Raeshaw and Burnfoot Estates to appeal General Licence Restriction orders

Raeshaw Corshope GL restriction map 2015Further to last week’s news that SNH has suspended the use of General Licences on four estates for what it said was “clear evidence that wildlife crimes have been committed on these properties”, which includes the discovery of poisoned raptors and illegal traps (see here and here), two of the estates involved are set to appeal.

According to quotes in this week’s Scottish Farmer, defence agent David McKie, representing Raeshaw Estate in the Borders, said: “We are disappointed by this decision and will be vigorously challenging it“.

A spokesman for Burnfoot Estate said: “We absolutely dispute the conclusions reached by SNH and consider the decision to be unfair. We will be appealing the decision“.

Meanwhile, a spokesperson for Scottish Land & Estates is quoted: “Our concerns about the level of evidence and robustness of process, which were raised previously along with other land management organisations, remain. We will be working with key industry stakeholders to learn more about the circumstances surrounding these new restrictions“.

A spokesman for the Scottish Gamekeepers’ Association is quoted: “It is up to the estates involved to take counsel and make a case if they feel there is insufficient evidence for the measure to proceed. When this measure was initially subject to consultation, the SGA opposed it, not in the spirit of what it was trying to do, but rather that it was simply not a good proposal“.

Article in Scottish Farmer here

Wonder if Raeshaw Estate or Burnfoot Estate is a member of the SLE?

SNH reveals reasons for general licence restrictions on Raeshaw & Burnfoot Estates

Raeshaw Corshope GL restriction map 2015Last week we blogged about the implementation of General Licence restrictions on parts of four properties: Burnfoot Estate & Wester Cringate Estate in Stirlingshire, and Raeshaw Estate & Corsehope Estate in the Borders (see here).

At the time, SNH did not reveal the reasons for the General Licence restrictions, other than to say “There is clear evidence that wildlife crimes have been committed on these properties” [since 1st January 2014, when the new regulations were enacted].

We speculated that the General Licence restrictions at Burnfoot and Wester Cringate in Stirlingshire were related to the poisoning of a red kite (July 2014), a poisoned peregrine (Feb 2015), and the illegal trapping of a red kite (May 2015).

We had no idea why the General Licence restrictions had been implemented at Raeshaw and Corsehope in the Borders, because there hadn’t been any publicity about any recent raptor persecution crimes in this area.

However, last Saturday (7th November 2015), a bit more information was revealed during an interview with SNH Wildlife Operations Manager, Robbie Kernahan, on the BBC Radio Scotland Out of Doors programme.

Amongst other things, the presenter asked Mr Kernahan directly about the reasons for General Licence restrictions on these four properties. Here’s what Mr Kernahan said:

Stirlingshire GL restrictions:Relates to some issues associated with poisoning birds of prey, birds of prey being found poisoned in that location, and illegal use of traps“.

Borders GL restrictions:There are issues about the illegal placement of traps“.

No further explicit detail was provided, although there was a general wider discussion about the use of General Licence Restrictions and their deterrent value in tackling raptor persecution.

The interview can be heard here for the next 26 days (starts at 02:15; ends at 09:06).

General licences suspended on four Scottish grouse moors in response to raptor persecution crimes

Yesterday, SNH published the following press release:

General licences restricted in wildlife crime hotspots

Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) has restricted the use of general licences on four properties in two wildlife crime hotspots – one in Stirlingshire and one in the Borders – this week. The decision was made on the basis of evidence provided by Police Scotland of wildlife crime against birds.

Nick Halfhide, SNH Director of Operations, said:

“There is clear evidence that wildlife crimes have been committed on these properties. Because of this, and the risk of more wildlife crimes taking place, we have suspended the general licences on these four properties for three years. They may though still apply for individual licences, but these will be closely monitored.

“This measure should help to protect wild birds in the area, while still allowing necessary land management activities to take place, albeit under tighter supervision. We consider that this is a proportionate response to protect wild birds in the area and prevent further wildlife crime.”

General licences allow landowners or land managers to carry out actions which would otherwise be illegal, including controlling common species of wild birds to protect crops or livestock.

The new measure complements other recent actions to reduce wildlife crime, including vicarious liability for offences against wild birds, which was introduced in 2011.

Restrictions will prevent people from using the general licences on the land in question for three years. This period will increase if more evidence of offences comes to light.

END

As promised in earlier correspondence with SNH about potential General Licence restrictions (e.g. see here), SNH has published ‘details’ of the current restrictions on its website. Although when we say ‘details’ we use the term loosely. The names of the estates have not been published (but see below) and the specific reasons (crimes) that triggered the restriction orders are also absent.

Instead, SNH has published two maps showing the areas where the three-year restriction orders will be in place.

