Earlier this month, NatureScot announced it was imposing a three-year General Licence restriction on Invermark Estate in the Angus Glens, relating to the discovery of a Peregrine with shotgun injuries found on 3 September 2024.
Invermark Estate boundary (in red), sourced from Andy Wightman’s Who Owns Scotland website
The three-year General Licence restriction on Invermark Estate doesn’t apply to the whole estate, just to land managed by Dalbrack Farm (outlined in red on the map below), which is owned by Invermark Estate, and prohibits the use of General Licences 01, 02 and 03 on that land from 7th August 2026 up to and including 7th August 2029.
In accordance with NatureScot’s Framework for implementing General Licence restrictions, Invermark Estate was entitled to appeal the restriction decision within 14 days of its implementation.
When an estate makes a formal appeal in writing, it effectively suspends the General Licence restriction notice until such time that NatureScot makes a decision on the appeal, which it tries to complete within four weeks.
I noticed yesterday that the decision notice to impose the three-year General Licence restriction on Invermark Estate had vanished from NatureScot’s website, which I interpret as meaning Invermark has appealed the restriction decision, and so NatureScot has temporarily suspended the restriction whilst the appeal is considered.
I’m not aware of any previous appeals made by other estates against General Licence restrictions ever being successful. Failed appeals include Raeshaw Estate and Corsehope Farm in 2016 (here, and a further failed judicial review in 2017, here), Burnfoot Estate and Wester Cringate Estate’s failed appeal in 2016 (here), Leadhills Estate’s failed appeal in 2020 (here, and for hilarious details of that failed appeal see here), Leadhills Estate’s (again) failed appeal in 2021 (here), Lochan Estate’s failed appeal in 2022 (here), Invercauld Estate’s failed appeal in 2022 (here), Moy Estate’s failed appeal in 2022 (here), and Raeshaw Estate’s (again) failed appeal in 2026 (here); Raeshaw has now lodged a judicial review against this latest decision (here).
Millden Estate said it would appeal its General Licence restriction in 2023 although I’m not sure whether it ever did. If it did appeal and I missed it, the appeal must have failed because the restriction was still in place in March 2026 when it was due to formally end. Lochindorb Estate is currently serving a General Licence restriction but I’m not sure it ever appealed, and if it did, the appeal must have failed because the restriction is still active today. The Milton of Drimmie Estate is currently serving a General Licence restriction and hasn’t made an appeal because the restriction is still in place and the appeal deadline has now passed.
General Licence restrictions are imposed on estates when there is sufficient evidence from Police Scotland that raptor persecution has taken place but when there is insufficient evidence to prosecute a named individual.
When NatureScot imposed the three-year General Licence restriction on Invermark Estate in August this year, a statement attributed to the estate was published in The Courier on the same day. It went like this:
There’s lots of very interesting stuff in this statement, and I intend to examine some of the claims in another blog.
But for now, I’m fascinated by Invermark Estate’s appeal against the General Licence restriction, which it claims is a “significant restriction upon us“, but has argued that it does not manage the land covered by the restriction.
The Guardian ran an article at the weekend about Defra’s previously stated commitment to consider gamebird shoot licensing in England (for Red Grouse, Pheasants and Red-legged Partridges), following the recent introduction of grouse shoot licensing in Scotland.
The Guardian’s angle was that game shoot licensing ‘could stop [the] poisoning of birds of prey‘.
Yes, I suppose it could, but it won’t. Grouse shoot licensing hasn’t stopped illegal raptor persecution in Scotland, and so far, despite ongoing wildlife crime, not a single grouse shooting licence has been revoked.
That’s not to imply that I think the licensing approach is pointless. I don’t think it is, in as much as I see it as an important staging period towards an outright ban. Only when the Scottish Government sees that licensing has failed will it realise that this level of regulation is unenforceable and that only leaves one remaining option.
The Guardian article contains a few inaccuracies. It claims that, ‘Currently, about 30 million pheasants are set loose each year by shooting estates for people to pay to shoot‘ – that should read 50 million (in addition to about 10 million Red-legged Partridges), but what’s a difference of 30 million between friends?
The article also claims that ‘Seven satellite-tagged hen harriers were found poisoned or shot on or near grouse moors last year‘. That should read at least 16 Hen Harriers ‘disappeared’ in suspicious circumstances, more than likely shot, and one was found poisoned.
