[Closed] Tree planting 'threatening' Scotland's grand vistas

My dad was a keeper. The last estate he worked on he was responsible for at least 3 new woods, obviously this was for benefit of the shooting but he took great pride in the improved environment for song birds too. He stopped keepering for various reasons but he was proud of his legacy. Please don't make broad sweeping statements like "gamekeepers bad."

steven - its one of the conundrums - Pheasant / lowland shoots require shelter belts / woodland - so lowland shoots have a very big role to play in managing the landscape in a way most of us would like. I accept the nuances in the whole hunting / shooting / fishing thang abnd its role in the rural economy and land management.

Its the massive grouse moors that are the main issue with their monoculture and raptor killings and even then some are more responsible than others but all grouse shooting impoverishes the landscape whereas lowland shooting and even deer stalking need not

If there is any chance of some new bike trails in these forests I am in.

I have to respond to IRC saying what has happened at Feshie is good.

Trees are not self seeding in Feshie, it isn't working. There is no new under storey, other than rampant heather caused by the lack of grazing AND fires. No seedling can get away because of the the thick brush. You need wild fires or some other intervention to fix this.

Trees For Life do good work but effort needs to be directed towards permitting natural regeneration rather than planting.

bigjim - Member
This map viewer may be of interest to anyone concerned about mountain areas becoming covered in Sitka etc

http://scotland.forestry.gov.uk/supporting/communication-consultation/map-viewer-guidance

in particular FCS Grants & Regulations> FGS (2014-20) Climatic Site Suitability and then click on tree crop of interest

Waderider - last time I was in feshie I thought there where a lot of young trees in places where there were none before? Not so?

I have no grounds on which to argue with TJ on this thread.

Cautiously in favour of tree planting with the correct trees in the correct areas. If it brings jobs to the highlands and other remote and rural areas then maybe we have a chance of keeping living communities in those areas.
There has been a dispute between the JMT in knoydart and their neighbours over deer management and tree planting ( JMT have apparently been planting trees but not fencing them off which makes the young trees an attractive and accessible food for deer and attracts deer from neighbouring estates depriving them of an income

gordihimor - do the neighbouring estates maintain very high deer numbers? Otherwise they wouldn't travel to eat young trees unless they had eaten all the grazing locally?

My opinion is part based on the opinion of a local professional forester and my own observations from working in and visiting the glen. No doubt there are some young naturally seeded trees. I am speaking generally regarding the glen as a whole.

TJ I know that it's a long term thing but the cropped areas will take many decades to naturally break down to easily plantable areas never mind resetting the natural pH of the area. I think it'd be great to plant slower growing softwoods or hardwoods into coppiced areas.

The cheap crap wood that is being grown at the moment was meant to make a quick buck but not quick enough to keep up with dropping prices.

Ta Waderider. I was just pleased to see young trees when I was last there

Need more trees on the tops around hebden/calder valley. Might soak up some of the flood waters...but land owners....

Instead mega public money spent on half hearted flood defences further down stream.

onehundredthidiot

I have seen deciduous plantations put directly into the ground on clearfell from conifers. In Affric they cut down all the non native trees and left them to rot to leach nutrients back into the soil. I have also seen the stumps dragged out and the brash chipped in other areas.

[url= http://www.deer-management.co.uk/the-knoydart-deer-massacre-–-what-can-we-learn-from-it/ ]Knoydart deer cull[/url]

[url= https://www.johnmuirtrust.org/about/resources/763-deer-management-in-knoydart-a-response-from-the-john-muir-trust ]JMT Defence of the cull[/url]
I don't know TJ. I am not an estate worker nor am I a member or employee of JMT.
What I do know is that friends who do work on estates, or are hunters were shocked to see piles of deer carcasses left on the hill. I hope the links above can explain the issues better than I have.

Leaving shot deer on the hill can benefit a variety of other wildlife. eg foxes, pine martens, eagles, ravens, and even insects. Probably why gamekeepers don't like it.

Also as the carcass rots, it will put a lot of nutrients back into the soil. Which can benefit any trees growing there. Better than carrying the carcass off, which just depletes the ecosystem.