Restriction order #1 can be viewed here: GL restriction order 1_ Nov 2015-2018

The map denoting the area relating to Restriction order #1 is here:

Raeshaw Corshope GL restriction map 2015

Having consulted Andy Wightman’s brilliant website Who Owns Scotland to check estate boundaries, we now know that the delineated area shown in Restriction order #1 includes parts of Raeshaw Estate and the neighbouring Corsehope Estate.

This is fascinating. Raeshaw Estate is well known to us and continues to be of interest. It is a mixed upland estate combining driven grouse shooting as well as pheasant and partridge shooting. We have documentary evidence that Mark Osborne’s company is involved in the estate management (more on that in the near future). Raeshaw Estate has been raided by the police at least twice (2004 and 2009 – poisoned and shot raptors and poisoned baits – see here) although nobody has ever been prosecuted for these crimes. However, the General Licence Restriction can only be applied for crimes that have been uncovered since 1st January 2014; it cannot be applied retrospectively for offences that took place prior to 1st January 2014. This means that further raptor crimes have been uncovered here but there has not been any publicity about them. Why not? There was news of a shot buzzard found in the nearby area on 24th July 2015 (see here), but this bird was found AFTER SNH had notified the estate of the intention to restrict the General Licence (see here) so this incident cannot be the one that triggered the General Licence Restriction.

Corsehope Estate has not been on our radar, although we’re told by local sources that gamekeepers from Raeshaw Estate are involved with ‘vermin control’ here so now we’re very interested.

Restriction order #2 can be viewed here: GL retriction order 2_ Nov 2015-2018

The map denoting the area relating to Restriction order #2 is here:

Burnfoot Wester Cringate GL restriction map 2015

Again, consulting Andy Wightman’s excellent website Who Owns Scotland to check estate boundaries, we now know that the delineated area shown in Restriction order #2 includes parts of Burnfoot Estate and Wester Cringate Estate.

This is also interesting. We believe (although it must be stressed that this is educated speculation as SNH has not published the information) that this restriction order probably relates to a series of raptor persecution crimes including a poisoned red kite (July 2014), a poisoned peregrine (February 2015) and an illegally trapped red kite (May 2015) – see here.

So, what do these General Licence Restriction orders mean? Basically, it means that the following activities, usually permitted under General Licences 1, 2 and 3, are now not permitted in the areas shown on the two maps for three years, starting 13th November 2015 and ending 12th November 2018:

The killing or taking of the following species:

Great black-backed gull, carrion crow, hooded crow, jackdaw, jay, rook, ruddy duck, magpie, Canada goose, collared dove, feral pigeon, wood pigeon, lesser black-back gull, and herring gull.

The use of the following methods to kill/take these species are not permitted:

Pricking of eggs, oiling of eggs, destruction of eggs and nests, use of Larsen trap, use of Larsen Mate trap, use of Larsen Pod trap, use of multi-catch crow cage trap, shooting with any firearm, targeted falconry, and by hand.

That sounds great, doesn’t it? But it’s not quite as clear cut as that. As we’ve discussed before, and as is stated in the SNH press release at the top of this blog, although these activities can no longer be carried out in the two denoted areas under the cover of the three General Licences, individuals may still apply for an individual licence to permit these activities, although SNH claims that if granted, these will be “closely monitored”.

What does ‘closely monitored’ actually mean? Closely monitored by whom? Daily inspections by SNH? Police Scotland? That’s hardly going to happen, is it?

Let’s hope that members of the general public, exercising their right to visit these areas under open access legislation, pay close attention to what’s going on around them. If they see a Larsen trap in use, or a crow cage trap in use, or witness any of the above bird species being killed/taken by any of the methods mentioned above, they inform the Police straight away. Actually, let’s hope they forget the police and inform RSPB Scotland and/or the SSPCA instead – they’re more likely to get a quick response from them.

It’ll be interesting to see how this all pans out. On the one hand, we welcome these Restriction orders and applaud the Scottish Government (especially former Environment Minister Paul Wheelhouse for initiating them), SNH and Police Scotland for pursuing what we hope will be the first of many such Restriction orders. But on the other hand, will these restrictions be anything more than a minor inconvenience to the estates involved because they can simply apply for individual licences to continue their game-shooting activities? We’ll have to wait and see.

RSPB Scotland’s response to the two General Licence Restriction orders here

As yet no response from Scottish Land & Estates or the Scottish Gamekeepers’ Association but we’ll post them here if/when they comment.

UPDATE 11.50hrs: The SGA has issued the following statement on their website:

On November 4th 2015, SNH announced general licence restrictions to two areas encompassing four properties.
The SGA has issued the following statement in response to questions.

