“I can assure you the Guardian story was rubbish, but then so was the Telegraph headline. There has [...]]]> After the publication of various conflicting accounts by the Telegraph and others (see below) regarding the position of its chairman, Sir Simon Jenkins, and the Trust itself, Sir Simon Jenkins clarifies the position of the National Trust on this subject below:

“I can assure you the Guardian story was rubbish, but then so was the Telegraph headline. There has been no change of policy. We are basically against these things wherever they might intrude on the landscape, and are currently protesting against more farms than I can name, including the Atlantic Array in the Bristol Channel and various outrages in Northamptonshire. We have a few small turbines on our land where farmers use them for themselves.

Fear not for the Trust, only for the countryside!”

Sir Simon kindly added today: “You can quote me anywhere you like, especially on wind farms!”

He also confessed to stealing 12 [...]]]> Matthew Gonshaw, regarded as  a serial egg collector with an obsession for rare birds eggs has been jailed for stealing hundreds of eggs including  golden eagle and osprey. When police raided Gonshaw’s east London home more than 700 eggs taken from nests, camouflage clothing, climbing equipment and maps of nesting sites were discovered.

He also confessed to stealing 12 avocet eggs from a nesting site on Two Tree Island in Essex.

Gonshaw also took eggs of other birds including peregrine falcon, dotterel, redwing and Merlin.

Gonshaw, 49, has previously been jailed for similar offences.

Although Gonshaw was given a six months sentence after admitting 10 charges of theft and possession of rare birds eggs by Thames Magistrates’ , despite being sent to prison on three pervious occasions he has failed to learn any lessons.

The Metropolitan Police were first alerted to Gonshaw illegal activities in June 2011 after intelligence claimed he had a large number of wild bird eggs which he was keeping at his address in London.

Mark Thomas from the RSPB’s Investigation Department said “Stealing the eggs of eagles and osprey is amongst the worst wildlife crimes possible in the UK” “It is clear the current powers available to the court have had very little impact on this individual, who has been jailed three times previously.”

Stephen Rodgers, of the Met’s Wildlife Crime Unit, said: “This is one of the most serious cases of wildlife crime I have had to investigate. Gonshaw’s actions directly jeopardize Britain’s wildlife and his obsession with collecting eggs threatens some of our rarest and most precious species.”

“We hope that this result here at court sends out a clear message that, together with our partners from the RSPB, we will work to protect Britain’s birds for future generations.”

In 2002 Gonshaw was jailed for three months over his egg collection.

In court he was described as a loner who abused his encyclopaedic knowledge of birds.

An Asbo application relating to Gonshaw is due to be heard on 17 February at Stratford Magistrates’ Court.

Read more on this story plus images here.

Related Stories

Man jailed for rare egg thefts 22 April 2002.

It just goes to show there are responsible organisations associated with raptors and their conservation who are only too willing to give their full support to Mrs Harper’s e-petition to protect birds of prey despite claims to the contrary. Indeed Chris Packham heads the Hawk and [...]]]> Call to stop killing of birds of prey by the Hawk & Owl Trust

It just goes to show there are responsible organisations associated with raptors and their conservation who are only too willing to give their full support to Mrs Harper’s e-petition to protect birds of prey despite claims to the contrary. Indeed Chris Packham heads the Hawk and Owl Trust campaign posted on the Hawk & Owl web site several months ago calling for the killing of birds of prey to stop.

This is what the Trust’s Web site says.

Tighten law against employers connected to persecution

An independent e-petition has been posted on the UK government website calling for Vicarious Liability for raptor persecution in England. This would mean that landowners/employers who encourage, allow or turn a blind eye to bird of prey persecution by their staff can themselves be prosecuted. This measure is available to prosecutors in Scotland, but not yet in England.

The Hawk and Owl Trust is formally supporting this e-petition as part of our campaign to halt the persecution of all birds of prey.

Please take a few moments to sign up – and also encourage others to sign, too.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/23089

The details posted on the Hwk & Owl web site can be found here.

Packham heads crusade to halt shooting of birds of prey

NEWS RELEASE 22 April 2010

Television wildlife presenter Chris Packham, as the new President of the Hawk and Owl Trust, is calling for a complete end to the shooting of birds of prey. He is spearheading the Trust’s crusade to stop persecution of these magnificent creatures so that they can achieve their full potential.

