Category: News

Red kite found shot & poisoned in notorious grouse moor area of North Pennines AONB

Press release from the RSPB (27th June 2023):

RED KITE SHOT AND POISONED IN DURHAM RAPTOR CRIME SPOT

  • The protected bird of prey was found dead, hanging in a tree near Stanhope Burn, in the North Pennines Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
  • The Weardale area has become a hotspot for raptor persecution
  • Police and partners want members of the public to report dead birds of prey and generate more information on raptor persecution in the area

A Red Kite found dead in Stanhope has been confirmed as having been both shot and poisoned, once again highlighting the area’s serious problem with bird of prey persecution.

The protected bird of prey was discovered hanging in a tree by a member of the public in October 2022. The bird’s body was x-rayed and found to contain pieces of shot revealing that the bird had been shot at some point in its life. But when the bird was sent for official toxicology examination, the body was found to contain the highly toxic pesticides carbofuran and bendiocarb – which were confirmed by testing to be the cause of death. Both these substances are frequently seen in bird of prey poisoning cases despite being banned for legal use in the UK for many years.

Illegally shot & poisoned red kite hanging in a tree near Stanhope in the North Pennines AONB, October 2022. Photo: RSPB
Investigator collecting the shot & poisoned red kite near Stanhope, Oct 2022. Photo: RSPB

Red Kites are graceful birds with long wings and a distinctive forked tail. Forty years ago their numbers were limited to a small population in Wales due to illegal persecution, until successful reintroduction programmes in the 1980s and 90s brought them back from the brink. However persecution remains a threat, even today. Like all birds of prey, they are legally protected in the UK, punishable by jail and/or an unlimited fine.

Last month (May 23), police and partners carried out searches of land and buildings the area, in connection with the incident.

Red star indicates approximate location of latest crime in the North Pennines AONB
Stanhope Burn, to the NW of Stanhope, is next to moorland managed for driven grouse shooting

This is the latest of a series of crimes involving birds of prey being illegally killed in this part of the North Pennines Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).

In 2020, two GPS satellite-tagged Red Kites disappeared in the Edmundbyers area in suspicious circumstances [Ed: see here]. Both tags – fitted as part of a species monitoring scheme by Friends of Red Kites, who monitor the red kite population in North-east England – had been transmitting as expected until they suddenly stopped. Neither bird, nor their usually very reliable tags, have been seen since.  

In 2021, a Red Kite was found poisoned by carbofuran and bendiocarb, also in the Edmundbyers area.

The following year, police together with partner agencies conducted a raid on nearby grouse moor estates in Durham and Northumberland, following previous incidents and intelligence related to bird of prey killing in the area [Ed: see here].

And in March 2023, a Red Kite was found shot, but still alive, on a grouse moor in Edmundbyers [Ed: see here]. Luckily, after care by local vets and a specialist rehabilitator, the bird recovered and was released back into the wild [Ed: see here].

The RSPB’s Birdcrime report, published last autumn, revealed that over two-thirds (71%) of all confirmed raptor persecution incidents in 2021 related to land managed for gamebird shooting. And since 1990, 67% of those convicted of these crimes have been gamekeepers.

Data from RSPB’s Birdcrime Report (2021)

Mark Thomas, RSPB Head of Investigations, said: “We are concerned about a spate of concentrated raptor crimes which is rendering the Weardale grouse moors a hotspot for the illegal killing of birds of prey. As such, we are concentrating our efforts of detection on this area, in the hope of catching anyone targeting protected birds such as Red Kites, which should be breeding successfully in this area. But we critically need the public to be our eyes and ears and report potential crimes to ourselves and the police.

“The fact that bird of prey persecution continues against the public interest makes it clear that additional regulation for grouse moors is necessary. We believe all grouse moors and their owners or sporting tenants must be licensed, as is happening in Scotland, to provide a meaningful deterrent to the illegal killing birds of prey. Ultimately this could mean the loss the licence to shoot grouse, if the Police are satisfied that wildlife crimes against raptors are occurring on a particular landholding. Law-abiding estates should have nothing to fear from this approach”.

PC David Williamson of Durham Constabulary said: “The illegal killing of birds of prey unfortunately is continuing in our rural areas. It is unacceptable that anyone should think they can ignore the law and kill these birds by poisoning, shooting, trapping or nest destruction and disturbance. I am sure that people in our community will know who is committing these offences and I would urge anyone with any information to report this. Durham Constabulary will continue to work with our partners to tackle this criminal activity, investigate any reports and prosecute offenders”. 

If you notice a dead or injured bird of prey in suspicious circumstances, call the police on 101 and fill in the RSPB’s online reporting form HERE.

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

Final evidence session today on Wildlife & Muirburn (Scotland) Bill

As many of you know, the Scottish Parliament’s Rural Affairs & Islands Committee is currently taking evidence from stakeholders as part of the Committee’s Stage 1 scrutiny of the Wildlife & Muirburn (Scotland) Bill.

