Nature conservation is often about making tough decisions about when to intervene and when not to. Decisions around how best to manage land for a particular species, or how to balance the needs of people versus nature. Sometimes - as is the case for vertebrate control - these decisions can be controversial and elicit strong emotions. In the end, as an evidence-based organisation the decisions we take are judged by the outcomes we achieve.

We see the killing or removal of vertebrates as a matter of last resort that should be carefully justified on a case‐by‐case basis, rather than as a uniformly acceptable everyday management tool. When we enact this policy, we do so with a clear focus on the nature or other benefits that will come from our actions. The decision to introduce any form of vertebrate control (lethal or non-lethal) is therefore something we never take lightly. It’s always guided by the RSPB’s Council-agreed policy which predicates that any killing or taking of vertebrates we carry out will be: a) ethically acceptable, b) scientifically justifiable, c) legal and d) efficacious and practical.

Before the RSPB carries out any kind of vertebrate control, we first seek evidence that a problem exists.  If there is good evidence that it does, we look for a non-lethal solution and, if there is one, implement that. However, non-lethal methods, whilst always the preferred way of doing things, are not always practical or effective and the problem may require lethal vertebrate control.  In order to even consider this, the following four criteria must be met:

  • That the seriousness of the problem has been established;
  • That non-lethal measures have been assessed and found not to be practicable;
  • That killing is an effective way of addressing the problem;
  • That killing will not have an adverse impact on the conservation status of the target or other non-target species.

Only when these four criteria are satisfied is lethal vertebrate control undertaken.  This is the case for all the figures presented below, which are for the most recent reporting period (Nov 2021-Oct 2022).

Vertebrate control summary on RSPB reserves for 2022 (2021 in brackets)

 

 

Sites

Number killed

Reason

Mink

 17 (21)

114 (104)

Water Vole & ground nesting bird conservation

Red Fox

 34 (38)

400 (490)

Wader, tern, Black Grouse & Crane conservation

Grey Squirrel

 2 (1)

 140 (155)

Red Squirrel conservation

Mole

 1 (1)

345 (2)

Listeriosis risk in cattle

Rabbit

 2 (4)

471 (957)

Damage to crops

Goat

1 (0)

51 (0)

Woodland habitat restoration

Fallow Deer

 10 (7)

416 (53)

Woodland habitat restoration

Muntjac Deer

 6 (5)

113 (119)

Woodland habitat restoration

Roe Deer

 9 (10)

516 (357)

Woodland habitat restoration

Red Deer

12 (9)

 937 (697)

Woodland habitat restoration

Sika Deer

3 (2)

138 (177)

Woodland habitat restoration

Carrion/Hooded Crow

 7 (13)

 333 (348)

Wader, tern & Black Grouse

Barnacle Goose

 1 (1)

37 nests, 189 eggs (33 nests, 167 eggs)

Tern and Avocet conservation

Canada Goose

3 (2)

180 nests, 62 eggs (70 nests, 167 eggs)

Air safeguarding

Greylag Goose

3 (1)

175 adults, 300 eggs (485 eggs)

Air safeguarding

Herring Gull

1 (2)

4 eggs (1 shot, 23 eggs)

Roseate and Sandwich Tern conservation

Lesser Black-backed Gull

2 (3)

1 shot, 16 eggs (3 shot, 148 eggs)

Roseate and Sandwich Tern conservation

Greater Black-backed Gull

1 (0)

3 eggs (0)

Roseate and Sandwich Tern conservation