For the full story, please follow this link to Birdguides.

We believe the Eurasian Eagle Owl’s European subspecies Bubo. B. bubo is, and always has been, a true native British species. – the World Owl Trust

Download in PDF format the World Owl Trust’s objections to the FERA risk assessment:

Risk Assessment Response

 3 February 2010

 Dear Mr. Green,

I am writing to you because I am very concerned for the safety and welfare of Lancashire’s only pair of European Eagle Owls which have been resident and have bred on your Bowland Estate since 2006. Resulting from what can only be described as irresponsible behaviour towards these iconic birds in the breeding season by a small number of your staff, this has resulted in their predicted low productivity after the pair were disturbed, against all expert advice given to your staff, to mark their eggs. I belong to a conservation group of over 2,000 members from all over the world that has been specifically established to make everyone aware of the problems these owls face in the wild, so be aware that the eyes of the world are watching United Utilities very closely at the present time.

Within the next two to three weeks as both birds in the Whitendale Valley have been observed copulating, these owls will have eggs. In view of the problems encountered last year I would like your personal assurance that they will be left completely alone this year. I am also fully aware of the fact that last year after the nest site was disturbed by two inexperienced police volunteers, the first clutch of eggs were deserted even though United Utilities were advised by many experts not to mark the eggs as it would almost certainly result in the nest being deserted, may I respectfully enquire why was this advice ignored?

As a responsible company you should also be concerned that after the nest visit was approved by your Bowland manager, the 3 eggs were taken without the appropriate licence, therefore in addition to the predicted outcome, the action approved by one of your managers was totally illegal. One other important consideration, I have subsequently learned that one of the two people approved to enter the nest to mark the 3 eggs has a criminal conviction for stealing eggs in Scotland. How can United Utilities countenance employing such a person to undertake  this sensitive work;  when this is made public I have no doubt what so ever this will severely damage the integrity of your company.

There is no justification whatsoever for marking eagle owl eggs and I feel that this was just an excuse to have the desired effect, failure of the eggs. It seems to me that you have people involved with these owls on your land that clearly do not know what they are doing and are prepared to break the law. Are you aware that eagle owls are protected under the European Bird Directive and by the Wildlife & Countryside act? Likewise it is a criminal offence to harm them in any way? I also understand that the President of the World Owl Trust, Mr Anthony Warburton has now written to your Bowland Manager asking for an urgent pre-season meeting to ensure the mistakes made last year are not once again repeated. I understand that following the problems last year Mr. Warburton on behalf of the World Owl Trust even offered to fund future on the ground protection of the pair on your land, but sadly such a gracious offer was ignored, why?

I have now written also to the European Union with regard to this matter by the way. You really should listen and take constructive advice from the professionals who know what they are doing. You not only have European Eagle Owls nesting on your estate, but also other important birds of prey, which it appears receive very little protection. When consistent details of failures have been brought to the notice of your estate manager these reports are dismissed. Curiously, after concerns were voiced concerning the low productivity of a number of protected nesting sites, together with other illegal actions taking place on your property, the coordinator of the local raptor group was banned from your estates. What message does this send out to the world? We find this totally unacceptable especially as you are a large company that claim to be green and wanting to help the planet so to speak.

Your actions with regard to these birds does not back up your so called policies, which in our opinion does not make you look good in the eyes of the public all over the world. You have a wonderful opportunity to promote yourselves here by showing that you are prepared to welcome and care for these birds in the proper and lawful way thus showing your customers and the public in general that you are putting something back into the environment that so badly needs our care.

I would also like to ask you why a convicted egg collector is allowed access by vehicle onto your land to monitor the very birds that he has stolen eggs from in the past! I understand that this individual has no license enabling him to visit protected nesting sites on your property. If such visits are being made, this also makes your company look very bad and gives you no credibility whatsoever.

It has also come to our attention that the Wildlife Crime Officer working on your land is under investigation by the Professional Standards Department at Lancashire Police Headquarters, after having twenty-six complaints made against him. Why may I ask are you allowing this man to be involved in any activities relating to birds of prey on United Utilities property, and indeed why is he still on active duty while he is under investigation? It is clear from the information we have that this officer has no loyalty to the very creatures he is paid to protect which is very worrying to all of us.

