Birdingonthe.Net

Recent Postings from
The UK BirdNet

Updated on Wednesday, December 12 at 04:05 AM ET
The most recently received Mail is at the top.

The basic information is now online at 
http://www.komitee.de/en/index.php?huntingbags

David
--
David Conlin
Proact International www.proact-campaigns.net/team joining costs nothing 
..... doing nothing costs birds
Committee Against Bird Slaughter (CABS) http://www.komitee.de/en/ .... 
actively operating against illegal hunting across Europe
Skype: david_conlin
_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Hunting of geese in Germany and the rest of Europe.

In reply to Malcolm's comments I omitted to add that in addition to the 
problem of Germans travelling abroad to hunt if nothing is available 'at 
home', there is already hunting tourism into Germany to hunt arctic 
geese where this is allowed and even intra-German hunting trips - 
particularly from South and West Germany to North and Eastern Germany 
where these species overwinter. There are adverts for such hunts on the 
internet and, if the new laws are passed and extended to other federal 
states we will have a big problem.

The hunting is poorly controlled or monitored (the much vaunted 
self-control by the German Hunters' Association is laughable) and I have 
been in confrontation with hunters who have surrounded roost waters at 
dawn and dusk (not permitted in many states, unsporting anyway - but 
easier than hunting them in the open) and without retriever dogs 
(illegal). Many wounded birds are left on the waters and the latter get 
a heavy dosage of lead). Identification skills are also poor. I was 
present when a colleague confronted a hunter with a Pink-footed Goose 
which the latterhad just shot (spread it out in front of him at one 
metre distance); but the hunter knew nothing better than to say 
"Graugans" (Greylag). Everything goose-like that flies (incl. WTE - 
which is hardly goose-like but is often present) is shot at.

Flight distances for geese flocks increase from year to year and now 
even birdwatchers have to be extremely careful not to cause the birds 
more stress by approaching too closely. This also results in the geese 
expending more energy, grazing therefore more extensively, thereby 
exacerbating the problem for farmers who are unhappy with the amount of 
compensation they receive. They call for more flexible hunting laws ans 
so the vicious circle closes.

David
--
David Conlin
Proact International www.proact-campaigns.net/team joining costs nothing ..... 
doing nothing costs birds 

Committee Against Bird Slaughter (CABS) http://www.komitee.de/en/ .... actively 
operating against illegal hunting across Europe 

Skype: david_conlin  

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Eddie Chapman wrote:
> David wrote:
> But Norway is also not the environmental giant it could (and should) be. 
> Wolves and Whales!
>
> Couldn't agree with you more David. If Norway spent more time and money on
> environmental matters, instead of trying to convince the world that the
> country is leading the field then things would be a lot better. Believe me,
> working on local grass roots environmental protection here in Norway is like
> hitting your head against the wall. My point with the German hobby fisherman
> was to show that things can soon get out of control.
>   

Eddie,

We are too few and the opposition and the disinterested majority (until 
the problem is in their backyard) are legion.

I missed the point on German '_hobby'_ fishermen. Perhaps you could let 
me have more info on that. Privately is perhaps better as it is somewhat 
off topic.

David
--
David Conlin
Proact International www.proact-campaigns.net/team joining costs nothing 
..... doing nothing costs birds
Committee Against Bird Slaughter (CABS) http://www.komitee.de/en/ .... 
actively operating against illegal hunting across Europe
Skype: david_conlin 

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Dear Malcolm et al,

Malcolm Ogilvie wrote:
> David
>
> Thanks very much for these figures.
>
> My question was very slightly tongue-in-cheek, but still I thought 
> relevant. There are certainly German shooters travelling outside their 
> country, and outside the EU, to shoot geese, not just mammals.
>
> I'm also very interested in the statistics for the different countries. 
> As you surmise, the number of birds shot in Britain is dominated by 
> pheasants. It has been variously estimated that the number reared and 
> shot each season is between 18,000,000 and 20,000,000.  I'm also 
> interested in where the figures came from, because bag records are not 
> required, nor kept, in Britain, so that numbers of, e.g. ducks and geese 
> shot, are estimated based on a very few returns, plus knowledge of 
> annual mortality, etc.
Source of figures:

[This is necessarily only a short extract from the paper, which I have 
(without the detailed tables for each country at present) on my computer 
as official translator.]

< ... >
In April 2004, CABS commissioned the Bioplan environmental planning firm 
(in Raisdorf, Schleswig-Holstein) to send a questionnaire to those 
ministries and other authorities responsible for hunting in the 25 EU 
states plus Switzerland and Norway, requesting information on the 
numbers of birds of species listed in Annex II BD (Parts 1 and 2) 
legally shot or trapped in their country. At the same time research on 
bag figures for individual countries, regions and species was carried 
out in various libraries and on the internet.


United Kingdom: The study used the estimates made by AEBISCHER (1997) 
for various fowl like birds (Galliformes) shot annually in England, 
Scotland and Northern Ireland as well as the MURRAY & SIMCOX (2003) 
estimates of British bag figures for ducks, grouse, Woodcock, Common 
Snipe and Wood Pigeon. The bag figures for the undifferentiated species 
group "grouse" was allocated to the distinct species Ptarmigan and Red 
Grouse in accordance with the ratio of numbers in the British 
populations  HAGEMEIJER & BLAIR (1997). Bag figures for the three 
huntable goose species are from RUTSCHKE (1997). The numbers of corvids 
shot annually in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland are taken from 
ROBINSON (2005).
Not included: The tables in this study do not include figures for data 
on so-called pest species, Starling and gulls, shot legally in the 
United Kingdom.
< ... >

There is also interesting information on the many exemptions permitted 
throughout the EU (a separate study is in preparation), from Ravens in 
Austria and Spain to the better known trapping of finches on Malta.

>  There's currently little evidence that shooting 
> of wildfowl in Britain is at too high a level except perhaps very 
> locally, which soon sorts itself out.
>
> Malcolm
>   
Thanks for that Malcolm. The full study paper in English has not been 
published yet. When the English version of this part of the website is 
online (within the next few days) the paper can be requested from CABS. 
Alternatively. I am authorised to pass it on as required/requested. I 
have asked for the tables so that the paper is complete.

David

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

David wrote:
But Norway is also not the environmental giant it could (and should) be. 
Wolves and Whales!

Couldn't agree with you more David. If Norway spent more time and money on
environmental matters, instead of trying to convince the world that the
country is leading the field then things would be a lot better. Believe me,
working on local grass roots environmental protection here in Norway is like
hitting your head against the wall. My point with the German hobby fisherman
was to show that things can soon get out of control.

Eddie Chapman, Voss. Norway. 

