Category: Persecution Incidents in England

Further breach of Freedom of Information Act by Dorset Police re: poisoned eagle

Yesterday I blogged about how Dorset Police and the Dorset Police & Crime Commissioner, David Sidwick, were both in breach of the Freedom of Information Act by failing to respond to Chris Packham’s FoI requests about the poisoned eagle incident within the statutory period of 20 working days (see here).

Today I can report a further breach of the Freedom of Information Act by Dorset Police in relation to my FoI requests, also relating to the poisoned eagle incident.

[The poisoned white-tailed eagle found dead on an unnamed shooting estate in North Dorset in January 2022. Photo by Dorset Police]

Regular blog readers may recall I submitted an FoI request to Dorset Police on 4th March 2022, asking for copies of all correspondence between Dorset Police and local Conservative MP Chris ‘eagles aren’t welcome in Dorset‘ Loder on the subjects of wildlife crime, police wildlife crime officers, and eagle reintroductions, from 1 January 2022 to date.

On 17th March 2022 Dorset Police tried to fob me off with a refusal notice with what is perhaps the most ludicrous excuse I’ve ever seen (see here to read it in full).

I appealed that decision and requested a review of it on 14th April 2022. According to the FoI Act, the public authority has another 20 working days in which to respond to that review request. Taking into account all the public bank holidays in April and May, Dorset Police should have responded no later than 17th May 2022.

It’s now 26th May 2022 and Dorset Police hasn’t responded. I have written to them, again, to remind them of their legal obligations. If their silence continues I will escalate my complaint.

Meanwhile, you may also recall that I’d sent a similar FoI request to the Dorset Police & Crime Commissioner (PCC) (David Sidwick) in early March. After a series of reminders to the PCC’s office (see here), I did finally get a response in late April 2022.

However, under scrutiny it became apparent that some of the correspondence I’d requested to see between Chris Loder MP and the PCC, David Sidwick, was missing from the bundle of information I received (see here).

So I wrote back to the PCC and asked them to forward ALL the correspondence, not just the bits they were happy for me to see.

That response was due back next Monday (30th May 2022) but I’m pleased to say it has arrived early and is now sitting in my inbox.

I’ve had a quick skim-read and it’s immediately obvious why ‘someone’ might not have wanted me to see it. I don’t have time to blog about that right now but will come back to it shortly…

UPDATE 16.00hrs: There’s quite a lot going on behind the scenes. For strategic reasons, I won’t be blogging further on this FoI response from the PCC until later next week. I’m sorry I can’t explain why right now but it will hopefully become apparent (and in a good way) next week. Thanks for your patience.

Buzzard shot & injured in south Derbyshire – police appeal for information

Derbyshire Constabulary’s Rural Crime Team has appealed for information following the discovery of a shot & injured buzzard and a magpie.

[Photo of the shot buzzard via Derbyshire Constabulary]

Both birds were found by a member of the public on 24th March 2022 at the cemetery, Newhall, Swadlincote. Both birds were alive and were taken for veterinary attention, where they were confirmed to have been shot.

Derbyshire Police published an appeal for information on 30th March 2022 which said, ‘Local enquiries are being made however should anybody have knowledge or information regarding who is responsible for shooting the birds please contact us quoting crime reference 22000171170‘.

Dorset Police and the PCC in breach of Freedom of Information Act by failing to respond to Chris Packham’s request for info on poisoned eagle

In April 2022, Chris Packham submitted two separate Freedom of Information requests to Dorset Police and to the Dorset Police & Crime Commissioner (PCC) David Sidwick, asking for copies of all correspondence between Dorset Conservative MP Chris ‘Eagles are not welcome in Dorset‘ Loder and various named senior police officers and the Dorset Police & Crime Commissioner, relating to the poisoned eagle incident and wildlife crime in general (Chris’s two FoI requests can be read here).

Chris submitted his Freedom of Information requests on 18th April 2022, which were acknowledged by both Dorset Police and the Dorset PCC within a couple of days.

Dorset Police and the PCC, as public authorities, ‘must respond to requests promptly, and by the twentieth working day following date of receipt of the request‘, according to Section 10 of the FoI Act.

Taking in to account a number of public Bank Holidays in April and May, the latest date by which Dorset Police and the PCC needed to respond was 17th May 2022. If Dorset Police and/or the PCC needed more time to fulfil the request (they are permitted a further 20 working days in exceptional circumstances), they should have told Chris that within the first 20 working days.

Chris has written again to Dorset Police and to the PCC to ask them to comply with the FoI Act and respond by return. So far, they have remained silent. If this continues, Chris will escalate his complaint through the relevant authorities.

More on this shortly.

