Blog

Chair of Bowland AONB condemns illegal raptor persecution

Following the recent publication of the RSPB’s 2016 Birdcrime report, it has been very encouraging to see a steady stream of public statements of condemnation of illegal raptor persecution from various organisations that previously have been pretty quiet on the subject, unless prodded with a large stick. This is indicative of increased public awareness of the issue, and subsequent public pressure demanding change.

First there was the Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority (here), then the Chair of the Nidderdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) (here), then the Peak District National Park Authority (here), and now the Chair of the Forest of Bowland AONB has joined in:

Statement on Persecution of Birds of Prey

7 November 2017

The Forest of Bowland AONB is an important area for the birds of prey that we associate with the English uplands, such as hen harrier, peregrine, merlin and short-eared owls.  However, the RSPB Birdcrime Report 2016 published last week highlights how some of these iconic species continue to be the subject of illegal acts of persecution throughout much of England and particularly the northern uplands.

The Chair of the Forest of Bowland AONB Joint Advisory Committee, County Councillor Albert Atkinson stated:

“It is particularly concerning to the Committee that these acts of illegal persecution continue; badly affecting the populations of birds of prey that are synonymous with the Forest of Bowland. These acts undoubtedly have an impact on the reputation of Bowland as an ‘Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty’.   The Committee unreservedly condemns all illegal persecution of birds of prey.  The AONB will continue to work closely with landowners, the police, RSPB and Natural England to help protect and conserve birds of prey across the area.”

If you wish to report any crimes against wild birds, we would suggest contacting the police by calling 101.

ENDS

We don’t remember ever seeing a public statement on this issue from the Forest of Bowland AONB, despite this being an area notorious for illegal raptor persecution.

Bowland AONB sign, as adapted by Mark Avery

And yes, we have been critical of the actual content of some of these recent public statements (e.g. see here and here), but we’re not going to criticise the intention behind the statements, nor the fact that these statements have been published on these organisations’ respective websites. By announcing these statements on the National Park and AONB websites, the messages of condemnation will reach a wide audience, including many who may previously have been unaware that illegal raptor persecution was even a ‘thing’, let alone a ‘thing’ going on inside these supposedly protected areas.

Well done, Cllr Albert Atkinson of the Forest of Bowland AONB. There’s still a LOT more to do at Bowland, and it will need more than just words, but this is an excellent start.

Peak District National Park Authority responds to RSPB’s 2016 Birdcrime report

The Peak District National Park Authority has issued a statement in reponse to the publication of the RSPB’s 2016 Birdcrime report.

Sarah Fowler, chief executive of the Peak District National Park, said: “Killing birds of prey is illegal. I am appalled by the persecution of any protected species, no matter what the circumstances.

The RSPB’s latest Birdcrime report brings the plight of birds of prey to the fore. It shows what we are up against in trying to reverse the fortunes of birds of prey. I welcome the recent acknowledgement from shooting organisations that the killing of raptors to protect game birds is part of the problem. It is – and it is damaging to their interests. I welcome and wholeheartedly support their condemnation of such activity.

Being able to watch birds of prey in the Peak District National Park should be part of everyone’s experience.

We have been working with landowners, gamekeepers and partners since 2011 to remedy the situation locally but it is clear from the results that much more needs to be done.

This year peregrines have failed to breed in the Dark Peak for the first time since they recolonised in 1984 and persecution of these incredible birds has been a factor in this. This has to change.

It is incredibly difficult to catch someone in the act or to collect evidence and make a case for prosecution. I appeal to all users of the countryside to help us bring persecution to an end by reporting anything you feel is suspicious to the police. The best hope we have is for law-abiding people within the game bird industry calling out those who operate outside the law.

The Peak District Birds of Prey Initiative will shortly be publishing a report documenting the fortunes of key birds of prey alongside confirmed or suspected incidents of persecution in the moorland areas of the Peak District during 2016 and 2017. On the back of this report, I will look for a renewed commitment from moorland owners and managers in the Peak District to work with us to reverse the fortunes of birds of prey – and a strengthening of this commitment. We cannot achieve this on our own.”

