|
Natural England have now published their 2023 wildlife licence data, including the complete figures for the lethal control of wild birds. (Please see at the end of this post for a link to the data)
As I begin to trawl through it all, I can see that there remain significant areas of concern... Songbird hunting for 'sport' One of my particular bugbears is the issuing of licences to hunt songbirds (including some red-listed species) using falcons. I highlighted this matter last year and at the time I implored Natural England to reconsider these particular licences which are extremely contentious and have little public support. Unfortunately they were resolute in keeping these controversial licences active, although they hinted at a potential change of policy when they told me there was no plan to reform them "in the short term" - nevertheless through 2023 they continued to issue them - with the result that a dozen licences were approved to hunt skylarks, potentially resulting in the deaths of more than 100 of these iconic and rare birds. Skylarks are just one of the species that can be legally hunted by falconers in England, the list of 'quarry' species includes many of high conservation concern, including Fieldfare, Redwing, Meadow Pipit, Mistle Thrush and more. Natural England's refusal to acknowledge public disquiet over these archaic licences is cavalier and not a good look for them. Cormorant hunting There are still high levels of Cormorant culling, 2023 seeing an increase in licences over the previous couple of years (a whopping 439 licences were issued to cull them last year, which could affect huge numbers of these impressive birds). This is a real worry; with little or no monitoring of these licences, it's pretty much a free-for-all hunting spree in the countryside. Nobody really knows how many of the birds might have been shot. These particular licences are handed out liberally, and whether or not you support the calls from anglers and fisheries to 'control' Cormorants, the number of birds that can be killed each year is clearly far too high. I don't think it will be long before we notice Cormorants disappearing from our waterways altogether in some areas. And before anyone attempts to justify the culls, I'll just remind them of the fate of the Passenger Pigeon..... Gull eggs for human consumption I'm now waiting on Natural England's decision over the licences allowing the abhorrent harvesting of Black-headed gull eggs for human consumption - in the past couple of years we have seen a reduction in the numbers of these gull egg licences, thanks to our campaign, but last year two still remained in place in Yorkshire, which permitted the taking and selling of thousands of eggs. I have strongly condemned these licences and have been trying to persuade Natural England to withdraw them all. Humans don't need to eat the eggs of wild birds, let alone those in steep population decline - it's an outdated practice that should be consigned to history. Watch this space for an update on this, as I have been told there is no decision on 2024 licences just yet. Killing Starlings for 'air safety' Killing birds for reasons of 'air safety' also raises many questions. For example a licence was issued last year to shoot 100 starlings (a red-listed species) for reasons of 'air safety' on Merseyside, with another licence permitting the shooting of 50 more starlings at an airport in Lancashire. So many species appear on these 'air safety' licences, officially permitting the culling of large numbers of rare wild birds. Meanwhile, common species such as the wood pigeon are targeted in extraordinarily large numbers under these licences, an example being one single licence that approved the shooting of 1000 of these birds, also on Merseyside. Other concerns I've only just scratched the surface of the data, but already there are some other glaring stats to look into, such as the single licence that enabled the applicant to 'take, damage or destroy' several hundred Mallard, Coot and Moorhen eggs. Data available because of our campaign All of this data is in the public domain thanks to our campaign - as it has been since I first persuaded Natural England to publish it back in 2018. Prior to that it was hidden away out of public view - and no wonder as the figures revealed a catalogue of killing and culling in the English countryside. Trawling through the data since then we've succeeded in highlighting anomalies and advising Natural England where wildlife culling has been licensed without due consideration. With regard to many species of wild birds, some would say the killing has been practically out of control for several years. Natural England had been issuing lethal control licences often for spurious reasons and we have questioned that and succeeded in pushing for transparency, accountability and change. There's no doubt in my mind that thousands of birds lives have been saved thanks to pressure from our campaign. The licence data is free to download and view, please do have a good look - it is up to us to highlight any inconsistencies. I am happy to raise questions directly with Natural England if you let me know of your concerns. Email me ([email protected]) and I'll do my best to follow up on it. NatureScot I'll also be in touch with NatureScot again soon, as they are due to publish their own licence data - for Scotland - in due course. With NatureScot's highly dubious record of enabling the killing of unfathomably huge numbers of gulls north of the border, that should make interesting reading... So, I'll be delving into the data further, it makes for depressing reading but at least we can all now see it, and ask questions over the 'management' of nature by the authorities. Natural England data is HERE Our campaign petition is HERE 
15 Comments
* The RSPB culled 345 moles at one of their reserves in 2022.