For new blog readers, this is the Bill that has been introduced by the Scottish Government in response to the recommendations made in the 2019 Werritty Review and is designed to bring in licensing for grouse moor management and introduce measures to put an end to the illegal killing of birds of prey on grouse moors.

Screen grab from the 3rd evidence session held on 21 June 2023 (via Scottish Parliament TV)

The first evidence session took place on 31st May 2023 and the Committee heard from members of the Scottish Government Bill Team, led by senior civil servant Hugh Dignon.

The second evidence session took place on 14th June 2023 and the Committee heard from members of the Werritty Review Group as well as a range of stakeholders discussing traps & increased powers for the SSPCA. It was a fascinating session and I’ve quite a lot to say about it but I don’t intend to comment until later.

The third evidence session took place on 21st June and the Committee heard from a range of stakeholders discussing grouse moor licensing and muirburn. Another interesting session that I’ll comment on in due course.

You can watch the third evidence session on Scottish Parliament TV (archived video here) and you can read the transcript here:

rural-affairs-committee-official-report-june-21-2023Download

The fourth and final evidence session takes place today, starting at 08.30hrs in the Fairfax Somerville Room at Holyrood. The Rural Affairs Cabinet Secretary, Mairi Gougeon, was originally scheduled to give evidence but she has now been replaced by the newly-appointed Environment Minister, Gillian Martin. Talk about a baptism of fire!

As Gillian is relatively new (she’s only been in post for a few weeks) and this is a highly specialised and politicised issue that’s been raging for years, it’s no surprise to see her supported in this session by three civil servants who know this issue inside out (they drafted the Bill and appeared before the Committee in the first evidence session in May).

You can watch live on Scottish Parliament TV (here) or watch the video archive shortly afterwards via the same website. The official transcript will be available several days after the meeting and I’ll post it on this blog when it comes out.

UPDATE: You can watch the fourth evidence session on Scottish Parliament TV (archived video here) and you can read the transcript here:

rural-affairs-committee-official-report-june-28-2023Download

Reaction to proposed new investigatory powers for Scottish SPCA to help tackle wildlife crime

Further to today’s excellent news (here) that the Scottish Government has (finally!) agreed to new proposed investigatory powers for the Scottish SPCA to help tackle wildlife crime, some of the early reactions are entirely predictable.

Those who are sick to the back teeth of the raptor killers getting away with it, as they have for decades, are delighted with the news. With more expert investigators on the ground, who knows, we may even finally see a conviction for those who continue to poison, trap and shoot the iconic golden eagle, which occurs disproportionately on land managed for driven grouse shooting.

Golden eagles. Photo: Chris Packham

Here’s the reaction to today’s news from the Scottish Greens:

SCOTTISH GREENS HAIL VITAL NEW SCOTTISH SPCA POWERS TO TACKLE WILDLIFE CRIME

The announcement that the Scottish Government will legislate to give additional powers to the Scottish Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Scottish SPCA) to investigate wildlife crime has been hailed by the Scottish Greens. 

The party’s nature spokesperson, Mark Ruskell MSP, called it “a massive step forward for animal welfare.”

The powers, which will be brought forward as part of the Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Bill, will allow the Scottish SPCA to, in certain circumstances, search, examine and seize evidence in connection with specified wildlife crime offences.

Mr Ruskell said: “This is a massive step forward for animal welfare and the protection of the birds and animals that we all love. It is a change that the Scottish Greens and wildlife campaigners have long called for.

One of the main reasons wildlife crime is so rife is because the criminals know they can get away with it. These vital new powers will make them think again.

The Scottish SPCA does a fantastic job but, at present, it is not even allowed to gather evidence to prosecute wildlife crimes, even when they know about them. These powers will give them more bite and will greatly help the police in stopping those that would harm or kill our iconic species and wildlife. With these new powers, Scottish SPCA officers can help the police to build a case and catch perpetrators“.

ENDS

Here’s the reaction from RSPB Scotland:

We warmly welcome today’s announcement by the Scottish Government to extend the powers of Scottish SPCA Inspectors to allow them to search, examine and seize evidence in connection with specified wildlife crime offences as part of an investigation.

Our Head of Investigations in Scotland, Ian Thomson, had the following to say about the announcement: “We have been campaigning for this important measure for over a decade.

Until now, Scottish SPCA inspectors could investigate cases where animals were actively suffering, for example in an illegal trap, but they could not look for evidence of further identical traps where nothing had been caught, or where a victim had already been killed.

The closing of this loophole will be commended by all who want to see more resources devoted to tackling crimes against Scotland’s wildlife”.

ENDS

And in complete contrast, here’s the hilariously hysterical reaction from Scottish Land & Estates, the grouse moor owners’ lobby group, who must surely qualify for a Spitting the Dummy trophy by now:

Decision To Enhance SSPCA Powers Runs The Risk Of Hindering Wildlife Crime Prosecutions

A decision to extend the investigatory powers available to the SSPCA goes against the advice of an independent taskforce set up by the Scottish Government to examine the issue, Scottish Land & Estates said today.

