Greece – the other migrant crisis

Tags

birds, conservation, Europe, Greece, illegal killing, migration, nature, spring hunting, wildlife crime

Greece. What does the word conjure up? The desperate human migrant exodus from Syria?   Money – bailouts, default, IMF etc.? Both of these have dominated recent news about the country. But, beyond these, there are more enduring qualities that soon come to mind – the light, the heat, the sea, the hospitality, the ouzo. Everyone loves the time they spend in Greece, whether for the wildlife, the weather, the history or just sunbathing on the beach.

Behind many beaches, however, just a few yards inland, there’s often a very different activity going on. The silent slaughter of songbirds. Thousands of mist-nets and limesticks bring a slow death to Robins, Blackcaps, thrushes, Cuckoos – anything that’s  passing – often lured by tapes of birdsong, suggesting a safe haven. Despite being banned, illegal bird killing is taking place at quite extraordinary and unsustainable levels. While many in authority turn a blind eye, an estimated 25 million birds are being illegally massacred annually around the Mediterranean.

Sadly, it is estimated that over a million birds are killed in Greece each year.

To add to this, tens of thousands of birds – Goldfinches are especially prized – are caught and sold in markets all over the country to become cagebirds. Even more openly, wild birds are sold in pet shops in Athens.

And now, as Spring arrives, those migrants that have survived the journey to Africa and are on their way back to Europe to breed are next in line. These are the survivors, the strong birds essential to maintaining the population, but throughout the Ionian islands – Corfu, Zakynthos etc. the first bird calls of spring aren’t just uplifting they are a call to put on the camouflage and get outside with a gun. Spring hunting, because of its damaging effect on future bird numbers, has been banned since 1979. So what happens? Hundreds of hunters in camo outfits, putting a resounding two fingers up at the law, are out shooting at anything within range. It may be illegal but there’s virtually no law enforcement. Just look at what the wildlife hospitals receive – harriers, eagles, Ospreys, herons, you name it. And it’s all defended in the name of tradition – ‘We’ve always done this’, ‘It’s part of our heritage’ etc, etc.

An Osprey bites the dust

Well, tradition is thin justification. It’s the last resort for those who know something is wrong but can’t find any other way of defending it. Burning witches and sleeping in caves were traditional but we don’t do them now. So, this has to stop. In the long term, education has a large role to play but birds are being killed now, today, as you read this. Pressure has to be brought to bear in the here and now on the authorities to enforce the law.

The Champions of the Flyway campaign is a Birdlife project targeting the illegal killing of migratory birds travelling between Europe and Africa. Each year one country is the focus. This year that focus is Greece. It is our chance to help lessen the impact of the killing fields of Greece on our migrant birds.

Listen to this podcast soundcloud.com/talkingnaturally/tn-022

Read this report from Birdlife birdlife.org/illegal-killing

Please support the Champions of the Flyway campaign so that something can be done about this terrible slaughter…… champions-of-the-flyway.com

 

---

Steve is a founder of Birdwing.eu who are sponsoring the Birdlife Greece Racers Team.

 

 

 

Mountain concerns

Tags

birds, conservation, environment, Farming, George Monbiot, nature, uplands

Last week I spent some time in the central belt of Scotland, walking the hills around Pitlochry, including the Munros of Ben Lawers and Schiehallion. The weather was great, the views endless, there was coffee in the flask and my enthusiastic Border Collie was doing five miles for every one of mine. Everything was great, well, nearly. Trouble is, I’ve read Feral. (1)

Miles and miles of short-cropped grass stretched in every direction, creating a typical English, Welsh and here Scottish upland view. The Lake District, Snowdonia and much of Scotland are full of them. It’s what the general public expect to see on a day out to such places. Unfortunately George Monbiot’s book, Feral, has changed my view of the views that were on offer on these Scottish mountains. I’ve always been aware of the lack of diversity in our uplands. They tend to be either heavily-nibbled grass or great swathes of heather. In both cases biodiversity is low, and often very low. As I wrote in a previous blog, ‘ In April I spent a day in Snowdonia – one of our national park ‘jewels’. After 8 hours of walking my birdlist was……… five. Five species – in a national park for God’s sake. If it hadn’t been for half a dozen Herring Gulls scavenging sandwiches at the summit of Snowdon the total of individual birds seen wouldn’t have been much more than five.’Here I was again, at altitude on a beautiful day, but, despite the glorious weather, the whole experience was slightly depressing. I couldn’t put my finger on it for a while but then the penny dropped. There obviously wasn’t a bird or animal for miles. Six hours produced Meadow Pipits, a few Ravens and precious little else.  It’s now that bits of Feral hit home. Monbiot’s description of these landscapes as ‘sheepwrecked’ says it all (2). Often a term as clever as this doesn’t quite hit things on the head. There has to be a bit of tweaking to make it fit. But not here. Sheepwrecked is what these hills are, as far as the eye can see. Sheepwrecked is the perfect description of this green monotone – with the help, in this area, of quite a few deer – and it’s taking the edge off my day. I can’t help but think what else these hills could be, what life they could support and how much more interesting that would make them to the millions of us who walk in them. Hill farming is hard and it’s uneconomic. Most of these enterprises don’t turn a profit and simply couldn’t exist without subsidies. In fact, the average subsidy for a Welsh hill farm is £53 000 against a net income of £33 000. In other words we – you and me – pay £20 000 a year on average to each farmer to enable him or her to create a landscape that is virtually devoid of life. Let’s just say that again – we pay through the nose to create and maintain lifeless green deserts in most of our hills and mountains. It’s madness and we’re all affected by this bizarre use of the uplands, both in the pocket and in the experiences we’re denied when we’re out in these landscapes – the chance encounter with a fox, a hunting stoat, a hare or a raptor. As Mark Avery says in ‘Inglorious’, ‘Upland landowners need to recognise that everyone has an interest in how the uplands look and what goes on in them because everyone is paying for those activities’ (3). But it’s not just the landowners or hard-bitten tenant hill farmers who need to do the recognising, it’s the government. They make this madness possible. They subsidise uneconomic activity which creates environmental harm over huge areas. There has to be a better way.

