Tag: buzzard

Stody Estate subsidy penalties: an update

IMG_4752 (2) - CopyOn 1st October 2014, gamekeeper Allen Lambert from the Stody Estate in Norfolk was found guilty of poisoning 10 buzzards and one sparrowhawk, which had been found dead on the estate in April 2013. He was also convicted of storing banned pesticides & other items capable of preparing poisoned baits (a ‘poisoner’s kit’), and a firearms offence (see here and here).

On 6th November 2014, Lambert was sentenced. Even though the magistrate acknowledged that Lambert’s crimes passed the custody threshold, he only received a 10 week suspended sentence for poisoning 11 raptors (suspended for one year), a six week suspended sentence for possession of firearms and nine poisoned buzzards (suspended for one year), and was ordered to pay £930 prosecution costs and an £80 victim surcharge.

On 5th October 2014, we blogged about the millions of pounds worth of subsidies that had been awarded to Stody Estate in recent years (see here) and we encouraged blog readers to contact the Rural Payments Agency (RPA) to ask whether Stody Estate would receive a financial penalty in the form of subsidy withdrawal for being in breach of the terms & conditions of their subsidy-fest.

On 10th October 2014, the RPA responded by saying they would consider what action could be taken against Stody Estate (see here).

Then it all went quiet.

In December 2014, one of our blog readers submitted an FoI to the RPA to ask what was happening. In January 2015, the RPA responded by saying they ‘weren’t able to provide a meaningful response’ but said they would take action if it was found to be appropriate to do so (see here).

Six months on, we thought it was time for an update so an FoI was sent to the RPA to ask whether they had implemented a subsidy penalty. This is their response:

Dear XXXXX XXXXX

Thank you for your email dated 5 July 2015 regarding Stody Estate.

Cross Compliance rules only apply to recipients of Single Payment Scheme or certain Rural Development scheme payment in the year in which a cross compliance breach is found.

The person prosecuted for the offences mentioned in your e-mail is not a recipient of either of these types of payment.  Therefore before RPA can take further action, it will be necessary to determine whether there [sic] a link between this person and a subsidy recipient and, if there is, whether that recipient can be considered liable for the actions of the person who committed the breaches.

Identifying whether the person prosecuted is linked to a subsidy recipient will form a key part of our investigations.

Should you have any further queries please contact us again quoting reference number XXXXX

Regards

Helen Hunter

Customer Service Centre, Operations

END

This is all very interesting. The mass illegal poisoning of birds of prey took place on Stody Estate and a Stody Estate employee, gamekeeper Allen Lambert, was convicted of these crimes and several others. But the Rural Payments Agency is still trying to determine whether there is a link between Lambert and the Stody Estate. Eh?

It’s not very convincing is it?

Perhaps the RPA should have a read of the judge’s comments about the relationship between Lambert and his (now former) employer – see here.

DEFRA’s plans unchanged despite loss of 5 breeding hen harriers

In June, following the news that five breeding male hen harriers had ‘disappeared’ from active nests this year, one of our blog readers submitted an FoI to DEFRA to ask about the Westminster Government’s contingency plans to protect hen harriers and to deal with the criminals who continue to persecute hen harriers and other wildlife:

Sir/ Madam

I am making a Freedom of Information request regarding hen harriers/ illegal persecution of wildlife.

1) With the recent losses of five male birds in northern England, as published in Natural England’s press release (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/five-hen-harriers-have-now-disappeared-from-northern-england), what is the Government’s contingency plan(s) to prevent the species becoming extinct in the wild in England as a direct result of illegal persecution within the next 5 years, i.e. the duration of this Parliament?  If there are no contingency plans, why are there no contingency plans?

2) In a recent court case in Spain (see http://www.venenono.org/?p=2506 with an English summary available here:https://raptorpersecutionscotland.wordpress.com/2015/06/09/now-thats-a-deterrent/, the sanction imposed on an individual found guilty of a wildlife offence was considerably more severe compared with recent similar incidents in England.  Does the UK Government have any plans to introduce similar sanctions that would act as a meaningful deterrent to wildlife criminals?  If not, why not?

3) Does the Government consider the current sanctions available to Magistrates/ Judges sufficiently severe to act as a deterrent to wildlife criminals, within the context of those imposed in the aforementioned Spanish case?

4) As in Spain, is the Government seriously considering introducing ‘sniffer dogs’ able to detect the use of poisoned bait as described in the article published by Raptor Persecution Scotland? If not, why not?