A Spokesman for The Scottish Gamekeepers Association said: “The SGA cannot condone wildlife crime and has a clear and consistent policy regarding this.
“As regards this case, it is our understanding that legal discussions are taking place regarding the areas affected and, therefore, it is not appropriate for us to comment further.”
END
UPDATE 13.20hrs: Statement from Environment Minister Dr Aileen McLeod:

“The announcement by SNH that the use of general licences has been restricted on specified areas of land in the Borders and in Stirlingshire is a result of work that the Scottish Government commissioned in July 2013 as part of a package of measures to combat wildlife crime.

We welcome the progress that has been made with this work. However we have not been involved in the decision-making and do not have any comment on the individual cases in question. The General Licence system is a light touch form of regulation. It is clearly sensible to apply closer scrutiny to areas where there is good evidence that wildlife crime has taken place, and we believe that this will prove a useful tool in the fight against bird of prey persecution.”

Vicarious liability prosecution: Andrew Duncan (Newlands Estate) part 2

Back in August we blogged (here) about a vicarious liability prosecution against Andrew Walter Bryce Duncan of Newlands Estate, Dumfriesshire.

The prosecution against Mr Duncan began after the conviction in August of Newlands Estate gamekeeper William (Billy) Dick, who was found guilty of illegally killing a buzzard by striking it with rocks and repeatedly stamping on it (see here). Dick was sentenced in September and received a £2,000 fine (here). It also emerged that the Newlands Estate was a member of Scottish Land & Estates (SLE) and an accredited member of SLE’s ‘Wildlife Estates Scotland’ initiative (see here).

The vicarious liability prosecution against Duncan continued last week with an intermediate diet at Dumfries Sheriff Court. Prior to that hearing, a provisional trial date had been set for 23rd November 2015.

However, at last week’s hearing the provisional trial date (November) was dumped and now a notional trial diet has been set for 18th January 2016. A notional trial diet just means that a formal trial date is likely to be set at that hearing.

So why the delay in the case against Mr Duncan? It may be because the gamekeeper, Billy Dick, is rumoured to be appealing his conviction, which if upheld could impact on the allegations against Mr Duncan. Although, confusingly, a vicarious liability prosecution is not dependent on the conviction of the person who committed the primary offence, but the prosecutor must demonstrate that the primary offence took place and that the offence was committed by a third party who has a specific relationship to the person being charged with vicarious liability (see here).

Clear? As mud. Guess we’ll have to wait and see what happens with the gamekeeper’s appeal.

Ross-shire Massacre: local MSP tries again for review of police investigation

In November 2014, Dave Thompson, the local MSP for Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch, wrote to the then Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Kenny MacAskill, to ask for a review of how Police Scotland had handled the investigation into the deaths of 22 raptors that had been found poisoned near Conon Bridge (the Ross-shire Massacre). The Police had been severely criticised for their handling of this case, not just for the investigation itself but also for what many of us believed to be an appalling media strategy. We blogged about it here.

Here is a copy of Dave Thompson’s letter to the Cabinet Secretary:

Dave Thompson MSP letter to Justice Sec

We didn’t hear anything further so an FoI was recently submitted to the Justice Department to find out what had happened.

It turns out that in December 2014 Mr MacAskill’s successor, Michael Matheson, had responded to Dave Thompson’s request by stating that he couldn’t comment about a live, on-going police investigation but suggested that Mr Thompson should raise any concerns with the Chief Constable. Here is a copy of Mr Matheson’s letter:

Justice Minister letter

Almost a year on from his first request, and with no sign that the Police investigation has made any progress in the 18 months since the dead birds were discovered (see here), Dave Thompson has now written to the Chief Constable of Police Scotland to urge him to issue an interim report on the first stages of the Police investigation of this case. His second request for a review was no doubt influenced by the recent release of an excellent short documentary video (see here) about the mass poisoning.

Dave Thompson MSP said: “I appreciate the need to await the full review into the investigation, especially as the case is live, and as such, we must be sensitive to the investigative process.

However, I feel enough time has elapsed that the general public are owed an explanation of where the case is at, which is why I have requested an interim review to be issued by Police Scotland, so we can see how the process has been handled in the early stages.

I have written to the Chief Constable and copied in the Chief Superintendent, Julian Innes, and the Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Michael Matheson, on the matter.

I look forward to hearing back from the Chief Constable as soon as is practically possible on what is an issue that still remains a concern to many of my constituents and beyond“.

Here is the transcript of his latest letter:

Dear Chief Constable,

Given the length of time that has passed and the failure to date to bring a culprit to justice, I am writing to ask if Police Scotland could issue an interim report on the first stages of the investigation, perhaps the first six months, into the raptor deaths around Conon Bridge. 

As you know there is considerable public anger at the incident and I believe this would go some way to helping people understand how seriously the Police are taking the investigation and the constraints you may have been under in the early stages.

