Blog

5 red kites, 1 buzzard & 1 raven found dead in suspicious circumstances in Oxfordshire

Press article from today’s Oxford Mail:

A police investigation has been launched after five red kites, a raven and a buzzard were discovered dead in a village in Oxfordshire.

The birds were discovered by a family on Sunday, September 17, near the village of Pyrton, on the edge of the Chilterns, who reported them to the RSPB.

All the birds were recovered and x-rayed by a local vet. The x-rays revealed no signs of shot.

However, the birds have now been sent off for toxicology testing by Natural England as part of the Wildlife Incident Investigation Scheme (WIIS), to see if the birds have been poisoned.

All birds of prey and ravens are protected by UK law, making it illegal to kill or harm them. Those found to have done so could face six months in jail or an unlimited fine.

Thames Valley Police, Natural England and RSPB are now working together on a joint investigation and are appealing to the public for information.

If you have any information relating to this incident, call Thames Valley Police on 101.

With their six-foot wingspan, red kites are Britain’s third-largest bird of prey and feed mainly on carrion.

If you find a wild bird which you suspect has been illegally killed, contact RSPB Investigations on 01767 680551, email crime@rspb.org.uk or fill in the online form: https://www.rspb.org.uk/our-work/our-positions-and-campaigns/positions/wildbirdslaw/reportform.aspx

ENDS

Four months after discovery and still no toxicology report?

UPDATE 31 Dec 2018: This incident has now been reported in the WIIS database as follows:

‘7 birds were found under a bridge caught in netting or barbed wire. Analysis has confirmed a residue of bromadiolone which may have contributed to the death of a red kite. Case closed as unable to determine where the exposure occurred‘.

Five year Hen harrier brood meddling trial gets green light to start this year

Natural England has finally given the green light to the highly controversial hen harrier brood meddling scheme and has issued a licence for the five-year trial to begin this year.

As many of you already know, brood meddling is one of six action points in DEFRA’s ludicrous Hen Harrier Action Plan, designed to rescue the English hen harrier breeding population from virtual extinction.

For the benefit of new blog readers, here’s a quick overview of what brood meddling is about:

Hen harriers have been wiped out as a breeding species on driven grouse moors in England. Even though this is a protected species of the highest conservation priority, it has been, and still is, illegally persecuted, with impunity, by grouse moor owners and their gamekeepers. There is enough room for over 300 breeding pairs in England: last year there were only three successful pairs, and none of those was on a grouse moor (prime habitat). So, here’s DEFRA’s ‘rescue’ plan.

Instead of throwing absolutely everything in to catching and prosecuting these criminals (because that’s what they are), the Government is instead going to allow the temporary removal of hen harriers from grouse moors during the breeding season. Eggs/chicks will be collected from nests (‘brood meddled’) and hatched/reared in captivity for a few weeks. The idea is that by removing the hen harrier eggs/chicks, the adult hen harriers won’t prey on as many red grouse chicks (which are already at a ridiculously artificial high density thanks to intensive management), which means there’ll be even more red grouse available later in the season for paying clients to shoot in the face, for a bit of fun. The grouse moor owners and their gamekeepers will be happy and there’ll be no need to kill any more hen harriers. Sounds good, right?

But wait. What about those young hen harriers that have been reared in captivity? What happens to them? Well, they’ll be released, at fledging age, back to the moorland areas from where they were first removed. They’ll no longer be a threat to the grouse moor owners’ profits because all the red grouse chicks will have grown in to adults so they won’t be as vulnerable to hen harrier predation.

Perfect. Everybody lives happily ever after (except the red grouse).

There’s just one tiny problem with this plan.

Those young hen harriers will be released back on to the moors around the same time that the grouse shooting season opens on 12 August. Those young hen harriers are going to be flying around the moors looking for food and the red grouse will react by either trying to hide or by scattering in all directions. This will disrupt the grouse ‘drives’ which is when the red grouse are flushed in lines towards the grouse butts and the waiting guns. Guests who have paid thousands of pounds for the chance to stand in a grouse butt and shoot those grouse are not going to be happy if there aren’t many birds available for them to blast to smithereens.

