Blog

Moorland Association’s amateurish attempt to analyse Hen Harrier tag data is full of holes (much like a shot Hen Harrier)

The illegal killing of Hen Harriers on British grouse moors has been known, for years, to be the main cause of the species’ desperately low population size in the UK.

This male hen harrier died in 2019 after his leg was almost severed in an illegally set trap that had been placed next to his nest on a Scottish grouse moor (see here). Photo by Ruth Tingay

The sheer weight of scientific and police evidence, collected over several decades, has led to this fact being undisputed by successive Governments, statutory conservation agencies, the police’s National Wildlife Crime Unit, scientists, raptor workers, conservationists….in fact everyone, except for those representing the grouse shooting industry.

That shouldn’t surprise anyone. These crimes are a public relations disaster for the grouse shooting industry, more so than any other environmentally and socially damaging aspects of grouse moor management, of which there are many.

As grouse shooting has fallen under closer scrutiny over the last decade or so, and the threat of regulation looms large in England (and has already been introduced in Scotland), the grouse shooting industry has been in overdrive in its attempts to portray itself as being benign at worst, and ‘a conservation success story‘ at best. It has also gone to great lengths to try and discredit and smear the reputations of any organisation, or individual, who has dared to challenge this view.

So today’s latest effort, a so-called ‘analysis’ of Hen Harrier tag data, published by the Moorland Association (grouse owners’ lobby group in England), that purports to show that ‘missing’ tagged Hen Harriers probably haven’t been killed by grouse moor gamekeepers, shouldn’t come as a shock to anyone.

The Moorland Association has produced what it calls a ‘Comprehensive Satellite Tagging Register’, supposedly documenting the fates of 269 Hen Harriers from 2002 to part way through 2025. The title itself is a complete misnomer because the spreadsheet includes 99 Hen Harriers that were fitted with radio tags, not satellite tags, way back in the early to mid 2000s before satellite tags came to the fore.

The Moorland Association writes on its website,

“We are not asking anyone to take our word for any of it; we are asking them to check it“.

So I did.

It wasn’t a comprehensive check – it didn’t need to be. I simply looked at the data for several well known Hen Harriers and could immediately see that at least seven of them had incorrect information assigned to them. If that’s the level of incompetence, found with just a quick glance at the data, how on earth is anyone supposed to trust any subsequent ‘analysis’ of the data?!

The seven incorrect entries that were found very quickly are:

  1. Hen Harrier Bowland Beth (also known as Bowland Betty). The Moorland Association’s Register states her body wasn’t recovered, and neither was it submitted for post mortem. Actually, her body was recovered, on the Swinton Estate, North Yorkshire, and a post mortem was undertaken, revealing she had a fractured left leg which led to her death. A pioneering forensic examination followed, undertaken by scientists at the University College London Institute of Orthopaedics and Musculoskeletal Science, who found a tiny fragment of lead at the site of the fracture, confirming that she had been shot. According to the Countryside Alliance, this expert scientific evidence was just ‘supposition’ (see here).
  2. Hen Harrier Rowan (Hawk & Owl Trust tag). The Moorland Association’s Register states that Rowan’s body was recovered, but it wasn’t submitted for a post mortem. Actually, his body was submitted for a post mortem at the Zoological Society of London, whose expert vets concluded, “ … the bird’s injuries were entirely consistent with it having been shot“, despite the Hawk & Owl Trust (in bed with the grouse shooters at that time) claiming the findings were “not wholly conclusive” (see here).
Zoological Society of London radiograph showing Rowan’s fractured leg

3. Hen Harrier Free. The Moorland Association’s Register states that Free’s body wasn’t recovered and nor was it submitted for a post mortem. Actually, Free’s mutilated corpse was discovered, on moorland in the Yorkshire Dales National Park and it was submitted for a post mortem, which revealed the cause of death was having his head twisted and pulled off. One (ringed) leg had also been torn off whilst he was still alive (here).

4. Hen Harrier Asta. The Moorland Association’s Register states that Asta’s body wasn’t recovered and nor was it submitted for a post mortem. This is technically accurate, but her satellite tag was later found crudely attached to a Crow, in a sick ploy to disguise the crime, and it was determined that Asta’s wings must have been ripped off for the harness to have been removed intact from her body (here).