Regular blog readers won’t find much new in the article. The RSPB wants gamebird licensing, Defra has committed to consider the evidence for further regulation (as if it doesn’t already know!) and hold a public consultation on any proposed changes, and the Countryside Alliance is apoplectic about (a) the perceived lobbying influence of the RSPB and (b) the terrifying concept of landowners being held to account for anything.
Nevertheless, I was pleased to read this article because its important that this issue remains in the public sphere, if nothing else to put pressure on the Government to fufill its commitment to collect evidence, make policy change and open a public consultation on the inevitable downfall of gamebird shooting in its current format.
The ‘tip of the iceberg’ is a phrase often used by researchers and conservationists when describing the scale and extent of illegal raptor persecution in the UK, meaning that what is known or can be seen is only a small fraction of what is actually happening under the surface.
Killing birds of prey is an offence in the UK, and has been for over 70 years, so the people committing these crimes will often go to great lengths to hide the evidence (e.g. here), which is quite easy to do if the offender is a gamekeeper working under the cover of darkness on a privately-owned estate in a remote area with few witnesses around.
Satellite tagging has done much to help us understand the scale of these crimes in recent years, particularly on grouse moors where Golden Eagles (here) and Hen Harriers (here and here) are targeted, and now new modelling research is about to blow the lid on the whole sorry story.
If you thought that 149 dead or ‘missing’ Hen Harriers in the UK since 2018 was shocking, most of them on or close to grouse moors, it’s clear we don’t know the half of it. Prosecutions are rare, as demonstrated earlier this year when Yorkshire Dales gamekeeper Racster Dingwall became the first person ever convicted in England for Hen Harrier persecution, despite hundreds of confirmed persecution incidents recorded since the 1980s.
This male hen harrier died in 2019 after his leg was almost severed in an illegally set trap that had been placed next to his nest on a Scottish grouse moor (see here). Photo by Ruth Tingay
At a recent British Ornithologists’ Union (BOU) conference earlier this year, new research was presented suggesting that there are around 400 Hen Harrier ‘persecution events’ across different life stages (e.g. nest, adult, 1yr and 2yr old birds) and that only 0.5 – 10% are detected.
This research was presented as a poster rather than a spoken presentation, and has not yet been published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, so caveats are needed at this stage but it is anticipated that the publication process is underway.
The Hen Harrier research is part of a wider PhD study, also examining ‘tip of the iceberg’ modelling scenarios for Golden Eagles, Peregrine Falcons and Red Kites – species that are long known to be the victims of illegal persecution on UK grouse moors.
The research is being undertaken at the Fitzpatrick Institute of African Ornithology at the University of Capetown, South Africa, as part of the research portfolio of Associate Professor Arjun Amar, well known for his studies linking the illegal persecution of raptors to driven grouse shooting in the UK, including the detrimental effects this can have at a population scale, particularly on Red Kites, Peregrines and Hen Harriers.
The research abstract submitted for the conference is as follows:
TIP OF THE ICEBERG: ESTIMATING THE TRUE EXTENT OF RAPTOR PERSECUTION ASSOCIATED WITH GROUSE SHOOTING
Arjun Amar, Koi Pillay, Rob Thomson, Steven Ewing.
Despite decades of legal protection, raptors continue to be persecuted in the UK, particularly in the uplands where red grouse shooting conflicts with raptor conservation. Detecting persecution associated with this conflict is challenging due to its illegality and the remoteness of grouse moors, meaning official crime records likely represent only the ‘tip of the iceberg,’ with many incidents remaining hidden as ‘dark figures.’ Here, we attempt to estimate the persecution levels and population data for Hen Harriers, Peregrine Falcons, Red Kites, and Golden Eagles. We then compare these estimates to recorded crime figures for the same species, period, and regions. Our findings suggest the actual scale of persecution is substantially greater than detected cases, underscoring the importance of recognising and accounting for ‘dark figures’ to avoid underestimating the severity of this threat to raptor populations.
I’m looking forward to seeing this research published in due course.
A couple of weeks ago I blogged about a forthcoming BBC documentary about the recent murder trial of retired Scottish head gamekeeper David Campbell, who was convicted of shooting dead his former colleague from Edradynate Estate, Brian Low.
The BBC’s award-winning documentary series Murder Trial was given permission to film part of the police investigation and then subsequently inside the High Court during Campbell’s murder trial.
Former gamekeeper David Campbell during his murder trial. Screengrab from BBC documentary
For those of us who have followed the dozens of reports and police investigations over the years of raptor poisoning on and next to Edradynate Estate, and the failure of the authorities to hold anyone to account (sometimes justifiably due to lack of evidence, other times unbelievably in the face of apparently compelling evidence), I felt a strong sense of someone finally getting his comeuppance when the jury returned its verdict.