Anyone with information to report about wildlife crime should contact Derbyshire Police on 101 or Crimestoppers on 0800 555111.

ENDS

Photo of an osprey found in the Peak District National Park in September 2015. It had two broken legs and succumbed to these injuries soon after being found. The post-mortem stated its injuries were consistent with being caught in a spring trap (Photo by RSPB)

It’s good to see strong condemnation of continued illegal raptor persecution from the Peak District National Park Authority, although, coming a week after the publication of the Birdcrime report it does have a whiff of ‘Oh God, everyone else has commented, we’d better say something too’. Nevertheless, better late than never.

We also appreciate Sarah Fowler’s acknowledgement that the 7-year-long Peak District Bird of Prey Initiative has been a complete and utter failure. She didn’t actually say that – she said, “It is clear from the results that much more needs to be done“, and, with the imminent publication of the Initiative’s 2016 and 2017 annual reports, she said “I will look for a renewed commitment from moorland owners and managers in the Peak District to work with us to reverse the fortunes of birds of prey – and a strengthening of this commitment“.

Hang on. Wasn’t ‘renewed commitment’ from project partners promised in 2015 when the Initiative’s five-year targets had all failed to be met? Ah yes, so it was. And yet, despite that ‘renewed commitment’ we’ve seen continued evidence of illegal raptor persecution within the National Park and now we learn that “This year peregrines have failed to breed in the Dark Peak for the first time since they recolonised in 1984 and persecution of these incredible birds has been a factor in this“.

We don’t want ‘renewed commitment’ from so-called project partners. It’s meaningless bollocks that nobody believes anymore. We’re sick of hearing it and sick of statutory agencies using it to pretend that everything’s going to be ok.

The Peak District National Park Authority needs to start calling out these grouse moor owners, managers and agents, by name, instead of shielding them and their criminal activities within this charade of partnership-working.

General Licence restriction – the Raeshaw Estate fiasco continues…

Good grief. Just when you thought this pantomime couldn’t get any more ridiculous….

As many of you will know, Raeshaw Estate in the Scottish Borders was one of the first in Scotland to be subjected to a General Licence restriction, issued in 2015, based on clear police evidence that wildlife crimes had been committed although there was insufficient evidence to prosecute any individual (see here). The estate contested the legality of SNH’s decision and this was seen as a test case, which went to Judicial Review in 2016. In March this year, the Court of Session upheld SNH’s decision and the General Licence restriction was considered lawful (here).

Here is a map showing the location of Raeshaw Estate, near Heriot in south Scotland (estate boundary details sourced from Andy Wightman’s Who Owns Scotland website).

For background, there’s been a long history of raptor persecution “nr Heriot“, dating back to at least 2001. Here’s a list we’ve compiled of confirmed raptor persecution crimes, listed in RSPB annual reports and / or the press:

2001 May: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “Heriot Dale”. No prosecution

2003 Feb: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2003 Mar: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2003 Apr: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2003 Nov: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2004 Feb: Carbofuran (possession for use) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2004 Feb: two poisoned buzzards (Carbofuran) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2004 Oct: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2005 Dec: poisoned buzzard & raven (Carbofuran) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2006 Sep: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2006 Oct: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “Heriot”. No prosecution

2009 Mar: two poisoned buzzards (Carbofuran) “nr Heriot”. No prosecution

2009 Jun: poisoned red kite (Carbofuran) “nr Heriot”. No prosecution

2009 Jun: 4 x poisoned baits (2 x rabbits; 2 x pigeons) (Carbofuran) “nr Heriot”. No prosecution

2010 Nov: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “nr Heriot”. No prosecution

2011 Jan: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “nr Heriot” No prosecution

2013 Jun: shot + poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) “nr Heriot”. No prosecution

2014 May: crow trap baited with two live pigeon decoys “nr Heriot”. No prosecution (but General Licence restriction applied in Nov 2015)