On the way down Ben Lawers, sun still shining, coffee consumed, dog finally showing her 13 years, we come across a glimpse of an alternative future. A tall fence encompasses a small area of land that has been able to regenerate without the limiting presence of sheep and deer. Wow. What a difference  (You need to click on the picture to really appreciate the difference). There are trees and shrubs, with birch, willow, juniper and rowan. The ground vegetation is tall and much more diverse. There are bees and crane flies everywhere. And….. there’s a bird. A Stonechat flits across onto a nearby rock and eyes us warily. I realise it’s the first bird we’ve seen in nearly an hour.

Is this a glimpse of how our uplands will look in the future? Is it possible that huge areas could look like this, with such a dazzling array of life? It could be, but first we need to decide on the nature of the benefits.

What kind of ‘benefits’ will be deemed more important? Will they continue to be  benefits paid to upland farmers – in the form of subsidies perpetuating such an uneconomic and environmentally damaging way of life? Or will they be in the form of benefits to society as a whole of regenerated, diverse and exciting upland landscapes with all the opportunities they could offer? We pay for what goes on in the uplands. It’s up to us to press for the uplands we want.

(1)  George Monbiot – Feral (Allen Lane, 2013) p.153

(2) ibid p.158

(3) Mark Avery – Inglorious. Conflict in the Uplands (Bloomsbury 2015) p. 187

You might also be interested in: rewildingbritain.org.uk and carrifran.org.uk

 

A propaganda machine?

Tags

birds, conservation, Grouse shooting, Hen harrier day, Hen Harriers, moorland, North York Moors, persecution, wildlife crime

A press of a button at the North York Moors National Park Centre lets you listen to this local ‘character’ who I have recorded here.

 

A statue of a gamekeeper giving a balanced view of grouse shooting? Like hell it is. This would be bad enough if it was from an actual grouse-shooting estate.

How on earth can this be the official view of a National Park? Just what is involved in ‘looking after the moors’?  I think we know – just look at the appalling record of raptor persecution in North Yorkshire. [1]

What we have here seems to be blatant propaganda justifying criminal activity and I can’t believe that the National Park in which I live has this as its official line.

Below is a letter I’ve just sent to them.

To the North York Moors National Park Authority,

As a resident of the North York Moors National Park I am writing to you regarding the practice of grouse shooting within the park boundaries.  With North Yorkshire having been named as England’s worst county for the persecution of birds of prey why is it that our National Park supports an activity that has been repeatedly linked to wildlife crime?  Why can’t people enjoy the sight of a Hen Harrier or a Short-eared Owl flying across open countryside on their weekend walks? Where are the Peregrine Falcons, Ravens and Buzzards?

In addition to the illegal killing of raptors there are several other issues linked to the forms of land management associated with, in particular, driven grouse shooting. For example, how exactly does heather burning improve the landscape of our National Parks?  A recent study by Leeds University states ‘The owners of grouse moors who set fire to heather to promote green shoots for young birds to eat are polluting rivers and contributing to climate change‘. In addition, the resulting patchwork looks awful.

This study further suggests that water from catchments dominated by grouse moors leads to increased water bills for many customers (since the costs of water cleaning are met by the customer not the polluter) and perhaps a greater risk of flooding.

So why is this allowed to happen within the National Park? And please, just to save you the time and effort, don’t invoke the need for grouse shooting to maintain heather moorland or the need for heather moorland to maintain grouse– was there really none of either before 1800?

The Cairngorms National Park is now beginning to address the issue of driven grouse shooting. It states, ‘While this single issue land management has achieved year-on-year record-breaking grouse numbers for sporting purposes, we consider that this activity comes at significant environmental cost’. In words that can equally be applied to The North York Moors National Park, it adds that illegal persecution of birds of prey to protect grouse has a ‘very damaging effect’ on conservation and public understanding, adding: ‘There is an unfortunate record of illegal raptor persecution in and around the national park, which risks undermining the park’s reputation as a well-managed place for nature and wildlife tourism’.

