Earlier last year Derbyshire Constabulary appealed for information after a pair of peregrines in the Peak District abandoned their breeding attempt in suspicious circumstances (see here).
It was later reported that eggs had been stolen from three peregrine nest sites in the Peak District this spring (see here) and officers from Derbyshire Constabulary believed they were being stolen for the Middle Eastern falconry trade.
Earlier this evening Derbyshire Constabulary issued a statement on Facebook, as follows:
Things sometimes take a while to come to fruition in our job, but two of our lengthy investigations have finally reached the point where people can be charged and summoned to court to answer for their actions.
The first involves the theft from a farm in the Bradwell area of a collection of vintage tractor parts which were part of a long-term project and labour of love on the part of the owner. Many of the parts were recovered and a salvage business underpinned by crime operating in neighbouring South Yorkshire was uncovered. The recovery of some stolen car parts from Buxton was a bonus too.
Our regular followers will know that we’ve invested a lot of time and effort into the problem of bird of prey persecution and trying to fathom where these illegally taken eggs are ending up and who’s involved. We were very pleased, therefore, back in the spring when we were presented with excellent video evidence of someone taking some peregrine falcon eggs from a breeding site in the Peak District. Thanks to the power of social media helping to identify the suspect we embarked on another long investigation which has now yielded charges, not only for the egg taking offences but for a firearms offence too.
Whilst this is very encouraging for us and those others we work with it doesn’t mean we’ve cracked it. Quite the opposite, in fact, and we’ll be putting next season’s plan together over the coming weeks.
ENDS
Well done, Derbyshire Constabulary.
Shame the RSPB wasn’t credited for providing the covertly-filmed footage, though.
NB: As this is a live prosecution comments won’t be published until criminal proceedings have concluded.
UPDATE 17 November 2020: Derbyshire man due in court in February for alleged theft of Peregrine eggs in Peak District (here)
Press release from the Scottish Greens following the recent publication of the latest Scottish Government-commissioned report on the socioeconomic and biodiversity impacts of grouse moor management:
Commenting on the publication of a new Scottish Government report into grouse moor management, Scottish Green rural economy spokesperson John Finnie said:
“It is welcome that The Scottish Government is exploring alternatives to grouse moors. This report shows that alternative uses would boost Scotland’s rural economy. A move to conservation or renewable energy, for example, would dwarf the economic impact of grouse moor management. Previous research has shown this would also create new jobs, especially in forestry.
“However, while this research recognises the growing public and political concern about grouse moors, it ignores some key issues. For example, the persecution of eagles and other raptors damages Scotland’s reputation as an eco-tourism destination, yet there’s no mention of it.
“It also fails to address the damaging impact of muirburn on our climate ambitions.
“The Scottish Government has dragged its heels for almost a year since the Werrity review published its limited findings. During that time we’ve seen the burning of peatland and the killing of wildlife continue. People have been shooting grouse even during COVID restrictions.
“Scotland’s land needs to be freed up for the economic and social benefit of all of its people and used in ways that contributes to a thriving rural economy and natural environment. It’s time for the Scottish Government to get on with it.”
As regular blog readers will know, there are currently proposals to reintroduce eagles to Wales by two organisations with very different approaches: Wilder Britain and the Eagle Reintroduction Wales Project.
The Eagle Reintroduction Wales Project, led by Dr Sophie-lee Williams, is currently assessing the feasibility of reintroducing golden and white-tailed eagles across Wales and has conducted extensive research to inform its proposals. Some of this research has already been published in peer-reviewed journals (e.g. here) and more output is expected shortly. The ERW Project is working with Cardiff University (where Sophie-Lee has just completed her PhD on this topic) and is liaising closely with a network of national and international eagle experts.