Campbell’s attitude during the police interview and then in the court room was chilling. The fortitude of Brian Low’s family in the face of such arrogance and appalling crime details, was remarkable.
Part one of Murder Trial:Death of a Dog Walker airs this evening at 9pm on BBC 2 Scotland but parts one and two are now available to watch on iPlayer, here.
In February this year, NatureScot imposed a three-year General Licence restriction on Raeshaw Estate, a grouse-shooting estate in the Scottish Borders believed to be under the management of ‘grouse guru’ sporting agent Mark Osborne.
The General Licence restriction related to the disappearance of a satellite-tagged Golden Eagle called ‘Merrick’, who Police Scotland believe was ‘shot & killed‘ as she slept in a tree on neighbouring land close to Raeshaw Estate’s boundary, in October 2023.
Raeshaw Estate boundary, from data provided by Andy Wightman’s Who Owns Scotland website
Screen grab from Who Owns Scotland website, annotated by RPUK, showing the proximity of Merrick’s last known location and the Raeshaw Estate (shaded in blue)
In response, Raeshaw Estate issued what I would describe as a bombastic statement, arguing that the General Licence restriction was “wholly unjustified” and that the estate would “challenge [the restriction] vigorously through an appeal“.
Raeshaw subsequently appealed the decision to NatureScot but in April that appeal was lost.
Raeshaw Estate has now applied for a judicial review of NatureScot’s decision-making process and permission has been granted for a substantive hearing in September 2026. This permission to proceed indicates that the court thinks that Raeshaw Estate has an arguable case, although the grounds for that case are not yet public.
This isn’t the first time Raeshaw Estate has been subject to a General Licence restriction in relation to wildlife crime and nor is it the first time it has tried to overturn it via judicial review.
This is an unprecedented second General Licence restriction for Raeshaw Estate. It was one of the first estates to receive a General Licence restriction in 2015, based on clear police evidence that wildlife crimes had been committed although, just as with the latest General Licence restriction, there was insufficient evidence to prosecute any individual (see here).
Representatives of Raeshaw Estate applied for a judicial review of NatureScot’s 2015 decision but the Court of Session upheld NatureScot’s procedures and ruled the process was lawful (here).
Whilst under that first General Licence restriction, Raeshaw Estate applied for, and was granted, a number of ‘individual licences’ so the gamekeepers could continue to kill certain species as part of the estate’s grouse moor management plan (quite a lot of birds were lawfully killed – see here).
However, in 2017 the individual licence was revoked by NatureScot due to non-compliance issues and more suspected wildlife crime offences (see here).
I note that NatureScot has not suspended the latest General Licence restriction on Raeshaw Estate and at the time of writing, it is still in place.
NatureScot has today announced a three-year General Licence restriction on two shooting estates: Milton of Drimmie Estate, near Blairgowrie, Perthshire, and Invermark Estate in the Angus Glens.
MILTON OF DRIMMIE ESTATE, PERTHSHIRE
The Milton of Drimmie restriction relates to the conviction earlier this year of gamekeeper and ex-sex offender Russell Mason, after he was caught on camera battering to death a Goshawk that had been caught inside a Crow cage trap on the Pheasant-shooting estate in February 2024.
Screen grab from RSPB covert footage showing gamekeeper Mason beating the Goshawk to death inside a Crow cage trap on the Milton of Drimmie Estate, Perthshire
Mason received a derisory 200-hour Community Payback Order for killing the Goshawk (even though his crime passed the custodial threshold) and he was also fined £890 for firearms offences (see here).
As far as I’m aware, NatureScot delayed its decision to apply a three-year General Licence restriction on this estate whilst criminal proceedings against Mason were ongoing.
The General Licence restriction on Milton of Drimmie relates to Cochrage Muir (outlined in red on the map below), which is owned by Milton of Drimmie Estate, and prohibits the use of General Licences 01, 02 and 03 on that land from 7th August 2026 up to and including 7th August 2029.
INVERMARK ESTATE, ANGUS GLENS
The Invermark Estate restriction relates to the discovery of a Peregrine with shotgun injuries on 3 September 2024, close to grouse butts in the Glen Esk area of the notorious Angus Glens. The Peregrine was later euthanised due to the extent of its injuries.
This incident, and the subsequent decision to impose a three-year General Licence restriction, but not a revocation of a grouse-shooting licence, deserves its own blog, which I’ll try and write in the coming days.
