Scottish gamekeeper convicted for using a gin trap on Cardross Estate: gets community service order

James Alfred O’Reilly, 50, a Scottish gamekeeper working on the Cardross Estate in Stirlingshire, has been convicted of four wildlife crime offences, including the use of a gin trap to catch a buzzard. His punishment? It’s the usual pathetic response: he’s been ordered to carry out 240 hours of unpaid work.

Here is the press release from the Crown Office:

At Stirling Sheriff Court today, gamekeeper James O’Reilly was given a Community Payback Order and ordered to carry out 240 hours of unpaid work after having pled guilty to four charges under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.

O’Reilly was convicted at Stirling Sheriff Court on 24 April of a number of charged including the use of an illegal trap for the purposes of taking of wild birds on the Cardross Estate in March 2013. Common buzzards, red kites, goshawks and white tailed eagles can all be found nesting in or as regular visitors to the area.

A man walking his dog on the estate, at a location known as Gartur came to an open area next to a pheasant pen where a distressed buzzard was caught in a trap by its leg next to a decomposed deer carcase.

The man released the jaws of the trap from the buzzard’s leg. When it became apparent that the buzzard was unable to fly he took the bird home and called the SSPCA. The SSPCA reported the incident to the police who continued the investigation. They found an illegal trap, which by its nature and placement by the accused was calculated to cause injury to wild birds.

They also found that the accused had set a number of snares in the area. None of which had identification tags on them as required by law.

It was clear to police that there was an issue in relation to the pest control methods employed by the accused and as a result, a search warrant for his house was obtained and executed on 4 April 2013.

In the course of the search, a snare containing decomposed fox parts was found next to a pheasant pen near to accused’s home address. It was apparent that a fox had become snared and the Accused maintains that he shot the fox after it had become trapped, and left the carcase lying. Staff at the Scottish Agricultural College confirmed that the fox caught in the snare had been there for more than 24 hours and possibly from the back end of 2012.

The buzzard was examined by a veterinary surgeon who found it had a severe injury to the right leg just above the foot. He commented that the injuries would have been extremely painful for the bird and would have taken several days to occur. Treatment was provided to the bird but its condition deteriorated and the bird was euthanized on welfare ground as it would never be suitable for release back into the wild.

Notes to Editor

  1. James Alfred O’Reilly (DOB 30/06/1964) of Stirling pleaded guilty on 24 April 2015 at Stirling Sheriff Court to four offences under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 as below. He was sentenced to 240hrs Community Payback Order, on all charges cumulo:

gin trap* Between 22 March 2013 and 25 March 2013 at Gartur, Cardross Estate , Port of Menteith, you JAMES ALFRED O’REILLY did intentionally or recklessly injure and take a wild bird, namely a buzzard in that you did set a gin trap also known as a leg hold trap on open ground or other similar type of trap which was baited with a deer carcass which trapped said buzzard by the leg, injuring it whereby it had to be humanely euthanased due to its injury; CONTRARY to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Section 1(1)(a);

* between 1 February 2013 and 4 April 2013 at Tamavoid, Cardross Estate, Port of Menteith, you JAMES ALFRED O’REILLY, whilst carrying out an inspection of a snare, did find an animal, whether alive or dead, caught by said snare and did fail to release or remove said animal namely a fox; CONTRARY to Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Section 11(3)(A);

* between 1 April 2013 and 4 April 2013 at Gartur, Tamavoid and The Big Wood , Cardross Estate , Port of Menteith you JAMES ALFRED O’REILLY did set in position a snare without having been issued an identification number by the Chief Constable under Section 11A(4) of the aftermentioned Act and did set 2 snares at a stink pit , 4 snares at a pheasant release pen and 1 snare at a stink pit, all of which did not have identification tags attached; CONTRARY to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Sections 11A(1) and (5);

* Between 22 March 2013 and 25 March 2013 at Garfur, Cardross Estate, Port of Menteith you JAMES ALFRED O’REILLY did set in position a trap, namely a gin trap also known as a leg hold trap being of such a nature and so placed as to be likely to cause bodily injury to any wild birds coming into contact therewith in that said trap was set on open ground next to bait, namely a deer carcass; CONTRARY to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Section 5(1)(a).

The requirement to tag snares was introduced by the 2011 Wildlife and Natural Environment Act as part of a suite of measures aimed at improving the accountability of snaring. This requirement came into force on 1st April 2013. Under the new regime, those responsible for setting snares were required to attend a training course, prior to being given an identification number. The accused O’Reilly had been issued with such a number on 23rd March 2013 by the licensing office in Pitt Street, Glasgow.

