NatureScot has published its 2022 licence data - but has concealed key information from the public.
* Scotland's nature agency admitted to issuing more than 2000 bird licences in one year but declined to publish the numbers of birds affected - including the fact that they permitted the unlimited lethal control of several red and amber listed species for 'bird air safety' - and that one licence alone approved the culling of 359 Barnacle Geese. The 'hidden' data that NatureScot decided not to publish - * "As many as required" Lapwing, Curlew, Mute Swan, Starling & more - approved for lethal control * Hundreds of amber listed Barnacle Geese and Pink Footed Geese licensed to be culled * "As many as necessary" chicks of Swallows and Swifts permitted to be killed, for 'air safety' * Similar key information is missing from all of NatureScot's published licence data. Why didn't they publish these figures? NatureScot: "we concluded that the time taken to process this quantity of data would not be viable" Not so 'open and transparent' then. Please read on.... Where are the figures? When NatureScot told me they were going to publish their wildlife licence data in the name of 'openness and transparency', I was hopeful. Well, it was finally released this week - but there's a big problem. They have neglected to publish the most important statistics. The number of birds affected by the licences has been intentionally withheld. The data release had already been delayed due to "pressures on the licensing team" but now that it's out, it raises far more questions than it answers. While the total numbers of wildlife licences are listed (including a whopping 2,269 licences issued to control wild birds in just one year), NatureScot decided not to include the specific numbers of birds (or other animals) associated with each licence - and this of course is the key information we need to see. Fortunately, I do have that information because I had the foresight to obtain it through a freedom of information request earlier this year. So let's take a dip into the data and see what they might be hiding..... 1 Licence = 359 birds An example of just how significant the missing information is: NatureScot say they issued just 6 licences to kill Barnacle Geese last year, and that much is true - but they leave out the rather important detail that just one of those 6 licences actually allowed 359 of these impressive birds to be culled - and this species is included on the amber list of conservation concern. And when NatureScot say in their published data that they issued 23 licences to kill Pink footed Geese (also an amber listed species), I can tell you that in fact the number of geese permitted to be killed under those 23 licences is around 300. Other species too are targeted by NatureScot in potentially very large numbers, but the published data doesn't allude to this fact either because the actual numbers attached to the published licences have been withheld. Red List Species Several red and amber listed species appear 'openly and transparently' in the published data, but again with no details over the numbers. In total, NatureScot say they approved 28 licences last year covering air safety - that may not sound alot - but I can tell you that none of these air safety licences specified an upper limit on the numbers of birds to be killed. NatureScot allowed (quote) "as many as required" of the listed species to be lethally controlled in the name of air safety. Yes, that's right, "as many as required". Another air safety licence permits the lethal control of "any number of" the specified birds. The birds covered by these controversial licences include several rare species and allow the licence holder to (quote) "Destroy nest and eggs", "Kill", "Take and kill adults and chicks" "As Many As Required" / "Any Number Of" Here's the full list of birds approved to be killed for air safety in unspecified and unlimited numbers. (red listed species in red, amber listed species in orange):- •Black-headed Gull •Brent Goose •Buzzard •Canada Goose •Carrion Crow •Common Gull •Common Shelduck •Common Teal •Cormorant •Curlew •Dunlin •Feral Pigeon •Golden Plover •Great Black-backed Gull •Grey Heron •Grey Partridge •Greylag Goose •Herring Gull •Hooded Crow •House Martin •Jackdaw •Lapwing •Lesser Black-backed Gull •Magpie •Mallard •Mute Swan •Oystercatcher •Pheasant •Pied Wagtail •Pink-footed Goose •Raven •Redshank •Ringed Plover •Rook •Sand Martin •Skylark •Snipe •Starling •Stock Dove •Swallow •Swift •Woodpigeon One air safety licence even allows "as many as necessary" chicks of Swallows and Swifts to be killed. Perhaps it's no wonder Scotland's nature agency doesn't want you to see this additional information. It doesn't inspire confidence in their work does it? So, why are they hiding the numbers? NatureScot's explanation I contacted NatureScot as soon as they published the licence stats on Thursday, and I put it to them that the most important data of all was missing entirely from the public release. I asked them if they would re-issue the data with the relevant figures included, in much the same way that Natural England now does following pressure from our campaign, explaining that otherwise it is pretty meaningless - and far from transparent. This is what they told me in response, "while data on the specific numbers associated with each licence is very informative, we concluded that the time taken to process this quantity of data would not be viable and would impede on current licensing demand." In other words, a flat refusal to share the information freely with the public. They went on to suggest that "specific numbers for each licence can still be requested through Freedom of Information requests and this method is built to accommodate the time it takes to collate and redact the information as required." Misleading the public? The published data, far from being 'open and transparent' is, I believe, merely a distraction and conceals the true picture. By omitting the key matter of how many birds are covered by each licence, NatureScot has made a very conscious decision to hide the information from the public. Such secrecy doesn't inspire confidence in their work. It's deeply disappointing. Releasing carefully edited statistics, and withholding this significant information, might mislead the public into thinking the numbers of birds killed is less than it actually is. The way NatureScot has presented the data just makes it look as though they have a whole lot of stuff to hide. Far from being open and transparent, this attempt to pacify the public merely suggests that they underestimate us - and it's not good enough. We need proper accountability from a government agency tasked with protecting nature. I will take their advice and I'll be submitting further freedom of information requests to find out even more of the specific details that we want to see. You can see NatureScot's edited licence data HERE Meanwhile....our campaign continues HERE
40 Comments
Keith Fenner
9/7/2023 10:37:34 am
As so many birds are being killed by the culls taking place ,i suggest a letter to King Charles might get a favourable response ,as his Highness is very close and interested in Scotland .