So what do you think’s going to happen? You don’t need to be a genius to work it out. And indeed satellite tag data has shown time and time again that young dispersing hen harriers are routinely killed on grouse moors, especially during the first few months of the grouse shooting season in August, September and October, because grouse moor owners and their gamekeepers will not tolerate anything that threatens to disrupt their lucrative grouse shoots.

Nobody will get caught/prosecuted, the grouse-shooting industry will deny all knowledge (they’ll deny it’s even happening because they’ll be careful to hide the evidence), there’ll be further delay in the Government considering any other kind of action (such as licensing or banning driven grouse shooting) because it’ll say the five-year trial needs to run its course, and so we’ll end up back where we started with virtually no hen harriers and the untouchable, filthy grouse shooting industry still getting away with their crimes.

Despite knowing all this, yesterday Natural England finally issued a licence that will permit brood meddling to begin this year. We’ve been asking for the details of this project for a long, long time and Natural England has put every possible obstacle in our way while the licence application was being considered. Reading the details that have just been released, it not hard to see why they would want to keep it under wraps for so long.

The most important documents for you to read are these:

Hen Harrier brood meddling trial project plan

Brood meddling licence 2018_2020

Letter to licensing applicant

Additional conditions for brood meddling licence 2018_2020

Technical assessment of brood meddling licence application

These documents (above) will provide you with a good overview of what’s going on. There are other documents that go in to more detail for those who wish to know more, and these are provided at the end of this blog.

Here are the main points about the brood meddling plan:

  • The licence covers moorland throughout northern England
  • No eggs or chicks may be taken into captivity unless the threshold of two nests within 10km is met
  • Nests can only be brood meddled where the harrier pair has the potential to reduce the shootable surplus of red grouse
  • No hen harrier pair can be brood meddled in consecutive nesting attempts (this assumes individuals can be identified)
  • Hen harriers cannot be brood meddled without the landowner’s consent
  • Hen harriers cannot be brood meddled until a release site has been determined and the ‘local team’ has been approved by Natural England
  • All brood meddled hen harriers will be satellite-tagged prior to release
  • Hen harriers cannot be brood meddled until satellite-tags have been procured
  • The Moorland Association is procuring the satellite tags (yes, really!)
  • A ‘new’ type of satellite tag will be used
  • The Moorland Association and GWCT, as members of the Project Board, will have access to the hen harrier satellite tag data (yes, really!)
  • Natural England is responsible for analysing the satellite tag data (yes, really!)
  • Hen harriers removed from a Special Protection Area designated for hen harriers (Bowland Fells SPA, Nothern Pennines SPA) must be returned within the boundary of that SPA
  • Hen harriers removed from sites outwith an SPA will be returned to ‘suitable habitat within the trial area and where practical close to the area from where they were taken’
  • There is a recommendation that hen harriers ‘should not be released within sight of burnt heather strips’ (!!)
  • Brood meddling will be undertaken by the International Centre for Birds of Prey (Newent, Glos) – the brood meddling licence holder is Mrs Jemima Parry Jones of the ICBP. Natural England tried to redact this information without realising it had already been released in response to one of our earlier FoIs, and they also made a hash of the actual redaction: ‘Dear Jemima’ is a bit of a giveaway!
  • The Moorland Association will pay the ICBP to undertake the brood meddling trial and has entered into a five-year legal contract with the ICBP to ensure funding throughout the trial
  • Brood meddled eggs/chicks will be held in captivity at the ICBP in Newent
  • At approx 3 weeks old, captive hen harriers will be removed to a temporary aviary at a suitable release site where a ‘local team’ will look after them
  • There must be 24hr site security at the release aviary
  • Details of release sites have not been given
  • The trial can be stopped at any stage if a number of things happen. One of these is if ‘there is higher than expected mortality of birds post release’. This is suspicously vague and may well become a contentious issue, a bit like the Hawk & Owl Trust’s so-called ‘immoveable provisos’ on illegal persecution that turned out to be quite moveable after all.

That’s quite a lot to digest so we’ll return to some of these details in due course.

The big question now is, how many grouse moor owners will ‘allow’ a pair of nesting hen harriers on their land? The grouse shooting industry is kind of backed in to a corner, and it’s all of its own making. Grouse moor owners probably all thought brood meddling was a great idea when it was first mooted, as they thought those ‘brood meddled’ harriers would be removed from their moors and dumped hundreds of miles away in southern England as part of the proposed reintroduction scheme down there. Now they’ve been told that’s not going to happen – brood meddled hen harriers have to be returned to the upland moors.

