Destruction of Duck and Moorhen Eggs At Wetland Nature Reserve: Approved by Natural England20/8/2020
*Natural England approved the destruction of 100 Tufted Duck eggs, 300 Moorhen eggs and 250 Mallard eggs - at a wetland nature reserve...
The results of my latest foi requests are in, and although there are no major surprises in the answers I received from Natural England, I continue to have concerns over some of their licensing decisions.... The destruction of hundreds of wild birds eggs at a nature reserve.... The potentially large scale destruction of waterfowl eggs at a nature reserve was a troubling discovery. In 2019, Natural England renewed an ongoing 'aviculture' licence which last year permitted the destruction of 100 Tufted Duck eggs, 300 Moorhen eggs and 250 Mallard eggs at a site in Greater London. Many of the details from this licence had been redacted prior to releasing the information to me, but nevertheless some interesting facts are included. The Tufted Ducks, Moorhens and Mallards whose eggs are licensed for destruction, are casualties of a conservation project at a site which is identified in the documents as being owned by 'Wetland Trust'. Tufted Ducks: a threat to captive species that are 'wanted within the collection' According to the technical assessment associated with this licence, the project aims to raise endangered species of waterfowl (some non-native) which are housed in special segregated enclosures set within a 60 acre wetland nature reserve. These enclosures are separated only by areas of vegetation, and if the Tufted Ducks happen to nest inside these segregated areas, their eggs can be legally removed - and destroyed. According to Natural England, Tufted Ducks are considered a threat to the carefully selected captive species that are 'wanted within the collection'. Natural England agreed that "effectively the tufted duck presence reduces the potential for the enclosure to healthily host the other bird species of interest within the collections...[species] often of greater conservation status". As mentioned, Moorhen, Mallard (and also a number of Coot) are covered by the same licence, so potentially hundreds of eggs of these native birds, in addition to those of Tufted Ducks, can also be legally destroyed, though returns data suggests that, for some of the periods covered by the licences at least, less than the permitted maximum number of eggs were ultimately destroyed. The wetland site in question is popular with visitors, and it seems unlikely that the public are aware of the wholesale destruction of wild birds eggs that might be going on behind the scenes, as they enjoy the nature reserve. Destroying wild birds' eggs at a nature reserve is "questionable" While it is worthy indeed to be helping endangered species from other parts of the world, which seems to be the primary aim of this project, destroying the eggs of native wild birds in the process is surely questionable in today's world, teetering as it is on the edge of ecological catastrophe. Here in the UK, with rampant habitat destruction, pollution and other environmental threats, even our more ubiquitous species deserve special consideration and extra protection. I hear from so many people who tell me that they have noticed a steep and rapid decline in the numbers of birds they see, birds that were once a much more common sight. It might only be a matter of time before some of our most familiar species join the ever growing red and amber lists of conservation concern. It has, after all, happened so many times before. Eggs could be collected and relocated Tufted Duck populations are thought to be stable, though their conservation status has not been assessed since 2016. Should Natural England really be in the business of approving and enabling egg destruction, even at the request of conservation organisations, however worthy the agenda might appear to be? And should conservation organisations themselves be comfortable with the destruction of wild birds' eggs as part of their work? If eggs are perceived to be in the 'wrong' place, whether for reasons of air safety, public health or, perhaps more dubiously as in this case, 'aviculture', surely it would be more ethical if they were collected and relocated. Right of reply..... Perhaps the conservation organisation involved in this particular project could reply, explaining why the Tufted Duck eggs cannot be collected and hatched for release in areas of depleted wildlife. I'd be happy to publish their response and explanation on my blog. I'd also be interested of course to hear readers' views on whether selective conservation is a valid reason for lethal control or egg destruction. It's a tricky subject. Now for some good news: Natural England are "learning lessons" Meanwhile the good news is that our campaign is continuing to influence policy at Natural England. In his blog post last month, Natural England's Director for wildlife, David Slater, admitted that "We are determined to learn lessons ......in terms of how we ensure that the evidence on which we base decisions is sound...." He added that "Licensing...operates in an ever-changing landscape - some bird species are in decline, which we need to take into account when issuing licences, and there is always new evidence emerging on non-lethal methods of control that can be used or what is causing population change in some species." The campaign continues Our campaign continues and we need more people to share the petition and spread awareness even further. We still haven't reached the next goal of half a million signatures - but I know we can. Here's a link to the petition: CLICK HERE Thanks everyone for your continued support and encouragement. Best, Jase
57 Comments
colette wilson
24/8/2020 04:17:24 pm
Please, do not destroy an important part of our environment.
