Author: RaptorPersecutionUK

More on that vicarious liability prosecution

wane1Regular blog readers will know that we’ve been chasing information about the first potential prosecution under the new vicarious liability legislation for some time.

The case in point relates to the conviction of gamekeeper Peter Bell, who was guilty of poisoning offences on the Glasserton and Physgill Estates in December 2012 (see here).

In July 2013 we asked the Environment Minister for an update on the VL prosecution (see here). He replied in August and said it would be inappropriate to comment as police enquiries had not yet concluded (see here). Fair enough.

By early October we expected the police enquiries to have been completed, ten months after the original offence was committed, so we asked the Environment Minister for an update (see here).

One of our blog readers wrote the following comment a couple of days ago:

“I duly sent an e-mail to Mr Wheelhouse about the update on whether or not there would be a prosecution under the vicarious liability following Mr Bells conviction. I’m apparently not allowed to post the reply anywhere but was told Mr Wheelhouse is unable to enter into discussion about such matters and I was pointed in the direction of The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service for any information I might want“.

Interesting. So the first excuse given was that ‘police enquiries had not yet concluded’, and that has now changed to ‘Wheelhouse is unable to enter into discussion’ (and apparently members of the public are not permitted to publish the Minister’s replies to their queries).

Anyone getting the impression that these answers are designed to subdue any further reporting on this case?

Wheelhouse has apparently suggested contacting the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service for the information. Let’s do that, taking note of the word ‘service’ – they are supposedly serving us, the general public.

The thing is, we’re not too sure who within COPFS to contact for this information. Rumour has it that the head of the Wildlife and Environmental Crime Unit (WECU) at COPFS, Craig Harris, has since moved on. Rumour also has it that a new head of unit has been installed although it’s not clear who that person is, although six-figure-Dysart’s name has been mentioned. Hmm.

We could ask the Lord Advocate, Frank Mulholland QC, who is the ministerial head of COPFS, although we’ve been unable to find a direct email address for him.

Let’s try our luck with the COPFS’s general email address and ask the following questions:

Dear COPFS,

Please can you tell us the name of the new head of the Wildlife and Environmental Crime Unit at COPFS? And please could you tell us whether there will be a prosecution under the vicarious liability legislation relating to the poisoning offences carried out at the Glasserton and Physgill Estates in December 2012? Thanks.

Emails to: enquirypoint@copfs.gsi.gov.uk

UPDATE: The email address to use is apparently this: _WildlifeSpecialists@copfs.gsi.gov.uk  Please note the underscore at the beginning of the address. Thanks to the contributors who have provided this new address.

Langholm hen harrier ‘Miranda’ flies to Ireland

Hen-Harrier-1 avico ltd‘Miranda’, one of this year’s four satellite-tagged hen harriers from Langholm, has been tracked to the Irish Republic.

She’d been hanging around at Leadhills for a couple of weeks, which was a cause for concern (see here), but she managed to get out alive and headed south to Dumfries & Galloway, before jumping over to the Isle of Man and then onwards to Ireland.

She’s a good example of why we’re not only interested in persecution incidents that take place in Scotland – relentless and systematic raptor persecution in any part of our isles, be it in Scotland, England, Wales, Northern Ireland or the Irish Republic has the potential for knock-on-population-level effects elsewhere.

Incredibly, all four sat-tagged Langholm harriers are still alive as we reach mid-October.

Well done Cat Barlow at Making the Most of Moorlands for publicising these harriers’ journeys.

Follow their movements here.

Countryside Alliance disputes evidence that Bowland Betty was shot

Those luminaries of hen harrier conservation, The Countryside Alliance, are claiming that the scientific evidence used to show that Bowland Betty was shot was actually just ‘supposition’.

For those who don’t remember, Bowland Betty was a young satellite-tagged hen harrier who was found dead on a Yorkshire grouse moor in 2012 (see here). There followed a post-mortem carried out by the Zoological Society of London, which showed she had a fractured left leg which led to her death. There was then a pioneering forensic examination by scientists at the University College London Institute of Orthopaedics and Musculoskeletal Science, which found a tiny fragment of lead at the site of the fracture, confirming that she had been shot (see here, scroll down to news item 9th January 2013, and later published in the journal Veterinary Record in 2015: hopkins-et-al-2015_bowlandbetty_vetrecord ).

According to a press statement on the Countryside Alliance website (see here), “The Countryside Alliance team has accessed and reviewed autopsy reports and has serious concerns about this claim“.

Hmm, I wonder how many professional forensic scientists are employed on the CA’s team? Probably the same number as the number of professional veterinary pathologists employed by the SGA when they challenged the findings about what had happened to the Deeside eagle (see here).