If you want forests you need less deer - at least until the trees are large enough to survive the deer. To some leaving the carcasses to rot is a waste of good meet, to others its about biodiversity

Waderider - Member
Trees are not self seeding in Feshie, it isn't working. There is no new under storey, other than rampant heather caused by the lack of grazing AND fires. No seedling can get away because of the the thick brush. You need wild fires or some other intervention to fix this.

We'll just need to disagree then. I've been visiting Glen Feshie on and off since the 1970s. It's far healthier now with much new growth of juniper, birch and pine. Still scope for more improvement but going in the right direction now deer numbers have been reduced. I'm not the only one that thinks so.

https://cameronmcneish.wordpress.com/2014/02/23/glen-feshie-a-new-beginning/

A strong pulse of natural regeneration of pine, birch,
rowan, alder, aspen, willows, juniper and other trees and
shrubs, and also an increasingly diverse herb layer, has
become well-established.

My second link has two pairs of photos on page 3 of the same spots in 1992 and 2016. Look at them and tell me it isn't working. Bare close cropped grass and heather in 1992. Young growth everywhere in 2016.

[i]The last estate he worked on he was responsible for at least 3 new woods, obviously this was for benefit of the shooting [/I]

I really don't see why folk are anti-shooting, it's income for the estates and therefore pays wages (in areas lacking in jobs). Countryside-wise, any changes that are needed/wanted that aren't economically positive will only occur with taxpayers money, and the FC and farmers/estates will always want to spend that.

If folk want to spend their money on a hobby that others think is expensive and damaging to the countryside, it's up to them. Although be careful what you complain about:

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/mountain-bikers-destroying-environment-protected/story-27862423-detail/story.html

BR - for some its a moral issue. For some its about practicalities.

Personally I feel it important to differentiate between deer stalking, moorland shooting ,lowland shooting and fox hunting.

Deer stalking has some utility in that there is a need to cull deer in Scotland due to the lack of predators and the meat can be eaten. Its also fairly highly skilled practice. However some estates hold far to high numbers of deer on the land with massive ecological damage this causes. On the other hand it does bring money and work into the rural economy.

Lowland shooting for pheasant and the like - no utility beyond the meat. However there is a need for woodland and shelter belts of trees which does enhance the local environment - without the shooting these would perhaps be cut down to enlarge grazing or arable land. However morally its pretty poor as they breed these fancy chickens and then shoot them or leave them to die over the winter ( more so in Scotland)

Grouse moors - ecological disaster areas with high erosion, poor biodiversity and degraded environments. Large numbers of raptors and hares killed illegally to "protect" the grouse that are going to be shot anyway

Fox hunting - the worst of the lot. No utility at all, responsible for much cruelty - fox ( and deer hunting with dogs) is all about the cruelty and as it has no utility at all no case can be made for it to continue

so for some forms of hunting the moral case against it is strong, for others the degradation of the landscape and killing of predators makes it hard to make a case for allowing it. For some form of blood sports the only argument against it is a moral one and for some folk this is absolute but for some it is nuanced

I don't know how many keepers you know TJ but I've never known any that leave them to die after the winter. Its your blanket bullshit statements like this that piss me off.

Well, it's interesting for him to compare them to Chickens, regardless.

From a welfare point of view, which do you think has the better life? By the age a pheasant is released in the woods, (in July/August, with shooting beginning October) most chickens have already been slaughtered... without so much as a sporting chance either.

I don't personally have anything against shooting in itself - not even largely the moral concerns TJ raises. I'm not so keen on some of the side effects of large scale commercial shooting - and damage to the countryside is also the business of people who don't own the land or pay to use it (your link is spurious, apart from it being a sensationalist inaccurate article, any damage caused by mountain bikers is on a completely different scale - arguably if you're going to complain about environmental damage it's the driving to trail centres you should be most concerned about).

steven round where my parents used to live there was a lot of pheasant shooting. You would see them being reared in pens, then released and they came into my parents garden looking for the bird food as they were effectivly tame. Numbers would go down over the shooting season then over the remaining winter numbers went down more with there being none around in the early spring until the next lot were released.

