Tag: gamekeeper

Case against Scottish gamekeeper William Dick: part 5

Criminal proceedings have continued against Scottish gamekeeper William Dick.

Dick, 24, of Whitehill Cottages, Kirkmahoe, Dumfries is accused of bludgeoning and repeatedly stamping on a buzzard. The offences are alleged to have taken place in Sunnybrae, Dumfries in April 2014. Dick has denied the charges.

An intermediate diet was heard at Dumfries Sheriff Court on 24th February 2015 and was continued for another hearing due to take place on 17th March 2015. A provisional trial date has been set for 23rd March 2015, pending the outcome of the next court hearing.

Previous blogs on this case here, here, here and here

Kitten dies from Carbofuran poisoning in Midlothian

Cat poisoned Midlothian Dec 2014 Bootes - CopyAn eight-month old kitten has died after ingesting the banned poison Carbofuran.

The cat, Bootes, was found alive but fitting by the owner of Edgelaw Farm Livery near Gorebridge, Midlothian. Bootes died shortly afterwards.

Toxicology results identified Carbofuran and the SSPCA is now warning the public that this highly toxic poison is in use in the area (even though it’s been banned for 14 years and even possessing it constitutes an offence).

Carbofuran is, of course, the gamekeepers’ ‘poison of choice’ – you only need a small amount, it’s fast acting and it’s deadly. It’s the most commonly-used poison in illegal raptor persecution cases in Scotland and has been for some years.

Nobody will be at all surprised to learn that pheasant shooting is popular in the area where Bootes was poisoned.

Full article on SSPCA website here

Modern criminal

Modern Poisoner Mike Wood article March 2015 - CopyA few days ago we blogged about an attack on the campaign group Birders Against Wildlife Crime that had appeared in this month’s edition of Modern Gamekeeping (see here).

We also said we’d be blogging about another article that had been published in this industry rag. It’s a full-page spread on page 18, written by Mike Wood. Here’s the bio that accompanies this piece:

“Michael Wood is a partner at Westfield Farms in Pickering, North Yorkshire. Founded in 1953, the farm has 59 years of experience breeding game birds, including pheasant, mallard, red-leg partridge and grey partridge“.

What the bio doesn’t say is ‘Michael Wood is a criminal with eight wildlife crime convictions to his name’.

See here and here.

Interesting, eh? How many times are we told not to tar all gamekeepers with the same brush? But why should we distinguish between lawful and criminal gamekeepers when the game-shooting industry itself doesn’t seem to bother? We already know that the National Gamekeepers’ Organisation doesn’t mind that Wood has wildlife crime convictions – they’ll still accept fund-raising donations from him and Charles Nodder from the NGO will still work with the Game Farmers’ Association, even though convicted wildlife criminal Wood is the GFA’s current Chairman (see here).

So we know that Noddy and the NGO don’t shun convicted wildlife criminals. But what about BASC? Surely they’ve got standards? Hmm. Take a look at this header from the front of Modern Gamekeeping:

 Modern Poisoner header March 2015 - Copy

It’s hard to read from this image so here’s what it says:

“Modern Gamekeeping is proud to be in partnership with The British Association for Shooting and Conservation”.

Does that mean that BASC (a member of the Partnership for Action against Wildlife Crime (PAW UK)) endorses the idea that a wildlife criminal with multiple convictions should be given column inches in an industry publication to discuss the ‘management’ of his game-rearing farm? Surely not.

All in it together…?

Convicted vicarious liability landowner loses nearly £66,000 in subsidies

In January we blogged about the subsidy penalty given to Ninian Johnston Stewart, the first landowner to be convicted under vicarious liability legislation in Scotland after his gamekeeper laid out poisoned bait that killed a buzzard in 2012. At the time of Johnston Stewart’s conviction we knew that he’d lost some of his agricultural subsidy but we didn’t know how much. The only information in the public domain was the following quote from his defence agent, David McKie, who was discussing Johnston Stewart’s (derisory) fine of £675:

“He [Johnston Stewart] had already been penalised substantially via a high five-figure deduction to his Single Farm Payment“.

The size of his subsidy penalty has now been revealed in the latest edition of the RSPB’s Investigations newsletter, Legal Eagle:

“In 2012, Johnston Stewart’s business received nearly £120,000 in Single Farm Payments. Under ‘cross-compliance’ there is a requirement to comply with a number of conditions in order to receive payments. The poisoned bait and buzzard were found on land used for agriculture by the business and consequently he lost nearly £66,000 of the 2012 payment“.