There are two forthcoming opportunities to ask Sophie-lee about any aspect of the project:
Facebook live interview/Q&A session on Sunday 8th November at 17.30hrs. Interview hosted by Mike Raine here
Facebook live interview/Q&A session on Tuesday 10th November at 19.00hrs. Interview hosted by Bywyd Gwyllt Glaslyn Wildlife here
Hopefully these live interviews will be recorded so if you can’t make the live session you can catch up with the videos later.
A farmer has been convicted of laying out poisoned baits in the Sierra Magina Natural Park in Andalucía in 2016 that killed two Bearded vultures from a reintroduction programme, as well as one Cinereous vulture, a golden eagle and numerous mammals.
He’s been fined 4,500 Euros and is banned from working as a cattle rancher for three years, although this sentence is apparently being appealed.
Further details about this case, including an extensive multi-agency investigation, can be read on the Vulture Conservation Foundation website here.
[One of the poisoned Bearded vultures, photo via Vulture Conservation Foundation]
Tackling the illegal poisoning of birds of prey is taken seriously in Spain with, for example, the deployment of specialist poison detection dogs and investigators given the authority to conduct unannounced spot checks in areas of suspicion. In recent years successful prosecutions have resulted in massive fines, custodial sentences and extended hunting disqualifications for those convicted of laying poisoned baits (e.g. see here, here, here, here and here).
Meanwhile, over here the illegal poisoning of birds of prey (and anything else unfortunate to consume the bait) continues without consequence. These are some of the cases reported this year alone, many during lockdown, and none of them are heading towards a prosecution:
The illegal killing of a white-tailed eagle found on a grouse moor inside the Cairngorms National Park in Scotland (here), the mass poisoning of 23 buzzards in a field in Co Cork, Ireland (here), the poisoning of four peregrines on Guernsey in the Channel Islands (here), the poisoning of a family’s pet dog, believed to have consumed a poisoned bait intended for birds of prey in Nidderdale, North Yorkshire (here), the poisoning of a buzzard found dead on a grouse moor in the North York Moors National Park (here), the poisoning of a buzzard in Nidderdale, North Yorkshire (here), the poisoning of a buzzard and a kestrel in Derbyshire (here), the poisoning of three peregrines and a buzzard in Staffordshire (here), the poisoning of a peregrine in South Yorkshire (here) and the poisoning of two peregrines in North Yorkshire (here).
There may well be further poisoning cases that haven’t yet been publicised.
There’s been a fair bit in the press in recent days on the alleged positive impact of grouse moor management on the Scottish rural economy, following the publication of a series of new reports.
Representatives and supporters of the grouse shooting industry will, of course, tend to focus on the assumed economic benefits and rarely, if ever, will they mention the economic costs of this damaging industry.
So this is a really important parliamentary question that’s been lodged by Scottish Green’s MSP Alison Johnson:
Question S50-04745. Alison Johnstone, Lothian, Scottish Green Party. Lodged 4/11/2020.
To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the impact on the rural economy of wildlife crime linked to grouse moor management.
Current status: Due in Chamber on 12/11/2020.
I’m not sure which Minister will be answering this question next Thursday but I look forward to the response.
Here’s a photo of a police officer examining the corpse of a white-tailed eagle, found illegally poisoned with a banned pesticide on a grouse moor inside the Cairngorms National Park earlier this year (see here). [Photo by Police Scotland]
He wasn’t the first victim and he certainly won’t be the last. Raptor persecution, whether that be poisoning, shooting or trapping, is still rampant on many Scottish (and English) grouse moors, despite it having been illegal since 1954.
It’ll be interesting to see how the Scottish Government intends to assess the economic cost of this ongoing criminality.
UPDATE 13 November 2020: Environment Minister acknowledges potential economic impact of wildlife crime linked to grouse shooting (here)
Wildlife cybercrime is in police’s sights, but wildlife crime underworld remains mostly beneath the radar
Our 2019 Annual Wildlife Crime Report gives a snapshot picture of the state of wildlife crimes across England and Wales
Wildlife and Countryside Link and Wales Environment Link’s latest report on wildlife crime across England and Wales reveals positive progress in identifying and tackling hi-tech online criminals who are harming our wildlife. Yet centuries old hunting, trapping, and poisoning practices, and smuggling of illegal wildlife goods, are still widespread, and exacting a heavy penalty for nature, warn conservation experts.