What will the grouse moor owners do? Do they play ball and allow hen harriers to breed on the moors (because DEFRA et al are going to be pretty upset if it looks like the grouse shooting industry is not cooperating)? But if they do that, they run the risk that ‘their’ nest may not get brood meddled, especially if neighbouring moors refuse to ‘let hen harriers in‘, and so then they’ll be stuck with an unwanted hen harrier pair plus offspring.

It’s all going to get quite interesting in the next few months.

Here are the additional documents released by Natural England for those who want more detail of this disgraceful decision:

SSSI notice proforma supplied with brood meddling licence

Summary of brood meddling licensing decision

Habitats Regulations Assessment of brood meddling licence application

Brood meddling licence application

Information from the applicant on project submitted in the form of a draft Habitats Regulations Assessment

Applicants email response to further information request

Information from applicant in response to further information request

UPDATE 17 April 2018: Legal challenge against hen harrier brood meddling continues, x2 (see here)

Environment Committee to scrutinise annual wildlife crime report – watch it live

The Scottish Parliament’s Environment Committee will take evidence on the Government’s 2016 annual wildlife crime report this morning.

This can be watched live at 10.30am on Scottish Parliament TV here [click on Committee Room 1]. We’ll post a link to the archive video and the official transcript when it becomes available.

The Committee will hear evidence from Police Scotland and the Crown Office. Last year, for the first time, representatives from the RSPB, Scottish Gamekeepers’ Association, Scottish Badgers and the Bat Conservation Trust were also invited to present evidence, but apparently not this year.

Here are the background papers relating to today’s evidence session: ECCLR agenda papers 16 January 2018

The Environment Committee has a good track record of asking pertinent questions about the annual wildlife crime report and has not been afraid to challenge witnesses with some determination (e.g. see here and here).

Since last year’s evidence session a number of issues have emerged, not least the Crown Office’s controversial decisions to drop a number of long-running prosecution cases, mostly without explanation. The Environment Committee wrote to the Crown Office to seek explanation but many questions remain unanswered. Hopefully the Committee will pursue this matter today.

Grouse shooting banned on Ilkley Moor

Press release from the campaign group Ban Bloodsports on Ilkley Moor, 15 January 2018:

Bradford councillors vote to ban grouse shooting on Ilkley Moor

Bradford Council’s Labour Group votes by overwhelming majority to not renew grouse shooting rights for Ilkley Moor, a move that has been strongly welcomed by wildlife campaigners.

Bradford Councillors voted to not renew controversial grouse shooting rights for Ilkley Moor at City Hall tonight. The decision, which was taken by the Bradford Labour Group, is understood to have been supported by an ‘overwhelming majority’ of those councillors who voted.

Bradford Labour is the largest party on the Council and ending grouse shooting is also backed by Bradford Liberal Democrats, Bradford Green Party and the majority of Independent councillors.

Ban Bloodsports on Ilkley Moor (BBIM), which has lobbied Bradford Council to end grouse shooting on the moor since its formation in May 2014, has strongly welcomed the move. The group notes that over half of protected breeding bird species have declined or become locally extinct on Ilkley Moor, government figures collated by the RSPB Northern England office show. It has urged for efforts to now be focused on reversing the wildlife crash, which has negatively impacted on the moor’s population of specialist species, including Merlin, Dunlin and Short Eared Owl, could result in the loss of the site’s conservation designations if declines continue.

Luke Steele, Spokesperson for BBIM, comments: “Bradford Council’s Labour Group decision tonight to not renew grouse shooting rights for Ilkley Moor is to be commended in the highest terms. It reflects the urgent need to reverse wildlife decline, habitat degradation and public dismay which has overshadowed this treasured moorland since grouse shooting was introduced in 2008. 

“We thank all of those who have relentlessly persued an end to grouse shooting on Ilkley Moor – the strong cross-party representation of Parish and District Councillors, regional MPs including John Grogan, Alex Sobel, Judith Cummins and Naz Shah, visitors to the moor and conservation groups. This is as much a victory for them as it is for the precious wildlife and habitat. Our efforts will now turn to reversing the terrible legacy of grouse shooting on the moor in pursuit of a first-class asset for the region, which promotes wildlife biodiversity, education, leisure and the local economy.”

