Has a vagrant raptor become a British Cecil?

Six months ago, Cecil, a 13-year old male lion from Zimbabwe, was shot illegally by American dentist Walter Palmer. His death sparked outrage across the world, bringing trophy hunting of animals, and all the corruption behind it, into the spotlight.

Now, it seems, we’re seeing a repeat of Cecil the Lion. Only this time it’s much closer to home.

This time it concerns a red-footed falcon, a raptor usually found in Eastern Europe. An individual had been blown from its natural range to Staffordshire back in July, before moving on to Lincolnshire and then to Cambridgeshire, where, two weeks ago, it was found shot.

…and in death.

 

Red-footed falcon. In life…

 

 

 

 

 

 

Of course, this is far from an isolated case: persecution of all species of raptors is rife within the UK despite protected status for all of them. But this raptor was different; it had attracted a wide audience of twitchers, and birdwatchers of all other genres, but also those outwith the birdwatching community. The RSPB remarked how “tame” and “approachable” it was. The death of this raptor was too great to ignore, and the wider world suddenly knew about what’s been going on behind closed doors. Predictably, the RSPB put out a £1,000 reward for anyone who could provide evidence that could lead to the falcon’s killer, but that sum was soon increase to £2,500 after the previously un-political twitcher’s hub Rare Bird Alert began a crowdfunding appeal to raise money for the same cause. Suddenly, people hitherto unaware of persecution of raptors in the name of vested interests have become informed and impassioned.

People were recalling Annie: one of 2015’s Langholm Moor hen harriers. Not long after fledging, she was found shot on Buccleuch Estate, one of the sponsors of the Langholm Moor Demonstration Project. By now, the hen harrier, the UK’s most persecuted raptor, needs little introduction. The petition to ban driven grouse (sign it here ) shooting now exceeds 25,000 signatures.

Annie the hen harrier.

 

And then, just over a fortnight ago,  we saw one of the heaviest fines in wildlife crime history. Stody Estate was fined over £180,000 after the keeper employed on the estate, Allan Lambert, was charged with poisoning 10 buzzards and a sparrowhawk and possessing the illegal poisons, as well as a firearms offence. This is a new record in the UK for wildlife crime, and something we should all be proud of.

It is not to say we should be tarring everyone in the shooting industry with the same brush, and with all due respect to those committed to shooting responsibly, without lead shot, and respecting our raptors. But the new power gained by the movement against wildlife crime by the criminal killing of a red-footed falcon will, with any luck and enough people speaking out, to make those who think they can escape the law think twice, and hopefully a third time.

What does the death of a single bird by one person without morales mean? Well, in the great scheme of things, not much, just as one dead lion doesn’t mean much. But if the bird in question becomes an animal martyr, it can be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.

The hidden secrets of grouse shooting

A new, radical paper came out a few days ago. Drawn up by Andy Wightman and Dr Ruth Tingay and released by the League Against Cruel Sports, it is the first all-encompassing paper on the effects of grouse shooting to the uplands.

Grouse shooting, to those that are unfamiliar, is the industrial-scale management of habitat for shooting grouse. The Moorland Association manages 860,000 hectares of upland Britain are managed for the purpose of raising grouse to unnaturally high densities for rich people to shoot.

What’s good for grouse, however, isn’t so good for other animals- for example raptors. Take the hen harrier, a medium-sized bird of prey that is now confined to upland areas, where its prey includes red grouse. As a consequence, the English population is at a mere 6 birds– a mere 2% of the 300 hen harriers England’s uplands could support. Admittedly, this is the highest number since 2010, but this coincides with the disappearance of 5 adult male hen harriers, in succession.

The shooting industry claim to be committed to stopping this and to make sure that these criminal estates are out with their ranks. Well, the Angus Glens Moorland Group, not long before this paper was launched, created a video of keepers in the estates they represent, speaking about “the benefits of grouse”. One of the estates covered prominently in the video was Glenogil- the site of no less than 18 incidents of wildlife crime from 2006-2010. Wildlife crime incidents have also been recorded in two other estates interviewed in the video-Millden and Invermark- as well as around the towns such as Easter Ogil and Noranside. The total number of wildlife crime incidents in that area since 2003 amounts to 37. On a national scale, it isn’t much better- the Scottish Moorland Group, which claims to be “ made up of the Chairmen of six regional groups of moorland owners”, is chaired by Lord Hopetoun, owner of Leadhills Estate, the site, since 2003, of no less than 46 incidents of wildlife crime and raptor persecution.
In fact, the Scottish hen harrier population fares little better than the English one. At first glance, the population of around 500 hen harriers appears to be well-off. However, that record, taken in 2010, shows a 20% decrease from the population in 2004, and there  is enough land in Scotland to support at least 1400 hen harriers, were it not for persecution by grouse estates. And while they breed well on Orkney and the Hebrides, they do quite badly in the East Highlands and Southern Uplands– areas that are hotspots for grouse shooting. And it’s not just hen harriers doing badly- peregrine falcons, according to the latest survey by the North East Raptor Study Group, are in similar decline due to persecution through the grouse industry. Add to this the legal shooting and trapping of thousands of foxes, weasels, stoats and corvids, the image emerges of one of the largest-scale killing of predators, in the name of raising numbers of grouse.
The shooting industry could claim a bias of a paper authorised by the LACS. But the grouse sector can hardly compete with the growing evidence against the actions it performs.
They claim their upland management benefits mountain hares. Yet grouse estates cull huge numbers of hares each year- hundreds, even thousands on some estates- to try prevent louping ill virus in grouse, despite the lack of evidence that culling hares reduces the virus.

