UK.

Strange, then, that the UK supported a recent proposal to downlist the Peregrine from Appendix to 1 to Appendix II of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) to allow capture of wild Peregrines and international trade to meet demands for falconry. Fortunately, the proposal was defeated in December 2025 (here).

A new article in The Guardian, published on Monday 5 January 2026, has now reported that demand from falconers in the Middle East has led to ‘hundreds’ of UK Peregrine nests being raided over the last decade to supply this illegal trade.

The article says, ‘Demand for wild birds [UK Peregrines] appears to be coming from two directions, experts and police say. The first is direct from falconers in the Middle East who want wild birds for racing. The second is from some breeding facilities [in the UK] that need them as parents to feed a booming appetite for hybrid falcons and legally exportable, captive-bred birds‘.

The NWCU says there are now 160 falcon breeding facilities in the UK, up from about 27 in the 1980s. The police inspected 27 of the 160 falcon breeding facilities during 2023 and 2024, during which 15 wild Peregrines were discovered and confirmed by DNA testing.

Journalists attending a recent International Hunting and Equestrian Exhibition in Abu Dhabi, where ‘elite’ falcons were on display, were told by a number of traders of their preference for wild-caught British Peregrines, rather than captive-bred falcons, due to the ‘purity of their bloodline and their speed’.

The article includes comments from those with a vested interest in the legal trade of captive-bred falcons: a UK falcon breeder who supplies birds to royals in the UAE and Bahrain, the CEO of the International Association for Falconry, and a falcon trader in the United Arab Emirates, who all either downplay the extent of the illegal trade, or deny completely that it exists.

This will be a familiar narrative to those who follow the issue of illegal persecution of birds of prey on UK gamebird shooting estates.

Readers can make up their own minds. The article is well worth a read – here.

Job opportunity: Hen Harrier Protection Officer (RSPB Geltsdale & North Pennines)

Job advert from the RSPB:

Hen Harrier Protection Officer
Reference: DEC20259029
Location: RSPB Geltsdale, CA8 + North Pennines
Salary: £24,571.00 – £26,231.00 Pro Rata
Contract: 4.5 months
Hours: Full-Time, 37.5 hours per week
Benefits: Pension Scheme, Life Assurance Scheme, 26 days’ Annual Leave (pro rata)

RSPB Geltsdale in the North Pennines is one of the largest nature reserves in England covering some 5000ha.

We are looking for someone with raptor experience and the ability to spend long hours alone in remote and difficult upland terrain. The early part of the contract will concentrate on patrolling the reserve to spot harriers returning and setting up breeding territories. If we have nesting harriers the emphasis will be on watching the nest site and possibly being part of a team of staff and volunteers undertaking 24 hour surveillance.

Hen Harrier carrying nesting material. Photo by Laurie Campbell

Essential skills include:

  • You will have a proven track record completing work alone and working within a varied team.
  • Good birdwatching and identification skills, particularly of raptors.
  • Experience of upland working and navigation.
  • Full driving licence valid for use in the UK.


Desirable qualifications, knowledge, skills and experience:

  • Hill skills course completed.
  • Knowledge of raptor breeding behaviour.


Additional information:

  • This role will involve lone working and working in remote locations. Candidates will need to be able to meet the rigour of the role.
  • This role will require occasional weekend, early morning and evening working so will need someone who is able to be flexible.
  • This is a Fixed-Term (4.5 months), Full-Time role for 37.5 hours per week.
  • The RSPB reserves the right to extend or make this role permanent without further advertising dependent on business needs at the end of the contract term.


Closing date: 23:59, Friday, 30th January 2026
We are looking to conduct interviews for this position from 16th February 2026.

To complete your application online please CLICK HERE

Closing Date: 30/01/2026  Location: RSPB Geltsdale, CA8 + North Pennines

ENDS

Gamekeeper due in court charged with killing bird of prey on a Pheasant shooting estate in Yorkshire

Gamekeeper Thomas Mundy is due to appear at Scarborough Magistrates’ Court next week after being charged with killing a Buzzard on a Pheasant shooting estate at Hovingham, North Yorkshire in April 2024.

Buzzard photo by Ronnie Gilbert

No plea has been entered yet and this will be the first hearing in this case.

NB: As criminal proceedings are live, comments have been turned off.

UPDATE 12 January 2026: Gamekeeper Thomas Munday convicted after brutally clubbing trapped Buzzard to death on a Pheasant shoot at Hovingham, North Yorkshire (here)

UPDATE 16 January 2026: Commentary on the conviction of gamekeeper Thomas Munday (bludgeoned Buzzard to death on Hovingham Estate, North Yorkshire) here

Proposal to close loophole on grouse shoot licensing is voted through at Stage 2 of Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill

The gaping loophole in the Scottish grouse shoot licences is a step closer to being closed off after a Government amendment was voted through at Stage 2 of the Natural Environment Bill just before Xmas.

If you recall, grouse moor licensing was introduced as part of the Wildlife Management & Muirburn (Scotland) Act 2024, as a result of the continued illegal killing of birds of prey on grouse moors and the associated difficulties of identifying an individual suspect and prosecuting them.