Bradford Council is the last local authority in the UK to allow grouse shooting to take place on public moorland. Others, including the Peak District National Park Authority and Sheffield Council, already prohibit the practice on their upland estates, having previously allowed it, and now maintain the land using other methods.  During a recent consultation on the future management of Ilkley Moor, the largest number of submissions received by the local authority on any single topic urged an end to grouse shooting.

ENDS

This is a significant victory for a grassroots campaign group. Well done!

Stop illegal persecution then no need for reintroduction of hen harrier to southern England, says DEFRA Minister

In response to a Parliamentary question about the reintroduction of hen harriers to lowland England, a DEFRA Minister responded as follows:

Sounds good, doesn’t it? Unfortunately, this response didn’t come from Dr Therese Coffey MP or Michael Gove MP. It came from Ben Bradshaw MP back in 2004, who at the time was the Under Secretary of State at DEFRA, under the leadership of Margaret Beckett.

The question came as part of a series of Parliamentary questions posed by James Gray MP (Conservative, North Wiltshire) in response to the launch of Operation Artemis, a police-led initiative aimed at tackling the illegal persecution of the hen harrier. Mr Gray wasn’t a fan (no surprise when you look at his background) as you can see from this Early Day Motion from Labour MP Tony Banks:

We haven’t been able to find the exact quote from Mr Gray on Hansard, but it’s clear he wasn’t in support of Operation Artemis, and judging by this (scroll down to the bottom), a number of his fellow Conservative MPs agreed.

Operation Artemis was launched in the spring of 2004 and part of the initiative was for police officers to visit every single estate where there was the potential for hen harriers to breed. The idea was that police officers would provide landowners and gamekeepers with a code of best practice to help any hen harrier breeding attempt, and invite those land owners and gamekeepers to sign up to support the initiative.

Here is Paul Henery (Police WCO for Northumberland) and Chief Constable Richard Brunstrom at the launch (photo by Guy Shorrock)

There was apparently strong support in Wales, but in England, landowners and gamekeepers reacted with fury. Here is a cutting from the RSPB’s Legal Eagle newsletter in July 2004:

And here is the astonishing response from the National Gamekeepers’ Organisation (take note of the suggestion that the limited police budget for this scheme could be decimated by police officers having to respond to a barage of complaints, which could then be withdrawn at the last minute):

Fourteen years on, the hen harrier’s breeding population in England remains critical, the illegal persecution of this species continues unabated, it is virtually impossible to secure a conviction even when high definition video evidence of the crime is available, the Conservative Government has approved the removal of hen harriers from grouse moors to allow a few hundred rich folk (including a number of Conservative MPS) to shoot 0.75 million red grouse in the face for a bit of fun, and thinks that importing hen harriers from France in to southern England under the guise of being a conservation initiative is a great idea, even though illegal persecution continues (which means the scheme does not meet the required IUCN guidelines for reintroductions).

Diverting attention from the illegal killing of peregrines on grouse moors

One of the many criticisms about the proposed reintroduction of hen harriers to southern England is that if a population does manage to become established, the grouse-shooting industry will use it to divert attention from the on-going eradication of this species on intensively managed driven grouse moors. ‘Look, hen harriers are doing just fine in the lowlands, the species’ conservation status has improved, everything’s fine, there’s nothing to worry about anymore’.

If you don’t think that that’s what will happen, just take a look at this letter from the Countryside Alliance, published in The Times yesterday:

PEREGRINE’S SUCCESS

Sir, your report that the peregrine falcon is “now seeking sanctuary in cities as it comes under threat” fails to provide vital context (“Prized peregrine falcons falling prey to greed“, News, Jan 9). The peregrine falcon population reached a low of about 150 pairs in the 1960s as a result of the impact of toxic agricultural chemicals such as DDT in the food chain as well as illegal persecution. However, improved legislation and protection has helped the peregrine falcon to expand its range and numbers. The latest estimates place the number of peregrines at a historic high of 1,500 pairs, and has led to the peregrine having its conservation status declared “secure”. The species, like other raptors such as the buzzard and red kite, is an undoubted conservation success.