“The Hawk and Owl Trust feels that it is completely unacceptable for any bird of prey to be killed – and should remain absolutely illegal. It is time for all who want to make Britain a better place for birds of prey to take a firm stand,” said Chris. “We want to see the bad old days, when land managers tended to reach for the shotgun first, consigned to the past.

“Yes, birds of prey are predators – but predation is both natural and essential for life. It drives evolution through natural selection and improves the genetic stock – the fitness – of both predator and prey species.”

As Hawk and Owl Trust President Chris succeeds actor Liza Goddard, who has just headed a highly successful 40th anniversary appeal for the wildlife charity as the culmination of nine years in the role. “She has been a tremendous, active advocate for the Trust and we are extremely grateful for all she has done,” said Chairman Barbara Handley.

The Hawk and Owl Trust is a national charity working to conserve wild birds of prey and their habitats. Chris has supported it since his youth when he and fellow members helped to warden the UK’s remnant population of red kites, which were just hanging on in mid Wales. More recently he has given up his time to help the Trust in a number of ways, including launching its Adopt a Box scheme in 1992.

Chris said: “Birds of prey are protected by law and there’s a very good reason for that. They are a crucial part of our natural environment – in fact, key indicators of its health – but are only just recovering from centuries of persecution, habitat loss and, in the 20th century, drastic pollution from now-banned pesticides. Numbers are still way below what they were before the gung-ho persecution of the 19th century when birds of prey, seen as a threat to game, were poisoned, trapped or shot. Egg collectors and taxidermists also helped to push many species towards extinction.

“Unfortunately, the RSPB’s latest Birdcrime figures include 210 reports of shooting and destruction of birds of prey in one year. That’s 210 too many – and those are only the incidents that are actually reported!”

The Trust’s firm stand against persecution – of any kind – reflects its commitment to helping bird of prey populations reach their full potential. Through its education centres and community projects, it is helping young and old to appreciate the importance of birds of prey. By supporting practical research it is increasing knowledge and understanding of them. Within the limits of its resources, it is backing with expert advice and practical conservation action anyone who wants to help them by reversing the great loss of habitat.

“We have a great track record of working on our own reserves and with others across the UK to create and manage vital habitat for birds of prey and the whole web of life on which they depend,” explained Chris.

“In the case of the barn owl, the Trust’s work with farmers and other land managers to improve habitat and provide nest sites has demonstrated conclusively the effectiveness of this approach.

“Similarly, the Trust is proving highly successful in creating habitat for marsh harriers on its own Sculthorpe Moor Reserve in North Norfolk, in restoring land for hobbies and buzzards on its Shapwick Moor Reserve on the Somerset Levels, and in managing Fylingdales Moor conservation area in North Yorkshire for merlin, short-eared owl and harriers.

“The Hawk and Owl Trust is keen to support the rural economy and if people feel that birds of prey have an economic impact we will work with them to secure a solution.

“But there is no excuse for shooting birds of prey, poisoning them or crushing their eggs – these are all 19th century reactions. There are other solutions today. Whether the problem is real or merely perceived, the last thing anyone should do is reach for a gun. Killing birds of prey is completely unacceptable under any circumstances. Where populations of other species are declining we need to identify the cause and not blindly blame birds of prey when farmland and songbird numbers, for example, are down primarily because of habitat loss.”

In the last couple of decades there has been much [...]]]> For over 20 years I’ve dealt with the dirty world of bird of prey persecution offences. In addition to dealing with a depressing catalogue of magnificent birds which have been shot, trapped and poisoned it has also provided an insight into why this problem won’t go away.

In the last couple of decades there has been much to celebrate with increases in buzzards and marsh harriers and successful re-introductions of red kites and white-tailed eagles. However, in the uplands of northern England and Scotland, where land is managed for red grouse shooting, the situation remains depressingly bleak. Species like golden eagles and hen harriers continue to be badly affected by illegal persecution. Last year a perilous four pairs of hen harriers bred in England, despite habitat for over 300.