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Norman D.van Swelm wrote:
>
> DavidConlin wrote: > Let's stick to birds. I hold no brief for Germany 
> (I just live there) or any other nation that over-exploits natural 
> resources. But Norway is also not the environmental giant it could 
> (and should) be.
>>
>> Wolves and Whales!<
>
> Seals, Herring, Cod!
Well I didn't want to it Eddie with a BIG stick. Bit of a problem on the 
WTE side with turbines as well ;-)
> Say David, who are in charge in the goose hunt states in Germany? 
> Christian Democrats perhaps?
Sorry Norman. Much as I would like to I can't lay all the blame at their 
door I can't. The present federal hunting laws are about 95 % unchanged 
since Hermann Goering was Reichsjagdmeister; but nothing has been heard 
from him since 1945 in Nuremberg. And unless the framework is set at a 
federal level the states can do more or less wht they like (althoughwe 
can - and do - lay complaints against then with the European Commission).

We tried to lobby the last joint Red/Green Govt to draft (which we did 
for them) and pass a new hunting law while they were in power but there 
was too much feet-dragging. On the back-burner again I'm afraid. Now the 
Christian Democrat (both misnomers) state princes are doing their own 
thing and serving their own client�le - the hunting and fishing lobby 
(viz.,mass shooting of cormorants)

David
_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

David

Thanks very much for these figures.

My question was very slightly tongue-in-cheek, but still I thought 
relevant. There are certainly German shooters travelling outside their 
country, and outside the EU, to shoot geese, not just mammals.

I'm also very interested in the statistics for the different countries. 
As you surmise, the number of birds shot in Britain is dominated by 
pheasants. It has been variously estimated that the number reared and 
shot each season is between 18,000,000 and 20,000,000.  I'm also 
interested in where the figures came from, because bag records are not 
required, nor kept, in Britain, so that numbers of, e.g. ducks and geese 
shot, are estimated based on a very few returns, plus knowledge of 
annual mortality, etc. There's currently little evidence that shooting 
of wildfowl in Britain is at too high a level except perhaps very 
locally, which soon sorts itself out.

Malcolm





In message <475E5C41.6070306 AT online.de>, Proact Campaigns 
 writes
>Malcolm Ogilvie schrieb:
>> Hmm, a thought occurs to me.
>>
>> If the Germans are encouraged to shoot more geese in their own
>country,
>> will this mean that the not inconsiderable numbers of Germans
>who travel
>> to other countries to shoot geese will cease to do so?
>>
>> Malcolm
>
>
>A bit of a chicken and egg question Malcolm. Or do I mean "when
>do you stop beating your wife?"?
>
>I don't have the (not inconsiderable) figures of German hunters
>traveling abroad to hunt annually (does anyone else in this
>forum?). What I do have is the following figures from the official
>statistics on European hunting bags (with UK & France as
>comparison):
>
>Germany: �� (birds shot/No. of� registeredhunters/birds per hunter)
>2,299,984 / 340,000 / 6.76
>
>France :�� 25,676,403 / 1,313,000 / 19.56���
>
>UK: �� 22,149,024* / 800,000 / 27.69��� (*high no. of pheasants?)
>
>
>Geese shot annually in Europe:
>
>Mute Swan��� Cygnus olor ��� 2,644
>Taiga Bean Goose��� Anser fabalis ��� 35,914
>Pink-footed Goose �� Anser brachyrynchos ��� 20,208
>White-fronted Goose��� Anser albifrons ��� 15,653
>Greylag Goose��� Anser anser ��� 107,813
>Canada Goose��� Branta canadensis ��� 64,297
>Brent Goose��� Branta bernicla ��� n.a.
>
>For those who are interested the full tables of hunting bags are at
>http://www.komitee.de/index.php?strecken (if you wait a couple of
>days all will be in English as well). I can also provide the full study
>paper
>
>�"Jagdbedingte Mortalit�t von Zugv�geln in Europa:
>Streckenzahlen und Forderungen aus Sicht des Vogel- und
>Tierschutzes
>
>Hirschfeld, A. & A. Heyd (2005): Mortality of migratory birds
>caused by hunting in Europe: bag statistics and proposals for the
>conservation of birds and animal welfare. Ber. Vogelschutz 42"
>
>40 pages on request (Name and address please).
>
>To my knowledge the majority of German hunters travelling abroad
>to hunt (and as EU conservation laws bite they will have to travel
>further) are more interested in mammals than birds. But I could be
>wrong.
>
>
>David
>--
>David Conlin
>Proact International www.proact-campaigns.net/team joining costs
>nothing ..... doing nothing costs birds
>Committee Against Bird Slaughter (CABS)
>http://www.komitee.de/en/ .... actively operating against illegal
>hunting across Europe
>Skype: david_conlin

-- 
Malcolm Ogilvie, Isle of Islay

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

DavidConlin wrote: > Let's stick to birds. I hold no brief for Germany (I 
just live there) or any other nation that over-exploits natural resources. 
But Norway is also not the environmental giant it could (and should) be.
>
> Wolves and Whales!<

Seals, Herring, Cod!
Say David, who are in charge in the goose hunt states in Germany? Christian 
Democrats perhaps?
Norman
 

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Eddie Chapman wrote:
> Hallo all,
> Malcolm could well be onto something here. If the German hunters are the
> same as the German Fisherman to go by. Norway had to put a quota on the
> amount of sea fish they could catch. Before that we were witnessing German
> fishermen arriving in their droves, and transporting their combined catch
> back to Germany with refrigerated transport. It was huge amounts, and while
> all this was happening, the local coastal fishermen had to stick to their
> government quota, while at the same time see their coastal fish stocks
> dwindled. As the German fishermen were seen as tourists, they were not
> governed by the same laws. Since the quota has been put into place there has
> been a drop in the numbers of Germans coming to Norway to fish along the
> coast, but I believe they have moved to the west coast of Sweden to carry on
> with their hobby.
>
> Eddie Chapman Voss, Norway

Steady Eddie,

Let's stick to birds. I hold no brief for Germany (I just live there) or any 
other nation that over-exploits natural resources. But Norway is also not the 
environmental giant it could (and should) be. 


Wolves and Whales!

David
_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Hallo all,
Malcolm could well be onto something here. If the German hunters are the
same as the German Fisherman to go by. Norway had to put a quota on the
amount of sea fish they could catch. Before that we were witnessing German
fishermen arriving in their droves, and transporting their combined catch
back to Germany with refrigerated transport. It was huge amounts, and while
all this was happening, the local coastal fishermen had to stick to their
government quota, while at the same time see their coastal fish stocks
dwindled. As the German fishermen were seen as tourists, they were not
governed by the same laws. Since the quota has been put into place there has
been a drop in the numbers of Germans coming to Norway to fish along the
coast, but I believe they have moved to the west coast of Sweden to carry on
with their hobby.

Eddie Chapman Voss, Norway.
Birding Scandinavia
Today's picture: Little Grebe
http://www.birdwatchnorway.com/index-filer/Page403.htm
  

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Malcolm Ogilvie schrieb:
 > Hmm, a thought occurs to me.
 >
 > If the Germans are encouraged to shoot more geese in their own country,
 > will this mean that the not inconsiderable numbers of Germans who travel
 > to other countries to shoot geese will cease to do so?
 >
 > Malcolm


A bit of a chicken and egg question Malcolm. Or do I mean "when do you 
stop beating your wife?"?