5. Hen Harrier Susie. The Moorland Association’s Register states that Susie’s body was not recovered and it was not submitted for a post mortem. Actually, Susie’s body was recovered, from a grouse moor in the North Pennines, and it was submitted for a post mortem, which revealed she’d been shot, although it couldn’t be determined if that was the cause of death (here).

6. Hen Harrier Edna. The Moorland Association’s Register states that Edna’s body was not recovered and it was not submitted for a post mortem. Actually, Edna’s body was recovered, and it was submitted for a post mortem, but it was too decomposed for the pathologist to determine a cause of death. The police still suspected she’d been illegally killed, and there are suggestions that her tag data had shown she’d been killed elsewhere and then transported to a windfarm to make it look as though she’d collided with a wind turbine (here).

7. Hen Harrier Margaret. The Moorland Association’s Register states that Margaret’s body was recovered but that it wasn’t submitted for a post mortem. Actually, Margaret’s body was not recovered, but her satellite tag was, and an examination revealed it had been ‘removed’ (here).

I’m sure if I looked harder I could find other examples of inaccurate data but there’s no need to spend any more time looking, because these initial seven are enough to render the Moorland Association’s ‘analysis’ as flawed.

It’s not clear who produced this spreadsheet for the Moorland Association because there isn’t a name attributed to it, which seems odd when the Moorland Association’s main tenet is that it is being transparent whereas the RSPB is not. Perhaps the author was Mr G. Keeper.

There’s also a ‘report’, to accompany the (flawed) data set. This document is hilarious, and it’s no wonder the author didn’t want their name on it. For a start, they’ve grouped together two very different types of tracker (radio tags and satellite tags) with an unqualified assumption that the outcomes are comparable without taking into consideration the massive number of variables between the two operating systems.

Inevitably, the report attacks the RSPB because the RSPB declined to share their satellite tag data with the Moorland Association. The author contends that this is because the RSPB has something to hide. Yeah, giving up highly sensitive data to the very industry that’s responsible for this species’ perilous conservation status makes perfect sense, right?

The author goes on to argue that the RSPB’s interpretation of its own data is flawed because the RSPB’s mapping resolution is too broad. Good grief. Does the author not understand that the RSPB’s analysis is based on a very high mapping resolution but that it only publishes low resolution data to protect sensitive information?!

Critical thinking is entirely absent from this report.

Moorland Assoc flawed HH sat tag analysis report_Dec2025Download

The Moorland Association’s accompanying blog to this ‘report’ claims that its ‘analysis’ challenges the findings of the Murgatroyd et al (2019) paper. That’s the paper that demonstrated that at least 72% of Hen Harriers satellite-tagged by Natural England were presumed to have been illegally killed on or close to driven grouse moors (see here). The Murgatroyd paper was published in one of the world’s top-rated peer-reviewed scientific journals:

The Murgatroyd paper was based on a comprehensive and complex statistical analysis of Hen Harrier satellite tag data. Funny, I didn’t find any statistical analysis in the Moorland Association’s anonymous ‘report’, just a multi-coloured word salad based on inaccurate data.

If the Moorland Association is so certain of its ‘analysis’, perhaps it will submit its findings to a peer-reviewed scientific journal?

Trial to resume of two Scottish gamekeepers relating to alleged shooting & killing of Red Kites in Cairngorms National Park

The trial of two Scottish gamekeepers, accused of offences relating to the alleged shooting and killing of Red Kites in the Cairngorms National Park in February 2025, is set to resume next week.

Head gamekeeper Graeme Rankin and assistant gamekeeper Steven Hague have both denied the charges.

Red Kite. Photo by Ronnie Gilbert

The pair appeared at Aberdeen Sheriff Court for a four-day trial at the end of April 2025, after an earlier trial, scheduled for December 2025, was adjourned as the two defence lawyers, both KCs (Kings Counsel), lodged a motion suggesting the Sheriff should recuse himself from the hearing as he was an RSPB member (see here).

The four-day trial in April was extended because the court ran out of time to hear from all the witnesses. It will resume on Monday 15 June 2026.

NB: Comments are turned off as legal proceedings are still live.