I know that because of this policeman’s unsupported malicious allegations the one experienced person who has worked so hard for these birds is now no longer welcomed or even allowed to monitor and help protect these birds on your land. This is disgraceful and gives the impression that United Utilities really do not care about the safety and welfare of any of these birds and it also sends a clear message that at the present time these birds are not safe, we are all very concerned.

 Rest assured that we will not go away; the safety and protection of the European Eagle Owls being our main concern at the present time, all information with regard to your behaviour towards these owls will be posted on our group site, both good and bad. You are responsible at the end of the day and have the final say, I urge you to do what is right, these birds must be protected as they are wonderful creatures which you should feel proud and very privileged to have on your property. Their ultimate care is entrusted to you, but I have to say up until now you have not made a good job of it. You can change it now and gain the respect of all of your customers and people all over the world.

I await your reply with interest.

Regards,

 Chrissie Harper. 

 Chrissie’s Owls and Stonesfield Owl Rescue

 www.chrissiesowls.com

We have enclosed a claim made in the Collins Bird Guide, first edition (1999) and repeated again in the new updated second edition published January 2010.

“Only a hand full of genuine records in Britain, all in the 19th Century.”

Collins Bird Guide, described as the user Bible for dedicated birders both the UK and across Europe. The first edition sold a quarter of a million copies, and the claim made in that edition has been re-stated once again in the  new updated second edition.

This must now provide some room for doubt. Why was this claim never questioned previously?

Eagle Owls Forest of Bowland: Historical Update.

Due to the lack of public knowledge relating the eagle owls in Bowland, and what has been happening since 2006, follow the link below for further information:

http://raptorpolitics.org.uk/?p=418

TaysidePolice have at last released a press release regarding the investigation into the death of a white-tailed eagle found on 6 August 2009 on the Glenogil Estate in Angus. They claim that extensive police enquiries have already been carried out after tests confirmed that the bird was illegally poisoned with banned agricultural pesticides. Nearly 6 months on from the initial discovery the police are only now appealing to the public for information.

The sea eagle was one of the 15 donated by Norway to Scotlandin June 2008 as part of the ongoing East of ScotlandWhite-tailed Eagle Release Project, a partnership between RSPB Scotland, Scottish Natural Heritage andForestry Commission Scotland. The birds had been met off the plane by the then Minister for Environment Michael Russell MSP and this bird was later released along with the others from a secret location in Fife. It is hoped that 100 young Norwegian eagles will be released over this period. Whilst most of the released white-tailed eagles have thrived, there have been several serious incidences of wildlife crime involving this species in Tayside.

The poisoned bird is likely to have ingested bait laced with banned agricultural pesticides that were deliberately laid on the Angus hills. The poisons used have been confirmed after analysis by the Scottish Agricultural Science Agency. Detective Inspector Ally Waghorn, in charge of the investigation, said, “It is an absolute disgrace that the use of pesticides to kill what are seen by some as pest species continues in Scotland. There is also a real risk to any hill walker who might encounter and handle poisoned bait. I’d appeal to anyone who has any information about the incident, or any other illegal use of pesticides against wildlife, to contact the police. “ This is the second White-tailed Eagle to be poisoned in this area and Tayside Police also previously issued a press release regarding a Golden Eagle which was killed on the same estate. The multi-millionaire owner of the estate John Dodd is reported as denying that his estate had anything to do with the poisonings – see http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/153665.

The Minister of the Environment Roseanna Cunningham has also issued a press release suggesting – “Our wildlife is precious and needs our protection, which is why I support the work of Taysidepolice in fighting to tackle this despicable crime against our natural heritage. Their continuing efforts will help result in a safer Scotland for sea eagles and other birds of prey.” The Minister perhaps needs to ask some questions as to why Tayside Police have been so slow in seeking public support for what is a high profile crime with a high degree of public interest.

Complaints and representations have previously been made to Tayside Police by estate owners and agencies acting on their behalf, regarding wildlife crime investigations and associated adverse publicity. These tactics are designed to muddy the waters and stall police investigations – such tactics are commonly used by many high profile criminals against the police and it appears they have now crept into the wildlife crime arena. Police forces need to be robust in the defence of their investigative processes and ensure that any such tactics do not delay the due process of law, especially when cases have such a high degree of public interest.

