A trial date has been set for David Campbell, the former Head Gamekeeper of Edradynate Estate in Perthshire, who is accused of murdering a former colleague, Brian Low, whilst Mr Low was walking his dog on Leafy Lane, near the Pitilie Track close to Aberfeldy in February 2024 (see here for background).
At a virtual hearing at the High Court in Glasgow today, 76-year-old David Campbell’s lawyer, Tony Lenehan KC, said Campbell pleaded not guilty to eight charges and lodged a special defence of alibi in connection to the murder charge.
Prosecutors allege Campbell shot retired groundsman Mr Low, having previously shown ‘ill-will and malice’ toward him.
Both the accused and victim were formerly employed on Edradynate Estate. Photo by Ruth Tingay
It is further alleged that prior to the shooting, Campbell had disabled CCTV cameras at Tigh Na Caorann on Crieff Road, Aberfeldy, in an “attempt to conceal” his whereabouts.
Campbell is also accused of attempting to defeat the ends of justice by disposing of the alleged murder weapon, and an airgun, and having replacement tyres fitted on an electric bike between February and May last year. It is alleged that Campbell dumped a number of items, including a box and a cartridge bag, at Aberfeldy Recycling Centre.
Campbell is also accused of being in possession of an airgun between May 11 2017 and February 16 2024 and discharging it without holding an airgun certificate.
Campbell also faces five separate breach of the peace charges spanning between July 1995 and September 2012. He is said to have acted in a disorderly manner, putting three men and a woman in a “state of fear and alarm”. This includes claims he threatened to shoot three of them as well as a dog belonging to another. These allegations relate to incidents said to have happened at Edradynate Estate, in The Square in Aberfeldy, and at Scone Palace in Perth.
Lady Drummond fixed a trial date of 2 February 2026 at the High Court in Glasgow, which is expected to last for three weeks. An intermediate hearing is scheduled in Edinburgh on 4 August.
PLEASE NOTE: As this case is live, comments are turned off until proceedings conclude.
UPDATE 22 November 2025: Pre-trial hearing for ex-gamekeeper accused of shotgun murder of former colleague (here)
Further to the news about the conviction and sentencing of Lincolnshire farmer/gamekeeper John Bryant for multiple offences at Grange Farms, West Ashby in October 2022, relating to an investigation into the illegal persecution of birds of prey (see here, here and here), Lincolnshire Police’s Rural Crime Team has provided some information about the revocation of Bryant’s shotgun and firearms certificates.
Convicted farmer/gamekeeper John Bryant
“We have been asked about his firearms/shotgun certificates.
“As a direct result of this investigation. Both from matters revolving around the storage and security of firearms and ammunition along with this case being brought against him, his authority to possess firearms and shotguns was also withdrawn. In other words, Lincolnshire Police revoked those certificates so he could no longer possess licensable guns.
“This was contested at Lincoln Crown Court whereby his legal team failed to argue the case and judgement was held in support of the Police decision to revoke them.
“This should also stand as a warning to all certificate holders. One criminal act can easily lose you your right to possess firearms, but also the way you store/secure/keep those firearms can also have a huge detrimental impact on those certificates“.
It sounds then, that in addition to the charges against Bryant for the poison and trap offences, there was also an issue about the storage and security of his firearms and ammunition, although I haven’t seen any report of charges being brought against him for those alleged offences, just a revocation of his licences.
Given that the appeal hearing against his firearms and shotgun licence revocations was held at Lincoln Crown Court (date unknown), this probably accounts for at least some of the reported £100,000 costs incurred by Bryant for his defence, as mentioned in court during his sentencing hearing yesterday.
Looking at the account’s for Grange Farms (West Ashby) Ltd, held on Companies House website, which lists Bryant as one of several Directors (here), the family’s company can easily afford to cover Bryant’s own legal costs in addition to the fine and costs he received from the court (£7,449) from the company’s £1 million+ capital and reserves.
I do wonder about the firearms and shotgun revocations though. Can other family members, residing and/or working at the same property, hold their own certificates and thus legitimately keep firearms and shotguns on the premises? And if so, what measures are taken to ensure John Bryant doesn’t have access to them?