Yours sincerely

Dave Thompson SNP MSP

END

Red sky on the Black Isle: new film on the Ross-shire Massacre

A short, 12 minute film has been released about the 2014 Ross-shire Massacre, the mass illegal poisoning of 22 red kites and buzzards.

Entitled ‘Red Sky on the Black Isle’, this is an excellent film and includes interviews with some of the key individuals involved with the investigation which, as you’ll know, still remains unsolved 19 months on (see here).

Watch the film here

Rossshire Massacre film

Misleading conclusions from Scot Gov’s 2014 wildlife crime report

Wildlife Crime in Scotland 2014 reportYesterday the Scottish Government published its latest report on wildlife crime: ‘Wildlife Crime in Scotland: 2014 annual report’ (see here).

It was accompanied by a Government press release (here) with a headline statement claiming ‘ Recorded wildlife crime dropped by 20 per cent in the period 2013-2014‘. This claim has been regurgitated, without real examination, in much of the national press, which will give the public the impression that all’s going swimmingly in the fight against wildlife crime in Scotland. This couldn’t be further from the truth.

Let’s start with the report’s name. It claims to be the ‘2014 annual report’, but actually the period covered by the report is the 2013/14 financial year: April 2013 to March 2014. That means the majority of the data are from 2013 (9 months worth) – these are wildlife crimes that took place as long ago as 2.5 years and the most ‘recent’ took place 18 months ago (March 2014). Many more offences occurred during the nine months between April-Dec 2014 but they are not included in this report. Although the report itself does explain the reasons behind this odd time-frame selection, the report’s title does not, which means anyone just browsing the headline news will be given a false impression of how recent these findings are. It’s a small point, but it’s an important one.

However, there are bigger issues than just a misleading report title.

If you take the report’s data at face value (which we don’t – more on that in a second) and accept that it’s representative of all reported wildlife crime in Scotland between April 2013 and March 2014, you might also accept that the claim of a 20% reduction in recorded wildlife crime is accurate. But if you look at the data (Table 1), you’ll notice that this supposed broad reduction (i.e. reduction of recorded wildlife crimes in general) is actually almost entirely due to a large reduction in one particular area of wildlife crime: specifically, fish poaching. To then apply this reduction of a specific wildlife crime to all other types of wildlife crime in a broad sweeping statement is wholly misleading.

Our main issue with this report, as with previous reports, is the Government’s insistence on only using crime data that has been recorded by the Police. Although this report does attempt to address this problem by including separate sections on data collected by others (e.g. Scottish Badgers, SSPCA), these data are still not included in the overall analysis of wildlife crime trends because these incidents weren’t recorded on the Police national crime database. A good example of this is shown in Table 10, which details the number of wildlife cases investigated by the SSPCA. The report accepts that cases investigated solely by the SSPCA (as opposed to cases where the SSPCA has assisted the Police) are not included in the ‘official’ recorded crime data because ‘they are not recorded on the police national crime database’. So in effect, 69 cases that were investigated solely by the SSPCA during the period covered by the report are absent from the national figures. It seems bizarre that even though these data are available (of course they are, they appear in this report, albeit in a separate section!) they are still excluded from the main analysis. This blatant exclusion immediately reduces our confidence in the robustness of the ‘national’ data.

Another blatant exclusion of data is demonstrated in Table 17 in the Raptor Persecution section. This table identifies only 16 bird of prey victims from the mass poisoning in March 2014 known as the Ross-shire Massacre, excluding the other six victims that were found. The report justifies this exclusion by explaining that evidence of poisoning was not found after examinations of those six raptors. That’s fair enough, but surely we’re not expected to believe that those six victims all died of natural causes, in the same small area, and at the same time, as the 16 confirmed poisoning victims? They don’t appear in the figures because a crime couldn’t be identified, but they still died as a result of this crime and to pretend otherwise is nonsense.

An additional problem that erodes public confidence in the accuracy of the ‘national’ data is the issue of how carefully wildlife crimes are recorded. A report published earlier this year (which includes part of the period covered by this latest Government report) revealed systemic problems with the under-recording of several types of wildlife crime as well as failures by the police to undertake follow-up investigations on reports of suspected wildlife crimes (see LINK report here). If the police don’t follow up with an investigation, the incident is unlikely to be recorded as a crime. Until these issues are suitably addressed, the accuracy of ‘official’ ‘national’ wildlife crime data will inevitably be viewed with suspicion.

So, we don’t have much confidence in this report’s data and we certainly don’t agree with the Government’s claim that (overall) recorded wildlife crime has reduced by 20%, but there are some positives. It’s clear that more thought has been put in to the material contained in this year’s report and there is definitely more clarity about the sources used. That’s good progress.

There are also a couple of things in this report that we are particularly pleased to see.

