Author: RaptorPersecutionUK

Here are two rare opportunities to join the RSPB’s Investigations Team in Scotland, on the frontline of tackling the ongoing illegal killing of birds of prey.

Here is the job spec, announced today:

Position 1: Full-time, 37.5 hrs per week, permanent.

Position 2: Full-time, 37.5 hrs per week, fixed-term until 31st March 2025.

Salary range: £30,940 to £33,215 per annum.

Closing date: Sunday 11th June 2023.

The RSPB Investigations team has two vacancies in Scotland, and is looking for enthusiastic, organised and committed individuals to join us in helping ensure a better future for our wildlife. This is a rare opportunity to join a dedicated team in the fight against wildlife crime and to really make a difference!

Across Scotland, our magnificent birds of prey continue to be illegally persecuted, with some of our rarest species such as golden eagles, hen harriers, red kites and peregrines regularly targeted. These two roles will be focussed on fieldwork, with the aim of detecting, recording, analysis and dissemination of information on wildlife crime, particularly in relation to priority species and habitats.

If you could thrive in a dynamic, challenging environment where you will have the opportunity to contribute your own ideas within a unique and specialised team, then this could be the perfect opportunity for you!

The successful applicant will need to be based in Scotland and prepared to travel throughout the Scottish uplands and occasionally further afield. Some evening and/or weekend work may also be required.

What’s the role about?

These roles involve working on the front line, following up reports of dead birds, monitoring the nests of some of our rarest breeding species, and carrying out targeted fieldwork in areas with a history of criminal activity. 

An enthusiastic, professional approach to fieldwork is essential. You will be spending a lot of time outside in remote upland environments where excellent navigation skills, confidence in working alone, and health & safety awareness are imperative. You will also need excellent bird identification skills and a comprehensive working knowledge of Scotland’s birds of prey.

Engagement with external partners such as the police and statutory agencies through providing advice, expert witness, and investigative help will be a key part of the role.

You need to be robust, persistent, focused, show initiative and be able to work calmly in pressured situations. 

Essential skills, knowledge and experience:

• A degree in ecology or conservation and/or relevant practical experience
• Ability to undertake demanding fieldwork in remote locations, whether alone or as part of a small team, in all weather and over rough terrain
• Comprehensive knowledge of wild birds, with experience in raptor monitoring
• Knowledge of Scottish wildlife protection legislation
• Knowledge of RSPB’s Investigations team priorities and work
• Experience of practical conservation delivery in support of species & habitat conservation
• Proven IT skills including MS Office software especially Excel, Outlook and Teams
• A confident and personable manner, able to liaise professionally with enforcement partners, and also to handle reports of wildlife crime with understanding and empathy, sometimes in sensitive situations
• Full, manual driving licence, valid in the UK

Desirable skills, knowledge and experience:

• Knowledge of gamebird management practices
• Experience of specialist software eg GIS
• Experience of working with Police standards for information management/best practice, and/or statutory agencies, media, or law enforcement partners
• Knowledge of data protection regulations
• Knowledge and experience in the use of satellite transmitters to monitor birds of prey
• Confident speaking in public eg. giving presentations, media interviews or giving evidence in court

We are looking to fill two roles as part of this vacancy:

• One is a permanent position working 37.5 hours per week;
• The other is a fixed-term contract until 31 March 2025, also working 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.

We are looking to conduct interviews for these positions from 19th June 2023. For further information please contact william.hayward@rspb.org.uk

As part of this application process you will be asked to complete an application form including evidence on how you meet the skills, knowledge, and experience listed above.

We are committed to developing an inclusive and diverse RSPB, in which everyone feels supported, valued, and able to be their full selves. To achieve our vision of creating a world richer in nature, we need more people, and more diverse people, on nature’s side. People of colour and disabled people are currently underrepresented across the environment, climate, sustainability, and conservation sector. If you identify as a person of colour and/or disabled, we are particularly interested in receiving your application. Contact us to discuss any additional support you may need to complete your application.

The RSPB is a licenced sponsor. This role is eligible for UK Visa Sponsorship

The RSPB is an equal opportunities employer. This role is covered by the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974.

To apply, please click here.

Press release from League Against Cruel Sports (16th May 2023)

HISTORIC VOTE TO BAN SNARES IN WALES

Leading animal welfare charity the League Against Cruel Sports has praised politicians in Wales following a crucial vote on snaring.

A vote in the Senedd on Tuesday night has paved the way for a complete ban in Wales on cruel traps known as snares, the first country in the UK to take this big step forward for animal welfare.

The vote to ban snares was part of the stage three debate on the Agriculture (Wales) Bill, during which amendments designed to water down the snares ban were defeated.

The legislative process now moves on to the fourth and final stage in which the Senedd is expected to ratify the bill as early as next week, subject to King’s consent.