ENDS

No mention then, of how illegal persecution on the north of England grouse moors is suppressing local peregrine populations (see here).

No mention then, of how the preliminary results of the 2014 national peregrine survey show a sharp decrease in peregrine occupation in the UK’s uplands, especially in areas intensively managed for driven grouse shooting (see here).

No mention then, of how illegal persecution has led to the continuing decline of peregrines in the grouse moor areas of north east Scotland, particularly on the eastern side of the Cairngorms National Park (see here).

No mention then, of how illegal persecution has led to the continuing decline of the peregrine’s breeding population on the grouse moors of Bowland.

No mention then, of how illegal persecution has led to the continuing decline of the peregrine’s breeding population on the grouse moors of the Dark Peak in the Peak District National Park (see here).

Funny, that.

Photo of a dead peregrine that was found shot next to a grouse moor in the Peak District National Park in 2016 (RSPB photo)

Reports of 2017 grouse shooting season distorted by PR bluster

We’ve been reading some reports of the 2017 grouse shooting season and it’s pretty clear that the industry is engaging in a public relations offensive to try and portray an image of huge success with significant support from local communities.

For example, there’s this article in today’s edition of The Northern Echo, headlined ‘Grouse Moors of North Yorkshire report successful shooting year’, with commentary from the North Yorkshire Moors Moorland Association. 

And then there was this article in last week’s Darlington & Stockton Times, headlined ‘Successful grouse shooting season in Nidderdale helps boost local economy’, with commentary from the Nidderdale Moorland Group.

There’s nothing wrong with reporting on business success, of course, but these articles lose credibility when you notice the similarity between them. For example, there is a quote in the first article from Tina Brough of the North Yorkshire Moors Moorland Association:

“The grouse industry is a life line for many in our rural community offering employment opportunities and supporting many local businesses, with shooting-related tourism bolstering trade during the winter off-season“.

There’s also a quote in the second article from Roy Burrows of the Nidderdale Moorland Group:

“The grouse industry is a life line for many in our rural community offering employment opportunities and supporting many local businesses, with shooting-related tourism bolstering trade during the winter off-season“.

Oh dear. Two identical ‘quotes’, word for word, supposedly from two individuals in different parts of the country? It’s pretty obvious that ‘somebody’, or more likely ‘some organisation’ has concocted a general press release designed to impress on the public how successful and important grouse shooting is (to the local economy), and then asked the moorland groups to adapt it to their particular areas.

The second article also includes a quote attributed to a couple of local hoteliers who talk about how important game shooting is to their annual revenue. Again, nothing wrong with that, but don’t be fooled by thinking that ALL local businesses benefit from, and support, the grouse shooting industry. The article failed to include the news that several local business owners in Nidderdale are so fed up with the continued illegal persecution of raptors on Nidderdale grouse moors that they’ve contributed thousands of pounds towards a reward for anyone who can provide information leading to the arrest and conviction of those involved (see here). There’s been a similar outcry from local traders in the neighbouring Yorkshire Dales National Park, who have reportedly complained to the Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority that the Park’s (deserved) reputation as a raptor persecution hotspot may damage their businesses (see here).

And just sticking with Nidderdale for a moment, the second article opens with this line:

‘The grouse shooting season proved a runaway success in the Nidderdale Moorland Group area with most estates enjoying a full shooting programme‘.

That’s an interesting claim, because according to a review of the grouse shooting season by sporting agency Dalesport (here), it wasn’t quite as successful a season as the Nidderdale Moorland Group is claiming:

‘There were Moors in Nidderdale and Coverdale that did not shoot and, yet some Nidderdale Moors had a real bumper seasons. What was very interesting about Nidderdale and Coverdale is that Bulgy Eye was present on most of the moors throughout the season and whether this was something to do with a lack of stock on a number of the moors is a separate question in itself‘.

It’s worth bearing in mind, when reading these reviews, who actually wrote them. All of the above articles included commentary from those with a vested interest in portraying the grouse shooting industry as a favourable and lucrative business. It’s not in their interests to say anything different, no matter how distorted the story they present to the media.