The government said today that new powers will “allow the Scottish SPCA to in certain circumstances search, examine and seize evidence in connection with specified wildlife crime offences.”

The announcement comes just six days after a report from an independent taskforce examined three possible scenarios for future SSPCA powers and concluded that enhanced partnership working for the charity – rather than new investigatory powers – was the recommended route forward.

The taskforce recognised the difficulty in reconciling new investigatory powers with the SSPCA’s campaigning against legal land management practices including snaring and glue traps.

Crucially, the taskforce said that an extension of powers would be “fraught” and noted that Police Scotland raised extensive concerns about the proposals whilst the Crown Office highlighted the standards in evidence gathering, processing and reporting required.

Ross Ewing, Director of Moorland at Scottish Land & Estates, said:

“The Scottish Government, not for the first time, has appointed an expert taskforce to examine an issue and take evidence from key stakeholders – and then chosen to disregard its recommendations.

We firmly support measures to address all forms of wildlife crime. It’s vital that those investigated have full trust in the impartiality of investigators. Where any form of search, examination or seizing of evidence is required, that should be the sole remit of Police Scotland.

If additional resource is needed to tackle this priority area, Police Scotland should be provided with that resource by the Scottish Government instead of powers being granted to a charity.

As the taskforce made clear in its report, there are substantial problems in allowing a campaigning organisation to hold key powers in investigating alleged criminality. The opposition of the SSPCA to legal land management tools such as snares is well known and surely calls into question their objectivity in any investigation.

The Scottish Government also states that SSPCA Inspectors will be required to undertake specified training prior to exercising new powers – but does not assert who will pay for this training.

Ultimately, SSPCA involvement could damage the likelihood of successful prosecutions where a crime has been committed if due process is not adhered to. This is a concern which Police Scotland raised in its evidence to the taskforce but is one that has been taken no notice of by the Scottish Government.”

ENDS

I’d argue that it’s reactions like this that have led to the situation that the game-shooting industry finds itself in today. Everybody knows what goes on, everybody’s sick of it, and everybody (except those who might find themselves finally held to account) wants an end to it.

Essentially, the Scottish Government has, in my view, been forced to take this step due to a combination of (a) national (and international) embarrassment at its consistent failure to deal with the raptor-killing criminals, (b) constant denial of the bleedin’ obvious by the game-shooting industry leading to a complete loss of confidence by Govt Ministers, and (c) strong public opinion and pressure.

The so-called ‘concerns’ about the SSPCA’s professionalism are laughable, given that they’re already an official specialist reporting agency to the Crown Office so know all about ‘due process’, and through their skill, experience and expertise, routinely bring some of the most sadistic wildlife-abusers to justice, including badger baiters such as this depraved Millden Estate gamekeeper last year (here).

Increasing the SSPCA’s powers to enable them to investigate crimes relating to dead wildlife in addition to wildlife that’s still alive and suffering, should be such an obvious move that it should have happened years ago. The fact it’s taken this long to achieve even a small amount of progress is very telling indeed so kudos to Cabinet Secretary Mairi Gougeon, former Environment Minister Mairi McAllan, and current Environment Minister Gillian Martin for standing up to those who still think its 1898.

New investigatory powers for SSPCA proposed by Scottish Government

BREAKING NEWS!

The Scottish Government has finally published its response to the recommendations made in its commissioned review of increasing investigatory powers for the Scottish SPCA to help tackle wildlife crime, including raptor persecution. It’s good news!

Here’s the Government statement:

Scottish Government Response to Taskforce Report on SSPCA Powers

In response to the independent Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SSPCA) Taskforce report, the Scottish Government is proposing to bring forward provisions to allow for a limited extension of the Scottish SPCA’s current powers to investigate wildlife crime.

We are grateful to the SSPCA Taskforce for conducting the review and producing their final report and we agree with the recommendation that further partnership working between the SSPCA and Police Scotland should be taken forward. Having considered the report in detail, we also propose that further limited powers for SSPCA inspectors should be provided.

Our proposal is to provide SSPCA inspectors with additional powers to search, examine and seize evidence in connection with specified wildlife crime offences under Part 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and certain offences in the Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Bill 2023. These powers would only be given to an inspector appointed under section 49(2)(a) of the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 and each inspector would be separately and individually authorised by the Scottish Government in connection with the new powers. All inspectors would be required to undertake specified training prior to being given authorisation to exercise the new powers. Authorisations could be withdrawn at the discretion of the Scottish Government.

In addition to the additional training requirements, protocols will be established between the SSPCA and Police Scotland to ensure effective partnership working and that Police Scotland have primacy over cases and offences under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and the Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Bill 2023.

It is intended that an important limitation would be placed on the exercise of these powers, namely that the additional powers could only be exercised when an inspector is already responding to a case using their existing powers under the 2006 Act.