I don't have the (not inconsiderable) figures of German hunters 
traveling abroad to hunt annually (does anyone else in this forum?). 
What I do have is the following figures from the official statistics on 
European hunting bags (with UK & France as comparison):

Germany:    (birds shot/No. of  registeredhunters/birds per hunter) 
2,299,984 / 340,000 / 6.76

France :   25,676,403 / 1,313,000 / 19.56   

UK:    22,149,024* / 800,000 / 27.69    (*high no. of pheasants?)


Geese shot annually in Europe:

Mute Swan    Cygnus olor     2,644
Taiga Bean Goose    Anser fabalis     35,914
Pink-footed Goose    Anser brachyrynchos     20,208
White-fronted Goose    Anser albifrons     15,653
Greylag Goose    Anser anser     107,813
Canada Goose    Branta canadensis     64,297
Brent Goose    Branta bernicla     n.a.

For those who are interested the full tables of hunting bags are at 
http://www.komitee.de/index.php?strecken (if you wait a couple of days 
all will be in English as well). I can also provide the full study paper

 "Jagdbedingte Mortalit�t von Zugv�geln in Europa: Streckenzahlen und 
Forderungen aus Sicht des Vogel- und Tierschutzes

Hirschfeld, A. & A. Heyd (2005): Mortality of migratory birds caused by 
hunting in Europe: bag statistics and proposals for the conservation of 
birds and animal welfare. Ber. Vogelschutz 42"

40 pages on request (Name and address please).

To my knowledge the majority of German hunters travelling abroad to hunt 
(and as EU conservation laws bite they will have to travel further) are 
more interested in mammals than birds. But I could be wrong.


David

--
David Conlin
Proact International www.proact-campaigns.net/team joining costs nothing ..... 
doing nothing costs birds 

Committee Against Bird Slaughter (CABS) http://www.komitee.de/en/ .... actively 
operating against illegal hunting across Europe 

Skype: david_conlin  
_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Hmm, a thought occurs to me.

If the Germans are encouraged to shoot more geese in their own country, 
will this mean that the not inconsiderable numbers of Germans who travel 
to other countries to shoot geese will cease to do so?

Malcolm


In message <475D2129.9010600 AT online.de>, Proact Campaigns 
 writes
>The petition is still running - please sign. Arctic geese killed here in
>Germany will never get to visit YOUR country.
>
><----->
>
>The German federal state government of Lower Saxony
>(Niedersachsen) is planning to permit shooting of goose which
>have until now been protected: White-fronted, Bean, Barnacle and
>Egyptian Goose.� In addition the existing open season for Greylag
>and Canada Geese is to be extended.
>
>Birders in Germany are protesting against these plans as goose
>hunting is unnecessary.
>"��� Germany is committed to the protection of migrating birds as
>signatory to numerous international agreements and conventions.
>"��� Many birds are only wounded and die a lingering and painful
>death.
>"��� The social structures of these family birds are destroyed and
>young birds have no chance of survival without their parents.
>"��� Damage to crops is only intensified by hunting (the birds move
>to other fillds and require more food for energy replacement).
>"��� Goose hunting is an extreme minority sport. The pleasure of the
>majority in watching wild birds is spoilt.
>For these reasons an online petition calls on the federal states
>which permit hunting of migrant geese to ban this practice.�
>
>You can support German birders and conservationists by signing
>the petition (in German) at:
>
>�
>http://www.vogelschutz-komitee.de/petitionen/html/petition_show.php?nr=1
>
>Click on "Klicken Sie hier, um die Petition zu unterschreiben" at the
>bottom of the box and fill in your personal details (you can type in
>your town and country e.g. Nottingham, England in the "Ort" box)
>in the new window. (Data is available to the petition initiator only
>and will be deleted after completion of the campaign) Then click on
>the "weiter" button and again on the next page to confirm your
>details. You can then see your signature by clicking on "Zur�ck zur
>Petitionsseite".
>
>David
>--
>David Conlin
>Proact International www.proact-campaigns.net/team joining costs
>nothing ..... doing nothing costs birds
>Committee Against Bird Slaughter (CABS)
>http://www.komitee.de/en/ .... actively operating against illegal
>hunting across Europe
>Skype: david_conlin
>_______________________________________________
>UKbirdnet mailing list
>ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
>http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

-- 
Malcolm Ogilvie, Isle of Islay

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Dear Birders,

Next year, we're planning on going to Tarifa to see the
autumn migration.  The following information would be
useful.

1. What's the best time of year to see the most raptors?

2. Where to stay (anything from self-catering to hotels)
   in Tarifa?

3. What tour guides cover that area of Spain?

Regards,

Mick               /"\                      
                   \ /                      
Linux Registered    X  ASCII Ribbon Campaign
User #287765       / \ Against HTML Mail
_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

The petition is still running - please sign. Arctic geese killed here in 
Germany will never get to visit YOUR country.

<----->

The German federal state government of Lower Saxony (Niedersachsen) is 
planning to permit shooting of goose which have until now been 
protected: White-fronted, Bean, Barnacle and Egyptian Goose.  In 
addition the existing open season for Greylag and Canada Geese is to be 
extended.

Birders in Germany are protesting against these plans as goose hunting 
is unnecessary.
.    Germany is committed to the protection of migrating birds as 
signatory to numerous international agreements and conventions.
.    Many birds are only wounded and die a lingering and painful death.
.    The social structures of these family birds are destroyed and young 
birds have no chance of survival without their parents.
.    Damage to crops is only intensified by hunting (the birds move to 
other fillds and require more food for energy replacement).
.    Goose hunting is an extreme minority sport. The pleasure of the 
majority in watching wild birds is spoilt.
For these reasons an online petition calls on the federal states which 
permit hunting of migrant geese to ban this practice. 

You can support German birders and conservationists by signing the 
petition (in German) at:

 http://www.vogelschutz-komitee.de/petitionen/html/petition_show.php?nr=1

Click on "Klicken Sie hier, um die Petition zu unterschreiben" at the 
bottom of the box and fill in your personal details (you can type in 
your town and country e.g. Nottingham, England in the "Ort" box) in the 
new window. (Data is available to the petition initiator only and will 
be deleted after completion of the campaign) Then click on the "weiter" 
button and again on the next page to confirm your details. You can then 
see your signature by clicking on "Zur�ck zur Petitionsseite".

David
--
David Conlin
Proact International www.proact-campaigns.net/team joining costs nothing ..... 
doing nothing costs birds 

Committee Against Bird Slaughter (CABS) http://www.komitee.de/en/ .... actively 
operating against illegal hunting across Europe 

Skype: david_conlin  
_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Dear all


I think it's a while since this was mentioned here?

As many of you may know, in a very abnormal move this scheme has now been 
"called in" by the Scottish Parliament, who in theory have power to overrule. 
The latest news from the Trump camp suggests they may be prepared to sit it out 
until they get a ruling in their favour, hence it is looking more than likely 
that the scheme will indeed go throo*. I don't think I need repeat the basic 
arguments, suffice to say that 

SNH, SWT and RSPB have all maintained strong and detailed objections**.