First, let’s go back to Table 10 (SSPCA data). You may remember (if you have a long memory) that in March 2014, the Government opened its consultation on whether to increase the investigatory powers of the SSPCA. That consultation closed in September 2014 and, over a year later, we’re still waiting for a decision. It’s our understanding that one of the main sticking points is with Police Scotland (who, as you’ll recall, strongly objected to an increase of powers – see here). Apparently, the current sticking point is that Police Scotland are worried that they’ll be excluded from wildlife crime investigations because the SSPCA ‘refuses to work with them’. However, if you look at Table 10, you’ll notice that 50% of all wildlife cases taken by the SSPCA during the period covered by this report were undertaken in partnership with the Police. That’s 50%. Does that look like an organisation that is refusing to work with the Police? It doesn’t to us.

The second point of interest in this report appears in Table 18b. This table provides information about recorded bird of prey crimes between April 2013 and March 2014. Have a look at the 7th entry down:

Species: Hen Harrier

Police Division: Aberdeenshire and Moray

Type of Crime: Shooting

Date: June 2013.

Why is this of particular interest? Well, cast your mind back to January 2014 when we blogged about a vague Police Scotland press release that stated a man had been reported to the Crown Office ‘in relation to the death of a hen harrier’ in Aberdeenshire that took place in June 2013 (see here). So it turns out this hen harrier had been shot. Amazing that it took over two years for this information to be made public. But that’s not the most interesting bit. For this unnamed individual to be reported to the Crown for allegedly shooting this hen harrier means that the Police have some level of evidence that they think links him to the crime. If they didn’t have evidence, he wouldn’t have been reported. So, the alleged crime took place 2.4 years ago. The Crown Office was notified 1.9 years ago. What’s happening with this case? Is there going to be a prosecution? Why such a long delay for a crime that is deemed a ‘priority’ by the Scottish Government?

Environment Minister misses the point

annie-with-her-sat-tagIn August this year, over 300 blog readers emailed Environment Minister Dr Aileen McLeod in response to the news that Langholm hen harrier ‘Annie’ had been found shot dead on a Scottish grouse moor (see here). Well done to all of you who took the time to write.

The Minister issued a press statement within a few hours. The response time was impressive, the content wasn’t (see here).

Now a month later, the Minister has been responding to the individual emails that she received (well, one of her civil servants has been responding on her behalf). We’ve been sent a number of these responses and they’re all identical. Here’s what the response says:

Thank you for your letter of 11 August 2015 to the Minister for Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform, Dr Aileen McLeod. I have been asked to respond on her behalf. Please accept my apologies for the delayed response.

Let me reassure you that the Scottish Government has been and remains committed to tackling wildlife crime. Since 2007 we have built a strong and broad-based Partnership for Action against Wildlife Crime in Scotland (PAW Scotland) involving conservationists, land managers and law enforcement.

We also have a group dedicated to tackling raptor persecution – the PAW Scotland Raptor Group – which is made up of representatives from law enforcement and government agencies, RSPB, Scottish Raptor Study Groups, Scottish Land & Estates, Scottish Gamekeepers Association, British Association for Shooting and Conservation, Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust and the Cairngorms National Park Authority.

We have pursued a number of initiatives since 2007, including for example

  • the first restrictions on the use of General licences by those convicted of wildlife crimes
  • tightening up of law relating to trapping and snaring, including the introduction of training and registration requirements for operators
  • new provisions in the Wildlife and Countryside Act relating to the protection of the nests of birds such as white-tailed eagles and protection against harassment for birds such hen harrier
  • the introduction of vicarious liability provisions for offences related to wild birds

Some of these initiatives were ground-breaking in the UK and have now also been adopted by England and Wales.

There are also a number of pieces of current work which are underway, which I will take this opportunity to update you on.

Pesticides Disposal Scheme – this Scottish Government funded scheme ran from 23 February to 29 May 2015. The scheme has removed over 720kg of highly dangerous toxic chemicals from Scotland’s environment and ensured they cannot be used to poison wild birds. Details about what was removed from Scotland’s environment were published on 9 September. There remains no good reason for people to retain these substances.

Wildlife Crime Penalties Review – this review has taken a comprehensive look at whether the penalties available to the courts in wildlife crime cases are adequate and appropriate. The review has been submitted to Ministers and will be published shortly.

Further restriction of General Licences – this new procedure which has been recently introduced will see restrictions being imposed on the use of general licences over land where it is believed the wildlife crime has taken place. A number of cases have been under consideration and I expect further news to be made public imminently. SNH will publish details of imposed restrictions when it is appropriate to do so.

Law enforcement obviously has a key role to play. Since being established, Police Scotland has ensured that there is a wildlife crime liaison officer (WCLO) in each police division and has also already delivered and made significant commitment to ongoing training not only for existing WCOs, but also to other officers force wide. Police Scotland aim to bring a consistent and professional approach to wildlife crime investigations, including the use of modern forensic techniques.