This has been a long-running issue and we believe that the approach we are proposing represents a balanced compromise. It will allow SSPCA inspectors who are already on the spot, investigating potential animal welfare offences under their existing powers, to seize and secure evidence of related wildlife crimes without delay and potential loss of that evidence. The proposal would not however lead to SSPCA becoming an alternative wildlife crime enforcement agency. Police Scotland would retain primacy as the enforcement body for all wildlife crime and the public should continue to report those crimes to Police Scotland.

Following further consultation with stakeholders the proposed changes will be brought forward as an amendment at Stage 2 of the Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Bill 2023. The Bill is currently before the Parliament and we welcome more evidence on this being provided at Stage 1.

ENDS

This is a surprisingly good outcome, given where we were the last time the Government made a decision on the issue back in May 2017, when increased investigatory powers were ‘ruled out’, apparently ‘on legal advice’ (see here).

I don’t know what that ‘legal advice’ was in 2017 – my own view is that this was just a convenient excuse at the time, because the law hasn’t changed since then but now increased powers are suddenly possible? Hmm.

The proposed new powers are limited, yes, but they’re a good starting point.

Had these powers been in place previously then I dare say we might have seen a better outcome in a number of wildlife crime cases where the SSPCA were already on scene investigating alleged animal welfare offences but were not permitted to collect evidence of further wildlife crimes that were staring them in the face – e.g. the illegally-set spring traps on a grouse moor on the Invercauld Estate in the Cairngorms National Park (see here) and the carcasses of nine shot raptors found in bags in and around the grouse moors of Millden Estate in the Angus Glens (see here).

I’m not sure whether the Scottish Government is proposing yet another consultation on this issue (‘Following further consultation with stakeholders the proposed changes will be brought forward as an amendment at Stage 2 of the Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Bill 2023‘) – surely to God we don’t need another bloody consultation – I’ve lost track of the number of consultations on this issue – we know where every organisation stands and none of them have changed their minds, or are likely to do so now. The general position is that the game shooting lobby don’t want the SSPCA to have increased investigatory powers (gosh, can’t think why) and the conservation organisations do want them to have increased powers.

Let’s see what happens between now and Stage 2 of the Wildlife and Muirburn (Scotland) Bill when the Government’s proposals will be debated. Stage 2 is expected to begin in the autumn.

For now, well done and thanks to everyone who has campaigned on this issue for the last 13 years, and thanks especially to Mark Ruskell MSP (Scottish Greens) who has championed the cause for many years.

This is not everything we wanted but nevertheless it’s a big win.

UPDATE 21.30hrs: Reaction to proposed new investigatory powers for Scottish SPCA to help tackle wildlife crime (here)

New spring traps – not so humane: guest blog by Bob Berzins

Guest blog written by conservation campaigner Bob Berzins, who has featured previously on this blog here, here, here and here.

The UK countryside is littered with thousands of animal traps and high concentrations are found around grouse moors and pheasant & partridge shoots, not surprising given the huge numbers of birds bred on moors or introduced in lowlands which inevitably attract predators.

Traps can be described in two categories: those that restrain and those that kill. This blog will examine lethal spring traps to see if they match up to claims of an instant humane kill.

WARNING:  Graphic images of animals killed in traps and descriptions of animal testing

There’s no doubt the UK has been slow to improve animal welfare standards around the use of traps. The Agreement on International Humane Trapping Standards (AIHTS) was brokered in 1997 and it took over 20 years for improved standards to be partially implemented in the UK (here and here).

AIHTS is about fur trapping which is a huge industry in Canada and Russia but in the UK the only “fur” animal that can be killed without special licence is the stoat. You might have noticed all the ermine on display at the recent coronation.

Until recently grouse moors often had hundreds of Fenn traps set on logs across streams as run through or “rail” traps or in single entrance tunnels. GWCT  provides the following information:

“Fenn traps, and all copycat designs such as those by Springer and Solway, were made illegal to catch stoats from 1 April 2020, because tests have shown that they fail to kill stoats reliably within the time-frame required by AIHTS (45 seconds). It remains legal to use them to catch other target species for which they are currently approved (e.g. weasels, rats, grey squirrels), even though they have not undergone humaneness testing for those species (because of cost constraints). But the AIHTS does not apply to those other species, and Defra is implementing AIHTS by means of the least possible change.”

So the UK has done the absolute minimum to implement humane standards of lethal trapping for the full range of UK mammals. Data shows Fenn traps kill stoats inhumanely but Fenn traps are still acceptable to kill grey squirrels which can be almost twice the weight of a stoat. More on this below.

I don’t know the current prevalence of Fenn trap use across the UK as a whole but they’ve been almost completely removed from the grouse moors where I live because stoats are found in these areas. Surely this must have resulted in improved animal welfare?

What I’ve actually seen is after a slow initial implementation of new approved spring traps from April 2020, there’s been increasing evidence that animals are suffering in the new traps. So I submitted an FOI to Defra (Animal & Plant Health Authority APHA) for detailed information about how the humaneness of traps has been determined.    