Unpopular

My job is to try to get those persecuting raptors into court. Whilst very difficult crimes to investigate, the RSPB have been instrumental in many convictions. This has understandably made us rather unpopular with the criminal element within the shooting industry.

Shortly after this image was taken Terry Pickford caught an estate gamekeeper

below the nest with a loaded shotgun.

Just this month gamekeeper Glenn Brown from the High Peak Estate in Derbyshire lost his appeal at Derby Crown Court. This followed a conviction for the illegal use of a cage trap baited with a live pigeon (a ‘hawk trap’) after he was covertly filmed – see recent blog posts on the court case and appeal for all the details. His failed appeal brought his costs to an eye watering £17,000, though the defence bill for employing a QC would no doubt have already dwarfed that figure. It seems somewhat unlikely that Mr Brown will be covering these bills and is a sign of the resources available to fight these cases.

Held to account

So another gamekeeper in the dock, now over one hundred since 1990 for raptor persecution related crimes. Of those how many of their employers or managers have been held to account? – well none that I’m aware of. In many ways the gamekeeper is something of a fall guy. The gamekeeper is man who does the dirty work whilst those in charge keep their heads well and truly down. If caught, he will get a good defence, keep his job and probably have his fine paid. In return, he keeps those in charge out of the frame.

Goshawk and Peregrine have been persecuted almost to extinction

in Derbyshire’s Dark Peak.

Gamekeepers themselves have told me that raptor persecution on upland grouse estates is routine and that it is something they are expected to do if they want to keep their jobs. I have no doubt it is the shooting industry itself, the managers and employers who run these wealthy shooting estates, who are at the root of this pernicious problem.

Much of the shooting world remains in denial about the extent of raptor persecution. It is this lack of accountability for those running the show which means catching a few gamekeepers every year has limited deterrent effect. Encouragingly, Scotland has taken a step forward and introduced new legislation and an offence of vicarious liability. This seeks to make managers and employers more accountable for the criminal actions of their staff – this has to be a step in the right direction.

What can you do to help?

An e-petition is currently running to try to persuade the government to adopt similar legislation in England. Please step up for nature and take just a moment and to sign the vicarious liability e-petition to add your support.

Despite over 50 years of legal protection there seem to be little sign of the shooting industry getting its house in order. It is about time those crouched behind the parapet are finally made to stand up and be held to account for the damage being inflicted on our countryside.

wildlife crime, vicarious liability, Sign the e-petition here.

This article written by Guy Shorrock has been reproduced here with the permission of the RSPB

But do we ever take time out to consider what is [...]]]> Over the past two-three months I’ve given an appreciable amount of thought to the above problem, discussed matters with different organizations and deliberated the options for improvement with like-minded colleagues. The problem is one which requires urgent correction……..irreversibly and with any resumption met by severe penalties.

But do we ever take time out to consider what is actually involved? Our reactions and criticisms so often appear to relate to the most recent incident, an apparent lack of action by given conservation bodies or to the questionable logic contained within a press release issued by a representative body with undoubted connections with the practitioners! Discussions between national bodies currently appear to be at a standstill with little hope of any immediate solution arising out of concord. The current situation in the UK vis-a-vis raptor persecution is a national disgrace and something which the current coalition Government appear to conveniently ignore despite declared “green commitments”.

Do we take time out to ask why it is happening and, in the process, possibly identify the means for its eradication? In many cases I think not and the continuing debate so very often revolves around the analysis of respective positions and incidents or to promote an individual issue with some tangential connection! Doubtless some people would claim this current article is unnecessary, old hat, and fails to add anything to the debate. But is that correct? Examine some of the distorted facts, prejudicial remarks, personalised crusades, unsubstantiated accusations and downright unintelligent remarks on some web sites and Blogs, coupled with an inability to even express such comments in basic English, and it suggests otherwise.

The foremost objective must be the eradication of persecution of our raptor species with parts of the accompanying policy being aimed at a consistent and extended effort with some species demanding a high priority of attention. All this must be a collective effort brought about by co-operation between all those involved with personal and “tribal” differences set aside. In my book anyone unwilling to accept the brief is simply ignored given the magnitude of the problem we are facing. The facts of the problem are plain and continually amending the game plan wastes time!