Reply
peter wintle
24/8/2020 10:24:38 pm
Unfortunately there is a total misunderstanding of the reasons the wetland trust is actioning this cull the species mentioned are under no threat world wide, all of these species are in abundance but do have a serious impact on what the trust is trying to achieve in small locations to preserve the well being of species in serious decline, The wetlands trust has for many years from the beginnings with Peter Scot been the saviour of many species, the stated cull in that location will have absolutely no impact on the stated species but will enable those species in serious decline to be built up. in respect to the mallard population there is a high degree of hybridisation with domestic mallard which has over the years had a major impact on the true wild mallard species.The wetland trust is not an organisation that does things on a whim it has many people who are experts in this field thats why we are lucky enough to have such enjoyable places to visit. The general public see every thing through rose tinted glasses thats not there fault unless you work with and understand how and what makes things tick in the natural world you cannot be expected to know. Unfortunately sometimes unpleasant things have to be-done to keep the balances in check.
Reply
Chris Adam-Smith
26/8/2020 05:37:40 pm
The mortality rate for duck and moorhen is already very high and quite noticeable locally. I see no reason to add to their woes, we should not interfere, it is an endless road. Certainly it is not the reason I joined the Wetlands! I am cancelling my membership and I don’t believe I will be alone.
mrs j lee
26/8/2020 05:43:16 pm
DISBAND NATURAL ENGLAND NOW
pam allen
6/9/2020 10:27:54 am
In reply to Peter Windle "Unfortunately sometimes unpleasant things have to be done to keep the balances in check."
Keith Dancey
7/9/2020 09:23:08 pm
What a torrent of anti-science drivel from Pam Allen.
Marcia
24/8/2020 04:41:11 pm
It's time Natural England was disbanded for good.
Reply
Cathy Stringer
24/8/2020 04:42:23 pm
Nature has a way of balancing things
Reply
Jennifer Budden
24/8/2020 05:28:25 pm
What worries me is that we always assume that we humans know best and can manipulate any aspect of nature as we see fit. I have just finished reading a book on rewilding which shows that left to its own devices nature is quite capable of producing balance and increasing biodiversity. I don't think that Natural England should play god. Surely it can't be right to decide that one species - because it is held to be abundant should be killed to protect another. That also assumes that humans are good at judging the impact of what they do. The state of the planet shows this is not so. The aims of Natural England should be reconsidered.
Reply
24/8/2020 04:48:23 pm
I am utterly shocked by this information. What on earth is the point of me signing lots of petitions against animal cruelty and countries not looking after their lands, when we have crass acts against our own wildlife going on in our very own country by the very people’s we trust to look after them? Do the RSPB and other charities know about these offences?
Reply
Keith Dancey
7/9/2020 09:30:59 pm
"As was asked in your report, why on earth can’t the eggs of the poor birds be collected and placed elsewhere in a safe place so they can happily hatch?"
Reply
Keith Dancey
24/8/2020 04:54:27 pm
It is an essential part of the conservation of rare species that common species which threaten that goal are controlled.
Reply
John Watson
24/8/2020 05:26:42 pm
I agree that rarer species must take priority, but surely the least harmful solution is to prevent the common species nesting there in the first place !
Reply
Keith Dancey
24/8/2020 05:41:42 pm
It is impossible to prevent common species from nesting in open enclosures.
Fraser Cottington
24/8/2020 04:55:11 pm
It worries me that all both Moorhen and Coot are now suffering whole broods being wiped out by inland breeding Herring and Lesser Black-backed Gulls at our nature reserve. This raises questions what are we supposed to do when native species are being attacked on all sides, both by urban gulls and now 'Unnatural England'. This nasty politicized quango should be marked unfit for purpose and replaced with a body of proper conservationists who grasp the reality and needs of native species and NEVER stoop to monied folks, or the bodies with any agenda outside one that protects our wildlife. What are we to expect next a Mink park where we pay to see them fed the eggs of Moorhens, Coots and Mallard. Utterly disgusted with NE.
Reply
Ernie Scales
24/8/2020 04:57:03 pm
One would have thought that appointing a vocal campaigner for the environment (ex FOE) as chair would see NE change for the better. Sadly, he seems to have sold out to the Establishment as little has changed or shows signs of changing.
Reply
Rod Leith
24/8/2020 05:07:24 pm
The failing in this case, surely, is that by not taking steps to ensure the common species do not nest in the areas reserved for the rarer species, the Wetland Trust is actively preventing the common species from nesting safely; because the WT fully intend destroying eggs that are laid in the 'wrong' place. Conservation and eugenics are very different concepts, and the onus should be on the WT to take all reasonable measures to prevent common species from unwittingly signing their own death warrants, before Natural England approves the implementation of those warrants by WT.