That’s a good result, although you have to question why his entire 2012 subsidy (nearly £120,000) wasn’t withdrawn.

In other subsidy penalty news, regular blog readers will be aware that we’ve been trying to find out (unsuccessfully so far) whether the Stody Estate (Norfolk) has also received a subsidy penalty, following the conviction of gamekeeper Allen Lambert for poisoning 11 raptors (10 buzzards and a sparrowhawk) in 2012 and a series of other related crimes (see here, here, here, here, here and here). According to our reckoning, Stody Estate has potentially breached two Statutory Management Requirements: SMR1 (intentional killing of wild birds) and SMR9 (use of pesticides).

Thanks to the determination of one of our blog readers, here’s the latest response from the Rural Payments Agency:

12 February 2015

Ref: XXXXXX

Dear XXXXX

Re: Freedom of Information – Information Request

Thank you for your request for information dated 15 January 2015 which has been dealt with under Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FoIA).

To answer your questions:

1. Has the illegal poisoning of birds of prey carried out by an employee of the Stody Estate been reported to the RPA as a possible breach of Cross Compliance SMR1?

We can confirm that members of the public approached RPA following the media reporting of the prosecution, with several suggesting that SMR1 had been breached.

2. If the answer to the above question is yes, how many individuals have reported the potential breach to the RPA?

RPA can confirm that we have received e-mails from 20 individuals mentioning a possible breach in RPA regulations by the Stody Estate.

3. Is the RPA currently investigating a reported breach in cross-compliance at the Stody Estate relating to SMR1?

We previously answered a similar question in our response to you, reference XXXXX, and advised we do not hold any information that answers this question. RPA is obliged by European legislation to follow up these reports. We can assure you that RPA will take action, including cross compliance reductions to CAP subsidy payments, if this is found to be appropriate.

If you are not happy with the way we have handled your request, you can ask for an internal review. These requests should be submitted within two months of the date of receipt of the response to your original letter and should be addressed to: Access to Information, Rural Payments Agency, North Gate House, 21-23 Valpy Street, Reading, RG1 1AF.

Yours sincerely

Rural Payments Agency

You’d think that it would be a lot easier for members of the public to find out how their taxes have been spent, or more importantly, whether they’ve been withdrawn from those involved with criminality, wouldn’t you?

National Gamekeepers’ Org linked to another convicted wildlife criminal

Regular blog readers may recall us writing previously about the National Gamekeepers’ Organisation’s unwillingness to expel a member who had been convicted of poison offences (see here).

We found this interesting, especially as the NGO is an organisational member of the Partnership for Action Against Wildlife Crime (PAW UK) – supposedly committed to helping tackle wildlife crime. Refusing to expel a member with a criminal conviction for, er, wildlife crime, should surely have resulted in PAW UK booting them off the Partnership? Apparently not – the NGO is still there.

And now we have evidence of the NGO’s connection with another convicted wildlife criminal – Michael Wood. We blogged about Michael Wood yesterday – he’s the pheasant/partridge/duck breeder in North Yorkshire who was found guilty of permitting the use of a banned pole trap at his breeding facility – Westfield Farm. In fact, a total of FIVE pole traps had been found there, but two of Wood’s employees escaped a criminal trial because North Yorks Police decided their crimes only merited a police caution.

Thanks to some investigative work by one of our blog readers (Marco McGinty), it turns out that the NGO accepted a fundraising donation from Michael Wood for their 2014 auction. Now, Wood hadn’t been convicted of the pole-trapping offence at that time, but he had been convicted, along with his company Yorks Sports Ltd., of seven offences under the Wildlife & Countryside Act in 2011 – these offences related to the unlawful release of thousands of pheasants (for shooting) which caused ‘significant damage’ to a noted conservation area in the Farndale valley (see here). So why did the NGO accept a fundraising donation from him in 2014?

NGO auction catalogue 2014 Mike Wood donation - Copy

Not only that, but as we mentioned yesterday, the NGO’s PR and political advisor, Charles Nodder, is also the Game Farmers’ Association’s contact for media and political enquiries. The current Chair of the Game Farmers’ Association is…..Michael Wood.

And let’s not forget the NGO’s recent attack on another PAW UK partner organisation – the RSPB (see here).

Isn’t it time the PAW UK Steering Group is asked to justify the continued membership of the National Gamekeepers’ Organisation as a partner member of PAW UK? Let’s ask them. Emails will have to be sent to the PAW UK Secretariat and ask for your message to be forwarded to the Steering Group. Emails to: paw.secretariat@defra.gsi.gov.uk  We’ll be very interested to hear what the Steering Group has to say.

