Press release from Hen Harrier Action, 7th August 2024:
FOUR YOUNG HEN HARRIERS SATELLITE TAGGED THANKS TO GENEROSITY OF WILDLIFE CHARITY SUPPORTERS
Uplands conservation charity Hen Harrier Action has just released full details of the four young Hen Harriers satellite tagged with funds raised by the charity’s supporters in a Christmas Appeal. The appeal aimed to raise enough money to fund four tags, and the donations poured in. In just 10 days the Christmas Appeal reached, and then exceeded, its ambitious target.
The satellite tags have been fitted to four young Hen Harriers, two that fledged in England, one in Wales and one in Scotland.
The tags, fitted by experts from the RSPB and Northern England Raptor Forum, will allow dedicated staff at the RSPB to monitor the birds’ movements throughout their lifespan.
Two English Hen Harriers fledged in the Forest of Bowland
The two English Hen Harriers, Sita and Binbeal, fledged in the Forest of Bowland. Sita, a female, is named for the Hindu Goddess of self-sacrifice and dedication – a fitting name for a female Hen Harrier who will hopefully go on to breed and fiercely defend her chicks.
And Binbeal, a male, is named for the Australian Aboriginal spirit of rainbows. In the mythology, he is the son of Bunjil, the creator deity often depicted as a Wedge-tailed Eagle.
Scottish and Welsh Hen Harriers
The Scottish Hen Harrier, a female, named Gilda by the Scottish Raptor Study Group, fledged at the Tarras Valley Nature Reserve, the ambitious community-led rewilding project. One of four chicks, Gilda has two sisters and a brother. In Old English, the name means golden.
And the Welsh bird, a male called Adar, fledged in North Wales, named after the medieval Welsh word for birds.
Battling the British Weather
After the unusually wet and dreary Spring and early Summer, it was challenging for the teams out in the field fitting satellite tags to the young Hen Harriers in the nest.
Steve Downing, Chair of the Northern England Raptor Forum and a veteran of satellite tagging projects, commented on the challenges: “It is always challenging and this year was no different with the occasional hot day; but predominantly the weather was dominated by cold, persistently wet days throughout the breeding season. Now we wish them and the other members of the 2024 cohort fair weather and a following wind to take them away from the threat of persecution and on to a long and successful life.”
For those who want to find out more about hen harriers and their illegal persecution in the UK, this year’s Hen Harrier Day, organised by Hen Harrier Action, takes place this Saturday (10th August) at Carsington Water in Derbyshire. For more details about this free event, please click here.
Two criminal investigations are underway following the discovery of two dead hen harriers earlier this spring.
According to Natural England’s most recent update on the fates of its satellite-tagged hen harriers (updates are periodical – the most recent was April 2024), the following two harriers have been found dead, one at an undisclosed location in Northumberland and another at an undisclosed location in Devon:
Hen harrier ‘Susie’, female, Tag ID: 201122, satellite-tagged in Cumbria on 21 July 2020. Date of last transmission: 12 February 2024 in Northumberland. Notes: “Recovered awaiting PM” [post mortem].
Hen harrier R2-M1-23, male, Tag ID: 213927, satellite-tagged as part of the brood meddling trial /sham on 19 July 2023 at site BM-R2-Cumbria. Date of last transmission: 7 March 2024 in Devon. Notes: “Recovered awaiting PM”.
You might remember ‘Susie’ – she’s the hen harrier whose chicks were brutally stamped on and crushed to death in their nest on a grouse moor in Whernside in the Yorkshire Dales National Park, in June 2022 (here).
I hadn’t seen any media about the latest two dead hen harriers so in May I submitted an FoI to Natural England to ask for the details of the post mortem reports to determine whether they’d been killed illegally.
Natural England responded in June and told me the information was being withheld under Regulation 12(5)(b) which states:
“A public authority may refuse to disclose information to the extent that its disclosure would adversely affect: (b) the course of justice, the ability of a person to receive a fair trial or the ability of a public authority to conduct an enquiry of a criminal or disciplinary nature”.
Natural England also told me:
“Natural England can confirm the investigations for the two Hen Harriers cases are live. As such it is our view that this exception covers the information we hold in scope of your request and therefore we are withholding because if it were to be disclosed at this stage it could comprise the result and have a serious impact on the ongoing process and proceedings“.
Natural England’s response suggests that criminality is indeed suspected but I’ll await confirmation before adding these two to the ever-growing list of hen harriers that have been illegally killed / disappeared in suspicious circumstances since the brood meddling sham began in 2018 (the running tally currently stands as 123 hen harriers).
These are the second and third known investigations this year, following the suspicious disappearance of a hen harrier called ‘Shalimar’ on a grouse moor in the Angus Glens on 15 February 2024 (see here).