2014 May: four set spring traps beside live pigeon decoy “nr Heriot”. No prosecution (but General Licence restriction applied in Nov 2015)

2014 May: four shot buzzards “nr Heriot” No prosecution

2015 Jul: shot buzzard “found by side of road between Heriot and Innerleithen” according to media reports (see here). No prosecution

Interestingly, also not included in the RSPB’s annual reports but reported by the Southern Reporter (here) and the Guardian (here), a police raid on Raeshaw Estate in 2004 uncovered nine dead birds of prey, including five barn owls, two buzzards, a kestrel and a tawny owl, described as being “poisoned or shot“. In addition, “a number of illegal poisons were discovered but no-one was ever prosecuted“. According to both these articles, during a further police raid on Raeshaw Estate in 2009 ‘three injured hunting dogs were seized by the SSPCA on suspicion of involvement with badger baiting’. We don’t know whether that resulted in a prosecution.

Also not included in the above list is the sudden ‘disappearance’ of a young satellite-tagged hen harrier in October 2011. This bird had fledged from Langholm and it’s last known signal came from Raeshaw Estate. A search failed to find the body or the tag.

Raeshaw Estate (photo by RPUK)

Once the General Licence restriction was in place in 2015, Raeshaw Estate applied for, and was granted, a number of individual licences, allowing them to continue to carry out various ‘management’ activities (killing corvids and other so-called ‘pest’ species) but under closer scrutiny than they would have been subjected to under the General Licence. We know that between July and August 2016, at least 1,000 birds (294 rooks, 706 jackdaws) were lawfully killed under the auspices of these individual licences (see here). It looked like business as usual for this grouse-shooting estate, even with a General Licence restriction in place.

In 2017 Raeshaw Estate successfully applied for more individual licences that would allow them to continue this lawful wildlife-killing spree. However, in May 2017 after a spot check on the estate by SNH staff, SNH announced it had revoked an individual licence on Raeshaw Estate following the discovery that the terms of the individual licence had allegedly been breached (see here). SNH also reported suspected wildlife crimes to Police Scotland; we await news on this.

Good, we thought. The General Licence restriction was still in place (until Nov 2018) and now the individual licence had been revoked, so we assumed, naively, that Raeshaw Estate would no longer be permitted to kill wild birds during this period.

How wrong we were.

In early October 2017 we submitted an FoI to SNH to ask a series of questions about this issue. Amongst other things, we wanted to know for how long the individual licence had been revoked, and we also wanted to know whether the Estate’s General Licence restriction would be extended beyond the initial three-year period (Nov 2015-Nov 2018) given that further alleged breaches, and suspected wildlife crimes, had been discovered. SNH’s framework for dealing with General Licence restrictions explicitly states that a restriction may be extended in these circumstances:

“Where, during a period of restriction, new evidence is received by SNH which provides reason to believe that wild birds have been killed and / or taken, there is intention to do so, other than in accordance with the terms of a Licence and the Licensing manager considers that the existing restriction should be extended, the Licensing Manager will recommend to the Wildlife Operations Manager that the existing restriction be extended“.

Well, guess what? Raeshaw Estate’s original General Licence restriction has NOT been extended – why the hell not?

And even more jaw-dropping, it turns out that even though SNH has revoked one individual licence, Raeshaw Estate can simply apply for another one, and another one, and another one, ad infinitum!!!

Here’s SNH’s response to our FoI:

How on earth is this allowed to go on?

It could be argued that SNH is simply following the General Restriction framework guidelines (in terms of considering further individual licence applications), and we have some sympathy with that, but, presumably SNH was involved in the drafting of these guidelines and even if they hadn’t noticed this glaring loophole at the time of drafting, it’s surely apparent now and SNH should be pushing for an urgent revision. And it does not explain why SNH has not extended Raeshaw Estate’s original General Licence restriction. If SNH has identified alleged breaches that were considered sufficient evidence to result in a revocation of an individual licence, why are these alleged breaches not considered sufficient evidence to extend the original General Licence restriction, as per the SNH guidelines?