Reply
Keith Dancey
24/8/2020 05:17:03 pm
It is impossible to prevent common species from nesting in open enclosures. And by nesting in such areas is not 'unwittingly signing their own death warrant' because the parent waterbirds are not harmed.
Reply
John Watson
24/8/2020 05:28:27 pm
No, it's not impossible. They're the experts, else they wouldn't be breeding rare species in the first place ! 24/8/2020 05:19:02 pm
I think the decisions of Natural England to exterminate the ducks and moorhens eggs absolutely disgusting!
Reply
Keith Dancey
24/8/2020 05:47:09 pm
"No, it's not impossible. They're the experts, else they wouldn't be breeding rare species in the first place !"
Reply
Peter Robinson
28/8/2020 03:50:23 pm
Dear Keith,
Reply
Gareth Huw Lewis
24/8/2020 06:14:30 pm
I think that this license to destroy eggs of Moorhen, Coot and Tufted Duck is quite wrong and indeed quite disturbing. Shame on Natural England for granting the license and More Shame on the so called "Conservation" organisation that made the application. What is this world coming to-NO IT IS NOT OK to kill the above native species to benefit some exotic bird that breeds normally(or doesn't by the sound of it!) in some distant land
Reply
Keith Dancey
24/8/2020 08:40:55 pm
"What I would say is that if this Wetland Trust is a familiar organisation and they are doing this without their members knowing-then this would be shocking. Personally if I am a member of this (at the moment) organisation that cannot be named then I would resign my membership if I ever found out that it was a wildlife charity to which I currently subscribe"
Reply
Paul Mostyn
24/8/2020 06:22:20 pm
Why is the site not being named and the owners/managers not being named and shamed?
Reply
Keith Dancey
24/8/2020 08:35:33 pm
Possibly to stop extremely ignorant people from disrupting important conservation work.
Reply
Keith Dancey
24/8/2020 08:43:25 pm
My browser is reporting: This server could not prove that it is url4069.editmysite.com; its security certificate is from *.sendgrid.net. This may be caused by a misconfiguration or an attacker intercepting your connection.
Reply
Irene Leggett
24/8/2020 10:07:43 pm
'Natural England' what a joke, along with Defra they are quite happy to see various species destroyed to suit themselves. It appears that the public and various rescue centres are now not allowed to rescue grey squirrels, some deer species and other animals but its quite alright for Defra to allow approx 57 MILLION (non-native) pheasants and partridges to be released (after being hand-reared) into the wild in preparation for THE SHOOTING SEASON, where these half-tame birds are ruthlessly shot, they are so tame that they do not even fly when beaters go after them so they are literally sitting targets. After a day's shooting, many of these innocent, dead birds are just dumped in ready-dug pits, or put onto piles and just left to rot. The whole world sure is going crazy......
Reply
Keith Dancey
25/8/2020 12:47:02 pm
I agree with you, Irene. The decisions (by Natural England and Defra) to prevent the re-release of injured non-native species back into the countryside whilst simultaneously approving the importation and release of approximately 60 million non-native birds as target practice for shooters is hypocritical.
Reply
LESLEY
25/8/2020 12:35:22 am
The nwt are just as bad as natural england ...my husband and myself who are keen birders were absolutely appalled by a volunteer at one of our local nature reserves which was recently refurbished for an obscene amount of money and now belongs to the nwt..anyway we were collared by one of the new volunteers who asked our thoughts on the changes and did we see many birds to which my husband said he wasn't impressed and birds yes mostly the usual culprits ?..oh you mean the geese she said yes others have complained of the numbers too but my husband said look its nature and im certainly not complaining but she said if it doesn't get any better we will be going round pricking the eggs ??...we told her we weren't impressed and wouldn't return
Reply
Dave B
25/8/2020 10:12:03 am
*If* this is the WWT, and *if* this is Barnes, and *if* the WWT are fully in support of the destruction of hundreds of wild bird eggs, presumably they'd be happy to report on it in their next magazine?
Reply
Keith Dancey
25/8/2020 12:49:00 pm
It has already been written about in their magazine.
Reply
Dave B
27/8/2020 08:54:57 pm
Care to elaborate?
Julia Dance
25/8/2020 11:45:35 am
One reply seems to be from an employee of this wetland trust, so can they please go into more detail about their choice for destruction and rejection of other moves such as relocation please ?
Reply
Keith Dancey
25/8/2020 12:41:10 pm
It is impossible to 'relocate' eggs. You clearly have no idea about what such birds require.