Unfortunately the police have a poor reputation for resolving high profile investigations of this nature, andthis particular case will unfortunately do little to enhance this. RSPB Scotland has issued a strong statement which SRSGs fully endorse – http://www.rspb.org.uk/news/details.asp?id=tcm:9-239540. Anyone with information relating to this incident is urged to contact Tayside Police on 0300 111 2222 or speak to any police officer. Calls can also be made in confidence to Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111.

GULLIBLE OR WHAT!!

Comment contained in the Express Newspaper relating to this matter:

23.01.10, 1:53pm

Strange how this so-called plot should happen, on the land of a man already punished for previous poisonings in the same place?…Who would such a “plot” benefit?..

Not the police who have to investigate it – and believe me, the Scottish police don’t like investigating crimes linked to powerful landowners – not the agriculture department, who although keen to stamp it out, are politically attacked every time they apply the rules and have our tax money taken from the landowner/farmer.

No, what this shows is that the arrogance and greed of the people involved here [and you can add several other large grouse moor estates to that group] is such that , despite getting caught before, they’ve carried on as usual – lightning wont strike twice will it?

This man would have us believe that someone poisoned a sea eagle [dead easy to find of course!!?] then carried it onto his land and dumped it.It is perfectly easy for someone to go for a walk on a huge estate like Glen Ogil without being noticed…I’m sure many people do…but they don’t walk around carrying poisoned baits or victims. Finally on that subject many poison victims aren’t found for a very long time – for the good reason that they don’t always keel over dead immediately – especially a bird as large as an eagle. So the poisoner misses them. Happens all the time – which is why we know about poisoning in the first place!

Give us a break…how gullible do you think the public are Mr Dodd…you show contempt for wildlife, contempt for readers of newspapers…and contempt for the tax payers who are propping up your estate. I hope you have all your payments withdrawn ..that would be a just result for what is a shocking crime.

Comment by the members of Raptor Politics-

Raptor Politics was initiated almost one year ago to highlight the plight of so called “protected” birds of prey throughout the United Kingdom. The fact that these avian aristocrats have been extensively persecuted throughout the life time of each and every person who is alive on our planet today and during the lives of generation who have gone before us, is testament to the ignorance, intolerance and selfishness of a  minority within our society. These individuals have always placed their own self-interests first, acting with autonomy, demonstrating their total contempt for any wildlife legislation designed to protect such important species within our country.

Such is the scale of greed and indifference being shown towards Britain’s raptors by a minority of wealthy individuals who place their own shooting interests first, the situation will continue to bring complete and utter shame upon our country.

Raptor Politics begins with the question, Are England’s birds of prey really protected by law?

We feel we are now able to answer that question – no they are not - and unless the laws designed to protect these birds are enforced, they never will be!

No-one could ever say that Eagle Owls don’t take other avian species because clearly they do.  But on Sennelager Training area in Nordrhein Westphalia they nested quite successfully in an area where we controlled annually ca 30 Red Kite nests and 22 Goshawk nests.  In that same area bred Osprey, Black Stork, Peregrine, White Stork, endless numbers of Buzzards, Honey Buzzards, Short-eared Owls and Bittern (to name only a few).  The numbers and variety of species there was far superior to what we find here in the UK and the birds seemed to survive without any obvious evidence of conflict.  From time to time I witnessed aerial stand-offs, but that is common in many raptor species.

For the time the Eagle Owls were here at Catterick Buzzard, Tawny Owl and Kestrel bred within 150 yards of each other over a 300m diameter with the Eagle Owl nest roughly in the middle of them all.  I don’t think I ever witnessed confrontation between any of them and the Tawnies, which were in an artificial nest box, raised young every year which we ringed.  That box was 100m from the Eagle Owl nest.  I visited the Catterick Eagle Owl nests at least 50 times over the years and the incidence of prey species other than rabbits was rare.  Very occasionally (I think four times only) I found remains of a Red Grouse.