Of course, it’s not the first time that the Countryside Alliance have been in denial about the extent of hen harrier persecution – see here, here, here and here for starters. Blimey, even Nick Griffin MEP has a greater grasp of the dire straits this species is in (see here) and that’s saying something!

It’s worth remembering that the Countryside Alliance was a participant in the charade that was the ‘Hen Harrier Dialogue’ – until the RSPB, Northern England Raptor Forum and the Hawk & Owl Trust finally had enough after six years of utter game-playing and walked out. Also interesting to note that the Countryside Alliance is still a participant in the PAW England and Wales Raptor Persecution Priority Delivery Group, along with the likes of the Moorland Association (see here for their view on hen harrier conservation) and the National Gamekeepers’ Organisation (we wrote recently about their contribution to tackling illegal raptor persecution here). Yet another charade, almost identical to the Scottish Raptor Priority Group, portrayed as ‘partnership working’ when it’s anything but.

The illegal killing of Bowland Betty provided tangible evidence of what we all knew was happening to the thousands of ‘missing’ hen harriers on UK grouse moors, just as the Countryside Alliance’s latest denial lays bare what we already knew was their real attitude to hen harrier conservation. Bowland Betty wasn’t the first silent witness and certainly isn’t the last…..watch this space…

Alleged raptor killer too ill for court

Thanks to the reader who sent us a copy of this article from the Lanark Gazette.

Barn Owl press cutting

Man arrested after owls found inside a freezer

_70396978_owl5_editA man has been arrested and bailed following the discovery of “a number of” dead owls in a freezer, as well as 25 stuffed birds, according to the BBC.

The 49 -year -old was detained on suspicion of trading in endangered species following a search of his property in Stanford-le-Hope in Essex. The arrest came as part of a wider joint enquiry involving the newly-formed National Crime Agency, the Border Force and the National Wildlife Crime Unit; an enquiry which apparently has so far identified around 150 endangered birds that are suspected to have been sold without the correct permits and certificates.

It’s great to see the new National Crime Agency getting involved with wildlife crime investigations….let’s hope that continues and that they turn their attention to the poisoning, shooting and trapping of UK raptors.

BBC article here.

Scottish govt and police are concealing poisoning incidents

The fiasco that is wildlife crime reporting in Scotland continues today with the release of the Scottish Government’s poisoning stats for the second quarter of this year (i.e. incidents from April, May and June).

These stats are published by SASA (Science and Advice for Scottish Agriculture), a division of the Scottish Government. A few years ago they used to publish the figures in a timely way – these days they’ve introduced a delay of approximately six months.  Here they are.

The stats are quite interesting. Take note of the number of buzzard deaths attributed to ‘probable starving’. These are the buzzards that are supposedly devouring gamebirds quicker than you can say, “Quick, pass the Carbofuran”. But, there’s something far more interesting in the report than that….or rather it’s not in the report…

For some reason, several known poisoning incidents are ‘missing’ from the data. We know that these incidents took place in March, April and May in Highland and Tayside. For one of them (a poisoned buzzard in March), this incident should have been reported in the stats for Q1 (Jan, Feb, March), but it wasn’t. We didn’t challenge that because it was reasonable to assume that a police investigation/raid may still be on-going and any publicity about the poisoning might have compromised a police operation.

But, now it’s October. These poisonings took place 7, 6 and 5 months ago, respectively. There hasn’t been a whisper of a police press statement about any of them. Why not?

And now the Scottish Government’s quarterly poisoning report has been sanitised to remove any mention of these incidents. Why is that?

Who stands to benefit from the concealment of these incidents? Certainly some organisations with a vested interest in wanting the public to believe that poisoning incidents are still on a downward trend, when actually they are not – they are on the increase from last year’s figures but of course nobody wants to admit that and if the figures aren’t in the public domain then they don’t have to admit to it!

Who told SASA to remove the data on these incidents? Was it Police Scotland?

Why don’t we ask them. Let’s ask Sgt Andrew Mavin, who is the Police Scotland Wildlife Crime Coordinator and who is quoted as saying, “Tackling crime, keeping people safe and building confidence is at the centre of everything the new service in Scotland stands for and this is exactly the approach we take to wildlife crime” (see here).

Is it really, Sgt Mavin? Then how do you justify the concealment of these poisoning incidents from public scrutiny? Why didn’t Police Scotland issue a press statement about them? Why didn’t Police Scotland shout it from the rooftops that highly toxic and illegal poisons are being left out in the countryside putting peoples’ lives at risk? Did Police Scotland ask SASA to remove these incidents from their public report? How can we have any confidence in Police Scotland when we find out that serious crimes are being kept hidden from the general public?