These are genuine questions. I’d welcome the opinion of any firearms experts who might be reading this.
Further to today’s earlier blog on the sentencing of Lincolnshire gamekeeper John Bryant who was found guilty of multiple crimes after a police investigation into the illegal killing of a red kite and two buzzards (see here), the RSPB Investigations Team has issued the following press release:
GAMEKEEPER ORDERED TO PAY OVER £7,000 AFTER BEING FOUND GUILTY OF POISON AND TRAP-RELATED OFFENCES
Numerous birds of prey had been poisoned in the Belchford area of Lincolnshire over a number of years, leading to a police investigation.
Police uncovered large quantities of banned poison and illegal traps on the gamebird shoot.
The RSPB is urging the government to introduce a licensing scheme for all gamebird shooting, with the sanction to remove licences to shoot if wildlife protection laws are broken, and to act as a meaningful deterrent to bird of prey crimes in particular.
After a two-day trial at Lincoln Magistrates’ Court, John Bryant (40), of West Ashby, Horncastle was found guilty on 7 March 2025 in relation to four offences. He was sentenced on 20 March 2025 and ordered to pay £7,449 in total – including £2112 in fines for the four offences, £4,492 in costs and a victim surcharge of £845. The court heard how a number of birds of prey were found poisoned in the Belchford area over several years, and how Lincolnshire Police then led a multi-agency search on a pheasant and partridge shoot at Grange Farms, West Ashby in October 2022 together with the RSPB, National Wildlife Crime Unit (NWCU) and Natural England.
This case is yet another example of why the RSPB is urging Westminster to introduce a system of licensing for gamebird shooting, to afford birds of prey better protection, and to follow Scotland’s lead on licensing all grouse shooting as a positive start.
Bryant, a gamekeeper and farmer, pleaded guilty to two offences relating to the illegal storage and usage of Alphachloralose. Alphachloralose can be legally used as a poison for rodents using products at 4% concentration or lower. However, during a search of his home, police found the poison illegally decanted into pots in the suspect’s vehicle and outbuilding. These two pots were tested under the WIIS (Wildlife Incident Investigations Scheme) run by Natural England, and found to contain banned and highly dangerous levels (85% and 88%) of the deadly substance. Alphachloralose remains one of the most common substances used for poisoning birds of prey.
Bryant was also found guilty of two offences relating to the possession of two pole traps, deemed as items capable of committing a wildlife offence. Police found unset spring traps (similar to a powerful mouse trap) hanging from wooden posts at two locations on land managed by Bryant. This set up is commonly recognized as a pole trap, used to catch and brutally injure birds of prey that perch on the post when hunting. Pole traps have been banned since 1904.
Forensic DNA analysis conducted by SASA (Science and Advice for Scottish Agriculture) found traces of Tawny Owl and wood pigeon DNA on one spring trap and the other spring trap tested positive for wood pigeon DNA. Bryant was found not guilty of setting any pole traps.
The District Judge said he found it unrealistic that Bryant would not have known the pole traps were on his land, which had been part of his defence.
Police also found four unset gin traps in an outbuilding belonging to the suspect. Forensic DNA analysis conducted by SASA found bird of prey DNA on three of the gin traps (a mechanical device, illegal in the UK since 1958, designed to catch an animal by the leg using spring-operated jaws). Two had Buzzard DNA on them, with a Sparrowhawk feather identified in the jaws of a third trap. Bryant was charged in relation to possession of the gin traps being items capable of committing a wildlife offence, but was found not guilty.
An assortment of traps found in Bryant’s garage. Photo: RSPB
One of the gin traps with what look like relatively fresh nettles caught in the jaw. Photo: RSPB
Several birds of prey have been found poisoned in the Belchford area over a number of years. In 2022 a Buzzard was found poisoned by Alphachloralose. In 2020 another Buzzard was killed having ingested the banned insecticide Aldicarb, and in 2017 a Red Kite was killed by Alphachloralose. Bryant was not charged in relation to poisoning any of these birds.