Many thanks,

XXXXX XXXXX

Here is DEFRA’s response:

Dear XXXXX XXXXX

Thank you for your request of 11 June about the illegal persecution of hen harriers. I have been asked to reply.

We share your concerns regarding the recent losses of five hen harriers but are encouraged by the news of several nests this year, following on from four nests in 2014, with 16 fledglings. In 2013, for the first time in over 50 years, there were no known fledglings.

All wild birds are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, which implements the EC Wild Birds Directive in Great Britain. This provides a powerful framework for the conservation of wild birds, their eggs, nests and habitats. I can assure you that we are committed to ensuring the strict protection afforded to wild birds of prey under our wildlife legislation is effectively enforced. There is a robust legal framework for protecting such birds with strong penalties for offenders, which can include imprisonment.

Despite the protection afforded to birds of prey, it is clear that they continue to be persecuted. To address this, senior Government and enforcement officers in the UK identified raptor persecution as a National Wildlife Crime Priority. Raptor persecution is subject to a prevention, intelligence and enforcement plan led by a senior police officer. The National Wildlife Crime Unit, which is part-funded by Defra, monitors and gathers intelligence on illegal activities affecting birds of prey and provides assistance to police forces when required.

It should be noted that despite instances of poisoning and killing of birds of prey, populations of many species, such as the peregrine falcon, red kite and buzzard have increased. While a small minority is prepared to kill birds of prey and where possible these people are brought to justice, this demonstrates that the policies in place to conserve these species are working.

One of our most threatened birds of prey is the hen harrier and we take the decline in hen harrier populations in England very seriously. In August 2012 Defra established the Hen Harrier Sub-Group of the Uplands Stakeholder Forum whose members include representatives from Natural England, the Moorland Association, the National Gamekeepers’ Organisation, the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust, National Parks UK and the RSPB.

All members of the Hen Harrier Sub-Group have a common interest to protect hen harriers.  They have made concerted efforts to engage and have produced a Joint Action Plan that contains a suite of actions intended to contribute to the recovery of the hen harrier population in England. The commitment shown by the differing organisations involved in the Sub-Group to help the recovery of one of our most iconic birds demonstrates a desire to bring about behavioural change amongst gamekeepers and confidence that this can be achieved through a package of complementary actions.

The Joint Action Plan includes three measures to stamp out illegal persecution, a trial toolkit comprising two measures for land owners to safely accommodate hen harriers on grouse moors and a measure to reintroduce them to suitable habitat in other parts of England. Defra officials are currently working with Sub-Group members to finalise the Plan.

As previously stated there are already strong penalties in place for people committing offences against birds of prey. You have asked if the Government intends to introduce tougher penalties for those convicted of wildlife crimes. I should first point out that Parliament is responsible for deciding the maximum penalties for offences. There are currently no plans to increase the penalties for offences against wildlife. Within the maximum limits, it is up to the court to decide the appropriate sentence in any case, having taken into account all the facts of the case.

We are aware that sniffer dogs are used in other countries, including Italy, Spain and Greece, to detect poisoned bait but are not aware that enforcement bodies in the UK have this resource or are considering it for the future. This would be a matter for individual Police forces to decide upon.

Yours sincerely,
Charlie Coombs
Customer Contact Unit

Gamekeeper’s trial collapses after District Judge rules RSPB covert video “disproportionate”

A Shropshire gamekeeper has been cleared of charges relating to the alleged illegal use of a trap after the District Judge pronounced the RSPB’s use of covert surveillance “disproportionate”.

Neil Wainwright had been accused of using a Larsen trap, illegally baited with two live quails, to trap birds of prey. The trap, set near to a pheasant pen, had been seen by an RSPB investigator (whilst walking on a public right of way), who had returned the following day to install covert video (on private land) to determine the identity of the trap user.

Footage from the camera had identified Wainwright, who was also reportedly seen carrying a dead buzzard. The RSPB then alerted the police who began an investigation, resulting in the Crown Prosecution Service taking the case to court.

This case featured several court hearings, and during one of these Wainwright had admitted using the trap baited with live quail but had claimed he was targeting mink, not birds of prey. So his use of the trap wasn’t in question (because he hadn’t denied using it); just his purpose for using it (which was the basis for some of the charges against him).