Although I was at a wildlife crime forum in London last month where a police officer from the NWCU’s Hen Harrier Taskforce told the audience that there were currently five investigations ongoing, although no details were provided.
Last week I blogged about how the Moorland Association (grouse moor owners’ lobby group in England) had been booted off the ‘partnership’ designed to tackle illegal raptor persecution in England and Wales (the Raptor Persecution Priority Delivery Group – RPPDG), after the Moorland Association had published an inflammatory blog that looked to be an attempt to sabotage the National Wildlife Crime Unit’s (NWCU) new Hen Harrier Taskforce (see here).
Grouse shooting butts in Yorkshire Dales National Park. Photo by Ruth Tingay
It seems that the Moorland Association’s inflammatory blog wasn’t an isolated incident, but more like the last straw for the NWCU.
A series of FoI responses has revealed some fascinating correspondence between the Moorland Association and the NWCU, about the Hen Harrier Taskforce, in the run up to the Moorland Association being booted out of the RPPDG last week.
I’ll post some of the correspondence below (there’s more to come) and although the names of the individuals have been redacted, it’s clear to me (from some other information released) that the Moorland Association’s correspondent is CEO Andrew Gilruth.
You can see that the Moorland Association is following a familiar line that we’ve seen from shooting industry organisations in recent years – that of putting pressure on the police to change the narrative on raptor persecution crimes (e.g. BASC did it here; National Gamekeepers Organisation did it here and again here) but this time the NWCU has called it out and has suggested that the Moorland Association is “wasting time and distracting from the real work” [i.e. that of tackling illegal raptor persecution, in this case hen harriers].
The Moorland Association’s response is to accuse the NWCU of “entirely unprofessional conduct” (cue official complaint). From what I’ve read, the NWCU has acted with patience and professionalism in the face of an arrogant and disruptive influence.
The following two files show correspondence between the NWCU and the Moorland Association from 21 December 2023 – 10 June 2024 and from 20 June 2024 – 8 July 2024:
This year is the 10th anniversary of Hen Harrier Day and it’ll be marked by an event at Carsington Water in Derbyshire on Saturday 10th August.
This year’s event is organised by the charity Hen Harrier Action and runs from 11am – 4.45pm on Saturday 10th Aug. Entry is free although you’ll have to pay for parking (calculated by the hour, max of £7 for the day).
The programme for the day looks like this:
In addition to events on the main stage, there’ll be over 20 stalls from the following organisations:
I’ll be there with my fellow co-directors from Wild Justice – Mark Avery and Chris Packham, and we’ll be looking back on the first ten years of Hen Harrier Day campaigning and looking forward to what comes next.
I hope to see some of you there – especially any of the #Sodden570 who were there when it all began amidst Hurricane Bertha at Derwent Dam!
For full details of this year’s event at Carsington Water please click here.
Eight hen harrier chicks have fledged on the Tarras Valley Nature Reserve this year, continuing to buck the trend in south Scotland.
The results of last year’s national Hen Harrier Survey demonstrated a steep regional population decline of 32% across the Southern Uplands and of four Special Protection Areas (SPAs) designated for hen harriers in this region, they were only breeding successfully in one – Tarras Valley.
Three of this year’s eight chicks have been satellite tagged – two females (siblings) and a male – with funding provided by the RSPB and charity Hen Harrier Action.
The three were named Ceilidh, Gilda and Red by Langholm Academy’s Head Girl and Boy and members of the raptor group and were tagged by licensed fieldworkers from the RSPB.
Photos of Ceilidh, Gilda and Red, copyright RSPB Scotland:
Tarras Valley was previously a driven grouse moor (known as Langholm Moor) but was bought from Buccleuch Estate a couple of years ago after an epic fundraising effort and is now a community-owned nature reserve, supported by the Langholm Initiative.
The Tarras Valley Nature Reserve team is working towards the development of a five-year action plan and many restoration projects are already underway – have a look around the TVNR website here to see what’s already been started and what else is planned.
Unsurprisingly, there are some in the grouse shooting industry who have been, and continue to be, critical of this community-owned project and seem desperate for it to fail, or at least for it to be perceived as a failure.
I mentioned last month that the Chairman of the Scottish Gamekeepers Association, Alex Hogg, recently told a Parliamentary Committee that the Tarras Valley Nature Reserve was a “species desert” and “there is nothing there at all” [now that it’s no longer being managed as a driven grouse moor].
His assessment seemed to be based not on any detailed surveys he’d undertaken, but on a single car journey he made recently over the moor. He obviously missed the hen harriers and all the other resident and visiting birds, not to mention all the other species that have been recorded on site in the last couple of years.
It’s a common theme, this slagging-off former grouse moors that are now part of a significant rewilding effort, because the gamebird shooting industry wants everyone to believe that managing a moor for grouse is the best and only suitable option for the land.