It is illegal to intentionally kill, injure or take a wild bird in the UK under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. Yet the persecution of raptors persists, particularly in connection with land managed for gamebird shooting. Of all individuals convicted of bird of prey persecution-related offences from 2009 to 2023, 68% have been gamekeepers.
Howard Jones, RSPB Senior Investigations Officer, said:
“This case highlights the immense value of police searches in relation to bird of prey persecution which clearly has been an issue in this area. This search found illegal poisons being used in a hugely dangerous manner, putting the public and wildlife at risk, along with a number of illegal traps.
“We are urging the UK Government to introduce a system of licensing for all gamebird shooting, whereby this licence to operate could be revoked if crimes against birds of prey are detected on an estate. This would set a better precedent and act as a greater deterrent to those tempted to commit these crimes. “We thank Lincolnshire Police, and in particular DC Aaron Flint, on an excellent investigation into this case, demonstrating the value in strong partnership working in tackling bird of prey persecution“.
DC Aaron Flint, Forces Wildlife Crime Officer at Lincolnshire Police, said:
“Unfortunately, this case is just one of a large number of bird of prey poisonings reported in Lincolnshire in recent years. However, the outcome demonstrates that Lincolnshire Police takes bird of prey persecution seriously. We thoroughly investigate any reports that relate to criminal activity around birds of prey. Our message is this: If you commit crimes against wildlife in Lincolnshire, we will identify you and you will be put before the courts.
“This investigation was made possible through close collaboration with multiple agencies, and I want to express my gratitude to the National Wildlife Crime Unit, the RSPB, Natural England, CPS and SASA for their invaluable support. The Forensic Analysis Fund also played a vital role in advancing this investigation“.
Chief Inspector Kevin Lacks-Kelly, Head of the UK National Wildlife Crime Unit:
“Thanks to the work of Police and Partners we have seen justice delivered. This conviction sends a strong message that bird of prey crime will not be tolerated, and you will feel the full force of the national policing capability. These offences are not only cruel, the undermine the conservation of our vulnerable wildlife. These birds should be free for us all to enjoy, not consigned to a police evidence bags.”
If you have information about anyone killing birds of prey which you wish to report anonymously, call the RSPB’s confidential Raptor Crime Hotline on 0300 999 0101.
ENDS
Well done to Lincolnshire Police Rural Crime Team and the partner agencies whose hard work resulted in Bryant’s conviction.
£7,000 is a relatively small fine given the seriousness of Bryant’s crimes, although when compared with some of the recent pathetic fines handed out by courts for wildlife crimes, this figure can be viewed as being substantial.
I’ve also been told by a blog reader who was observing proceedings in court, that it was mentioned that Bryant’s defence costs were £100,000. If that figure is accurate then he certainly has taken a big financial hit.
Conservation campaign group Wild Justice has taken out a full page ad in the latest edition of Private Eye, the UK’s number one best-selling news and current affairs magazine, to draw readers’ attention to the absurd release of over 50 million non-native pheasants into the countryside every year.
This startling fact is not widely known beyond conservation/environmental circles, I guess because it’s not something the gamebird shooting industry has ever really wanted to highlight to the general public.
The annual release of this many non-native pheasants into the UK countryside, plus another 10 million non-native red-legged partridges, just to be used as live targets for people with shotguns, doesn’t quite fit the shooting industry’s narrative of wanting to be seen as the so-called ‘custodians of the countryside’.
Thanks to Wild Justice’s advert, a lot more people are now going to be aware, and probably, appalled.
A former gamekeeper has been sentenced after being found guilty of two wildlife crime offences relating to the digging and blocking of a badger sett in Fife.
Dylan Boyle, 52, from Avonbridge, Falkirk, had been filmed on 10 January 2023 by a field officer from the League Against Cruel Sports who was monitoring the activities of the Fife Fox Hunt on farmland near Cupar, which terrier man Boyle was operating alongside that day.
Footage showed Boyle digging in to an active badger sett with a spade and deliberately blocking entrances to the sett with rocks, nets and earth using a spade. A fox that bolted from the sett was shot and killed.