Masked gunmen caught on camera attacking goshawk nest in Cairngorms National Park

Police Scotland and the RSPB have released video footage showing a gang of masked gunmen attacking a goshawk nest in the Cairngorms National Park.

The gunmen, wearing balaclavas, were filmed on a secret camera set up to monitor the nest site on Forestry Commission Scotland land at Glen Nochty, Strathdon. They made at least four visits to the nest tree – 14th May 2014 at 10.26hrs and again at 20.08hrs, and 15th May 2014 at 09.11hrs and again at 20.01hrs.

The video has been released in an appeal for information – nine months after the crimes were committed.

You can watch it here. [Update: this video appears to have been removed from YouTube. You can still see it on BBC News website here]

Interestingly, this FCS forest is very close to the boundaries of three grouse moor estates. Now, it’s not apparent from the video whether the criminals are gamekeepers (hard to tell when they wear balaclavas) but we’ll take an educated guess that it isn’t a gang of District Nurses having a bit of recreational downtime in between home visits, out for a little spot of armed trespass, dressed up in camouflage and firing bullets at the nest of a protected species. A species that just happens to be hated by those involved with game-bird shooting.

Media coverage:

BBC news (with a quote from Environment Minister Aileen McLeod) here

RSPB Scotland press statement here

There’s actually been a great deal of media coverage, which is excellent, including P&J, Daily Record, STV News, and the video was broadcast on Reporting Scotland. Strangely, no publicity from the SGA….

Amusingly, this shocking video footage coincides with a campaign currently being run by the Countryside Alliance who are lobbying for police to ‘unmask’ hunt sabs. In the longer term, they also want the next Government to review the law around wearing balaclavas. You can read their campaign notes here – and they really are worth a few minutes of your time. The Countryside Alliance should be careful what they wish for – there’ll be a lot of gamekeepers who won’t be happy if they’re banned from covering their faces while committing their crimes (see recent convictions of balaclava-wearing criminal gamekeepers such as George Mutch and Glenn Brown).

Countryside Alliance masked thugs - Copy

Gamekeeper Neil Wainwright faces trial for alleged mis-use of trap

Shropshire gamekeeper Neil Gordon Wainwright is to face trial accused of alleged mis-use of a Larsen trap in July 2014.

At a plea hearing at Shrewsbury Magistrates last week, Wainwright denied possessing a Larsen trap at Birch Hill Wood in Gatten, Stiperstones on 22 and 28 July 2014. He also denied charges relating to using live quail in the trap to catch wild birds.

He did, however, plead guilty to three other charges relating to the storage of firearms, ammunition, and poison. He admitted failing to comply with his firearms licence by not keeping his ammunition in a secured cabinet at his home on 5th August 2014. He also admitted failing to keep the poison Phostoxin in a secure manner on 5th August 2014.

Wainwright, 54, of Norbury near Bishop’s Castle, will next appear before a District Judge at Telford Magistrates Court on 8th May 2015.

News item from Shropshire Star Jan 2015 here

News item from Shropshire Star Feb 2015 here

North Yorks Tory candidate thinks grouse shooting is ace

Kevin Hollinrake is the Conservative’s prospective parliamentary candidate, standing in the next general election for the Thirsk & Malton constituency, a Tory ‘safe seat’ in North Yorkshire.

Kevin Hollinrake is an estate agent.

Here are his views on grouse shooting in North Yorkshire, as reported in a local newspaper yesterday:

GROUSE shooting on the North Yorkshire Moors is worth millions of pounds to the local economy, says Kevin Hollinrake, prospective Conservative parliamentary candidate for Thirsk and Malton, much of which covers the moors.

Speaking at a meeting with landowners, managers and gamekeepers at Lastingham, he said that grouse moor management was worth some £67 million and provided some 1,500 jobs, as well as safeguarding 860,000 acres of heather moorland.

He praised a £52.5 million annual spend on conservation on the moors, adding that the Moorland Association had played a key part in DEFRA’S hen harrier recovery plan, and lobbied for a crack down on wildlife crime.

“We have in this country, 75 percent of what is left of the world’s heather moorland. Shooting creates the necessary income for its upkeep, along with 42,500 days of work a year.

“It benefits many rural people, from food suppliers to hoteliers and clothing manufacturers to dry stone wallers. When calls are made to ban or licence driven grouse shooting, thought is seldom given to the harmful consequences to rural economies and conservation.”