It follows over five years of campaigning by animal welfare charity the League Against Cruel Sports.

Will Morton, head of public affairs at the League Against Cruel Sports, said: “Wales is leading the way in animal welfare by being the first country to ban these cruel and indiscriminate traps.

“We thank the thousands of campaigners who are backing the ban in Wales and the MSs who gave cross party support to make it become a reality.”

The debate on Tuesday evening saw the defeat of amendments to allow so-called ‘humane cable restraints’, a term used by the shooting industry lobby to try and mask the cruelty of these devices.

Snares are cruel wire traps – nearly quarter of a million lie hidden in the British countryside at any one time – and are used by shooting industry gamekeepers on ‘game’ bird shoots to trap wildlife.

They tighten around the neck, torso or legs of the animal and cause immense pain and suffering to their trapped victims for hours or days before the animal is either shot or faces a lingering death.

They trap indiscriminately and government figures from Defra show nearly three quarters of the animals caught are not the intended target species.

Polling carried out by YouGov in January 2021 showed 78 per cent of the Welsh public wanted snares to be made illegal.

Once the Agriculture (Wales) Bill is passed – something that is all but inevitable – it will then come into force two months after receiving royal assent.

Will added: “The ban on the use of snares will protect wild, farmed and domestic animals from falling victim to these brutal devices, a move that will be welcomed by the vast majority of the Welsh people.

“The next step is to lobby the UK and Scottish governments to follow the precedence set in Wales and to ban these barbaric devices.”

ENDS

The Scottish Parliament is set to debate the use of animal snares at stage 2 of its Wildlife and Muirburn (Scotland) Bill, which is anticipated to take place in early autumn. Last month animal welfare charity OneKind published a new report on snaring (see here) and has campaigned for a complete ban on snares in Scotland, along with another REVIVE coalition member, League Against Cruel Sports Scotland.

Last August the RSPB called for an immediate moratorium on the release of birds for shooting, such as pheasants, partridges and ducks, due to the risk of them spreading highly pathogenic avian flu to wild bird populations (see here).

DEFRA chose to ignore the call.

Now the RSPB is repeating the call, this time to DEFRA and the devolved governments, asking them to take a precautionary approach ‘to limit the spread of avian influenza in wild birds and reduce the risk of viral re-assortment leading to new strains of the disease’.

In a blog written two days ago by RSPB Senior Policy Officer Claire Smith (well worth a read – here), the RSPB says that since 2021 there have been 10 outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza in gamebird rearing premises: one in Scotland, five in England and four in Wales. This includes the most recent at Bettws Hall Game Farm, near Newtown, Powys, here, which has been described as ‘Europe’s leading game hatchery’.

Claire also points to DEFRA’s risk assessment on the spread of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) from pheasants to wild birds, which concluded that the risk of transmission to birds of prey from pheasants infected with HPAIV before release is ‘high to very high’, and the risk of transmission to birds of prey from pheasants infected with HPAIV after release is ‘very high’.

That risk assessment can be read/downloaded here:

Also worth noting yesterday’s news that two more poultry workers have tested positive for bird flu in England (see here).

Press release from the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), 10th May 2023.

INCONSISTENT LAWS & FUNDING PUTS UK WILDLIFE IN DANGER

Illegal wildlife crime such as fox hunting, badger baiting and hare coursing is going on under the radar in the UK, according to new research.  

Wild animals face horrific acts of cruelty by being poisoned, trapped and set upon by dogs. Inconsistent laws, a chronic shortage of resourcing and a lack of awareness of wildlife crime are enabling this problem.  

The report ‘Make wildlife matter—spotlight on wildlife crime: working with police and enforcers for change’, is based on these findings, according to a new comprehensive study commissioned by IFAW from criminologists at Nottingham Trent University and the University of Gloucestershire. The report shines a spotlight on how wild animals in the UK need greater protection. 

There are also mounting concerns about wildlife crime links to organised crime. Specifically, it found:  

• 81% of the police force respondents said they felt wildlife crime was linked to theft and dishonesty offences; 
• 50% highlighted links to firearms; 
• 38% linked it to drugs, and; 
• 50% believed wildlife crime was connected to violent crimes.   

Police, legal experts and NGOs cite wildlife crime’s ‘non-notifiable’ status as a major source of its inequality under the law. This means incidents do not have to be reported by the police to the Home Office that use these to compile national crime statistics. 

“Wildlife in the UK is already in crisis—being pushed to the brink through habitat loss, climate change and pollution. But these alarming findings show that criminals are purposefully going out of their way to harm or make profit from them,” Frances Goodrum, Head of Campaigns, IFAW UK said.   