Satellite-tagged White-tailed Eagle ‘disappeared’ on Snilesworth Estate, North York Moors National Park

Further to the news earlier this week that a young satellite-tagged White-tailed Eagle (known as G834) had ‘disappeared’ on 1st May in what the police describe as suspicious circumstances, on a grouse-shooting estate in the North York Moors National Park (see here), one of five satellite-tagged White-tailed Eagles to have vanished in recent months (here), it has now been revealed that his last known location was on the Snilesworth Estate.

This news didn’t come from the appeal for information issued by North Yorkshire Police last Monday – that vague appeal just gave the location as, ‘the western side of the North York Moors‘. Instead, the information has come from a lengthy feature article in this morning’s Guardian newspaper, written by Chief Reporter Daniel Boffey.

Photos by Ruth Tingay

Daniel Boffey visited the estate this week and was given short shrift by gamekeeper Charles Woof, who, when asked about the missing eagle, reportedly said:

“I don’t know anything about it” and “It’s private property, I am going to have to ask you to leave“.

The article refers to Woof’s 2008 conviction, where he admitted to using a baited trap to catch birds of prey. That’s interesting. I thought the shooting industry claimed to have a zero tolerance policy to raptor persecution and that anyone convicted would be kicked out of the profession? Apparently not.

Mark Thomas, Head of the RSPB’s Investigations Team is also quoted in the article, having been asked for his opinion about what might have happened to White-tailed Eagle G834:

“I think something has happened in the middle of the night whilst this eagle was at roost. Now, these things don’t fly around in the dark. They will wait till first light.

“If you’re asking me to look at the probability … it’s most likely the bird has been shot. And if the bird is shot whilst it’s roosting, then it’s being shot at night, potentially with thermal imaging gear“.

The article also reports that ‘Snilesworth estate management declined to comment‘. I don’t know who manages the estate these days but for many years it was managed by ‘grouse guru’ Mark Osborne’s company, starting in 2000, according to an earlier version of the company’s website:

One of Osborne’s other companies, William Powell Sporting, currently sells shooting days (Grouse, Pheasant & Red-legged Partridge) at Snilesworth:

Here is a review from one happy Snilesworth customer, featured on a William Powell Sporting publicity brochure:

Photo by Ruth Tingay

The Guardian article is careful to emphasise that there is nothing to suggest that gamekeeper Mr Woof or his team may have been involved in the eagle’s disappearance. Boffey writes:

‘The range of possible suspects is huge, including local farmers and others connected to nearby grouse lands, of which there are many‘.

The article also mentions that on the day the Guardian reporter visited, Mr Woof was ‘busy preparing for a charity clay pigeon shoot‘.

That’ll be this one, happening today, organised by the Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust (GWCT).

Hopefully the charity shoot guests won’t be causing any disturbance to the local wildlife as they shoot their way around the six clay pigeon stands across the estate and they can keep an eye out for the missing eagle…

Raven shot in Essex: Police appeal for information

Press release from Essex Police (4 June 2026):

COLCHESTER: APPEAL AFTER RAVEN SHOT IN SUSPECTED WILDLIFE CRIME

We are appealing for information after a raven was shot dead in West Bergholt.

It was reported the bird was shot in Nayland Road on 1 June and later died.

Raven photo by Pete Walkden

Shooting wild birds without lawful reason is an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.

We want to hear from anyone who was in the area on 1 June, or the night before, and may have seen anything suspicious or has doorbell, CCTV or dashcam footage which could help our enquiries.

PC Jed Raven said:

“This was a distressing incident and we are carrying out enquiries to establish exactly what happened.

“Intentionally harming defenceless wildlife and birds is not just illegal, it is cruel and can lead to the animal suffering before death.

“If you were in the area and saw anything, or have any footage which may help, please get in touch with us“.

Please contact us quoting investigation 42/85306/26.

You can contact us by submitting a report on our website or by using our online Live Chat service, which is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

Visit our website to find out more about our online reporting services.

Alternatively, you can call 101.

If you would prefer to report anonymously, you can contact the independent charity Crimestoppers by visiting their website or by calling 0800 555 111.

ENDS

Appeal Court throws out Moorland Association’s legal challenge against new burning regulations

Good news!

The Appeal Court has thrown out the Moorland Association’s legal challenge against the new burning regulations, which restrict burning on deep peat.

