Natural England Misses Legal Deadline And Fails To Respond To FOI Request

7/8/2019

Natural England has failed to respond to a Freedom of Information request, regarding the shooting of Herring Gulls - in spite of being legally obliged to do so.

I submitted the request, relating to an individual licence, as part of my enquiries into the agency's licensing system, having been advised to do so by Natural England's Operations Director, James Diamond.
The licence in question, issued to an applicant in Devon, permitted the shooting of 100 red-listed Herring Gulls and was just one example of many that were approved by the agency.
In fact the total number of Herring Gulls killed under similar licences might potentially be several thousand.
Herring Gulls are a declining, red-listed species of serious conservation concern, so I was interested to discover the reasons behind Natural England's decision to allow the shooting of thousands of these birds.

Information Requested Following Advice From Natural England Operations Director
Mr Diamond informed me that this information would have to be obtained through a FOI request, and so I selected a typical individual licence from the agency's data and asked very specifically, as advised by Mr Diamond, for details of the original application together with Natural England's technical assessment.
I made it clear that I would like to know the precise reasons provided by the applicant explaining why they felt it was necessary to kill Herring Gulls, together with Natural England's response to the applicant and details of the process via which the agency arrived at their decision to approve lethal control of this red listed species.
I also requested return figures if they were available, detailing the numbers of birds finally killed under this individual licence.

That was on 5th July.

On 6th July I received an acknowledgement from a paralegal at Natural England confirming the following:-
"Thank you for your request for the information detailed in your email below, which we received on 5th July 2019.
We are dealing with your request under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004.
Your request is being considered and we will send out our response within the legal deadline of 20 working days which is 6th August 2019. If, for any reason, we are unable to meet the deadline we will keep you fully informed of the reasons for this."

Today is 7th August.

The legal deadline has passed.
I have not heard from Natural England and so they have failed in their legal responsibility to either provide the information requested or to keep me 'fully informed' of any reasons for not meeting the legal deadline.

There may be three reasons for this failure to comply with their legal obligations.
It may be because they have information that they prefer to hide.
It may be because they don't even know the reasons behind the decision themselves.
Or it may be that they are simply so disorganised that they don't have a clue what they are doing.

Whatever the reason, this is a massive failure on their part to comply with their legal responsibility.
Such blatant disregard for the law is shocking.

Where do we go from here? Anybody's guess.
But one thing has been made very clear indeed:
Natural England are definitely not fit for purpose.

43 Comments

Melanie mills

7/8/2019 10:30:40 am

Let’s hope this goes against them by not responding to a legal request

Pam Leadbeater

7/8/2019 12:51:08 pm

WHOSE WORLD IS THIS?

WHOSE WEALTH IS THAT?

WHOSE RULES ARE THESE?

HOW FAT’s THE CAT?

WHO MAKES OUR DEALS?

HOW GREAT’s OUR COST?

CAN FAIRNESS WIN?

OR HAVE WE LOST?

We shouldn’t have to go through the legal system to receive natural justice, but sadly ordinary people have to go to these lengths unfortunately. Surely the RSPB should get on board to help you in this endeavour.

Martin Bell

7/8/2019 03:43:53 pm

The Tories have ensured justice and legal help is only available for the rich.

Sandra Haynes

7/8/2019 01:56:03 pm

Natural England is defently not fit for purpose I hope something is fine about them soon as it was disgusting that they did not reply in time to save all these birds .There has to be an alternative motive.

Helen Davidson

7/8/2019 06:00:47 pm

Report them to the information commissioner. They can be heavily fined.

Ronald Teague

29/8/2019 06:39:17 am

where is the rspb what use are they if they cannot protect birds this selfish country sickens me

Liz Damaschka

7/8/2019 10:36:34 am

They are required, by law, to divulge this information.

Michael Clarke

7/8/2019 12:45:18 pm

If they are required by law - have they committed a criminal offence? If so, will the directors/trustees be fined or imprisoned?

Fiona Millward

7/8/2019 10:37:22 am

This is really worrying...thank you stepping up on behalf of those who care and for your continued commitment to this issue!

As it is a legal requirement to have responded by yesterday then they absolutely need to be held accountable - should the Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs as their sponsor be the next step?

Such disregard should not be swept under the carpet, as I fear so many of these things are...