“The fact that wildlife crime cannot be reported as a crime in a meaningful way means the government cannot measure or manage the current situation. Countless sinister crimes could be being committed—we simply do not know—it is all very ‘finger in the air’. This must change – our wildlife deserves better”, Goodrum added.  

Because wildlife crimes occur under such a veil of secrecy and in remote places, overstretched polices forces have difficulty allocating resources to investigate and prosecute them.  

To tackle the problem IFAW is launching a campaign called ‘make wildlife matter’. We are calling on the government to protect our precious wildlife by introducing the following measures:  

• Making wildlife crimes notifiable  
• Harmonising all UK wildlife law    
• Ensuring there is at least one dedicated full-time wildlife crime officer per force 
• Incorporating wildlife crime into the Policing Education Qualification Framework  
• Developing enforcement, prosecution and sentencing guidelines to combat inconsistencies around wildlife crime scenarios and how those should be dealt with. 

To sign the petition, please visit here.  

ENDS 

Calls for wildlife crimes to be made ‘notifiable’ in the UK are not new – many have been asking for this simple measure to be introduced for years, notably the umbrella organisation Wildlife & Countryside LINK (e.g. see here) – there are ongoing discussions between LINK’s Wildlife Crime Group and Ministers but little action has resulted.

To understand why it’s important that wildlife crimes become notifiable, as well as an explanation about other obstacles getting in the way of effective wildlife crime enforcement in the UK, it’s well worth reading this IFAW-commissioned research report (as mentioned in the press release, above):

Don’t forget to sign the IFAW petition so that a unified voice can be presented to the Rt Hon Chris Philp MP in his capacity as Minister of State for Crime, Policing and Fire, asking him to help make wildlife crimes notifiable so these crimes are officially recorded in national statistics. Petition is here.

WARNING – DISTRESSING IMAGES

Blog reader Tim Melling has provided the following photographs and words:

“I was out for a walk on the moors (with my wife) at about 2pm on 9 May 2023 on Langsett Moors at SE 184001 when we saw a male Red Grouse stumbling along the track in front of us. I could see that it’s left foot was missing and it’s right foot was just attached by a few tendons. It could not spring to take flight. Apart from the missing legs it didn’t seem weak or ill. We left it where we had found it. It looked to me like the legs had been snapped off, and I assumed it had been caught in a spring trap“.

The injuries, as horrific as they are, don’t appear to be fresh so this red grouse has been able to survive for some time after its traumatic injuries.

I agree with Tim’s assessment, that the injuries look to be consistent with the bird being caught in an uncovered spring trap*. A report published by the REVIVE coalition in 2020 provided the first quantitative estimate of the number of traps deployed on driven grouse moors in Scotland to eradicate predators, and that they often also catch non-target species (see here).

There isn’t an equivalent report for grouse moors in England that I’m aware of but anybody who’s spent time on the English moors will know that traps are also deployed routinely.

If that isn’t bad enough, that this is happening in a so-called National Park to support recreational shooting is beyond acceptable to many of us.

*Update: it’s been suggested on social media that these injuries are also consistent with a red grouse flying into a wire mesh fence at speed and getting stuck.

After more than two years of formal legal proceedings, Chris Packham’s libel trial has finally drawn to a close.

Regular blog readers will know that Chris is taking libel action against three individuals associated with Country Squire Magazine, who are accused of writing defamatory material about him, notably accusations of dishonesty and fraud in relation to the rescue of a number of tigers from a Spanish circus, and allegations that Chris faked a death threat letter to himself. The defendants are Dominic Wightman (Defendant 1), Nigel Bean (Defendant 2) and Paul Read (Defendant 3).

Chris has vigorously denied all the allegations and maintains that the defendants have embarked on a campaign of online hatred and abuse which has caused him anguish, anxiety and distress (see here for a press release from his legal team at the start of this trial two weeks ago and see here for Chris’s witness statement about the devastating impact of it all).

During the second week of the trial at the Royal Courts of Justice, the three defendants from Country Squire Magazine were cross-examined by Jonathan Price, Chris’s barrister.

Defendant 1 was on the stand for all of Tuesday and a small part of Wednesday morning. Defendant 2 and Defendant 3 took up the rest of Wednesday. I’ll write more about what they each said, once the judgement has been received.

For clarity, Defendants 1 & 2 were claiming dual defences of ‘truth’ and ‘public interest’ in relation to the alleged libellous material that was published by CSM. Defendant 3 claims that he wasn’t an author or editor of the alleged libellous material and that his re-tweeting of the articles didn’t amount to serious harm to Chris’s reputation.