Royal Courts of Justice, London (photo by Ruth Tingay)

If you recall, the Moorland Association (grouse moor owners’ lobby group in England), along with three chums, applied for a judicial review last year, seeking permission to challenge Defra’s new regulations on peatland burning (Heather and Grass etc. Burning (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2025), which further restrict the 2021 Regulations for burning over specific areas of peatland, specifically limiting the depth of peat where fires can be lit.

These regulations, which came in to force on 30 September 2025, were a significant blow to grouse moor owners because rotational burning (on peatland moors) is a fundamental aspect of managing a grouse moor to facilitate the maximum number of Red Grouse available to be shot.

The Moorland Association’s grounds for legal challenge could be distilled down to, ‘It’s not fair‘ and ‘Who are you to tell us what we can do on our land‘, but if you want the specific details then see here and here.

In January 2026, Mrs Justice Lieven heard the Moorland Association’s case and told the MA’s lawyers that she considered their arguments ‘hopeless’ and that “It [the Moorland Association’s argument] just seems to lose all sense of reality“.

She refused permission for the judicial review to proceed to a full hearing, because in her view, the Moorland Association’s grounds were all unarguable.

Undeterred by having to pay £29,000 costs to Defra for the first hearing, the Moorland Association decided to appeal Justice Lieven’s decision.

Another judge has now reached the same conclusion as Justice Lieven and has also refused permission for the Moorland Association’s case to proceed.

That brings the legal challenge to a close.

More news on the satellite-tagged White-tailed Eagle that ‘disappeared’ on a grouse shooting estate in the North York Moors National Park

On Monday the news broke that a young satellite-tagged White-tailed Eagle had ‘disappeared’ in suspicious circumstances on a grouse shooting estate in the North York Moors National Park (see here).

I was critical of the vague appeal for information issued by North Yorkshire Police and said I would write more about the details that hadn’t been included in that appeal.

However, since then, there has been a new development. I can’t explain any further at the moment but all will become apparent in due course. For this reason, I’ve decided not to add any of the missing details, at least not just yet. If the new development doesn’t progress as I expect it to, then I will come back to this news story.

Meanwhile, it’s worth talking about G834, the eagle at the centre of the police investigation, and placing his suspicious disappearance in to wider context.

White-tailed Eagle G834, prior to fledging, after being ringed and fitted with its satellite tag (photo by Tim Mackrill, Roy Dennis Wildlife Foundation)

G834 hatched in Dorset in 2025, the first wild-fledged White-tailed Eagle in that county for over 240 years (see here).

His parents first paired up in 2023 after being released in 2020 as part of the Isle of Wight Reintroduction Project, led by the Roy Dennis Wildlife Foundation and Forestry England.

G834 was the product of their first successful breeding attempt, and brought the number of wild-fledged WTEs in England up to six since the project began (one chick in Sussex in 2023, two chicks in Sussex in 2024, and two chicks in Sussex and one chick in Dorset in 2025).

He was the star of the show at Poole Harbour at the beginning of this year, where 30 young members of the Young Birders’ Club, an initiative set up by the brilliant charity, Birds of Poole Harbour, were able to watch him feeding in the harbour. The significance of this sighting was summed up by Birds of Poole Harbour Project organiser, Sam Ryde:

“This was such an important and historical moment. To be able to show a group of young conservationists a wild born White-tailed Eagle right here in Dorset is beyond special. Not only that, to be able to explain to them how these projects work, why it’s important and actually show them the outcome is what it’s all about. These reintroduction projects change the baseline for what’s considered ‘normal’ in these landscapes. For many people here in Dorset and Poole Harbour White-tailed Eagles are a new-comer due to the fate they suffered all those years ago. However, kids will now grow up in Dorset with White-tailed Eagles having always been a part of their local heritage, which they’ll want to continue to protect and conserve”.

Three months later, G834 made the fatal mistake of visiting a grouse moor in the North York Moors National Park where, only a few hours after arriving, his satellite tag stopped transmitting whilst he was roosting nearby overnight and he hasn’t been seen since.

The circumstances remind me of the fate of the young Golden Eagle called Merrick, believed to have been shot, killed and removed overnight from a roost site in the Moorfoot Hills, south Scotland, in October 2023.

