The voluntary approach of the Hen Harrier Action Plan has failed, leaving licensing as the only viable option.
I’m generally very patient. My natural preference is to build partnerships and work to make positive change from the inside with those who want to abide by the law and deliver progress.
However, sometimes that approach simply doesn’t work and there can be no clearer example of that right now than hen harriers, where illegal killing of this rare bird remains its most significant threat.
The RSPB played a full part in the production of Defra’s Hen Harrier Action Plan and despite disagreeing with certain points (notably brood management), welcomed its publication earlier this year. However, at the time, I noted the need for immediate progress to help build trust in the approach.
Unfortunately this has not happened.
Image courtesy of Shay Connolly
In 2015, we were all extremely frustrated by there being just six successful hen harrier nests from 12 attempts in England. 2016 is on course to be much worse, with only three nests at the time of writing, none of which are on grouse moors.
Some will argue that the weather or vole population is to blame, however, early returns from the national hen harrier survey suggest numbers away from intensively managed grouse moors in north and west Scotland have done ok. We remain convinced that the primary reason for the hen harrier‘s continuing scarcity remains illegal killing.
Simply put, hen harriers (and other birds of prey) are illegally killed on some estates because they eat grouse. Crimes are committed to increase the number of grouse that can be shot. This year, there have been a series of depressingly predictable incidents in England and Scotland, the disappearance of the hen harriers ‘Chance’ and ‘Highlander’, the use of pole traps and the hen harrier decoy in the Peak District. And as well as hen harriers, it has also been a really bad year for red kites in North and West Yorkshire with several suspicious deaths. In addition, there are more cases working their way through the legal system.
All of this adds up to a picture which shows that the commitments made in the Hen Harrier Action Plan are not being delivered. People are still breaking the law and not enough is being done within the grouse shooting community to effect change.
Some will argue that we should be more patient as behavioural change takes time. But the hen harrier does not have time on its side and the longer hen harriers remain on the brink, the greater public antipathy towards intensive grouse shooting will become.
Hen harriers and other birds of prey in our uplands will not recover without a completely different approach.
We have therefore decided to withdraw our support from Defra’s Hen Harrier Action Plan.
We have come to this conclusion because we believe that reform to protect the hen harrier will only come through licensing of driven grouse shooting where, for example, crimes committed on estates managed for shooting should result in the withdrawal of their right to operate.
A licensing system isn’t about tarring everyone with the same brush, or blaming a whole community for the actions of the few. Quite the opposite: it is effectively a targeted ban that will stamp out illegal activity and drive up the environmental standards of shooting.
Law abiding estates have nothing to fear from this system and, indeed, I believe that it is in their own interests to champion such an approach. We believe that this is the only way to deliver a significant shift in attitudes and potentially secure a future for their sport. Licensing systems appear to work well in most other European countries, so why not here as well?
We fully support the current petition in Scotland and we would like to reinvigorate the call for Defra to introduce licensing in England too.
Of course, we will continue to work on the ground with our partners, especially raptor workers (who monitor and protect birds of prey), landowners who wish to see a progressive future, local people and the police to provide the most effective possible year round protection.
My preference is always for the partnership approach, but partnership requires action from both sides. In this case, that has failed. When shooting organisations are either unable or unwilling to lead the necessary change to rein in illegal activity, then reform must be delivered from outside. That is what we will now seek to do though promoting licensing.
I fully expect our critics (such as the grouse industry funded You Forgot The Birds) to push out a wearyingly predictable series of attacks on the RSPB in coming weeks. I can only imagine that this is designed to divert attention from criminal activity on some intensive grouse moors. But this won't shake our resolve to seek change.
An early opportunity to talk more about all of this will be at the Hen Harrier Day events. I’ll be at the Hen Harrier Day North East event at the RSPB's Saltholme reserve on Sunday 7 August, while my boss Mike Clarke will be at the event at Rainham Marshes on Saturday 6 August. Other RSPB representatives will be at various of the other events too. I hope to see many of you there and hopefully many more will be able to attend other events across the country.
Together, we can and will save our hen harriers.
James Clarke,
Dear oh dear......you obviously missed the last part of my sentence. Here it is again '...or much better still, don’t!'
Slightly off-topic, but here’s some examples of anti-raptor propaganda: http://tinyurl.com/j2unwub & http://tinyurl.com/gtxkth4 & http://tinyurl.com/jx8sdon & http://tinyurl.com/j6v82hx & http://tinyurl.com/zbgmenb & http://tinyurl.com/zvgtdv9 & http://tinyurl.com/hgjozab & http://tinyurl.com/kguxng9
Keith, didn't you just tell me to 'go away'? Luckily my shoulders appear a touch broader than those of the director of anti-raptor propagandists Songbird Survival, so I won't take your On-line Disinhibition as an attempt at bullying.
Glossy Ibis (aka Richard Ebbs)
You say that “It appears at some point that you consider this blog to be a personal conversation between yourself and Martin”. Not true, only my Comments that begin, “Martin”, and then continue to ask him a couple of questions that he is best placed to answer. The ones that begin with other folk's names, like this one, I do not consider to be a personal conversation between myself and Martin.
It doesn’t surprise me that you see no evidence of On-line Disinhibition Effect (ODE) here. So let me help, comments that falsely impugn motives, opinions and imply support for illegal activities, to others, or that imply that they are speaking for other constituencies or organisations when they are not, all fall into that category. ‘If the cap fits wear it….’ as they say.
I won't be going anywhere, Keith.
And on cue, to reinforce my post to Steve J (whoever he is), like another ‘whack-a-mole’ character, up you pop with another off-topic posting. Although, to be fair, this one is less offensive than usual. For example, you are not accusing me of dishonesty, as you have done in the past, or lambasting Martin Harper, our Conservation Director, for only doing his job, or railing against him and publicly declaring that you don’t want to make any contribution whatsoever to his salary! You clearly haven’t met Martin, or if you have, don’t know him very well. On a personal and professional level, I have found Martin to be a thoroughly decent, honourable and straight fellow. You do yourself no credit with these untrue, unfair and offensive utterances.
Quite what ‘balance’ you seek is beyond me – is it because my opinions do not conform to your fixed views and other prejudices? Am I as a member and volunteer of the Society not allowed to voice my personal opinion to our Conservation Director when he asks for views from, and ‘…looks forward to continuing the conversation….’ with, members? As I pointed out in yesterday’s posting at 09:45, such on-line harassment is a form of low-level bullying and abuse, and symptomatic of the On-line Disinhibition Effect (ODE) see here – http://tinyurl.com/hw3vwo8 I suggest you read, digest and modify your on-line behaviour accordingly. ODE behaviour is corrosive and has no place on our Society’s website and blogs.
Although irrelevant in the context of this blog posting, I confirm that I am director of the pro-songbird charity SongBird Survival and that the charity is not an anti-raptor body. It is not a secret and you know this already of course as I have confirmed it here several times before, often in response to your and other vexatious posters. Moreover, as I have also told you here before, hen harriers are not an issue for songbirds so my day job is not pertinent to the topic at hand – that is my Society’s decision to withdraw support for the multi-agency Hen Harrier Action Plan. That is the issue that the rest of us are discussing. Now go away and harass someone else – or much better still, don’t!