The General Licence restriction on Invermark Estate relates to Dalbrack Farm (outlined in red on the map below), which is owned by Invermark Estate, and prohibits the use of General Licences 01, 02 and 03 on that land from 7th August 2026 up to and including 7th August 2029.
Here is NatureScot’s announcement today:
7 August 2026
NatureScot has today restricted the use of general licences for three years on land at Milton of Drimmie Estate, Perthshire, and Invermark Estate, Angus.
The decision was made based on evidence provided by Police Scotland of wildlife crime against birds.
In the case of Milton of Drimmie, this relates to the conviction of former gamekeeper Russell Mason at Perth Sheriff Court on 17 March 2026 for killing a goshawk. The restriction will apply to the area of Cochrage Muir, where the offence took place.
In the case of Invermark Estate, the restriction will apply to the Dalbrack Farm area of the estate. NatureScot received robust evidence from Police Scotland in relation to the shooting of a peregrine which was discovered in this area.
Chris Dailly, NatureScot’s Head of Licensing, said: “We have decided, in discussion with Police Scotland, to suspend the use of general licences on these two areas of land for three years until August 2029.
“We are committed to using all the tools we have available to tackle wildlife crime. These measures will help to protect wild birds in these areas, while still allowing necessary land management activities to take place.
“We believe this is a proportionate response to protect wild birds and prevent further wildlife crime. We will continue to work closely with Police Scotland and consider information they provide on cases which may warrant restricting general licences.”
Individual licences may still be applied for, but these will be subject to strict record-keeping and reporting requirements and will be closely monitored to ensure licence conditions are met.
General licences allow landowners or land managers to carry out control of common species of wild birds, such as crows and magpies, to protect crops or livestock, without the need to apply for an individual licence.
In addition to these restrictions, there are currently three other restrictions in place in Scotland: on Lochindorb Estate in the Highlands and Raeshaw Estate and Watherston Wood in the Scottish Borders.
ENDS
General Licence restrictions, which have been available to NatureScot since 2014, are based on the civil burden of proof and are issued when NatureScot receives information from Police Scotland about wildlife crimes but where there is insufficient evidence to identify an individual offender for prosecution. Although, General Licence restrictions can also be imposed on estates where gamekeepers have been convicted of wildlife crimes, as in the Milton of Drimmie Estate case.
General Licence restrictions do not prevent an estate from game-shooting, nor do they prevent an estate from carrying out [lawful] predator control – this can still be undertaken if the estate applies for an ‘individual licence’ which may restrict the amount of predator control, the estate may be subject to compliance spot checks, and the licence holder must provide NatureScot with licence returns (i.e. indicate how many birds were killed, where, and when etc).
General Licence restrictions are not perfect as an effective sanction – they are nowhere near, as I’ve written about many times before (e.g. see here and links within). They do, however, work as a ‘reputational driver’, although in some cases reputation is apparently not an issue of concern.
I’ll come back to the shot Peregrine on Invermark Estate in a separate blog…
UPDATE 26 August 2026: Invermark Estate appeals 3-year General Licence restriction imposed after evidence of raptor persecution (here)
On Monday 20 July 2026, at Aberdeen Sheriff Court, all charges were dropped against two gamekeepers who had been on trial for the alleged shooting of Red Kites, as well as alleged firearms offences, in the Cairngorms National Park.
What follows is my understanding of the case, based on material published by the media, court documents, and conversations I’ve had with people who attended the trial. As far as I’m aware, the outcome of this case has not been reported formally, either by journalists, Police Scotland or the Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service. It’s pointless me asking for case details from the Crown Office or Police Scotland because they are protected by data protection regulations. For this reason, the following account should be treated with caution, i.e. it is not provided as a definitive account of the legal proceedings.
CASE BACKGROUND
On 4 February 2025 a member of the public notified the RSPB that a dead Red Kite had been found on private property in the Glenbuchat area of Strathdon, in Aberdeenshire, and the finder said that he had concerns that it might have been poisoned. The RSPB’s Investigations team collected the kite carcass and submitted it to Scotland’s Rural College (SRUC) lab for examination, notifying Police Scotland of their action. A short time later a post mortem revealed the kite had been shot, which led Police Scotland to open a wildlife crime investigation.
As part of that investigation, an appeal for information was issued by Police Scotland on 28 February 2025. Shortly afterwards another member of the public, William Johnstone, came forward with footage that had been captured on a night vision trail camera that he and local landowner, Roderick McGilvary, had installed in Knockie Wood (owned by Mr McGilvary) to monitor wildlife. Although the footage was not properly date/time stamped, Mr Johnstone and Mr McGilvary both stated that the footage had been captured over the preceding three weeks.
