|
* The UK Minister for Nature has issued "a lacklustre response" to campaigners' concerns over wildlife licences.
* Hopes for licence reform are overshadowed by apparent lack of empathy and engagement. Hi folks, As many of you will know, we have been awaiting a response from the government's Minister for Nature, Mary Creagh, after I contacted her on behalf of the 400,000 good folks who have signed our petition. I put to her the notion that the current wildlife lethal control licences need a complete overhaul and that many of these licences are, as we know, spurious and poorly thought through - this being the essence of our campaign and something we have pointed out time and again. Initially there was no reply at all from the Minister, but - after I called out this silence - I was promised a formal response to our concerns, and I was told that details of some specific points would be addressed and forwarded to "policy officials in Defra and Natural England". This sounded impressive but actually we are already in contact with said "officials" and have been for a number of years. 'Dull' response from Minister I thought it would be good to offer the Minister a chance to reassure us that our legitimate concerns are heard and might be addressed. I hoped that would be the case, but the cynical side of me suspected that we might get a pretty dull standard response. And folks, I'm afraid that's what we have received. Anyway, I said I'd share the Minister's response with you all, so here goes. Initially it sounded promising: "The fact that your petition has received over 400,000 signatures," said the Minister, "is a clear illustration of the level of public interest in our national wildlife and the associated concerns with how wildlife licensing is implemented. I apologise for the delay in getting back to you". So, at least there was some recognition of the strength of our campaign. But then her lengthy letter descended into a rather lacklustre explanation of wildlife licensing, the sort of thing we used to receive at the start of our campaign - before we were taken seriously. The Minister began by telling us what we already know, "Natural England (NE) consider licence applications on a case-by-case basis and take into account any impacts on the conservation status of a species when deciding whether to issue a licence. NE operates within the legislative framework to protect species that is set by government and considers licence applications which can be deemed legitimate subject to a number of statutory tests and government policy criteria...." (Yeah, we know.... this is just 'copy and paste' stuff.) She continued, "....These include that the cumulative effects of licences should not be detrimental to the conservation status of native wild bird populations or protected species." But that's really our point isn't it? - some of the species directly affected by the licences are already very much at risk and further endangered by the government issued licences that permit their destruction. It's pretty obvious that killing more of them will be 'detrimental' to their conservation status. Minister not concerned over trade in threatened birds' eggs The Minister went on to address just one of the specific concerns that I raised with her, the contentious issue of harvesting Black-headed gull eggs for human consumption, a distasteful practice that is approved under licences issued by Natural England. Our campaign has helped to ensure the withdrawal of most of the licences that permit this outdated trade to prosper, though two licences still remain in place. I had hoped the Minister would at least support the withdrawal of these last two remaining licences. I was wrong. Black-headed gulls are a species suffering significant population decline in the UK, they are on the amber list of conservation concern. But the Minister seems to imply that this concern is misplaced, telling me that "At the national scale, the cumulative effects of black headed gull egg-collecting are considered very small in relation to the national population of the species and the eggs they produce. Furthermore, NE colleagues make site visits to understand local populations where appropriate. As a result, in some areas NE continues to consider licensing at the current scale to be sustainable." Point of interest: when I raised this matter with Natural England a few years ago, there was a similar situation with active licences in place at that time to harvest gull eggs in Hampshire. However, shortly after I queried the justification for these licences, the practice of egg collecting in that area was rather suddenly considered 'unsustainable' and those licences were withdrawn.... The Minister perhaps underestimates our understanding of the matter. "Open to consider further changes" I asked the Minister if the new Labour government would consider an overhaul of the current licensing system (something which I think we can all agree is long overdue), and there was a glimmer of light in her reply, "We are currently considering wild take licensing, and we are open to consider further changes to NE's licensing processes." Exactly what is meant in this context by the term 'wild take' licences is unclear to me, though it might refer to the taking of birds of prey from the wild for use in falconry and aviculture. In fact, back in 2022, Natural England called for evidence ahead of a review for these wild take licences, so if we assume this is what is referred to in the Minister's reply then it's really not news. Minister's lack of empathy with nature? I do wonder just how much empathy with nature our Minister for Nature actually has, but the Minister sought to reassure us by telling us that "This government is committed to improving biodiversity and halting the decline in species abundance by 2030 and reversing it by 2042." (Well. Nice words). The Minister explained how they would achieve this, "To meet these biodiversity targets we need to take action on three fronts: creating wildlife-rich habitats, reducing pressures on biodiversity, and taking targeted action for species." (Oh dear, it's not really rocket-science level stuff is it...) 