Thank you again Jason,
Fiona

Tony Whiting

7/8/2019 10:38:54 am

I agree with you that it’s poor that NE haven’t replied in their timeline. I would like to see a few less Pigeons in the UK, also less Magpies and Grey Squirrels as those 2 both take eggs and young out of small birds nests which reduces the population of small birds slightly.

Dr Richard Meyer link

7/8/2019 12:18:11 pm

This seems a bizarre argument in this context. By 'pigeons' which species do you mean? Grey squirrels, I agree, but irrelevant here. Incidentally you do not need to say "a few less", 'fewer' would do!

Peter

7/8/2019 03:57:23 pm

Seriously, you're complaining about grammar? There are more important things at stake here, like the animals!

jeannette brazier.

7/8/2019 03:57:41 pm

There is no need for less pigeons magpies and grey squirrels. Nature should all be left alone.

Charles David Foulstone

7/8/2019 04:40:18 pm

Sorry Jeanette, but you seem to have forgotten your natural history. The reason we have so many grey squirrels now & so few native reds is because a hundred years ago we DIDN'T leave nature alone, so what happens now? Do we try to redress former interferences, or just sit & live with the consequences.

Dennisa

7/8/2019 10:39:59 am

I note the Head of Natural England is now Tony Juniper, formerly of WWF and FoE. Disappointing.

D. Swift

7/8/2019 10:47:44 am

I would think they are having great difficulty in explaining the indiscriminate slaughter of our native birds. This on top of the killing of blue tits and other birds that cannot be justified in any possible way.

Virginia Mc Loughlin

7/8/2019 10:48:51 am

Dear Jason,
I regularly read your updates with regard to the concerns expressed by you and the relentless pursuing of issues
such as the one outlined in the killling of herring gulls.

Without 'Environmental Soldiers' such as yourself the world would be a very sad place. I am involved myself in numerous campaigns with regard to all types of animals and the unnecessary cruelty and killing that goes on here in Ireland the latest being the greyhound racing industry.

I applaud your efforts in highlighting these issues as they occur - unfortunately we have a disgraceful reputation when it comes to protecting our wildlife here in Ireland.

Kind wishes,
Virginia

sandra glynn link

7/8/2019 10:53:58 am

these vile tories seem to be untouchable and do nothing that is legal requirements.when will people open their eyes and see what is NOT been done rather than listen to lie after lie

David Garnett

7/8/2019 10:51:32 am

Hi Jason

Natural England just hope you will go away.

However, if you have not contacted Information Commissioner's Office ICO, please do. The ICO is set up to look into breachs of none information and they have a help line. I have used them and found them helpful to move forward.

https://ico.org.uk/

J M COLE

7/8/2019 11:01:06 am

Spot on Jason. The ICO will logically view this as a constructive breach of the Act and not an oversight, which tends not to Wash anyway. High chance that NE will be censured and fined and rightly so. Must not let this pass.

Ken Smith

7/8/2019 10:51:38 am

You now need to take this matter up with the Information Commissioners Office https://ico.org.uk/

Christine Austin

7/8/2019 10:51:49 am

Thank you so much for doing this!
We need to protect all wildlife unless there is a very, very, very, very, good reason.

Ian Williams

7/8/2019 11:01:14 am

This is a total disgrace. Natural England is not above the law and if the law says you jump, you ask how high? Give us the response which is rightfully ours.

Henry Goodall

7/8/2019 11:03:16 am

So Called 'Natural England' are a law unto themselves.
They destroyed an irreplaceable artefact at the former Stoney Cross WWII airfield (perimeter track, previously open to all including disabled visitors) without any consultation with conservation and historical community groups. This was done in secret, during the bird ground nesting season by a contractor who had no idea what he was destroying.
They are a disgrace.

Sophie

7/8/2019 11:04:49 am

You need to take legal action. Do you have a lawyer to do this for free ie not free for the sake of our creatures ? You need to make an foi for every single license. A corrupt individual is issuing them .... clearly and making money. There is a market for stuffed animals close to extinction

Nikki Deavall

7/8/2019 11:09:05 am

Thank you so much for your continued efforts in bringing this to the public's attention. Your efforts are so appreciated
We are custodians of our wildlife and your findings yet again prove that there are those supposedly looking out for our wildlife who are obviously doing just the opposite and it seems even breaking the law at that. I am sick of people like these making fatal decisions about our wildlife, often without our knowledge and then (ridiculously) are even unable to give a genuine reason why. This is our countryside and if we dont look after it then people like this will be free to take whatever measures they feel necessary, legal or not it seems, and definitely with no morals or ethics present. Well done you. Thank you again and keep up your fantastic work.