G834 is the fifth satellite-tagged White-tailed Eagle to have ‘disappeared’ in suspicious circumstances in the last year. Here are the others:

  • In May 2025, a young satellite-tagged White-tailed Eagle ‘disappeared’ on a grouse moor in Nairnshire, Scotland (see here).
  • On 13 September 2025, the satellite tag belonging to White-tailed Eagle G615 was found on remote moorland in mid-Wales. Dyfed Powys Police stated the tag had been removed with a sharp instrument before being hidden in an attempt to dispose of it. Searches in the area to try and locate the body of the bird have so far been unsuccessful (see here).
  • On 26 September 2025, a satellite tag belonging to young White-tailed Eagle G842 was recovered from the River Rother, near Petersfield, Sussex. It had been removed from the bird using a sharp instrument. Searches in the area to try and locate the body of the bird have so far been unsuccessful (see here).
  • On 8 November 2025, a four-year-old satellite-tagged White-tailed Eagle (G819) ‘disappeared’ in the Moorfoot Hills, south Scotland (see here).

I mentioned earlier that in 2025, three young White-tailed Eagles fledged in the wild (two in Sussex and one in Dorset). Two of those three birds are now ‘missing’ – one (G842) had its tag cut off that was subsequently thrown into a river, and the other one’s tag (G834) has stopped transmitting in suspicious circumstances and the bird hasn’t been seen since.

Two out of three. That’s disgraceful.

And given how long these birds take to mature before they’re old enough to breed (anywhere between 3-7 yrs), and how low their productivity is when they do breed (1-3 chicks per year), it’s no wonder that the project team is planning to release more eagles this year, on both the Isle of Wight and on Exmoor. Given the natural attrition rate (e.g. disease, accidental collision etc), and then illegal persecution on top of that, this population is going to need the release of many more eagles before it becomes sustainable.

UPDATE 6 June 2026: Satellite-tagged White-tailed Eagle ‘disappeared’ on Snilesworth Estate, North York Moors National Park (here)

Young White-tailed Eagle ‘disappears’ from grouse shooting estate in North York Moors National Park

Press statement from North Yorkshire Police (1st June 2026):

INVESTIGATION UNDERWAY AFTER DISAPPEARANCE OF EAGLE

We are appealing for information after the disappearance of a white-tailed eagle.

The satellite-tagged juvenile white-tailed eagle (G834) was born in the wild in Dorset in 2025 and travelled widely across England this spring. On 30 April 2026, it arrived in the western side of the North York Moors.

Overnight into 1 May, the tag device did not communicate. There have been no further transmissions since then.

Following analysis by the National Wildlife Crime Unit, the eagle’s disappearance is being treated as suspicious, and an investigation is underway by North Yorkshire Police.

Anyone with any information is asked to call North Yorkshire Police on 101, quoting reference 12260086274.

ENDS

Young White-tailed Eagle (not the one that’s vanished). Photo by Pete Walkden

This press statement from North Yorkshire Police couldn’t be more vague.

Given the location, and the details of this young eagle’s final hours (as revealed by its satellite tag), there’s an awful lot of information that’s missing from this appeal.

I’ll be writing more about it shortly…

UPDATE 3 June 2026: More news on the satellite-tagged White-tailed Eagle that ‘disappeared’ on a grouse shooting estate in the North York Moors National Park (here)

UPDATE 6 June 2026: Satellite-tagged White-tailed Eagle ‘disappeared’ on Snilesworth Estate, North York Moors National Park (here)

Catching the people illegally killing Britain’s birds of prey – BBC film goes behind the scenes with RSPB Investigations team

Following on from the publication of the RSPB’s latest report on the illegal killing of birds of prey in the UK (Patterns of Persecution, published last week), the BBC has released an eight minute film documenting the issue.

The BBC’s Climate Editor, Justin Rowlatt, joined members of the RSPB’s Investigations team in the field and in the office.

The RSPB repeats its calls for a licensing system for gamebird shooting, whilst Dr Marnie Lovejoy from BASC argues against it because, er, ‘it’s all so unfair’ (I’m paraphrasing, of course).

Available to watch on YouTube:

Shooting industry’s flawed analysis of RSPB raptor persecution data

In a typically desperate attempt to undermine and deflect from the stark findings published by the RSPB in its excellent Patterns of Persecution report earlier this week, the shooting industry has apparently rolled out its genius division to try to pick apart the statistics presented in the report.

