Tag: scottish gamekeepers association

Joke sentence for second-time convicted gamekeeper

David Alexander Whitefield, the former gamekeeper at Culter Allers Estate in South Lanarkshire, was today sentenced following his December 2011 conviction for illegally poisoning four buzzards (see here for conviction report).

Before we discuss his latest sentence, let’s remind ourselves of Whitefield’s criminal record: This keeper, who was also a member of the Scottish Gamekeepers’ Association, was convicted in October 2008 for offences relating to the unlawful capture and subsequent welfare of a buzzard. His sentence for that conviction was a £300 fine. He kept his job as the sole gamekeeper and he was not expelled from the SGA. Just six months later, in April 2009, RSPB investigators were alerted to the signs of an illegal poisoning spree on this estate. Obviously, these subsequent poisoning activities, for which Whitefield has now been convicted, demonstrate that the £300 fine had zero effect as a deterrent (no great surprise really).

So then you might expect today’s sentence to reflect not only the seriousness of the crime of poisoning wildlife (and potentially any human and/or domestic animals that happened to wander through the well-used public walking trails on this estate), but also to acknowledge that Whitefield, already previously convicted for wildlife crime there, had shown a complete disregard for wildlife legislation.

You might reasonably expect that the sheriff in this case, Nicola Stewart, might utilise her full sentencing powers and go for the most serious sentence available for this type of crime, which includes a custodial sentence and/or a financial penalty for each poisoned bird. That would see Whitefield put away for a while and would send out a very clear message that this type of crime will no longer be tolerated in this country, just as the Scottish Government has claimed over and over again in recent years.

So why then, was Whitefield handed down a 100 hour community service order as his ‘punishment’?

According to an RSPB press release, Sheriff Stewart is reported to have said the punishment was a direct alternative to a custodial sentence and that poisoning is a serious offence. Why was he given a direct alternative to a custodial sentence and where, in his 100 hour community service order, is there any indication that illegal poisoning is considered a serious offence?

This is a joke sentence, to add to all the other joke sentences that have been handed out to the few criminals that are actually prosecuted for these crimes. As we keep seeing, over and over again, these punishments are not providing the required deterrent so surely it’s now time to introduce mandatory sentences for these offences, and that includes custodial sentences. These are already available to the judiciary – so far, for whatever reason, not one custodial sentence has been given to a convicted raptor poisoner. We need to be asking why that is, and we need to keep asking.

Well done to the SSPCA for some serious doggedness with this case – it’s been a long time in the works and looked at one point to be in danger of failing on a legal technicality. Perseverance paid off, and despite the pathetic sentence, those involved with the groundwork deserve much credit.

BBC news article here

RSPB Scotland press release on Birdguides Blog here

Convicted poisoner (gamekeeper) is a member of SGA

There’ll be some red faces at the SGA today. After all the proclamations of Alex Hogg, Chairman of the Scottish Gamekeepers Association, who is on record as saying, “Professional gamekeepers do not poison raptors” (see here), it turns out that the gamekeeper David Alexander Whitefield, who today was convicted of poisoning four buzzards (see here), is a member of the SGA!!

The SGA has issued a statement after today’s conviction, that says Whitefield’s membership will be suspended with immediate effect (see here). This is welcome, if belated, news. But why wasn’t his membership terminated after his earlier conviction for wildlife offences in 2008? Or is membership only terminated after a conviction for poisoning, as opposed to other types of wildlife crime?

Previously convicted gamekeeper guilty again

A previously convicted gamekeeper has today admitted to poisoning four buzzards with Alpha-chloralose laced baits. At Lanark Sheriff Court, David Alexander Whitefield (45) of Coulter, near Biggar in Lanarkshire, pled guilty to the offences that took place between March and November 2009 at Culter Allers Farm, near Biggar, where Whitefield was employed as the sole gamekeeper for pheasant and partridge shooting. He has reportedly blamed his employer (the landowner), whom Whitefield claims told him to reduce the number of buzzards.