Will the North York Moors National Park reconsider the status of driven grouse shooting within its boundaries? Will you speak out more forcefully against wildlife crimes being committed in the region on and around grouse moors? Will the ‘gamekeeper’ at the Moors Centre be rerecorded to be less of a propaganda machine? Do you have any powers to influence or alter existing practice in this industry when it takes place within the boundaries of the National Park? I would like to hear your views and to learn more about what powers the Park authorities have to monitor and affect what happens in the National Park related to this issue.

Yours in anticipation,

Steve Mills

• http://www.wateratleeds.org/fileadmin/documents/water_at_leeds/EMBER_2_page_exec_summary.pdf
• http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/news/home-news/hunting-estates-harming-wildlife-to-boost-grouse.26083354

 

 

Malta – what next?

Tags

birds, Birds of prey, conservation, environment, Europe, Malta, slaughter, spring hunting

So the vote is lost and it’s business as usual in Malta. The majority in favour of spring hunting took 50.9% of the votes [1]. So, starting today, birds on their way to breed in Europe will be slaughtered in their thousands by hunters wearing both camouflage and even broader smiles than usual. So, who’s to blame for this huge loss for conservation? Firstly the hunters – because without them this issue wouldn’t exist. However, the majority of these people may well have limited education and lead very little lives. Well, you’d have to really, to get such kicks from killing small birds. Of course, the need to kill things may also point to size deficiencies in things other than intellect, but we needn’t go into them here. So who else is in the firing line? Well, the poll was lost by a mere 2220 votes with 75% of the population voting. Blame also lies, for me, squarely in the laps of those other 25% who in many cases probably couldn’t be bothered to stand up for the lives of their fellow creatures. You can bet your life that everyone who wanted the killing to continue got themselves out there, so the vast majority of the remaining 25% would likely have voted for life rather than death. If only they could have been arsed. Third in my sights is the EU. How is it that Malta got to vote anyway? How is it that spring hunting is even an issue to be voted on? It’s against European law and is allowed nowhere else. Shouldn’t that be enough? What happened? Did Malta only agree to join the EU and receive large amounts of EU money if spring hunting was allowed to continue? Was it – ‘You allow us to carry on regardless if you want us to accept your cash’? Heads I win tails you lose. How did that happen? The EU has to deal with this issue once and for all rather than pussyfooting around hoping Malta would sort it out themselves. They couldn’t and so the EU, very happy to regulate so many other aspects of our lives, needs to step in. Why, you might say, should we do anything at all? Malta has decided for itself. It’s their decision. Well, I’ll tell you why. Number one – these aren’t Maltese birds. They belong – if belong is the right word – to all of us. Two – while I also dislike hunting during autumn migration it is far less damaging to bird populations than killing in spring. In autumn there are far more birds heading south than come north in spring, because there are all the year’s youngsters as well. Many of these will not be around next spring because of starvation, predation, accidents etc. over the winter period. That’s natural and is why birds usually raise several chicks each year. Spring hunting, however, takes out the survivors. These aren’t young birds that might have died naturally before returning north. These are the superbirds – those that have survived all the dangers that traveling thousands of miles and then surviving for months on another continent can bring. It really is the survival of the fittest and here they are, in prime condition and ready to breed. And then they make their last landing in Malta. Killing these birds is very damaging to the population as a whole. Three – the populations of the two permitted target species – Turtle Dove and Quail – are in freefall across Europe with Turtle Dove numbers down by 77% since 1980 [1]. Doesn’t that count for anything? Four – allowing any spring hunting means all manner of protected birds are shot and, make no mistake, this is what happens. No doves in sight? Never mind, there’s an Osprey about to take its last breath. Or a Montagu’s Harrier perhaps. If spring hunting was banned there would be no excuse for shooting anything. There would be no gunfire. As such it would be so much easier to police. We know that hunters don’t stick to the law. There’s years of evidence to show that. So, where are we? It’s impossible to influence the hunters whose manhood demands that cruelty and death be inflicted on little birds. It’s also too late to influence Maltese citizens. So there are two things we can do. For the short-term, we can donate to and support organisations like CABS (Committee Against Bird Slaughter) and Birdlife Malta to help them police this season’s killing to at least keep it within the rules. For the longer term we must write, en masse, to our MEPs. They must exert pressure to bring Malta within EU law and they will only do it if enough of us tell them to. Here’s a letter that can be downloaded and modified, courtesy of Chris Packham who has done so much to raise awareness of this issue. The alternative is to just capitulate. To give up and let Europe’s avian treasures pay the ultimate price. And that’s not an option. We simply have to keep on to give our birds a better chance of making it home. Take a few minutes and do one or both. Don’t join the ranks of those who just couldn’t be arsed.

Stop wishing. Start doing.