Stoat appears to escape from trap. Photo: Bob Berzins

This stoat appears to have tried to escape a head strike by the Tully trap or did the rear leg move by a death spasm or similar?

Data from laboratory tests on stoats and rats

The FOI revealed the AIHTS requirement is the trap induces irreversible removal of corneal and palpebral reflexes within 45 seconds (both these reflexes are tested by a stimulus to the eye). Removal of these reflexes indicates unconsciousness. APHA provided details of lethal tests on stoats and rats for DOC traps and tests on stoats for Tully traps. Overall the recorded time for cessation of heartbeat (death) ranged between 10 seconds and 7 minutes 35 seconds. So the humaneness standard is not for these traps to kill instantly but for these traps to induce unconsciousness within 45 seconds. This could provide plenty of time for the stoat above to try to escape from the trap.

When unconscious the brain is anything but silent  

The rationale from APHA is that unconscious animals feel no pain so it doesn’t matter if an animal takes seven minutes to die – a trap is humane if the animal is unconscious within 45 seconds. We are not going to get any research or data on brain activity of unconscious animals and it’s important to note the brain of a stoat or rat is not as developed as a human brain. But it is worth considering what we know from human research, particularly that there are many levels of unconsciousness.

The NHS describes coma patients who can have awareness of what is happening around them  and levels of unconsciousness can be measured using the Glasgow Coma Score (here). We don’t feel the pain of an operation when under general anaesthetic but anaesthetists aim to administer drugs to an optimal level, so we are neither too deeply nor too shallowly unconscious. And this paper (here) from the University of Basel shows synchronised activity of cells in the cerebral cortex  (the part of the brain generally associated with consciousness) under general anaesthesia. All of this suggests unconsciousness has many factors and we simply don’t know under what circumstances an animal will feel pain.

APHA data showed successful laboratory tests on DOC traps always resulted in a strike to the head/neck and severe head trauma is most likely to result in rapid unconsciousness and death. But real life data shows a huge variation in which parts of the animal are crushed by these traps – that’s important because strikes away from the head introduce a lot of uncertainty about how long the animal remains alive, conscious and in pain.    

Decomposed rat in the edge of a DOC trap – note the trap has not struck the head. Photo: Bob Berzins
Another rat also in the edge of a DOC trap which has struck the jaw and part of the chest. Photo: Bob Berzins

Successful and Unsuccessful laboratory tests

Sample sizes for DOC 150, Doc 200, Doc 250 and Tully trap were all aimed at achieving 10 successful tests. However a number of trap/configuration/species test failures were recorded as follows:

DOC 150 single entrance configuration (stoat) – one failure due to stoat being struck on the abdomen

DOC 150 single entrance configuration (rat) – one failure due to strike on the nose

DOC 200 single entrance configuration (stoat) – one failure due to unconsciousness not achieved within 45 seconds

DOC 250 configuration not specified  (rat) – one failure due to strike on the nose

Tully Trap – one failure no details provided.

Taken as a whole these results are shocking because they show a failure rate of around 1 test in ten or 10%. This implies that 1 in 10 animals would not be killed humanely by these traps. Yet this is deemed acceptable by Defra and AIHTS.  

In the real world the sample size now runs into thousands given the widespread use of these traps. Canadian researchers have calculated, given these test results on small samples, the real life probability of these traps being successful in a large population is 71% (here) which implies even more animals will die a painful inhumane death.

Tests using Tully traps recorded either head, neck, shoulder or chest strikes. The stoat in the photograph below was struck on the chest – a strike any further down the body would be regarded as a trap failure. Lab tests recorded stoats taking up to 3:04 minutes to die so it’s reasonable to question how much pain this animal suffered before dying?

Stoat in Tully trap strike on chest. Photo: Bob Berzins

Foul strikes

Police attended this trap and determined the (decomposed) stoat was caught by front paw only. This unfortunate animal must have suffered greatly before death:

A photo of the same trap before the stoat entered, showing the entrance/access holes. These details are discussed below. Photo: Bob Berzins

In practice this trap became a leghold trap which is illegal under the following legislation:

The Leghold Trap and Pelt Imports (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 implement a prohibition on the use of leghold traps in the UK,

Section 8 of the Pests Act 1954 prohibits the approval of any leghold trap, defined as “a device designed to restrain or capture an animal by means of jaws which close tightly upon one or more of the animal’s limbs, thereby preventing withdrawal of the limb or limbs from the trap” for use in England.

DEFRA also provided me with the following:

“For traps which may occasionally produce a foul strike and restrain or pin animals in their mechanism without providing a quick and irreversible unconsciousness, the Animal Welfare Act (2006) requires users of traps to ensure animals do not endure prolonged suffering. This should include regularly checking traps and euthanizing any animals which continue to suffer. An example of best practice guidance can be found at Pest Management Codes of Best Practice | pest control standards (bpca.org.uk).

