Haven for harriers: our letter in The Times

Times letter 110915 You may have seen Andrew Gilruth’s letter published in The Times on Friday, 11 September 2015.

Sir,

Defra has achieved exactly what the RSPB demanded in 2012, a hen harrier recovery plan endorsed by the landowning and shooting organisations. Now the RSPB says it cannot support the Defra recovery plan until harrier numbers have recovered (“Soldier goes into battle for hen harriers”, Sept 9). Those seeking to hinder the plan have been called “eco-activists” by the Hawk and Owl Trust’s chairman, Philip Merricks (letter, Sept 10), but I feel England’s hen harriers might have used a stronger term.

Andrew Gilruth
Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust

Comments

Non-human problems for hen harriers

at 15:30 on 17/09/2015 by Richard Austen-Baker

RSPB and general activists drawn to the hen harrier issue tend to assert that losses of hen harriers are always due to persecution by gamekeepers as part of grouse moor management. Yet an RSPB officer appears in a video (find it on YouTube by searching "eagle owl forest of bowland") saying that eagle owls should not be introduced (they have not been native for at least 10,000 years, since the disappearance of the land-bridge with the Continent) because escaped ones are already known to have killed hen harriers in Bowland. A recording of the live video feed from a hen harrier nest to the Bowland Visitors Centre shows a sustained attack on a hen harrier nest by an eagle owl. Natural England has also released statements about the eagle owl problem. Moreover, it is notable that in this year in which it has been reported that three MALE hen harriers (not the females) have deserted nests in Bowland, grouse numbers in the area are some 40% or more down on the previous year - why is it never canvassed that the males, having the opportunity, have left owing to lack of food? The RSPB likes to put forward a simple and emotive story that will raise money - like many charities, the impulse to raise money has become an end in itself and led to losing sight of the real purpose of the organization. Then come the lefty agitators like 38 Degrees, who neither know nor care about the factual background and the subtleties of the problem, but wish to batten on to an anti-toff issue.

Hen Harriers

at 16:07 on 16/09/2015 by Richard Almond

Why should Mr. Kettlewell say it is "down to the managers of moors to put matters right" as far as breeding Hen Harriers goes, when the RSPB can't breed them successfully on their own estates. What action is the RSPB taking to "deliver on Hen Harrier numbers"?

Hen Harriers

at 10:23 on 16/09/2015 by Andrew Gilruth

Thank you for theses comments. In 2012 all agreed that the hen harrier, in England, required a recovery plan. There is now no dispute that the RSPB objects to a plan because (1) there are not enough hen harriers and (2) they don't trust those on the ground to deliver results (see link below to RSPB CEO Mike Clarke's blog). We should not be surprised that the RSPB has not applied these two rules to the recovery plans of other species; neither are conservation objections. As for brood management itself, it is such a successful conservation technique that the RSPB are currently helping to fund its use to recover a species still threatened by illegal killing, the spoon-billed sandpiper (see link below). http://www.rspb.org.uk/community/ourwork/b/martinharper/archive/2015/08/11/guest-post-by-mike-clarke-hen-harriers-and-the-glorious-12th.aspx http://www.saving-spoon-billed-sandpiper.com/

Haven for harriers

at 8:34 on 16/09/2015 by Patrick Stirling-Aird

It is only the hen harrier brood management aspect of the Defra recovery plan that the RSPB will not support, at least until hen harrier numbers on the English moorlands have recovered from close to zero to some resemblance to a natural level. There is a larger, fundamental issue behind allegations of "eco-activism" and the RSPB's present stance vis-a-vis that of Defra and others. It is that this one controversial part of the hen harrier recovery plan in effect supports the continuation of grouse moor management in its present intensive form. Increasingly, evidence is coming to light that this intensive management system has damaging consequences for upland habitats beyond those of the killing of hen harriers and other nominally protected species. Rather than go down the brood management route, it would be better if all concerned were to work towards a management system with more modest expectations in terms of red grouse numbers and consequently less damage to the upland environment. This argument is valid irrespective of whether one supports or opposes grouse shooting per se.

Hen Harrier Recovery Project

at 0:01 on 16/09/2015 by Dave Stewart

The RSPB are exactly right in what they are saying with regards to The Hen Harrier Recovery Plan, but apart from that it's blatantly obvious who is to blame for the virtual extinction of this superb raptor. I do have some sympathy with the land managers and gamekeepers, because at the end of the day it's a business, and the recovery of the Hen Harrier will no doubt have some effect on Grouse numbers. Having said that this persecution has got to stop, and the sooner better.

Hen Harrier

at 19:41 on 15/09/2015 by Arthur Branthwaite

If the RSPB cannot support a positive recovery plan for the Hen Harrier , surely then their attitude is insufficient. Any effort must be surely considered positive in some regard . I think most of us would give credit to moor managers for the right mindset for the plan

Harriers

at 19:39 on 15/09/2015 by W.B.Whitcher

What evidence does M Kettlewell have to back up his comments that human actions have caused a low population of these birds, it would be good for him to clarify exactly what he means. The same old rhetoric that we have had to put up with from the birdy folk for years. One or two incidents that have been brought to light , and all of a sudden every Harrier death is attributable to human intervention ... Utter rubbish. It is widely accepted that moorland managed for grouse produces higher populations of waders , and many other birds including the beloved Birds of Prey. Until comments such as those made by M.Kettlewell cease , progress will be very slow. One thing is for sure, Harriers are nothing like as rare as the RSPB would have the public believe.

Haven for harriers

at 15:50 on 15/09/2015 by Patrick Stirling-Aird

I wrote to "The Times" following Andrew Gilruth's letter published on 11th September, but unsuccessfully. Perhaps the editor found my letter too boring or did not wish to put forward its content. My letter read as follows: "Let us be clear that it is only the hen harrier brood management aspect of the Defra recovery plan that the RSPB will not support, at least until hen harrier numbers on the English moorlands have recovered from close to zero to some resemblance to a natural level. Where at present are there the hen harrier broods to be "managed" in this way? "There is a larger, fundamental issue behind allegations of "eco-activism" and the RSPB's stance vis-a-vis Defra and others. It is that this one controversial part of the hen harrier recovery plan in effect supports the continuation of grouse moor management in its present intensive form. Increasingly, evidence is coming to light that this intensive management system has damaging consequences for upland habitats way beyond those of the killing of hen harriers and other nominally protected species. "Rather than go down the brood management route, it would be better for all of the organisations involved to work together towards a system with more modest expectations in terms of red grouse numbers and consequently less habitat-related damage to the upland environment. This argument is valid irrespective of whether one supports or is opposed to grouse shooting per se."

Hen Harriers

at 14:34 on 15/09/2015 by Mike Kettlewell

It is a fact that Hen Harrier numbers in England are lamentably low because of human actions. If DEFRA's action delivers on Harrier numbers, no doubt the RSPB will endorse it. Your careful use of language says the 'the RSPB cannot support the program'. It does not mean that the RSPB opposes the program but that it considers it insufficient and reserves it's support until the program's effects, or lack of them, are evident. I'm sure the RSPB will support actions that actually deliver on Harrier numbers. It is down to the managers of moors to put matters right.

Make a comment

Name

Email

Subject

Message