It’s very strange then, that the District Judge, Kevin Grego, should then exclude the video evidence and claim its use to be “disproportionate” because the RSPB didn’t have the landowner’s permission to film there. This implies that the RSPB should have sought the landowner’s permission, which would have been a complete non-starter because for all they knew, the landowner and/or the agent may have been complicit with any alleged offences so asking for permission to film would have defeated the objective of filming. It may also imply that the judge thought that the RSPB should have approached the police before setting the camera. However, for the police to have been involved they would have needed to seek authority to film under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. The chances of them getting that authority for what may be considered a minor offence (in terms of the scale used to categorize the seriousness of all crimes, not just wildlife crimes) on private land would be pretty slim.

In which case, any trap user intent on illegal activity to trap and kill birds of prey on private land can be assured that the chance of being prosecuted is virtually non-existent. In other words, they’re untouchable.

This is the second time this year that RSPB video footage in relation to the alleged mis-use of a trap by a gamekeeper has been ruled inadmissible in England – see here for earlier case. These are interesting developments because covert video footage has long been accepted as admissible in the English courts, as opposed to the difficulty of having it accepted by the Scottish courts. And although neither of these two recent cases set a legal precedent, you can bet your house that defence lawyers in future English cases will be pointing to these findings as they try to justify having similar evidence dismissed.

These examples serve to demonstrate, once again, just how high the odds are stacked against securing a conviction for wildlife crimes that take place in relatively remote areas where direct witnesses are few and far between.

Wainwright’s case wasn’t a complete failure though. He was convicted of three other offences which wouldn’t have come to light without this investigation in to the alleged mis-use of the trap: failure to properly store ammunition (two offences, for which he was fined a total of £300) and failure to store a dangerous chemical securely (Phostoxin, a highly toxic fumigant used to gas moles, rabbits etc) which was found in his vehicle (one offence, for which he was fined £200). He was also ordered to pay £85 costs and a £30 surcharge.

Previous blogs on this case here, here and here.

BBC news article on Wainwright’s trial here

Judicial review: awaiting written decision

The judicial review brought by a Northumberland gamekeeper to question whether Natural England followed due process when they refused to give him licences to kill buzzards and sparrowhawks, has finished.

We now await the written decision of the judge, which can take weeks.

Useful background information about the judicial review process here and here.

Judicial review underway for gamekeeper who wants to kill buzzards

An important judicial review is underway at the High Court this week. It concerns the legal question about whether Natural England acted fairly when it refused licences to a gamekeeper to allow him to kill buzzards and sparrowhawks to protect his pheasants.

The JR has been brought by Northumberland gamekeeper Ricky McMorn and is backed by the National Gamekeepers’ Organisation.

Article in the Chronicle here.

We’ve blogged extensively about this over the last three years. See here for earlier posts, which include discussions about whether DEFRA/Natural England should entertain a licence application from a gamekeeper with a previous conviction for possession of a banned poison (apparently that’s not a problem), whether the National Gamekeepers’ Organisation should expel a member with a conviction for possession of a banned poison (apparently not), and whether there’s any scientific evidence to demonstrate buzzards (and sparrowhawks) have a substantially detrimental effect on game bird shoots (there isn’t).

Henry’s Tour day 42: Leadhills

Thurs 11th June Copy

Henry went with an armed escort to visit Leadhills in South Lanarkshire.

He looks a bit distressed. Perhaps he was being deafened by the booming gas guns that have recently been deployed on the grouse moors of the Leadhills (Hopetoun) Estate.

Or perhaps he’d just been told about the long list of wildlife crimes that have been discovered in this corner of South Lanarkshire; 46 confirmed since 2003, but only two resulting in successful convictions (2004 – Leadhills Estate gamekeeper convicted of shooting a short-eared owl; 2009 – Leadhills Estate gamekeeper convicted of placing out a poisoned rabbit bait).