In addition to the four poisoned buzzards found on the shooting estate, a large quantity of Alpha-chloralose was found inside unlocked outbuildings, some of it inside a coffee jar – this extremely hazardous poison could have easily been mistaken for sugar or powdered milk by an unsuspecting visitor. Culter Allers is a popular area for walkers and it is fortunate indeed that no person or pet was poisoned. The buzzards were not so lucky.

This case has been in the works for some time, first reported a year ago and then delayed for legal technicalities (see here, here and here). Sentencing for his latest conviction has been deferred for background reports and will take place in early January. We will watch with great interest.

Whitefield’s previous convictions include failing to ensure the welfare of a buzzard and possession of a buzzard. These offences took place at Culter Allers and he was convicted at Lanark Sheriff Court in September 2008. He received a pathetic £300 fine (see here). Just six months later he was poisoning buzzards. At the time of the first conviction (Sept 2008), he was reported to be a self-confessed member of the Scottish Gamekeepers Association. It is not known if he was a member of the SGA at the time of the buzzard poisoning incidents (March-Nov 2009) or whether he is still a member – you can find out by emailing info@scottishgamekeepers.co.uk

Congratulations to the SSPCA for leading this case and for securing a conviction. Let’s hope the Scottish parliament takes heed next year when they’re consulting on extending the powers of the SSPCA for the investigation of wildlife crime.

STV news story about Whitefield’s latest conviction here

BBC news story here

It’s oh so quiet

Is it just us, or is anyone else curious about the deafening silence of landowner and gamekeeper organisations following last week’s report about the discovery of poisoned bait on Glenlochy Estate (see here)?

For two organisations (Scottish Land and Estates and Scottish Gamekeepers Association) who have been making (welcome) press statements about their condemnation of criminal raptor persecution, and their desire to ‘stamp it out’ of their industry, it seems a bit of a missed opportunity. We wonder whether Glenlochy Estate is a member of the SLE? We wonder whether any Glenlochy Estate gamekeepers are members of the SGA? We don’t know, because neither group publishes their membership lists for public scrutiny. And to be fair, neither group is obliged to publish that information, but you’d think that in light of the recent discovery, which isn’t the first for this particular area (see here), these groups would want to grab every opportunity available to publicly distance themselves from what appears to be another incident of alleged wildlife crime on a Scottish sporting estate. Wouldn’t you?

Lessons in eagle ecology part 2

Hot off the press from the team who brought you Eagles Could Eat Children (see here), this month’s lesson is all about Why Eagles Don’t Nest on Grouse Moors.

Contrary to the endless scientific papers that show unequivocally that eagles (and lots of other raptor species) are absent from many upland grouse moor areas in the UK due to high levels of persecution, the Scottish Gamekeepers Association has today informed us of the real reason they’re absent:

“Many grouse moors do not have the isolated nesting habitat which is required by eagles so it should come as no surprise they don’t nest there“.

Strange then, that there are ‘many’ (see quote below) unoccupied eagle nesting territories in Scotland where eagles are known to have bred historically, and that these old nest sites just happen to be on land that is managed for red grouse shooting! Here’s a quote from the Golden Eagle Conservation Framework Report that was published by Scottish Natural Heritage in 2008 (available here) –

“The most serious failures to meet favourable conservation status tests were in Natural Heritage Zones in the central and eastern Highlands where less than half of all known territories were occupied. Based on the production of young golden eagles, the populations in these regions should be expanding markedly, but instead they continue to decline (there was a loss of 15 occupied territories between 1992 and 2003, and 86 vacant territories by 2003). This indicates, in the absence of any evidence for emigration, that survival of subadult and/or adult birds is low“.