END

So, here are some questions:

1. Is O’Reilly still employed as a gamekeeper on the Cardross Estate (where they offer driven pheasant and partridge shooting)? Emails to: enquiries@cardrossestate.com

2. Is O’Reilly a member of the Scottish Gamekeepers Association, and if so, has he now been booted out? Emails to: info@scottishgamekeepers.co.uk

3. Is the Cardross Estate a member of Scottish Land & Estates, and if so, has it now been booted out? Emails to: info@scottishlandandestates.co.uk

4. When will the review of wildlife crime penalties be published by the Scottish Government (we understand it’s been submitted) and, more importantly, when will the review’s recommendations for change be implemented? Emails to: ministerforenvironment@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

You can perhaps combine this last email with one asking the Minister when we can expect to see a General Licence restriction order enforced on land where a poisoned red kite, a poisoned peregrine, and an illegally trapped red kite have been found – see here.

UPDATE 21st May 2015: some responses to these questions here.

Red kite illegally trapped on Scottish grouse moor has to be euthanised

The BBC news website is reporting that a red kite that had been illegally trapped last week has had to be euthanised due to the severity of its injuries.

The kite was found ‘in distress and seriously injured’ on Wednesday 13th May 2015.

The article (see here) is fairly low on details, but what has been written is actually quite informative.

It quotes a Police Scotland spokesman: “This was clearly an intentional act with the sole purpose of trapping this kind of bird of prey“.

That tells us that the bird probably wasn’t caught inside a crow cage trap (by accident), but more than likely was caught in an uncovered, illegally-set spring trap, baited and deliberately placed to trap a bird of prey by its leg(s).

The article also states that the bird was found trapped ‘on moorland west of Stirling’. This is also pretty revealing. There isn’t much moorland to the west of Stirling and the moorland that is there is managed for grouse shooting (for those who don’t know the area, have a look on google maps and look for the tell-tale muirburn strips that identify the land as a grouse moor).

This latest raptor persecution crime is not the first one reported from this area in recent months. In July 2014, a poisoned red kite was found in the area. This crime wasn’t publicised by Police Scotland and didn’t reach the public domain until we blogged about it in January this year, when we found the details hidden away in a government report. At that time, we asked blog readers to contact SNH to ask whether they had issued a General Licence restriction order for the land where the poisoned kite had been found (see here).

In February 2015, Andrew Bachell, Director of Operations at SNH responded by saying the case was ‘under consideration’ (see here).

Meanwhile, later in February, a poisoned peregrine was found on the same estate (see here). It, too, had been killed by ingesting the banned poison Carbofuran.

According to the SNH website, a General Licence restriction order has still not been issued for this estate (or any other estate, come to that).

And now, three months later, an illegally trapped red kite is discovered in what appears to be the very same area.

Somebody (or some people?) is clearly conducting a campaign of raptor persecution crimes in this area. Where’s the enforcement? Why hasn’t a General Licence restriction order been issued for this area of moorland? Had one been issued for the poisoned red kite (July 2014) or the poisoned peregrine (Feb 2015), this latest crime may not have occurred and this poor red kite may not have had to suffer such appalling injuries that it had to be euthanised.

We think it’s time to ask Environment Minister Dr Aileen McLeod some questions about the apparent lack of enforcement action in this area. Only last month she wrote an article stating that “wildlife crime will not be tolerated in modern day Scotland” and she specifically mentioned the General Licence restriction orders: “Arrangements are also in place for SNH to restrict the use of general licences where there is evidence of wildlife crime” (see here).

So, if “arrangements are also in place”, why hasn’t a General Licence restriction notice already been enforced in this particular area and when might we see notification that one has been issued? It’s time for the Government Minister responsible for tackling wildlife crime to show her mettle. Emails to: ministerforenvironment@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

Red kite photo by David Tomlinson

You forgot the biology

Well, well, well. The ‘campaign’ group You Forgot the Birds, headed up by that well known ornithological expert (ahem) Sir Ian Botham, is back.

You might remember them from last year, when they tried, unsuccessfully, to discredit the RSPB, resulting in widespread derision and the rejection of their complaints to the Charity Commission.

This time they’ve surpassed all expectations. They’re accusing the RSPB of ‘deliberately looking the other way’ while hen harriers die because they’re more interested in using the species as an ongoing ‘fundraising tool’.