END

It’s good that he’s lobbying for a crack down on wildlife crime – North Yorkshire is recognised as the worst county in the UK for reported raptor persecution incidents, a title it has held for six of the past seven years (see here), so he’s got his work cut out. It is, of course, purely coincidental that the dominant land-use in North Yorkshire is driven grouse shooting.

In the same article, the following appears:

Robert Benson, chairman of the Moorland Association, said that thanks to careful moorland management and co-operation of gamekeepers, had led to the successful fledgling of 16 hen harrier chicks.

“On the North York Moors we have seen notable improvements in a number of other ‘at risk’ species, such as endangered lapwing, curlew and ring ouzel. Breeding records for merlin are four times more abundant where there are game keepers.”

Mr Benson said peatland habitats, damaged by wildfires, bracken, over-grazing and historic drainage, had been restored. “This helps capture carbon and improve water quality,” he added.

“Without the work and passion of our gamekeepers and land managers, working in tandem with farmers, many moors would revert to scrub and be lost to all those who depend on them.”

END

Surely Mr Benson isn’t trying to suggest that the fledging of 16 hen harrier chicks last year can be hailed as some sort of success? It’s “thanks to careful moorland management and co-operation of gamekeepers” that only four hen harrier nests in the whole of England managed to produce young last year (none of which were on grouse moors in North Yorkshire) – what happened to the other 300+ pairs? Perhaps Mr Benson needs a new soundbite: “Breeding records for hen harriers are 75 times less abundant where there are gamekeepers”.

If you think Mr Hollinrake and Mr Benson are talking out of their arses, you can join 20,767 others who have signed a petition to ban driven grouse shooting HERE

Gamekeeper trial collapses after court dismisses RSPB video evidence

The case against Head gamekeeper Ian Sleightholm of the Bolton Hall Estate in North Yorkshire collapsed yesterday after magistrates at Northallerton ruled the RSPB’s video evidence inadmissible.

Sleightholm had been accused of alleged mis-use of a cage trap – specifically that the trap he was operating did not have adequate shade and that the water provided was unsuitable, in contravention of the terms of the General Licence.

The court ruled that the RSPB’s video evidence amounted to ‘an abuse of process’ because RSPB investigations staff “were trespassing on another farmer’s land when they visited the site, saw the trap and set up covert surveillance cameras”. The court ruled that because Sleightholm was unaware of the cameras, ‘he didn’t have the opportunity to discuss the issues with the RSPB or prepare his defence’ and this denied the accused the opportunity of a fair trial.

Eh?

The magistrates also ruled that the case should be dismissed because the only evidence put forward was photographic. It was argued that samples of the water should also have been collected to determine whether it was suitable or unsuitable drinking water.

This is fascinating. According to the terms of the English General Licence (under which Sleightholm was operating the trap), the following criteria apply:

“Water must always be available to decoy birds and drinkable; it should be free from chemical additives and changed regularly to ensure that it is clean“.

As far as we’re aware, there is no legally-binding definition of what constitutes ‘drinkable’ water for birds. There’s plenty of legislation defining ‘drinkable’ water that is fit for human consumption (e.g. The European Drinking Water Directive) but these standards are unlikely to be applicable to water provided for decoy birds. So quite what test parameters the magistrates would be looking for to demonstrate that the water was suitable or unsuitable is a bit of a mystery.

We’d have thought that it’s pretty obvious when water is ‘clean’ or not, and photographic evidence should suffice. If the water container contains, say, green sludge, most people would consider that to be unclean. The terms of the General Licence do not define what constitutes “changed regularly” – does that mean daily, weekly, monthly, annually? Once again, the vagueness of the General Licence conditions do not stand up to legal scrutiny.

The collapse of this case is a bit of a surprise. Video evidence has long been considered admissible in English courts (as opposed to the difficulty of using it in the Scottish courts) and it’ll be interesting to see how the ruling in this case affects future cases where video evidence plays a central role in the prosecution’s case.

As you can imagine, there has been much crowing from the Dark Side about this result, and we were particularly interested in the following tweet from Duncan Thomas:

Duncan Thomas tweet RSPB covert video case

The name Duncan Thomas may sound familiar to some of you. He is a former Police Wildlife Liaison Officer with Lancashire Constabulary and now works as the North West Regional Officer for BASC. We recently blogged about him here. BASC is a member of the Partnership for Action against Wildlife Crime (PAW). Do you think his published opinion (which, incidentally, was also re-tweeted by the National Gamekeepers Organisation) is conducive to ‘partnership’ working, or do you think it exposes the ‘partnership’ sham for what it actually is?