Therefore, if you have not yet done so, I would strongly urge you to sign the 
petition on the 10 Downing Street site (only takes a minute): 




http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/trumpoff/


Please note that you can only sign if eligible to vote in the UK. There were 
other polls running but this is the critical one now as it is being run in 
direct opposition to a "pro" poll - which is currently 

ahead by a factor of more than 3:1***. However, there is a suspicion
that the "pro" poll is being hugely distorted due to the main local
media pushing it to the extreme - www.thisisaberdeen.co.uk prominently
feature *only* the "pro" petition link, with support from blatantly
one-sided reporting.

NB - for those outside Scotland who question the merits of using a "10 Downing 
Street" petition for a Scottish Parliament issue - please note that there is no 
active petition on the latter site, either for or against, and the media have 
pulled the plug on their own local polls (results didn't suit!). 


Finally, I'm sure many will concur that simple strength of numbers *ought* not 
even to be a relevant factor where we are talking of protected sites, but due 
to the sheer scale of the development undue commercial and political pressures 
have emerged in this instance... 




Many thanks



Stephen



* http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=

** 
http://www.aberdeenshire.gov.uk/committees/files_meta/802572870061668E8025739100\\5F6D35%5CHearing_Minute_-_menie_270907%20final%20draft.pdf 


(see in particular sections 4.3-4.5)

*** as I type, 13473 "pro", 4329 "anti"





      ___________________________________________________________
Support the World Aids Awareness campaign this month with Yahoo! For Good 
http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/ 


_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

That's pathetic Norman.... even by the unenviable standards of an unhinged mind 
that you yourself set . I considered the paper relevant to the discussion and 
passed it on without comment. The paper is a digest of research papers 
published in journals including Ibis, The Auk and The Journal of Applied 
Ecology. 


For some reason best known to yourself you deliberately confabulate 'the people 
who kill and poison birds of prey' with the Game Conservancy scientists who 
produce quality peer-reviewed research and who, at Loddington, blazed a trail 
for the conservation of UK farmland birds long before the RSPB looked beyond 
buying and building avocet factories on the East Coast (most of which will be 
gone by the end of the century in any case) and jumped on the bandwagon and 
bought their own demonstration farm. On the strength of this GC are the only UK 
conservation charity I'm a member of . I have never once fired a gun, or killed 
a bird or mammal, pursuing field sport.... though fishing as a child I will 
'confess' to. 


I can't answer your first two questions because they arise from a false 
premise. 


I believe the numbers produced by GC and if you were better read you'd know 
that they've also produced plenty of data over the years which have shown the 
inefficacy of various practices associated with game management and shooting. 


Of course I don't 'believe that nature (whatever THAT is?) cannot do without 
the interference of leadshot'. You just get a different 'nature' without 
shooting where the biodiversity associated with the agriculture carried out 
where shooting represents an important secondary source of income to the farmer 
is reduced when that shooting interest is removed and the agricultural profit 
motive comes top the fore. The same will happen now that agricultural commodity 
prices have rocketed in price in the last 18 months and the profits forgone by 
devoting land to anything other than growing crops are too great for farmers to 
consider going without them. 


Obviously you were selective in choosing Willow Warbler to demonstrate your 
point. If you'd used Blackbird or Song Thrush I'd have said 'yes'. 


More than 90% of the crows are removed using Larsen and crow traps in the 
spring. If you knew anything about crow shooting at all you'd know that it's an 
amazing day if a keeper can shoot more than three. 


Other than that I think your comments manifestly failed to move the discussion 
forwards and just sought to stifle it with infantile 'playing to the gallery' 
and perverted casuistry. 


Paul 



From: Norman.vanswelm AT wxs.nl
To: tout AT xnet.it; ukbirdnet AT dcs.bbk.ac.uk
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2007 20:28:02 +0100
Subject: [UKbirdnet] Only a Ban Grouse shooting can end illegal killing of 
birds of prey! 











Now you disappoint me Paul! Do you really trust people who 
kill and poison birds of prey and in the end are too cowardice to come forward 
and confess they did it? Now you of all people believe the numbers these people 

produce? Crop damaging and pillaging game feeders by Rooks? Don't make 
me laugh! Do you really believe nature cannot do without the interference of 
leadshot?
Sure, your shooters aim at quantity, the more introduced 
Pheasants and Red Partridge they can blast from the sky. They are too ignorant 
to appreciate the important role predation plays in natural selection. But you 
Paul, you are a reasonably intelligent man, do you really believe there is any 
link between crow shooting and the number of Willow Warbler territories? No you 

don't, you only want to please your gun-crazy friends!
Cheers, Norman

Paul Tout wrote: This one should keep the pot 
boiling:

http://www.gct.org.uk/uploads/Singing%20fields%20report.PDF

here's 
a clip:

"Predator and pest control

On the Allerton farm until 
2002, magpie and crow numbers were reduced
from 10 and eight pairs to zero. 
Rook numbers were reduced from 55 nests to
between 25 to 30, to reduce crop 
damage and pillaging the game feeders. Likewise
woodpigeons, of which there 
had been some 30 pairs, were kept to near zero.

Game and open-field 
birds
Unsurprisingly wild pheasants doubled, red-legged partridges increased 
from two to
16 pairs. Skylarks (36 to 37 pairs) were plentiful 
throughout.

Hedgerow and thicket residents
Many common garden birds 
fall into this group and although none were scarce at
Allerton, the crow and 
magpie control seemed to boost their numbers considerably.
Wren (47 to 141 
pairs), dunnock (46 to 144 pairs), robin (54 to 110 pairs),
blackbird (66 to 
143 pairs), song thrush (14 to 56 pairs). All these species declined
after 
predator control was stopped.

Tree-hole nesters
These garden 
favourites seem largely immune to magpie and crow predation and
they don�t 
venture far from the woods and gardens. None of the birds showed
much 
improvement in number - Marsh tit (four to seven pairs), blue tit (46 to 
51
pairs), great tit (21 to 30 pairs) and long-tailed tit (four to nine 
pairs), although the
latter is not a hole nester.

Resident seed-eating 
finches
Most finches increased after 1992 at Allerton. Chaffinch (135 to 229 
pairs),
greenfinch (15 to 62 pairs), goldfinch (three to14 pairs), linnet (10 
to 25 pairs) and
bullfinch (six to12 pairs). All these birds took advantage 
of the pheasant feeders and
set-aside cover crops, and all but the goldfinch 
dropped in number when predator
control stopped. They are open nesters and 
easily spotted by magpies. Only the
yellowhammer (57 to 55 pairs) seemed to 
be unaffected. Their habit of nesting in
thick vegetation on or near the 
ground makes their nests difficult to find.

Migratory warblers and 
flycatchers
Four out of five species improved with game conservation and this 
was most clearcut
for blackcap (19 to 38 pairs), chiffchaff (two to 10 
pairs), willow warbler (28
to 47 pairs) and spotted flycatcher (eight to 14 
pairs). Both blackcap and chiffchaff
continued to increase after the predator 
control stopped. Whitethroat (25 to 45
pairs) were on an upward trend anyway 
so it is difficult to credit game conservation
for the improvement. Garden 
warbler (11 to nine pairs) numbers were unchanged."