Here’s the list, all from Leadhills unless otherwise stated:

2003 April: hen harrier shot [prosecution failed – inadmissible evidence]

2003 April: hen harrier eggs destroyed [prosecution failed – inadmissible evidence]

2004 May: buzzard shot [no prosecution]

2004 May: short-eared owl shot [gamekeeper convicted]

2004 June: buzzard poisoned (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2004 June: 4 x poisoned rabbit baits (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2004 June: crow poisoned (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2004 July: poisoned rabbit bait (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2004 July: poisoned rabbit bait (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2005 February: poisoned rabbit bait (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2005 April: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2005 June: poisoned rabbit bait (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2005 June: poisoned rabbit bait (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2006 February: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2006 March: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2006 March: poisoned pigeon bait (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2006 April: dead buzzard (persecution method unknown) [no prosecution]

2006 May: poisoned rabbit bait (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2006 May: poisoned rabbit bait (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2006 May: poisoned egg baits (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2006 June: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2006 June: poisoned raven (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2006 June: 6 x poisoned rabbit baits (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2006 June: poisoned egg bait (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2006 September: 5 x poisoned buzzards (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2006 September: poisoned rabbit bait (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2006 September: poisoned rabbit bait (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2007 March: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2007 April: poisoned red kite (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2007 May: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2008 October: poisoned buzzard (Carbofuran) [listed as ‘Nr Leadhills’] [no prosecution]

2008 October: poisoned rabbit bait (Carbofuran) [listed as ‘Nr Leadhills’] [no prosecution]

2008 November: 3 x poisoned ravens (Carbofuran) [listed as ‘Nr Leadhills’] [no prosecution]

2009 March: poisoned rabbit bait (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2009 March: poisoned raven (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2009 April: poisoned rabbit bait (Carbofuran) [gamekeeper convicted]

2009 April: poisoned magpie (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2009 April: poisoned raven (Carbofuran) [no prosecution]

2010 October: short-eared owl shot [no prosecution]

2011 March: illegally-set clam trap [no prosecution]

2011 December: buzzard shot [no prosecution]

2012 October: golden eagle shot (just over boundary with Buccleuch Estate) [no prosecution]

2013 May: shot otter found on estate [no prosecution]

2013 June: significant cache of pre-prepared poisoned baits found on estate [no prosecution]

2013 August: red kite found shot and critically-injured in Leadhills village [no prosecution]

2014 February: poisoned peregrine (Carbofuran) [‘Nr Leadhills’] [no prosecution]

Word has it from a local informant that a suspected shot raven was found on Leadhills Estate in May 2015. Post-mortem results are awaited.

Just a few weeks ago, we were sent footage of a young man dressed in camouflage who was lying on the moor holding a firearm, looking over at a plastic decoy peregrine which had been placed on top of a small mound. When he realised he’d been spotted, he removed the decoy and took off back down the hill on a quad bike. Can’t imagine who that was or what his intentions might have been.

Update on convicted gin trap gamekeeper James O’Reilly

A few updates on some of the questions we asked yesterday following the conviction of Scottish gamekeeper James O’Reilly (see here)….

1. We asked the Cardross Estate whether O’Reilly was still employed as a gamekeeper on their estate. They have issued the following statement:

CARDROSS ESTATE REFUTES WILDLIFE CRIME ALLEGATIONS

(Issued on behalf of Cardross Estate)

Cardross Estate today issued the following statement after the conviction and sentencing of a gamekeeper at Stirling Sheriff Court on offences under the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981.

Sir Archie Orr-Ewing, owner of Cardross Estate, said: “The reputation of the estate has been unjustly tarnished by the publicity around these court proceedings. The estate does not have any involvement whatsoever in the sporting management of the land in question. The area of land where these offences occurred is let on a long-term lease to a third party who has full rights and responsibilities for the management of sporting activity. The gamekeeper is employed by the third party and has never been employed by the estate.

“Having co-operated fully with the authorities during their investigation and having been asked to be a prosecution witness, I am bitterly disappointed that the Crown Office did not see fit to clarify the estate’s position in its public statement following the case.

“Cardross Estate is an estate that takes its land managcment responsibilities very seriously and is a business focused on the local community and the delivery of sustainable rural enterprise. In particular, we are committed to contributing to the tourism offering of the Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park.”

END

According to some media outlets, O’Reilly no longer works on the Cardross Estate and some claim he no longer works in the gamekeeping industry.

2. We asked the Scottish Gamekeepers’ Association whether O’Reilly was a member of the SGA, and if so, has he now been booted out. They have issued the following statement, which seems to carefully avoid answering the question:

SGA RESPONSE

Responding to the sentencing of a former gamekeeper, who used an illegal gin trap to catch a buzzard, a spokesman for The Scottish Gamekeepers Association said: “This is the first we have heard about this case but, as an organisation, we are appalled. These actions have no place in modern gamekeeping and show ignorance of the legal requirements which are involved in being in the profession. They are an affront to all those who advocate high standards and take their responsibilities seriously and with care.”