Tags

birds, Birds of prey, conservation, environment, George Monbiot, Hen Harrier, nature, persecution, photography, wildlife crime

When we think of corruption it’s often in terms of somewhere abroad. Somewhere in Africa, maybe, or perhaps southern Europe. It’s not usually about something on our own doorstep, but, as George Monbiot writes, that’s because we’re not looking hard enough. ‘Would there still be a commercial banking sector in Britain if it weren’t for corruption? Think of the list of scandals: pension mis-selling, endowment mortgage fraud, the payment protection insurance scam, Libor rigging, insider trading and all the rest.’ (1) Corruption occurs everywhere.

And so it is with wildlife crime. We might think it’s ‘over there’ somewhere, and indeed it often is, with ivory poaching and rhino killing in Africa, industrial scale songbird slaughter all around the Med and commercial whaling in all but name from Japan, Iceland and Norway. And it’s not difficult to find lots of other instances around the world. But, just as with corruption, there’s plenty of wildlife crime on British soil. Take the Ministry of Defence’s bases on Cyprus for a start. Although the trapping of songbirds was made illegal 40 years ago, last year saw 900 000 birds trapped and killed there – on British soil. I’ll just say that again – just short of a million birds were trapped and killed on British soil in 2014 alone. And what’s more, the situation is getting worse, with 2014 being the worst year on record.

So, why is this happening? Graham Madge of the RSPB said, back in 2012, “This isn’t just a few guys trapping on a Sunday morning with a few nets, this is almost getting into the realms of organised crime. There are massive operations at some locations, to the point where shrubbery is planted across hillsides to attract the birds, irrigation systems are put in to water the bushes to make them attractive to insects and therefore to birds, sound systems are put in. They play the bird song at night as the birds are migrating over the island in an attempt to try and pull them in to trap them.” (2) And all this is just so the local dish of ‘ambelopoulia’ – grilled Blackcaps, Robins and warblers eaten whole – can be brazenly and illegally served in local restaurants. And the Ministry of Defence? Again, back in 2012, it said it took the matter ‘very seriously’. And yet the annual number of birds killed is estimated to have doubled in the two years since.

Although this area is British soil, and thus is our responsibility, it isn’t Britain as such. But wildlife crime is rife here too. We don’t have to go abroad to get a bellyful. We just have to go out into the countryside. Chasing terrified foxes and hares with dogs has hardly gone away despite legislation. Badgers are still ripped apart for fun with incidents on the increase partly, perhaps, as a result of a degree of legitimisation by the government through its non-evidence based scapegoating of the badger and cap-doffing to the National Farmers’ Union. In addition, all manner of animals and birds are exterminated across our uplands in the name of grouse moor ‘management’ on behalf of wealthy landowners. It’s against the law and it all deprives us of having more wildlife encounters, more biodiversity and a richer natural world.

As Monbiot concludes, for many countries the kind of corruption that exists involves paying bribes to officials. But what happens in Britain is much more sophisticated and is carried out by the rich and powerful. Corruption is dressed up as legitimate business.

In the same way that the elite influences what qualifies as being corrupt, and therefore excuses their own practices from inclusion for their own benefit, the same happens with wildlife crime. When it would benefit those with power to alter what is a crime against birds and animals they want to change things. Repealing hunting laws? Killing, sorry ‘culling’, protected badgers? Making it legal with special licenses to kill certain birds of prey? Coming up with a plan to legally remove Hen Harriers? The list goes on… and most of these are being discussed to benefit the elite and their activities. The bottom line?  Anything rather than changing their own ways.

The question is how much do we – you and I –  care? Unless people like us take that extra step then things will just go on, illegally, as before, benefiting the few at the expense of the many and perpetuating animal cruelty.  And that would be criminal.

So, there are plenty of things we can do:

• Report any wildlife crime by ringing 101 or, if the crime is actually taking place, 999. To do so anonymously ring 0800 555111
• Join an organisation, such as the RSPB, League Against Cruel Sports or the Badger Trust
• Write to your MP about strengthening laws to protect our wildlife and to put an end to the disgrace in Cyprus
• Write to your Police and Crime Commissioner about what their force is doing about wildlife crime
• Support those trying to fight wildlife crime here and abroad,  e.g. Fundrazr appeal
• Get your friends and family involved, e.g. raising awareness and family fundraising
• Follow and support like-minded individuals and groups on social media such as Birders Against Wildlife Crime, Wildlife Crime Aware and Mark Avery

It’s time to stop wishing and start doing.

1 http://www.monbiot.com/2015/03/18/hard-graft/
2 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/political-row-flares-over-brutal-slaughter-of-three-million-birds-a-year-in-cyprus-8181671.html

A toxic waste

Tags

birds, Birds of prey, conservation, environment, nature, persecution, photography, Vultures, wildlife crime

In the last few years we have increasingly come to realise just how much the migrant birds of the Eastern Mediterranean are under intense pressure. Every year, hundreds of millions of birds make the twice yearly trip between Europe and Africa. Unlike birds that stick to one area for the whole of their lives, the vast movements of migrants mean they encounter many more dangers as they go about their usual year. Not only do most of these migrants have to to cross the Sahara and the Mediterranean Sea each spring and autumn and deal with all kinds of weather conditions, humans also are responsible for incredible hazards they must overcome. A staggering number of birds do not make it.