It could also be argued that even though Raeshaw Estate is allowed to apply for as many individual licences as it likes (despite these repeated alleged licence breaches and alleged wildlife crimes), SNH may refuse to grant any more. We do know, from correspondence between Raeshaw Estate’s lawyer and SNH, released as part of our FoI resonse, that Raeshaw Estate was planning to submit another individual licence application “for 3 cage traps in order to control rooks in particular which were spoiling feeders for pheasants“. We have submitted another FoI to determine whether SNH has granted any further individual licences, even though there is yet another on-going criminal police investigation in to alleged wildlife crimes on this estate.

Watch this space.

Northern England Raptor Forum (NERF) responds to RSPB’s Birdcrime 2016 report

The Northern England Raptor Forum (NERF) has just published its response to the publication of the RSPB’s Birdcrime 2016 report.

Read it here

NERF’s unreserved condemnation of the continued illegal killing of birds of prey is everything you would expect from an organisation that works at the frontline of raptor conservation. In addition, NERF welcomes the recent statements of condemnation from senior representatives of the Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority (here) and the Nidderdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (here). NERF is particularly appreciative of the frank admission and call for a halt to the illegal killing from BASC’s acting CEO, Christopher Graffius (here).

Incidentally, there are still places available to attend NERF’s annual conference on 18 November 2017, at Northumbria University (City Campus East) in Newcastle. Programme & booking details here.

Costs/benefits study of driven grouse shooting due to begin spring 2018

In September 2017 the Scottish Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee considered petition # PE01633, submitted by Les Wallace, calling on the Scottish Government to sponsor a comprehensive and independent study into the full economic impacts of driven grouse shooting.

The Petitions Committee agreed that a full independent study was needed but was unsure whether this topic would be covered as part of the Scottish Government’s earlier commitment in May to undertake a review of grouse moor management practices.

There was also confusion as to whether the Scottish Government had actually commissioned this research yet, and the Committee agreed to contact the Scottish Government to ask for an update on progress and to ask for a timescale (e.g. start / finish date) of that proposed work.

The Scottish Government has now responded to the Petitions Committee with this:

It’s our understanding that this commissioned research on the economic and biodiversity costs/benefits of driven grouse shooting (and other types of upland land use) is separate to the other main piece of work announced by Roseanna Cunningham five months ago in May 2017 – that being ‘to set up an independently-led group to look at the environmental impact of grouse moor management practices such as muirburn, the use of medicated grit and mountain hare culls, and to recommend options for regulation including licensing and other measures which could be put in place without new primary legislation‘.

We are expecting details of this independently-led environmental impact review group to be announced by Friday 10th November, as requested by the Scottish Parliament’s Environment Committee last month.

SNH refuses to disclose details of individual General Licence restriction

In September 2017 we learned that SNH had imposed a General Licence restriction on an individual for alleged criminal activity in relation to raptor persecution (see here).

This was a highly unusual restriction because it applied to an individual rather than to an estate.

At the time the restriction was announced, SNH provided virtually no information other than to say a General Licence restriction had been imposed and that it would apply for three years.

However, RSPB Scotland released a press statement in relation to this restriction order which included the following quote from RSPB Scotland’s Head of Investigations, Ian Thomson:

The restriction was imposed after RSPB investigations staff passed video footage to police of a gamekeeper allegedly setting illegal traps, baited with a dead woodpigeon, very close to a goshawk nest in NE Scotland”.

Here’s a clip from that video evidence:

From this, we were able to deduce that this alleged wildlife crime took place in March 2014 ‘nr Tarland, Aberdeenshire’, although the specific location was not given.