I pass it on without 
comment - except to say I was very impressed when I visited Loddington in 1999 
with the sheer number of farmland birds present.<



_________________________________________________________________
Explore the seven wonders of the world
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=7+wonders+world&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Now you disappoint me Paul! Do you really trust people who kill and poison 
birds of prey and in the end are too cowardice to come forward and confess they 
did it? Now you of all people believe the numbers these people produce? Crop 
damaging and pillaging game feeders by Rooks? Don't make me laugh! Do you 
really believe nature cannot do without the interference of leadshot? 

Sure, your shooters aim at quantity, the more introduced Pheasants and Red 
Partridge they can blast from the sky. They are too ignorant to appreciate the 
important role predation plays in natural selection. But you Paul, you are a 
reasonably intelligent man, do you really believe there is any link between 
crow shooting and the number of Willow Warbler territories? No you don't, you 
only want to please your gun-crazy friends! 

Cheers, Norman

Paul Tout wrote: This one should keep the pot boiling:

http://www.gct.org.uk/uploads/Singing%20fields%20report.PDF

here's a clip:

"Predator and pest control

On the Allerton farm until 2002, magpie and crow numbers were reduced
from 10 and eight pairs to zero. Rook numbers were reduced from 55 nests to
between 25 to 30, to reduce crop damage and pillaging the game feeders. 
Likewise 

woodpigeons, of which there had been some 30 pairs, were kept to near zero.

Game and open-field birds
Unsurprisingly wild pheasants doubled, red-legged partridges increased from two 
to 

16 pairs. Skylarks (36 to 37 pairs) were plentiful throughout.

Hedgerow and thicket residents
Many common garden birds fall into this group and although none were scarce at
Allerton, the crow and magpie control seemed to boost their numbers 
considerably. 

Wren (47 to 141 pairs), dunnock (46 to 144 pairs), robin (54 to 110 pairs),
blackbird (66 to 143 pairs), song thrush (14 to 56 pairs). All these species 
declined 

after predator control was stopped.

Tree-hole nesters
These garden favourites seem largely immune to magpie and crow predation and
they don�t venture far from the woods and gardens. None of the birds showed
much improvement in number - Marsh tit (four to seven pairs), blue tit (46 to 
51 

pairs), great tit (21 to 30 pairs) and long-tailed tit (four to nine pairs), 
although the 

latter is not a hole nester.

Resident seed-eating finches
Most finches increased after 1992 at Allerton. Chaffinch (135 to 229 pairs),
greenfinch (15 to 62 pairs), goldfinch (three to14 pairs), linnet (10 to 25 
pairs) and 

bullfinch (six to12 pairs). All these birds took advantage of the pheasant 
feeders and 

set-aside cover crops, and all but the goldfinch dropped in number when 
predator 

control stopped. They are open nesters and easily spotted by magpies. Only the
yellowhammer (57 to 55 pairs) seemed to be unaffected. Their habit of nesting 
in 

thick vegetation on or near the ground makes their nests difficult to find.

Migratory warblers and flycatchers
Four out of five species improved with game conservation and this was most 
clearcut 

for blackcap (19 to 38 pairs), chiffchaff (two to 10 pairs), willow warbler (28
to 47 pairs) and spotted flycatcher (eight to 14 pairs). Both blackcap and 
chiffchaff 

continued to increase after the predator control stopped. Whitethroat (25 to 45
pairs) were on an upward trend anyway so it is difficult to credit game 
conservation 

for the improvement. Garden warbler (11 to nine pairs) numbers were unchanged."

I pass it on without comment - except to say I was very impressed when I 
visited Loddington in 1999 with the sheer number of farmland birds present.< 

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

In message <005e01c839c0$bdc55770$$ AT co.uk>, James Cracknell 
 writes
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ukbirdnet-bounces AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk [mailto:ukbirdnet-
>> bounces AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Derick Evans
>
>
>> Unfortunately SPA and SSSI designation stand for nothing if you do not
>> spend the money on the sites.
>
>I think the other issue here is legal responsibility - have you heard of
>prosecutions for landowners not meeting their legal commitments to upkeep a
>SSSI on their land.
>
There have been many instances of landowners having their legal 
commitments pointed out to them whereupon they take the necessary 
action, rendering prosecution unnecessary. However, no landowner has a 
legal commitment to do anything to upkeep an SSSI on their land until or 
unless he has signed an SSSI management agreement with the country 
agency. He will have a legal commitment *not* to do various damaging 
operations from the moment of notification, but a great many SSSIs are 
declared because the owner or manager is doing exactly what is needed 
which is why it was suitable for designation in the first place.

There have also been a small number of Nature Conservation Orders which 
are used to stop some (usually deliberate) damaging action. I was 
involved in a site where this happened and the person responsible 
stopped, otherwise he would have been prosecuted.

>I taught at a school and we had a SSSI on our property.  I found out about
>this and panic took hold because the school hadn't upkept the SSSI!  Thing
>is it wasn't the schools responsibility but oh the County Council's who
>manage the land and own the site.  Now lets have a quiz - who do you think
>actually upkept the SSSI and turned back the neglect and who couldn't care
>less.
>
>- the school
>- the County Council
>
But did the County Council have an SSSI management agreement with EN?

>The thing is SSSI upkeep is not measurable - there needs to be targets and
>management plans that have to be legally adhered to (and monitored) for
>upkeep of habitat for key species.
>
There are in Scotland. SNH has a programme of what it terms Site 
Condition Monitoring, which is a rolling 5-10 year assessment of every 
designated area. This is separate from local area staff being aware of 
what is happening on designated areas in their own patch.

-- 
Malcolm Ogilvie, Isle of Islay
_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

In message <005401c839bd$4beca020$4101a8c0 AT evo>, Derick Evans 
 writes
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Paul Irving" 
>Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 9:46 AM
>Subject: Re: [UKbirdnet] Only a ban on grouse shooting
>
>
>> As some body who has long been involved with raptors on grouse moors
> The habitat argument is wrong most of the habitat is protected
>as SPA or SSSI so in theory is not reliant on shooting.
>
>Unfortunately SPA and SSSI designation stand for nothing if you do not
>spend the money on the sites.
>

That, if I may say so, is a sweeping generalisation!

There are a great many SPAs and SSSIs which don't require money spending 
on them in order to remain in excellent condition protecting the named 
habitat/species.

While money is needed for some designated areas, in order to improve 
them or to maintain the habitat/species, the majority where there is a 
payment rely on quite modest amounts paid to the landowner or land 
manager to carry out certain agreed operations, maybe a particular 
grazing regime, maintaining fences, etc., or not carrying out others, 
e.g. drainage, tree felling, etc.