The following statement has appeared on various social media pages in recent days, apparently attributed to Scotland’s Regional Moorland Groups but bearing a striking similarity to the official statement published by Scottish Land & Estates on its website. As ever, the lines are blurred between the so-called ‘grassroots’ organisations and those who present themselves as official representatives of the industry:

On the face of it, the RSPB data presented are portrayed as being misleading – this is exactly what the shooting industry wants you to believe, but as ever, it’s always worth a closer look…

It appears that whoever did this ‘analysis’ found what they call the “official” figures in the raptor persecution section of the Scottish Government’s latest report, Wildlife Crime in Scotland, published in February this year, to compare with the RSPB’s data.

This government report states that there were 117 recorded raptor persecution offences in Scotland over the 6-year period 2019-20 to 2024-25:

25 recorded offences in 2019-20;

11 recorded offences in 2020-21;

24 recorded offences in 2021-22;

22 recorded offences in 2022-23;

14 recorded offences in 2023-4 ;

21 recorded offences in 2024-25.

But wait a minute…

If you look at the Ministerial foreword to the Scottish Government’s 2020 wildlife crime report it clearly says that it uses “recorded statistical data from the 2019-2020 financial year”. In other words, 6 April 2019 – 5 April 2020.

The 2021 report makes a similar statement about the data used in that report being based on the financial year, and although I’ve not been able to find similar statements in the Scottish Government’s subsequent reports, it’s reasonable to assume they follow the same method because they’d have said if the method had changed.

The RSPB didn’t include the original source data in its Patterns of Persecution report, and nor did it mention annual figures, so it’s not clear to me where SLE/the Scottish Regional Moorland Groups found the RSPB figures they cite for 2019-2020 (65 incidents), 2020-2021 (50 incidents), and 2016-2017 (31 incidents), but perhaps these stats are from previous RSPB annual BirdCrime reports? If so, why present them now as a critique of the RSPB’s latest report, Patterns of Persecution?

Anyway, regardless of that, the best source to look at for these figures is the RSPB’s online Bird of Prey Persecution Map Hub which currently details confirmed bird of prey persecution incidents in the UK from 2007-2024.

If you use the filters on this persecution map hub, you can select a country and/or years, so I looked at ‘Scotland’ and ‘2019’ and ‘2020’. That came up with a count of 32 and 33 confirmed incidents, respectively. Add them together and you get 65 confirmed incidents, the same figure quoted by SLE/the Scottish Regional Moorland Groups, although SLE and the SRMG are presenting the data as only covering one year (2019-2020), not two separate years worth of data (2019 AND 2020).

Then I looked at ‘2020’ and ‘2021’, which showed 33 and 17 confirmed incidents respectively, which when combined makes 50 confirmed incidents, again the same figure cited by SLE and the Scottish Regional Moorland Groups.

And a search for ‘2016’ and ‘2017’ gave 14 and 17 confirmed incidents respectively, which when combined gives 31 confirmed incidents, again, the same number cited by SLE and the Scottish Regional Moorland Groups.

Bingo.

So whoever did this ‘analysis’ for SLE and the Scottish Regional Moorland Groups has compared two full calendar years worth of RSPB data, with one financial year’s worth of data from the Scottish Government. Surprise, surprise, the numbers are quite different! And not because the RSPB are trying to mislead anyone, it’s entirely down to SLE/Scottish Regional Moorland Groups misinterpretation of the data and not having an understanding of how those data are collected and subsequently reported.

As those who came up with this completely irrelevant, flawed comparison said in the Regional Moorland Group’s Facebook post, “the discrepancies are impossible to ignore”. Aren’t they just!

Can we now expect a full retraction and apology from SLE and the Scottish Regional Moorland Groups for their error? No, thought not.

UK legislation continues to fail birds of prey as widespread illegal killing continues – new report from RSPB

Press release from the RSPB (27 May 2026)

UK LEGISLATION CONTINUES TO FAIL BIRDS OF PREY AS WIDESPREAD ILLEGAL KILLING CONTINUES

  • 921 confirmed incidents of bird of prey persecution were recorded in the UK from 2015-2024, involving 18 protected species. Shockingly, these figures represent only a fraction of the true number of these crimes.
  • 55% of all confirmed incidents (2015-2024) were associated with land managed for gamebird shooting with two thirds of individuals convicted linked to the gamebird shooting industry.
  • These latest findings prompt renewed calls for tougher regulation of the gamebird industry through the introduction of licensing for all gamebird shooting in the UK.