Some grouse moors do have big numbers of wader species, that’s without doubt, but it’s not a good indicator of wider biodiversity on the moor. The main reason those waders do well is because predators are ruthlessly and systematically destroyed, some legally, others illegally, for the benefit of producing an artificially-high population of red grouse for paying guests to shoot at. The benefit to the waders is simply a convenient by-product of that.
Well done to the team at Tarras Valley Nature Reserve and the army of volunteers who are helping to encourage a wide suite of habitats and species to re-establish and thrive here, including those hen harriers.
The grouse moor owners’ lobby group in England, the Moorland Association, has at long last been booted off the Raptor Persecution Priority Delivery Group (RPPDG), the so-called partnership for tackling raptor persecution crimes in England & Wales.
The trigger for this expulsion seems to have been the Moorland Association’s inflammatory blog earlier this month where it looked to be trying to sabotage the work of the police’s new National Hen Harrier Taskforce (I wrote about it, here).
The Moorland Association has now posted a new blog (here) where it claims to be ‘perplexed’ about its expulsion from the RPPDG:
Hilariously, in addition to being ‘perplexed and ‘bemused’, the Moorland Association’s response includes this line, which made me laugh out loud:
“We regret this decision, as the Moorland Association has been a loyal member of the group since it was established and has arguably achieved more than any other partner in reducing wildlife crime, with bird of prey numbers at record highs“.
I’ve written about the failure of the RPPDG many times since its inception in 2011, and have argued that it simply won’t work when there is a clear conflict of interest amongst some of the ‘partners’ whose sole intention seems to be to undermine progression on tackling these crimes. We’ve seen similar when the Peak District Bird of Prey Initiative collapsed last year (here).
From the beginning, the RPPDG has been dominated by organisations from the game shooting industry and the group’s perpetual lack of results (it’s achieved precisely nothing in terms of effectively tackling raptor persecution) has been consistently supported by a series of Tory DEFRA Ministers whose wilful blindness has been off the scale (e.g. Therese Coffey here, Rebecca Pow here, Richard Benyon here, Rebecca Pow again here, Richard Benyon again here, and Trudy Harrison here).
Let’s see what happens with the RPPDG now the Moorland Association has been removed from its position of influence.
Well done to Chief Inspector Kev Kelly, head of the National Wildlife Crime Unit (and current stand-in Chair of the RPPDG) for a courageous (and in my view, long overdue) decision to remove the Moorland Association from the RPPDG. I imagine he considered the consequences of making such a decision (i.e. a nasty, spiteful backlash from certain quarters) but decided the potential benefits to the partnership outweighed the cost. It’s an impressive example of integrity and I applaud him for it.
UPDATE 1 August 2024: Police call out Moorland Association for “wasting time & distracting from the real work” of Hen Harrier Taskforce (here)
UPDATE 22 November 2024: Revealed: letter of expulsion to Andrew Gilruth (CEO, Moorland Association) from Head of National Wildlife Crime Unit (here)
A couple of weeks ago I blogged about the new National Hen Harrier Taskforce – a police-led initiative to tackle the ongoing persecution of hen harriers on driven grouse moors (see here).
This hen harrier was euthanised after suffering catastrophic injuries in an illegal trap set next to its nest on a grouse moor in 2019. Photo by Ruth Tingay
The Taskforce’s proposed strategy for tackling hen harrier persecution on grouse moors is based on a new framework designed to tackle all types of Serious Organised Crime that was launched by the Home Office last year (see here). It’s based on a three-step plan of ‘Clear, Hold, Build‘.
Step one (‘Clear‘) involves police officers relentlessly pursuing organised crime members within a community (or in this case, an industry), using all available powers to ‘clear’ the offenders from specific locations.
Step two (‘Hold‘) sees officers undertake continued high visibility activity to ensure other serious organised criminals can’t move in and operate in the vacuum created by step one.
Step three (‘Build‘) relates to building local community resilience and trust, through partnership-working, to ensure that Serious Organised Crime doesn’t reoccur at that location.
When I wrote about the Taskforce a few weeks ago (here) I mentioned a similar police initiative, called Operation Artemis, that was launched to tackle hen harrier persecution on grouse moors in 2004, some twenty years ago. That initiative crashed and burned within three years because grouse moor owners refused to cooperate with the police. The new Taskforce has a more sophisticated theoretical approach and stronger enforcement support, but the basic premise is the same: establish a partnership between landowners and the police to target the hen harrier killers.
However, as we’ve come to learn, partnership-working is only successful if all partners have the same objective and there are no conflicts of interest.
