I enjoyed speaking today at the National Gamekeepers' Organisation AGM at the very impressive JCB world headquarters.  

As expected, we did not agree on everything (for example badgers and hen harriers), but the NGO members present were polite enough to give me a round of applause even if I didn't get the standing ovation afforded to David Bellamy and Robin Page!

The debate was actually healthy and friendly. It is only through talking that we get to understand each other a bit better and that is a prerequisite to any collaboration. A battle of dogma or a war of words conducted through the media helps no-one.

As well as discussing our general approach to nature conservation, I covered the science of predation and described how our policy around vertebrate control guided practice on our reserves (as covered in my previous post).

I ended with a challenge regarding ongoing illegal killing of birds of prey. I showed a map of the number of incidents of illegal killing of birds of prey over the past ten years (c2,500) and a chart that illustrated that 70% of the 160 people convicted of offences related to bird of prey persecution between 1990 to 2012 have said that their profession or interest related to game.

I argued that every time someone with game interests is convicted of a wildlife crime, whether a member of the NGO or not, it tarnishes the reputation of the whole profession.

It is in the gamekeepers' interest to have zero tolerance of illegal activity which is why it is right that the NGO has, through its disciplinary procedures, a clear policy on those that are convicted of wildlife crime.

Every incident of illegal killing and every conviction of someone with game interests, makes collaboration harder.  

That said, we are reaching out, for example through our Skydancer programme (here), to gamekeeper colleges and offering demonstration days at our reserves, like Geltsdale, to talk about ways of reducing conflict between birds of prey and gamebirds through habitat management and techniques such as diversionary feeding.  

I ended by saying that I looked forward to the day when I didn't have to stand up at a NGO AGM and show a map of illegal killing, that I don’t hear about the poisoning of nineteen birds of prey in Ross-shire as I did fortnight ago and I no longer get calls from one of our investigators to say that police have just charged someone with game interests for illegal killing.

Instead I would be talking about how we are working together to save species like lapwing, curlew, black grouse and yes, hen harrier.

That would be a good day.  

  • I enjoyed your presentation today Martin, and applaud and commend your initiative in reaching out to the NGO (and others) - and for challenging them as well.  

    Here's hoping that your positive, can-do attitude is both adopted and implemented by the Society's representatives in the various stakeholders' forums that are currently dealing with the more intractable conservation issues.  There is no room for grandstanding or dogmatic and ideological posturing in such conflict resolution initiatives.

    And please 'encourage' those who deal with Robin Page's correspondence to adopt a more professional approach - rather sad to hear that he is often not accorded the courtesy of a reply from Europe's largest conservation charity!  

    Looking forward to seeing some tangible progress in the long-running HH saga.        

  • Well done, a very difficult tight rope to walk, but as you say "jaw jaw is better than war war". However having no breeding hen harriers in England is just not acceptable and the NGO must realise this and must take on board methods for diversionary feeding etc.

    However the gamekeepers are probably only half the story. In most cases they are no doubt acting under direction from their employees, namely the landowners, that is why introducing vicarious liability is so important.

    While the RSPB is doing so much and all it can to try to protect our birds of prey and nature generally, it contrasts vividly with how little this Government is doing. It could do so much by strongly encouraging the landowners to really "get to grips" with this disgraceful situation and really contribute to the "jaw jaw" but they sit  on their hands and do nothing.