UKC

>http://www.express.co.uk/news/nature/582718/Fifth-Hen-Harrier-mystery-disap...

Police are keeping an open mind, eh?

I'm not.

Of course, if the shooting estates succeed in eradicating the hen harrier that won't actually make it extinct, exactly. It wouldn't be something to be very proud of, though. And I don't imagine that the present government is likely to do anythiung much to help.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Could do with learning a lesson from the Spanish.

https://raptorpersecutionscotland.wordpress.com/2015/06/09/now-thats-a-dete...

In reply to dissonance:

Indeed!

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Simon Barnes of The Times was sacked for having the temerity to question why the estates were destroying Hen Harriers.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Ironic really, that the Forrest of Bowland's logo is a Hen Harrier.

I agree with increasing the fines, jailing game keepers and banning shooting on the estates where this happens. But is there also a case for a carrot as well as a stick?

I believe that in some areas farmers get paid for dead lambs, killed by large raptors. Could this be extended to shooting estates? Say, a harrier eats 1 grouse per day, at a cost of £2 each. So why not pay the estates that money to protect the birds? I'm sure that given the choice of either crippling fines / jail or free money for not killing the birds it would seem an obvious choice.

In reply to dread-i:

Sounds like a good idea and is used in other parts of the world I believe.

In reply to lummox:

Sacked from the Times?

In reply to dread-i:

There is already a scheme in place that provides money for diversionary feeding.
Thats leaving aside the rather large sums the estates get from the tax payer via the agricultural schemes.

In reply to Phil1919:

Yes. They said it was because they could no longer afford him. Right.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Of course let's not forget that our wise overlords have passed into law the Infrastructure Act 2015 which makes it legal to 'control' any species no longer normally resident in the UK. Meaning if the gamekeepers can succeed in illegally driving the hen harrier to extinction in the UK, they can from then on cull it legally. This was initially thought to be just poor wording but no, despite opposition it has now become law.

In reply to dissonance:

We haven't got a lot to learn about bird welfare from the Spanish, or any Mediterranean country, I suspect.

In reply to Tom Valentine:


I would tend to disagree with regards to raptor protection if that case is fairly standard there.

In reply to Alyson:

Slightly alarmed to hear of this. Having read the act though, doesn't it allow for

(a)species control agreements between environmental authorities and owners of premises, and
(b)species control orders made by environmental authorities,

rather than by game-keepers or others on their own?

Talking of poor wording, it defines: “Species” means any kind of animal or plant. Doesn't this imply sea-weed, for example, falls outside the act, it not being either plant or animal?

In reply to dissonance:

I meant bird welfare in general, since I consider all birds to be more or less equal in worth.

In reply to Tom Valentine:


Clearly some are at greater risk than others. Anyway rather than simply declaring they cant provide any lessons how about reading the link?
It may be that they could learn some lessons from the UK for some species but for raptor protection they seem a bit ahead.

In reply to dissonance:

I read the link, for what it's worth.

Yes, I agree. They could learn some lessons from the UK about some species.Like, all species. Do you actually know which species are taken in their bird traps annually, among the estimated 4 million? I don't know, neither does the Spanish government, but hey, it's OK , because they look after the raptors and raptors are cool. Right?

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

"Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust recently reported: “This is a case of genuine wildlife conflict. Hen harriers eat grouse. If there are too many harriers on a moor, a shoot becomes uneconomic.”

So there you have it. A clear admission of guilt. Sod the law. Thats for you lot and not the Game & Wildlife Conservation trust.

Ironic too that United Utilities land is/was the last strong hold of Hen Harriers in England and I think they do not allow shooting? . I assume this means then that some local estate shot the birds when they were flying off UU land or that a local keeper 'out for a walk', sat near the nest until the eggs went cold - another way of getting rid.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

ffs. Surely you can grasp the concept that they are far beyond the UK in raptor protection regardless of if they lack in other areas and hence it might be worth learning a lesson from them?
is this just whataboutery to try and deflect from the piss poor condition of many raptor populations in the UK (plus many other species particularly farmland birds but they arent often specifically targeted).