Screen grab from LACS video footage of Boyle taking photos whilst a dog savages a fox that had bolted from the badger sett that Boyle had been digging up
Boyle had pleaded not guilty to a number of wildlife crime offences and faced trial at Kirkaldy Sheriff Court in September 2024. Boyle’s defence team relied on testimony from an expert witness who happened to be the ‘chief’ of the Scottish Gamekeepers Association’s ‘training centre’. That expert witness reportedly told the court that he’d viewed the footage of Boyle and had ‘not seen anything wrong’ in Boyle’s actions of deliberately interfering with an active badger sett, contrary to the Protection of Badgers Act 1992.
That is deeply concerning given the SGA’s positioning to be a training provider for those operating under the new Wildlife Management & Muirburn (Scotland) Act 2024.
Boyle told the court that it wasn’t an active badger sett and that badgers ‘must have moved in overnight’ the evening after Boyle had been filmed.
Boyle’s implausible explanation was not accepted by the court and he was found guilty of two offences but sentencing was deferred for six months for Boyle ‘to be on good behaviour’ (see here).
Appearing for sentencing at Kirkaldy Sheriff Court last week, Sheriff Mark Allen fined Boyle a pathetic £400 after hearing he had ‘been of good behaviour’ since his conviction.
Penalties for interfering with a badger sett include a maximum of 12 months imprisonment and / or a £40,000 fine.
Robbie Marsland, Director of the League Against Cruel Sports in Scotland said:
“Despite Scotland having some of the strongest animal welfare legislation in the UK, the courts too often issue modest penalties for wildlife crimes.
“Mr. Boyle’s actions demonstrated wanton cruelty and a disregard for the law but sentences like this provide little deterrent to those who harm wildlife.
“If we are serious about protecting Scotland’s wildlife, meaningful penalties that reflect the severity of these crimes are required to serve as a deterrent.
“While this case should remind those who harm wildlife that our cameras are everywhere, it should also prompt a serious reconsideration of how our justice system responds to animal cruelty“.
It probably won’t come as a surprise to anyone to learn that the UK Government, along with the Welsh and Scottish Governments, have missed the deadline (13 March 2025) to respond to the Health & Safety Executive’s recommendations for restrictions on the use of toxic lead ammunition, including a ban on the use of lead shot for live quarry shooting (see here for background).
Here is a press release from a consortium of campaigners who have been working on this issue for many years:
‘DELAYS MEAN DEATHS – BAN TOXIC LEAD AMMUNITION NOW’, EXPERTS URGE GOVERNMENT
Environmental charities and campaigners insist there is still time for the government to save thousands of waterbirds from needless and painful deaths despite another delay on the decision to ban toxic lead ammunition.
Steve Reed, Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, was expected to announce a decision on the future of lead ammunition on Thursday 13 March, but this deadline has been missed.
Dr Julia Newth, an expert on the impact of lead on birds at WWT, said: “In what has been a string of endless delays, this was the government’s chance to stand on the side of wildlife and choose a lead-free future – and yet, we’re still waiting for a decision.
“More delays will mean more unnecessary deaths. Ending the era of lead is in all of our interests and there’s still time for the government to show it is prepared to take this historic opportunity to rid society of toxic lead ammunition once and for all.”
Just last month, research by Cambridge University revealed five years of promises to phase out the toxic lead shot had failed spectacularly, despite industry pledges to comply (see here).
WWT, the charity for wetlands and wildlife, has been leading a coalition of charities and parliamentarians urging the government to bring in a full and swift ban of lead ammunition.
Earlier this year WWT, RSPB, Wildlife and Countryside Link, CHEM Trust and Wild Justice penned an open letter to Steve Reed calling for a transition period towards a full ban of lead shot of no more than 18 months.
Separate letters were sent to the respective Welsh and Scottish environment secretaries, who will play a key role in the final decision.
Following this, more than 14,000 people wrote to the Secretary of State calling for a swift and full ban on lead ammunition.