UPDATE 26th May 2022: Further breach of Freedom of Information Act by Dorset Police re: poisoned eagle (here)

Wildlife Crime Working Group seeks (& receives) assurance from Sussex Police re: poisoned eagle investigation

In February this year, I blogged about the suspicious deaths of two white-tailed eagles on two separate game-shooting estates – one in Dorset and the other one rumoured to be in West Sussex (see here).

Both eagles were from the Isle of Wight Reintroduction Project – a privately-funded but Government-backed five-year project bringing young sea eagles from Scotland and releasing them on the Isle of Wight to re-establish this species in part of its former range.

The dead eagle found poisoned on an unnamed shooting estate in Dorset remains an ongoing issue of concern, not least because Dorset Police chose to close the investigation prematurely without a proper explanation (see here, and more on that case shortly).

The dead eagle found poisoned on an unnamed shooting estate in West Sussex has received less attention, although in April I revealed this eagle had been poisoned with Bendiocarb and that toxicology results from a dead dog found on the same shooting estate were pending (see here).

The reason this eagle poisoning case has received less attention is simply down to the fact that Sussex Police has failed to publicise the crime, even though it took place seven months ago (Oct 2021)! However, I was pleased to see The Independent picked up the story from this blog, as did The Telegraph, so it did make the national news but we’ve heard nothing more from Sussex Police.

To ensure that Sussex Police doesn’t ‘do a Dorset Police’ and drop this investigation without an explanation, Wildlife & Countryside LINK’s Wildlife Crime Working Group, England’s largest coalition of organisations working to tackle wildlife crime, has written to the Chief Constable of Sussex Police seeking assurance to that effect.

Here’s the letter that was sent last week:

To her absolute credit, Chief Constable Jo Shiner phoned LINK that afternoon to reassure the Wildlife Crime Working Group that the Sussex investigation is very much ongoing and that she understands the need for possible raptor persecution crimes to be looked at closely. I’m told, by people who know these things, that a fast and personal response like this is unheard of.

Compare and contrast Jo Shiner’s response to that of the Chief Constable of Dorset Police, who had also received a letter from LINK (see here) seeking an explanation about the Force’s failure to investigate the poisoned eagle found dead in Dorset. He has yet to reply.

I’m really pleased to see LINK’s Wildlife Crime Working Group applying pressure in these cases to ensure they’re taken seriously by the respective police forces (not that that should even be needed), but should it really be down to wildlife and conservation NGOs to do this? Surely this is what our statutory agencies should be doing? Wilful blindness, writ large, again.

Court case delayed against Wiltshire gamekeeper Archie Watson

Criminal proceedings against a 21-year-old gamekeeper for multiple alleged raptor persecution and firearms offences have been delayed.

Archie Watson, of Dragon Lane in Manningford Bruce near Pewsey, Wiltshire, was due to appear at Swindon Magistrates next Wednesday (25th May 2022) to face six charges under the Wildlife & Countryside Act and three charges under firearms legislation, for offences alleged to have been committed on an unnamed game-shooting estate in 2019.

However, this case has now been adjourned to 1st June 2022 where Watson will be invited to submit his plea. If he pleads guilty sentencing will follow shortly afterwards; if he pleads not guilty this case will proceed to trial at a later date.

This case relates to a multi-agency raid in Wiltshire in September 2020 when two warrants were executed at locations in the Pewsey and Beckhampton areas. Firearms were seized as part of ongoing enquiries, and the carcasses of a number of birds of prey, including red kites and buzzards, were located at the site in Beckhampton (see here).

Earlier this month a Wiltshire Police spokesperson said: ‘The case has been brought after almost two years of detailed investigation and forensic analysis in conjunction with the CPS, RSPB and other partners. It is potentially the largest English raptor persecution case in terms of the number of alleged victims‘.

For context, and to provide an indication of how many raptor deaths may be involved, prior to this case the largest one in England was at the Stody Estate in Norfolk in 2014 (here) when gamekeeper Allen Lambert was found guilty of poisoning 11 birds of prey – 10 buzzards and one sparrowhawk.

PLEASE NOTE: As Archie Watson has been charged and court proceedings are live, I won’t be accepting blog comments on this case until criminal proceedings have concluded. Thanks for your understanding.

For previous blogs on this case please see here, here and here.

Wildlife Crime Working Group seeks explanation from Dorset Police about failure to investigate poisoned eagle incident

Wildlife & Countryside LINK’s Wildlife Crime Working Group, England’s largest coalition of organisations working to tackle wildlife crime, has written to the Chief Constable of Dorset Police with concerns about the premature decision to terminate the police investigation into the poisoned eagle found dead on a game-shooting estate in January.