As a final aside, do take the time to read sporting agency Dalesport’s review of the 2017 grouse shooting season. Again, bear in mind that this sporting agency has a commercial interest in demonstrating to potential new clients how the agency can help them find ‘good’ shooting days so the review cannot be described as objective, but it does provide an insight to what is considered ‘good’ shooting – it’s still all about how many red grouse are available to shoot.

When will the grouse shooting industry wake up and realise that this continued reliance on the intensification of grouse moor management, just to get big bags, is going to be their downfall?

National Trust set to initiate new grouse shooting leases in Peak District National Park

In April 2016 we published a video of an armed man crouching next to a decoy hen harrier on Ashop Moor, which is part of the National Trust’s Park Hall & Hope Woodlands Estate in the Peak District National Park.

That video footage sparked outrage and significant public pressure was placed on the National Trust to take action against its shooting tenant (believed to be Mark Osborne).

As a direct result of that public pressure, in June 2016 the National Trust announced that it was pulling the shooting lease four years early and the shooting tenant had been asked to leave by April 2018. The National Trust was widely applauded for its action.

In 2017 the National Trust announced it was seeking new tenants ‘to work with us to create a new exemplar model delivering outstanding moorland nature conservation with grouse shooting’. Not everyone agreed that grouse shooting should continue on these National Trust moors and a local campaign group, Moorland Vision, was established to encourage the National Trust to consider rewilding these moors. This group delivered a petition to the National Trust last summer and had the support of 15 local environmental groups.

Yesterday, the National Trust released a statement to say that it had selected three new shooting tenants under a five-year lease:

After a thorough interview process the National Trust has selected three new shooting tenants to work as partners on the High Peak Moors in Derbyshire. A fourth area of land will not be let.

The tenants will have the opportunity over the next five years to work in partnership with the Trust to demonstrate that less intensive forms of grouse shooting can be compatible with the charity’s High Peak Moors Vision.

Andy Beer, Regional Director for the Midlands said: “We’ve made our decision based on what we think is best for nature. The High Peak is a managed landscape and we have chosen tenants who have committed to work with us to carry out land management which is good for the birds, plants and insects. With regards to hawks, falcons and owls we’ve made it very clear that the High Peak should have more of these birds, and we expect to see an increase in their numbers over the next five years.

“This partnership is a new way of working, one which operates transparently, works to the highest standards, and helps us deliver our conservation aims of the High Peak Moors Vision“.

ENDS

This public statement doesn’t provide much detail at all but Mark Avery managed to glean a bit more from a discussion with the National Trust (see here). Of particular interest was this:

  • some land, on the Kinder plateau, will be taken out of shooting altogether
  • another parcel of land (the Back Snake – north of the A57) will be run as a walked-up shoot by a local farmer/gamekeeper
  • another parcel of land (south of the A57 area of the Hope Woodlands) will be run as a driven grouse shoot by a consortium of GWCT members
  • a fourth parcel of land (known as Park Hall) will be shot by the age-old method of shooting over dogs

Here’s a map of the estate as published by the National Trust when they advertised the tenancies. The red area is the Hope Woodlands site (with the A57 running through it) and the blue area is Park Hall. The town to the north west is Glossop:

As Mark Avery commented, it looks like the National Trust is trying to appease everyone by incorporating different types of grouse moor management (and in one area, no grouse shooting at all), but not everyone is impressed. If you read the response written by Moorland Vision (here), the group makes some persuasive arguments and describes the new grouse shooting leases as “a lost opportunity”. And it’s not as though the National Trust had no other option but to allow grouse shooting – according to the Moorland Vision blog the Derbyshire Wildlife Trust had also submitted a bid to help manage some of the moorland around Kinder Scout and Bleaklow, but the National Trust appears to have dismissed this an an option.

There’ll be more detail to come about these new tenants and we’re particularly looking forward to finding out more about the ‘consortium of GWCT members’ who will be running the driven grouse shooting south of the A57. The GWCT knows all about this area (Ashop Moor) – a day’s grouse shooting here was a GWCT raffle prize last year – donated by William Powell (co-owned by one Mr Mark Osborne, the current shooting tenant whose lease has been terminated).

These moors are also part of the long-failing Peak District Bird of Prey Initiative – will the new tenants help to increase the number of breeding raptors on these moors? Rest assured, this will be closely monitored.

