The poor season for hen harriers was covered in yesterday's Daily Telegraph and Guardian. The Guardian basically rehashes our press release (I'm not complaining!) whereas the Telegraph quibbles a bit about whether the lack of this grouse-eater is the fault of grouse-shooters. I found the last line in the Telegraph piece very witty - you don't often find jokes in the papers' news coverage. It says that '...gamekeepers and landowners insist that shooting estates are helping to protect the hen harrier by ensuring grouse moors are well managed and maintaining native moorland.'. That was meant to be a sardonic joke, surely?
I can't find any comment from Natural England on their web page on this sorry state of affairs - although we did offer them a quote in our press release. In the past Natural England has been commendably outspoken on the subject of raptor persecution. On 22 December 2008 Natural England were happy to say 'Persecution is prime cause of harrier disappearance.'. On 2 November 2009 Natural England were happy to say '... illegal persecution has led to today’s critically low breeding numbers and patchy distribution.'. So what has happened since then? The General Election was held on 6 May 2010.
Maybe in this new age, Defra is the place to look for comment on this subject? I cannot find any comment on the Defra website - certainly not under 'news'. Bu then this isn't news is it? It is the status quo.
The Raptor Politics website is naturally concerned about the plight of this fantastic bird. Farmers Guardian and Bird Guides also cover the story.
Jockeyshield: "If management concentrated on Black Grouse not Red then the uplands would be diverse."
Never mind the colour of the grouse, management is concentrated on money.
Diversity would be much better served by the absence of management., although I can't see that happening any time soon. Even the conservation organisations don't agree - managers like to manage and for the most part they see natural processes - such as ecological succession - as negative forces to be battled rather than as a vital part of the nature they claim to be conserving.