This accusation is centred on the recent events in Bowland, Lancashire, where three male hen harriers, all with active nests, (un)mysteriously ‘disappeared’ (see here).

We have a copy of the group’s press release (thanks to the journalist who sent this). It reads (slightly edited) as follows:

You Forgot the Birds campaign.

The mysterious disappearance of endangered birds of prey in Lancashire has become a whodunnit with the RSPB implying that gamekeepers are to blame and the gamekeeper’s champion, Sir Ian Botham, saying that the RSPB is deliberately looking the wrong way – and has ulterior motives.

Embargo 00.01 Tuesday 19 May 2015

England’s hen harriers are close to extinction and the RSPB is too ideologically blinkered to do anything to help.  This is the view of Sir Ian Botham who is responding to the news that at the Bowland Estate in Lancashire, RSPB officials are watching abandoned eggs on hen harrier nests instead of transferring them into incubators.  The fledglings could then be released back into the wild.

“The RSPB uses hen harriers as a fundraising tool and is forever blaming gamekeepers for their low numbers” says Sir Ian Botham, “but the real culprits are the ‘sit on their hands and do nothing’ RSPB officials who keep blocking government attempts to help the birds recover.”

Under a Natural England licence the RSPB could save the eggs at Bowland.  Officials at Defra have proposed a similar scheme to increase hen harrier numbers on grouse moors but this has been obstructed by the RSPB.

“The RSPB are deckchair conservationists with binoculars who sit and watch failing nests. They campaign, they complain, they blame – but they are rubbish at conservation.  Year after year the RSPB fails to live up to its name and protect birds.  If you want to protect birds from predators you need gamekeepers not the RSPB” says Sir Ian.  Uncontrolled fox populations are a major problem for hen harriers.

His criticism came after the RSPB, without producing any evidence, blamed the disappearance of the hen harriers on wildlife crime and offered a £10,000 reward for a conviction.

Sir Ian in response is offering a £10,000 reward to the first conservation group which moves the abandoned eggs into an aviary and then releases the fledglings back into the wild.  A similar process has already successfully raised harrier numbers in France.

While there are more than 1,000 hen harriers in Scotland, in England the numbers remain pitifully low.  Last year there were only four successful nests south of the border – three of which were on grouse moors.

“No bird lover can accept this impasse.  The current situation is an embarrassment to both Defra and to Natural England and provides stark evidence that the RSPB puts ideology and fundraising far ahead of the birds it claims to protect,” says Sir Ian who is spokesman of the You Forgot The Birds campaign.

The RSPB receives more than £1m of grants from the EU and the Heritage Lottery Fund for its hen harrier programme and would risk not getting further grants if hen harrier numbers increased.

Defra officials want excess hen harrier chicks on grouse moors to be raised in aviaries so that bird numbers increase while allowing the moors to remain economic.  The highly respected Hawk and Owl Trust has offered to help implement the scheme.  However the RSPB continues to object to the plan and is putting pressure on the Trust to back down.

Contact

Ian Gregory xxxxx xxxxx

You Forgot The Birds   www.youforgotthebirds.com

Notes:

  1. The Scottish hen harrier population is 505 territorial pairs (Hayhow et al. 2010)
  2. The grouse industry suspects that the RSPB’s offer of a £10,000 reward over the Bowland Estate hen harriers is an attempt to deflect responsibility away from its failure to protect birds on land that it controls.
  3. The RSPB has not produced any evidence that the birds are dead. Nor has it explained why it thinks that they have not been taken by predators e.g. eagle owls, peregrine falcons or goshawks.
  4. If a gamekeeper was responsible for the birds disappearing then how was this not detected by the RSPB’s extensive network of people and remote cameras in Bowland?
  5. The RSPB has ‘previous’ for playing media games with hen harriers: for more than six months it delayed reporting the deaths of two hen harriers at a wind farm. (The RSPB campaigns for wind farms and has even built a turbine at its headquarters.)
  6. At Bowland a Natural England Licence would allow conservationists to use portable incubators, dummy eggs (in case the parents return) and supplementary feeding (to encourage females to remain when their partners have abandoned a nest). If the fledged birds were returned to the place where the eggs were taken from there would be no breach of IUCN guidelines.
  7. The You Forgot The Birds Campaign thinks that the RSPB is fearful that if it reverses its position on the Defra scheme, the resulting growth in hen harrier numbers would show how its years of opposition have been hugely damaging for this endangered species.
  8. The RSPB’s claim that unrestricted hen harrier numbers can co-exist with grouse moors is proving unfounded at the Langholm Project in Scotland.  This longstanding experiment, which is partly funded by the RSPB, uses “diversionary feeding” of hen harriers in an attempt to reduce their predation of grouse.  However grouse numbers on the moor remain so poor that there has not been one day’s shooting in seven years – this is not economically viable.
  9. The You Forgot The Birds Campaign is funded by the British grouse industry.