Huge numbers are being slaughtered as they make their journeys. Millions are shot each year en route by people who consider killing a sport. Vast numbers of birds are caught in nets in northern Africa, the Middle East and Southern Europe – it is estimated that the length of the nets laid out each spring and autumn to catch desperately tired migrants totals over 700 km in Egypt alone!!! [1] Then there are overhead power cables that birds fly into, together with an increasing number of wind farms that large birds are not evolutionarily adapted to avoiding.

It’s a wonder any birds make it! Sadly fewer and fewer do.

For those birds that do manage to successfully cross into Europe, even when they arrive at their breeding grounds the dangers are still there. Take Lazarus, an Egyptian Vulture nursed back to health from poisoning and fitted with a satellite transmitter. He left Greece in 2012, spent the winter in Africa and headed home in 2013. His journey took him over Egypt, Israel, war-torn Syria and Turkey, but two days after crossing the Greek border, only 200km from home, he swallowed poisoned bait and died.

Now all this makes me angry. Really bloody angry.

But what can we do? Well, if it makes you angry perhaps you would consider this.  A fundraising appeal has been made by Birdwing (a conservation organisation set up by my wife and me several years ago – see birdwing.eu) to raise money to help prevent the extinction of Egyptian Vultures from Greece. 

As part of an ongoing project anti-poison sniffer dogs are working in the breeding territories. They sniff out poison baits before they can do their killing.

Here’s the link.

It is vital work and every small donation can have a massive impact on the future of this species in Greece. It’s a chance to make a difference. Will you help?

http://fnd.us/c/7wpfa

[1] www.unep-aewa.org

The neatness obsession

Tags

birds, conservation, environment, Farming, hedge, nature, neatness, photography, Verges

I hear it a lot – ‘It’ll just be kicked into the long grass’ – but whether it’s the government who’s doing the kicking or some other decision-making body, an awful lot of things end up in the long grass. Well, what I want to know is this – where is all this long grass? Because there’s precious little of it around my way. I live surrounded by fields, yes, lucky I know, but there isn’t a square metre of long grass in any of them. Not as far as the eye can see. Even when the field is grass it definitely isn’t long. There isn’t a strip of long grass anywhere, not edging an arable field or running alongside a hedge. There are no rough field margins at all. The fields around me are farmed to within an inch of their lives. Maybe I’m unlucky here, perhaps that’s not typical everywhere, but it certainly is in my area of North Yorkshire. As a result there’s no hunting habitat for owls or kestrels and hardly any farmland birds in the hedgerows.

And then there are the hedges themselves. Tall, bushy, vibrant with life? Not exactly. Most of them are sacrificed on the altar of neatness. Is it a question of simply having nothing to do that brings legions of farmers out in their tractors flaying and slashing? Around me so many hedges – potential blossom and berry-producing nesting sites – are brought to their knees each year. It’s not a question of cutting to thicken the hedge or anything like that, it’s simply vandalism. Usually vandalism moves things from the tidy to the untidy but here this form of ‘natural vandalism’ goes the other way, where the untidy becomes tidy. It’s wanton, ignorant vandalism for the sake of neatness. Look at these examples – these sad hawthorns are reduced to this every single year. Squared off, neat and absolutely pointless. They don’t produce berries anymore or even function as a hedge, but they still have to be controlled, still have to be slashed lest they run amok in a berry-producing frenzy.

I’ve spoken to the farmer. I’ve asked why they can’t be allowed to grow, ‘Wouldn’t look neat’ was the simple response, as I gazed across his yard at the remains of various bits of rusting farm machinery in a heap in the corner, next to the pile of tyres. And, for God’s sake, farmers can get money for not cutting their hedges. For not cutting them. So what is this obsession with neatness? And why is it only applied to living things? Why doesn’t a pile of old junk qualify but a hedge of blossom, berries and nesting sites does?

Last year I wrote to my local council asking whether they might ease back on the frequency of cutting on some of the town’s grass verges. I suggested that the council could do its bit for bees and butterflies and save money in doing so. More wildlife at less cost. I mean, councils are not exactly awash with cash these days. Two big boxes ticked and a bit more money to be spent elsewhere. What’s not to like? But – and I think you know what’s coming – I had, of course, completely underestimated the power of the neatness obsession.  I was told that a significant number of residents preferred the ‘manicured look’ and the council therefore had no plans to save money and do anything at all for nature. Okay, they didn’t put it exactly like that but that’s what they meant. [1]

Are we, as humans, predisposed towards a desire for neatness? There’s no doubt a picture can be enhanced by being framed and a show lawn can look neater when it’s cleanly edged. Are these anti-nature activities by some farmers simply an extension of this? Do they see their fields as works of art to be encircled by a neat frame? Is this why my local farmer won’t consider a skylark plot amongst his wheat, because the neatness mantra was invoked here, too. Rough margins and skylark plots can be funded by agri-environment schemes but is the neatness obsession one of the reasons why the take-up of the Environmental Stewardship scheme hasn’t been higher? I’m sure the form-filling can be a pain, but, however easy it was made to be, would it founder on the altar of neatness? From my conversations with farmers and the council it certainly seems so round these parts.