People naturally like to describe exceptions and I believe this is where a lot of the misinformation arises.  I have no doubt Eagle Owls have taken foxes and a deer kid but to my knowledge there is one record written up on both.  I myself have seen them take a Grey Heron and a Grey Lag Goose – but one of each by exception over a 25 year period!  I have never been aware that the presence of Eagle Owls had a noticeably detrimental effect on the remainder of the avian ecosystem. The Black Stork which I refer to re-colonised the Senne (a large military training area and SAC equivalent) whilst I and the Eagle Owls were in Sennelager; if the Eagle Owls were such demons the Black Storks which are clumsy and had set up territory nearby would never have had a chance.  They had been absent for around 80 years.

Eagle Owls like other raptors are opportunists and on some occasions may be having more difficulty accessing food than on others.  Any port in a storm!  A lot of the conjecture written about Eagle Owls is pure humbug.

Two final points.  Approaching Eagle Owl nests soon after laying or at any time during the egg stage is fatal and frankly stupid unless there is an ulterior motive; desertion is almost a certainty.  Secondly, when Fergus Beeley produced the Eagle Owl film at Catterick he was subsequently sent photographs from North Sea oil platforms of exhausted Eagle Owls on the platforms pers comm., these birds were not parachuted in so how did they get there?  Caged birds, pets….. I don’t think so!  Fergus rang me personally to tell me about these photographs after the film had gone out on TV.  (He is the same chap who produced the recent TV film on Black-throated Divers in the Highlands).

As so often seems to happen in this country now paperwork like these Risk Assessments is released to bureaucrats almost as a fait accompli.  I have seen little/nothing in any ornithological press about it and assume it is another foregone conclusion sneaked through on the nod.  What a pity the legislators don’t make an effort to approach those with a little first hand knowledge even for an opinion.

A much more simple, straight forward resolution to saving what remains of the raptor population in this country, certainly in this area, would be to take greater care with and restrict more severely the licensing of guns.  Getting excited about the few Eagle Owls we have when it is patently obvious that unacceptable numbers of raptors (and other birds) are being shot and poisoned – and have been for years – seems to convey a seriously mixed message.

To put the last paragraph into perspective, last Sunday on the River Ure where we were ringing were the carcasses of roughly 20 geese and cormorants, hung up in the branches of the willow trees in a bend on the river.  These birds had been maimed, shot but not killed outright, and had managed to crash land in the swollen river where they had later perished, presumably in pain.  In the flood from the melting snow the carcasses had been dragged downsteam on the flood and on the high tide line where the water had spread into the riverside vegetation they had become caught up in the trees.  The water had then subsided leaving the remains of the birds hanging obscenely in the bare branches.

Every time we ring at this site people are firing guns nearby almost all day long, which I assume is legal, but many of those firing are poor shots or novices and others, because they are trigger happy, fire at impossible distances.  This results in endless numbers of these poor creatures being wounded but not killed.  What a sad state of affairs!  I was taken to see exactly the same picture at the same site last year!

Poorly publicised scheme

The first thing that should concern anyone with a practical interest in the Eurasian eagle owl is the way the Risk Assessment document has been handled and publicised. It was only by sheer chance that the document was highlighted to members of the NWRPG last week. We have now spoken to a number of England’s most experienced eagle owl experts, and it comes as no surprise to learn not one of them had any knowledge of the on-going risk assessment scheme 3.3. What kind of public consultation nonsense is this?

In a recent e-mail sent to John Miles at Geltsdale, the None Native Species Secretariat dealing with this ongoing project on behalf of FERA, informed Mr. Miles each person having an interest in eagle owls in this country had already been contacted. This reply flies in the face of reality. Major Anthony Crease, a devoted eagle owl expert with over thirty years eagle owl experience in both Germany and the UK, Tony Warburton, President of the World Owl Trust and Roy Dennis, all had no knowledge of what was being undertaken, or that the risk assessment document existed. In addition, all the field workers associated closely with eagle owls in the Forest of Bowland , including Terry Pickford, having also worked in Europe with eagle owls since the mid 1970’s in both the Czech Republic and Poland,  were totally unaware of the public consultation assessment taking place due to the lack of contact by FERA.