In an extraordinary blog posted on the Moorland Association’s website on 8 July 2024, (the Moorland Association is the lobby group representing grouse moor owners in England), it is suggested that the police are ‘bypassing regulation’ by asking grouse moor owners to sign a letter giving permission for the police to enter land at any time and use equipment for the prevention and detection of crime. This includes the installation of cameras, proximity alarms and other equipment on and around hen harrier nest and roost sites.
The Moorland Association is advising its members not to sign any letters authorising police access without first taking legal advice because, it suggests, this is an attempt to ‘bypass regulation on surveillance’.
I don’t see any issue with the Moorland Association advising its members to seek legal advice – that’s standard due diligence – but to state that the police are ‘bypassing regulation on surveillance‘ seems to me to be incendiary.
Here is a copy of the Moorland Association’s blog, screen grabbed here because it has already been altered from its original version (more on that below).
I’m not sure who wrote the Moorland Association’s blog because there’s no name attached to it but my money would be on the author being the Moorland Association’s CEO, Andrew Gilruth. Why do I think that? Well Mr Gilruth built an impressive reputation for presenting distorted information when he worked as Director for Communications for the GWCT (e.g. see here, here and especially here) and the Moorland Association’s blog has all the familiar hallmarks.
For example, the opening paragraph of the Moorland Association’s blog goes like this:
‘Most will remember the irony of RSPB staff falling foul of the courts in order to try and catch others breaking the law – and then expressing outrage when their evidence was thrown out of court here. In short, judges felt the police could not use others to circumvent the law on covert surveillance‘.
I’m not sure of the relevance of including this statement about the RSPB’s video evidence in the context of the Moorland Association’s blog about police surveillance, other than to (a) try yet again to undermine the credibility of the RSPB and (b) contrive an image that the police have previously ‘used others’ to ‘circumvent the law on covert surveillance‘.
It is accurate for the Moorland Association to point to the court case in 2015 where the judge ruled the RSPB’s video evidence as inadmissible. As regular blog readers will know, there have been a number of court cases where the RSPB’s evidence has been ruled inadmissible (e.g. here and here) but what the Moorland Association’s blog conveniently fails to point out is that there have also been a number of cases where the RSPB’s video evidence has been accepted by the courts and has, in fact, been crucial to the conviction of criminal gamekeepers, including these recent cases in 2022 here, again in 2022 here, and in 2023 here.
Far from the police ‘using others to circumvent the law‘, the police have worked legitimately and lawfully in partnership with the RSPB many times to convict criminal gamekeepers, both with and without the use of covert surveillance.
This successful partnership really agitates many in the game-shooting industry and I’d argue that’s the reason the Moorland Association’s blog opens with that paragraph – to infer that the police have a track record of ‘circumventing the law on covert surveillance‘ and to place this thought firmly in their members’ minds before moving on to discuss why the Moorland Association believes the police’s latest tactics on the Hen Harrier Taskforce are of ‘concern‘.
The rest of the blog appears to be a distortion of what the police are asking landowners to do. It’s surely obvious that the police aren’t asking landowners for permission to undertake covert surveillance – it would hardly be ‘covert’ if they’re telling the landowner that’s what they intend to do!
Rather, what it seems the police are actually asking for is permission to visit the moor at any time (Step one of the three-step strategy) and to install equipment (including proximity alarms and cameras) ‘on and around nest and roost sites‘, to catch the criminals that are killing hen harriers. You know, the criminals that the landowners and their gamekeepers claim to have no knowledge of, but who are repeatedly turning up on their estates, armed, to commit serious crime.
This isn’t covert surveillance in the sense of spying on people who live and work on that estate – hen harriers don’t tend to nest close to people’s houses and, as hen harriers are a Schedule 1 protected species, nobody should be anywhere near their nest sites without a disturbance licence anyway, so the likelihood of a landowner or their employees being ‘covertly surveyed’ by a nest camera is pretty implausible, assuming they’re not involved in the crimes being committed at those sites.
I note that the Moorland Association blog appears to have been edited since it first appeared on 8th July – it now includes a ‘note’ (under the sub-header ‘Should I sign oneofthese letters?‘) to clarify the police’s position that what they are asking for does not amount to covert surveillance. That’s an interesting edit. I wonder if it’s been added on legal advice to try and soften the Moorland Association’s accusations against the police? I imagine the police’s reaction to the Moorland Association’s original blog would not be favourable, given that it’s not conducive to partnership working and also seems to be verging on defamation.
The wider context of this Moorland Association blog is of most interest to me. Here is an organisation that repeatedly claims to have a ‘zero tolerance’ policy against raptor persecution, and yet here it is giving a pretty good impression of an organisation intent on sabotaging the police’s attempts to tackle raptor persecution (as well as other Serious Organised Crime) on grouse moors.