END

It’s hard to know where to begin, and to be honest, we can’t really be arsed to go through it sentence by sentence, but there are two points that are worthy of some attention.

1. The two hen harrier nests (with their eggs) were abandoned by the females at some point between 30th April (when both males ‘disappeared’) and 6th May, when the RSPB announced the news. Botham’s press release was embargoed until today (19th May). Botham is offering £10K to any conservation organisation who will take the eggs, incubate them, and then release the subsequent fledglings. It’s not clear how he thinks that eggs containing embryos that have been dead for between 13-19 days can now be successfully incubated. It’s biologically impossible.

He may well argue that had the RSPB intervened when the nests were first abandoned, the eggs could have been saved. Well, that’s potentially a biological possibility, although this scenario doesn’t take in to account the difficulty of knowing precisely when the nests were abandoned, and thus when to intervene. The nests were being closely observed and the people watching the nests will have seen the females leave. But at that stage, they wouldn’t have known whether the females had left temporarily (to find food for themselves in the absence of their male partners) and were coming back, or whether they’d abandoned the nests for good. Intervening at that early stage and removing the eggs could have been disastrous, not to mention illegal. By the time the nest observers realised the females weren’t returning, the eggs would have chilled and the embryos would already be dead.

However, that’s not what he’s arguing. His press statement is clearly written in the present tense – he seriously thinks that the eggs will still be viable, two weeks after they were abandoned. He’s either a deeply religious man with faith in the concept of resurrection (£10 grand for a miracle rebirth – what a bargain), or his understanding of biological principles is as strong as his Twitter account password. Perhaps he should change his nickname from Beefy to Mincey, as in ‘thick as….’

2. The second point worthy of mention is the final sentence in the ‘notes’ section of the press release:

The You Forgot The Birds Campaign is funded by the British grouse industry‘.

How interesting. But what is meant by ‘the British grouse industry’? A few individuals with a vested interest in grouse shooting, or an organisational body that represents those who own grouse moors? Mark Avery has attempted to find out the answer to that (here).

Whoever or whatever the ‘British grouse industry’ is, we owe them a debt of gratitude for choosing Mincey Botham as their spokesperson.

Article about this story in today’s Telegraph here.

Response from RSPB Conservation Director Martin Harper here

Henry’s Tour day 30: Abbeystead Estate, Bowland

Mon 18 May Copy

Henry’s in Bowland, Lancashire, pondering whether he should visit the Abbeystead Estate.

The vast Abbeystead Estate is owned by trusts on behalf of Gerald Grosvenor, the 6th Duke of Westminster (another former vice president of the Game Conservancy Trust [now GWCT]).

Eleven years ago, Abbeystead Estate was one of several grouse-shooting estates that refused to sign a pledge to accept laws protecting the hen harrier. Abbeystead’s Estate Manager gave the following explanation:

The Abbeystead estate’s view is that we already had the English Nature hen harrier recovery unit running for two or three years and we had been very supportive. Our police came to see us with this declaration to sign, which I was not going to do. We thought the whole thing very heavy-handed” (see here).

Martyn Howat, the then chairman of English Nature’s hen harrier recovery project, said: “On the Bowland fells, English Nature have a good relationship with the gamekeepers and managers of privately owned grouse moors, particularly the Duke of Westminster’s estate“.

For an eye-opening example of the good relationship between English Nature (now Natural England) and the Abbeystead Estate, here is a fascinating read.

Talking of Martyn Howat, that name rings a bell. Ah yes, here he is.

£1K reward offered after peregrine shot dead

The RSPB is offering a £1,000 reward for information leading to the conviction of the person who shot a peregrine earlier this month.

The dead bird was discovered at an undisclosed location in north Staffordshire on 7th May 2015. The exact location hasn’t been revealed, to protect other birds that may be nesting near by.

Staffordshire Police are also appealing for information (Tel: 101 and cite Incident Number 200).

Article in the Stoke Sentinel here

Peregrine photo by Martin Eager

Henry’s Tour Day 29: occupying another grouse butt

Fri 15 May Copy

Henry’s still in the Yorkshire Dales National Park and today he visited the Grinton Estate in Swaledale as his search for a potential mate continues.