Reply
Gareth Huw Lewis
25/8/2020 02:43:35 pm
Anyone who is a member of Wildlife Trusts and other conservation organisations has a right to know about procedures such as above. Arrogant and frankly offensive comments from certain individuals such as on this blog do not help-arrogance and ignorance often go hand in hand and if members of the conservation bodies of organisations that I belong to or reserves I visit were to write in scientific journals and similar publications in such a manner , then I would be quite happy to tell them what to do with their suggestions!-everyone has a right to an opinion and it is very obvious to me that we all have to be pleasant and have an informed discussion-trolling is a wonderful word and perfectly describes the behaviour of some factions on social media 25/8/2020 05:19:48 pm
The wrangling & arguments in this & other e-mails & petitions that I read are all very disheartening. Maybe I have lived too long, but all I know is that in the 20 years since I have retired & came to live in my present rural home:-
Reply
Keith Dancey
26/8/2020 03:57:29 pm
"The bird shooters of the Mediteranean Islands that I spent so much time & money protesting about are now totally eclipsed in destructiveness by a single government body that calls itself "Natural""
Reply
diane freeland
26/8/2020 10:34:08 am
How I agree with the comments from Charles. The species I was so familiar with in garden and on walks down so dramatically. I am thrilled to see of hear the finches I once took for granted. Never mind, so long as mankind flourishes it seems few care. Wipe out the magnificent raptors do long as there are non native birds to shoot.
Reply
Keith Dancey
26/8/2020 04:02:35 pm
"Anyone who is a member of Wildlife Trusts and other conservation organisations has a right to know about procedures such as above"
Reply
Keith Dancey
26/8/2020 05:42:43 pm
"I see no reason to add to their woes, we should not interfere, it is an endless road. Certainly it is not the reason I joined the Wetlands! I am cancelling my membership and I don’t believe I will be alone"
Reply
Keith Dancey
26/8/2020 05:45:13 pm
"DISBAND NATURAL ENGLAND NOW"
Reply
Lesley
27/8/2020 11:29:00 am
There's a UK-based charity called the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust, and a US-based organisation called The Wetland Trust. I wonder who 'Wetland Trust' could be?
Reply
Keith Dancey
28/8/2020 12:41:57 pm
"Certainly not a news item saying “we now regard our most well known waterbirds as pest species and are destroying their eggs”. How far back do I need to go?"
Reply
Dave B
28/8/2020 06:05:30 pm
You know very well I was referring to having an article in the supporters’ magazine informing said supporters of the hostility towards native species, and that, in the last year, the wwt has taken such steps. Not an obscure academic article from years ago that most people will never see.
Reply
Keith Dancey
28/8/2020 07:55:12 pm
In which case you will know that the WWT publish academic articles to their members, and that in order to conserve some species they also have to sometimes control others.
Dave B
29/8/2020 11:22:47 am
Keith, I asked whether the wwt would report on it (this, current, 2019/2020, destruction of the eggs of native wildfowl) in their next magazine. You stated they already had. I challenged you as to when. You have so far been unable to provide a reference, merely to state there have been academic papers.
Reply
Keith Dancey
7/9/2020 09:44:42 pm
"You know very well I was referring to having an article in the supporters’ magazine informing said supporters of the hostility towards native species, and that, in the last year, the wwt has taken such steps."
Reply
Dave B
8/9/2020 09:41:42 am
I would say that destroying eggs counts as hostility.
Keith Dancey
8/9/2020 05:02:56 pm
"I would say that destroying eggs counts as hostility."
Reply
Dave B
8/9/2020 08:06:02 pm
Eating egg products from farmed eggs is one thing. Blatant destruction of wild eggs simply because they've been laid in what, to someone, is an inconvenient place, is quite another.
Keith Dancey
8/9/2020 08:29:25 pm
"Blatant destruction of wild eggs simply because they've been laid in what, to someone, is an inconvenient place, is quite another." Follow the money. While the Wetland Trust may be a charity and dedicated to conservation there is a large element of desire to attract Joe Public to their reserves with the offer of exotic ducks and geese. Joe Public won't pay good money to see Tufted Ducks but perhaps they should. Although the species may not be endangered now, it almost certainly will in the future when 70 million people cram into the UK's concreted over green land.
Reply
Keith Dancey
7/9/2020 09:54:47 pm
"Joe Public won't pay good money to see Tufted Ducks but perhaps they should"
Reply
Thomas Bickerton
8/9/2020 10:24:39 am
There are a number of issues here, if we take NE first and it’s not any sort of judgment, but a request for a licence was placed with them, their decision was binary, yes or no, it’s unfortunate for the tufted duck that the decision was positive.
Reply
Keith Dancey
8/9/2020 05:12:17 pm
Yet another load of anti-science claptrap.
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
|