Case against Bleasdale Estate gamekeeper James Hartley: part 2

Today we attended Preston Magistrates Court in anticipation of listening to a case hearing in relation to the prosecution of James Hartley, a gamekeeper from the Bleasdale Estate in Bowland who is accused of a number of offences in relation to the alleged killing of two peregrines in April 2016 (see first court report for details here).

Photo by RPUK

Mr Hartley has pleaded not guilty to the alleged offences and today’s hearing had been initiated for the court to hear legal arguments from both the prosecution and defence before the onset of a potential trial.

At some point between the first hearing in September 2017 and today’s hearing, this case has been elevated to be heard by a District Judge rather than by magistrates. We don’t know the reason for this.

Legal arguments were not heard in court today, and a further date for those arguments to be heard has been set for 14th March 2018.

In addition, defence barrister Justin Rouse QC requested that District Judge Goodwin direct, under the Contempt of Court Act 1981, Section 4(2), “no publication of preliminary interests“, due to what he described as “inappropriate reporting of the previous hearing“. No details of the alleged inappropriate reporting were given in court.

District Judge Goodwin agreed with Mr Rouse’s concerns and, in the interest of avoiding the substantial risk of prejudicing the case, she directed that “nothing pertaining to the legal arguments may be published prior to the conclusion of this case“.

At the end of today’s hearing we asked District Judge Goodwin for clarification on this point and she told us that as of today we may not publish anything about the specific legal arguments that are due to be heard on 14th March (although we can report on these legal arguments at the conclusion of this case), but we were free to report that today’s hearing took place and we are free to report on the trial (if it proceeds) as long as that reporting is fair and accurate – the usual caveats for reporting on legal proceedings.

Given this direction from District Judge Goodwin, we will not be publishing any blog readers’ comments on this particular case until it has concluded.

Depending on the outcome of the legal arguments to be heard on 14th March 2018, and District Judge Goodwin’s judgement (which she said would be ‘reserved’ – which means she won’t make a judgement on the day of the hearing but will take time to consider the legal position and announce her judgement at a later date), a preliminary trial date has been set for 23 April 2018 and is expected to conclude on 30 April 2018.

GWCT’s North of England Grouse Seminar 2018

The GWCT is hosting another North of England Grouse Seminar on March 8th at The Morritt Hotel & Garage Spa, Greta Bridge, nr Barnard Castle in County Durham.

Here’s the planned programme:

What an exciting line-up! First some news about how intensive grouse moor management has caused the rapid spread of disease across moors in England & Scotland.

Then some science that shows if you kill off predators, waders will have improved breeding success (duh!). Oh, and so will your red grouse, meaning there’ll be more birds for you to kill later in the year. Not that that’s your primary motive – no, you’re all about wader conservation and any side benefits that help increase your already-way-too-high red grouse population are simply unintended.

Then a bit about how great it is to repeatedly burn the heather on your grouse moor (as long as you ignore the widespread environmental damage this causes). It’s no big deal, it’s just like getting your hair cut. The fact that moorland burning has been detected in 55% of Special Areas of Conservation and in 63% of Special Protection Areas, (sites that are designated under EU legislation for their conservation value) and yet many are in ‘unfavourable condition’ with burning identified as the primary cause, is nothing to worry about.

Then after a spot of lunch, there’s an as yet to be revealed guest speaker from Natural England, talking about er, something.

Perhaps it’ll be someone coming along to reassure the room full of grouse moor owners that they needn’t worry, Natural England is doing its level best to ensure the last known fixes of all those missing satellite-tagged hen harriers remain a secret. [Incidentally, we have an update on this – blog coming soon].

Or perhaps it’ll be someone coming along to advise grouse moor owners how to get a licence to kill marsh harriers.

Then there’s some stuff about black grouse, and then a chance to hear the ‘final results’ from the Langholm 2 Project. Perhaps this time Dr Sonja Ludwig will be allowed to answer any questions about the science by herself, instead of being bulldozed off stage by someone who clearly doesn’t understand etiquette, nor science, and doesn’t like buzzards.

You don’t have to be a grouse moor owner to attend this seminar. If you’ve got a spare £40, you can book your ticket here.