For new blog readers, this young white-tailed eagle, one of the reintroduced birds from the Isle of Wight, was found dead in January on an unnamed estate and a post-mortem revealed its liver contained the rodenticide Brodifacoum, at an exceptionally high concentration (x 7 the amount needed to kill a bird of this size). This indicates either (a) misuse of the product (e.g. failure to adhere to the strict terms of use) or (b) abuse of the product (e.g. the deliberate placing of a bait containing an exceptionally high concentration of poison). Either way, it’s an offence and thus requires a full investigation.

Unbelievably, instead of undertaking a follow-up search of the estate, Dorset Police chose to close the investigation abruptly without adequate explanation. This decision came shortly after local Conservative MP Chris Loder made statements on Twitter about how the police should be focusing on other issues and not on suspected wildlife crime on game-shooting estates. Mr Loder’s entry on the Parliamentary Register of Interests reveals substantial donations to his election campaign by notable game-shooting estates in Dorset.

Since the decision to close the investigation, Dorset Police has attempted to dodge Freedom of Information requests about this incident (see here and here) and responses are now overdue. More on that tomorrow.

Here is the letter sent today by the LINK Wildlife Crime Working Group to the Chief Constable of Dorset Police, Scott Chilton:

Note, the deadline given by the Wildlife Crime Working Group for the police response is 1st August, two and half months from now. That’s just because it’s the editorial deadline for the Group’s annual report, which will feature this failed investigation as an example of how some wildlife crime investigations are still well below the standard required, even high profile cases of national significance such as this one.

Well done to Wildlife & Countryside LINK and especially its Wildlife Crime Working Group for pursuing an explanation about this disgraceful case. But it really shouldn’t be left to environmental NGOs to have to do this – where is the National Wildlife Crime Unit? Where is DEFRA??

Peregrine suffers appalling injuries after being being shot & trapped in Suffolk

This is grim.

Press statement from Suffolk Constabulary, 16th May 2022.

APPEAL FOLLOWS DEATH OF WILD PEREGRINE FALCON

A wild peregrine falcon found badly injured after being illegally trapped and shot has been put down.

The bird was discovered by a member of the public in a field in Cratfield on 15 March and taken to the Suffolk Owl Sanctuary at Stonham Barns. However, its injuries were too severe to save it. Both of its legs were badly broken and it was also found to have been shot. Police believe the bird was caught in an illegal trap and released alive but injured and officers would like to hear from anybody who could help find those responsible.

Sgt Brian Calver, head of Suffolk Police’s Rural Crime Unit, said:

“These iconic birds are not a common site in Suffolk and are vulnerable to human interference. Populations are improving slowly but persecution by humans remains one of the biggest threats to them. These are schedule one birds and the fastest animal on the planet. To trap any bird in such a way is cruel but to release an illegally trapped bird with broken legs is horrible. This bird would not have been able to feed and if not found by a member of the public would have suffered a slow and painful death. The traps we suspect to have caused these injuries are indiscriminate when used unlawfully. I appeal to anybody who has any knowledge of this to get in touch with Suffolk Police, quoting crime reference 37/18491/22“.

ENDS

Mail on Sunday blames ‘vigilantes’ for police investigation into alleged wildlife crime on Van Cutsem’s estate

The police investigation of alleged raptor persecution and associated wildlife crime at William van Cutsem’s Hilborough Estate in Norfolk is being kept in the public eye thanks to the Mail on Sunday (MOS).

However, instead of claiming that [Police] ‘Officers found no evidence of wrong-doing‘ [on van Cutsem’s estate] which is what the MOS published the previous weekend (here), this time they’re focusing on the ‘animal rights vigilantes’ who had secretly filmed the alleged offences on the estate and then passed on their footage to the police.

The full article can be read here.

It’s classic tabloid nonsense, designed to take the focus off the alleged offences and undermine the credibility of the people who discovered those alleged offences.

The article quotes ‘a source close to Mr van Cutsem‘ throughout, but conveniently doesn’t name that source. Quotes from this unidentified source include:

‘A source close to Mr van Cutsem condemned HIT as a vigilante group which had set up cameras on private land without his permission, saying there were questions about its relationship with police and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds‘.

and

‘William is baffled the police didn’t say anything or give him any information and he had to read about it [on their Twitter page],’ said the source.

and

‘What also is interesting is how close HIT works with the RSPB. It would be good to understand how a mainstream charity is working with a shady group. Police said nothing.’

and

‘The source added: ‘William doesn’t want to say anything else at this stage, but needless to say it’s bonkers that the first he finds out about details was not from the police but from the HIT story’. 

‘The same weekend this happened, a neighbouring estate had four traps vandalised and a buzzard was found in another one, which was then released by the estate owner. 

‘These were all reported to the police. I’m also surprised the RSPB, who attended the raid, seem to be getting information from a group with a long history of shady entrapments.‘

Interesting then that ‘the source’ didn’t apparently raise any concerns about what had been filmed, just who had filmed it and whether they had permission to do so.

