It's good to see (here) the shooting community supporting the need for a recovery plan for the hen harrier in England - this is a positive step forward.
As I have written previously (for example, see here), we want a world richer in nature and we want to see a recovery plan that does what it says on the tin, i.e. it secures recovery for the hen harrier in England. This is something to which the UK Government is committed to through its Biodiversity 2020 Strategy and for which it has legal obligations under the EU Birds Directive.
A target-led approach to species recovery which focuses on tackling the key threats has long been a theme of nature conservation and, indeed, was the basis of the UK Biodiversity Action Plan established in 1994 by the then Environment Secretary, John Gummer, now Lord Deben.
In our discussions with Defra, we have sought to ensure that the developing plan focuses attention on the right issues, especially tackling the root causes of decline. In the case of the hen harrier, the key threat constraining recovery is illegal persecution.
There has been some debate about the relative merits of a so-called brood management scheme (BMS) whereby hen harrier chicks would be removed from a moor when a threshold of birds was reached to remove perceived predation pressure on grouse.
This is an idea that emerged a few years ago and which we have given considerable thought – indeed we even wrote an article in the Journal of Applied Ecology on the subject in 2009 (see here).
We have concluded that this may merit experimental investigation in England 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.
It is regarding the conservation target that we and the shooting community differ. They would like to pilot the BMS now. We think this is not only premature but potentially not compliant with existing legislation. It would also send a terrible signal to nature conservation that it is appropriate to 'manage' a highly threatened population of an iconic species.
To survive in the 21st century, driven grouse shooting must be able to demonstrate that it can operate in harmony with healthy populations of birds of prey like the hen harrier and that it can address the other negative environmental impacts associated with grouse moor management (here). This is why we think it is right and timely to license driven grouse shooting.
The conflict between grouse shooting and environment is understandably becoming an increasingly emotive debate and there have, over the past three years, been four separate e-petitions on the Number 10 website about birds of prey and grouse shooting. Most people want the wildlife in our uplands to flourish and I note the growing support for Hen Harrier day being organised on 10 August. While I shall be on holiday for the day itself, I shall be there in spirit hoping that it helps put a spotlight on illegal killing. I know many RSPB supporters, staff and volunteers will be attending and adding their support to the call for the end of illegal persecution of the hen harrier.
In the meantime, we look forward to continuing our work with Defra, the shooting community and others to secure an effective hen harrier recovery plan so that everyone can get behind it soon. It's only by working together that we'll save the hen harrier and we're determined to reach an agreement.
Nightjar, Ollie,
Your gracious apology fully accepted - thank you. Yes, we both want the same thing, which is more Hen Harriers in UK, not just England.
I happen to feel that the best way to resolve this conflict, is in an incremental, inclusive fashion and to give the Defra Plan a chance. It would be tragic if it too was consigned to the rubbish heap of past failed initiatives without a shot at breaking the decades old logjam.
Running a pilot BMS (as proposed by Professor Steve Redpath of Aberdeen University) in parallel with the remaining 2 years of the Langholm Moor Demonstration Project, would give those brave interlocuters who are struggling to resolve the conflict through dialogue, not confrontation, another ‘tool’ or technique around which to help broker agreement.
Martin is correct, the debate has become too emotional. Sadly, this is what happens when frustrations at the slow pace of progress, and in the absence of any detail from ‘closed’ negotiations, allow polemicists and other mischief makers to fill the void. Polarisation of the debate is not in anyone’s interests and certainly not in the Hen Harriers’.
Best wishes
Keith C(owieson)
Keith C - I apologise for jumping to the conclusion that you were a member of the shooting community. That was clearly a mistake, based on your support for the Recovery Plan in its current form and your link to the e-petition written by Andrew Gilruth, who is the marketing director for the GWCT.
If you read my comment again, you will note that I didn't accuse you personally of any criminality at all. My name is Oliver Wright. I am happy to admit that the persecution of Hen Harriers makes me 'furious', but I'm not sure if I'm guilty of 'self-righteousness' and, being aware of the law as a trained journalist, I'm certainly not guilty of 'libel'.
As Martin points out, this is a very emotive issue and one that has touched me very deeply. The reason for my exasperated comment was probably because I've made the mistake of engaging with this issue on Twitter and found the reps of the shooting industry to be pretty intransigent. Just today, Mr Gilruth tweeted me to accuse the RSPB of wilfully holding up the Recovery Plan in order to 'raise more money', which makes a bit of a mockery of their public position of 'working together' with other stakeholders.
From the nature of your reply, it is obvious that we both want - very much - the same thing, which is more Hen Harriers in England. Again, I apologise for any offence caused and will try to be a bit more measured in my next post.
It's up to Martin and his team to fight for the birds as best they can and I have faith in them and their position. Let's hope that we see real progress in the coming months.
Best wishes,
Ollie
keith c - you have disclosed that you are the Chief Exec of Songbird Survival here, have you? Because you are, aren't you?
Martin - thanks for mentioning Hen Harrier Day and thanks for the RSPB support for it. The event in the Peak District two weeks today is fully subscribed (the site won't take any more people) and I'm glad that RSPB staff, Wildlife Trust staff and Hawk and Owl Trust staff intend to be there in an official capacity - that's great.
Martin - thank you also for the RSPB supporting (by doing a lot of the work - thank you) a social media thunderclap on Hen Harrier Day which is gathering fantastic support. I'm sure you will plug it on your blog but here's the link for people to sign up to it if they use Twitter, facebook or tumblr www.thunderclap.it/.../14411-hen-harrier-day The simple message that we support Hen Harriers will go to over 600,000 people across the world and that number is growing all the time (so, thank you, again, RSPB for your support). This thunderclap is supported by the RSPB, Chris Packham, the Green PArty of england and wales and the Laeugue Against Cruel Sports - quite a mixture - as well as hundreds of 'ordinary' birders and conservationists like myself.
And that link to ban driven grouse shooting is here epetitions.direct.gov.uk/.../65627 as keth c's huffings and puffings have pushed it down to the bottom of these comments! over 9200 signs - it would be good to get to 10,000 by Hen Harrier Day - as Glossy Ibis says - it sends a strong message.
Always Martin,
Just not used to being falsely accused of criminal behaviour in a public forum by someone hiding behind a pseudonym, whom I have never knowingly met and who clearly hasn't the foggiest about me.
He can put up or shut-up, whoever he is, heat or no heat.
Martin,
Thanks for your considered response. You are right, it is for Defra to decide whether to publish the draft? Joint Plan - here's hoping that they will decide to do so. There is a lot to be said for letting light fall on these sort of negotiations when they reach an impasse. Transparency can be a great stimulus sometimes.
WRT whether the EC would grant a derogation to allow BMS given that other non - interventionist measures (such as diversionary feeding) have not been applied, my point was that if the plan is published, then both DF and a pilot BMS could run concurrently, and provide data to be incorporated in the final Langholm conclusions and recommendations. Thus 2 enabling mechanisms could exist, on the shelf, for immediate roll-out when the 26 year conflict resolution 'experiment' & demonstration project, finally concludes.
Additionally, if the IUCN and French Defra-equivalent were happy with a brood management scheme during the Breeding Montagu Harriers v Harvesting of Cereal Crops conflict there, then that seems to me like a reasonable basis for a precedent from which to proceed.