Golden eagles are particularly susceptible to lead poisoning. Photo by Pete Walkden
Richard Benwell, CEO of Wildlife and Countryside Link, said: “Toxic lead has been poisoning our environment and wildlife for far too long, so it’s disappointing that Government has missed the deadline to respond to recommendations to ban it in ammunition. “This would have been the first chemical ban or restriction the UK implemented since leaving the EU, compared to ten implemented on the continent. As the gap between the UK and EU on chemical safety gets ever bigger, we hope that ministers will get back on track, with a rapid ban on lead ammunition and alignment with the EU on the other toxic chemicals polluting UK waters, communities and wildlife.”
The RSPB’s Director of Conservation, Katie-Jo Luxton, said: “The case for ending toxic lead ammunition is clear. Shooting organisations themselves committed to phasing it out by 2025, so now is the time to act. We need swift action to ban lead, ensuring regulation follows urgently. With a legally binding target to halt species decline by 2030, the UK Government has a chance to eliminate a major threat with immediate effect.”
Dr Anna Watson, Director of Policy and Advocacy at CHEM Trust said: “This gives an alarming picture of how difficult it is to regulate harmful substances in the UK, now we have left the EU. The Government should ban toxic lead in ammunition to prevent the needless poisoning of tens of thousands of waterbirds.
“Our chemical regulatory system needs to get back on track to protect people and wildlife from harmful chemicals. The UK should adopt a strategic policy of matching or exceeding EU bans and other controls on harmful chemicals. This is the pragmatic way to prevent the long-term harm that will be caused by continuing with the current sluggish and inadequate approach.”
Dr Ruth Tingay, Co-Director of Wild Justice said: “The Secretary of State has many difficult decisions to make. This isn’t one of them. Does he want to protect wildlife, the environment and people from the poisonous effects of toxic lead ammunition, knowing that there are suitable alternatives readily available? The answer should be a quick, easy and resounding “YES”. How hard can it be?”
Lead is toxic and has been poisoning our countryside for decades, as a result of lead ammunition pellets discarded from shooting. Every year, 7,000 tonnes – about the weight of the Eiffel Tower – of poisonous lead is scattered into our environment.
ENDS
DEFRA has previously argued, whilst waiting for the recommendations from the HSE: “The use of lead shot in England and Wales is already legally prohibited in specific circumstances – including on all foreshores, and in or over specified sites of special scientific interest, predominantly wetlands“.
It’s accurate to say toxic lead shot ‘is already legally prohibited in specific circumstances’ but that statement needs to be put into context by including the phrase, “but we’re aware that compliance is very poorand so further legislation is obviously requiredurgently“.
Poor compliance has been evidenced by a number of scientific papers showing that the shooting industry is consistently failing to comply with current regulations on using lead ammunition in sensitive environments in England (here and here) and in Scotland (here).
And UK governments are consistently failing to act, even when they’ve been handed a golden opportunity to do so, as with the HSE recommendations.
This decision should be an absolute no-brainer and I can’t think of a single legitimate excuse for further delay.
For those of you on social media you may recently have been introduced to gamekeeper* Glenn Massacre.
For those of you not on social media, here’s your introduction, via a recently filmed conversation between Chris Packham and Glenn.
They have a nice chat about driven grouse shooting and Glenn provides some fascinating insights from a gamekeeper’s perspective.
There’ll be more to come from Glenn Massacre over the coming weeks.
You can watch this first conversation here:
If you’d like to support the petition to ban driven grouse shooting, PLEASE CLICK HERE. The petition currently has 78,000 signatures. It requires 100,000 signatures before 22 May 2025 to trigger a debate in Westminster.
*For the avoidance of doubt, Glenn Massacre is obviously a parody, created by the evil genius Henry Morris.
Further to this morning’s blog about Natural England’s farcical interim evaluation of whether, as a result of brood meddling, attitudes within the grouse shooting industry had changed towards a greater tolerance of hen harriers (see here – spoiler alert, no, they obviously haven’t!), Natural England has today made an announcement about the status of the hen harrier brood meddling sham trial.
For new blog readers, the hen harrier brood meddling trial was a conservation sham sanctioned by DEFRA as part of its ludicrous ‘Hen Harrier Action Plan‘ and carried out by Natural England between 2018 – 2024, in cahoots with the very industry responsible for the species’ catastrophic decline in England. In general terms, the plan involved the removal of hen harrier chicks from grouse moors, they were reared in captivity, then released back into the uplands just in time for the start of the grouse-shooting season where many were illegally killed. It was plainly bonkers. For more background see here and here.