Failing the neatness test?

Now it may be that anyone who has read this far is nodding in agreement while looking out at a tidy, manicured garden. Hmmm. We know, in the face of the assault on the countryside, that gardens are increasingly important to our wildlife but how many of us disapprove of the farmers’ neatness obsession whilst succumbing to it ourselves?

I must plead guilty to having had a Damascene moment of my own some years ago, when I suddenly realised how this subconscious pull towards neatness was meaning that my garden was, when I stood and really looked at it, largely ornamental. Neat lawns and flowerbeds. Pretty and nice to look at, all trim and ordered – and time-consuming. But of vanishingly little value to anything at all. So, buoyed by a sudden sense of wild abandon, I stopped mowing part of the lawn and left the hedge alone. I didn’t get any money for doing this but what the hell. I chucked some wildflower seeds in and built a bughouse. Result? Less effort for me and an influx of life. So many birds use the hedge, the long grass is full of moths in the summer as well as birds foraging for insects and grubs for their chicks. Bees and butterflies feast on the wildflowers and a wren has staked a claim to the logpile. If you’ve got a garden – big or small – just do it. It all adds up to making such a difference – and what’s more it frees up time, so everyone’s a winner. So let’s lighten up on the tidiness and embrace some messiness – and see whether you can get a farmer and your council to do the same because the difference each one of us – and them – can make by embracing just a little entropy is enormous.

Before

After

Britain’s deserts

Tags

birds, Birds of prey, environment, George Monbiot, Hen Harrier, moorland, nature, photography

So, Hen Harrier Day is over. It was uplifting, and those of us who were there, dripping and paddling, felt a sense of cohesion and inspiration from being with a group of committed, like-minded people who have simply had enough of the illegal persecution of birds of prey. And it’s now so important that this momentum builds.

The fact that the likes of the Daily Telegraph is writing such tendentious, scurrilous, ill-informed pieces show that some people, somewhere, are running scared. Maybe in the future we will see Hen Harriers and other raptors living unmolested on our grouse moors. Let’s hope so, but it could be some time in coming. Nevertheless, I’m in it for the long haul.

In the meantime, with our attention focused on driven grouse moors, let’s not forget all the other areas of our uplands that are also harrier – and raptor – free. In fact many of them are pretty much bird free altogether. In April I spent a day in Snowdonia – one of our national park ‘jewels’. After 8 hours of walking my birdlist was……… five. Five species – in a national park for God’s sake. If it hadn’t been for half a dozen Herring Gulls scavenging sandwiches at the summit of Snowdon the total of individual birds seen wouldn’t have been much more than five. A few Ravens, a singing wren, two Meadow Pipits and a Pied Wagtail in the car park completed the list. After eight hours in a National Park in April. Wow.

Raptors? Don’t be silly, there wasn’t a single one. Why would there be raptors? There was absolutely nothing for them to eat. I say it again – in a national park in April.

Bird, mammal and insect free

George Monbiot’s term for these uplands is the most apt – they are ‘sheepwrecked’. (1) They are a barren, green, short-cropped desert, the result of subsidised overgrazing that we – you and I – pay for. It seems that, in 2010, the average Welsh sheep farm on the hills received £53 000 in subsidies. The average net income per farm was £33 000. Hang on, that’s a deficit of      £20 000 per farm. That’s right, in creating a green desert each farm incurred a loss of £20 000. So, we pay £53 grand a year to each farm to encourage them to, in effect, remove wildlife and wildlife habitat from the hills. So no harriers there either, then. And this is considered normal in our national parks. Let’s just do that again. We – you and I – pay £53 000 per farm to create an upland desert.

And it’s not just in Wales that these green deserts proliferate. There are huge swathes of English and Scottish uplands, much of which is in national parks, where birdlists would stay well inside single figures. To quote Monbiot,

Sheep farming in this country is a slow-burning ecological disaster, which has done more damage to the living systems of this country than either climate change or industrial pollution.(2)

And it gets worse. Before 2004, subsidies were paid to farmers according to how many animals they had, but since then they have been paid in accordance with how much land is farmed. This has made it financially advantageous for hill farmers to remove any remaining scrub etc. on their land to increase their eligibility for subsidies and, in so doing, further reduce its wildlife potential. It’s clearly a nonsensical way to go about things.

One of the traps that we, as humans, often fall into is believing that things have always been as they are now. In the case of our uplands they haven’t always been as they are now. Grazing by sheep has created the current lifeless state of much of them. Hardly anything survives their relentless molars. But, when any change is mooted, the prophecies of doom come thick and fast, e.g. Will Cockbain, until 2012 the National Farmers’ Union spokesman on hill farming, ‘If the hills are not grazed, they will turn to scrub and trees, which may look scenic but will decrease biodiversity.’ (3) Good God! Less biodiversity? Could that be possible? Could we be heading for a birdlist of zero? You simply couldn’t make such nonsense up.