'Rapid review' of 'Environmental Impact Plan' The Minister also told me that Defra has already launched a rapid review of the Environmental Improvement Plan (EIP) to ensure that policies are in place to deliver on the Secretary of State's priority to recover nature. The 'rapid review' was announced in July. They will publish a summary of findings in early 2025. Riding roughshod over our countryside In response to this 'rapid review', the Office for Environmental Protection offered the government the following advice: "The Government has been clear about its ambitions for house building and clean energy. As it develops its plans for such large scale initiatives, and as it reviews the EIP, it must take the opportunity to align them to nature, rather than work against it, to enhance nature rather than further deplete it." Personally, I feel that this good advice from the OEP might be difficult for the current government to follow, given the government's apparent intention to ride roughshod over our countryside building houses, wind turbines, pylons and solar farms, amid weakened local planning restrictions - surely this is at odds with their claim to be 'committed' to "creating wildlife-rich habitats" and "reducing pressures on biodiversity"? But then I'm relying on common sense, and I wonder how many politicians are in possession of this faculty. On a final note that holds at least a little hope, the Minister told me "I want to assure you that we will continue to review other areas of policy that may be hindering nature's recovery", adding, "I welcome further engagement on specific wildlife licensing issues for which there is genuine public concern." Mind you, I had already cited some other specific licensing issues in a separate communication with the Minister's office, including the hunting of red-listed songbirds permitted by falconry licences and the culling of Cormorants - though it seems that these 'specific issues' escaped her attention.... So folks, I'm not terribly impressed, are you? I think we deserved better. I definitely get more engagement working directly with Natural England (and NatureScot) to be honest, but I suppose it's good to have channels of communication open with any authority who has influence, including the Minister for Nature. I'll reiterate something I said in my last blog post: protecting nature in the UK relies on individual citizens - and not government. Wishing you all a great Christmas and a Happy New Year. And sincere thanks for all your support. The campaign continues.... Best, Jase 
26 Comments
IMPORTANT UPDATE: 7/12/24 @ 17.35pm:- Following the publication of this blog post (below), I have just heard from the office of Minister Creagh, with an apology for not having responded sooner. I have been assured that the matter has been picked up, and escalated, and that the issues raised in our petition are being looked into with policy officials in Defra and Natural England. I've also been informed that a formal response from the Minister will be shared with me shortly, once internal discussions on this have finished. So, excellent progress. Thanks to every one of you who has shared, commented and helped to get our concerns noticed. I'll be in touch again when I have a further update. Best, Jase *************************************************************************** As our landmark petition reaches 400,727 signatures, the UK's official Minister for Nature has failed to acknowledge the concerns of the country's wildlife campaigners. I reported on my blog last month that I had written to Mary Creagh, the UK's new Minister for Nature, on behalf of the hundreds of thousands of people who support our campaign; we are calling for an overhaul and reform of the UK's current wildlife licensing system, a system that facilitates the mass culling of wildlife in the UK. Our work has focused on two government agencies, Natural England and NatureScot, both of which issue lethal control licences to 'manage' wildlife. In particular we have concerns over the licences affecting wild birds. Some of these licences are issued for contentious and often spurious reasons, and include those that allow culling species of high conservation concern. UK's nature lovers feel 'snubbed' by minister Our campaign began back in 2018, and since then we have managed to achieve some significant changes to the system, not least ensuring the transparency of data by persuading Natural England and NatureScot to publish regular licence declarations, thereby allowing the public to see and scrutinize details of the controversial licences. This has allowed us to raise concerns over individual licences and enabled discussions with the authorities responsible. So you might have thought that the UK's Minister for Nature, whose remit includes responsibility for 'domestic biodiversity', would be interested in the opinions of 400,000 people who love nature. I've written to the minister twice now, on behalf of the good folks who have signed our petition, and have not even had the courtesy of an acknowledgement. It feels like a snub for the hundreds of thousands of people who care passionately about this country's wildlife - and begs the question as to what 'Minister for Nature' actually means. We are a large group of good people who are worried about the state of nature in the UK, we see our precious wildlife being destroyed before our eyes - and we have a Minister for Nature who has apparently ignored our polite and respectful request for our concerns to be noted and acknowledged. Follow the money? As mentioned earlier, the minister's remit includes responsibility for 'domestic biodiversity' and indeed she is also the 'lead for Natural England', so you might assume she'd be interested in the views of a huge number of genuine nature lovers who have worked very hard to bring about changes to the failing system. The minister's job description also includes responsibility for 'green finance', whatever that means. Perhaps money takes priority over nature, (something we see time and time again in this country). Whatever the reason for the minister's silence, we can only speculate for now. It would certainly be helpful to know her thoughts on the current licensing system, how she views nature in the UK, and what she intends to do to protect 'domestic biodiversity'. Alas, we might never know. People power - a powerful force for good It is really disappointing that the government's minister for nature has not responded to the voices of those striving to protect nature in the UK. What our campaign has achieved so far is incredible, what we can accomplish together going forward can be just as impressive. The wildlife of the UK relies on us, as individuals, doing what we can on the ground - it might be that the government doesn't care, but we do and that is a more powerful force for good than any government minister could ever hope to be. The campaign continues.  |
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