Stephen Varty

7/8/2019 11:11:57 am

These people should face prosecution as individuals instead of hiding like cowards inside a cocooned organisaton. There should be automatic fines and jail sentences. Why do we need them anyway? Sometimes I think people like this just come up with decisions to justify their needless, species destroying, overpaid jobs! They are no better than the sad bar stewards that go on pheasant shoots!

Alan Digweed

7/8/2019 11:29:38 am

Have you considered taking the route via the legal system. I have no doubt there are legal guidelines in place for a provider failing to submit a response in time.
I submitted one to the Treasury; yes, they met the deadline but sent me pages and pages of statistics but no narrative

Clifford Luty link

7/8/2019 11:29:49 am

Un-Natural England!! Typical bureaucratic bungling. Definitely not fit for purpose!!

Debbie Kimble

7/8/2019 11:34:06 am

Time to get MP's involved and start throwing the book at Natural England

Sarah

7/8/2019 11:48:59 am

They'll be banking on the fact that you won't take them to court, and there aren't enough government funds for anyone official to follow-up, so unless you put your money where your mouth is, it's unlikely it will go anywhere. My advice is to write an intriguing article....find out if there have been any other animals being culled without care, and get it printed in as many newspapers and magazines as will write it up. If it's systematic and widespread, that's the clincher.

Terry Canham

7/8/2019 11:54:38 am

My guess is that Boris has diverted them all to work on 'no deal Brexit'! More seriously though, I have lost all faith in the motives and motivation of Natural England. I've seen too many questionable examples of their decision making, particularly around landing issues. They need investigating, independently and fully.

7/8/2019 12:01:16 pm

Sorry, in my earlier post I meant Planning Issues, not Landing Issues. Wretched prescriptive text!

Jan Webb

7/8/2019 12:03:22 pm

Who are Natural England and do they speak on behalf of the Nation. If the head of them used to be with WWF where is there compassion for the beautiful wildlife in this country. I am appalled at this situation.
Well done Jason for speaking on behalf of the wildlife.

Dustydog link

7/8/2019 12:24:52 pm

Looking at Mr Diamond’s various titles , ‘ champion of Natural England” maybe he’s so far up his own #### he doesn’t want you finding out truth.
Time for help from your MP and the National press?

Eva Ferlez

7/8/2019 12:50:45 pm

Dear Jason
Have you considered speaking with the Information Commissioner's Office for advice about what you can do? You can find contact details online.

Best wishes
Eva

satya

7/8/2019 01:31:15 pm

under law they should be fined. Well worth pursuing

Skizzy Smith link

7/8/2019 02:16:09 pm

If its a legal obligation that has not been met, is that an offence? Who governs the law that has been broken and will they bring Natural England to court to face charges? Or will it get lost in a mountain of paperwork and never come to court? Is it necessary to bring a private action?

B H Wykes

7/8/2019 04:23:05 pm

Failure to comply with a legal request requires enforcement of the law. For what other purpose is legislation and the dubious means we have for enforcement?

Carole Sutton

7/8/2019 06:35:56 pm

Well there's a surprise - they are thumbing their noses at us all.
They certainly are not fit for purpose and are an absolute disgrace. That doesn't help all the birds they have allowed to be killed and those that will follow unless these licences can be stopped.
Nature has managed itself for thousands of years, any problems have been caused by humans, plain and simple.

D.Jackson

7/8/2019 11:44:14 pm

Mr. Enfield, you need to calm down and stop using such emotive language about a failure to meet a statutory time lime, which I belive was miscalculated, although today is clearly passed the response date. The failure is in providing a response or stating the need for an extension.

The correct action is defined in regulation 11, defined as representationions and reconsideration. You calmly write to Natural England, make representation that your application has not been correctly processed and await the response. If this response is not satisfactory, you then refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

Pamela Allen

8/8/2019 11:04:29 am

In Full Agreement Jason, Natural England is in breach of their FOI public duty, necessitating unfortunate further but necessary action.