Beautiful, but empty

Sheep farming is a particularly unproductive and damaging use of our uplands and it’s about time that we, in Britain, had a look at the whole issue of our upland areas. Their current state is an economic and environmental disaster. And that’s not to even mention the rain that now streams straight off the scoured hills to create flooding misery downstream. Let’s think beyond the constraining prism of the present. We need to get past all this trotted-out nonsense about sheep farming being vital in maintaining the land as it always has been. It isn’t and it hasn’t. It used to be richer, more diverse and much more full of life. We need to develop a vision of what these areas could be. We need to discuss what we think the uplands are for and then find a way of changing them for the better, both for wildlife – harriers included – and, as a result, for us and our experiences of being in them.

The ‘tipping point’

Tags

birds, Birds of prey, conservation, Hen harrier day, nature, persecution

Is the clock ticking for grouse shooting? Or at least for ‘driven grouse shooting’, the more intensive form where the need for large numbers of grouse to be available for shooting creates ‘Dalek-like gamekeepers’ with a one-word vocabulary, ‘Exterminate! Exterminate!’ And that’s exactly what happens. Anything that might remotely eat a grouse chick is ruthlessly destroyed, particularly birds of prey. And, what’s more, just to be on the safe side, even creatures that don’t eat grouse – hares for instance – are often also exterminated. Why? Because they just might spread ticks to grouse and attract predators that could then help themselves to a grouse dinner. Hares, for God’s sake!

Photo: Raptor Persecution Scotland

Hundreds of fully protected birds of prey – majestic eagles, harriers, hawks and falcons – shot, poisoned, and trapped. Eggs removed. Nestfuls of helpless chicks stamped on. The complete removal of a whole suite of creatures from our uplands to allow a few days of killing by the rich and privileged. It’s beyond belief that this is going on in Britain. It’s all very well for us to be outraged by what’s going on in the likes of Malta – and quite right that we are – but this is happening here. And what’s more it’s getting worse. A six year study of Hen Harriers in England – Natural England’s Hen Harrier Recovery Project – found that there were fewer Hen Harriers on England’s uplands when this important initiative ended than when it began!

So this is where we are.

Will these practices continue unchecked for the benefit of the ‘wealthy few’ in our society?

Is there any light at the end of this sad, depressing tunnel?

 

Well, perhaps the intransigence of the whole grouse-shooting fraternity towards changing anything at all might ultimately come to bite them on the backside. There is a precedent here. Remember the ‘right to roam’ issue some years ago? Officially called the 2000 Countryside and Rights of Way Act (CROW), it allows the public access to those areas of mountain, moor and heath from which they were previously excluded.

Many wealthy landowners were confident that it would never become law because they were the rich and powerful. They had the political clout to stop it. But they didn’t. With Labour taking power in 1997 the political pendulum swung left and the weight of public opinion made it happen. Had something been done earlier to appease public concern, to show some understanding of the issue, then who knows what the outcome might have been. But no, those concerned stuck their heads in the sand with two fingers pointing skywards and lo and behold there was suddenly a right to roam.

There comes a “tipping point” on every issue; a time when it’s possible to still have some influence over what happens, and then a time when it’s too late. Was the ‘ignore it and it will all go away’ attitude over the CROW Act a classic example of doing too little too late?

And could the grouse-shooting industry be heading that way? Could history repeat itself? Can the industry afford to ignore the growing swell of public opinion? There is already a significant momentum for change gathering pace – and we have an election around the corner.  The signs are there to be seen:

• In 2012 an epetition raised over 10 000 signatures in favour of vicarious liability for raptor persecution in England. Those who persecute birds of prey frequently do so at the direction of their employers or others with vested interests, and this offence of vicarious liability would bring those parties to justice. So the moor owners, rather than just their gamekeepers, would be liable. This recently became law in Scotland. The government in England, is currently ‘monitoring’ the Scottish situation.
• Earlier this year another epetition advocating the licensing of grouse moors passed the 10 000 threshold.
• In the light of the ‘head in the sand’ attitude of the grouse shooting industry a third epetition is gathering momentum – please sign it if you haven’t already – concerning the banning of driven grouse shoots – the most harmful to other wildlife.
• After a fair bit of fence-sitting the RSPB has come out in favour of a licensing scheme for grouse moors. If there’s no evidence of criminal wrongdoing on your moor then you keep your license. Found guilty of illegal raptor killing? Then you lose it for a period until you put your house in order. What could be wrong with that?
• Increasing exposure of the issue in the media is visible including a recent piece on the BBC’s Countryfile, in the BBC Wildlife magazine and in the current issue of Birdwatch, not to mention newspaper reports, blogs and other social media. Numbers of tweets about this are increasing week-by-week.
• Hen Harrier Day. On August 10^th there will be a series of peaceful protests to raise awareness amongst the public about the plight of this raptor and the criminal activity pushing it to the verge of extinction as a breeding bird in England.