Attack information misleading

The statement that on occasion an eagle owl has been known to attack humans was most inappropriate and misleading, giving the wrong impression that an eagle owl was a danger to the public. This behaviour is also demonstrated by goshawk, peregrine falcon, hen harrier, tawny owl and the sparrow hawk when disturbed close to a nest containing  unfledged young. Let us not forget also the great skua and the capercaillie, (the largest member of the grouse family), both of these species are very aggressive to humans during the breeding season. Such a broad statement clearly indicates those individuals making such a comment had little or no first hand practical experience of bird behaviour in the natural environment. Of course another explanation may be that the individual making the claim intended to give a dog a bad name.

Instances of human attack by eagle owls are rare and in the majority of cases involve individuals approaching occupied nests containing unfledged chicks. It is a matter of record, humans are at a higher risk of attack by a tawny owl in the UK. Since 2004, there have been just two recorded instances in Bowland where an eagle owl, in defence of a nest containing unfledged young, carried out such an attack. The famous bird photographer Eric Hosking lost an eye after an attack by a female tawny owl. The first case of an eagle owl attack reported in the Forest of Bowland involved a person walking close to a nest with a dog off the leash, where the dog – not the person – was attacked. The second incident occurred when a bird watcher approached an occupied nest to take photographs of the three chicks the nest contained. If such instances are being used to condemn or give this species a bad name, the same protocol could be applied to a wide spectrum of British raptors including other wild birds when defending their nest against human disturbance; such a comment shows a lack of understanding and ignorance, even perhaps a degree of malice towards the eagle owl.

Predation on other species – where is the evidence?

The risk assessment document claims the eagle owls will predate on a range of birds of prey and is intolerant of other raptors and owls nesting within its territory. Where is the evidence that this has taken place in this country? In Europe where this natural phenomenon is more widely experienced and studied, not one raptor species has so far gone extinct as a result of such natural behaviour!

In Bowland when such a claim was made two years ago, the feathers of a hen harrier recovered close by the nest by a Natural England field officer were in fact identified by eagle owl experts as common gull feathers. Significantly in Bowland, and at one additional Cumbrian eagle owl territory, hen harrier, peregrine, tawny owl, kestrel, goshawk, short-eared owl and merlin are just a few raptor species nesting within or adjacent to an eagle owl territory without any antagonism between species. The pair of Yorkshire eagle owls and the pairs currently located in Lancashire and Cumbria are known to predate mainly on rabbit. Other prey items observed at nests in Bowland have been stoat, grey squirrel and pheasant. There is filmed evidence originating from the eagle owl territory in Yorkshire, lambs raised within the territory were never predated at all by the nesting pair of eagle owls during a ten year period of observation.

Major flaw in assumptions

There is one particular over-riding flaw contained in the document’s assumptions which we consider undermines the scientific value of the risk assessment’s conclusions. The document downplays any possibility that eagle owls historically may have crossed into the British Isles from Europe. No one can make such an assumption; in nature anything is possible. For example in 1975 a pair of spotted sandpiper’s flew across the Atlantic from North America and laid  a clutch of 4-eggs on the Isle of Skye at Uig.  Experts in the UK had claimed such an event was also impossible. We believe it would be foolhardy, irresponsible and dangerous for anyone to claim with any certainty that eagle owls at some point in the last few hundred years were not native to our shores. On the basis of probability, the likelihood that eagle owls within the UK existed and were breeding, is a more probable scenario given the numerous recorded observations of this species in remote regions of our country beginning in the 17^th Century.

Importantly, before any final conclusions can be reached on the current eagle owl situation in the UK, a complete scientific study, evaluating the influence of the Eagle Owl upon its prey, together with its effect upon both habitats and ecosystems must be a priority. Such research should be undertaken in joint cooperation with experienced eagle owl field workers in each regional breeding location. The current risk assessment in our view places the cart in front of the horse and appears to be based upon hysteria and misinformation. Where is the evidence which proves the eagle owl in its current English range is invasive, posing a threat to other species, habitats or ecosystems? From our own studies undertaken in the Forest of Bowland throughout the last 6 years, non of our raptor group members have witnessed any invasive behaviour towards other raptors, habitats or ecosystems in the area.