I'd didn't mean they were callously left to die - I meant few of them survived the winter even allowing for those who were shot. I believe in England more survive the winter in Scotland few do IME. Maybe thinking about it a series of cold winters when I was there

Ninfan - its a good point. I'd rather eat free range meat that factory farmed - and Pheasants perhaps have a better life than many chickens. Ditto deer / cows. Hence I find the issues interesting and nuanced and some forms of hunting are less damaging than others and some have utility and others none

without so much as a sporting chance either.

Give the pheasants shotguns and we'll call it a sport

Tj- I certainly don't leave my remaining stock unfed- why would I? I give them the best chance to breed for next season as every successful chick they fledge is an extra bird for very little cost. With all the massive spin offs for the beleaguered native wildlife that brings.

Anybody who eats pretty much any mass produced crop has blood on their hands- modern farming is an ecological disaster.

As for grouse Moors- have you been to a progressive, well run one?
I hadn't been at all until last season and I had my eyes opened. It was like stepping foot onto the biggest, best kept wildlife reserve you've ever visited- a truly great couple of days.

And shooting Hares isn't illegal.....

crosshair - I can only say what I saw with the pheasants round where I lived ( central scotland in an area with a cold microclimate) Maybe a poorly run lot? There were none around by march. All died off over the winter - and I knew where the pens and feeders were.

Grouse moors? I have not been to a grouse moor that is anything but an ecological disaster. Theses one you mention. Any tree planting? Did they trap for stoats and weasels? ( often done illegally) Did they still burn off the heather so much? ( again often burnt in larger areas than lega;l "accidentally"

Research stats suggest about 16% released birds outlive the season (i.e, 1st Feb) after which, as rightly pointed out, they otentially add to the breeding stock as feral birds. Also worth remembering that not all shoots release, some rely on entirely 'wild' stock (though I don't think stealing them off the neighbouring estate with raisins filled with sleeping pills applies)

Regards grouse Moor, I was lucky enough to visit some of the best estates years ago, where the keeper was already grip blocking and trying to revive black grouse populations back to the eighties - and to see the wildlife that this created an absolute haven for.

I can't really comment on one shoot I've never seen- but it seems unlikely. Here, if I stopped feeding, all the dozens of surrounding small farm shoots who release next to no birds but with hoppers running would soon be rubbing their hands together 😉

It was a Moor in Northumberland and yes there was tree planting on the fringes.
Of course they trapped for stoats and weasels- that's why they had wheeling flocks of Lapwings and Snipe by the hundreds.
It's pretty hard to trap illegally- as long a Fenn is covered to avoid catching non-target species (and Grouse lol!) you don't technically have to ever go back and check it so not sure what you are alluding to there?

As for burning, it was the most perfect chequerboard of 20m square's of different aged heather. Large illegal burns are more likely to be done by shepherds than keepers as large patches of single age heather re-gen have less holding potential than lots of smaller ones..... but I don't actually know a lot about it tbh.

so trapping predators is OK? Illegal trapping is common with these traps - as you say its about how they are set up. I have seen illegal trapping with my own eyes. Personally if they are trapping stoats and weasels then they are not OK. So its only somew wildlife that is allowed to flourish - anything that might reduce shooting stocks is eliminated.

Sorry - you will never convince me on grouse moors. Yes a well run one with an eye on biodiversity is not as bad as one run purely to maximise shooting but its still a long long way from good and still causes huge damage

Large populations of predators means good stocks of prey species. Not the other way round.

You have to wonder why the RSPB spend so much time doing it then, don't you?

Taken this way away from the OP and I apologise. One last thing on Grouse moors

RSPB Scotland has appealed for information following the discovery of illegally-set spring traps in the heart of the Cairngorms National Park. The conservation organisation has commended the actions of two members of the public who alerted it to a distressed bird caught in a trap they came across while out walking but is disappointed that, as with many wildlife crimes, the perpetrators are yet to be identified.

these are the spring traps that are legal if covered as you say but left uncovered and with bait beside them to catch raptors.