END

Actually, O’Reilly’s criminal activities didn’t show ignorance of the legal requirements; according to the press statement issued by the Crown Office yesterday, O’Reilly had undertaken the snaring course (run by either GWCT or SGA) legally required for anyone wanting to set snares in Scotland. He’d passed the course so he wasn’t ignorant, he just chose to blatantly disregard the law.

We’re still interested in whether O’Reilly was an SGA member at the time he committed these offences. If you’re also interested, you too can email them again: info@scottishgamekeepers.co.uk

3. We asked Scottish Land & Estates whether the Cardross Estate was a member of their organisation and if so, had it now been booted out.

They haven’t yet made a public statement, although they did respond to a private email from one of our blog readers by saying that the Cardross Estate resigned from their organisation in 2012.

4. We asked Environment Minister Dr Aileen Mcleod when the Scottish Government will publish the recently completed Wildlife Crime Penalties Review, in light of the pathetic sentence given to O’Reilly for his barbaric crimes. One of her civil servants has issued an acknowledgement email, saying someone will respond soon.

On a related note, there’s an article here with further details about why the Sheriff didn’t give O’Reilly a more fitting punishment. It includes a suggestion from O’Reilly’s defence agent that the gamekeeper was ‘under pressure from above’. It’ll be interesting to see whether the Crown Office decides to go for a vicarious liability prosecution.

Scottish gamekeeper convicted for using a gin trap on Cardross Estate: gets community service order

James Alfred O’Reilly, 50, a Scottish gamekeeper working on the Cardross Estate in Stirlingshire, has been convicted of four wildlife crime offences, including the use of a gin trap to catch a buzzard. His punishment? It’s the usual pathetic response: he’s been ordered to carry out 240 hours of unpaid work.

Here is the press release from the Crown Office:

At Stirling Sheriff Court today, gamekeeper James O’Reilly was given a Community Payback Order and ordered to carry out 240 hours of unpaid work after having pled guilty to four charges under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.

O’Reilly was convicted at Stirling Sheriff Court on 24 April of a number of charged including the use of an illegal trap for the purposes of taking of wild birds on the Cardross Estate in March 2013. Common buzzards, red kites, goshawks and white tailed eagles can all be found nesting in or as regular visitors to the area.

A man walking his dog on the estate, at a location known as Gartur came to an open area next to a pheasant pen where a distressed buzzard was caught in a trap by its leg next to a decomposed deer carcase.

The man released the jaws of the trap from the buzzard’s leg. When it became apparent that the buzzard was unable to fly he took the bird home and called the SSPCA. The SSPCA reported the incident to the police who continued the investigation. They found an illegal trap, which by its nature and placement by the accused was calculated to cause injury to wild birds.

They also found that the accused had set a number of snares in the area. None of which had identification tags on them as required by law.

It was clear to police that there was an issue in relation to the pest control methods employed by the accused and as a result, a search warrant for his house was obtained and executed on 4 April 2013.

In the course of the search, a snare containing decomposed fox parts was found next to a pheasant pen near to accused’s home address. It was apparent that a fox had become snared and the Accused maintains that he shot the fox after it had become trapped, and left the carcase lying. Staff at the Scottish Agricultural College confirmed that the fox caught in the snare had been there for more than 24 hours and possibly from the back end of 2012.

The buzzard was examined by a veterinary surgeon who found it had a severe injury to the right leg just above the foot. He commented that the injuries would have been extremely painful for the bird and would have taken several days to occur. Treatment was provided to the bird but its condition deteriorated and the bird was euthanized on welfare ground as it would never be suitable for release back into the wild.

Notes to Editor

  1. James Alfred O’Reilly (DOB 30/06/1964) of Stirling pleaded guilty on 24 April 2015 at Stirling Sheriff Court to four offences under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 as below. He was sentenced to 240hrs Community Payback Order, on all charges cumulo:

gin trap* Between 22 March 2013 and 25 March 2013 at Gartur, Cardross Estate , Port of Menteith, you JAMES ALFRED O’REILLY did intentionally or recklessly injure and take a wild bird, namely a buzzard in that you did set a gin trap also known as a leg hold trap on open ground or other similar type of trap which was baited with a deer carcass which trapped said buzzard by the leg, injuring it whereby it had to be humanely euthanased due to its injury; CONTRARY to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Section 1(1)(a);

