Last week I spent two half days, and some time in a bar in between, with a bunch of RSPB site managers (or wardens as we used to call them!) talking about fox control.
We have over 200 nature reserves and we cull foxes on about 20 of them, so, as written before, we use fox control as a management option but not as a standard management prescription. Our main reason for fox control is where we have vulnerable populations of breeding waders such as lapwing, redshank and snipe and where we believe that foxes are making a big difference to their numbers or breeding success.
But getting out the rifle is not the only option - non-lethal methods may be more effective, cheaper and more acceptable to the public or to our staff. One option is fencing, and the results of some trials are described in the RSPB Reserves review for 2010 (see pages 34-35 of the document or pages 36-37 of the pdf). A couple of different fence types have been tested but both have electric strands. One advantage of fences is that, as well as foxes which we know can be important predators of waders nests, they also exclude badgers which are more occasional nest predators. Another advantage is that you aren't up late at night with a reifle trying to get a clean shot at a wary animal.
The results are encouraging but we are a cautious bunch so we aren't claiming anything yet. I can't see fences being very useful in the uplands but in lowland areas they may have a part to play. We'll see.
I live in the countryside and hardly ever see a fox. Most of my recent sightings have been in London on early mornings where just as the foxes seem very nonchalant about people, most Londoners seem very relaxed about urban foxes. I get quite excited when I see a fox - they are lovely animals. But I don't, personally, have any problem about a bit of fox control to protect birds of conservation importance.
But we, the RSPB, do take a particularly strict line on predator control on our own land. We don't use snares. We don't use dogs to flush foxes underground or above ground. And we try very hard not to shoot at times when we might kill lactating vixens with young cubs underground. Those constraints don't make fox control very easy compared with the job a gamekeeper can do.
Overall, over the last few years, (2005-2009, see the Reserves Review) lapwings and redshanks have increased in numbers on our nature reserves (and that isn't because we've added more land - it's true of the land we started with in 2005) so unless lots of waders flock into our reserves every year (which is just possible) we can't be doing too much wrong. But lapwing and redshank numbers fell a bit this year (2010) so there's nothing to be complacent about.
A love of the natural world demonstrates that a person is a cultured inhabitant of planet Earth.
Snares: I know it is your agreed Council policy - but why? It is a legal, effective and humane management tool (or, if you prefer, "the least inhumane method of pest control", according to a senior vet who gave evidence to the Scottish RAEC).
Mustelids: No, you're right, not many stoats at Otterburn. But there are plenty of other places where their impact on ground nesting birds, eg waders and blackgrouse, is considerable, with peer reviewed science to prove it. Besides, the quote about them being one of the most important nest predator species came from a paper by the RSPB's own scientists Macdonald and Bolton. If you don't think they're that important, why say so in your lapwing information leaflet?
Who is talking about managing every predator to oblivion? I'm not, and nor I am sure is Phillip Merricks. As for the hapless Lindsay Waddell, he was merely the messenger, quoting Merricks' paper in the October issue of British Wildlife.
The issue is trying to ensure a sustainable population of waders. Where the rate of hatching and fledging success falls below a certain level then we surely have a species of conservation concern. Merricks would say that predator control is an essential ingredient - one of several - in any management solution; so do Lindsay Waddell, trimbush and I. So, it would appear, does Ian Newton. What about you?
All - I thought you'd be interested in this subject!
A few points now - but I will come back to this subject fairly soon.
Snares - we don't use them because that is our agreed Council policy. But we haven't campaigned against their use by others (we have expressed some concerns about capercaillie being caught in snares in some parts of Scotland). That hardly seems an absolutist position - just our choice! Others can use snares as long as they remain legal. I thought that there was quite a chance that snares might be outlawed in some parts of the UK - but I may be wrong as we don't enter into this debate ourselves.
Badgers and ground-nesting birds - yes they do take some nests (of course) but our studies suggest they are much much less important than foxes.
Fences - did you look at the results in the link? They do look very promising so why not use them?
Stoats/weasels - not many killed in the GWCT Otterburn study which helped show that predator control can increase wader breeding success and numbers - and little evidence from our work that they are that important. Rarely seen on nest cameras monitoring predation events.
Badgers and TB - think Nightjar is right in saying that the science shows that badger culling may increase TB levels - this is the perturbation effect which is well-established - but is not the only thing to consider in this complex question. I'll come back to badgers and TB some time soon too.
Titchwell is a nature reserve not a bird reserve - last time I looked stoats were part of nature too. The idea that every predator must be managed to oblivion on a nature reserve would strike most people as a contradiction in terms. Lindsay Waddell though, is a gamekeeper, so has a very different perspective.
RSPB culls some predators on some of our nature reserves - we do it to protect species of conservation concern. We also use non-lethal methods if we think those will work. And we take animal welfare issues into account in how we carry out predator control.
... and why does the RSPB adopt such an absolutist stance on snares? After all, the Scottish Government acknowledges that they are an essential tool in countryside management. And the Rural Affairs and Environment Committee has just today come out in support of them.
Where birds of conservation importance are in serious decline and even at risk of extinction, as some wader species are in many parts of the country, including (it has to be said) on your own reserves, don't you have a duty to use every legal tool available to you?
Nightjar - "hard science"? Do you refer to the RBCT by the ISG?
Sadly - Your 'understanding' of these matters undermines everything else that you have previously said.
You should seek the truth - the whole truth and nothing but the truth - and learn to recognise it.
When badgers were gassed in setts - a mere 300 infected cattle were slaughtered each year
As the culling strategy 'softened' it gradually rose to some 4,500 infected cattle per year in 1996
When New Labour ceased culling in 1997 it rose from 4,500 to the present 35,000 per year - QED
Get a grip!
"LW suggests the RSPB stops moaning at farmers and gets on with producing more chicks."
Bad news stories help hold up RSPB subscriptions ;-)