Pole traps are a cruel illegal and ignorant misuse of a Spring trap.
That's irrelevant to stoat and weasel trapping though..,

As you say- large predator numbers are a spin off of high prey densities. Seeing as a)stoats and weasels aren't being eradicated- merely controlled and b)the large prey densities provide the economic stimulus for all the vital habitat management that makes moors so diverse- what is wrong with humanely controlling them to sustainable levels?

That was not pole traps - that was the spring traps used for mustelids laid on the ground with a dead rabbit next to them and no cover. IE an attempt to catch raptors but disguised to make it look accidental.

I have seen spring traps on the ground / on bridges over streams with no covers

It's the same thing- a misuse of a legal device.

I don't believe you've seen a live, set trap deliberately uncovered on a bridge- it would be the fastest way to catch a Grouse.....

What is the legality regarding Pheasants btw, i've always fancied clubing one over the back of the head and taking home for dinner. Frowned upon? 😆

How do you know if it's just a wild pheasant or if some estate owns it?

Joe, seems like a good idea to reverse the damage caused by humans over many centuries. The current state and more worryingly the state 100 years ago is unnatural. The strategic is now to reverse this.

Assume you have seen

Quite an interesting read. As often gov publications are often far better than the noise tha the poliicians themselves create

Sadly- they belong to whoever's land they are on. Which pleases me no end when I see £40,000 worth over the boundary on next doors fields some mornings 😀

crosshair - ninfan - lets stop arguing from different perspectives and look at solutions?

For grouse moors I would say licensing and vicarious liability ( as in Scotland) will help. IE mange the land badly- lose your licence. Raptors killed on your land - the landowner is responsible and will face jailtime.

Things are moving this way in Scotland slowly but in a two steps forward one back fashion.

well run shoots like you describe would actually benefit as they would be able to compete better as unethical practices are stamped out, badly run ones would lose their income for a period and thus land values fall either allowing more responsible estates to take over or the land to be used for other uses or perhaps they would get their house in order

That's already pretty much the case in England- estates lose their single farm payment if an employee is caught killing wildlife illegally I believe......

The trouble is, Raptor persecution is worth a fortune in donations to the RSPB. They can't afford to fix the problem constructively now 😉

I like the open aspect of our hills and mountains but the planned increase of tree cover shouldn't affect that much. A big sky is worth preserving too.

The big estates give plenty bullshit about the "jobs" they create, but the land they occupy used to support far more humans than they do now. If we are to reintroduce any predators, let it be humans and restore the common right to live off the land, ie deer for the pot, a fish from the stream.

If you look at the evidence of human habitation on the high ground, it's amazing how many people used to live up there. Unfortunately early forestry practices ploughed much of the evidence of that into the ground.

For example if you wander up Ben Wvyis, at around the 800 foot mark off to the left of the path are 2 sets of remains of slag from metal working. That suggests a thriving community in the vicinity - you don't randomly wander up a mountain and think, Och, let's start smelting some metal. To do that they would have a need for plenty fuel, and that means trees.

teamhurtmore - Member
Joe, seems like a good idea to reverse the damage caused by humans over many centuries. The current state and more worryingly the state 100 years ago is unnatural. The strategic is now to reverse this.

I'd say this thread has gone some way to eliminating my cynicism displayed in the OP. Got more confidence in it now tbh. 🙂

Cheers for that link.

but the land they occupy used to support far more humans than they do now

Yes, agricultural practices have changed a bit over the last century though, What was once a labour intensive industry that could support thousands of shepherds and crofters at a subsistence level simply can't offer a similar level of employment nowadays. Much the same with eg. Lead mining.

crosshair - Member
Sadly- they belong to whoever's land they are on. Which pleases me no end when I see £40,000 worth over the boundary on next doors fields some mornings

saying that, there's more chance of them creeping up on me, they make some racket when they decide to flutter their wings into flight, normally when you least expect it!

crosshair - there is a big difference between losing some subsidy and having your license revoked or facing criminal action

Cheers for that link.