The idea was that a licence to shoot Red Grouse could be amended / withdrawn / revoked by NatureScot if evidence showed that illegal raptor persecution had taken place (importantly, based on the civil burden of proof, i.e. balance of probability, rather than the criminal burden of proof, i.e. beyond reasonable doubt). It was expected that the licence would cover an estate’s entire landholding, not just the areas where Red Grouse are shot, because raptor persecution crimes often take place beyond the boundary of the moor (e.g. in woodland).

However, in November 2024, just three months after they began, the licences were significantly weakened after legal threats from the grouse shooting industry were used to successfully sabotage the licensing regime. Instead of now covering an entire estate, it was announced that the licence holder could decide on the extent of the area the licence covered, specifically the area where Red Grouse are ‘taken or killed’.

Effectively, this could mean simply drawing an arbitrary line around their grouse butts, denoting the reach of a shotgun pellet, and argue that THAT is the area where they take/kill grouse and thus that should be the extent of the licensable area:

Photo of a line of grouse-shooting butts by Richard Cross, annotated by RPUK

In addition to this, the changes made to the licence by NatureScot meant that a whole suite of other relevant offences listed in the Wildlife Management & Muirburn Act that were supposed to trigger a licence revocation (i.e. offences on the Protection of Badgers Act 1992, Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996, Conservation (Natural Habitats etc) Regulations 1994, Animal Health & Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006, Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Act 2023) were NOT covered, which was clearly going against the intent of Parliament when the Wildlife & Muirburn Act was voted for.

Conservationists and some politicians, notably Mark Ruskell MSP from the Scottish Greens, campaigned throughout 2025 and kept the pressure on the Scottish Government to address this loophole. Mark Ruskell lodged amendments at Stage 2 and 3 of the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill during 2025 (see here) but didn’t press it because by that time, Minister Jim Fairlie had announced the Government’s intention to lodge an amendment during the Natural Environment Bill instead. (Mark also lodged an amendment (#31) to the Natural Environment Bill, just to make sure the subject was covered, but withdrew it in favour of supporting the Government’s amendment).

The Government’s proposed amendment (#35) to the Natural Environment Bill was lodged on 7 November 2025 – I blogged about that here. Minister Fairlie wrote to the Rural Affairs & Islands Committee on 30 October 2025 to notify the committee of the Government’s intention:

Minister Fairlie to RAI Committee 30Oct2025Download

Predictably, certain members of the Rural Affairs Committee wanted to push back against the amendment, presumably at the behest of lobbyists from the grouse shooting sector, and there followed a series of back and forth letters between the Committee and Minister Fairlie, with the Committee wanting more ‘clarity’ about the need to close the grouse licensing loophole and the Minister providing the rationale behind it. That correspondence can be read here:

RAI Convenor Carson to Minister Fairlie 7Nov2025Download

Minister Fairlie to RAI Committee 11Nov2025Download

RAI Convenor to Minister Fairlie 20November2025Download

Fairlie letter to RAI Committee 21November2025Download

In the middle of all this correspondence, the Scottish Government’s amendment (#35) was debated at Stage 2 of the Natural Environment Bill during a Rural Affairs Committee hearing on 19 November 2025.

I’m not going to repeat the detail of that debate, nor of Conservative MSP Rachael Hamilton’s counter amendments (#35a, 35b, and 335) because you can read it in the official report of that meeting (page 78 and Cabinet Secretary Gillian Martin’s response starting on p84) and also in the official report of the continued debate on 10 December 2025 (starting at the bottom of page 124). Both reports are provided below:

OfficialReport RAIC 19Nov2025 NatEnvBill Stage 2Download

OfficialReport RAIC 10Dec2025 NatEnvBill Stage 2Download

The Government’s amendment was pressed, as were Rachael Hamilton’s three counter amendments, and the votes went as follows:

Amendments #35a, 35b and 335 in the name of Rachael Hamilton were all defeated by seven votes to two (the two Conservatives on the Committee, Finlay Carson & Tim Eagle the only ones to support the amendments).

Amendment 35 in the name of Jim Fairlie was agreed by seven votes to two (the two Conservative MSPs being the only ones opposed to it).

This all looks promising, assuming the Bill will progress without further new amendments at Stage 3 to sabotage progress again, although even if there are, they’re unlikely to pass given the entire Parliament can vote at Stage 3, rather than just a small cross-party committee, and the Conservatives simply don’t have anywhere near sufficient numbers to push this through against a Government-led amendment that also has the support of the Greens, Labour and Lib Dems.

Good.

The Scottish Government deserves credit for acting to close the loophole but massive credit also to Scottish Green Mark Ruskell MSP for holding the SNP’s feet to the fire.

It won’t be the end of the story though. As I blogged in November, the effective implementation of the amended legislation will still rely heavily on NatureScot standing up to the powerful landowning lobby, who I have no doubt will try every trick in the book to avoid licence revocations when the inevitable raptor persecution crimes and other ‘relevant offences’ are uncovered on grouse shooting estates.

NatureScot’s track record is not at all convincing on this (e.g. see here, here, here, here, here and here for a few examples of many).

In the short term, the ineffectiveness of the licensing scheme would be frustrating if the wildlife killers were still getting away with their crimes. But in the longer term, if licensing is shown to be ineffective, as many of us think it will be, then the Scottish Government will only have one option left – a complete ban on all grouse shooting.