RSPB - nonsense again

[Fisheruk]

This is a very good article from GWCT. Worth a read to prime you up with ammunition for the antis.

Someone needs to ask the Charity Commission to look into their waste of funding.

https://www.gwct.org.uk/blogs/news/2018/may/why-are-the-rspb-trying-to-veto-the-hen-harrier-plan/?utm_source=All+Contacts&utm_campaign=5e70ed8222-NonMem-NL-150518&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_dd843c5cb6-5e70ed8222-27506271&goal=0_dd843c5cb6-5e70ed8222-27506271&mc_cid=5e70ed8222&mc_eid=13d55da1a8

[panoma1]

The RSPB don't want Hen Harrier brood management to work, because they would not have raptor persecution as a stalking horse to attack driven Grouse shooting..........which is their real agenda!

[Fisheruk]

4 minutes ago, panoma1 said:

The RSPB don't want Hen Harrier brood management to work, because they would not have raptor persecution as a stalking horse to attack driven Grouse shooting..........which is their real agenda!

Got it in one!

 

[Yellow Bear]

I posted this elsewhere on here  today but am having trouble liking so cut and paste:

This is a problem in Derbyshire at the moment - our old "friends" the RSPB are calling for licencing of grouse shoots in the dark peaks because persecution of raptors by grouse moor operators there are few peregrines and goshawks in the area whereas they are plentiful in the white peak where there is no grouse shooting, completely (and I feel deliberately)  omitting to mention that these are two completely different habitats.

the white peaks being limestone plateau cut with steep sided dales (peregrine country)  and wooded shallower dales (goshawk country)

The dark peak being high level peat on gritstone moorland completely unsuited to either species,

As expected good old auntie beeb omits the facts and gives this prime time coverage in the region.

[chrisjpainter]

2 hours ago, Yellow Bear said:

I posted this elsewhere on here  today but am having trouble liking so cut and paste:

This is a problem in Derbyshire at the moment - our old "friends" the RSPB are calling for licencing of grouse shoots in the dark peaks because persecution of raptors by grouse moor operators there are few peregrines and goshawks in the area whereas they are plentiful in the white peak where there is no grouse shooting, completely (and I feel deliberately)  omitting to mention that these are two completely different habitats.

the white peaks being limestone plateau cut with steep sided dales (peregrine country)  and wooded shallower dales (goshawk country)

The dark peak being high level peat on gritstone moorland completely unsuited to either species,

As expected good old auntie beeb omits the facts and gives this prime time coverage in the region.

Not strictly true. There's great nesting potential for peregrines there, it's just not what we'd automatically think of as prime real estate. And, in any case, the habitats aren't really the issue here, because the fact is that Dark Peak does support peregrines and peregrine nesting. The fact that these have failed and that persecution is likely to have played a part (recognised not just by the BBC and RSPB, but by the Derbyshire WT, the Moorland Association, the National Trust, Natural England and the Peak District National Park Authority as well) is cause for concern. They have had breeding pairs the for over 30 years, so failure is significant. 

Likewise with the Goshawks, their presence and breeding success shows they are content to breed in the area, but the report (put together by an independent scientist) recognises that breeding success is still well below where it should be and detailed specific, evidenced based occurrences of persecution. The report is even-handed and does recognise that they may have screwed up on peregrine nest by a daft positioning of a camera.

 

On the subject of brood management, there are legitimate concerns with brood management and this article is being a touch disingenuous towards the RSPB (understandable, given the fractious relationship they have, and neither side has really helped the cause there!). Yes they're against it right now, but it is not a blanket refusal to try it in the future. Their point, and I think it merits exploring, is that other stuff should be done first. It's worth reading the RSPB's case. Even if it's just to know their argument inside out before it's given to you! 