UPDATE 20:00hrs: Does the spokesman of the National Gamekeeper’s Organisation have a headmaster fetish?

Jailing raptor-killing gamekeepers ‘not the answer’, says Robertson

Alastair Robertson Scotsman 24 Jan 2015The fall-out from the shock custodial sentence for raptor-killing gamekeeper George Mutch continues….

The following appeared in yesterday’s Scotsman weekend magazine (24th January 2015). It’s the regular country sports column written by Alastair Robertson, the pro-game shooting journalist who also contributes to Daily Mail, Mail on Sunday, Telegraph, The Sun, Country Life & The Field.

“I only met George Mutch a few times. We were both in the beating line on a local shoot early in the season. Later, when I was shooting myself as a guest of a friend on Donside, I spotted him with his dogs picking up behind the guns. “Changed days from beating”, we laughed. Like most keepers he was helping out on the next door shoot for a few quid and a dram. At the time Mutch’s name didn’t mean anything until I spotted his face on Raptor Persecution Scotland, a website dedicated to the iniquities of gamekeepers and the game shooting world and a site which I highly recommend to anyone who likes shooting.

Which is why Mutch’s photo had appeared. He was captured on a hidden RSPB “research” camera killing goshawks caught in a vermin trap on Kildrummy where he ran the pheasant shoot.

His jailing for four months is being hailed as a breakthrough by the anti-shooting lobby which for years has complained that the government, police and courts have underrated the seriousness of wildlife crime. Perhaps, in their unofficial minds, police put the discomfort of birds rather further down their list of priorities than domestic violence, paedophilia, rape and drink-driving. But now the worm has turned. Mutch is the first keeper to be jailed for killing a raptor. The sad thing is that there is little understanding really on either side of the raptor argument.

The comments on Raptor Persecution following Mutch’s jailing were largely of the “Yippee, serves him right” sort. On the other side there are clipped official statements deploring wildlife crime, while among keepers and shooters a sullen silent resentment pervades that the RSPB, generally loathed for its interfering ways, has somehow “won”.

The only sensible comment I have seen, on the Raptor Persecution site as it happens, is that instead of jailing Mutch at great expense he should have been sent, possibly as a community service order, to work on an RSPB reserve. This may have been a joke and I missed it. But at least the reserve wouldn’t have any vermin problems.

The Mutch affair will inevitably increase demand to ban all legitimate live traps which keepers use to keep down vermin. It might, however, be better to turn the whole bird of prey argument on its head. Instead of trying to catch keepers at it, pay them a bounty for all raptors caught, logged and/or released. Poachers turned gamekeepers as it were. If, as the anti-shooting/raptor lobby insist, raptor persecution is widespread, then what is the point of conducting a war of low level attrition in the countryside which no-one is winning? Banging up Mutch pour encourager les autres isn’t the answer”.

END

So, no real surprises. Gamekeepers and shooters apparently ‘loathe’ the RSPB for ‘interfering’ (= catching raptor-killing gamekeepers and reporting them to the police). Oh, and killing raptors doesn’t really merit a custodial sentence because it doesn’t rank as a priority crime, even though the Government and Police Scotland have both stated that tackling wildlife crime IS a priority, and even though the penalty available for EACH offence could be a £5,000 fine and/or a six month custodial sentence. Some would say Mutch got off lightly with just a four-month jail sentence.

Instead of trying to catch gamekeepers at it, Robertson’s theory is that gamekeepers should be paid a bounty for each raptor they manage not to kill. A bit like giving a bank robber a bounty for each bank he manages to walk past without robbing it. ‘Ah, well done lad, you’ve managed to go a whole day without committing a crime – here, have some tax-payer’s money in recognition of your self-control’.

Talking of Mutch, we were interested to receive a photo taken on a grouse moor in September 2014.  This was on Edinglassie Estate in Aberdeenshire. Edinglassie is an award-winning estate, receiving the GWCT’s Golden Plover Award in 2013 for their progressive & sustainable moorland management, and becoming WES-accredited (SLE’s Wildlife Estates Scotland thing). Is that George Mutch, clearing the butts after a drive? Who would employ Mutch to help out on a game shoot? (There’s no more helping out for a few quid and a dram – new rules mean that, unless in exceptional circumstances, HMRC views beaters etc as ’employees’ for tax purposes). Interesting. Although to be fair, in September he was still denying his guilt and hadn’t yet been convicted (that came in Dec). Can’t imagine an esteemed estate like Edinglassie would employ him now he’s been convicted of raptor persecution…..