Location of Knockie Wood, Strathdon, in the Cairngorms National Park
Knockie Wood & surrounding grouse moor area, screen grabbed from a land sale brochure Aug 2026
The footage showed two armed individuals, with night vision equipment, carrying the body of a(nother) Red Kite. Mr Johnstone and Mr McGilvary both said they recognised the two armed men and named them as Graeme Rankin and Steven Hague, the Head Gamekeeper and underkeeper from nearby Glenbuchat Estate.
Mr Johnstone said he recognised the two men from shooting events he’d attended and from living in the local area. Mr McGilvary said he’d previously given Mr Rankin permission to kill ‘vermin’ on his land.
The trail camera footage was passed to Police Scotland and after examination, several officers, including a Firearms Licensing Officer, also said they recognised the two armed men as gamekeepers Graeme Rankin and Steven Hague.
On 1 May 2025 the Police executed a search warrant at the addresses of the two suspects and firearms were seized.
Following police interviews, to which both suspects gave ‘no comment’ replies, they were reported to the Procurator Fiscal and subsequently charged as follows:
Charge 1(GraemeRankin & Steven Hague) – Between 1 – 26 Feb 2025 at Knockie Wood, Strathdon, intentionally or recklessly killed a wild bird (Red Kite) with a firearm, contrary to Section 1(1)(a) of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981;
Charge 2 (Graeme Rankin & Steven Hague) – Between 1 – 26 Feb 2025 at Knockie Wood, Strathdon, were in possession and control of a dead wild bird (Red Kite), contrary to Section 1(2)(a) of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981;
Charge 3 (Graeme Rankin & Steven Hague) – On 3 or 4 February 2025 at [REDACTED], Glenbuchat, Strathdon, intentionally or recklessly killed a wild bird (Red Kite) with a firearm, contrary to Section 1(1)(a) of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981;
Charge 4 (Steven Hague) – On 1 May 2025 at [REDACTED], Glenbuchat, Strathdon, failed to keep keys for gun cabinets in a secure place, failed to ensure the key safe lock was secure and worked properly, and failed to secure ammunition, contrary to Section 1(2) of the Firearms Act 1968.
THE TRIAL
Both defendants pleaded not guilty to all charges so a two-day trial was scheduled to begin in Aberdeen on 9 December 2025. The defendants were each represented by an advocate of Kings Counsel (KC) status. Brian McConnachie KC, one of Scotland’s leading criminal lawyers, represented Graeme Rankin, and Shelagh McCall KC, also highly experienced, represented Steven Hague. Karen Rollo, an experienced Procurator Fiscal from the Wildlife and Environmental Crime Unit at the Crown Office, appeared for the prosecution.
Before proceedings really got going, the Sheriff made a declaration of being a monthly subscriber to the RSPB, which resulted in the two defence KCs lodging a motion that the Sheriff should consider recusing himself because the ‘public might perceive some bias’.
After giving the motion some consideration, the Sheriff agreed to stand down because this case involved RSPB staff members as witnesses for the prosecution.
Unfortunately, no other Sheriff was available immediately to hear the case so it was adjourned and rescheduled as a four-day hearing in April 2026, this time in front of Sheriff Peter Hammond.
Due to the large number of witnesses called by the prosecution in the first four days, the trial was further extended to another two days on 15-16 June 2026.
Prosecution witnesses included the finder of the first dead Red Kite (that was later confirmed shot), RSPB Investigations staff who had collected the kite carcass, William Johnstone who had installed the trail camera at Knockie Wood (landowner Robert McGilvary had since passed away but had previously provided a statement to Police Scotland), the SRUC vet who had performed the post mortem examination of the first dead Red Kite, a ballistics expert who could comment on the weapons and ammunition seen on the footage compared to what was seized during the search warrant, and multiple police officers who had been involved in viewing the captured footage, identifying the individuals (and their equipment) in the footage, and those involved in the execution of the search warrant.
There were significant delays at the start of the trial due to technical challenges in getting the video evidence to be shown in court; this seemed to be due to formatting issues regarding the ‘stitch video’ (a single film of various clips knitted together to make it easier to view). These were eventually resolved, although prosecution witnesses noted that the quality of the video shown in court was poorer than the raw footage they had been able to view at the police station.