During the trial, Defendants 1 & 2 withdrew a number of their defences as it became apparent that they didn’t have the evidence to support their allegations against Chris. The Honourable Mr Justice Saini described events as “a moving feast” and took time to clarify the changeable positions. It was hard to follow but my understanding of what was withdrawn and what remained is as follows:

• The allegation that Chris wrote a fake death threat letter to himself was “unequivocally withdrawn”.
• The allegation that Chris dishonestly took part in writing a press release relating to the death of a tiger called ‘Simi’ – the ‘truth’ defence was withdrawn but the ‘public interest’ defence remained.
• The allegation that Chris was dishonest when fundraising for the Wildheart Trust to support the rescue of five tigers from a Spanish circus – the ‘truth’ defence and the ‘public interest’ defence remained.
• The allegation that Chris was dishonest when he re-tweeted an article relating to the burning of peat on two grouse moors during COP26 – the ‘truth’ defence was withdrawn but the ‘public interest’ defence remained.
• The allegation that Chris was dishonest when fundraising for the Wildheart Trust during Covid (alleged insurance fraud) – the ‘truth’ defence was withdrawn but the ‘public interest’ defence remained.

Closing arguments were heard on Thursday from the legal representatives of Defendants 1 & 2 (Nicholas O’Brien) and of Defendant 3 (David Price KC), as well as from Jonathan Price. Mr Justice Saini reserved judgement and told the parties that he anticipated handing down judgement in writing before the end of this month.

Once the judgement has been announced, it is expected there will be a further hearing to determine costs.

The second defamation case that Chris is bringing, against Fieldsports Channel Ltd and one of its journalists, Ben O’Rourke, is ongoing. In June 2022, Fieldsports Channel Ltd published an article and an accompanying video, accusing Chris of dishonest and unethical behaviour. They claimed that Chris wrote a fake death threat letter to himself and that he dishonestly claimed that it was sent to his home by an anonymous member of the shooting and farming community (see here).

There should be an update on the status of this case shortly, given the “unequivocal withdrawal” of a similar allegation by Defendants 1 & 2 in the CSM case.

Press statement from Crown Prosecution Service (11th May 2023)

Landowning company fined in ground-breaking case

A landowning company in Yorkshire has been fined for allowing vegetation to be burnt without a licence in an area of Special Scientific Interest.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said that areas of land owned by Dunlin Ltd on Midhope Moors in Upper Midhope, Stocksbridge, near Sheffield, were burned illegally in October 2022.

The Midhope Estate is within a Dark Peak Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSI), the South Pennie Moors Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and the Peak District Moors Site of Protection Area (SPA).

Peatland areas store vast quantities of carbon and, if they are damaged, emit this carbon into the atmosphere. It also damages the habitat for birds, flora and fauna.

Landowners sometimes burn vegetation on peatland as part of land management and they can apply for a licence that allows them to burn limited areas.

Land agents acting for Dunlin, JM Osbourne Rural and Sporting, applied for a licence to the Peatland Protection Policy Team of the Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on 30 March 2022.

However, it was refused as they hadn’t given enough detail about the amount of land to be burned. Detailed feedback was given to help with any future applications. No further application was made.

On 18 October 2022, a conservation officer from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds was visiting the area and noticed plumes of smoke coming from the land.

He took photographs and video footage and sent this and a report to the Peatland Protection Policy Team. Inspectors visited the land a few weeks later and found evidence of the offences.

On 10 March 2023, one of the company directors, Julian Richmond-Watson was interviewed. He said he assumed the activity was allowed and apologised on behalf of his gamekeepers who carried it out. He said he didn’t realise that an application had been made for a licence for his company.

On 10 May 2023, at Sheffield Magistrates’ Court, guilty pleas were entered on behalf of the company to six offences in contravention of the Heather and Grass etc Burning Regulations 2021 and a fine of £1,800 was imposed on Dunlin Ltd. Costs of £125 and a surcharge of £720 were also imposed. 

Sentencing, Judge Gould said the offending had a significant environmental impact and there was a reckless failure by the company.

Senior Crown Prosecutor Maqsood Khan, of CPS Mersey Cheshire’s Fraud and Rural Crime Unit said: “This is the first case of its kind to come to come to this unit of the Crown Prosecution Service. The legislation around this offending is relatively new.

“The company was clearly reckless as to the impact of their actions in burning this land.

“Land agents acting for them made an application to legally burn areas of vegetation so they were clearly aware that they needed one. When the licence was refused, they simply went ahead and did it anyway.

“The actions damaged an area of land that is already at risk and undermined the regulatory system in place to protect areas of special scientific interest.

“The company is now paying the price.”

ENDS

This is an excellent result, although the fine was pathetic and can’t possibly be seen as a deterrent. However, the publicity about this successful prosecution has been quite prominent.

I couldn’t help but notice the name of the land agent involved.

Here’s some of the interesting media coverage:

RSPB blog here

BBC News here

The Independent here