If I was a landowner, and armed criminals were repeatedly coming on to my estate to kill protected wildlife, I’d be on the phone to the police without hesitation, asking them to respond. Not just for the sake of the wildlife but for the safety of my family, my employees, my neighbours and the visiting public. I’d be asking for an armed response unit and would give them permission to do whatever they thought necessary, for however long it took to catch the gunmen. Wouldn’t this be the response of any reasonable, law-abiding citizen who had nothing to hide?
It’ll be fascinating to see what the police’s response is to the Moorland Association’s blog, assuming they’ve seen it. From the presentations I’ve heard from DI Mark Harrison, the officer from the National Wildlife Crime Unit (NWCU) leading the National Hen Harrier Taskforce, he’s playing strictly by the rules, being transparent, and initially taking a softly, softly approach with landowners, refusing to embarrass estates by naming them publicly as hen harrier persecution hotspots because he wants to work in partnership with them.
Hen Harrier Taskforce approach, presented by DI Harrison at a recent seminar. Photo: Ruth Tingay
I’ve been cynical of his ‘partnership’ approach and have suggested that all he’s doing is shielding the criminals. However, DI Harrison has been very clear that his tactics are part of a longer-term strategy and that if landowners refuse to cooperate, it makes it easier for him to take the next step and upgrade the tactics to something far more serious.
The Taskforce isn’t just looking at wildlife crime. It is also intent on tackling offences such as theft (of satellite tags), criminal damage (of satellite tags), fraud offences, criminal use of firearms, and potential conspiracy offences relating to encouraging or assisting crime. Some of these are very serious offences, triable either way (i.e. can be heard in a higher court that has greater sentencing powers than a magistrates court) and thus there are more serious consequences for anyone convicted of these offences than being convicted for a wildlife crime offence.
The tactics that he’ll be empowered to use are far more intrusive than anything these grouse moor estates will have faced before, he won’t need their permission to deploy them and they won’t know what’s happening until it’s too late.
Let’s see if the Moorland Association’s inflammatory blog will trigger a response from DI Harrison and the NWCU, resulting in the Taskforce ramping up its tactics on any grouse shooting estates where a landowner refuses to sign up.
UPDATE 23 July 2024: Moorland Association booted off the Raptor Persecution Priority Delivery Group (RPPDG) here
UPDATE 22 November 2024: Revealed: letter of expulsion to Andrew Gilruth (CEO, Moorland Association) from Head of National Wildlife Crime Unit (here)
The Scotsman has published my opinion piece today about the potential impact of the new licensing scheme for grouse shooting in Scotland.
You can read it on The Scotsman website (here) and it’s reproduced below:
I call them ‘The Untouchables’. Those within the grouse-shooting industry who have been getting away with illegally killing golden eagles, and other raptor species such as hen harriers, buzzards and red kites, for decades.
They don’t fear prosecution because there are few people around those remote, privately owned glens to witness the ruthless and systematic poisoning, trapping and shooting of these iconic birds. If the police do come looking, more often than not they’re met with an Omertá-esque wall of silence from those who, with an archaic Victorian mindset, still perceive birds of prey to be a threat to their lucrative red grouse shooting interests.
For a successful prosecution, Police Scotland and the Crown Office must be able to demonstrate “beyond reasonable doubt” that a named individual committed the crime. As an example of how difficult this is, in 2010 a jar full of golden eagle leg rings was found on a mantelpiece during a police raid of a gamekeeper’s house in the Highlands. Each of those unique leg ring numbers could be traced back to an individual eagle.
The gamekeeper couldn’t account for how he came to be in possession of those rings, but the police couldn’t prove that he had killed those eagles and cut off their legs to remove the rings as trophies.
Despite the remains of two red kites, six illegal traps, an illegally trapped hen harrier and poisoned bait also being found on the estate, the gamekeeper was fined a mere £1,500 for being in possession of one dead red kite, that was found mutilated in the back of his estate vehicle.
In another case in 2010, three golden eagles were found poisoned on a grouse-shooting estate in the Highlands over just a few weeks. Even though the police found an enormous cache of the lethal poison – carbofuran – locked in a shed to which the head gamekeeper held a key, they couldn’t demonstrate that he was the person who had laid the poisoned baits that had killed the eagles. This meant he was fined £3,300 for the possession of the banned poison, but wasn’t prosecuted for killing the eagles.
In recent years, researchers have been fitting small satellite tags to young golden eagles which allows us to track their movements across Scotland, minute by minute. Analysis has shown that between 2004 and 2016, almost one third of tagged eagles (41 of 131 birds) ‘disappeared’ in suspicious circumstances, mostly on or next to grouse moors.
