If like me you have been following this story develop over the last week or so you may be interested in the Guardian article that went out on friday.
As it mentions in the article, the RSPB have written to Marks & Spencer offering our advice and sharing our concerns over some aspects of the unsustainability of intensive grouse moor management, the use of lead ammunition and specifically the issues surrounding the hen harrier.
However, on the overall policy of selling grouse, we have no objection to the fact that Marks & Spencer are keen to sell grouse. If the produce comes from well-managed estates, which don’t kill birds of prey or take part in other environmentally-damaging practices, we believe that selling grouse could provide a valuable income from treasured and wildlife-rich landscapes.
What do you all think to it?
I'll try to keep you updated on how our discussions with M&S go.
Warden Intern at Otmoor.
I agree it sounds a bit counter-intuitive, but I'm guessing that taking away the farming of red grouse for shooting would probably see numbers drop even further. At present, the shooting estates have a very real interest in ensuring the continued survival of the species. If you stop the shooting, no-one would have a financial interest in keeping a large population (nor a reason to manage the moors in a manner beneficial to the birds).
___
Find me on Flickr / All about your camera - The Getting off Auto Index
I wish someone was running an estate purely aimed at helping the bird but there would be no financial interest in that. Saying that I'm fairly sure that some private landowners have ospreys nesting on their land and the locations still remain a secret thanks to said landowners so there are some wonderful people out there.
Our herring gulls are red listed birds. Think about that the next time you hear some flaming idiot calling for a cull of them.
I agree - it is very easy to tar all landowners with the same brush, but, like many things, we only hear about the bad apples and problems. We don't get to see the good stuff that goes on quietly, day in day out.
The problem is, doing nothing is no longer an answer. Because Man has tinkered with the environment for so long now, simply walking away and leaving it to nature wouldn't return things to they way they used to be. Red deer, left unchecked, would end up killing off the Caledonian forests (as an example) due to the way they eat saplings. Unless we re-introduce the wolf to keep numbers down naturally of course!
michael s said:RoyW,of course all relevant legislation includes no poisoning,no shooting,no destroying Hen Harriers nests to mention a few of the things these Grouse moor shoots are obviously doing and if you think they are complying then I am at a loss for words to fit the bill without being censored.I am really surprised it appears you are almost defending them.
Sooty: In my reply to your earlier comments I did not disagree that there is obviously a problem with the illegal persecution of raptors on estates that hold grouse shoots, in fact I quite clearly stated the opposite. In no way did I defend any illegal persecution by gamekeepers (or anyone else), I think that everyone breaking the laws that are in place to protect wildlife should be condemned and prosecuted, plus laws should be strengthened, and penalties increased. What I did do is to question your implication that if a grouse moor in England has no breeding Hen Harriers then that moor must be guilty of illegal persecution. The absence of breeding Hen Harriers on a grouse moor that has had them present in the past, and still looks suitable to human eyes, does not mean that the gamekeepers are "obviously doing" any of the things that you suggest here.
If the absence of a breeding species in habitat that we think is suitable is grounds for the assumption of illegal persecution, then we should also be looking at prosecuting conservation organisations (including the RSPB), churches, etc., for the illegal persecution of birds like Spotted Flycatchers - which no longer breed at many nature reserves and churchyards across the UK although the habitat remains suitable. I wonder how many pairs of Spotted Flycatchers the habitat in England should support in comparison to the actual number?
.
michael s said:You surely do not believe this bit about getting the pigeons to more or less give to raptors,they are simply protecting the lovely Red Grouse.
Yes, I do believe this. In the same way that I have no doubt that some gamekeepers illegally persecute raptors, I also have no doubt that some are attempting to use legal methods like this to limit raptor predation on 'their' grouse (although sadly perhaps a much smaller percentage than those who act illegally). Unfortunately techniques like this are more labour intensive, less effective, and probably more expensive, than killing predators - and if estates using these methods are going to be tarred with the same brush as those breaking the law anyway, regardless of their efforts, is it really any surprise that relatively few try? I also fully believe that estates where there are Black Grouse present are actively trying to conserve these and help them increase in numbers - despite the fact that they are now no longer shot (I believe the ban is still voluntary, but could be wrong, and I understand that some estates fine shooters who 'accidentally' shoot Black Grouse).
You are correct that the estates are "...simply protecting the lovely Red Grouse", that is after all their main business interest, but your assumption that none try and do this legally is unwarranted. As Whistling Joe has said, some grouse estates are now also actively trying to attract those who are interested in watching wildlife (one example: Atholl Estates - wildlife / Atholl Estates - grouse shooting). I cannot guarantee that the estate that I have used as an example does not illegally persecute raptors, but they are actively promoting the presence of various species, including Hen Harriers, and I see no reason to assume that they aren't trying to manage viable grouse moors with raptors present.