-- 
Malcolm Ogilvie, Isle of Islay
_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Irving" 
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 9:46 AM
Subject: Re: [UKbirdnet] Only a ban on grouse shooting


> As some body who has long been involved with raptors on grouse moors
 The habitat argument is wrong most of the habitat is protected 
as SPA or SSSI so in theory is not reliant on shooting.

Unfortunately SPA and SSSI designation stand for nothing if you do not 
spend the money on the sites.

All the best,
                   Del.

(They say practice makes perfect, but if nobody's perfect, why 
practice?. ) 

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Sigmar, the Lesser Spotted Eagle shot down over Malta in September is 
dead. The veterinary surgeons of the Free University Berlin who have 
been treating him put him to sleep on 7 December 2007 after new 
complications arose. In the area of the injured shin bone a serious 
infection had again set in which resulted in severe pain for the bird.

As a release into the wild was in any event no longer possible due to 
the extent of the injuries and the bird's inability to use its talons, 
the doctors decided to put an end to Sigmar's suffering.

David
--
David Conlin
Proact International www.proact-campaigns.net/team joining costs nothing ..... 
doing nothing costs birds 

Committee Against Bird Slaughter (CABS) http://www.komitee.de/en/ .... actively 
operating against illegal hunting across Europe 

Skype: david_conlin  
_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Hi All,

This one should keep the pot boiling:

http://www.gct.org.uk/uploads/Singing%20fields%20report.PDF

here's a clip:

"Predator and pest control

On the Allerton farm until 2002, magpie and crow numbers were reduced
from 10 and eight pairs to zero. Rook numbers were reduced from 55 nests to
between 25 to 30, to reduce crop damage and pillaging the game feeders. 
Likewise 

woodpigeons, of which there had been some 30 pairs, were kept to near zero.

Game and open-field birds
Unsurprisingly wild pheasants doubled, red-legged partridges increased from two 
to 

16 pairs. Skylarks (36 to 37 pairs) were plentiful throughout.

Hedgerow and thicket residents
Many common garden birds fall into this group and although none were scarce at
Allerton, the crow and magpie control seemed to boost their numbers 
considerably. 

Wren (47 to 141 pairs), dunnock (46 to 144 pairs), robin (54 to 110 pairs),
blackbird (66 to 143 pairs), song thrush (14 to 56 pairs). All these species 
declined 

after predator control was stopped.

Tree-hole nesters
These garden favourites seem largely immune to magpie and crow predation and
they don�t venture far from the woods and gardens. None of the birds showed
much improvement in number - Marsh tit (four to seven pairs), blue tit (46 to 
51 

pairs), great tit (21 to 30 pairs) and long-tailed tit (four to nine pairs), 
although the 

latter is not a hole nester.

Resident seed-eating finches
Most finches increased after 1992 at Allerton. Chaffinch (135 to 229 pairs),
greenfinch (15 to 62 pairs), goldfinch (three to14 pairs), linnet (10 to 25 
pairs) and 

bullfinch (six to12 pairs). All these birds took advantage of the pheasant 
feeders and 

set-aside cover crops, and all but the goldfinch dropped in number when 
predator 

control stopped. They are open nesters and easily spotted by magpies. Only the
yellowhammer (57 to 55 pairs) seemed to be unaffected. Their habit of nesting 
in 

thick vegetation on or near the ground makes their nests difficult to find.

Migratory warblers and flycatchers
Four out of five species improved with game conservation and this was most 
clearcut 

for blackcap (19 to 38 pairs), chiffchaff (two to 10 pairs), willow warbler (28
to 47 pairs) and spotted flycatcher (eight to 14 pairs). Both blackcap and 
chiffchaff 

continued to increase after the predator control stopped. Whitethroat (25 to 45
pairs) were on an upward trend anyway so it is difficult to credit game 
conservation 

for the improvement. Garden warbler (11 to nine pairs) numbers were unchanged."

I pass it on without comment - except to say I was very impressed when I 
visited Loddington in 1999 with the sheer number of farmland birds present. 


Paul Tout, Malchina (TS) ITALIA

> From: james AT jcracknell.co.uk
> To: stephen.williams677 AT ntlworld.com; p.irving AT csl.gov.uk; 
bo.beolens AT btinternet.com; ukbirdnet AT dcs.bbk.ac.uk 

> Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 10:50:15 +0000
> CC: surfbirdsnews AT lists.surfbirds.com
> Subject: Re: [UKbirdnet] [Surfbirdsnews] Shooting and AI (was RE: Only a ban 
ongrouse shooting) 

> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: stephen.williams677 AT ntlworld.com
> > 
> > Hi James,
> > 
> > Please forgive my ignorance here but.......
> > 
> > 1) If it was not for income generated by 'overgrown chicken' shoots
> > then
> > surely many of our privately owned keepered woodlands and their
> > associated
> > wildlife would simply vanish, would they not ?.
> > 
> > 2) What species of  non native Wildfowl are you actually referring to?
> > 
> > I do enjoy reading emails on these forums but there does seem to be a
> > lot of
> > potentially dangerous and  unfounded accusations flying around of
> > late.....Eagle Owl/Hen Harrier thread for example. If there is to be
> > critism
> > levied at organisations such as Defra, RSPB etc....then at least back
> > it up
> > with evidence!
> > 
> > Best Wishes,
> > Steve.
> 
> Steve
> 
> The difference is with me it's first hand evidence - not based on 3rd
> parties and hear-say and people who don't know the difference between a Hen
> Harrier and a Common Gull.
> 
> Yes, I agree with your comment, but the law now exists where woodlands are
> protected - even though countless landowners break the hedgerows act on a
> weekly basis!  Shooting doesn't bring in massive amounts of income for your
> average lowland farmer - in fact the local guys round here moan it costs
> them money.
> 
> The fact is (and I was a beater as a child) I've seen the law broken so many
> times.  Birds shot out of season, Owls and Raptors shot - some because the
> guy with the gun doesn't know the difference between a Tawny and Pheasant.
> 
> We also need to look at who brings in money and the problems? Is it the
> local farmer who can shoot - or is it some business man or the local elite
> who have their own ideas and often consider themselves above the law?
> 
> Look at the number of convictions too for illegal shooting?  It's so poor,
> the punishments mean nothing - it's a disgrace.
> 
> At the end of the day it's us the taxpayer that are subsidsing Europe's
> farmers through CAP and yet we're not providing adequate support for the
> long-term for farmers willing to turn all of or part of their farms into
> nature reserves.  The Government has really messed the UK Farming industry
> about.
> 
> J.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> UKbirdnet mailing list
> ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
> http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

_________________________________________________________________
Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger�

http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=wlmailtagline 
_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

 

Steve

The difference is with me it's first hand evidence - not based on 3rd
parties and hear-say and people who don't know the difference between a Hen
Harrier and a Common Gull.

Yes, I agree with your comment, but the law now exists where woodlands are
protected - even though countless landowners break the hedgerows act on a
weekly basis!  Shooting doesn't bring in massive amounts of income for your
average lowland farmer - in fact the local guys round here moan it costs
them money.