Satellite-tagged golden eagle prior to fledging. This eagle was tagged in 2014, ‘disappeared’ on a Strathbraan grouse moor in 2016 and it’s satellite tag was found wrapped in heavy lead sheeting in the River Braan in 2020. Photo by Duncan Orr-Ewing
The lengths the criminals will go to avoid detection were exposed in 2020 when a walker found a satellite tag that had been cut off an eagle, wrapped in heavy lead sheeting – presumably to block the signal – and dumped in the River Braan. The tag’s unique identification number told us it belonged to a young eagle tagged in the Trossachs in 2014. This eagle had disappeared without trace from a Perthshire grouse moor in 2016, in an area where eight other tagged eagles had vanished in similar suspicious circumstances. Nobody has been prosecuted.
The remains of the satellite tag that had been cut off the eagle, wrapped in lead sheeting and dumped in a river. Photo by Ian Thomson, RSPB Scotland
The most recent disappearance of a tagged eagle happened just before Christmas 2023, close to the boundary of a grouse moor in the Moorfoot Hills. ‘Merrick’ was translocated to the area in 2022 as part of the South of Scotland Golden Eagle Project. Her tag data told us she was asleep in a tree immediately before she disappeared. Police found her blood and a few feathers at the scene and concluded she’d been shot. Who shoots a sleeping eagle? Again, no one has been prosecuted.
This situation has persisted for decades because although golden eagles have been afforded legal protection for the last 70 years, to date there hasn’t been a single successful prosecution for killing one. The chances of getting caught and prosecuted have been so low that the risk of committing the crime has been worth taking, over and over again. Until now.
Earlier this year, the Scottish Parliament passed new legislation, the Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Act 2024, which introduces a licensing scheme for grouse shooting. For the first time in 170 years, red grouse shooting can now only take place on estates that have been granted a licence to shoot.
How will this stop the slaughtering of golden eagles and other birds of prey on Scotland’s grouse moors? Well, the licence can be revoked for up to five years if there is evidence of wildlife crime on the estate. Significantly, this will be based on the civil burden of proof which has a lower evidential threshold than the criminal burden of proof.
This means that instead of the police having to prove ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ that a named individual was responsible, they now have to prove that it’s based only on the ‘balance of probability’. This is a real game-changer because instead of being perpetually ‘untouchable’, now there are real, tangible consequences for the grouse shooting industry if these crimes continue. Estates will no longer be able to rely on the implausible protestation that ‘a big boy did it and ran away’.
As with any legislation, it will only be effective if it is strongly enforced. The jury’s out on that and we’ll be keeping a close eye on performance, but as the licensing scheme is based on a policy of mistrust, the Scottish Government has sent an unequivocal message to the grouse shooting industry. We all know what’s been going on and the public will no longer tolerate it.
Blog readers may recall a press release in April 2024 from North Yorkshire Police detailing the execution of a search warrant on an unnamed grouse moor in the Yorkshire Dales National Park, in relation to the illegal persecution of hen harriers (see here).
This hen harrier was euthanised after suffering catastrophic injuries in an illegal trap set next to its nest on a grouse moor in Scotland in 2019. Photo by Ruth Tingay
The very first line of that press release said this:
“On Wednesday, (17 April 2024), a National Harrier Task Force operation was held at an undisclosed location in the Yorkshire Dales“.
That was the first time I’d heard of the ‘National Harrier Task Force’ but I’ve since learned much more about it.
I’ll begin this blog with the reproduction of a press article about the new Taskforce that appeared on a relatively obscure website (CandoFM) in May 2024, then I’ll provide some of my own commentary on this new initiative.
Here’s the press article:
Hen Harrier Task Force Launched To Tackle Illegal Persecution
A new task force has been launched to tackle the illegal persecution of hen harriers, one of the rarest bird of prey species in the UK.
The National Wildlife Crime Unit (NWCU) will use innovative technology and strategic partnerships to detect, deter and disrupt offenders.
Given the rarity of hen harriers, significant resource is invested in their conservation. Satellite tags are fitted to the birds to research their ecology, but these tags have also revealed a concerning amount of illegal killing.
Criminals are intent on targeting this vulnerable species and operate with impunity. There have been no successful prosecutions in recent years despite the efforts of the police and partners.
In response, the launch of the Hen Harrier Task Force, led by Detective Inspector Mark Harrison of the NWCU, represents a pivotal shift in combating wildlife crime.
“The persecution of birds of prey is not just a wildlife issue; it’s serious crime blighting our countryside,” said DI Harrison. “With the launch of the Hen Harrier Task Force, we are determined to disrupt illegal activity and protect this vulnerable species.”
Central to the bird of prey task force’s approach is standardising reporting practices and improving the police response to incidents. Police and partners will work together to ensure resources are deployed swiftly and investigative opportunities are maximised. The task force will also bring together partners to engage with local communities and raise the profile of hen harrier persecution in a unified effort against wildlife crime.