This alleged offence was reported by Police Scotland to the Crown Office in April 2014 (see here). It is clear, now, that the Crown Office did not prosecute the gamekeeper, probably on the grounds that the video evidence was deemed ‘inadmissible’. That’s the sixth alleged wildlife crime case, that we know about, that the Crown Office has dropped in recent months.

So at this stage we know that an alleged wildlife crime had taken place, we know that a criminal prosecution is not going to happen (because the case is now time-barred), and we know that SNH has imposed an individual General Licence restriction on a gamekeeper as a supposed sanction. The identity of the alleged offender remains a secret, as does the name of the estate where the alleged offence was committed. This lack of transparency is, frankly, appalling, especially when former Environment Minister Paul Wheelhouse had stated when he first introduced General Licence restrictions in 2014 that he expected them to function as “a reputational driver”. Not much chance of that happening when the details of a case are kept secret.

In early October 2017 we submitted an FoI to SNH to try and find out more details about this case. We asked for:

  1. The name of the person who had been given a General Licence restriction (we didn’t expect to be told but thought we’d ask anyway – you never know)
  2. The occupation of that person (we already knew from the RSPB press statement that he was a gamekeeper but we wanted SNH to confirm this)
  3. The name of the county in which this individual resides (we already knew from the RSPB press statement that the alleged offence had taken place in Aberdeenshire but we wanted SNH to confirm this)
  4. The name of the estate from where the Police evidence of alleged raptor persecution had been collected
  5. An explanation about why an individual and not an estate was the recipient of the General Licence restriction
  6. An explanation about how SNH intends to monitor the activities of the individual for potential breaches of his General Licence restriction.

SNH has now responded and it’s astonishing:

It looks like SNH has been taking lessons from Natural England in the withholding of information that should be in the public domain. It’s understandable that SNH can’t disclose the alleged offender’s identity, but withholding details of his occupation and the county in which he resides because “this would allow them to be identified” is obviously nonsense, and we already know this information from the RSPB press release!

We would argue that it is in the public interest to know the name of the estate on which this alleged offence took place (and we do know from various local sources it was on a game-shooting estate and that this gamekeeper was employed by that estate). Why should that information be kept secret? Who is SNH shielding, and why?

And does anyone actually believe that Police Scotland, no matter how well-intentioned, has the resources to track this gamekeeper’s activities for the next three years to ensure he’s not breaching the terms of his General Licence restriction?!

Whilst this response doesn’t get us any further forward in knowing the specifics of this case, what it does demonstrate, quite clearly, is that the General Licence restriction, introduced as a way of publicly embarassing estates where there is evidence of wildlife crime but, due to perceieved evidential difficulties, the cases don’t ever reach the courts, is simply not working.

Tomorrow’s blog, on another General Licence restriction case, will emphasise this point again but on a whole bigger scale.

Jim Shannon MP tells Westminster “there are too many birds of prey”

Dim-witted dinosaur Jim Shannon MP (DUP, Strangford, NI) is back making a fool of himself again.

Just a few weeks after being told that the UK Government “is not considering any further controls on the number of raptors” (see here), here’s what the Countryside Alliance member said in the Westminster Parliament yesterday:

From Hansard (2 Nov 2017)

“The number of birds of prey across the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has risen astronomically to the detriment of songbirds. The Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs does occasionally grant licences to cull birds of prey, but many country people and landowners who want to avail themselves of such licences in order to achieve a balance in the countryside find the process to be off-putting. Indeed, sometimes they cannot get a licence. There are too many birds of prey and too few songbirds and mammals, so will the Leader of the House grant a debate on that or call for a statement from DEFRA?”

Here’s the response from Andrea Leadsom MP:

“The hon. Gentleman shares with me a love of nature and wildlife, but we have seen a reduction in this country’s wildlife over many years. As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [Michael Gove MP] has said, it is vital that we take steps as we leave the EU to improve our biodiversity and the prevalence of songbirds and mammals. He is taking steps to ensure that that happens, and there will be further opportunities as we leave the EU“.