In reply to dissonance:
No, it's a genuine concern about the hierarchical perception of birds among people who purport to be concerned.

There's a mindset which says raptors can do no wrong. Try applying it to corvids.

From my own observations magpies and sparrowhawks predate on the birds in my garden pretty much the same way.
With a general licence and a decent bit of spiel I can trap magpies and probably dispatch them with a blow to the head.
Imagine trying the same with a sparrowhawk. I don't bear them a grudge, they're only doing what comes naturally, but I'm blowed if I can understand why they should be granted preferential treatment.

Then there's the red kites. In spite of observed behaviours such as taking young lapwings there is a queue of apologists trying to tell me that red kites are basically scavengers and don't take young chicks. But they do. They are predators, face up to it and stop the misinformation.

As for hen harriers specifically, during the course of my work I have seen one four times since Christmas on one of the most intensely keepered moors in the Peak.

In reply to Alyson:

>... Meaning if the gamekeepers can succeed in illegally driving the hen harrier to extinction in the UK, they can from then on cull it legally...

Cull what legally? They're extinct!

In reply to Tom Green:

Only in England. Still some in North Wales, completely coincidentally on moorland where there is no grouse shooting.

In reply to Dave Perry:



I hope to god you never serve on a jury, if that is a clear admission of guilt in your eyes, heaven help the accused.

In reply to Tom Valentine:


I have never come across that attitude. Admittedly I have come across people claiming that attitude exists but those who do so tend to be those who either dont want competition killing other birds or just want to race their pigeons and everything else be damned.


Applied it and again dont see a problem.
Corvids should have, generally, better protection so people cant just stick plentiful food in front of them and then complain when the inevitable happens.


You are inventing positions again. The fact is they are primarily scavengers but yes will predate on occasion. Which is why the RSPB do practice diversionary feeding. However, of course, if you do give a toss about lapwings then a far bigger problem is habitat loss.
Its worth noting Red Kites and lapwings manage to co exist for many years until the red kites got butchered and lapwings had their habitat destroyed.
The RSPB give the latter as part of the problem. Since the lapwings breeding areas are concentrated they are put at greater risk


I am curious what work is that?
Also its pretty stunning whilst whining about others alledgedly being dishonest you come up with such a selective statement.
When they manage to breed successfully there it might be worth taking note of. You know as compared to the complete failure in 2013 and the 1 nest, on national trust land and heavily guarded, in 2014.

I live close to the north York moors, as I understand one of the biggest open expanses of moorland in the country, yet you never see any kind of bird of prey at all. How can such a massive area apparently support no birds of prey at all. I see more birds of prey by the motorway. It's a disgraceful state of affairs.

In reply to Jimmy1976:

I blame Franco. According to Andy Farnell it's a well-known fact that overgrading tends to scare off birds of prey.

jcm

In reply to dissonance:

He's a drystone waller.

I kind of get the impression he's annoyed at how inconsistent and selective humans are, about which birds they decide are important, and has made the mistake of thinking anybody who is bothered about any of the birds which seem to be favoured over others, is themselves being as inconstant as humans in general seem to be (or seem to be to him).

In reply to Timmd:
Thank you, Timmd. You've more or less got it. I think.
And I didn't think I was whining but there you go.

In reply to Jimmy1976:
So, you don't see kestrels ?
perhaps someone who lives and works on the North York Moors will give you some guidelines.

In reply to Tom Valentine: I do work there.

In reply to Jimmy1976:

Fair enough. Very surprised that you never see any kind of bird of prey at all.

In reply to Tom Green:



Cull them should any birds try to recolonise. Sorry for not being clear.

In reply to Timmd:


Really?
It comes across to me as the tiresome fallacy of relative privation combined with the current astro turf approach of the shooting lobby, see Songbird Survival Trust etc. Even the magpie/sparrowhawk line is trotted out of that playbook.