“We cannot tackle this problem alone,” emphasised DI Harrison. “Through proactive partnerships and community engagement, we can strengthen our response and hold perpetrators to account.”
The task force will tackle crimes involving satellite tagged birds of prey. It is data-led, relying on analysis of police data and hotspot mapping. The NWCU has identified crime hot spots where they can focus enforcement efforts, as well as other areas of historic vulnerabilities where they will be seeking to revisit and raise their presence with landowners and land users. These meetings are an opportunity to highlight the issues/risks and identify ways to prevent further incidents from occurring.
Rather than purely focusing on the wildlife aspect of the crime, DI Harrison has tasked his team with taking a holistic view of the criminality and considering all types of offences. Criminals will often steal and destroy the satellite tags to conceal their offending. This could constitute criminal damage, theft and fraud. In the last few years alone, £100,000 worth of satellite tags have been lost in circumstances suspected to be criminal. The apparent use of firearms adds a further level of seriousness to these cases.
Recent examples of this include Anu, a hen harrier in South Yorkshire, which had its satellite tag deliberately cut off by someone possibly using scissors or a knife. Asta, a hen harrier in North Yorkshire, is another example. Although the dead bird was not found, its tag was recovered from a dead crow. The NWCU suspect that fitting the tag to a crow was an attempt to make it look like the hen harrier was still alive and hide the fact that it had been illegally killed. Unfortunately, the crow also died from unknown causes.
The task force’s multifaceted approach includes:
Improved incident response: Standardised reporting processes enable rapid response to suspicious incidents, ensuring investigative opportunities are maximised.
Innovative technology: From tracking drones to specialised detection dogs, the task force uses innovative tools to overcome logistical challenges and enhance evidence collection in remote areas.
Strategic partnerships: The taskforce brings together law enforcement, government agencies, non-governmental organisations, landowners and communities to tackle crime in hotspot areas.
Community awareness Initiatives: Building on successful models like Operation Owl, the task force seeks to boost public support and encourage vigilance against wildlife crime.
As the task force gains momentum, the team will be dedicated to protecting the UK’s hen harriers. Through collaboration and innovation, it is set to make a lasting impact in the fight against wildlife crime.
About the Hen Harrier Task Force
The Hen Harrier Task Force is an initiative led by the UK National Wildlife Crime Unit and supported by seven police forces (Cumbria, Derbyshire, Durham, Northumbria, North Yorkshire, South Yorkshire and West Yorkshire), DEFRA, the RSPB, National Gamekeepers’ Organisation, British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC), The Wildlife Trusts, GWCT, national parks, Country Land and Business Association (CLA), Natural England and The Moorland Association to combat the persecution of hen harriers in the UK. The taskforce aims to detect, deter, and disrupt offenders involved in wildlife crime by using technology and improving partnership working.
ENDS
My initial reaction to this new Taskforce was one of deep cynicism. Given some of the organisations involved, it just looks like yet another pseudo-‘partnership’ that will achieve nothing other than providing a convenient vehicle for DEFRA and its raptor-killing mates within the grouse shooting industry to be able to pretend that they have a zero tolerance approach to the illegal killing of hen harriers because they are all ‘cooperating’ on this Taskforce.
It’s a ploy that’s been utilised many times before and has simply facilitated the continued illegal killing of hen harriers (and other raptor species) without anyone being held to account. The RPPDG (Raptor Persecution Priority Delivery Group) is a prime example – established thirteen years ago in 2011 and has served no useful purpose in terms of tackling raptor persecution, but has provided numerous Government Ministers with an opportunity to appear to be dealing with it. Utter greenwashing.
Those of you with long memories will remember Operation Artemis, another police-led initiative launched twenty years ago in 2004 designed to work in ‘partnership’ with grouse moor owners to tackle the illegal killing of hen harriers. Here’s some info about it from the RSPB’s 2004 Birdcrime Report:
As described by the RSPB, Op Artemis was not well-received by the shooting industry, even resulting in an article published in The Times where the then Chief Executive of the Countryside Alliance, Simon Hart (who later became Chief Whip for the Conservatives) said the police operation was “part of a wider witch-hunt against gamekeepers“.
Operation Artemis stumbled along until 2007 when it was closed down after achieving nothing at all. Here are two more write-ups about it from the RSPB’s Birdcrime Reports in 2006 and 2007 respectively:
Given the complete failure of Operation Artemis to effectively tackle the illegal killing of hen harriers on driven grouse moors, how will this latest initiative, the National Hen Harrier Taskforce, rolled out some 20 years later, be any different?
Well, there are some positive differences.
This time around, the police have the benefit of access to hen harrier satellite-tracking data (provided by Natural England and the RSPB) which has allowed the National Wildlife Crime Unit (NWCU) to identify clear persecution hotspots, i.e. the estates where a disproportionate number of hen harriers are killed / ‘go missing’ in comparison to the rest of the species’ range.