Reply
Kevin Morgan
9/7/2023 10:41:41 am
This is really disgusting it’s no wonder the bird population has fallen to such a low,I hardly see starlings,an never any lapwings,curlews used to be on a rock where I fish the last 5-6 years I have not seen them.
Reply
Lenn Morris
9/7/2023 10:43:00 am
How many of these licences have been given to the RSPB?
Reply
Chris Jennings
9/7/2023 10:49:26 am
I am very shocked by all of this.
Reply
IAN SHERFIELD
9/7/2023 10:54:39 am
To approve such an extensive list of legal slaughter indicates that these people have no understanding of species decline or they are in the pocket of the shooters and trappers. As for safety reasons, this is a complete
Reply
Elaine Baker
9/7/2023 11:17:22 am
All I will say is, 'I could not agree more' with your very eloquent and well-worded comments. And how true.
Reply
Leslie Wilson
9/7/2023 10:56:03 am
This is utterly shameful, this entity should be shut down,
Reply
Elaine Baker
9/7/2023 11:21:38 am
It is absolutely disgusting, as you so rightly say and a disgrace. Nature generally has its own way of keping things in check. It most certainly does not need certain entities culling whole species.
Reply
Sharon
9/7/2023 11:03:44 am
All I can say is, very damn sneaky. Yes, NatureScott are partly responsible for destroying nature instead of preserving it! Our bird life needs to recover due to their willy nilly issuing of licenses to destroy.
Reply
David Wicks
9/7/2023 11:04:40 am
What does "Air safety' mean? What is being kept safe? Is it the shooting community's wish to shoot everything which flies? This needs to be questioned.
Reply
Jennifer Bowen
9/7/2023 01:13:16 pm
Good question. I also don't understand what 'air safety' means.
Reply
Dougie Dickson
9/7/2023 06:40:53 pm
I am in no way condoning the shooting of birds, some species are declining at an alarming rate. Air safety is a term used at major airports whereby birds are shot within a given area to prevent air traffic collisions. Birds can apparently be culled under licence if they are proving to be a pest. It seems rather a lot of licences are being issued to shoot Schedule One species contrary to what NatureScot should be supportive of, ie preserving these species. They are on Schedule One for a clearly defined reason, ie their numbers are reducing below a threshold. In my opinion, NatureScot is a clueless organisation. In their former guise as SNH, staff were removing non-native trees and shrubs. In one particular area they removed Sycamores and Rhododendron and the area was left like a scene from a war film with no benefit to the native birds and insects that used these.
John Sorrell
10/7/2023 12:54:47 pm
Air Safety means the prevention of any birds being a danger to the operation of AIRPORTS, RAF Airfields and government weapons testing.
Jennifer Hall
9/7/2023 11:13:43 am
How many recorded incidents of birds causing flight incidents have there been? Is this information been recorded anywhere? If so is it available for Freedom of Information search? Who are the licenses issued to?
Reply
Julia Dance
9/7/2023 11:21:54 am
Dear Jase, Should more of us submit "freedom of information" requests? If so , may you put us on the right road please?
Reply
Rodney Kupczyk
9/7/2023 11:35:39 am
Thank’s for info Jason. Who funds NatureScot & why?
Reply
Hi Julia,
Reply
9/7/2023 11:42:57 am
I know the answer to this AIR SAFETY problem ! Do not FLY during the DAYLIGHT HOURS. Or if you need to go somewhere during the day then go by TRAIN. No need to SHOOT any one be it animal or human.
Reply
9/7/2023 12:10:56 pm
Dead naturescot that should be called from now on and richard a pigram Seriously? intrigued as to how your going to get birds to not fly in daylight hours and take the train?
Reply
Tim Burke
10/7/2023 11:16:42 pm
I don't know but I suspect that most of the air safety licences are RAF. Civil airports don't seem to have a problem, especially abroad, for example at Faro where Storks soar and breed on the boundary almost at the end of the runway.
Reply
9/7/2023 12:00:38 pm
Aren't these people all in cahoots with each other giving their social and golfing confreres what they request of them. Who monitors the actual numbers culled?. 'As many as necessary' -is blanket permission for wanton slaughter. Hardly encourages a sense of responsibility, does it....