There was a good feature about this on Northern Ireland’s BBC Newsline this evening, with a response from Dr Marc Ruddock of the Northern Ireland Raptor Study Group, who managed not to laugh and instead calmly explained that the scientific evidence does not support Jim Shannon’s ludicrous claims. You can watch it on iPlayer here (starts 12:05) but it’s only available for 24 hrs.

Apparently Jim Shannon wasn’t available for interview. Too busy practising his lines for The Simpsons, perhaps.

Interesting bedfellows: 4

Every now and then we blog about who’s (figuratively) getting in to bed with whom within the grouse-shooting industry. Previous installments in this revealing series have included this, this and this.

Today’s fascinating bedfellows are the Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust (GWCT) and Mark Osborne, joint owner of William Powell and grouse moor management ‘guru’, who, according to our research, has links to at least 70 grouse and pheasant shooting estates across the UK, including some very familiar names to this blog such as Leadhills, Glenogil, Raeshaw, Glenlochy, Snilesworth, Abbeystead.

Last year in one of it’s never-ending fundraising drives, the GWCT held a raffle, with a pair of shotguns, a day’s driven grouse shooting and 500 cartridges on offer, all worth an estimated £25,000 and all donated to the GWCT raffle by William Powell. That was extraordinarily generous.

A few days ago a blog apeared on the GWCT website (here) describing the winner’s ‘fantastic day’ on a grouse moor in Derbyshire called Ashop Moor.

Here’s a map showing Ashop Moor, which is part of the Park Hall & Hope Woodlands Estate inside the Peak District National Park:

And here’s a photo of Ashop Moor (photo by RPUK):

It looks lovely, doesn’t it? Just the sort of landscape where you might expect to see a pair of breeding hen harriers. But there aren’t any breeding hen harriers there.

The name of the estate and the name of the moor may not be familiar with blog readers, but you’re more likely to know it for what was filmed there on 24th February 2016 at around 11am:

A few months after we published this video, the National Trust announced it had pulled the shooting lease on this estate four years prematurely and the shooting tenant, believed to be Mark Osborne, was given notice to leave by April 2018.

Very interesting bedfellows indeed.

Chair of Nidderdale AONB condemns illegal raptor persecution

Don’t ever underestimate the power of public pressure.

You know that big solid wall of silence we’re all so used to looking at every time a raptor crime is discovered and reported? It looks like it’s finally beginning to crumble.

The latest to speak out, spontaneously (i.e. without prompting), about the continued illegal killing of birds of prey is the Chair of the Nidderdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty’s Joint Advisory Committee, Councillor Nigel Simms:

He’s obviously taken a lead from the spontaneous statement made by the neighbouring Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority yesterday.

The publication of this statement from the Nidderdale AONB is really, really welcome. The Nidderdale AONB in North Yorkshire is notorious as a raptor persecution hotspot and has been for many years. We’ve lost count of the number of red kites that never make it out of this particular hell hole, although the RSPB has been keeping track – 22 poisoned or shot in the last ten years, and that’s only the ones that were found.

Nidderdale red kite persecution incidents 2007-2017, map by RSPB:

Illegally-killed red kite (photo Marc Ruddock):

We also know that hen harriers rarely get out of Nidderdale alive – unfortunately we can’t show you a detailed map because Natural England wants to keep the details a secret. Natural England is supposed to protect hen harriers but it’s clearly more interested in protecting the reputations of criminal landowners and gamekeepers. Anyway, here’s a photo of an illegally-killed satellite-tagged hen harrier – something you might see if you visit Nidderdale AONB, assuming you get to it before the gamekeeper who shot it:

It’s interesting to see that these crimes are “starting to have a damaging effect on tourism businesses“, according to Cllr Simms. Good, not for the businesses affected, obviously, but good that it will drive increased local pressure to bring these crimes to an end.

