Author: RaptorPersecutionUK

A couple of weeks ago I launched a crowd funder to help support Chris Packham’s libel action in two separate cases.

As many of you will know, Chris is currently suing three individuals from Country Squire Magazine (CSM) for alleged defamation (see here), and has recently begun legal proceedings against Fieldsports Channel Ltd and one of its journalists, also for alleged defamation (see here).

The public’s response to the crowd funder has been phenomenal – quickly passing £100K in just ten days, and it has now passed £115K with another 12 days still to run.

If you were one of the 5,944 donors (so far), thank you so very much. The outpouring of support has been deeply appreciated by Chris and his team.

The case against Fieldsports Channel Ltd is still in its early stages but the case against the three individuals from CSM, that has been running for two years, is reaching conclusion with a trial set to start in a few weeks.

There have been numerous hearings in the CSM case already, mostly procedural.

At the most recent hearing, held in the High Court of Justice King’s Bench Division on 30 March 2023, the Honourable Mrs Justice Heather Williams DBE heard an application from CSM Defendants 1 & 2 (Dominic Wightman & Nigel Bean, acting as litigants-in-person) who were seeking specific disclosure and/or inspection of a Schedule of 42 categories of documents.

In response, Chris’s lawyers argued that Chris had provided all disclosable documents not covered by legal professional privilege and that the further documents requested were either irrelevant to the defendant’s case as pleaded, had already been provided, or were not in his control.

The Honourable Mrs Justice Williams DBE considered the application in a two and a half hour hearing and in a lengthy and detailed judgment delivered afterwards she dealt with each of the requests in turn, refusing permission for all 42 of them after deeming the requests speculative and irrelevant.

Here is a copy of her judgement (which is a public document):

The Honourable Mrs Justice Williams DBE further ordered that the First and Second Defendants are to pay the Claimant’s (Chris’s) costs of the Specific Disclosure Application within 14 days. These costs were assessed at £17,500 plus VAT (= £21K).

For clarity, the Third CSM Defendant (Paul Read), who has legal representation, took no part in the Specific Disclosure Application or the associated hearing and is not liable for this particular costs order.

The CSM trial will commence on 2nd May 2023.

This blog passed another milestone a week or so ago, reaching nine million views.

Here’s the photograph that I publish every time a new milestone is reached. This is a golden eagle that was found dead on a grouse moor in the Cairngorms National Park in 2006. It had been illegally poisoned. It epitomises everything in its pitiful, poignant, senselessness.

What’s changed?

On the raptor-killing front, not much. Birds of prey in the UK are still being illegally trapped, shot and poisoned. In the last ten years, 72% of convictions for raptor persecution crimes were linked to gamebird shooting.

In Scotland last week, the 56th gamekeeper since 1990 was convicted for raptor persecution crime.

You might ask then, what’s the point of continuing to write this blog, if progress seems so discouragingly slow? Believe me, I’ve asked this question many times.

But the progress we’re seeing in Scotland is reason enough for me to continue.

It’s taken decades of campaigning, by many, many people who were involved long before I started, to convince the Scottish Government that raptor persecution is ‘a thing’, and is happening at such a scale as to impact on the distribution and abundance of several species at a population level. That’s not just one or two so-called ‘bad apples’ killing the odd bird of prey every once in a while; that’s the systematic killing of birds of prey by a lot of people working in an industry that has evaded accountability for way too long.

And no, I don’t believe they’re all at it, but enough of them are, and it’s often difficult to distinguish between them, especially when industry representatives continually refuse to call out the criminals. But that’s their problem, not mine.

My problem is that this blog has only reached nine million views. It needs many more.

Thank you to everybody who supports and contributes, including those who share the blog content on social media channels and in conversations with friends, family, colleagues and associates.

Nine million views is a lot, but it’s not enough. There’s still so much work to do. 

Onwards towards ten million.

Over the last few years the RSPB has been asking the public to report sightings of muirburn on grouse moors throughout the UK.

Muirburn is the intentional burning of heather and grass vegetation (usually to promote new growth) and is a land management practice typically associated with managing land for grouse-shooting, deer, and some agricultural purposes. It is currently ‘lightly regulated’ with some outdated statutory regulations supported by a voluntary code of best practice – the Muirburn Code.

The RSPB has developed an App to collect and report your sightings on the move, or you can report on this website when you get home.

This mapping information is crucial for the RSPB’s advocacy team to ensure that muirburn on deep peatland soils is banned.

The burning season runs to April 15th in England (and can be extended to April 30th in Scotland with landowner’s permission) so if you’re out and about enjoying the fine Easter weather, please keep an eye out and take a note of any moorland fires you see, or evidence of recent burning.

You can view the burning maps already produced by the RSPB here.

Deliberately setting fire to peat-rich moorland, in the midst of a climate emergency, is highly controversial (some would argue moronic), especially when it’s being done simply to help increase the number of red grouse available to be shot in the autumn. A recently published report commissioned by REVIVE, the coalition for grouse moor reform, entitled Muirburning for Grouse: Does it Increase or Decrease Net Carbon Emissions provides an excellent appraisal of the arguments and evidence. There’s also an excellent overview of the situation written by Dr Richard Dixon, the former Director of both Friends of the Earth Scotland and WWF Scotland, here.

The Scottish Government’s Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Bill includes proposals to ban burning on deep peat (exact definition of ‘deep’ to be defined but currently proposed as 40cm) and to licence all other muirburn, thus restricting its use in some circumstances.

In response, the grouse-shooting industry has gone into meltdown (pun intended) in a desperate bid to protect its ability to set fire to grouse moors (because without it, the days of intensively-managed grouse moors are numbered). The industry has been heavily promoting some preliminary research results by Dr Andreas Heinemeyer from the University of York whose report suggests that burning may be beneficial and enhance carbon storage in the longer term. The RSPB has published a strong response urging caution over the interpretation of these results – see here.

In England, an investigation by Greenpeace last year revealed widespread burning on grouse moors despite a Westminster ban against burning on protected peatlands (see here).

As the arguments, and the fires, and the denials, rage on, it’s critical that evidence of intentionally-set moorland fires is collected to inform Government policy on both sides of the border. Please do submit your records to the RSPB (information page here) to help them argue the case.