Defra, by implementing the Spring Traps Approval (England) Order 2018 requires users to deploy traps in appropriate enclosures, and where specified follow the manufacturer’s instructions closely. As both enclosure design and mode of use help minimise the chance of a foul strike, this requirement in regulation helps ensure the humane management of wildlife.”

The trap above was set using 50mm mesh for the tunnel/enclosure which allows the target species to enter the trap from above or from the side. Manufacturer’s instructions only have a vague specification the tunnel must be “suitable for the purpose”. So it’s virtually impossible to prosecute a trap operator for a tunnel/enclosure like the one above. In addition there’s no statutory requirement to check spring traps. And to gain a prosecution under the Animal Welfare Act: it’s necessary to establish that the defendant knew or ought reasonably to have known both that his or her act or failure would cause a protected animal to suffer and that the suffering was unnecessary. This is not going to be established if DEFRA- approved traps are used in a vaguely “suitable” tunnel.

 I suspect DEFRA are fully aware of the unlikeliness of prosecution so I regard their comments above as disingenuous to say the least. In reality there is little or no protection to stop or prevent animal suffering in traps like the one above.

Stoat on top bars of Tully trap. Photo: Bob Berzins

This Tully trap (photo above) has an enclosure of smaller gauge mesh but the stoat has still managed to end up on top of the bars of the trap with front paw only crushed in the trap. Once again this trap in reality has become an illegal leg hold trap.

Fenn Traps

As GWCT describe, killing a stoat in one of these traps is now unlawful because tests show it’s inhumane:

Stoat killed in Fenn trap (pre 2020). Photo: Bob Berzins

But killing a larger grey squirrel in a Fenn trap is still lawful:

Squirrel killed in Fenn trap. Photo: Bob Berzins

I asked DEFRA what testing had taken place to determine the humaneness of Fenn traps used for this species and the reply was: “The Fenn Vermin Trap Mark IV does not appear to have undergone any testing for grey squirrels. The approval for this trap was granted via the Spring Traps Approval (Amendment) Order 1970, prior to the implementation of the AIHTS.”

I fail to see how Fenn traps could pass any AIHTS level testing for humanely killing grey squirrels.

 DEFRA claims “The UK is a world leader on animal welfare” (here). Yet even the traps which are approved to international standards have a shocking failure rate, no effective statutory requirements for tunnels/enclosures and in real life conditions strike, crush and hold a range of animal body parts. These traps are not working as intended resulting in animal suffering which is not prevented by the Animal Welfare Act and legal requirements for trap use.   

ENDS

New Scottish Environment Minister’s responsibilities include wildlife management & wildlife crime

Earlier this month I blogged about the appointment of Gillian Martin MSP as the new Environment Minister in the Scottish Government, alongside her current role as Energy Minister (see here).

Environment & Energy Minister Gillian Martin in action at Holyrood last week (Scottish Parliament TV)

At the time of Gillian’s appointment her specific responsibilities under the ‘Environment’ remit had not yet been published, other than to say she would be supporting the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands (Mairi Gougeon).

The full list of Gillian’s responsibilities has now been made public, and as expected, her new portfolio covers many issues relevant to us, including wildlife management and wildlife crime:

She’s going to be busy!

Environment Minister ‘open to ideas about closing loopholes’ that currently block SSPCA investigating some wildlife crimes

Further to the publication yesterday of the Scottish Government’s commissioned review on increased investigatory powers for the Scottish SPCA (here), this issue was raised in the Scottish Parliament yesterday during Portfolio Questions.

New Environment Minister Gillian Martin responded to questions as follows:

This is a fairly positive response from the Minister but yet again, we’re left waiting for a formal Government response to the review, even though in February we were told that the Government’s response would be published at the same time as the review (i.e. yesterday).

I don’t understand why we’ve had to wait eight months for this very short review to be published (it was submitted to Government in Oct 2022) if the Government hasn’t even managed to cobble together a formal response yet. What was the delay for? And given that the issue has been tabled during the recent evidence sessions during the Stage 1 scrutiny of the Wildlife & Muirburn (Scotland) Bill, wouldn’t it have been useful to have had this review available in time for discussions?

So now we wait again….more bloody can-kicking, 12 years on. It’s tedious and unimpressive governance. Nevertheless, kudos to Mark Ruskell MSP (Scottish Greens) who has been pushing on this issue for many years now.

Another grouse moor, another mannequin (hen harrier scarer), this time in North Pennines AONB

Thanks to the blog reader who sent in photos of another mannequin (hen harrier scarer), this time on a grouse moor in the North Pennines Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).

Photos taken last Saturday (17th June 2023).

Other mannequins (hen harrier scarers) photographed on grouse moors this year include those seen in the Yorkshire Dales National Park (here and here) and the Peak District National Park (here).

Short-eared owl shot & killed on Broomhead Estate, a grouse moor in the Peak District National Park

The RSPB has this evening released video footage of an eyewitness’s account of a short-eared owl being shot on the well-known Broomhead Estate in the Peak District National Park last summer.

Screen grab from the RSPB video showing the shot corpse of the short-eared owl.