It’s also strange that before the sentence about ‘many grouse moors do not have the isolated nesting habitat required by eagles’, the SGA tells us this: “A large portion of all eagles fledging takes place on grouse moors across Scotland“. Eh? How can that be, if the habitat ‘isn’t there’?

The SGA article continues with some name-calling (and this from the group who have recently complained to the Scottish Government about how they were being portrayed!) and then some partly-accurate but mostly inaccurate information about siblicide amongst eaglets, before getting in another dig at the Irish Golden Eagle Reintroduction Project (yawn). This all builds up to a grand finale where we’re told:

“If you were to read all the media reports you could be forgiven for thinking that raptors only breed safely on reserves. The truth is there are possibly 500’000 raptors in the UK and 350’000 of them will be breeding successfully on land used for game sport shooting of some kind. This fact is completely ignored by those attempting to take the moral high ground“.

Hmm, I’d be really interested to see the data that this “fact” is based upon. Especially in light of the recently published scientific paper (see here) that shows, again unequivocally, that peregrines nesting on grouse moors in northern England are 50% less successful than peregrines that breed on non-grouse moor habitat.

Interestingly, the SGA article makes no comment about the poisoned buzzard and poisoned bait that was found on Glenlochy Estate and was reported in the media two days ago (see here). The SGA wouldn’t be trying to deflect attention from yet another disgusting and illegal poisoning incident, would they?

SGA article here

RSPB ‘may have been brainwashing children in schools’

We didn’t think it was possible to top the recent claim by the Scottish Gamekeepers Association that eagles might eat children (see here). How wrong we were. Their latest considered opinion is that the RSPB  ‘may have been brainwashing children in schools’.

This claim follows the article in the Telegraph last week where it was reported that Scottish landowners were upset about a cartoon in an RSPB kids magazine (see here). It’s not clear who wrote the latest SGA tirade, but we’re assuming it’s a view held by the organisation as a whole, seeing that it’s published on their website.

The article accuses the RSPB of ‘sponging off children’ and discusses ‘the incredible success raptors have enjoyed in the countryside since the cessation of DDT’. It also accuses the RSPB of ‘poisoning young minds’. An ironic choice of verb.

To learn more about the evil RSPB, read the full article on the SGA website here

Meanwhile, south of the border, Mark Avery continues his series about what he calls ‘the raptor haters’ on his blog. This month it’s well-known ‘countryman’ Robin Page. Well worth a read (here).

Elaine Murray MSP keeps up pressure for greater powers for SSPCA

Back in February 2011 when the Wildlife & Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill was still being debated, Peter Peacock MSP put forward an amendment that would provide greater powers for the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SSPCA) inspectors to investigate a wider suite of wildlife crimes (see here). The SSPCA currently has limited powers that only allows it to investigate certain types of wildlife crime (see here).

Given the concern over public spending cuts that will affect police resources, and the on-going concerns of getting police to even attend wildlife crime incidents (see here for info from SSPCA and RSPB, and info here from OneKind, page 12), Peter Peacock MSP proposed that if increased powers were given to the SSPCA, then perhaps more wildlife crimes (and especially raptor persecution incidents) might stand a better chance of being investigated more effectively.

The Environment Minister at the time (Roseanna Cunningham MSP) said that the proposed amendment raised significant issues of accountability – which seemed a fairly weak argument given that the SSPCA is already empowered to investigate some animal welfare incidents – but she did say that she thought the amendment could be considered, after public consultation, in a future Criminal Justice Bill.

Seven months later and some MSPs may have hoped/wished this proposal was long dead and buried. Not so! Enter stage right Elaine Murray MSP, who lodged the following motion in the Scottish Parliament late last week:

S4M-00932 Elaine Murray: First Dog-fighting Conviction under the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006—That the Scottish Parliament congratulates the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SSPCA) on obtaining the first successful conviction for animal fighting under the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006; notes that two brothers received jail sentences of four and six months for being involved in dog fighting involving pit bull terrier-type dogs; regrets that the perpetrators have only received a ban from keeping dogs for five years; notes that the SSPCA were able to achieve this conviction using powers conferred under the act to search and enter homes under warrant to retrieve evidence, and believes that the granting of similar powers to the SSPCA with regard to the investigation of wildlife crime should be considered.