Pleasure - the thread was getting derailed* and probably time to get back to the real facts behind the story. Hope you are happy with the tree choices and what looks like a semblance of a joined up strategy.

* surprised that Purdey and Holland ^2 haven't come up so far!!!

Not when that subsidy is worth more than the entire income from the farm.....

You already can lose your shotgun and firearms certification for being a convicted criminal as well as some hefty fines.
Licensing shoots seems to me to be about control and jealousy- the true source of most anti-shooting rhetoric I think.

v good points crosshair

crosshair - I assure you that is not anything to do with the reasons.

Its landscape damage and raptor persecution plus those for whom its a moral issue

The thing about the raptor killings is that raptors are a big driver of tourism - so by killing raptors you actually damage the rural economy. Wildlife tourism is huge now in Scotland. Grouse moor owners routinly kill dozens if not hundreds a year including sea eagles and Goldens.

the pair of Golden eagles I watched on the monadliath several times over a camping weekend were killed last year by the landowner

Absolute overblown nonsense. If there was a market for tourism led Raptor watching, do you not think landowners would have already exploited it for those years when the Grouse numbers are low?

Almost every case you delve into gets foggier and foggier and getting reliable, unbiased data is harder and harder. Yes, there are undoubtedly Raptors shot illegally by gamekeepers but the problem is nowhere near what the media hype likes to suggest.

Hen Harriers are ground nesting birds. One of the reasons they don't do well in the UK even where there is no grouse shooting (aka Wales) is because they are hugely vulnerable to predation by foxes, badgers and other birds of prey.
You think the burgeoning population of Buzzards and Red Kites ignore these fluffy grey easy meals?
My wife saw a Red Kite with two Tawny owl fledgelings last year!

As for Eagles, I went stalking Red Hinds near Loch Ness a few years ago. The stalker's house was in a stunning spot. He said he had built it there because it overlooked the traditional Golden Eagles nest site on the opposite Glen.
The neighbouring estate was sold and the RSPB bought half of it. They erected a hide near the nest that spring and the Eagles have never returned!

Illegal persecution is bad and indefensible but to attribute some arbitrary defecit in an entire species to it is naive and misleading.

Utter bullshine - raptor persecution by grouse moor owners is well known and documented and is by far the single largest cause of death. Dozens if not hundreds a year all on grouse moors in Scotland.

This is well researched and proven but hard to get prosecutions for under the old laws hence the changes to the law.

"The RSPB maintains a database of reported incidents which are classified under the headings 'Unconfirmed', 'Probable' and 'Confirmed'. According to their most recent data (RSPB 2012), the number of confirmed victims of poison abuse in Scotland from 1989-2011 is 932. This figure includes 75 red kites, 29 golden eagles and 364 buzzards. The number of confirmed victims of shooting, trapping or nest destruction in Scotland from 1989-2011 is 334. This includes 7 red kites, 17 golden eagles, 145 buzzards, 63 peregrines, 51 hen harriers, 13 goshawks, 16 sparrowhawks and 28 kestrels. It's a widely held view that these confirmed incidents represent just the tip of a large iceberg; a view supported by the findings of a recent study that compared unpublished 'vermin' destruction records from one estate in Perthshire with known persecution incidents throughout Scotland as recorded by the authorities. The results showed that over a period of years, the number of raptors illegally killed on just one estate far exceeded the number of 'official' incidents recorded across the whole of Scotland (McMillan 2011)"

so in 22 years well over a thousand confirmed cases of raptors being killed illegally 50 year. As significant % of the population of Goldens FFS

Until those of you who support shooting get your house in order then you will continue to face oppositiuon.

I don't really want to get sidetracked down an unproductive conversation, only to point out that

number of confirmed victims of poison abuse

Includes, for example, birds that appear to have died where the ingestion of legal rodenticides is indicated as playing a part, that Gould include birds that had consumed rats and mice that had eaten poisons, rather than being truly indicative of deliberate raptor poisoning.

shooting, trapping or nest destruction

Ah, "nest destruction" - yes, whatever the cause or perpetrator, generally not known, but you can of course assume it's gamekepers, even on non game estates, because badgers and foxes are presumed to never do anything like this.