Apparently HRH Prince Charles has shot grouse here.

The Grinton Estate is owned by Lord Peel, a former President of the Game Conservancy Trust (now known as GWCT).

In 2001, Willie Peel was quoted in a Telegraph article: “I say, let’s have more hen harriers, but we want the freedom to control them so that they don’t decimate the grouse“.

No hen harriers were to be seen on Henry’s visit. In fact no raptors were seen. But there were plenty of grouse shooting butts to mess around in.

Henry left a nice gift in one of them.

SSPCA investigations lead to two poisoning convictions

sspca logo 2Eight and half months after the close of the public consultation on whether the SSPCA’s investigatory powers should be increased (see here) and we’re still waiting for a decision from Environment Minister Dr Aileen McLeod.

Regular blog readers may recall that those against an increase of powers included Police Scotland and many organisations with vested interests in game shooting. They gave a variety of reasons for their opposition, which can be read here. They include issues about ‘accountability’ and ‘lack of training and competence’, amongst others.

Interesting, then, that in the last couple of months, criminal investigations led by the SSPCA have resulted in the conviction of two poisoners. In both cases, the poisoners had targeted cats by laying poisoned baits laced with antifreeze (see here and here).

Apart from the obvious point that cats are not raptors, what is so different about the principle of investigating cat poisoning crimes and raptor poisoning crimes? The principles seem pretty similar – somebody deliberately laces bait with poison and then deliberately lays it out to target an animal. The investigators need to identify who laid out the poisoned baits and thus who was responsible for the crime.

The Crown Office didn’t seem to have any issue with the standard of investigation in the two cat poisoning crimes, otherwise they wouldn’t have decided to prosecute.

The Sheriffs didn’t seem to have any issue with the standard of investigation in the two cat poisoning crimes, otherwise they wouldn’t have convicted the offenders.

The main difference between cat poisoning crimes and raptor poisoning crimes is the politics. One offence typically involves ordinary members of the public (as far as cat poisoners can be described as ‘ordinary’), while the other offence typically involves those associated with game shooting.

Interesting, isn’t it?

Police launch raptor crime awareness campaigns in Scotland, England & Wales

Police forces in England, Wales and Scotland have recently launched poster campaigns to raise awareness of crimes against birds of prey.

A couple of days ago, North Yorkshire Police announced their campaign against the illegal poisoning of raptors. They’ve produced a poster that will be distributed in rural areas including the Yorkshire Dales and the North York Moors; both of these areas are dominated by driven grouse moors and both areas are well known as raptor persecution hotspots. The posters will be displayed in National Park Centres and on parish council notice boards.

North York Police poisoning poster May 2015

Earlier this month, North Wales Police launched a campaign called Operation Raptor, aimed at targeting raptor poisoners in their region. This follows the poisoning of five peregrines last year and a suspected buzzard poisoning incident this year. The main peregrine poisoning suspects in the region are usually pigeon fanciers/racers.

Police Scotland launched their wildlife crime campaign in March (in collaboration with PAW Scotland), which involves raising awareness of all six national wildlife crime priorities, including raptor persecution.

These publicity campaigns are good to see. Excellent, in fact. However, the most important facet of tackling wildlife crime is not raising awareness (as important as that is), but what the police actually do in response to a reported wildlife crime. A recently published report on wildlife crime enforcement in Scotland revealed a catalogue of failures, including poor follow-up investigations and sometimes no follow-up at all (see here).

We’re watching with interest to see just how long it takes Police Scotland to publicise a number of raptor persecution crimes that have taken place within the last 12 months, especially those involving the use of banned poisons that have killed raptors on or very close to sporting estates with long histories of such crimes.

Henry’s tour: day 28

Weds 13 May  Copy

After visiting the grouse moors of Swinton Estate, Henry paid a visit to the estate’s luxury hotel, Swinton Park, in Masham.

The Swinton Park Hotel was the venue for one of GWCT’s dinner auctions in November last year (see here). What an interesting choice of venue for the GWCT.

Eggs stolen from Marsh Harrier nest in Norfolk

Norfolk Constabulary is appealing for information following the theft of eggs from a Marsh Harrier nest in Guist, near Fakenham, Norfolk.

The theft is believed to have taken place on Sunday 10th May.

Norfolk Constabulary press release here

Nigel Pickover, editor of the Eastern Daily Press, says the newspaper is offering a £1K reward for information leading to a conviction (see here).

Marsh Harrier photo by Robert Pickett