Natural England’s announcement, attributed to John Holmes, NE Strategy Director, and published here, announces that the seven-year brood meddling sham trial has concluded and the ‘partnership’ has now closed.
The announcement also states that no decision has yet been taken about whether NE will issue licences for hen harrier brood meddling to be rolled-out on a wider, annual basis – we know that there is currently a live licence application outstanding from the Moorland Association (grouse moor owners’ lobby group in England) for brood meddling, which apparently (see here and here) includes the following condition requests:
That there should be a single release site [for the brood meddled HHs] irrespective of the location from where they’d been removed from their nests; and
That the requirement for the brood meddled HHs to be satellite-tagged should be dropped.
Natural England states that it has commissioned four research reports about the brood meddling trial, covering population modelling, social science, and evaluation, and that any decision on the future of brood meddling licences will be based on an assessment of those reports. Only one report has been published so far (population modelling) and there is no indication about when the others will be published.
Natural England’s general review of the brood meddling trial has concluded that during the initial stages of the trial there was a significant increase in the number of hen harriers nesting in some grouse moor areas, mostly where brood meddling was being undertaken. However, towards the later stages of the trial this figure dropped substantially.
Natural England’s review has also concluded that illegal persecution has continued throughout the trial period in some grouse moor areas.
The NE-commissioned report on recent hen harrier population trends was undertaken by the British Trust for Ornithology (BTO) and was published this morning (see below for report). The study used a population modelling approach to try to determine the mechanism behind the sudden increase in the hen harrier population and whether that was attributable to the brood meddling trial or to other factors.
The authors used modelling techniques to look at changes in the rates of hen harrier productivity, survival and settlement but there were obvious constraints in the limited data available. They concluded that it was not possible to determine definitively whether the population increase was solely related to brood meddling or whether it was a response to wider environmental drivers (e.g. high prey availability).
The study was unable to determine whether hen harrier survival had increased in England during the trial period, and if it had, to what extent.
In total, 15 hen harrier nests were brood meddled during the trial period and 58 chicks were released back into the uplands. We know that at least 30 of those brood meddled chicks were either brutally killed or ‘disappeared’ in suspicious circumstances, mostly on or close to driven grouse moors. Some of them did manage to survive long enough to breed but many of them were killed within a few weeks/months of being released.
In addition to those 30 young birds, we know there were at least another 104 hen harriers that were killed or ‘disappeared’ during the brood meddling trial period (and actually this figure will definitely rise – we’re waiting for the police to publicise more cases).
*n/a – no hen harriers were brood meddled in 2018. **Post mortem reports on a further six hen harriers found dead in 2024 are awaited.
So what have we learnt? That despite over 70 years of supposed legal protection, and over £1 million (at least) of public money being wasted on years of facilitating pantomime ‘partnerships’ and a sham brood meddling trial, hen harriers are STILL being killed illegally by many within the grouse shooting industry.
I’m pleased that Natural England has finally seen sense and closed the brood meddling trial – it should never have even started – but we still need to see whether NE will issue further brood meddling licences to the very industry that’s responsible for bringing the hen harrier to its knees.
Natural England’s statement this morning included this:
‘It follows that a range of approaches may be required to reduce illegal killing on grouse moors and increase hen harrier numbers in future, potentially ranging from co-operative approaches to mitigate the impacts of hen harriers on grouse and support responsible grouse moor management, to monitoring and enforcement activities designed to tackle illegal killing and disturbance, depending on location and situation‘.
No, Natural England. Forget ‘co-operative approaches to mitigate the impacts of hen harriers on grouse‘. If these businesses are not sustainable because they cannot function without illegally killing protected species then the industry should be consigned to the dustbin. Enough, now. This charade of sustainability and respectability has gone on for far too long.
For those who want to see an end to driven grouse shooting, please sign this petition calling for a ban. It currently has 77,000 signatures – it needs 100,000 signatures before 22nd May 2025 to trigger a parliamentary debate in Westminster.
