Songbird Survival have been in the news a bit recently - and I wrote a blog concerning them just recently (here) to add to a few mentions they have had in the past (click here, here and here).
One of their supporters appears to be Mr Mark Osborne, a game manager from Banbury, who wrote recently in the Farmers Weekly about the 'extraordinary imbalance' of raptors. I've met Mr Osborne a couple of times and he is a well known figure in shooting circles.
When I say that he is well known in shooting circles I refer to the fact that apparently he is known for his ability to take a poor grouse moor and turn it around. James Marchington, an occasional poster on this blog, and one of the most reasonable figures in the shooting community (at least on a good day) wrote of Mr Osborne's bad luck in running moors where illegally killed eagles have been found over the last few years. And the Guardian has mentioned Mr Osborne's name too.
But Mr Osborne usually keeps out of the limelight so it's interesting that these days he appears to be emboldened to speak on the subject of raptors. And he is not that keen on raptors - I got that impression when we met.
Mr Osborne writes of the 'massive localised damage being caused by some raptor species' and 'We in the countryside are going to have to accept often significant damage caused by raptors, but equally if this damage is at a level that threatens to wipe out the prey species, or even take their populations to a vulnerable low, then we should be unequivocally pushing for control of raptors in some format. That way we may actually make some progress.'.
Well, apart from the fact that I live in the countryside, and used to live in the countryside near Banbury where Mr Osborne lives, and I don't share Mr Osborne's views, this is the clearest call for a long time for a reduction in protection for raptors. This subject never goes away. Those 210,567 signatures calling for the protection of birds of prey may well come into their own again in the future.
Another trustee of Songbird Survival, Robert Middleditch from Suffolk, was outspoken as an opponent of the proposed reintroduction of sea eagles to Suffolk. He feared that these eagles would further reduce farmland bird populations. The prospect of an eagle chasing a skylark or a linnet or a corn bunting takes quite a stretch of the imagination. The ecological understanding embedded in these statements is poor.
And it's interesting that some of those supporting Songbird Survival such as Lord Coke and Mr Osborne come from a shooting background.
A love of the natural world demonstrates that a person is a cultured inhabitant of planet Earth.
"To take one paragraph out of 56 pages of a research report and use it to claim the RSPB is calling for predator control is a bit strange."
Bob, good morning. Nowhere do I claim that the RSPB is calling for predator control.
If you read my post, waht I say is that the RSPB themselves carry out predator control. I also point out that the RSPB report states that more research is needed in this area.
In regards the latest RSPB research into predation on ground nesting birds, I am aware of it. Also of much other research in that area. While habitat control is of paramount importance, when predation is a major factor, and alternative methods of controlling the probelm, as advocated by RSPB fails, then predator control needs to be resorted to, as proven by the RSPB themselves in many cases.
"............their own charter would require them to fight against."
I am also cognizant of the wording of the RSPB Royal charter. I cannot remember a clause that says they only need to protect some birds, but may cull others.
Mark, thank you for your welcome to the blog.
Not just historical use of predator control Mark, this is still current on many RSPB reserves and has been going on throughout your tenure with RSPB. If these alternative measure of controlling predators and if habitat management was enough, why is it that RSPB still control predation on reserves through use of larsen traps and other methods. As you say, RSPB
"I wouldn't want to generalise.................."
But you do Mark.
In regards
"Legal predator control is legal and we have not campaigned against it. "
The Songbird Survival & G&WCT research study is being done under license and is therefore legal. It is also fulfilling the RSPB call for more research in this important area where there is a paucity of research.
Why then are you campainging against it?
My main concern in this whole issue is that the constant sniping at farmers, other charities, conservationsist, landowners and the G&WCT and shooting fraternity - " the dark forces" as I constantly see them referred to on the RSPB fora is not conducive to furthering conservation of all species and the environment. Because some people may carry out the abhorrent practice of illegal persecution of raptors, this should not lead to the generalization that all landowners or shooting interests do nothing of value in the conservation area, but only take "relish" in killing.
If habitat was the sole criteria for healthy bird population, then the RSPB have failed miserably in the last 20 years. They have control over 200+ nature reserves covering 130,000 + hectares and huge resources in manpower and money, yet we see decline in many species, even on the reserves.
To ignore any aspect of conservation management because it may not sit well with sections of the membership, and to antagonize a large section of the community and landowning fraternity does not to me seem like a good way forward.
Conservationists / landowners / government bodies and the shooting fraternity must work together.