The story so far......
*Natural England have issued licences to shoot thousands of Herring Gulls *Population of the species has collapsed *Dozens of other species on kill list *A licensing process that is shrouded in secrecy *An agency that doesn't want to engage with 346,000 petition supporters It is patently obvious to most of us that we should not be killing a species that is in severe population decline. The fact that the killing is being officially sanctioned by England's nature watchdog is mind-boggling. I've delayed writing this in order to give Natural England time to respond to a question about their licences, specifically the lethal control licences that they issue to kill Herring Gulls. Although their Operations Director, James Diamond, is polite and approachable, he hasn't as yet fully addressed my concerns (on behalf of the 346,000 supporters of the petition) about Natural England's approval (which as far as we know is ongoing) of licences to shoot this endangered gull. This chapter of the long running story begins a few weeks ago when I asked, as part of our ongoing discussions, why the agency sanctions the lethal control of this red listed species, whose population has collapsed in recent years. I cited one example licence (from a long list of similar licences) where Natural England granted permission to an applicant in Devon allowing them to shoot 100 of the birds. Initially Mr Diamond himself placed a Freedom Of Information request on my behalf relating to this example Herring Gull kill licence. I had wrongly supposed that he might have more immediate access to licensing data - being the Operations Director - rather than having to submit a FOI request in order to procure the basic information that I had asked for, but sometimes these organisations work in ways which baffle the logical mind. Long-winded and frustrating process to get minimal information When, after nearly a month, the requested information eventually came through, it revealed less than nothing. I wanted to know for what purpose the licence had been granted. This information was missing. I complained and was advised to submit a further request, which I have since done; but it is a long-winded and frustrating method of obtaining what should be very simple and accessible data. Is Bureaucracy Hindering Simple Logic? While waiting for the results of this second request, and in the wake of much public consternation at the Herring Gull licence controversy, I asked again why the agency deemed it appropriate to add to the pressures on this red listed species by sanctioning kill licences at all. I suggested a statement from Natural England might shed light on the reasons why they felt it necessary to kill the birds. Perhaps they could justify this action in some way that would pacify those for whom the whole business seemed less than decent. Natural England has been keen to point out that a review of the licences might happen at some point following a repeat national survey of seabirds, "Once we have that updated information and evidence it seems likely we will need to review again our approach to gull licensing". But I believe that we do actually have enough data right now to know that Herring Gulls are in severe decline, and many of us agree that Natural England should have already stopped issuing lethal control licences for the species. Isn't that just common sense? I suggested this to them but it seems to have fallen on deaf ears. While I am sure that the agency no doubt carries out some excellent conservation work, sometimes bureaucracy gets in the way of simple logic, it is patently obvious to most of us that we should not be killing a species whose population has crashed. The fact that the killing is being officially sanctioned by England's nature watchdog is mind-boggling. Should we be worried...? Let's not forget that Natural England issue kill licences for dozens and dozens of other species too, it's not just the beleaguered Herring Gull that deserves more protection. Should we be worried that Natural England is in charge of our wildlife licensing system? Should we be worried that it is shrouded in secrecy? And that it is making decisions that will resonate for decades to come? Yes, I'm beginning to think we should be very worried indeed.
9 Comments
trev
11/7/2019 07:15:41 pm
I think you've hit the nail on the head, official institutions and organizations are tied up in bureaucracy by their very nature to the point where common sense is lost in the system because there is no tick box to accommodate it. It's the same in other areas of life, the DWP for example, and local Councils.
Reply
Daniele Brocard
11/7/2019 10:13:56 pm
Ce sont des criminels comle partout sur terre.
Reply
Pauline Allon
12/7/2019 08:09:26 am
Wildlife is under threat from climate change; lack of habitat and the Conservative government who puts money and vested interests before our precious wildlife. If we leave the EU this could escalate. Why is Natural England not fighting for our natural world
Reply
Ben
12/7/2019 02:51:25 pm
Are they going to wait until there are no more getting gulls left before they become a protected species?
Reply
sam
11/7/2019 11:17:14 pm
I've had run ins with Natural England over them giving licenses to fell trees in an Area of Special scientific interest during peak nesting time for birds and bats in some local woodland. They seemed less than interested and my impression was that they're there to protect the interests of wealthy land owners, they're not there for the wildlife
Reply
Pauline Allon
12/7/2019 08:20:32 am
Exactly, they are Obviously again putting the needs of business before our precious wildlife - wildlife is under threat with this Government and even more so when we (if) we leave Europe . We must fight for our precious wildlife.
Reply
Pamela Allen
12/7/2019 11:25:07 am
Completely agreed Jason....Bureaucracy cannot nor should it hinder the right and reasonable protection of all endangered species and natures wildlife.
Reply
14/7/2019 12:10:53 am
What is Natural England and who are the representative speaking for it. How can anyone gain a seat on this organisation. The existing body is clearly not representative of public opinion, seems to be completely out of touch with the protection of the natural world and is too secretive in its operation and decision making. There needs to be room in its structure for representatives who are aware of the needs of a world in which nature is allowed to continue to operate in its very delicately balanced way, protected from the interference of insensitive and unimaginative quangos such as Natural England. I will be prepared to be a member of this body if asked. How many other people would do the same?
Reply
Susan butler
1/8/2019 08:08:17 am
Please add my name in protest of so called natural England issuing licences to kill our bird population who are in decline as it is.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
If you appreciate what I write about, please consider showing your support by buying me a virtual coffee!
Click the button below! Thanks :) Archives
July 2023
|