A number of witnesses told the court that they couldn’t identify the suspects based on the poor quality of the footage shown in court but reiterated that they’d been able to identify them from the original footage at the police station.
Police Firearms Officer Tomas Spracklen told the court he’d attended Steven Hague’s cottage on 1 May 2025, alongside other officers executing the search warrant. He said he found that a safe, which stored keys to a gun cabinet, was not secure as he was able to access it and remove the key without having to use a code. He said that the key to a second gun locker was hanging on a hook behind a table leg just yards away in the same room where shotguns were kept. He also told the court that other Police Officers had found an unsecured pouch of ammunition in the gun room.
The two defence KCs challenged the provenance of the video footage, focusing on the fact that it wasn’t properly time/date stamped. They also challenged whether there had been procedural errors by the Police Officers during the execution of the search warrant.
The defence then lodged a motion to the Sheriff that on all charges, there was no case to answer. With respect to the charges of the killing of the second kite, they contended that the prosecution had failed to demonstrate that their witnesses had identified the defendants on the basis of the(poor quality)footage played in court, and that the prosecution had also failed to demonstrate that the footage captured was consistent with the dates of the charges libelled. They suggested, therefore that all these witnesses’ evidence should subsequently be disregarded.
The defence further suggested that the prosecution’s reliance on the established Scots Law ‘Moorov principle’ that allows for the use of similar factual evidence to corroborate multiple charges, should also mean that despite apparent similar circumstances surrounding the killing of the first Red Kite, if the charges above were dismissed, then charge 3 should also be dismissed.
The defence also argued that the fourth charge, relating to unsecure ammunition, should also be dismissed as they suggested that there was no corroboration of the lack of security of the accused’s gun room (i.e. the key to the gun cabinet hidden behind a table leg, shown to one Police Officer by the accused).
On 20 July 2026, the Prosecution made a lengthy submission in response to the defence’s motion, countering all of the above points, including giving examples of case law to support its case. However, although the Sheriff agreed that the footage captured was within the dates of the charges libelled, he accepted all of the other points made by the defence and made a ruling that there was no case to answer on all four charges. The defendants were then told they were free to go.
MY COMMENTARY
What follows is my opinion. It does not infer any guilt on the two defendants, but rather focuses on the mechanics of the case.
To start, it’s worth mentioning Police Scotland’s early appeal for information after they’d received confirmation from a post mortem that the first Red Kite had been shot. It was a direct result of that appeal that two witnesses came forward with their trail camera footage showing two armed men carrying a(nother) dead Red Kite, in the same area, and around the same time as the discovery of the first dead Red Kite. Some police forces don’t bother putting out appeals for information when birds of prey have been persecuted – this case highlights the value of issuing timely appeals, so plaudits to Police Scotland for making the effort to do so, and quickly.
On to the case itself…
It’s really difficult to comment on the legal complexities because (a) I wasn’t in court to hear the evidence; (b) I’m unsighted on any written submissions made to the court by both the prosecution and defence; (c) I didn’t hear, and nor have I seen, the Sheriff’s detailed explanation for his decision-making; and (d) I’m not a lawyer.
Nevertheless, the information that is available about the case raises some obvious, and in my view, serious, questions about the course of justice.
My main concern centres on the Sheriff’s ruling that the prosecution had not been able to establish, in court, the identities of the two armed men. That failure to identify them seems to be based entirely on the poor quality of the footage shown in court, even though multiple witnesses, including Police Officers, had given testimony (in sworn witness statements and in person before the court) that they had been able to identify them from the raw footage viewed at the police station.
If the video evidence in court was of such obvious poor quality, why wasn’t the trial adjourned until such time that better quality footage, which was known to exist, could be shown in court? I don’t know if a request for an adjournment was made and the Sheriff refused it, or whether it just simply wasn’t raised. It seems an absurdity to me that a trial can stand or fall on a technical failure that could have been so easily resolved.
Related to this, I don’t understand why the Sheriff was willing to accept the testimony of Mr Johnstone and Mr McGilvary that although their trail camera footage wasn’t properly time/date stamped, the footage related to the time period they’d said it related to, but then he wasn’t willing to accept the testimonies of serving Police Officers who’d stated that they’d been able to identify the suspects from footage they’d viewed at the police station. That makes no sense to me.
Another question I have relates to the apparent lack of corroboration about the alleged lack of security in the gun room. I thought that all Police Officers wore body-worn cameras these days, and that that footage is considered acceptable as ‘real evidence’ in court. Was body-worn camera footage available in this case and if so, why wasn’t it accepted? If no body-worn footage was worn, then it sounds like a fundamental cock-up was made by the Police Officers executing the search warrant, making easy pickings for the defence KCs.