Explore the evidence

England is a part of the wider European Community; as such we should consider carefully how we handle the eagle owl situation in our country before making any rash decision on the species future. The eagle owls currently benefits from full legal protection throughout all European countries; this legal status also applies to eagle owls currently breeding in Britain. If a cull is the final decision following the current consultation process, then any migrants from Europe that may already exist in the UK will also be condemned and exterminated along with the rest, this cannot be right or acceptable. Are we willing to make such a reprehensible decision without exploring the evidence as suggested above in a professional way to determine fact from fiction?

Terry R. Pickford
North West Raptor Group
January 2010

As expected the eagle owl has generated polarised views in our country, particularly within the shooting fraternity, but also by some ornithologists who regard the eagle owl as an invasive alien species. There is a view that eagle owls pose a real risk by predating upon a wide range of birds and mammals in our country. Of course anyone with any scientific background will know this behaviour is a natural part of this species’ ecology.

Subject to the consultation review, attempts to remove or eradicate this species could start very quickly.   Having read the risk assessment, details below, it would appear that there is some concern about the views of the bird watching public and, there is a comment that eradication/capture could be relatively easy subject to the cooperation of UK birders.

As such raptor politics think it is very important that our followers submit their own personal response to the consultation document before the 6 February deadline. e-mail address as follows: nnss@fera.gsi.gov.uk or write to None Native Species Secretariat, Fera, Sand Hutton, York, YO41 ILZ

There is some very informative information on the raptor politics website from a number of different experts.  This includes details from a forthcoming BB paper that reports on stable isotope analysis of feathers (and knowledge of moult pattern) from an injured eagle owl found in Norfolk that showed the juvenile feathers “had a very low 2H/1H ratio, significantly different from the ?adult? feathers, suggesting that the bird had originated in an area with very low 2H/1H signatures. That, I suggest corresponds with those found in Scandinavia”. This questions the view that all eagle owls in this country are escapes/releases albeit the likelihood that the majority are.

The FERA risk assessment can be found at https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/nonnativespecies/index.cfm?pageid=216

Update: Risk assessment in PDF format: https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/nonnativespecies/downloadDocument.cfm?id=43

Just before Christmas one of the Derby Cathedral Peregrine Project team happened to check the ‘tower webcam’ that looks across the tops of gargoyles where peregrines often roost, feed, and even mate. It was 10.45pm on a clear, frosty night. It had been dark for six hours. A peregrine was standing on the nearest gargoyle, alert and in hunting mode, and was looking outwards around the night sky.

Suddenly she flew off out of camera-shot, but returned within minutes carrying prey. This turned out to be a woodcock (Scolopax rusticola) and the video recording we later retrieved shows it was clearly alive and struggling to free itself from the peregrine’s powerful talons. After a while the falcon dispatches the wader with a swift bite to its neck. (We see her feel for it a few times prior to this, but we must remember that to her, the prey was in darkness. Our footage is taken under infra-red light which she cannot see, and is lit only from below by the cathedral’s floodlighting. She then stands on her quarry and lifts it slightly nearer the back ledge where it would be less likely to fall off. She then flies off to a further perch before disappearing again. (The story of what happened next will be the subject of a separate blog post, and is almost as unusual as this clip.)

The woodcock remained there for the next sixteen days (from 20th December to 5th January) before one of the peregrines started to pluck and eat it. The remains had disappeared by 7th January, so it was either eaten, moved, or possibly dropped.

The Taiwan footage not withstanding, we believe our YouTube video to be the first in the world showing film evidence of night hunting. You may remember that, since peregrines cache food they have caught earlier, it was vital that film evidence showed clearly a peregrine bringing back a live prey item, rather than one it could have caught and killed earlier. Derek Ratcliffe, in his 1993 monograph on The Peregrine Falcon, mentions that these birds will hunt on moonlit nights in rural areas. He was writing long before urban nesting became widespread around the planet. So, with hugely increased levels of lighting in cities, it is no surprise that peregrines have found it easy to catch night-flying birds that pass within reach. This behaviour has been observed at many urban sites throughout the world (including the Empire State Building in New York) – and we feel lucky our cameras have been the first to capture and publish this unique footage from Derby Cathedral.