Activity on wildlife cybercrime (which can include illegal hunting and trapping coordination, gambling on live-stream cruelty such as badger and dog fights, and the online sale of rare protected species) has ramped up over the last year. Online initiatives from police and wildlife organisations have led to more tips from the public, arrests, and rescues of animals – such as dogs injured in badger-baiting. The creation of a new Cyber Enabled Wildlife Crime Priority Delivery Group, led by the police National Wildlife Crime Unit, has been hailed by conservationists as a major step forward in improving prevention, intelligence and enforcement.
Yet many wildlife crimes continue to be unwitnessed or unreported and go unpunished. A shocking array of wildlife including bats, birds, badgers, plants, hares, deer, fish, seals, dolphins, amphibians and reptiles, and more, are harmed at the hands of hunters, poachers, criminals, and even normally law-abiding members of the public every year. Overall levels of reported wildlife crimes have changed very little in the four years since our annual report was first published, with 3800 incidents reported in 2019 compared to 4288 in 2016.
Convictions remain shockingly low, with just 10 people convicted of wildlife crimes in 2019 (other than convictions relating to fisheries crimes).
Dr Richard Benwell CEO of Wildlife and Countryside Link said: “The wildlife crime underworld in Britain remains rampant. Our figures are just a snapshot of the number of animals being illegally hurt and killed every single day, sometimes for sport, sometimes for profit, sometimes in sheer callousness. Steps forward in tackling the growing online world of wildlife crime are very welcome. But overall a lack of adequate police recording and resourcing, low levels of prosecutions and inadequate sentencing are leaving our wildlife without the protection it needs“.
Martin Sims of the League Against Cruel Sports and Chair of Link’s Wildlife Crime Working Group, said: “It seems incredible in our digital age that our police forces can’t just call up the data they need to effectively tackle wildlife crime at the touch of a button. While the police are cracking down on wildlife cyber criminals more effectively now, their own electronic data on wildlife crimes is decades behind where it should be. We need to bring the fight against wildlife crime into the 21st century and ensure police have the resources they need to punish those who are harming our natural world“.
Paul De Ornellas, Chief Wildlife Adviser at WWF-UK said: “In recent years the UK has played a significant role in focusing global attention on the illegal wildlife trade. This report clearly shows that wildlife crime, including links to illicit wildlife trade internationally, is happening here at home, with a concerning increase in cybercrime and the use of major UK airports by traffickers. To continue to show global leadership, the government must do more to address IWT in its own backyard, as well as overseas”.
The biggest barrier to tackling wildlife crime remains the lack of recording, reporting, and resourcing allocated to these crimes by the police and Home Office. Wildlife cybercrime is believed to be extensive, but, as with many types of wildlife crime, it is not recorded in any meaningful way, due in large part to the absence of dedicated police wildlife crime reporting codes. So it is impossible to assess patterns and levels of wildlife crimes accurately and effectively target resources. There is a National Wildlife Crime Unit within the police, but this has been significantly underfunded for years and is currently going through an opaque restructuring process.
While fisheries crimes continue to receive low sentencing (and are a target for organised crime for this reason), the data, prosecution and conviction rates for fisheries crimes are notably better than for other types of wildlife crime. The main reason for this is that these crimes are tackled by a well-resourced section of the Environment Agency (in England) and Natural Resources Wales, funded by fishing licence fees. The fact that in 2019 2642 fisheries crimes were reported (more than double the number of all types of wildlife crime we report on combined) and 1992 people were convicted (compared to just 10 for other crimes) puts into stark relief the difference that adequate resourcing can make.