Firstly, let’s dispel the notion that persecution is isolated, carried out by a minority of gamekeepers and that , in some way, it reflects some primeval prejudice held by man against raptors. Such activities are geographically widespread in the UK, collectively condoned and carried out with ruthless and unrelenting determination by far too many within the “industry” associated with game management.. Yes, there are those within the industry who, thankfully, have a healthy respect for all wildlife and who are supported by their employers. They buck the trend and, what’s more, they should receive suitable recognition and support from conservationists and activists for adopting such a positive role. Do we do enough in that respect I wonder?

As far as the others are concerned, every conceivable avenue should be explored, and the results applied, to stop what is the pursuit of selfish ends. And, in passing, let’s put into perspective the whole business about the responsibilities of estate owners and their agents. No modern-day enterprise , if it expects to prosper, vests the overall management of its operation within the lowest level of its staffing structure. Key decisions are shouldered by those “at the top” , not as an optional element but as a permanent reality. Uppermost amongst this reasoning is that it is they who are usually responsible for the investment involved, a management aspect of which they are usually unwilling to delegate entirely. Negative PR, such as a court case, is clearly something which can affect such effective management and is to be avoided. It follows that the day-to-day strategies will all be examined to ensure they are watertight and activities occurring on the estates will, therefore, be generally agreed. Whilst legislation associated with vicarious liability embraces the above, the matter is sufficiently fundamental in my view such that no especial provision is necessary. If persecution events occur on an estate then all associated with its operation are culpable!

Neither let us delude ourselves that shooting activities are the product of a nice few days including social exchanges, fine dining and an opportunity to pot a few birds! Far from it! Many shooting enterprises are based on a commercial philosophy against which requisite charges are raised on the participants. I have no objections to this scenario as I am not anti-shooting. However, it does offend when one realises some areas within shoots qualify for government subsidies aimed at habitat management requirements , all of which run in parallel to the commercial aspects. Associated with such habitats can be some of our key raptor species which are an integral part of our natural heritage which the above subsidies are intentionally linked to. Additionally, such iconic species are protected by law (see below) and their disturbance or destruction can attract financial penalties if an incident is proven in court. Some species contained within Schedule 1 ( Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981 (amended) ) attract even greater penalties under the same provisions.

Given our raptors are protected by law and many, some would argue all, are iconic elements of our natural heritage then their retention is as significant as the policies we apply towards our cultural heritage. Try destroying artefacts in a museum and then , arrogantly, expect everyone to turn a blind eye to your excesses or to at least exert leniency. Is that not what these people involved in persecution expect or, even worse, that they somehow expect to be allowed to Play God and destroy every competitive natural component associated with their enterprise that they find unacceptable, be they raptors or mustelids!

The key element lurking below all this is that it is not an all abiding hatred of all such things that persuades them into such activities but the aspect of competition.. Eradicate all competitors, create a level playing field of your own making and expect, along the way, to be exonerated of all responsibility if such actions fly in the face of civilised behaviour. It’s like a local takeaway enterprise setting fire to the premises of all its nearby competitors in order to ensure success. Why should we see the demise of iconic elements of our natural heritage in order to lend support to a commercial enterprise bolstered up in some instances with money from the public purse? It stinks and it needs to end!

What do these people really think they’re at? Arrogance beyond belief and a deliberate setting aside of the requirements of the laws of the land. One could easily be led into believing such attitudes are being expressed by a certain strata of society, or their cohorts, who are of the belief that they are above the law in many respects and that, in any event, their chums will turn a blind eye. Undoubtedly such beliefs obtained in past times , but things have changed and are still changing.

The above sets out what I believe to be the component factors of the problem. Within these are legal, social, systemic and political aspects within which the solutions lie. Given the objectives for reform are clear it only remains to clearly identify the means by which change can be achieved and to construct a strategy aimed at an unrelenting challenge to the practices condemned. The time has come to set aside the Queensbury rules of engagement, which undoubtedly the national conservation organizations have abided by in the past , and to move forward by force of numbers, exposure of the facts, pressure on Government and direct exposure of those responsible. More to follow!

http://www.birdingodyssey.blogspot.com/