Clare Bailey said:I've just looked on the RSPB profile for the red grouse and it's amber listed. How come it's being killed and sold if its status gives cause for concern?
This is a result of the criteria which are used to group birds into each category (see here). As an extreme example, it is technically possible for a species to have quadrupled in numbers in the UK within the last ten years, to the point where all available habitat is overpopulated, but for the species to still be 'amber listed' because the UK population makes up over 20% of the European population! Red Kite is amber listed for this reason (although they still have room to spread and increase). Amber listed species should generally be considered to be species where the population trends should be monitored, rather than species that are at risk at present.
As Whistling Joe has said, if moors weren't managed for grouse shooting we probably wouldn't have as many as we do now (the population of Red Grouse is maintained at an unnaturally high level). Perhaps we should stop 'meddling', and allow a natural balance to be reached, but this would result in major changes in the wildlife around us.
�
Clare Bailey said: I wish someone was running an estate purely aimed at helping the bird but there would be no financial interest in that. Saying that I'm fairly sure that some private landowners have ospreys nesting on their land and the locations still remain a secret thanks to said landowners so there are some wonderful people out there.
Pete
Birding is for everyone no matter how good or bad we are at it,enjoy it while you can
Unknown said: I read somewhere that the birds are intensively reared it was always my understanding that Red Grouse cannot be reared in intensive conditions or is the moor going to be used more intensively ? kif so they could rear a few more to make up for what the raptors take to survive. As for selling to M & S what is the difference between this or selling to game dealers or hotels ?
I read somewhere that the birds are intensively reared it was always my understanding that Red Grouse cannot be reared in intensive conditions or is the moor going to be used more intensively ? kif so they could rear a few more to make up for what the raptors take to survive.
As for selling to M & S what is the difference between this or selling to game dealers or hotels ?
I have come to this post a bit late but do find this a bit of a strange one with 2 issues colliding. Clearly there is the BIG issue of BoP disappearing on moorlands and that should be a major concern to everyone. Secondly there is this commercial issue about whether M&S should sell Grouse.
Grouse are presumably sold all the time through game dealers and hotels (I have never been able to afford to stay at those hotels though). There is no reason why M&S shouldn't market something they can sell but for the first time the average shopper is now in a position to ask questions of an organisation and I look forward to seeing any reply they may make to the RSPB. They have reputation for being open about where their goods come from and it shouldn't be any different this time.
Pete, I think the phrase 'intensive' is used in a slightly different context here. Grouse are not raised and released like pheasants but are farmed as 'wild birds'. The 'farming' techniques allows them to occur at a much higher density than you would expect of a true wild bird and I can recall going on a grouse moor in relation to my work several years ago and being relatively excited at the potential prospect of seeing grouse for the first time. The first one I saw was excellent but after seeing 50+ in the next half a mile the enthusiasm waned a bit. Being at that unnatural high population level requires feeding, medicinal management, heather management and predator control - all of which create the concerns that are being expressed, let alone the potential after effects of lead shot in the diet.
So for me if M&S want to sell grouse let them do it but like all other food they should be in a position to declare that it complies with regulations of food safety and with the law in how it is raised. The latter might be the main issue.
[/quote]It was the intensive bit that confused me Bob,having lived and worked around moors most of my life I thought that there was some new system in place.You have not missed much by not eating the bird Bob,the sauce is usually the tastiest bit,pheasant breasts are much tastier
Facts are simple,experts predict we should have 300 pairs Hen Harriers breeding in England,whether we agree with these figures or not it is certainly miles away from the number this year of no successful nests.
Fact is if you go to Mull where either no persecution takes place or at least very little persecution then Hen Harriers in my experience are relatively successful.Perhaps even under worse conditions in spring for the chicks.
Think almost every Grouse moor is probably several thousand acres and quite capable of supporting a breeding pair of Hen Harriers.
Diversionary feeding in general is aimed at feeding Hen Harriers when they have chicks,not to protect the Red Grouse all the time and evidence is in general these estates do not take up the offer readily even when offered the opportunity by think it is rspb.
They obviously think they are better off without any on their property.
I speak in general and do not intend to tar everyone with the same brush but if there were many good guys we would have at least some Hen Harriers.
michael s said:I speak in general and do not intend to tar everyone with the same brush but if there were many good guys we would have at least some Hen Harriers.
We do have a mixture of good/bad estates in our recording area,one large estate seems to be a black hole for raptors yet one beautiful moor we visit often turns raptors up on most visits,pity we think all keepers have two heads and forked tails.Mind you the bad ones we see seem to be the pits and nothing has much chance.