Here is his email address: andrew.mavin@scotland.pnn.police.uk

And while we’re on the subject of official cover-ups….we’ve been having a closer look at the Scottish Government’s Wildlife Crime Annual Report (2012) that was published last week (see here). We’re still not ready to write a detailed review on that report but we did notice something that’s relevant to today’s blog – the 2012 poisoning figures given in that report number three incidents. Conveniently, at least one other poisoning incident is ‘missing’. It involved the death of a raven and a crow and the discovery of poisoned meat bait and 2 rabbit baits, and it happened in the ‘Borders’ in May 2012. We blogged about it (here).

Why was this incident excluded from the Scottish Government’s so-called ‘official report’ on wildlife crime in 2012? Was it because no raptor species was reported as being poisoned? In which case, in the 2013 report are we going to see the exclusion of the 35+ poisoned meat baits found in gamebags on Leadhills Estate this year, because no poisoned raptor was actually found?

Let’s ask Environment Minister Paul Wheelhouse: ministerforenvironment@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

Dear Environment Minister,

Please can you explain why confirmed wildlife poisoning incidents are being concealed from the public and excluded from official government reports?

Thanks.

Benyon given the boot

Some good news! Richard Benyon MP, the DEFRA minister, has been booted out in today’s Government reshuffle. He now returns to the back benches, presumably with more time to pursue his ‘sporting’ interests on his grouse moor in Scotland and his pheasant shoot estate in Berkshire.

Benyon had been in post at DEFRA for just over three years, with special responsibility for biodiversity and the natural environment, amongst other things (see here).

He is best known to us for being in office when a buzzard ‘management’ trial was sanctioned in 2012 (see here) which DEFRA almost got away with until public opinion forced a speedy government u-turn (see here).

Benyon also refused to criminalise the possession of the banned poison Carbofuran in England (see here) and didn’t see the need to introduce vicarious liability in England, but instead applauded gamekeepers “for the wonderful work they do in providing excellent biodiversity across our countryside” (see here).

Good riddance.

Buzzard shot – police ‘not currently investigating’

buzzardAn injured buzzard has been rescued on Guernsey – a veterinary x-ray showed it had been shot through the right shoulder with an air rifle.

The buzzard is now being treated in an intensive care unit at a wildlife hospital and is expected to make a full recovery.

Interestingly, according to the BBC, the police have been informed but are ‘not currently investigating’!

Guernsey SPCA are nevertheless appealing for information. Tel: 01481-257261.

Article on Isles News website here

BBC article here

Vicarious liability prosecution?

wane1On July 1st this year, Environment Minister Paul Wheelhouse set out his proposed ‘further measures’ to tackle the continuing problem of illegal raptor persecution (see here).

In response to his announcement, on July 2nd we asked him (see here) for clarification on some of these ‘further measures’ and also for updates on some previously promised measures, including prosecutions under the new vicarious liability legislation.

On August 4th we blogged about the Minister’s responses to our questions (see here).

One of the questions we’d asked him was this:

Question 3:

Please can you advise whether there will be a prosecution under the new vicarious liability legislation following the recent conviction of gamekeeper Peter Bell, found guilty of poisoning offences on the Glasserton and Physgill Estates? If you don’t know the answer (which would be surprising, given that you said in March 2013 that you would be “keeping an eye on this particular area [i.e. vicarious liability] with interest”, please can you provide the contact details of someone who can answer the question?

The Minister’s response was this:

It would be inappropriate to comment further on this case as police enquiries have not yet concluded.

At the time we said we weren’t too impressed with this response, seeing as though 8 months had already elapsed since the original crimes were committed (in December 2012). However, as this was the first time a potential prosecution had been considered under the new legislation, we didn’t have a benchmark for how long these cases might take. We also said we would ask, periodically, for updates on this case so that it couldn’t be quietly swept under the carpet.

It’s now October, ten months after the original crimes were committed, and there’s still no official word. We thought it was time to ask the Minister for another update.

Dear Paul Wheelhouse,

Please could you provide an update on whether there will be a prosecution under the new vicarious liability legislation following the recent conviction of gamekeeper Peter Bell, found guilty of poisoning offences on the Glasserton and Physgill Estates?

Thanks.

Emails to: ministerforenvironment@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

Case against gamekeeper George Mutch: part 2

Criminal proceedings against Scottish gamekeeper George Mutch continued today at Aberdeen Sheriff Court.

Mutch, from Kildrummy Estate in Aberdeenshire, is understood to have been charged with six alleged offences under Sections 1 and 5 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act.

Section 1 of the Act is concerned with the protection of wild birds, their nests and eggs.

Section 5 of the Act is concerned with the prohibition of certain methods of killing and taking wild birds.

This case opened last month (see here) for a pleading diet, but was continued without plea until today’s hearing. The case was adjourned again today, still without plea, until 30th October.

As we wrote last time, this case is of particular interest on several levels and is expected to attract a great deal of interest. Watch this space…