Although all birds of prey have been protected under UK laws for over 60 years, a new RSPB report, Patterns of Persecution reveals that these protected species are being illegally targeted and killed across the UK. Between 2015 and 2024, 921 confirmed incidents were recorded across the UK. Of these, 48% were shooting related.

In this ten-year period 18 protected bird of prey species, including many reintroduced and recovering species of conservation concern, fell victim to these crimes. Buzzards were the hardest hit with 319 confirmed incidents recorded, followed by Red Kites (157 confirmed incidents) and Peregrines (97 confirmed incidents).

Concerningly, as these crimes take place predominantly in remote and often inaccessible areas of the countryside, not all are detected. These figures therefore represent only the tip of the iceberg.

Evidence, including police investigations, intelligence reports, eye-witness accounts and covert footage have shown that bird of prey persecution is significantly linked to the gamebird shooting industry. 55% of confirmed incidents (2015-2024) were linked to land managed for gamebird shooting (21% grouse shooting, 28% pheasant and/or partridge shooting, and 6% mixed gamebird shooting).

On some shooting estates birds of prey are being illegally shot, trapped or poisoned, nests and eggs destroyed, and chicks killed before they have fledged the nest.  These often-brutal crimes are committed in an attempt to prevent any perceived threat to gamebird stocks, in an effort to maximise the number of gamebirds available to be shot.

Despite hundreds of confirmed incidents of bird of prey persecution being recorded in recent years, if there is no substantive evidence which links a person to the crime these incidents go unchallenged and unpunished. Between 2015 and 2024, despite hundreds of incidents being recorded, only 24 individuals were convicted of bird of prey persecution-related offences. Two thirds were associated with the gamebird industry, and more than half were working as gamekeepers at the time.

This latest report shows that these crimes continue to detrimentally impact Hen Harrier recovery in England and Scotland. This iconic and threatened Red-listed species has been persecuted for decades, resulting in their population being suppressed to a fraction of their natural capacity. Between 2015 and 2024, 49 confirmed Hen Harrier persecution incidents were recorded in the UK. The majority of these incidents took place on or near land managed for grouse shooting. In the same ten-years 100 satellite tagged Hen Harriers disappeared in suspicious circumstances on or near grouse moors. They were suspected to have been illegally killed.

To provide a meaningful deterrent and effectively challenge the illegal killing of birds of prey, the RSPB is supporting the introduction of a licensing scheme for all gamebird shooting in the UK. Under a civil burden of proof, licences could be suspended or revoked where evidence indicates bird of prey persecution has occurred on licensed land. The system would promote best practice, penalising only those who break the law while respecting the rights of responsible estates. Under this legislation, birds of prey would have the effective protection they desperately need. 

In 2024, Scotland took significant steps, introducing mandatory licensing of grouse shooting under the Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Act 2024. Now it is time for these protections to be extended across the UK, for all gamebirds shooting.

James Robinson, the RSPB’s chief operating officer: “As this report shows, existing UK laws continue to fail to protect our magnificent birds of prey. Without a meaningful deterrent, these crimes will continue. eagles will be poisoned, Hen Harriers shot and Buzzards beaten to death in traps. All of these crimes are unacceptable.

“Frustratingly, under existing laws, those committing these crimes have been able to do so with little fear of retribution. This needs to change.

“Regulation in the form of a licensing system is the most appropriate and fair way to achieve this, providing an effective and meaningful deterrent to those willing to commit these crimes and finally give these incredible species the protection they urgently need.”

If you notice a dead or injured bird of prey in suspicious circumstances, call the police on 101 and fill in the RSPB’s online reporting form: https://www.rspb.org.uk/birds-and-wildlife/advice/wild-bird-crime-report-form/

If you have information about anyone killing birds of prey which you wish to report anonymously, call the RSPB’s confidential Raptor Crime Hotline on 0300 999 0101.

ENDS

The new RSPB report and its appendices can be downloaded here:

RSPB Patterns Of Persecution Report_2015_2024Download

RSPB Patterns of Persecution_Appendices_May2026Download

UPDATE 29 May 2026: Shooting industry’s flawed analysis of RSPB raptor persecution data (here)