For those interested in reading the Natural England-commissioned report on recent hen harrier population trends in England, undertaken by the BTO, it’s available to read/download here:
This is a blog I’ve been meaning to write for some time but for various reasons it kept dropping down the list. However, given hen harrier brood meddling is back on the agenda (we’re awaiting the imminent publication by Natural England of its review of the hen harrier brood meddling trial and a decision about whether brood meddling will be allowed to continue now the 7-year trial has ended) it’s probably timely to write it now.
For new blog readers, the hen harrier brood meddling trial was a conservation sham sanctioned by DEFRA as part of its ludicrous ‘Hen Harrier Action Plan‘ and carried out by Natural England between 2018 – 2024, in cahoots with the very industry responsible for the species’ catastrophic decline in England. In general terms, the plan involved the removal of hen harrier chicks from grouse moors, they were reared in captivity, then released back into the uplands just in time for the start of the grouse-shooting season where many were illegally killed. It was plainly bonkers. For more background see here and here.
One of the objectives of running the brood meddling ‘trial’ was to test whether the availability of brood meddling would change the attitudes of grouse moor owners/managers towards hen harriers (i.e. would they have more tolerance of harriers), which could be judged by, for example, reduced levels of illegal persecution.
The brood meddling trial began in 2018 and three years in, Natural England conducted an ‘interim’ social science study in 2021, ‘to evaluate any changes in social attitudes by those involved in upland management‘.
This interim social science evaluation was completed in 2022 but I couldn’t find a copy in the public domain so I eventually received a (heavily redacted) copy via FoI in 2023. It’s this report that is the focus of this blog and the report is available to read/download at the bottom of this page.
I’ve read a lot of nonsense from Natural England over the years about hen harrier brood meddling but I’ve got to say, this report is right up there as being hilariously bad.
The evaluation was flawed right from the start. Given the tiny number of grouse moors directly involved in the brood meddling trial, it meant that there weren’t that many grouse moor owners and/or gamekeepers available to participate in Natural England’s evaluation interviews to measure if/how attitudes had changed.
There were so few relevant interviewees, in fact, that to make up the numbers for a semi-decent sample size it was decided to extend the list of participants to include seven Natural England staff (who were directly involved in the trial) as well as 12 non-Natural England participants who were directly involved in the brood meddling trial including a few grouse moor owners, gamekeepers and a bunch of people who weren’t from the grouse shooting industry at all but who had participated directly in the brood meddling trial, either by helping to apply for licences or those physically undertaking the brood meddling. The actual breakdown of who these people were and what their roles/affiliations were have been redacted from the report.
So, the opinions of 19 interviewees, seven of whom were Natural England staff and 12 others, some of whom were not directly associated with grouse moor management but were being paid what is believed to have been a large sum of money by the Moorland Association to undertake brood meddling, were used to assess whether attitudes had changed towards hen harriers within the grouse shooting industry as a result of brood meddling being available.
You couldn’t make it up!
Of course they’re going to say that brood meddling is a brilliant wheeze and is a positive course of action and how it’s promoted changed attitudes towards hen harriers; for some of them, their jobs/income relied upon brood meddling continuing!
To be fair to the authors of the interim evaluation report, some of the limitations were acknowledged:
“It is important to recognise a number of potential limitations of this study. First, although the [report’s social science] researchers are not part of the project delivery team, their affiliation with Natural England may have limited respondents’ willingness to be open and honest about their experiences of the trial. Second, in order to provide evidence for the process evaluation, the sample is limited only to those who are delivering or participating in the trial. There have only been a limited number of grouse moors where the density threshold for using brood management has been met as well as receptor sites assessed as suitable for harrier release within the same SPA. This has resulted in the comparatively small sample size of this research compared to the totalnumber of grouse moors and people involved in grouse shooting. As such, participants are likely to be among those members of the moorland management community who are most receptive to the idea of brood management and who recognise the need to change attitudes and behaviours. Caution must therefore be taken in extrapolating the potential effects of rolling the trial out more widely“.