The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service has a dedicated Wildlife and Environmental Crime Unit with four specialist Procurators Fiscal who have developed an extensive knowledge in this area, and have now secured the first prosecution in relation to vicarious liability. There has also been the first custodial sentence for a gamekeeper found guilty of killing wild birds.

The Scottish Government has previously stated that it would be prepared to consider the licensing of shooting businesses to further regulate this sector, however it is important that we are able to assess the impact of the measures that have been recently implemented, or are still to be fully implemented, before consideration is given to the introduction of any further regulatory measures. We do not consider it is appropriate to react to every instance of criminal activity with further changes to the law. Scotland already has some of the strongest laws to deal with wildlife crime. Appropriate action by the law enforcement agencies is the correct response to wildlife crime, as with any other criminal activity.

I hope that this response demonstrates the breadth of work that is ongoing in this area.

Yours faithfully,

Karen Hunter

Wildlife Crime Policy Officer

END

As you can see, it’s full of the usual guff about ‘commitment’ and ‘partnership-working’ yada yada. But there are a couple of things that particularly interested us –

First:

We have pursued a number of initiatives since 2007, including for example

  • the first restrictions on the use of General licences by those convicted of wildlife crimes
  • tightening up of law relating to trapping and snaring, including the introduction of training and registration requirements for operators
  • new provisions in the Wildlife and Countryside Act relating to the protection of the nests of birds such as white-tailed eagles and protection against harassment for birds such hen harrier
  • the introduction of vicarious liability provisions for offences related to wild birds

Some of these initiatives were ground-breaking in the UK and have now also been adopted by England and Wales“.

Hmm. As far as we’re aware, only one of these “ground-breaking initiatives” has been adopted elsewhere, not “some of them”. The one that has been adopted is the restriction on the use of General Licences by those convicted of wildlife crimes. Although this can hardly be called a “ground-breaking initiative” when the person who is no longer permitted to use a General Licence on account of a relevant conviction can simply apply to the statutory agency (SNH or Natural England) for an individual licence to enable them to continue their trapping and killing activities as if they hadn’t been convicted at all!

The introduction of training and registration requirements for snare operators has not “also been adopted by England and Wales“. And how’s that going in Scotland, by the way? Ooops, looks like Police Scotland has cocked up big time by issuing duplicate tag numbers to 60 individuals, due to ‘an administrative error’ – see here. Brilliant.

The new provisions of the WCA relating to extra protection for white-tailed eagles and hen harriers  has not “also been adopted by England and Wales” because the enabling legislation is Scotland-specific (see here).

The introduction of vicarious liability provisions for offences related to wild birds has not “also been adopted by England and Wales“. Indeed, the Westminster Government has thus far refused to consider it as a serious option (see here and here).

Aileen McLeod MSP3The other statement in the Minister’s response that interests us greatly is this:

The Scottish Government has previously stated that it would be prepared to consider the licensing of shooting businesses to further regulate this sector, however it is important that we are able to assess the impact of the measures that have been recently implemented, or are still to be fully implemented, before consideration is given to the introduction of any further regulatory measures. We do not consider it is appropriate to react to every instance of criminal activity with further changes to the law“.

In our opinion, the last sentence indicates that the Minister has completely missed the point. Nobody is asking, or expecting, further changes to the law in response to every instance of criminal activity. That would be ludicrous. The point that we, and everyone else who sends her emails is making, is that every criminal raptor persecution incident is yet further evidence that the current measures are clearly not working!

Since the latest ‘new measures’ were first announced by former Environment Minister Paul Wheelhouse in July 2013 (see here), many of which are still to be implemented over two years later, we have seen a continuous number of reported crimes (which undoubtedly will be the very tip of a very large iceberg). Here are some of them, all detailed on this blog, and we expect there to be many more that haven’t yet made it in to the public domain:

June 2013: Shot buzzard found close to a grouse moor in the Borders, later revealed to have also been poisoned.

July 2013:  Buzzard shot in the throat in North Ayrshire.

August 2013: Red kite found shot close to a grouse moor in Leadhills.

September 2013: Poisoned buzzard found in Stirlingshire.

October 2013: Langholm hen harrier ‘Blue’ disappears.

October 2013: Half-made raptor trap discovered on a sporting estate in Angus.

December 2013: Buzzard died of ‘unnatural causes’ close to a grouse moor ‘near Tomatin’ [we now know it had been shot].

December 2013: Golden eagle ‘Fearnan’ found poisoned on Angus grouse moor.

January 2014: Man reported for hen harrier death in Aberdeenshire.