Equally Ninfan we know that this is only a small part - the confirmed killings.

One step those of you that support shooting need to do is to accept this level of illegal activity is real and help the conservationists stamp it out. Not spreading myths and lies in a vain attempt to minimise it.

Hopefully the vicarious liability prosecution ( a really somewhat dubious piece of law really) will help and hopefully Holyrood will go for licensing so we can get rid of the landowners that kill rap-tors - because not all do

Crosshair - ask the residents of Mull how much the Sea eagles are worth to the local economy

So how are all the native species of birds of prey doing in terms of population trends?
( Against a general backdrop of decline in most other species of birds thanks to habitat loss and modern farming techniques?)

Irrelevant - they are a recovering population following the end of DDT use and against a background of persecution. there are huge tracts of land suitable for raptors without any. Habitat loss is not an issue.

the answer is about 60% of what they would be given no persecution

I don't really want to get sidetracked down an unproductive conversation

actual lol

So shooting is thriving, persecution is decreasing, BoP populations are rising? Sounds like a win win win to me- unless you have other agendas....

So how are the Hen Harriers doing in upland Wales with all that beautiful unshot Moorland??

Persecution is not decreasing. Raptor poulations are still struggling and persecution is causing real issues. thousands of raptors killed by gamekeepers over the last 20 years

Crosshair - you are a sensible seeming chap and most of the discussion has been good natured but you and others in the shooting industry who have a decent hearts should be helping the conservationists deal with the rogues who kill raptors not pretending it doesn't happen and spreading fatuous false information

I have no other agenda than conservation as you can see about my comments about other forms of blood sports. I have been involved in raptor conservatiuonm on and off for 40 years - not from a class war / Hunt sab type direction but from a conservation and tourism direction.

On one hand:

they are a recovering population

But then again:

Raptor poulations are still struggling

So which is it?

I'm certainly not denying it takes place and certainly not defending it- my heart sinks when another suspected case hits the news. I'm just questioning the extent of the impact relative to the overblown reactions.

The reactions are not overblown! Its a far more significant problem than the landowners will admit. dozens if not hundreds of the large birds of prey every year. Eagles, Ernes, Kites, Dunno where you are but in Scotland there is real anger over this and huge pressure for legislative change. Unless the responsible landowners help with the conservationists you risk all losing your shooting rights. You need to shun the killers not protect them as the landowner groups do.

One landowner in Scotland successfully prosecuted for raptor killings is still in the major organisation that represents them and is still receiving public money for his "conservation" Theses are the folk responsible landowners should be shunning

Squirrelking. Both. The populations of these birds is recovering but struggling to do so due to the killings

Unless the responsible landowners help with the conservationists you risk all losing your shooting rights. You need to shun the killers not protect them as the landowner groups do.

Ah, collective punishment now is it?

Just imagine if Donald suggested treating people like this based upon the actions of a minority...

Ninfan - its the pressure for legislation. Its not collective punishment. However the longer this goes on the harder it will be for folk to defend it and the greater the pressure for legislation. so shun the rogues throw them out of your oganisations or risk all being tarred with the same brush and hit by the same legislation

"Golden eagles also continue to be absent in many parts of the eastern Highlands. Less than one third of the traditional ‘home ranges’ in this area were occupied by a pair of eagles and no eagles were recorded at all in over 30% of them, despite the fact that these should be very productive landscapes for these birds. Many of the vacant territories in this area are on ground managed intensively for driven grouse shooting and in recent years, four eagles fitted with satellite tags have been found illegally killed in the central and eastern Highlands"

So the extent of this illegal persecution is far worse than the figures suggest?
The implication being that thousands extra are actually being killed per annum.
Yet still the populations rise! So do these also need to be added on to the population estimates too then?

I also question the accuracy of the statistics. Badgers are huge, live in easily discovered setts and are easy to watch with NV equipment. Yet look how badly they underestimated their populations for the cull!