This sort of commentary is a tried and tested routine, and one we’ve seen over and over again from the likes of You Forgot the Birds and C4PMC, even down to the slagging off of the RSPB. This is not quality journalism, it’s just laughable bollocks, designed to deflect attention from the alleged crimes filmed on this estate.

I particularly enjoyed the MOS’s sub-heading in this article:

‘They [that’ll be the so-called vigilantes] released a video purporting to show a Goshawk stuck in a trap on the estate‘.

Er, I think it was a bit more than showing ‘a goshawk stuck in a trap’! What the video actually showed was a masked man removing a goshawk from an illegally-set trap (baited with live pigeons) purportedly filmed on van Cutsem’s estate. The man was then filmed carrying the goshawk away, which is also an offence under the Wildlife & Countryside Act (the goshawk should have been immediately released).

Thanks for the laugh, MOS, and especially for the crap reporting which will just draw this police investigation to the attention of an even larger audience.

I look forward to reading an update from Norfolk Police in due course.

Poisoned eagles in south of England feature in The Telegraph

The news that white-tailed eagles are being poisoned in southern England is still making the headlines, and rightly so.

The Telegraph included a feature article on Saturday and, considering the paper’s typical demographic, it was pretty good, even though the deaths of these eagles on game-shooting estates in Dorset and Sussex is anything but ‘mysterious’. The article was well-researched although it didn’t provide us with any new information about either incident.

This news story just won’t go away.

Tomorrow is the deadline for Dorset Police to respond to my challenge of their refusal to provide the details of correspondence between them and Conservative MP Chris Loder, which I’d asked for as part of a Freedom of Information request back in March. As you may recall, they tried to fob me off by claiming my request would exceed the statutory 18 hours they’re permitted to pull together such information, because they’d need to ask all 2,500 staff members (that would include mechanics, accountants, personal safety trainers etc!) to check their emails for correspondence with Mr Loder. It was a ludicrous excuse, made, in my opinion, to avoid revealing any potentially compromising correspondence.

I look forward to hearing from them tomorrow.

Covert video footage published showing masked man with trapped goshawk on van Cutsem’s Hilborough Estate

Yet more evidence has emerged about the police investigation into alleged raptor persecution on William van Cutsem’s Hilborough Estate in Norfolk (see here, here, here for previous blogs).

Last night, the Hunt Investigation Team (HIT), a group describing itself as ‘anti-bloodsports’, published covert video footage it claims was filmed on van Cutsem’s estate. The footage shows a crow cage trap in woodland, the trap had been baited with live pigeons (this is an offence) and a young goshawk was attracted to the bait, entered the trap and then couldn’t escape. A masked man is then recorded entering the trap, pinning the goshawk to the side netting with a stick so he could grab the bird, and then removing it from the trap and walking away with it (also an offence). The goshawk’s fate is not shown.

[Screen grab from the HIT covert footage]

The video can be watched on YouTube here.

There are concerns amongst some conservationists, including me, that releasing this footage at this stage could jeopardise any potential prosecution. This is (was?) an active police investigation, the estate had been searched, police had seized various items and a number of employees are (were?) due to be questioned this week. Norfolk Police were doing a good job by all accounts and there wasn’t any reason to question their commitment to the investigation.

I doubt very much whether Norfolk Police gave their blessing to release this footage at this stage of the investigation.

The HIT team have already published potentially libellous commentary on Twitter (which I won’t repeat here, for obvious reasons) and they said this about releasing the footage at this stage of the investigation:

‘We do not believe in sitting on evidence for months and years on end, hoping for an unlikely prosecution whilst wildlife is relentlessly killed. People need to know what goes on within shooting estates and to be empowered to act‘.

I do sympathise with this view, and I guess it’s a reflection of the many police failures to investigate allegations of illegal fox-hunting (which is an area in which the HIT team are very experienced) and failures of some police forces to investigate raptor persecution. People get frustrated when the authorities repeatedly refuse to investigate what looks like clear criminal activity, and so they decide to do what they think is right. But from my point of view, with this particular investigation, Norfolk Police had responded well and were actively pursuing enquiries so the premature release of this footage by the HIT team is hard to comprehend. I wish they’d waited a few more days.

It’s out there now though. And the camera is well-positioned and the footage is very clear.

I hope the release hasn’t jeopardised this police investigation by compromising the planned employee interviews. Even if the case does reach court, a top QC (because let’s face it, that’s who would be representing the defendants) would make light work of drawing attention to this footage and the associated commentary and could argue the defendants wouldn’t get a fair trial.

Let’s see what happens.

UPDATE 16th May 2022: Mail on Sunday blames ‘vigilantes’ for police investigation into alleged wildlife crime on van Cutsem’s estate (here)