* In this age of rapidly diminishing wildlife, shouldn't the RSPB be setting an example - not joining in with the mass killing of native wildlife? The RSPB and the mass mole cull The RSPB culled the moles at one their 200+ reserves. Their annual vertebrate control summary published in December, states that they killed 345 moles at a single location, though they don't specify which one, (it might be helpful, for clarity and transparency, for the RSPB to include locations in their data...) The reason they give for culling the unfortunate mammals is a "listeriosis risk in cattle". Now, here's where the whole thing gets messy because there are many differing opinions over the science behind the claim that moles are a significant cause of listeriosis in farm animals, some suggesting that the risk is overestimated. The soil from a mole hill can contain listeria bacteria, and if it contaminates grass consumed by animals, there is a potential risk that the animals can contract the disease. Some say this risk can be mitigated simply by flattening the mole hills as they appear, many others say that moles can be moved along harmlessly by using simple cost-effective sonar deterrents - or just left alone. Futile exercise Regardless of the RSPB's motives for killing the moles, it's pretty obvious, I think, that removing that many moles from a location will merely encourage other moles to recolonize the area - which means more molehills and more "risk" - whether that risk is real or not. So it's perhaps something of a futile exercise, albeit one resulting in masses of dead wildlife, especially if the lethal control is ongoing. The RSPB should know better and I wonder who advised them to carry out the cull, which many would say was unnecessary - and unethical. Not just moles.... The RSPB say that they "see the killing or removal of vertebrates as a matter of last resort..." but nevertheless they saw fit to cull not just the 345 moles, but many other species too at their reserves, for example 400 foxes and nearly 1000 red deer. We are in the midst of a biodiversity crisis. While culling a few hundred moles might only have a local impact on the conservation status of this animal, the RSPB's decision to kill them remains highly questionable, both ethically and morally. The RSPB no doubt do a great deal of good work across their reserves, but I would suggest that culling hundreds of a single species at one of their sites - in order to pursue what appears to be an experiment in nature management - is lacking moral clarity and is certainly out of touch with current efforts to preserve what survives of our fast diminishing native fauna. There might - rarely - be rational reasons to control some animals in some circumstances, but culling hundreds of moles seems entirely avoidable and unnecessary. More legal protection for moles Many environmentalists agree that moles, one of our most loved native mammals, desperately need more legal protection. Unlicensed lethal control of these diminutive creatures is prohibited in many civilized countries like Germany and Finland, but here in the UK any individual or 'pest controller' can embark on a killing spree with very few restrictions - and no consequences. Moles play an essential part in maintaining a healthy ecosystem and it's high time these amazing animals were afforded more legal protection in this country - then even the likes of the lofty RSPB would need a licence before even contemplating the massacre of our treasured wildlife. 
Photo by Lara Lone on Unsplash
Hi folks,
Just a heads up that I'm expecting Natural England's 2023 wildlife licence data to be released imminently. Last month they told me it was scheduled for the end of February but, perhaps not surprisingly, that didn't happen. It's not unusual for it to be late - and for me to have to chase it up. Anyway I'm asking them again today for a publication date. I'll post a further update when the data comes out and would urge everyone to take a good look when it's available. What will the data reveal....? I don't need to remind you that the annual licence data is in the public domain purely thanks to our campaign - as it has been since I first persuaded Natural England to publish it back in 2018. Prior to that it was hidden away out of public view - and no wonder because the figures revealed a catalogue of mass killing and culling in the English countryside, all officially sanctioned by the government's nature advisory body Natural England. By trawling through the data since that first release, we've succeeded in highlighting anomalies within the lethal control statistics for birds in particular and advising Natural England where wildlife culling has been licensed without due consideration. In some cases, the killing was practically out of control for years. Natural England had been issuing lethal control licences often for spurious reasons, and so I asked questions over the integrity of the licensing system; this led to discussions with them, resulting in more transparency, accountability - and change. There's no doubt in my mind that thousands of birds lives have been saved thanks to pressure from our campaign and all of the wonderful citizens who support it. Incidentally we now have more than 400,000 signatures on the petition, that's a lot of potential people power to harness. Areas of concern It will be interesting to see whether levels of lethal control have fallen, or not. Areas of concern in the past have been high levels of Cormorant culling, licenced hunting of songbirds and the lethal control of various species of gull (though this has been even worse in Scotland and I'm also waiting for the latest figures from NatureScot in due course). RSPB culling wildlife On a separate - but related - note, it's also of great concern to me that the RSPB are still busy killing birds and mammals for various reasons that they try to justify by assuring us all that they only do so "as a matter of last resort". They kill significant numbers of some of our most loved species. For example, in 2022, they killed nearly 1000 Red deer, more than 500 Roe deer, 400 Foxes and - would you believe - 345 moles. Oh, and the RSPB, whose very name suggests it exists to protect birds, also culled more than 300 crows and 175 Greylag geese. I think it's an appalling record and I don't accept that it's in the name of 'conservation'. Defra and the dead whales In other matters, I am still challenging Defra's decision to withhold data relating to cetacean deaths around the UK. They haven't released the figures for stranded whales, dolphins and porpoises for the past five years.... ever since a shocking rise in the numbers raised eyebrows amongst environmentalists and begged many questions. More than 1000 dead cetaceans were washed up on UK beaches in 2018 alone. I think the data should be in the public domain in order to encourage open discussion and debate. Defra seem to think otherwise. I have asked the Information Commissioners Office to look into the matter and I'll have more on this in due course. So, that's the update for now. I'll be in touch again soon (hopefully) when Natural England's data is published. Best, Jase 
|
If you appreciate what I write about, please consider showing your support by buying me a virtual coffee!
Click the button below! Thanks :) 
Archives
December 2024
|
RSS Feed