To help ensure that wildlife across England and Wales are adequately protected, conservation groups are calling on the Home Office and the Police to:
Ensure wildlife crimes are recorded and reported on effectively – with long-promised dedicated wildlife crime recording codes put into place urgently
Create a new Wildlife Crime Strategy with recording, reporting and resourcing at its heart, backed up by an action plan for the delivery of key targets
Provide transparency over changes to the police’s National Wildlife Crime Unit – including a consultation on funding, form and function to ensure this coordination body is better-resourced and fit for purpose
Keep up the momentum on wildlife cybercrime – by ensuring funding is in place to increase effectiveness through more dedicated officers to tackle the growth in online coordination and facilitation of wildlife crimes.
Deliver effective guidance and training on wildlife crimes for police officers through online knowledge and training hubs and tying local police in to regional wildlife enforcement hubs,
Strengthen the network of wildlife crime experts within the Crown Prosecution Service and ensure they are actively available to inform and support police officers
Wildlife and Countryside Link is the largest environment and wildlife coalition in England, bringing together 57 organisations to use their strong joint voice for the protection of nature. Wales Environment Link is a network of environmental, countryside and heritage non-governmental organisations with an all-Wales remit. Both operate as part of a UK-wide coalition – Environment Links UK. The calls in the Wildlife Crime Annual Report 2019 are supported by: Amphibian and Reptile Conservation, Badger Trust, Bat Conservation Trust, Born Free Foundation, Buglife, Humane Society International UK, Institute of Fisheries Management, League Against Cruel Sports, the National Trust, Naturewatch Foundation, Plantlife, RSPB, the RSPCA, Whale and Dolphin Conservation, Wild Justice, WWF-UK, Zoological Society of London (ZSL).
The Independent ran an exclusive on the report’s launch today – see here
A few days ago the League Against Cruel Sports published the results of a poll that indicated that almost three-quarters of Scots wanted an end to driven grouse shooting (see here).
A second poll, this time being hosted by The Herald, was opened on 4th November after the publication of a series of new reports on the socioeconomic and biodiversity impacts of driven grouse shooting in Scotland.
The link to this poll is here. It ends today (not sure what time). Anybody can participate, and so far over 25,000 have taken part, so why not have your say?
Earlier this morning, the poll results were looking like this:
Oh dear. It looks like the grouse shooting industry has quite a bit of work to do to convince an increasingly well-informed public that driven grouse shooting isn’t an environmental shitshow and shouldn’t be consigned to the history books without further delay.
The research group has written a short overview (here) explaining the background to the work and here’s what they say about each of the technical reports:
Part 1 – Socioeconomic impacts of moorland use
This research analysed 24 moorland use case studies. The case studies were selected systematically to include a range of different land uses, enterprise scales, management intensities and owner motivations. The results provide indicative estimates of the extent of socio-economic impacts arising from driven and walked up grouse shooting alongside those arising from alternative moorland uses – specifically: deer management, sheep grazing, afforestation and woodland creation, renewable energy and conservation management.
Part 2 – Employment Rights of Gamekeepers
This work helps deliver a Programme for Government commitment to undertake “work in relation to protecting gamekeepers’ employment and other rights”.
The results from our survey of gamekeepers provides unique insights into wage rates, tied housing and employment terms, as well as sentiments and experiences from being a gamekeeper in Scotland.
Part 3 – Mapping the areas and management intensity of moorland actively managed for grouse
This research built on work undertaken in Phase 1 and provides new insights into strip burning on moorland areas associated with grouse shooting.
Alongside updates of the extent of muirburn and its change over time, characterisation of grouse butt density (butts per km2) was also improved through more nuanced demarcation of the area of moorland associated with grouse shooting.
Part 4 – Biodiversity considerations on grouse moors
This work used the outputs from the mapping exercise (specifically strip burning intensity) and overlaid species data.