Those peregrine experts who have already viewed the clip (including Ed Drewitt and Nick Dixon here in the UK) have been very impressed with what it shows. They recognise its importance in the study of urban peregrines – so we are delighted our webcameras have helped make this breakthrough in Derby. For those wondering where in Derby all this amazing habitat is where woodcock, snipe, quail and golden plover are found, the fact is that these prey items are mostly “passing through”. Or over. They’re possibly following the River Derwent which runs north-south through the city centre, en route to more suitable habitats, and they’re using the cover of darkness to make their journey safer. But the cathedral tower is less than 200 metres from the river, so a peregrine sitting atop its ancient stone walls can easily pick it off as it passes by.

More at the Derby Cathedral Peregrine Project

There is much within the legislation that is sensible associated with, for example, the prevention of invasive plant species within watercourses, or the further introduction of non-native crayfish which have already been found to have decimated our own stocks in certain areas and so on.

When it comes to the Eagle Owl I support the intention aimed at limiting any releases to the wild, but feel there are a number of other issues the Government’s agencies need to address rather than feel the job of work is finished. To this extent its inclusion in Schedule 9 might muddy the water as opposed to providing an all embracing, once and for all solution! The whole question of the status of the species within the UK needs future examination and an unequivocal statement issued as to its position within our avifauna.

Undoubtedly some Eagle Owls have been released to the wild and some have escaped captivity. It is known that the species has bred freely and raised young in Britain in recent years too. Now whilst I feel we don’t want to see endless birds released willy-nilly into the wild, to include the bird on Schedule 9 amongst a list of other aliens begins to confuse what could be a different situation at the present time. In my opinion there are sufficient facts relating to a gradual westwards extension across Western Europe to suggest we be very careful about what label we do attach to the species!!

Birds can easily be seen in Iberia but now, much farther north, there is emerging evidence of breeding pairs in the Low Countries and of a persistent colonisation of the Baltic islands. So why not the odd migrant to Britain? Some sceptics pronounce the bird to be large and sedentary with a probable predilection against flying over a large body of water, i.e. the North Sea. Well, other raptors do it, as do Long-eared Owls, a selection of photographs of which can be seen on the North Sea Bird Club web site. Indeed it may well be the case that, as a species, it doesn’t like the idea of flying over the sea and, therefore, its westward extension comes to an abrupt stop. That presumption, at this very point in time, appears non-proven and somewhat convenient! We can’t prove immigration has not occurred, nor what would be the aftermath if a sufficiency were in Britain and part of the operating fabric of our countryside. Would they be a disastrous threat?

The web page the RSPB displays on the subject is, in my view, a fair assessment of the position despite the organization having concerns on the subject. A declaration that, if it were to arrive naturally, then they would welcome it as part of the avifauna, is firm and ad vocative and provides the clarity needed. Similarly their suggestion ( to Government ) that an impact assessment be completed of what is currently an increasing population again would provide a basis upon which better predictions could be made whatever happened in future years. The difficulty at the moment is that the offspring produced may be from escaped birds, but there is no way of knowing. Simply designating them as such is irresponsible in my view and ignores the demands of the situation, difficult though these may be.

There are those, of course, who will delight in the lack of recognition afforded to the species, and for whom its relegation to “alien status” will provide an opportunity to call for its control, or worse! At the present time I feel, quite sincerely, that we should be willing to be open minded and make every attempt to determine what the true situation might be. Difficult, of course it is, and demanding of imaginative ways of tackling a very challenging problem, but attempting to achieve this through “labelling” will never give us the truth and will be used by some to distort the situation. If, in the fullness of time, the population reaches a plateau, and then diminishes, we can accept the current provisions to be adequate and reflect the correct perspectives of the situation. In the meantime it seems to me that we should be open to a possible changing process and set prejudice and self interest aside so as to witness, properly, what could be a natural phenomenon ( running in parallel to what has been a similar “domestic” phenomenon in recent times ).

Discussions with colleagues have raised various points, almost legal points , about which I haven’t yet reached clarity in my own mind due, mainly, to a lack of precise knowledge on my part. Given Eagle Owl is a resident, “accepted ” species in Continental Europe it is obviously, and its young, afforded protective status under the European Birds Directive . As we are part of the European Union presumably the young produced in this country from parents whose derivation is presumed at the moment, not documented or proven, could be ( should be? ) afforded the same protection. Such would mean it being accepted into our avifauna? Heigh ho, that should get the “grey suits” in a state of flux!!!

John S. Armitage