The fact is (and I was a beater as a child) I've seen the law broken so many
times.  Birds shot out of season, Owls and Raptors shot - some because the
guy with the gun doesn't know the difference between a Tawny and Pheasant.

We also need to look at who brings in money and the problems? Is it the
local farmer who can shoot - or is it some business man or the local elite
who have their own ideas and often consider themselves above the law?

Look at the number of convictions too for illegal shooting?  It's so poor,
the punishments mean nothing - it's a disgrace.

At the end of the day it's us the taxpayer that are subsidsing Europe's
farmers through CAP and yet we're not providing adequate support for the
long-term for farmers willing to turn all of or part of their farms into
nature reserves.  The Government has really messed the UK Farming industry
about.

J.

I have first hand evidence from a farm manager thet he would rather not have
shooting over the land as it is a nusiance to him. He is only a tenant so I
assume he has no control over the shooting rights.

The activity is good for farmland birds but I would much rather this was
achieved by providing adequate support in the way you state. Rpator numbers
are very strong locally so if there is any persecution it is minimal around
here. Clearly this is not necessarily the case elsewhere.

Alan










Alan

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Interestingly I have heard of this before but Red Crested Pochard are 
not on the list allowing them to be shot in the UK.

				Paul
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Irving	                        Phone:  
Field Biologist/EBG1		        GTN:    5129
Central Science Laboratory              Fax:    
Sand Hutton                             Email:  p.irving AT csl.gov.uk
York YO41 1LZ                           Web:    http://www.csl.gov.uk
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclaimer
The information contained in this message may include privileged,
proprietary or confidential information. Please treat it with the same
respect that you would expect for your own information.  If you have
received it in error, we apologise, and ask that you contact the CSL
sender immediately and erase it from your computer. Thank you for your
co-operation.

Further information on confidentiality of our communications, can be
found at http://www.csl.gov.uk/email.htm

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Hi All

I have posted 3 photos (of my usual poor quality) of the first Slavonain Grebe 
for Oman on the ID Discussion Gallery on Surfbirds. I have never seen a 
Slavonian Grebe like this before, nor can I find any images of one like it. It 
has an orange bill, with just the culmen dark, and the extreme tip whitish. 
There is a brownish cheek patch, and the flanks are buffish. It does not have 
the usual black & white appearance of a winter-plumaged Slavonian Grebe, and 
for a while, while it was swimming with a Little Grebe, I overlooked it as one 
of that species, although it was a little larger & larger-headed. Also, 
although the eye is reddish, it is duller than normal. 


It could be an individual which is aberrant in several features (displaying a 
syndrome), or could it possibly be a hybrid Slavonian x Little Grebe hybrid? 
The bird at http://www.chardres.clara.co.uk/pictures/dabchick2.jpg (which came 
up on an image search for Slavonian Grebe), does appear to be a Dabchick 
(Little Grebe) as captioned, but bears some resemblance to the Oman bird. 


I would welcome informed comments.

Cheers

Brett_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

The German federal state government of Lower Saxony (Niedersachsen) is 
planning to permit shooting of goose which have until now been 
protected: White-fronted, Bean, Barnacle and Egyptian Goose.  In 
addition the existing open season for Greylag and Canada Geese is to be 
extended.

Birders in Germany are protesting against these plans as goose hunting 
is unnecessary.
.    Germany is committed to the protection of migrating birds as 
signatory to numerous international agreements and conventions.
.    Many birds are only wounded and die a lingering and painful death.
.    The social structures of these family birds are destroyed and young 
birds have no chance of survival without their parents.
.    Damage to crops is only intensified by hunting (the birds move to 
other fillds and require more food for energy replacement).
.    Goose hunting is an extreme minority sport. The pleasure of the 
majority in watching wild birds is spoilt.
For these reasons an online petition calls on the federal states which 
permit hunting of migrant geese to ban this practice. 

You can support German birders and conservationists by signing the 
petition (in German) at:

 http://www.vogelschutz-komitee.de/petitionen/html/petition_show.php?nr=1

Click on "Klicken Sie hier, um die Petition zu unterschreiben" at the 
bottom of the box and fill in your personal details (you can type in 
your town and country e.g. Nottingham, England in the "Ort" box) in the 
new window. (Data is available to the petition initiator only and will 
be deleted after completion of the campaign) Then click on the "weiter" 
button and again on the next page to confirm your details. You can then 
see your signature by clicking on "Zur�ck zur Petitionsseite".

David
--
David Conlin
Proact International www.proact-campaigns.net/team joining costs nothing ..... 
doing nothing costs birds 

Committee Against Bird Slaughter (CABS) http://www.komitee.de/en/ .... actively 
operating against illegal hunting across Europe 

Skype: david_conlin  
_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

During the last major AI outbreak in Europe (Jan 2006 and associated with Mute 
Swans moving out of the Caspian Sea) Italy banned all releases of gamebirds for 
the rest of the hunting season and well on into the spring (when utterly 
pointless 'repopulation' releases of overwintered captive-bred pheasants and 
partridges take place). They also banned the use of live (domestic) mallard 
decoys - a practice which I think is already illegal in UK. 


Regards,

Paul Tout, Malchina (TS) ITALIA.

> From: james AT jcracknell.co.uk
> To: p.irving AT csl.gov.uk; bo.beolens AT btinternet.com; ukbirdnet AT dcs.bbk.ac.uk
> Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 11:40:36 +0000
> CC: surfbirdsnews AT lists.surfbirds.com
> Subject: [UKbirdnet] Shooting and AI (was RE: Only a ban on grouse shooting)
> 
> Hi all
> 
> What amazes me is the shooting fraternity have not stopped introducing their
> glorious over grown chickens (Pheasants etc.) into the countryside given AI.
> Nor have Defra stopped this and the release of ducks.  I am in the process
> of writing an article on this & the cruelty I've witnessed in what should
> have been restored to a County Wildlife Site after being used for
> gravel/sand extraction.
> 
> They (Defra) stop me from letting my chickens out in the garden and yet just
> up the road they release thousands of birds that have been bred in poor
> conditions.  These birds and non-native wildfowl are known to be carriers of
> AI and more susceptible than your average Passer domesticus.  In addition
> where they introduce non-native wildfowl for shooting.
> 
> I am appaled that many conservation organisations and Natural England don't
> seem to care about the deliberate introduction of non-native wildfowl on
> such a massive scale and the lack of disease control.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> UKbirdnet mailing list
> ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
> http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

_________________________________________________________________
Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger�

http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=wlmailtagline 
_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

You're kidding?!!!!

Well, obviously not, but ....... really ........ for goodness sake
....... don't they have any brain cells?!