Cllr Simms’ comment that illegal raptor persecution “undermines the work of law-abiding landowners and gamekeepers who are actively working alongside us to improve prospects for all forms of wildlife in the AONB” is slightly odd. Which law-abiding landowners and gamekeepers are those? Presumably not anyone involved with any of the aforementioned red kite killings or hen harrier disappearances, nor, presumably, anybody involved with the attempted shooting of a nesting marsh harrier and the removal of its eggs, as filmed on a Nidderdale AONB grouse moor by the RSPB earlier this year?

There’s much work to do in this AONB but this very public condemnation of illegal raptor persecution from the Chair of the AONB Advisory Committee is encouraging. Well done, Cllr Nigel Simms.

Now, who’s next to speak out and bring that wall of silence crashing down?

BASC Chairman Peter Glenser calls for “honesty” in raptor debate

Have we moved in to a parallel universe? It feels like it today.

First we have BASC’s acting chief executive, Christopher Grafficus, admitting there are “criminals among us” and urging his members to stop killing raptors (see here) before also admitting that the number of convicted gamekeepers “must be the tip of the iceberg” (see here).

And now BASC’s chairman, Peter Glenser, has written a short piece on BASC’s website calling for “honesty in the raptor debate”:

Hmmm. To be honest (as Peter Glenser wants), we’re not as convinced by Peter’s statement of intent as we were this morning with Christopher Graffius’ sincerity. There are a number of reasons for this.

Where was BASC’s ‘honesty’ in the evidence they submitted to last year’s Westminster debate on driven grouse shooting, about the extent of criminal behaviour on driven grouse moors? They claimed it was only undertaken by “a small minority of individuals”.

Where was BASC’s ‘honesty’ in December last year when a senior staff member was telling a Scottish Parliamentary Committee there was no need for game shoot licensing because

“Shotgun certificate holders are among the most law-abiding sector of society and any hint of illegal activity can lead to the right to hold a certificate, and the ability to shoot, being withdrawn”

when on the very same day, Peter Glenser (in his capacity as a barrister) was defending the right of a gamekeeper to have his firearms returned even though it was accepted by the court that this particular gamekeeper had been involved with storing poisons in a secret underground stash on a grouse moor?

Where was the ‘honesty’ last year when BASC’s Director of Northern England, Duncan Thomas, reportedly told a conference that it was ‘an absolute fact’ that disturbance from birdwatchers was the major factor in the losses of hen harriers from grouse moors and it wasn’t much to do with illegal persecution?

There are probably plenty of other examples we could cite if we could be bothered to look for them, and then there’s also BASC’s cynical attempts (e.g. here, here, here) to silence Chris Packham, on the pretence of being concerned about BBC impartiality but in reality probably being more concerned about Packham’s ‘celebrity’ status allowing him to reach a wide audience with his concerns about raptor persecution on driven grouse moors.

We’re also a bit suspicious of Peter Glenser’s use of the phrase “the raptor debate”. There is no ‘raptor debate’. This is about the criminal offence of killing of birds of prey, that’s it. What we suspect Peter might be getting at by the use of this phrase is perhaps he thinks there should be a debate and the focus of that debate would be how many licences gamekeepers can get for legally killing raptors.

That debate, if it ever comes, is a long way away. The immediate issue, as Christopher Graffius recognised, is getting gamekeepers and land owners to stop killing raptors. And while we very much welcome BASC’s apparent commitment to this objective, the immediate and dismal response of the two gamekeeping organisations (NGO and SGA) shows just how difficult that will be.

We don’t know what has sparked these sudden declarations from BASC, although we’d love to know, but it might just be too little, too late. Scotland is already well down the path towards the introduction of a licensing scheme, mainly because the gamebird – shooting industry has comprehensively failed to self-regulate, since 1954! They’ve shown time after time, for decades, they simply can’t be trusted.

Whether BASC can organise the other members of the shooting community (i.e. the non-gamebird shooters) to rally against the criminals within the grouse and pheasant shooters, which is what BASC appears to be trying to do, then maybe, just maybe, they can salvage something from the train wreck that’s thundering their way.