Reply
Derek Gould
9/7/2023 12:03:31 pm
Culling of any wildlife betrays our duty to the environment. To slaughter endangered species is a criminal affront.
Reply
John Dyda
9/7/2023 01:19:05 pm
What is this 'air safety' nonsense? This should be brought up in parliament, although these tories are not going to give a damn about it. They want to keep their shooting buddies sweet.
Reply
Joanna
9/7/2023 01:27:11 pm
Shame on Scotland, thank you Jason for highlighting this despicable practice of wholesale murder licences
Reply
9/7/2023 01:52:52 pm
Good work again Jason, and fully agree it raises more questions than answers. So a range of tiny birds with average weights of <20g are deemed a threat to "air safety", incl the hirundines and Pied Wagtail - what evidence is there to support that? Geese or swans or even flocking waders might be understandable, in terms of a defined threat, but I don't see a Swallow impeding a flight?
Reply
Debra Palm
9/7/2023 01:53:55 pm
Transparency and openness, there is no government body that is transparent and open and this blatant cover up on the true figures confirms just that. I have read other articles and petitions that concern this department which shows they really are not fit for purpose.
Reply
Simon George Spratt
9/7/2023 04:09:03 pm
Good afternoon Jason!! It’s not a good situation. The problem is that the Scottish National Party are merely Tories under another name!! We all know that they won’t be open and honest about their bird culling licenses and the number of birds killed by them.
Reply
Christine Burden
9/7/2023 05:11:52 pm
Thank goodness we have you to expose this wrongdoing. Dangerous swallows and swifts indeed!
Reply
9/7/2023 05:54:45 pm
It certainly Says that Nat Scot and Nat England are no Different .When will they Learn Birds,and Animals are Not Theirs They belong to ALL of us and Governments Should Learn This . For Again I Will Ask My Question When Did You See a BULLFINCH ?
Reply
Melanie Mackay
9/7/2023 06:03:01 pm
Speechless. NaturScot and every one of your employees shame on you.
Reply
9/7/2023 06:58:06 pm
Hi: Jason From Edward Cole
Reply
Janette Kipling
9/7/2023 11:45:14 pm
Seems to me that it is Scottish Nature that needs culling! Put all these people in one building & invite Hitchcocks' birds to avenge all the birds already killed. Actually killing the parents & their chick's is atrocious. Thanks for posting this information - l will definitely not be visiting Scotland any time soon. They even claim that Scottish wild cats are extinct when they are not. Let's hope that the birds & cats boycott Scotland & these horrid murdering people get bitten to death by midges as they don't know how to cull the insects!
Reply
Iris Saxon
10/7/2023 03:37:24 pm
Nothing these atrocious people do surprises me any more. What a dreadful world we live in these days where killing and cruelty is on the increase. I am daily sickened with photos of animal torture - snares, glue traps, dog and cat meat markets!! What has the human race come to? What can you say about the people that work at NatureScot as they obviously have no conscience or remorse for sanctioning the killing of such beautiful creatures. We live in the countryside and the lack of birds is very notable!
Reply
Cara
7/8/2023 02:13:37 pm
And not forgetting vile hunting, animal experimentation, and barbaric slaughters of rabbits, cows, pigs and chickens too! It is sadly indeed a cruel and dreadful world that we are living in but if everyone acts with compassion and lives kinder with what we eat, wear, support and do, hopefully, this will all change!
Reply
Richard C
11/7/2023 10:42:41 am
Know your enemy. I am sure not all those working for NatureScot are in any way approving of the culls of birds. There are 700 employees so its not a small organization. There are strong vested interests in Scotland like anywhere else in the UK.
Reply
Alan A
12/7/2023 10:51:47 am
Why anyone should believe anything that comes out of Nature.Scot amazes me. This is the organisation that continually claims that the Scottish wildcat is 'functionally extinct' when new sightings are being made constantly. They seem far more concerned with human existence than the destruction of our wildlife. Together with the Royal Zoological Society of Scotland and the Forestry Commission they have their own agenda whether it is so-called air safety or provision of wind-farms and the associated destruction of forests; ? 'vested interests'. And we are paying their salaries!
Reply
G Hopkins
13/7/2023 08:02:11 am
A reply from 'the top' of NatureScot regarding why the detail of licencing has not been published is: 'NatureScot is committed to transparency in our licencing data. This will be best achieved when our on-line licencing system is up and running. Therefore, we are prioritising this, to ensure a better service to customers, as well as providing more transparent data.'
Reply
G Hopkins
18/7/2023 09:05:44 am
As a follow up: NatureScot have said they are unable to provide a timeframe for their online licencing system being fully up and running. This means full data on number of birds culled under individual licences will not be available for an unknown time. Their focus is on 'priority licences types which have the highest impact both wildlife and the public'. Each licence type will be made avaliable on the new system when the new system is ready. Their aim is to create 'an online portal where the data will be accessible to the general public', but that there will be 'varying levels of redaction' due to GDPR. A final decision on how data will be presented/shared has yet to be taken and NatureScot is open-minded on this point.
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
|