Mountain hares, culled at the aforementioned Glenogil Estate.

They claim that the activity of grouse shooting reduces demand for upland sheep farming and forestry. Well, I’ve walked on countless grouse moors, and on almost every single one I’ve come across flocks of sheep- which last year went up from being subsidised at £30 per hectare to £56 per hectare-and blocks of conifers.
They claim to be helping preserve upland peat bogs and wet heath, but the University of Leeds and EMBER study show that moor burning increases water acidity, temperature and particulate deposition, and decreases macroinvertebrate diversity.
They claim that grouse shooting is a source of income for conservation of upland wildlife. It’s true that millions of pounds are generated by people paying to shoot grouse, but if hundreds of millions are produced, why are the estates in question exempt from business rates and inheritance tax? How much money would they make if they paid these? And the figure for grouse moor employment, quoted in the paper as 2640, is a tiny sum across all of rural Britain- less than the population of the Isle of Mull.
Can grouse shooting be a sustainable and responsible field sport? It most certainly can. What’s needed is to change the way the industry works the upland land they own. Allowing the full diversity of habitats- woodland, bog, scrub, meadow and heath- is key to allowing the full diversity of wildlife. Burning grouse moors needs to stop- more natural grazing, perhaps by cattle or (controlled numbers of) deer, would be a better system. And, of course, we need to end the persecution of protected predatory birds- the golden eagles, peregrines and hen harriers.

Chris Packham vs. the hunting lobby or Who are the real extremists?

Well, what a week it’s been: I’m back at school, the Queen has become the longest reigning British monarch and the solidarity against wildlife crime movement is more active than ever! The latter is the subject of this article, and in particular one particular piece that has had the hunting brigade see red (and not just their uniforms). I refer to Chris Packham’s monthly column in BBC Wildlife, which has had the Countryside Alliance demand he be sacked from the institution.

What exactly did Chris Packham do to create this demand? Well, it appears to be he has expressed a view of his. Specifically, his latest column has called for “more from Britain’s conservation groups, not fence sitting and ineffectual risk avoidance”, referring to issues such as fox hunting, the badger cull and persecution of hen harriers on grouse moors. This has caused Tim Bonner, fresh in from his new position as head of the Countryside Alliance, to pen a post on his own blog about what Chris said.

           

Tim begins by saying “he has continued to happily use the fame given to him by his work for the BBC to promote an increasingly extreme agenda.” But what does Tim mean by “extreme”? Look up the definition of extreme, you’ll find “(of a person or their opinions) far from moderate, especially politically”, with synonyms including radical, extremist, or militant, definitions applicable to groups such as ISIS or Britain First, but not to a magazine columnist communicating ideas through the written words. Is Chris advocating blowing up laird’s mansions or beheading gamekeepers? No. So you’re not convincing me there, Mr Bonner!

Tim Bonner then goes on to accuse Chris of “blatant political propaganda”. Bear in mind, when considering this, that the man saying this stood for eight years as Conservative candidate for Truro and St Austell, and has called for people to vote a Conservative majority into power to allow the Hunting Ban to be repealed. So Bonner is being a hypocrite here.

In fact, this is far from an isolated case of bad-mouthing from the field sports lobby. Bert Burnett, one of the Scottish Gamekeepers Association Committe members, spoke angrily on his Facebook page about how the Glen Turret Hen Harrier Day protesters “interfere wi legal traps, let oot the decoys and try tae get the man [whoever ‘the man’ is] prosecuted for damage they did” (we did none of this; all we did was talk and do a few photos-trust me, I was there) before declaring “I wouldna go any place near them unless I had permission tae set them on fire“.

And who can forget Modern Gamekeeping’s March 2015 issue, in which the columnist ‘Predator’ ranted off at “A bunch of antis calling themselves Birders Against Wildlife Crime” and how “They’ll be calling on all birdwatchers, hikers and dog-walkers to turn amateur crimespotters, poking about looking for trouble where none exists, and reporting the slightest suspicion to the police”.

Tim Bonner ends by saying “the BBC’s only answer can be to remove the BBC from Chris Packham’s biography [sic] by refusing to employ him any more.” 

This incident only shows we are winning. Wildlife crime is becoming an issue of increasing public awareness, people now know about the death of hen harriers on grouse moors and the criminals within the shooting industry, leading to the industry trying to defend themselves in increasingly fascistic ways. And if Chris Packham were to be sacked by the BBC and his human rights to free speech revoked, it will only make us stronger.

You may write me down in history, with your bitter, twisted lies.

You may trod me in the very dirt.

But still,

like dust,

I rise.