 

[Fisheruk]

5 hours ago, chrisjpainter said:

Not strictly true. There's great nesting potential for peregrines there, it's just not what we'd automatically think of as prime real estate. And, in any case, the habitats aren't really the issue here, because the fact is that Dark Peak does support peregrines and peregrine nesting. The fact that these have failed and that persecution is likely to have played a part (recognised not just by the BBC and RSPB, but by the Derbyshire WT, the Moorland Association, the National Trust, Natural England and the Peak District National Park Authority as well) is cause for concern. They have had breeding pairs the for over 30 years, so failure is significant. 

Likewise with the Goshawks, their presence and breeding success shows they are content to breed in the area, but the report (put together by an independent scientist) recognises that breeding success is still well below where it should be and detailed specific, evidenced based occurrences of persecution. The report is even-handed and does recognise that they may have screwed up on peregrine nest by a daft positioning of a camera.

 

On the subject of brood management, there are legitimate concerns with brood management and this article is being a touch disingenuous towards the RSPB (understandable, given the fractious relationship they have, and neither side has really helped the cause there!). Yes they're against it right now, but it is not a blanket refusal to try it in the future. Their point, and I think it merits exploring, is that other stuff should be done first. It's worth reading the RSPB's case. Even if it's just to know their argument inside out before it's given to you! 

 

Why don’t you post a link to the RSPB article you refer to, then we can make up our own minds.

[Kalahari]

https://www.gwct.org.uk/policy/policy-reports/hen-harriers-and-the-joint-raptor-study/

 

Here you go.

 

David.

 

PS not much more time to vote for me for council.

[chrisjpainter]

4 hours ago, Fisheruk said:

Why don’t you post a link to the RSPB article you refer to, then we can make up our own minds.

yeah, that would have been sensible! oh well. Right. here's the summary report of the raptor initiative going on on dark peak, which includes the details of nest success across a number of species, as well as details of persecution - and the admittance of the rather dopey camera position!

http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/1055570/Bird-of-Prey-Initiative-2016-17-Report.pdf

And here's the RSPB stance on brood management. There's some reasonable stuff in there. It might not be enough to convince, but I think it's enough to show there's a case. I just wish they'd not started with the weakest of all the arguments! Why start with legal concerns? It's the one people will care least about, it's one that's got nothing to do with practical conservation and, if something's designed to help a struggling species, why immediately say it's not a good idea because of red tape? They really don't help themselves!

http://ww2.rspb.org.uk/Images/hen-harrier-action-plan-position_tcm9-385468.pdf

I am by no means a fan of the RSPB. They're high on fluffy factor, high on headline making, but low on science and common sense. However they do make a case here. 

As for me, I think brood management should be used - but only as a last resort when other less intrusive methods have failed and where wildlife crime has been removed from the equation by the Police. That would stop the RSPB taking the law into their own hands and ********* up potential convictions because they broke the law getting evidence!

[scotslad]

If ur interesed that link above was the original langholm project ,they're has since been a 2nd 1 at the same moor which has also failed and the 'stakeholder' groups are now busy fighting over the results.

As 1 side doesn't want to take its head out of the sand.

 

The rspb are now doing more harm to UK's birds than good.

There point blank refusal to blame grannie's cats for killing anything incase it cost's then sub's must cost millionss of birds lives every year.

 

Ps on brood managemnet is it not quite widely used by many other european countries and elsewhere?

Also why do they promote it with other species? Golden Eagles for example?

[panoma1]

But when the RSPB, Packham et al have fulfilled their real agenda and banned or made driven Grouse shooting uneconomical, and because of it, when the landowners have abandoned the moors to nature, lack of management has turned this upland habitat into a predator riddled, barren scrubland, local hotels, B&B's, pubs, resturants have gone out of business, keepers, beaters and the many directly dependent workers and workers in ancillary jobs are on the dole.......who will fund the moors upkeep?.......and with nesting waders and the Grouse have all gone due to degradation of habitat and having fallen prey to uncontrolled predation....what will the Hen Harriers eat then?