* between 1 February 2013 and 4 April 2013 at Tamavoid, Cardross Estate, Port of Menteith, you JAMES ALFRED O’REILLY, whilst carrying out an inspection of a snare, did find an animal, whether alive or dead, caught by said snare and did fail to release or remove said animal namely a fox; CONTRARY to Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Section 11(3)(A);

* between 1 April 2013 and 4 April 2013 at Gartur, Tamavoid and The Big Wood , Cardross Estate , Port of Menteith you JAMES ALFRED O’REILLY did set in position a snare without having been issued an identification number by the Chief Constable under Section 11A(4) of the aftermentioned Act and did set 2 snares at a stink pit , 4 snares at a pheasant release pen and 1 snare at a stink pit, all of which did not have identification tags attached; CONTRARY to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Sections 11A(1) and (5);

* Between 22 March 2013 and 25 March 2013 at Garfur, Cardross Estate, Port of Menteith you JAMES ALFRED O’REILLY did set in position a trap, namely a gin trap also known as a leg hold trap being of such a nature and so placed as to be likely to cause bodily injury to any wild birds coming into contact therewith in that said trap was set on open ground next to bait, namely a deer carcass; CONTRARY to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Section 5(1)(a).

The requirement to tag snares was introduced by the 2011 Wildlife and Natural Environment Act as part of a suite of measures aimed at improving the accountability of snaring. This requirement came into force on 1st April 2013. Under the new regime, those responsible for setting snares were required to attend a training course, prior to being given an identification number. The accused O’Reilly had been issued with such a number on 23rd March 2013 by the licensing office in Pitt Street, Glasgow.

END

So, here are some questions:

1. Is O’Reilly still employed as a gamekeeper on the Cardross Estate (where they offer driven pheasant and partridge shooting)? Emails to: enquiries@cardrossestate.com

2. Is O’Reilly a member of the Scottish Gamekeepers Association, and if so, has he now been booted out? Emails to: info@scottishgamekeepers.co.uk

3. Is the Cardross Estate a member of Scottish Land & Estates, and if so, has it now been booted out? Emails to: info@scottishlandandestates.co.uk

4. When will the review of wildlife crime penalties be published by the Scottish Government (we understand it’s been submitted) and, more importantly, when will the review’s recommendations for change be implemented? Emails to: ministerforenvironment@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

You can perhaps combine this last email with one asking the Minister when we can expect to see a General Licence restriction order enforced on land where a poisoned red kite, a poisoned peregrine, and an illegally trapped red kite have been found – see here.

UPDATE 21st May 2015: some responses to these questions here.

Police launch raptor crime awareness campaigns in Scotland, England & Wales

Police forces in England, Wales and Scotland have recently launched poster campaigns to raise awareness of crimes against birds of prey.

A couple of days ago, North Yorkshire Police announced their campaign against the illegal poisoning of raptors. They’ve produced a poster that will be distributed in rural areas including the Yorkshire Dales and the North York Moors; both of these areas are dominated by driven grouse moors and both areas are well known as raptor persecution hotspots. The posters will be displayed in National Park Centres and on parish council notice boards.

North York Police poisoning poster May 2015

Earlier this month, North Wales Police launched a campaign called Operation Raptor, aimed at targeting raptor poisoners in their region. This follows the poisoning of five peregrines last year and a suspected buzzard poisoning incident this year. The main peregrine poisoning suspects in the region are usually pigeon fanciers/racers.

Police Scotland launched their wildlife crime campaign in March (in collaboration with PAW Scotland), which involves raising awareness of all six national wildlife crime priorities, including raptor persecution.

These publicity campaigns are good to see. Excellent, in fact. However, the most important facet of tackling wildlife crime is not raising awareness (as important as that is), but what the police actually do in response to a reported wildlife crime. A recently published report on wildlife crime enforcement in Scotland revealed a catalogue of failures, including poor follow-up investigations and sometimes no follow-up at all (see here).

We’re watching with interest to see just how long it takes Police Scotland to publicise a number of raptor persecution crimes that have taken place within the last 12 months, especially those involving the use of banned poisons that have killed raptors on or very close to sporting estates with long histories of such crimes.

Buzzard shot and killed in North York Moors National Park

A breeding female buzzard has died from shotgun injuries in the North York Moors National Park. She was discovered near Old Byland.

Police Wildlife Crime Officer Jez Walmsley is investigating.

Photo via Jean Thorpe, Ryedale Wildlife Rehabilitation Centre, North Yorkshire.

BZ shot Malton April 2015