From what I understand, I think the Crown Office can appeal ‘no case to answer’ decisions if it chooses to, but has to lodge an appeal within a relatively short time scale following the judgement. It’ll be interesting to see whether that happens in this case.
What we’re left with is the knowledge that two Red Kites were illegally killed in the Glenbuchat area of Strathdon during February 2025, one confirmed shot and the other one more than likely to have been shot. This area in the north-east part of the Cairngorms National Park has long been recognised as a raptor persecution hotspot but once again, the raptor killers, whoever they are, are getting away with it.
NB: For anyone considering leaving a comment on this particular blog, please remember that all charges were dropped against the two defendants. Any libellous comments, either direct or inferred, won’t be published.Comments about the legal process are welcome.
Earlier this year, retired Scottish gamekeeper David Campbell was found guilty of murdering his former colleague from the Edradynate Estate in Perthshire, Brian Low, in February 2024.
During a 13-day murder trial, the jury at Glasgow High Court heard that Campbell had held a ‘festering grudge’ against Mr Low and set out to ‘ambush’ and ‘execute’ him by lying in wait with a shotgun on a quiet country lane near Aberfeldy where Mr Low regularly walked his dog.
A couple of days ago I blogged about a forthcoming BBC documentary series, Murder Trial, which will feature the February 2026 trial of David Campbell (see here).
There’s also now a forthcoming book about the case, called Prelude to Murder: Revenge Killing on a Highland Sporting Estate, written by former Police Wildlife Crime Officer Alan Stewart and Lindsey Hamilton, Chief Reporter at The Courier.
The two authors are uniquely placed to provide first-hand accounts.
The book tracks the many police investigations into raptor persecution crimes at Edradynate Estate, in Perthshire, over a four-decade period that just happened to coincide with David Campbell’s employment as the Head Gamekeeper (1984-2018). Co-author Alan Stewart was involved in many of those investigations, as this notorious estate was on his patch as Police Wildlife Crime Officer for what was then Tayside Police.
Cleverly intertwined with Alan’s detailed, and frankly, chilling chronicle of events at Edradynate, is Lindsey Hamilton’s account of her involvement as a seasoned journalist, first sent to Aberfeldy to report on the police investigation into the murder of Brian Low, and then later attending Glasgow High Court to report on the trial of prime murder suspect, David Campbell.
Much has been written over the years about raptor persecution at Edradynate Estate and the failure to hold anyone to account, but this book contains more detail than I’ve seen published before. Similarly, the murder, the police investigation and the subsequent trial and conviction have also received extensive media coverage, but Lindsey’s first-hand experience brings insight and a real sense of the reaction within the local community.
If you want to know why sadistic gamekeeper David Campbell thought he could get away with murder, and why a local community had lived in fear of him for decades, this compelling account provides some answers. The warning signs were all there, in plain sight. It’s disturbing that a reign of terror was allowed to continue for so long, with such tragic consequences for Brian Low.
The book will be published in September 2026 and is available for pre-order, either directly from the publisher (ThirstyBooks) or if you want a signed copy, directly from Alan Stewart.
Note – the pre-publication flyer says the book is 284 pages, but it’s actually 184 pages.
Earlier this year, retired Scottish gamekeeper David Campbell was found guilty of murdering his former colleague from the Edradynate Estate in Perthshire, Brian Low, in February 2024.
During a 13-day murder trial, the jury at Glasgow High Court heard that Campbell had held a ‘festering grudge’ against Mr Low and set out to ‘ambush’ and ‘execute’ him by lying in wait with a shotgun on a quiet country lane near Aberfeldy where Mr Low regularly walked his dog.
Convicted murderer & former Head Gamekeeper David Campbell (photo by Police Scotland)
Campbell’s conviction was not a surprise to many in the local community who’d lived in fear of him for years. He’d previously been a suspect in multiple police investigations into alleged raptor persecution crimes and other offences, with traces of poison found in pockets of his clothing and in his Land Rover, as well as dead raptors found concealed under the seat of his vehicle, but he was never convicted and often not even prosecuted, due to evidential difficulties, although in one case the Crown Office’s decision not to prosecute was not supported by Police Scotland.
The BBC’s award-winning documentary series Murder Trial was given permission to film inside the High Court during Campbell’s murder trial and the two-part programme, called Death of a Dog Walker, will air in August.