These wildlife crime hotspots have been known for years but this time the NWCU has done its own analysis on the tag data and, even though it has drawn the same conclusions as the RSPB previously, because the hotspots have been identified by the Police it cuts off any opportunity for estate owners to claim that the data are ‘biased’ or ‘fabricated’ simply because the data belonged to the RSPB. In other words, the estate owners/managers can’t so easily dismiss the data as not being credible.
Another major difference this time around is that the police officer leading the Taskforce, Detective Inspector Mark Harrison, is taking a much more strategic approach. He’s not only looking at the offence of killing a hen harrier – he’s looking at the wider, associated offences such as theft (of very expensive satellite tags) and firearms offences. In combination, these crimes amount to a considerable and serious level of offending and can open the door to the police receiving permission to undertake covert tactics, including surveillance and communications monitoring.
To reach that stage, certain steps have be taken first as part of a longer-term strategy. These include police visits to the known hotspot estates (and I understand that there have now been several of these visits in addition to the one in the Yorkshire Dales National Park that was reported in April). If, after these visits, hen harrier persecution continues to be suspected at those hotspots, the police will then be in a position to demonstrate to senior officers that the ‘nicely nicely’ approach has been tried but hasn’t worked and so permission to begin more covert tactics is more likely to be granted.
Permission should be granted just on the basis of suspected firearms offences taking place. If the estate owners / managers / gamekeepers are denying any knowledge of the offences (which is what they’ve been doing for 30+ years) then the police can legitimately conclude that ‘someone’ [apparently unidentified] is running around an estate committing firearms offences and is clearly a threat to the public. As the fundamental role of the police is a duty to protect the public then I can’t see how permission to deploy more covert tactics can legitimately be withheld under these circumstances.
Of course none of these ideas are anything new – we’ve all been saying for years that if estate owners / managers / gamekeepers claim not to know who’s committing firearms offences on their land then there’s a serious concern that armed individuals are running amok and those estate owners / managers / gamekeepers should be fully supportive of the police doing everything they can to find them, just as any of us would if armed criminals were operating on our property.
However, the difference this time is that here we have a senior police officer, with a background specialism in covert surveillance (and thus a deep understanding of what hoops need to be jumped through to get permission for covert ops), prepared to push the envelope and take a more radical approach and actually implement this strategy instead of just talking about it, and I applaud him for that. Whether he’ll be allowed to stay in post for long enough to carry through with this strategy remains to be seen.
Another new initiative with this Hen Harrier Taskforce is a ‘mutual aid agreement’ between a number of police forces. One of the big issues in tackling wildlife crime, and particularly raptor persecution, has always been the availability of a wildlife crime officer to attend the scene promptly to secure evidence. We all know that the police are stretched, budgets are stretched, and it’s not always possible to get an officer on scene quickly – sometimes delays run into days and weeks, which is ridiculous. The mutual aid agreement means that a number of regional police forces have committed to making officers available at short notice for cross-border searches if the local officers can’t attend in time. If that works in practice, it should be good.
Once on scene, the Taskforce is also utilising a wide array of new techniques and equipment to aid any searches. These include the use of drones working within the range of satellite tag signals and the use of specialised detection dogs trained to search for bird corpses, amongst other things.
This all sounds very promising, on paper. Although to be fair, the Taskforce has already started the strategic plan by paying visits to those known persecution hotspots and has given fair warning to the estates about what they can expect if the persecution continues.
The only issue I have with that approach at the moment is that those crime hotspot estates have not been publicly named. The police say this is because they’re trying to build relationships of trust. I say they’re shielding the criminals. I have been told that the decision not to name hotspot estates is ‘not set in stone’ and may be revisited.
Let’s see.
I wish the Taskforce well and, given the current rate of ongoing hen harrier persecution on grouse moors, I’ll expect to see results in the not-too distant future.
UPDATE 17 July 2024: Is the Moorland Association already trying to sabotage the police’s new National Hen Harrier Taskforce? (here)
Elena is the Scottish Parliament’s Hen Harrier Species Champion, an initiative set up by Scottish Environment LINK to encourage MSPs to champion threatened and iconic species and habitats.
She was lucky enough to see a food pass between the breeding adults during her visit.
Strangely, the chairman of the Scottish Gamekeepers Association, Alex Hogg, recently told a parliamentary committee that the Tarras Valley Nature Reserve was a “species desert” and “there is nothing there at all” [now that it’s no longer being managed as a driven grouse moor].
I’ll return to Hogg’s parliamentary evidence session in a separate blog because it was quite something and it even prompted the RSPB to write to the committee to correct his false claims.
Raptor Persecution UK 