The eyewitness, who understandably doesn’t want to be identified (probably due to the harassment and intimidation suffered by other eyewitnesses in this region – e.g. see here), watched the owl being shot by an armed man who had arrived on the grouse moor on an all-terrain vehicle, carrying a shotgun and a bag. He shot the owl and shoved its lifeless corpse inside a rabbit hole in an effort to conceal the crime.

Fortunately, this eyewitness was savvy enough to have filmed the event and was able to return to the grouse moor the next day and pinpoint the spot for investigators from the RSPB and South Yorkshire Police.

They retrieved the owl’s corpse and a post-mortem confirmed it had been shot.

A local gamekeeper became the immediate suspect but, as happens so often, there was insufficient evidence to link him conclusively to the crime and so no prosecution could take place. You can read the RSPB’s blog about this case here, including a link to the video.

RPUK map showing location of Broomhead Estate in Peak District National Park

Grouse moors in this part of the Peak District National Park have been at the centre of other police investigations into alleged raptor persecution in recent years, including the suspicious disappearance of a satellite-tagged hen harrier (‘Octavia’) in 2018 (here).

Last year, another satellite-tagged hen harrier (‘Anu’) roosted overnight on a local grouse moor before ‘disappearing’. His tag was found several km away, no longer attached to the harrier and a forensic examination revealed the tag’s harness had been deliberately cut from the bird (here).

Two other hen harriers ‘disappeared’ from their breeding attempts on National Trust-owned grouse moors in the Peak District National Park last year (see here).

I’ve blogged previously about the Broomhead Estate in relation to the apparent mis-use of medicated grit (see here) and the use of gas gun bird scarers (here, here, here and here).

Grouse-shooting butt on Broomhead Estate. Photo: Ruth Tingay

Wildlife crime: Scottish Government publishes its review on increased investigatory powers for the Scottish SPCA

The Scottish Government has finally published its commissioned review on increasing the Scottish SPCA’s investigatory powers to enable the organisation to help tackle wildlife crime, and particularly raptor persecution.

Buzzard killed after eating poisoned rabbit bait. Photo: NIRSG

As a quick recap for new blog readers, the SSPCA’s current powers (under animal welfare legislation) limits their investigations to cases that involve a live animal in distress (including some wildlife crimes). The proposed new powers would allow them to also investigate wildlife crimes under the Wildlife & Countryside Act legislation, e.g. where the victim is already dead, and also incidents where a victim may not be present (e.g. if an illegally-set pole trap or a poisoned bait was discovered). See here for further detail.

The review taskforce, launched in July 2022 and chaired by Susan Davies FRSB, was established after 11 long years of political can-kicking on this issue by the SNP, only because the Scottish Greens insisted on its inclusion in the historic Bute House Agreement, the power-sharing policy document published by the two parties in 2021.

The 13-page published review, which was submitted to the Scottish Government in October last year, can be read/downloaded here:

sspca-powers-review-report-minister-environment-land-reformDownload

I haven’t read the review in detail yet but the main recommendation is that the Scottish SPCA NOT be given increased powers due to the lack of support for this provision from Police Scotland, the Crown Office and the National Wildlife Crime Unit (NWCU).

I’ll comment on that when the Scottish Government has published its own response to the review, which it previously said (here) would be published at the same time as the review was published, but I haven’t seen the Government’s response yet.

I think it’s prudent to wait to see the Government’s response before making any comment, although I’ve previously been critical of the apparent bias in favour of game-shooting industry organisations being invited to contribute to the review (all of whom are opposed to increased powers for the SSPCA), whereas opportunities for conservation organisations were apparently limited (see here and here).

Increased powers for the SSPCA is due to be debated at Stage 2 of the Wildlife & Muirburn (Scotland) Bill in the autumn, so this is far from over.

This issue has now been running for the last 12 years – here is the timeline of this sorry saga:

February 2011: Increased powers for the SSPCA was first suggested by MSP Peter Peacock as an amendment during the Wildlife & Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill debates. The then Environment Minister Roseanna Cunningham rejected it as an amendment but suggested a public consultation was in order.

September 2011: Seven months later Elaine Murray MSP (Scottish Labour) lodged a parliamentary motion that further powers for the SSPCA should be considered.

November 2011: Elaine Murray MSP (Scottish Labour) formalised the question in a P&Q session and the next Environment Minister, Stewart Stevenson MSP, then promised that the consultation would happen ‘in the first half of 2012’.

September 2012: Nine months later and nothing had happened so I asked Paul Wheelhouse MSP, as the new Environment Minister, when the consultation would take place. The response, in October 2012, was:

“The consultation has been delayed by resource pressures but will be brought forward in the near future”.

July 2013: Ten months later and still no sign so I asked the Environment Minister (still Paul Wheelhouse) again. In August 2013, this was the response:

“We regret that resource pressures did further delay the public consultation on the extension of SSPCA powers. However, I can confirm that the consultation document will be published later this year”.

