The content of the Hen Harrier Action Plan has once again been subject to much commentary through social media (see here and here) .  This was triggered by news that another conservation organisation, the Hawk and Owl Trust, has agreed to run an experiment to test a scheme known as brood management.

This is not the way to formulate policy in a highly contested area and it reinforces my view that the brood management scheme should have been put out to public consultation.  There is little trust between the grouse and raptor communities and I fail to see how deals done behind closed doors will instill confidence.

Our position on the Action Plan and the proposed brood management scheme – see here - has not changed.

We believe brood management could merit experimental investigation in the future, but only once hen harrier numbers have recovered to a pre-agreed level and less interventionist approaches, particularly diversionary feeding, have been widely attempted.

We think that’s reasonable, given that it gives estates a chance to tackle impacts through diversionary feeding, and puts the beleaguered hen harrier first by giving the species a chance to recover naturally.

Those designing or promoting the plan will have to answer a number of questions to carry public confidence (we've posed 25), but by far and away the most important ones are...

1. What are the objectives of the trial?

2. What is the legal basis for carry out such a trial?

The former matters because a trial is a trial – it is designed to test a proposition and report on whether it was successful.  The latter – well, you’d want any scheme to operate within the law wouldn’t you?  But, given there is a proven and less interventionist way of reducing predation of grouse by hen harriers (ie diversionary feeding) or reducing illegal killing (ie stop illegal killing), I remain unclear as to how a trial would respect protected species legislation.

While all of this is rumbling on, I thought it would be useful to reiterate what we should all be trying to achieve i.e. recovery of one England’s most threatened species.

Back in 2011, the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) published ‘A Conservation Framework for Hen Harriers in the United Kingdom’ http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/jncc441.pdf . The JNCC provides the Government with advice on nature conservation issues. The document sets out targets for what is known as favourable conservation status and identifies the constraints acting on hen harrier populations across the UK. But, what is this so-called favourable conservation status and what does it mean?

The wording in the EU Birds Directive and Habitats Directive is the key. They say that ‘‘conservation status of a species means the sum of the influences acting on the species concerned that may affect the long-term distribution and abundance of its populations’’ and that ‘‘the conservation status will be taken as ‘favourable’ when:

  • population dynamics data on the species indicate that it is maintaining itself on a long-term basis as a viable component of its natural habitats;
  • the natural range of the species is neither being reduced nor is likely to be reduced for the foreseeable future; and
  • there is, and will probably continue to be, a sufficiently large habitat to maintain its populations on a long-term basis.’’

Favourable conservation status does not mean that when criteria are reached populations can be capped or managed through culling. It simply defines a ‘safety net’ to ensure populations, like that of the hen harrier in England, do not drop below dangerous threshold and when they do, that urgent action should be taken to seek recovery.

In the current JNCC Framework, regional targets for favourable conservation status were set as follows:

  • A minimum of 1.2 young fledged per breeding attempt; • at least 44% of the apparently suitable habitat occupied; and
  • a density (number of pairs per 100 km2) threshold of 2.12 pairs per 100 km2 of suitable habitat.

Based on an estimate of 6,636 km2 of habitat, this suggests that England should be supporting at least 61 pairs to achieve favourable conservation status. Yet, based on the total area of suitable habitat available and the best available data at the time, the authors estimated that the potential English population could be as high as 323-340 pairs.  I understand that a second version of the JNCC Framework is to be published soon.  We'll see if the numbers change.

In 2014, there were only four successful hen harrier nests in England. So, whether you agree with JNCC’s criteria or not, we have a very long way to go to reach their estimate for favourable conservation status and even further if these birds were left to settle and breed in the areas where they should be an integral part of our countryside. Whatever methods Defra decides to back in the Hen Harrier Action Plan, we believe the test of its success will be the recovery of the hen harrier across all suitable habitat and that this should be the ultimate objective.

The RSPB will work with everyone who wants to secure favourable conservation status and then build on that to secure full recovery across suitable habitat. That’s why we support the majority of the Defra-lead Hen Harrier Action Plan (the actions that tackle illegal persecution threat directly and promote diversionary feeding) and are stepping up our own efforts through our new EU LIFE+ funded project. You can read more about this new and exciting project and how you can get involved at http://www.rspb.org.uk/henharrierlife/.

 

  • Martin - you omit to mention that we have spent seven years trying to make diversionary feeding work at Langholm. It has failed to restore the grouse population - nor is it predicted to work unless new raptor management options are adopted alongside it.

  • Rob - those who persecute hen harriers already have a reason not to - it's illegal. And has been illegal for decades.  But they seem to think that that particular law should not apply to them because it is inconvenient  They put themselves above the law for their own selfish ends.

    Your suggestion is not being brave - it's being craven. Standing up to bullying is brave. Well done RSPB.

    A love of the natural world demonstrates that a person is a cultured inhabitant of planet Earth.

  • Nothing but the fullest support for what you have set out here Martin.

    To all conservation organisations concerned about the preservation of the Hen Harrier and all the other wildlife associated with our uplands, I would say it is very important in this battle, that a consistent common policy and front is presented to the shooting industry, the owners of driven grouse moors and Defra. If this is not done then for sure the shooting industry and grouse moor owners will play one organisation off against the other with a consequential weaking of the cause.

    Some interested conservation organisations and individuals may well have some  differences of emphasis on policy and the way ahead etc. However I believe the RSPB is the best qualified organisation to lead this battle for the Hen Harrier and other upland wildlife. It therefore behoves these other conservation organisations with any differences of view, in the final analysis, to sink those differences and give all support to the RSPB in this most important cause.

    redkite

  • Yes Martin - did you see my comment underneath Stuart's blog?! I am acutely aware of the report having assisting the Langholm Moor Demo Project partnership turn the 'hard wrought' science into a readable (arguable!) document.

    The results are not to everyone's taste but then very little in human:human conflicts is. If we actually see who's involved, we might be able to try trusting each other to then find a workable way to help wildlife. See this paper from recognised expert conservation scientist Steve Redpath www.scribd.com/.../Tilting-at-wildlife-reconsidering-human-wildlife-conflict

    Fighting for wildlife is one thing, painting ourselves into a corner is another. The RSPB is running its great LIFE+ project but you can't 'own' it all. Enlightened grouse moor owners have said they want more harriers on their moors - if they can deliver this biodiversity public benefit, then who are we to try and prevent it.    

    www.robyorke.co.uk