As the pressure continues to build remember that you can be part of this change. “It is the greatest of all mistakes to do nothing because you can only do little. Do what you can.” Sydney Smith

Here are a few things to do – and don’t forget – we – you and I – are the momentum for change:

• attend a Hen Harrier Day event – click on the banner below for more details
• Make your voice heard on social media!
• donate to the RSPB’s Hen Harrier appeal – go to the RSPB site here
• sign the epetition on driven grouse shooting – sign here
• Write to your MP or to opposition parties to let them know your strength of feeling – see my post Your right to write for details of how to do this easily

“Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we’ve been waiting for. We are the change that we seek.” Barack Obama

 

Your right to write

Tags

birds, conservation, diclofenac, environment, nature, photography, politics

In recent weeks I’ve blogged about the madness of allowing veterinary Diclofenac in Europe, tax-payer subsidies for grouse moor owners and the enforced disappearance of the Hen Harrier and other birds of prey from our countryside. Positive responses to these came in from many sources: people liked, favourited, commented, followed, retweeted and shared. That’s great and thanks. These all show how many people care about nature and wildlife.

But do our politicians know this? Do they really have a sense of the number of people who care about nature – and the strength of their feelings? I wonder. When was the last time you personally expressed your desire to protect wildlife to your MEP or to your local politician? How many people wrote an email or a letter to their MEP showing their outrage over the licensing of Diclofenac? Yes, some of us will have signed e-petitions but does this really get under the skin of a politician? Does it counterbalance the number of friends and associates he or she may have who favour a more ‘gun-toting/kill them/cull them’ approach to the natural world?

The recent European elections put brand new politicians into the European Parliament. They are – hopefully – keen to represent the opinions of the nation. Our MPs, in whatever country we live, also, we hope, aim to stand up for the electorate’s views. But the question is this – where do they get their ideas of what these views are? Are they based on a general sense of what the people around them believe; their friends and other party politicians and the like? In what other ways are they forming their ideas about the electorate’s opinions?

Well, we know that e-petitions, like this one (which I hope you have already signed), must be responded to by politicians if 10 000 people sign them. It is a way of expressing your view and – if the magic number is reached – of at least forcing a response. That has to be a good thing, even if a large dose of fobbing off can be the result.

But is that it? Is that enough? Should we stop there? We all know that we probably shouldn’t but it always seems such a lot of effort to do more. The bottom line, so to speak, is this – can we really criticise our politicians for some of their decisions when we can’t even be arsed to write to them?

So, what stops us from telling our politicians what we think? Is it:

1.  Who to write to?
2.  What to say?
3.  The time it will take?

In turn: 1. Who to write to? For UK readers, type your postcode into the search at this website writetothem.com and select the recipient of your choice. You can choose your district councillor, county councillor, MP, any of the Lords and, once they take up their positions in early July, the MEPs representing your local area. It takes just seconds to do this! Alternatively find the email or postal addresses of the MEPs for your region at: www.europarl.org.uk.

2. What to say? The trick is to keep it simple. State the issue you feel strongly about and explain what you want your MEP etc. to do about it. Then ask for their opinion and, if you are asking about a forthcoming vote or report, request that they explain how they plan to vote and their reasons. That’s it. It doesn’t have to be more complicated than that.* Then give your full name and address. If they don’t think you’re a constituent of theirs, your message may be binned. This is not to say that other politicians can’t be contacted, even those in other countries where your concern may be.  For example, I have written and received replies from a range of politicians and organisations in Greece as part of conservation work there.

3. And finally the time issue. The biggie. How long does it take to fire off an email? How many emails, status posts, tweets etc. do you send out each week? Is one more message really too much? Ok, so some extra time may be required (more than posting a comment about Coronation Street on Facebook perhaps), but do you care enough to do it? The time issue really is more about motivation – the ‘can I really be arsed’ factor. Why not write just one letter as a start and see how long it really takes? And see how you feel having done it.

Do we care enough about the loss of diversity in our countryside?

Wildlife needs our help more than ever. Whether it’s an email to an MEP about killing vultures with diclofenac, to an MP about the rich and powerful using our uplands as a personal playground or perhaps to a local councillor about allowing wildflowers to grow on our roadside verges, it’s worth it.

So, well done for reaching the end of this post. I hope you’re challenged to write. If you do, please leave a comment and let me know. Someone once said ‘We get the politicians we deserve’. I’d like to think a few more of them will discover that there are lots of us out here who love and want to preserve the natural world. If you’re one of them then we simply have to do just a little more. Give it a go.

Do we care enough that these are poisoned?

Do we care enough that these will be legally trapped – endorsed by the EU?

Do we care enough that these are shot illegally?

Do we care enough about wildlife crime?

* It’s worth saying that it can be more effective if a specific politician is targeted at the right time, such as when specific organisations appeal for you to write to a particular person at a particular time. Your message may then have even more influence. But don’t let this stop you from writing to your own representative on your own about the issues you care about. Ultimately, the more you write to a politician the more you will be able to build a relationship with them. This is your right – so get writing!

And lastly, if you can recommend anything further about writing in this way please add your comments. The more we can learn how to use our influence the better.