Category: 2023 persecution incidents

Yesterday a friend sent me a link to a recent claim made by the grouse shooting industry that ‘Natural England hen harrier data reveals just 2% suffered persecution‘.

The article, published on the dodgy astro-turfing C4PMC (Campaign for Protection of Moorland Communities) website (see here for background on this murky outfit) has since been widely shared on social media by the usual suspects, in an attempt to counter my rolling list of missing/dead hen harriers in the UK since 2018 (currently reporting 110 birds but there are more to come).

The grouse shooting industry REALLY doesn’t like this rolling list, or the accompanying posters, because it lays bare their criminal activities with proven data sources (from Natural England and the RSPB) to back up each and every one of those listed ‘missing’/killed hen harriers.

My friend had never heard of C4PMC but knew the article was dodgy just from its introductory blurb, which describes me as an “animal rights activist” – he knows I’m not, and suggested I’d been labelled this way in an attempt to undermine my credibility. It’s a common tactic to create a wholly false impression of someone – the Daily Mail also tried this defamatory ploy a few years ago when it described me as an “anti-hunt extremist” and an “animal rights extremist“, presumably egged on by the loathsome Countryside Alliance, but was later forced to apologise and correct the article (see here).

Personally, I don’t read the C4PMC website ever since it published a particularly malicious ‘advent calendar of hate’ a few years ago, targeting well known conservationists, broadcasters, authors and politicians with vindictive and spiteful personal attacks, posted online every day in the run-up to Xmas during a lockdown period; so misjudged that even many of their own supporters from within the grouse-shooting industry thought they’d gone too far.

But given that my friend had drawn my attention to this latest article about hen harrier persecution being as low as 2%, I thought I’d take a look.

I’m glad I did, because it’s hilariously and hopelessly inaccurate. It’s apparent that whoever writes for C4PMC can’t count, can’t think, and can’t even copy data from a published source.

In a nutshell, C4PMC has published a list of satellite-tagged hen harriers, supposedly copied from Natural England’s public spreadsheet, showing the fates of NE’s satellite-tracked hen harriers since 2017, and has attempted to analyse those fates and present them as factual.

There are many problems with how they’ve done this (which I’ll describe below), but C4PMC’s first and most obvious mistake is to present the data from only 82 hen harriers, whereas Natural England’s spreadsheet shows the fate of 97 hen harriers. For some inexplicable reason, C4PMC has ‘forgotten’ to include 15 hen harriers (the ‘forgotten’ harriers are highlighted in blue in the document below).

Then when I started to analyse C4PMC’s ‘results’, I noticed that they’d completely changed the status of some of the birds – nine of them in fact – so for example, where Natural England has recorded a harrier as ‘Missing Fate Unknown’ in Cumbria in May 2020, C4PMC has recorded the same harrier as ‘Alive and well and living in France’ in September 2023!

C4PMC even included one harrier on its list that doesn’t actually exist in Natural England’s spreadsheet (highlighted in pink in the document below). C4PMC just made it up!

To show you the extent of C4PMC’s catalogue of ineptitude, I’ve produced a table to compare Natural England’s data with C4PMC’s misinterpretations (highlighted in red in the document below):

It’s quite obvious that any conclusion C4PMC has drawn from its inaccurate and unreliable ‘analysis’ is going to be flawed, given how many harriers they’ve left out and how many fates they’ve changed.

But it still doesn’t answer the question about how they calculated hen harrier persecution to be as low as 2%. It took me a while but then it dawned on me – to calculate the 2% figure, C4MPC has only included the two hen harriers confirmed to have been illegally killed (Free and Asta) and has totally ignored all the harriers listed by Natural England as ‘Missing Fate Unknown’ (i.e. those suspected of being/most likely have been, illegally killed).

This is a very strange approach to take but is absolutely what we’ve come to expect from the grouse shooting industry. Even Natural England acknowledges that illegal persecution is still rampant; the only ones still in denial are those within the grouse shooting industry itself (including the Chair of the Moorland Association, who last month told BBC Radio 4, “Clearly, any illegal [hen harrier] persecution is not happening” (here)). Why Natural England continues to view this industry as a ‘partner’ when that industry so blatantly ignores/denies what’s so obviously going on is beyond me, I’m afraid (although the £75,000 ‘donation’ received by NE might have something to do with it).

I’ve done a quick calculation for C4PMC, as they obviously need some/lots of help. Counting up all the harriers listed by Natural England as ‘Missing Fate Unknown’ (but excluding all those listed as likely to have been predated, or carrying failed tags, or have been found dead outside the UK), there’s a grand total of 34 hen harriers listed as ‘missing’ (in suspicious circumstances and likely to have been illegally killed in the UK), which out of 97 tagged birds amounts to a 35% persecution rate.

That’s over a third of Natural England-tagged harriers suspected to have been killed illegally, which funnily enough closely corresponds with the fates of satellite-tagged golden eagles in Scotland (here) and the fates of hen harriers satellite-tagged by the RSPB (here).

Imagine that, actual data backing up actual science.

And let’s not forget, these are the tagged birds. How many un-tagged hen harriers is the grouse shooting industry also killing?