This allowed researchers to assess the effect of grouse moor management intensity on the distribution of selected upland species where the association between species distribution and grouse moor management is less well understood or unknown (Birch, Green hairstreak butterfly, Curlew, Merlin, Lesser redpoll, Bilberry / blaeberry, Adder, Golden plover, Kestrel, Whinchat).
Meanwhile, the RSPB issued a press release in response to the publication of these reports:
RSPB Scotland responds to socio-economic review of grouse shooting in Scotland
SRUC have today released a series of reports assessing socioeconomic and biodiversity impacts of driven grouse moors and the employment rights of gamekeepers.
Duncan Orr-Ewing, RSPB Scotland Head of Species and Land Management, said: “We welcome the production of these socio-economic reports. We do not take argument with the fact that grouse moor management may produce local economic benefits, however it is also equally important that these benefits are kept in proportion and not exaggerated. We do not think these economic benefits detract either from the need to take action over the increasing harms that intensive driven grouse shooting is causing to the environment and wider costs to society in the context of the climate and nature emergencies. The Werritty Review itself was primarily initiated to address the longstanding issue illegal killing of birds of prey, which is strongly linked to grouse shooting, and the need to address this issue has not gone away. We support the immediate introduction of licensing of driven grouse shooting to protect birds of prey alongside other public interests. Licensing would not result in a cessation of grouse shooting, and it can be delivered with minimum bureaucracy, therefore responsible land managers should have nothing to fear from his approach”.
ENDS
UPDATE 7th November 2020: Grouse moor report ‘ignores key issues’, say Scottish Greens (here)
UPDATE 12th November 2020: Government report shows driven grouse shooting is ‘economically unviable’ says Scottish think tank (here)
Alongside The National‘s exclusive a couple of days ago about how 25 SNP branches are putting forward a motion to conference calling for an end to driven grouse shooting (see here), the paper also published a comment piece from Max Wiszniewski, campaign manager at the Revive coalition for grouse moor reform.
It’s reproduced here:
IF grouse shooting had never existed, and the shooting industry wanted to start grouse moors in Scotland today, would the Government be in … or would it be out? Revive: the coalition for grouse moor reform has simulated this scenario in its new video Government’s Den in which two professional lobbyists ask Government ministers for 12-18% of Scotland’s land for the controversial bloodsport – Dragon’s Den style.
You can ask yourself the same question. If you were being asked to give over huge swathes of Scotland for grouse moor management, would you be in? Would you let hundreds of thousands of foxes, mountain hares, stoats, weasels, crows, and other animals be snared, trapped and killed every year so more grouse could be shot by a few people for sport? Would you let the land be scarred by unregulated bulldozed hill tracks to make life easier for shooters or burnt to make the environment more suitable for grouse – damaging our vital peatlands and biodiversity?
Would you say yes to mass outdoor medication of grouse so that their numbers become unnaturally high only to be shot by tons of poisonous lead ammunition which is spread across the countryside?
Twenty-five branches of the Scottish National Party and elected representatives have submitted a motion asking conference to say no to the circle of destruction that surrounds driven grouse moors and yes for a transition to better alternatives.
This motion shows the grassroots membership of the party leading the charge, to change the face of Scotland for the better. The enthusiasm for tackling Scotland’s grouse moors from within the party is immensely welcome but not such a huge surprise.
Revive meetings at previous conferences have been filled beyond capacity. Moreover, without the push by the SNP grassroots in 2015, working with the Our Land campaign, the 2016 Land Reform (Scotland) Act as it stands might never have happened.
The case for radically reforming grouse moors and land reform in Scotland is very interlinked. Grouse moors, it can be said, are a metaphor for land reform in Scotland – very few people using land very badly for very little benefit to society. In fact, for all the land grouse moors use up, they only contribute 0.02% to our overall economy.
To put this another way, if Scotland’s economy is the size of Ben Nevis, grouse shooting’s contribution would be the size of a bottle of Irn-Bru.