‘In 2024, the body of 65-year-old groundsman Brian Low is discovered on a country track in rural Aberfeldy, his beloved black Labrador Millie by his side. Police assume that Brian has suffered a medical episode, but six days later, the post-mortem reveals the shocking truth – Brian has been shot dead. His former colleague and gamekeeper on the estate where he worked, David Campbell, now stands trial for his murder.
With the site of the murder exposed to the elements for days, police are unable to forensically link anyone to the deceased. The prosecution builds a case against the accused around smaller, individual strands of circumstantial evidence while working to convince the jury that he is guilty beyond reasonable doubt’.
‘With Brian’s family desperately seeking justice and answers, the fate of the accused hangs in the balance. Witnesses unearth more shocking revelations, and the defendant takes the stand before the jury answer the ultimate question: guilty or not guilty?
As the police investigation team finally close in on their suspect, the court are shown dramatic footage from Campbell’s custody interview where tempers flare when allegations are put to him. The prosecution point to a guilty man on the ropes, while the defence argue it shows a police force under pressure to get their man.
As the case builds to a climax, with persuasive and gripping closing speeches from both sides, Campbell awaits his fate whilst Brian’s grieving family anxiously await justice – either way, lives will change forever’.
This programme will air on BBC 2 Scotland at 9pm on Tuesday 11 August 2026 and will be available on BBC iPlayer shortly afterwards.
UPDATE 2 August 2026: Book Review – Prelude to Murder: Revenge Killing on a Highland Sporting Estate (here)
Natural England has finally, after many months of delay, published its formal review of the Hen Harrier Brood Management (Meddling) trial that ran from 2018-2024.
For new blog readers, the Hen Harrier Brood Meddling trial was a conservation sham sanctioned by DEFRA as part of its ludicrous ‘Hen Harrier Action Plan‘ and carried out by Natural England between 2018 – 2024, in cahoots with the very industry responsible for the species’ catastrophic decline in England. In general terms, the plan involved the removal of Hen Harrier chicks from grouse moors, they were reared in captivity, then released back into the uplands just in time for the start of the grouse-shooting season where many were illegally killed. It was plainly bonkers. For more background see here and here.
Male Hen Harrier (photo by Pete Walkden)
In March 2025, Natural England announced the end of the Hen Harrier brood meddling sham and noted that the so-called ‘partnership’ had now closed, although NE also said that no decision had yet been made about the potential annual roll-out of brood meddling (here).
In April 2025, Natural England announced that it had turned down a licence application from the Moorland Association for a brood meddling licence for 2025, mainly because the Moorland Association wanted to remove the licensing requirement that all brood meddled Hen Harriers must be satellite tagged (hmm, can’t think why), and also because the MA wanted a single release site for brood meddled Hen Harriers, presumably to get around the problem of there not being sufficient receptor sites/estates willing to take the young brood meddled birds on their release (see here).
This afternoon, Natural England has published three final reports as part of its review of the brood meddling trial. These are:
Hen Harrier Brood Management Trial Evaluation: The effectiveness of brood management as a mechanism for supporting Hen Harrier recovery.
Hen Harrier Brood Management Trial: Interim social science evaluation.
Hen Harrier Brood Management Trial: Findings from the social science survey of moorland managers Authors: National Centre for Social Research.
The three reports are available for download at the end of this blog. I haven’t read them yet – and probably won’t have time to do that until next week at the earliest, so will comment further once I’ve read them, if I find anything of interest.
Natural England has published a blog today, to accompany the publication of the three reports. Here’s the most relevant part:
This suggests that NE will consider brood meddling in the future, on the basis the same licence conditions used during the trial are in place (i.e. sat tagging, release site must be within the SPA from where the Hen Harriers are brood meddled etc).
Two of these paragraphs don’t make sense to me, as one contradicts the other. NE says that, “Such projects [i.e. brood meddling] should be for the explicit aim of increasing Hen Harrier numbers by reducing illegal killing and disturbance” but then in the next paragraph, it says, “It [brood meddling] is not a substitute for tackling wildlife crime“.
Eh?
The final sentence of NE’s blog is also relevant – “These views….will be kept under review as new evidence emerges“.
I don’t know if Natural England is aware, but significant new evidence on the extent of Hen Harrier persecution on UK grouse moors is on its way shortly, and if that doesn’t put an end to any idea about continuing the ludicrous brood meddling sham, I don’t know what will.
Meanwhile, here are NE’s three final reports on the Hen Harrier brood meddling trial:
Raptor Persecution UK 