This proposal seems to me to be a complete no-brainer. The SSPCA has been a reporting agency to the Crown for more than 100 years. They are highly effective – in 2009-2010, the SSPCA reported nearly 200 cases for prosecution to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. Surely any sensible individual or organisation, who was committed to cracking down on wildlife crime, would support the proposal to widen the powers of these very productive and experienced investigators? Apparently the Scottish Gamekeepers Association doesn’t agree (see here on page 11).

Well done Elaine Murray MSP for keeping up the pressure – it will be interesting to see how this proposal develops over the coming months.

SGA extends pointless rant about sea eagles

Last week the SGA wrote to the Scottish Government about the threat of sea eagles eating children. The Scottish Government effectively told them to sod off, although not using those exact words, of course. The letter (or at least the snippets that we were privy to) caused astonishment around the world – a common response was, “What’s wrong with these people?” 

However, not to be deterred, the SGA is still pursuing answers to its earlier questions. In an ill-disguised attack on the RSPB, Bert Burnett switches from the ‘eagle might eat child’ approach (although he doesn’t discount it entirely), and instead focuses on what he calls the “considerable direct damage being done to farmed stock by these eagles“. What considerable direct damage?, you may ask. It’d be a good question. Claims of this nature have been made before, notably by sheep farmers on the west coast (see here). However, several scientific studies later, the evidence demonstrated that sea eagles have a ‘minimal impact’ on lamb survival (see here), although when the results didn’t go their way then the crofters claimed the study was rigged (see here and here). Has Bert Burnett got new evidence to back up his claim of ‘considerable direct damage’? If he has, he needs to share it. Put up or shut up, Bert.

Bert’s latest rant is accompanied by two emails from some random individuals. I’m not sure why they were included. I wish he’d shared the following message, which was posted on the SGA Facebook page in response to their ‘eagle could eat baby’ story:

“If a sea eagle introduced by the RSPB carried off and ate a human baby, would the RSPB be guilty of murder? I think so.” Priceless.

To read the SGA’s latest rant about sea eagles, click here.

“Alarmist nonsense from the SGA”, says RSPB

Just in case there was any doubt, the RSPB says that the SGA’s concern over whether a sea eagle could differentiate between a child and its natural prey, is “alarmist nonsense”.

Bert Burnett of the SGA is reported by the BBC to have said: “Some might think this is gamekeepers making a fuss for some obscure reason. That’s not the case. It is a genuine concern felt by other people out there other than gamekeepers“. He didn’t elaborate about who these ‘other people’ are and whether or not they have game-shooting interests.

Don’t worry about being misunderstood Bert, I’m sure everyone can work out what the agenda is.

BBC news story here, including the response from the Scottish Government.

SGA turns up the hysteria on sea eagles

A couple of weeks ago a clergyman in Perthshire reported being ‘attacked’ by one of the recently reintroduced sea eagles – his story received widespread coverage in the national press (eg see here, here, and perhaps the best one here, where the clergyman hints that sea eagles could attack and kill a baby in a pram!).

Today, the Scottish Gamekeeper’s Association has joined in with the hysteria and says it has called for a public enquiry into the impact of reintroduced species (see here). The SGA has apparently written to the Scottish Environment Minister, and asked: “Will these very large creatures differentiate between a small child and more natural quarry?” – see BBC news article here.

Wow. This sort of propaganda was common about 100 years ago when people didn’t know any better. Is it any wonder that raptors continue to be illegally poisoned and shot in this country when the industry figureheads are still spouting this nonsense?

What next? A call for licences to ‘manage’ [kill] sea eagles?