However, we also know that a few very powerful people with vested financial interests do not want things to change. These interests do not even think you should need a licence to manage a grouse moors, arguing against any kind of change or regulation that other industries would find reasonable.
Changes in the law may not alone be enough, however. Grouse moors are already commonly associated with the suspicious disappearances of countless birds of prey. These crimes are notoriously difficult to prosecute, so many believe a total ban on driven grouse shooting, or at least a transition to better land uses is the only way forward.
Wildlife tourism alone, a burgeoning sector, is already worth around five times the value of grouse shooting to the economy and forestry is about 30 times the economic value.
In order for Scotland to become “Green New Deal” compliant, which is the Scottish Government’s ambition, then it’s very clear driven grouse shooting and the circle of destruction and environmental damage that surrounds it is not sustainable going forward. If the Government is serious about fighting the climate crisis, it will do all it can to transform our moors despite the protestations of large, landed interests.
Revive fully supports the efforts of these branches and elected representatives to update their party policy on grouse moors which, if passed by the party’s conference, would put the SNP in line with the opinion of most Scots.
New polling shows more than 70% of Scottish people, rural and urban alike, are against grouse shooting for sport compared to just 12% who support it, so the SNP should certainly not be afraid to tackle it.
Driven grouse moors do exist in Scotland and they are one of the most destructive, cruel and least productive uses of our land. A modern progressive Scotland should declare itself out as soon as possible and along with land reform, make way for better land uses that benefit our people, our wildlife and the environment.
Max Wiszniewski is campaign manager for Revive, a coalition of like-minded organisations working for grouse moor reform in Scotland, made up of Common Weal, Friends of the Earth Scotland, the League Against Cruel Sports Scotland, OneKind and Raptor Persecution UK
The National newspaper ran an exclusive yesterday (see here), written by Jane Cassidy, on a new motion calling for an end to driven grouse shooting in Scotland, submitted to the SNP conference for consideration by members and supported by 25 regional SNP branches. If successful it could be included in the SNP manifesto.
The article is reproduced here:
TWENTY-FIVE SNP branches from across Scotland have submitted a motion for national conference calling for an end to the circle of destruction of driven grouse shooting in Scotland.
The submitted motion calls for an end to all the unsustainable practices on grouse moors including the snaring, trapping and killing of hundreds of thousands of animals, muirburn and mass outdoor medication, all to increase grouse numbers for sport shooting.
The motion, proposed by councillor Julie Bell of Kirriemuir and Dean, an area dominated by grouse moor interests, also calls for an end to the “use of poisonous lead shot” and for all shooting estates to be “licensed as soon as possible”. In line with the Scottish Government’s ambitions for land reform and tackling the climate crisis, it calls for a transition away from driven grouse shooting and calls for these asks to be in the SNP manifesto next year.
The controversial sport has recently come under increasing pressure as polling of both rural and urban Scots this week revealed that 71% of Scots are opposed to it, compared to just 12% who support it.
Bell said: “There’s a real groundswell of concern, not only in my ward but across Angus and Scotland, about the impact this ‘sport’ has on our land. That’s reflected in my inbox and in local forums.
“I’m therefore urging our membership to support our motion as a step towards more ethical, sustainable land use.”
Ruth Maguire MSP, who is seconding the motion, said: “When it comes to grouse moors, the scale of land used for the benefit of so few and the accompanying damage done to the environment, wildlife and health is a matter of importance not just to the majority of rural Scots who support reform but to our whole nation. The SNP as the party of Scotland have the opportunity to be in the driving seat and take meaningful action to change the cycle of destruction.”
ENDS
UPDATE 6 November 2020: Why the SNP should back and end to grouse shooting on Scottish moors – comment piece from Revive’s campaign manager (here)
UPDATE 12 November 2020: SNP leadership faces grassroots rebellion at conference over watered down grouse shooting motion (here)