January 2014: Dead bird (species unknown) & suspected poisoned bait found in South Lanarkshire.

February 2014: Poisoned peregrine found close to a grouse moor in Leadhills.

March 2014: 22 poisoned raptors (16 red kites + 6 buzzards) found on farmland in Ross-shire.

April 2014: Man arrested for alleged attempted raptor trapping in Aberdeenshire.

April 2014: ‘Illegally-killed’ peregrine found near Stirling [we now know it had been shot].

April 2014: East Scotland sea eagle chick ‘disappears’ on Aberdeenshire grouse moor.

April 2014: Gamekeeper charged with allegedly bludgeoning & stamping on buzzard on a sporting estate in Dumfriesshire.

April 2014: Poisoned buzzard found in Fife.

May 2014: Masked gunmen caught on camera shooting at active goshawk nest in Cairngorms National Park.

June 2014: Allegations emerge of ‘coordinated hunt & shooting’ of a hen harrier on a grouse moor in Aberdeenshire last year.

June 2014: Hen harrier died on a grouse moor near Muirkirk “as result of criminal act”. We later discover it had been shot.

June 2014: Red kite found on railway line, shot in the head.

July 2014: Red kite found poisoned on a grouse moor in Stirlingshire.

September 2014: Red kite found poisoned on a grouse moor in Morayshire.

November 2014: Buzzard fatally injured after being shot & stamped on in the Borders.

December 2014: Tawny owl shot dead in East Lothian.

February 2015: Peregrine found poisoned on a grouse moor in Stirlingshire.

March 2015: Kitten found poisoned (Carbofuran) close to a grouse moor in the Borders.

March 2015: Hen Harrier ‘Annie’ found shot dead on a South Lanarkshire grouse moor.

May 2015: Red kite fatally injured after caught in illegal spring trap on a grouse moor in Stirlingshire.

July 2015: Buzzard fatally injured after found shot close to a grouse moor in the Borders.

August 2015: Buzzard shot dead in Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park.

August 2015: Red kite fatally injured close to a grouse moor ‘near Tomatin’ – cause of death “not due to natural causes”. [Was probably shot].

The Minister points to two recent notable successes – the vicarious liability conviction and the custodial sentence given to a raptor-killing gamekeeper. They were indeed huge results and were warmly welcomed at the time. However, they are still the exceptions to the rule and we have since seen a number of convictions this year that have resulted in the usual derisory sentences (e.g. Michael Johnston fined £400 for possession of banned poison Strychnine; Gamekeeper James O’Reilly given a 240 hours Community Payback Order for four offences including the use of a banned gin trap; Poultry farmer Michael Harrison fined £600 for shooting and stamping on a buzzard; Gamekeeper William Dick fined £2,000 for bludgeoning and stamping on a buzzard). We have only seen one vicarious liability conviction in three and half years since the new legislation was enacted.

We keep being told that ‘we need more time to assess the impact of the new measures’. Why do we? Isn’t it bleedin’ obvious that raptor persecution is continuing despite all the so-called partnership-working, new measures and deterrents? The Minister may well be irritated that her inbox gets bombarded after each raptor crime but she can expect more of the same each and every time we hear of yet another crime. And there will be more, mark our words.

She should also know that if and when she decides to make a stand with something forceful and tangible, she’ll be deluged with emails of appreciation and support.

Ross-shire Massacre: 18 months on

It’s been 18 months since the corpses of 22 birds of prey (16 red kites and 6 buzzards) were found in a small area around Conon Bridge in the Highlands.

We know that 16 of these birds were illegally poisoned (12 red kites & 4 buzzards). Still no word on the other six victims.

Still no word on the type of poison used, although Police Scotland did eventually admit that it was an “illegally-held poisonous substance” (see here). Carbofuran is suspected by many of us (see here).

The details of this illegal mass poisoning have still been deliberately excluded from the quarterly SASA reports – the Government reports that are supposed to inform us about recent illegal poisoning crimes in Scotland.

Police Scotland still maintains that the birds “were most likely not targeted deliberately but instead were the victims of pest control measures” (see here) – even though they can’t possibly know this unless they have a suspect who has given a full confession.

We’re still waiting to hear whether MSP Dave Thompson’s request, back in November 2014, for a review of Police Scotland’s handling of this investigation will be undertaken (see here).

We’re still waiting to hear when the thousands of pounds worth of reward funds, that many of us donated, will be released by Police Scotland so that RSPB Scotland can redistribute them to support the work of their investigations team (see here).

Two months ago in July 2015 MSP Bill Kidd called on Police Scotland to tell the public more about the investigation (see here). We’re still waiting.

18 months on and still no arrests.

18 months on and still no charges.

18 months on and still no prosecution.

18 months on and still no conviction.

18 months on and still no justice.