To be honest, as soon as it was known that there were too few relevant participants available this social science ‘study’ should have been scrapped. How much public money was wasted on it?
I won’t go in to detail about the study’s findings – you can read them for yourselves in the report below – but there are some hilarious assertions made by the interviewees.
These include a suggestion that ‘within the last five years [up to 2021] there has been a wider change in attitude toward harriers among the grouse shooting community due to recognition that the future of grouse shooting is intrinsically linked with the future of hen harriers. Brood management was perceived to have tapped in to this change and helped harness it in a practical way‘
and
‘Brood management enabled moors to hold each other to account for any persecution through greater self-policing‘.
Of course, we all have the benefit of hindsight several years later and we know that attitudes by the majority of grouse moor owners/managers towards hen harriers has not changed one bit, as evidenced by the continued illegal killing throughout the duration of the brood meddling trial:
*n/a – no hen harriers were brood meddled in 2018. **Post mortem reports on a further six hen harriers found dead in 2024 are awaited.
I haven’t seen any evidence of ‘greater self-policing’ by grouse moor owners/managers, have you? How many cases have there been where someone from within the grouse shooting industry has reported another for illegal persecution?
What we’ve seen instead is at least 134 hen harriers confirmed illegally killed or ‘missing’ in suspicious circumstances on or close to grouse moors (here), complete denial by the then Chair of the Moorland Association, Mark Cunliffe-Lister, that persecution was even happening (here), the current CEO of the Moorland Association, Andrew Gilruth, being booted off the national priority delivery group (RPPDG) set up to tackle illegal raptor persecution and being accused by the police of “wasting time and distracting from the real work” of the police’s new Hen Harrier Taskforce (here), and a police investigation into alleged raptor persecution on a grouse moor that was directly involved in brood meddling (here). Oh, and what should have been a police investigation into the illegal poisoning of a red kite found dead on another grouse moor that was also directly involved in brood meddling (here).
Changed attitudes? Not by any stretch of imagination.
Although, thinking about it, it probably IS fair to say that attitudes have changed, but not in the way Natural England intended. They’ve changed in as much as more recently, gamekeepers are deliberately NOT targeting hen harriers that are carrying satellite tags because they know that will attract unwanted attention and instead they’re aiming their guns at untagged harriers, simply because those untagged victims are less likely to be detected by researchers or the authorities.
We saw and heard a vivid example of this change of tactics in the Channel 4 News programme that aired last October, which showed RSPB covertly-captured audio and video footage of three gamekeepers on a Yorkshire grouse moor discussing this very issue, deciding not to shoot a tagged hen harrier but then apparently shooting and killing an untagged one. If you haven’t seen this programme I strongly encourage you to watch it – it’s astounding:
I’ve no idea whether Natural England’s interim social science evaluation of the hen harrier brood meddling trial served any useful purpose in NE’s overall review of the trial, but hopefully we won’t need to wait for much longer before the final review is published and we learn whether the Moorland Association’s current licence application for brood meddling has been granted.
In the meantime, if you want a good laugh, here’s the interim report:
Another trial and yet another gamekeeper convicted of offences relating to the illegal killing of birds of prey.
The trial of gamekeeper John Bryant, in relation to the illegal killing of a red kite and two buzzards, concluded at Lincolnshire Magistrates Court last week where he was convicted of four of ten alleged offences.
Gamekeeper Bryant, 40, of West Ashby, Horncastle, Lincolnshire had been summonsed to court last September following a police investigation into reports of three birds of prey, a red kite and two buzzards, being poisoned and killed over a five year period between 2017 and 2022.
Buzzard photo by Ruth Tingay
Bryant had pleaded not guilty to ten charges (two charges of using a trap to kill or take a wild bird, six charges of possessing an article capable of being used to commit a summary offence, and two charges of contravening health & safety regulations) so he faced trial starting 6th March 2025.
He will be sentenced for the four offences next week when full details of the case and convictions will be published.
UPDATE 20 March 2025: Lincolnshire gamekeeper John Bryant sentenced for crimes relating to raptor persecution – police statement (here).
Raptor Persecution UK 