You have to be rather dim if you cant spot why there is greater concern about the raptors than other birds and, more specifically, certain raptors,

In reply to dissonance:

Yes. I think we can be fairly confident that if there were myriad hen harriers and a just a few dozen magpies left with numbers declining, the concerns would be reversed.

There is perhaps room for criticism of our concerns in that we tend to be more bothered by birds and things we like than ugly slimey things even though both are vital to a healthy ecosystem. However, if things like hen harriers and other species at the top of the food chain are doing well, things lower down will likely be doing well too.

In reply to dissonance:

OK, humour me.
Where raptor numbers are not at risk, why is there more concern for them than for other birds?

In reply to dissonance:



That sentence comes across to me as pompous verbosity.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Ok, its because you are distorting things again, whether deliberately or not I am not sure.
Some people care more about raptors than other birds, some care more about other birds than about raptors. Then some care about equally.
My mum for example liked her garden birds and wasnt overly chuffed when sparrowhawks raided them. However she then spent the time growing out some bushes so she could relocate the feeders to somewhere which didnt allow the sparrowhawks in easily.

Now humour me.
Why are you doing your best to avoid the issue. Why do you refuse to respond to anything but just throw shit around?

How about you address the issue of this thread.
Which is hen harriers are being heavily persecuted. I could sort of understand it if it was to preserve some other birds but it isnt. it is so they can blow some other birds away later.
The same sort of people who massacre mountain hares for the same reason.

In reply to Moley:


ah well shit happens. I went the more formal route to try and avoid out right insults.
If you want to translate it as "throwing about whatabouteries and regurgitating the bullshit spread by fake environmental organisations" feel free.

In reply to dissonance:

My initial response was to your comment that we could learn a lesson from the Spanish. If giving out big fines to stop the illegal killing of raptors is the way forward, so be it.
My mistake was in not sticking to the thread title and having the temerity to suggest that in other areas of bird welfare, we could actually teach the Spanish a thing or two. I didn't think that mentioning songbird slaughter was the same as throwing shit around, but perhaps it's a topic better suited to a different thread.
As you say, different people care about different birds . Hawks and doves.

In reply to dissonance:


So what?
The fact is the sparrowhawk still needs it's supper or it starves, so it probably goes next door for it's meal. She isn't stopping the sparrowhawk from eating birds, she's simply moving her problem onto someone else - out of sight is out of mind - for her.

If someone waved a magic wand and all gardens were like hers, then many sparrowhawks would starve and the population drastically drop. Probably would anyway if everyone stopped feeding garden birds and providing easy meals for these raptors.

Anyway, I have better things to do this afternoon than argue about birds, so please excuse me.

In reply to Moley:


Nope they can, and do, raid several parts of the garden they just cant easily raid the area where there is a concentration of birds due to the feeders.

As for the feeding birds. Since the farmland round there has been monocropped I do tend towards agreeing with additional feeding to try and reverse some of the decline. Not sufficient in itself but its one way to try and stop the decline.

In reply to dissonance:



I've no idea what you're on about with play book and astro turf policy, but I can appreciate why there is concern about certain raptors

I dare say it's a discussion you should be having with Tom V.......?

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

>http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/fight-or-flight-why-is-the-h...

Goodness me. What an utter cretin Sir Ian Botham must be. Well, I mean, obviously he is - he shoots birds for fun, say no more - but he seems to have the gift for making his cretinousness publicly apparent.

jcm

In reply to Timmd:


Astro turf is an organisation which pretends to be a grass roots protest group concerned about an issue but is really a lobbying operation trying to push a particular agenda
Songbird survival trust and You forgot about the birds, which Botham fronts, are good examples. Both are run by the shooting lobby and just happen to push an agenda which suits their masters. Songbird survival trust for example is rather thin on anything other than predator control.