Just prior to Parliament summer long break, NE I believe represented by a Mr Diamond gave evidence before a Select Committee on UK environment on climate change. Perhaps NE in 2019 has taken on more than it can chew, because he drew attention to NE gross reduction in manpower over the past decade. Indeed his statements made some disturbing listening, where Mr Diamond inferred successive Governments reduced NE funding to such as point the body is struggling to meet its commitments and specifically on research into climate change on UK land and how the UK can help itself to stop and prevent further land damage ie drying up of peat bogs, blocking waterways to encourage regeneration of salt marsh to expand salt marsh all helps absorb ozone depletion gases such as Carbon dioxide thereby reduce climate change.

Might I suggest to listen to this debate to understand NE position on reduction of public funding year on year thereby great reduction of NE manpower. The fact supports why NE is not fit for purpose in 2019 therefore should not have/hold the responsibility to issue cull licences.

Three anti seagull media articles complained of : 1st - wrote to complain about Devonlive hypocritical use of emotive and inappropriate wording regarding the natural behavior of local seagulls at an Exeter Weatherspoon beer outdoor garden; First the report stated customers were "terrorised" when the CCTV video recording can hear people laughing with a few standing up, "dive bombed" and "steal" when a sea gull swoop down on a table to attempt to get one beak of food. Weatherspoon said they will pay to bring in a natural predator a bird of prey to deter the seagulls from the area.
Clearly three terms are wrong and inappropriate I found this article public incitement of hatred toward seagulls. Below the article the reporter placed an article on protection of birds, for supposedly 'balance'. My complaints raised the fact these seagulls are starving, we having taken majority of their food source and habitat and they are behaving naturally.
After writing the complaint the realisation a bird of prey will not only deter seagulls from this area but ALL BIRDS therefore Weatherspoons will directly adversely effect all birds and public who appreciate birds where they live and enjoy this area gardens and parks and such like for the sake of a tiny few who choose to eat outside without garden umbrellas.

Two days ago I heard two loud bird alarms simultaneously a crow and seagull raise the disturbing bird alarm to a predator (not a cat the neighbor's and our cat are often out) assumed a bird of prey. The seagull's prolonged warning made several circular flights whilst maintaining its constant alarm call to all birds who flew for immediate cover and safety they remained hidden and quiet for around 30 minutes, one seagull who chose for a moment to ignore the warning to eat found itself panicking in its flight to get away such was the panic. Never before encountered this incredible bird spectacle a privilege to bear witness to full cooperation between the bird species. Seagulls HELP other species of bird including the small and song bird when it comes certain threats.
Therefore if one wishes to introduce a bird of prey to frighten off certain birds such as seagulls or pigeons in an area a licence should be obtained and the public must be provided an opportunity to reply and if necessary object. Alternative safe deterrents should be implemented such as garden brollies, they said netting's inappropriate large area, birds could get trapped.

2nd recent story - Small Dog allegedly taken from garden by seagull - No evidence supporting allegation allegedly made by the male partner not owner of dog - This case disturbingly commented on by supposed "experts" who added it is possible for seagulls to take small mammals such as a small dog - Without a shred of evidence this has ever occurred further the dog is either as heavy or heavier than the seagull and the seagull has to fly against gravity with a dog in its beak with the dog no doubt using its fangs claws and struggle to free itself should be consigned to old folk lore or wives tale, fiction not fact. Either the dog got out of the garden or some other closer person is connected to this dogs disappearance, definitely not a seagull.

3rd poor anti seagull report - BBC breakfast yesterday immature presenter Dan stated "The plague of seagulls" adding he would keep his back to the wall when eating his (£1.70-£2.00) portion of chips, it is reported he is paid over £200,000 a year for his part time job at the BBC therefore can afford to lose a chip or two. Whilst co-presenter Louise, mentioned abroad some restaurants provide their paying customers water guns to shoot the seagulls at this they both laughed at the thought of dinners being given water g

Debbie Macmillan

9/8/2019 02:43:17 pm

You've done really well to uncover a Quango where no honest records are kept and they do not care how many birds are being cruelly slaughtered by those hunters they gave a licence to. I hope they are put on the 'bonfire' of quangoes which David Cameron agreed to but I believe only one was dismissed! :(

JASON ENDFIELD

Natural England Misses Legal Deadline And Fails To Respond To FOI Request

Leave a Reply.

Subscribe to my newsletter!

Archives