Same stalker I mentioned earlier. Remarked that they had two successful broods of hen harriers that year. When I replied that the rspb next door must be pleased, his un-printable reply was that the last thing they would do is tell them as the place would be inundated with people.

The whole thing definitely falls into the heading 'post-fact politics!'

And until shooting is banned, 20yrs elapses and people realise that without the grouse and the predator control- you don't get the Harriers back anyway nobody is going to talk any sense on this issue.

crosshair - the proven cases are only the tip of the iceberg but its a serious and significant problem and pressure for legislation is rising.

sorry dude but you either do not want to hear or refuse to believe the extent. An eagle in Scotland has a 30% chance of being killed by gamekeepers. Get your house in order before the body politic does it for you

So you propose yet more legislation? It won't be long before every sodding aspect of our lives is legislated for and against.

The fact is, existing legislation just needs to be enforced rather than adding to it.

ANYWAY, BACK ON TOPIC

Round here they want to plant a commercial forest behind the town, where literally nobody goes. There is no easy access, you can't see it from most places and no existing tourism. You would think someone was proposing a baby shredding plant by the way the locals have reacted, claiming forestry isn't natural (??), that it would ruin the walking tourism (what walking tourism?) and then the usual "community benefit" money grabbing. At the rate they're going we'll end up with nothing. Some people just refuse to listen, that's what you're up against.

ANYWAY, BACK ON TOPIC

When has arguing down (or trying to) people who have greater topic knowledge been off-topic 😉

Par for the course really, why have a productive debate when you can debate bullshit and pedantry?

[quote=squirrelking ]The fact is, existing legislation just needs to be enforced rather than adding to it.

Theoretically. But what if it enforcing the existing legislation is too difficult to enforce and therefore doesn't result in sufficient deterrent? In that case it doesn't seem unreasonable to look at alternative legislation which might be more effective at solving the problem.

I don't believe that statistic. Either that it's solely gamekeepers killing Golden Eagles in the interest of preserving game or that the few FARMERS and gamekeepers that are undeniably responsible for some illegal killings kill close to 1 in 3 of the population.

Both the SGA and NGO have 0 tolerance towards illegal activities- the wider gamekeeping community is not implicit.

Brood management is a viable solution to the Hen Harrier dichotomy- pity the RSPB have walked away from it....

http://www.gwct.org.uk/wildlife/research/birds/raptors/hen-harrier/joint-recovery-plan/

Indeed aracer - hence the drive for licensing of shoots and the recent change in the law in Scotland to allow vicarious liability - first prosecution underway

crosshair - you need to look at why the RSPB walked away Its not 1/3 of the population each year - its that each individual bird has a 30% chance of getting killed by a gamekeeper over its lifetime ( 20 + years for eagles).
http://www.rspb.org.uk/community/ourwork/b/martinharper/archive/2016/07/25/withdrawal-from-the-hhap.aspx

Ah, "nest destruction" - yes, whatever the cause or perpetrator, generally not known, but you can of course assume it's gamekepers, even on non game estates, because badgers and foxes are presumed to never do anything like this.

You think the burgeoning population of Buzzards and Red Kites ignore these fluffy grey easy meals?
My wife saw a Red Kite with two Tawny owl fledgelings last year!

@Countzero- yes because Birds of Prey all live in mutual harmony 😀

@Countzero- it was a nest in an Ivy clad dead oak tree- I went and found it later as I was curious too!
There was no sign of feathers on the floor and one was still alive when they were dropped.

Basically- a bird of prey is like a fish. It will shovel in any flesh, living or dead that it can fit in its beak- regardless of species.
I've seen (and I truly wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it) a Kestrel scavenge and eat a roadkill Collared Dove!!!

nature red in tooth and claw crosshair. I am under no illusions about this at all. I understand meat is animals, I understand nature is often violent and nasty.

did you read why the RSPB walked away?

Yes- it wasn't conducive to their fund-raising appeals 😀

😉

Crosshair - one minute I think you are a decent chap who wants to debate with folk with differing viewpoints then you come out with tosh like that. they walked away because the shooting side did not uphold their end and continued to kill hen harriers.