18 months on and still no confidence in Police Scotland’s ability to solve this appalling crime.

Previous posts on the Ross-shire Massacre here.

Three more poisoned red kites

WT J 1 as I foundThe following press release has been issued today by FoRK (Friends of Red Kites) –

POISONING OF RED KITES CONDEMNED

Three red kites have been found illegally poisoned in a blow to efforts to re-establish a thriving population across north east England.

One found near a grouse moor died from Carbofuran poisoning despite the use of the chemical being banned in Britain since 2002. The two others were found together and died as a result of poisoning by Aldicarb, a widely-used pesticide which has been implicated in deliberate poisonings elsewhere in Britain.

The bodies of all three were recovered and sent for post-mortem examination after tip-offs from the public.

The three deaths, revealed by Friends of Red Kites (FoRK), the voluntary group set up to protect and monitor the population, brings the region’s total number of known kite casualties from illegal poisoning to ten in recent years.

FoRK has condemned the killings but fears that the known deaths are just the tip of the iceberg and that many more dead birds are never found. It believes that persistent persecution, mainly through illegal poisoned baits, is among factors preventing the birds from spreading from their core Derwent Valley sites.

The bird killed by Carbofuran was found near Edmundbyers, Co Durham. The two others were found at High Spen, Gateshead, and included a wing-tagged female from a nearby breeding site which had produced young for the previous four years.

Previous poisoning involved two kites found dead in Hexhamshire and a breeding pair killed near Whittonstall whose chicks then perished in the nest. Other local kites were found poisoned in Teesdale and Wharfedale, Yorkshire. Another bird, which moved to Scotland, was found poisoned in the Cairngorms. Other kites have been found in suspicious circumstances but have been dead too long for scientific examination.

Allan Withrington, FoRK Kite Welfare Officer, said: “These poisonings are appalling and totally unacceptable. Carbofuran has been illegal in this country for many years but is still apparently the poison of choice of those who illegally put out poisoned baits to target raptors, crows and foxes. 

Leaving poisoned baits in the open is not only illegal but completely indiscriminate as the deaths of many bird and animals, including dogs and cats, has shown over the years.

We will be continuing to do everything possible to expose those responsible and work with the police, farmers, landowners and other conservation organisations to protect the red kites and other species.”

The most recent available figures from the RSPB show that there were 76 confirmed cases of illegal poisoning in Britain in 2013, including 19 from Carbofuran and 5 from Albicarb. Twenty-one red kites were among the victims which also included buzzard, white-tailed eagle, golden eagle and marsh harrier. Raven, magpie, sparrowhawk and even a collared dove also died along with two dogs and two cats.

Britain’s single worst recorded wildlife poisoning incident occurred in April 2014 with red kites being the main victims. 16 kites and six buzzards were found dead near Inverness. Despite a major investigation by Police Scotland and rewards totalling £32,000 being offered no-one has been charged.

ENDS

There are a number of interesting facets to this press release. Firstly, no dates are given for when these birds were found poisoned. We can’t be certain, but the press release may refer to three poisoned kites that were discovered in Co Durham in 2014: two in November 2014 and one in December 2014, according to government statistics. It’s possible that the three kites mentioned in the above press release were poisoned this year, but the published government stats only cover the first quarter of 2015 (up until March) and no poisoned kites in Co Durham are present in those figures. These days we have to wait more than six months to find out what’s actually been going on more recently so if they were poisoned after March 2015 we might find out about it ‘officially’ sometime after Christmas.

The second interesting point about this press release is it has come from FoRK. Here’s how FoRK describe themselves:

The Friends of Red Kites (FoRK) is a constituted, membership-based, community organisation which was formed by volunteers in 2009 to continue to encourage an active interest in the conservation of the red kite population in Gateshead’s Lower Derwent Valley and to continue to monitor their health & welfare.

FoRK is the successor to the funded Northern Kites Project which was responsible for the re-introduction of 94 young red kites in the core area between 2004 – 2009. In 2006 red kites began to breed in the region for the first time after an absence of 170 years.

Interesting then that a voluntary, community-based organisation has issued this press statement, and not the police and not Natural England. Has FoRK issued this press statement because they’re tired of waiting for action by the authorities? Was there a police follow up? Was there a follow up by Natural England? If these three birds were poisoned in November and December 2014, why haven’t the police or Natural England said anything? Could their (apparent) silence / inaction have anything to do with the localities of the poisoned carcasses? Check out the village of Edmundbyers on a Google Earth map – see all those weird rectangular shapes on the hills surrounding the village? They’re the tell-tale muirburn strips (burnt heather) that indicate that this area is dominated by driven grouse moors.

Say no more.

Petition to ban driven grouse shooting – PLEASE SIGN HERE

Friends of Red Kites (FoRK) website here

Edmundbyers