[scotslad]

2 hours ago, panoma1 said:

But when the RSPB, Packham et al have fulfilled their real agenda and banned or made driven Grouse shooting uneconomical, and because of it, when the landowners have abandoned the moors to nature, lack of management has turned this upland habitat into a predator riddled, barren scrubland, local hotels, B&B's, pubs, resturants have gone out of business, keepers, beaters and the many directly dependent workers and workers in ancillary jobs are on the dole.......who will fund the moors upkeep?.......and with nesting waders and the Grouse have all gone due to degradation of habitat and having fallen prey to uncontrolled predation....what will the Hen Harriers eat then?

 

Ur spot on its already happened at Langholm after the 1st JRG study, moor went from 5 FT keepers and 2 pairs of HH which fledged young most years, throu study peaked at 25+ pair of HH, when the grouse numbers dipped as they always did in those days throu stongleosis?sp (langholm was a 7 year cycle, most english moors were 5 yr cycles) the grouse simply couldn't recover so all the keepers paid off.

The remaining HH and various other vermin ate most of the grouse and waders, even the shepherds up there hardly heard any grouse when the keepers left.

Within a few years down to 2 pairs of HH but both struggling to fledge any young.

1 of the big problems at langholm 2nd time round was all the heather was in such a bad state, either old and rank with a lot of beetle damge and old heather struggles to recover from beetle or complely lost due to overgrazing by sheep. Also a mmassive wild fire hazard when whole hillsides get old with no breaks

 

The exact same cycle is about to happen again at Langholm and Ikley moor, i just hope some shooting orgs/gwct are monitoring bird numbers and changes as the moor returns to its 'wild' state.

[Fisheruk]

The trouble with RSPB and the WLT’s is that they are stuffed full of “conservationists” who have done this or that degree in land management or conservation, but mostly they are not country folk. There they have been taught by academics who are lecturing because they can’t get a proper job. They then they come out and try and swim against the tide of common sense. I realise that there are some nasty criminal activities which need to be stopped eg., Badger baiting, but Conservation is really about balance. Protecting badgers per se in the Wildlife and Countryside Act was an over reaction to a criminal act which is still going on regardless of the WCA. It is the criminal acts which need to be targeted more effectively rather than just blaming legal occupations and the many who know more about conservation without really thinking about it rather than the academics who think they know everything, but really need to be earthed in the really world.

Better put the tin hat on now! 

[chrisjpainter]

5 hours ago, Fisheruk said:

The trouble with RSPB and the WLT’s is that they are stuffed full of “conservationists” who have done this or that degree in land management or conservation, but mostly they are not country folk. There they have been taught by academics who are lecturing because they can’t get a proper job. They then they come out and try and swim against the tide of common sense. I realise that there are some nasty criminal activities which need to be stopped eg., Badger baiting, but Conservation is really about balance. Protecting badgers per se in the Wildlife and Countryside Act was an over reaction to a criminal act which is still going on regardless of the WCA. It is the criminal acts which need to be targeted more effectively rather than just blaming legal occupations and the many who know more about conservation without really thinking about it rather than the academics who think they know everything, but really need to be earthed in the really world.

Better put the tin hat on now! 

I think this is part of the RSPB's concern. Brood management doesn't really tackle the nasty criminals, instead it appeases them and accepts that it can never be stopped, so you have to mitigate the effects.

You have a real point about some in conservation. Too often they come in knowing theory but having very little experience. I have an MSc in Wildlife Management and Conservation, from Reading University. But I'd say that's only equally as useful as the 30 years + I've had of growing up and living buried in the countryside with countryside attitudes and countryside experience. I should also say that two of my lecturers in particular were brilliant. They really went to town on the wildlife management side - the whole module on pest control (dressed up as 'management of vertebrates for the purposes of conservation' - or the Death Module!) really covered the necessary control of foxes, deer, rodents, pigeons etc. There were, however, a fair few others that might have proved your point