September 2013: At a meeting of the PAW Executive Group, Minister Wheelhouse said this:

“The consultation on new powers for the SSPCA will be published in October 2013“.

January 2014: In response to one of this blog’s readers who wrote to the Minister (still Paul Wheelhouse) to ask why the consultation had not yet been published:

“We very much regret that resource pressures have caused further delays to the consultation to gain views on the extension of SSPCA powers. It will be published in the near future“.

31 March 2014: Public consultation launched.

1 September 2014: Consultation closed.

26 October 2014: I published my analysis of the consultation responses here.

22 January 2015: Analysis of consultation responses published by Scottish Government. 233 responses (although 7,256 responses if online petition included – see here).

I was told a decision would come from the new Environment Minister, Dr Aileen McLeod MSP, “in due course”.

1 September 2015: One year after the consultation closed and still nothing.

25 February 2016: In response to a question posed by the Rural Affairs, Climate Change & Environment Committee, Environment Minister Dr Aileen McLeod said: “I have some further matters to clarify with the SSPCA, however I do hope to be able to report on the Scottish Government’s position on this issue shortly“.

May 2016: Dr Aileen McLeod fails to get re-elected and loses her position as Environment Minister. Roseanna Cunningham is promoted to a newly-created position of Cabinet Secretary for the Environment.

12 May 2016: Mark Ruskell MSP (Scottish Greens) submits the following Parliamentary question:

Question S5W-00030 – To ask the Scottish Government when it will announce its decision regarding extending the powers of the Scottish SPCA to tackle wildlife crime.

26 May 2016: Cabinet Secretary Roseanna Cunningham responds with this:

A decision on whether to extend the investigatory powers of the Scottish SPCA will be announced in due course.

1 September 2016: Two years after the consultation closed and still nothing.

9 January 2017: Mark Ruskell MSP (Scottish Greens) submits the following Parliamentary question:

Question S5W-05982 – To ask the Scottish Government by what date it will publish its response to the consultation on the extension of wildlife crime investigative powers for inspectors in the Scottish SPCA.

17 January 2017: Cabinet Secretary Roseanna Cunningham responds:

A decision on whether to extend the investigatory powers of the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals will be announced in the first half of 2017.

31 May 2017: Cabinet Secretary Roseanna Cunningham rejects an extension of powers for the SSPCA ‘based on legal advice’ and instead announces, as an alternative, a pilot scheme of Special Constables for the Cairngorms National Park (here). It later emerged in 2018 that this pilot scheme was also an alternative to the Government’s 2016 manifesto pledge to establish a Wildlife Crime Investigation Unit as part of Police Scotland – a pledge on which it had now reneged (see here).

November 2019: The pilot scheme of Special Constables in the Cairngorms National Park was an absolute failure as a grand total of zero wildlife crimes were recorded by the Special Constables but plenty were reported by others (see here).

June 2020: Mark Ruskell (Scottish Greens) proposed further powers for the SSPCA at Stage 2 of the Animals and Wildlife Bill. The latest Environment Minister, Mairi Gougeon persuaded him to withdraw the proposed amendment on the basis that she’d consider establishing a taskforce to convene ‘this summer’ to consider increased powers (see here).

December 2020: Mark Ruskell (Scottish Greens) submits two Parliamentary questions asking about the status of the taskforce and who is serving on it (see here).

January 2021: New Environment Minister Ben Macpherson says the taskforce has not yet been appointed but that it is “expected to be established later this year“ (see here).

September 2021: In the 2021 to 2022 Programme for Government it was announced that the ‘independent taskforce [Ed: still to be appointed] will report before the end of 2022’ (see here).

May 3 2022: In an interview with Max Wiszniewski of the REVIVE coalition for grouse moor reform, new Environment Minister Mairi McAllan said: “It’s imminent and I wish I could tell you today but we are just finalising the last few points for the membership but I’m hoping to be able to make an announcement about that in the next few weeks“ (see here).

1 July 2022: Scottish Government announces Susan Davies has been appointed to lead the taskforce review and will ‘publish a report later this year’ (see here).

27 December 2022: A Scottish Government spokesperson tells Scotsman journalist the taskforce has completed its review and its findings will be published ‘within weeks’ (see here).

31 January 2023: An FoI response from the Scottish Government to this blog’s author reveals the Taskforce’s review was submitted to the Scottish Government on 22nd October 2022 and will be published ‘prior to summer 2023’.

1 February 2023: Wildlife crime: key conservation organisations ‘excluded’ from Scottish Government’s review on increasing SSPCA powers (here).

7 February 2023: Scottish Government tells journalist from The Scotsman that it will provide a response at the same time the Taskforce review on SSPCA powers is published (here).

7 March 2023: More detail provided on why key conservation organisations were excluded from Scottish Government’s review on increasing SSPCA powers (here).

21 June 2023: Scottish Government publishes its commissioned review on SSPCA powers.

UPDATE 27th June 2023: New investigatory powers for SSPCA proposed by Scottish Government (here)