Kevin 

-----Original Message-----
From: ukbirdnet-bounces AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
[mailto:ukbirdnet-bounces AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk] On Behalf Of James
Cracknell
Sent: 05 December 2007 11:55
To: 'James Cracknell'; 'Paul Irving'; 'bo beolens'; 'UKBirdnet'
Cc: surfbirdsnews AT lists.surfbirds.com
Subject: Re: [UKbirdnet] Shooting and AI (was RE: Only a ban on
grouseshooting)

What I meant to say was where they release these non-native wildfowl for
shooting are areas where gulls and other birds congregate on a large
scale.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ukbirdnet-bounces AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk [mailto:ukbirdnet- 
> bounces AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk] On Behalf Of James Cracknell
> Sent: 05 December 2007 11:41
> To: 'Paul Irving'; 'bo beolens'; 'UKBirdnet'
> Cc: surfbirdsnews AT lists.surfbirds.com
> Subject: [UKbirdnet] Shooting and AI (was RE: Only a ban on grouse
> shooting)
> 
> Hi all
> 
> What amazes me is the shooting fraternity have not stopped introducing

> their glorious over grown chickens (Pheasants etc.) into the 
> countryside given AI.
> Nor have Defra stopped this and the release of ducks.  I am in the 
> process of writing an article on this & the cruelty I've witnessed in 
> what should have been restored to a County Wildlife Site after being 
> used for gravel/sand extraction.
> 
> They (Defra) stop me from letting my chickens out in the garden and 
> yet just up the road they release thousands of birds that have been 
> bred in poor conditions.  These birds and non-native wildfowl are 
> known to be carriers of AI and more susceptible than your average 
> Passer domesticus.  In addition where they introduce non-native 
> wildfowl for shooting.
> 
> I am appaled that many conservation organisations and Natural England 
> don't seem to care about the deliberate introduction of non-native 
> wildfowl on such a massive scale and the lack of disease control.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> UKbirdnet mailing list
> ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
> http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
may still contain software viruses, which could damage your computer system:
you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.


_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Paul Irving wrote:

< Pauls job argument 
> does not hold there are less than 2000 grouse keepers and when analysed 
> the financial argument does not hold either ( on the basis of their own 
> figures )

Just a couple of points before I shut up on this one. The 5,000 jobs
include the 2000 (grouse) keepers and c.3000 staff in the associated
industries (hotels, catering). The keepers are just the front-line so
to speak. 

> The habitat argument is wrong most of the habitat is protected as SPA or SSSI 
so in theory is not reliant on shooting. 


I don't dispute that the areas are SPA or SSSI but I'm surprised that someone 
from the CSL would add the sequitur 'so in theory is not reliant on shooting'. 
What theory? Such a view might be permissible in the mind of 'Joe Public' but 
it can't go unchallenged here. 


The fact is that Red Grouse and many other species would become very much rarer 
over much of UK and might well disappear altogether outside Scotland when one 
combines the effects of global warming, habitat loss and reduced predator 
control, much as Black Grouse risked disappearance in England and Wales in the 
1990s. 


I ought to make my position clear. I'm all in favour of banning grouse shooting 
if and when the resources are in place to ensure the continued management 
regime on the c.8% of the UK land they occupy. Until that time I think a ban 
would be pure folly. 


Paul Tout

_________________________________________________________________
Discover the new Windows Vista
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

> ...can someone tell me what habitat is used by grouse [and the other
> species which use grouse moors] elsewhere... although 'our' grouse is
> considered by some to be speciated surely it shares habitat need with the
> continental equivalent where, so far as I know, there are no 'grouse'
> moors?

Wet tundra in the north, bogs further south (e.g., in Belarus).

David may not like the word "management", and ultimately I don't like it
either, but wet and treeless habitats are typically transitory under our
latitudes.
In untouched natural ecosystems, habitat cycles occur all the time, and
there is a rule that states that the fraction of the cycle duration over
which a given transitory habitat is present, should normally translate into
the fraction of the surface occupied by this habitat at any point in time.
It follows that if you want to protect a given surface of this habitat and
let nature on its own, just protecting sites totalling this surface and
where this habitat occurs is never going to work. If this habitat is present
during, say, 5% of the natural habitat cycle duration, you should in fact
protect 20 times this surface, to allow for the habitat to reappear
naturally in other places, when it will disappear from where it exists
nowadays. And of course you should continue to protect the sites from where
the habitat will have disappeared, forever. It's at this price only that
nature can be a "better warden - if she is left alone".
The only alternative is indeed management, that stops habitat cycles and
stabilises the habitat where it occurs now. A totally unnatural practice,
but difficult to avoid in our overpopulated countries.

Laurent -
--
Laurent Raty
l.raty AT skynet.be
Brussels, Belgium

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

This site may be of use -
http://www.gct.org.uk/gsg/grousesp/WILLOW.HTM
As I suspected, Willow Ptarmigan (Red Grouse's 'Mum', as it were) is a
tundra species and it's the remoteness of its habitat that is so far
protecting it.

Kevin 

-----Original Message-----
From: bo beolens [mailto:bo.beolens AT btinternet.com] 
Sent: 05 December 2007 10:11
To: Caley Kevin; Paul Irving; UKBirdnet
Subject: Re: [UKbirdnet] Only a ban on grouse shooting

...can someone tell me what habitat is used by grouse [and the other
species which use grouse moors] elsewhere... although 'our' grouse is
considered by some to be speciated surely it shares habitat need with
the continental equivalent where, so far as I know, there are no
'grouse' moors?

bo
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Caley Kevin" 
To: "Paul Irving" ; "Caley Kevin" 
; "UKBirdnet" 
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: [UKbirdnet] Only a ban on grouse shooting


> Hi Paul,
> As one in the know, then, how are the 'grouse' moors managed in areas
> where shooting doesn't occur?  Are there enough controlled fires
> produced to allow for new growth, even in 'remote' areas?  Are there
> enough wildlife corridors put in position to allow grouse (and other
> wildlife, like the insects) to continue breeding in the future?
>
> In fact, are there any papers out there on this anyone knows about?
> Would be interesting (and useful)! Particularly as, from what I
> understand, SSSI's aren't (or, possibly, weren't) that well protected
-
> sure you couldn't build on them, but ploughing them up, while now made
> illegal, was something that could potentially have been done, and
> leaving them to degrade, rather than conserving / preserving their
> individual environments seems to be quite commonplace, in practice if
> not on paper.
>
> Obviously, this is different from what's been happening on our heaths
> and downlands, where the habitats were left to the rabbits (until the
> myxamatosis) and subsequent scrub & urban developments.
>
> Hm.... starting to sound like a 'UK.Conservation' chatgroup!
>
> Kevin
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Irving [mailto:p.irving AT csl.gov.uk]
> Sent: 05 December 2007 09:47
> To: Caley Kevin; UKBirdnet
> Subject: Re: [UKbirdnet] Only a ban on grouse shooting
>
> As some body who has long been involved with raptors on grouse moors
> whilst the deaths of white tailed eagles on moors due to being shot or
> poisoned( See SRG site) is absolutely appalling it is hardly
surprising.
>
> These people in "Defence of their sport" kill eagles of both species,
> harriers, peregrines and absolutely hundreds of buzzards every year,
> they are to put it bluntly a national embarrassment. the real scandal
is
> not just that they do this but that in 99% of cases they get away with
> it and somehow area allowed to continue. In the long term unless there
> is major change their sport has no future as a result. The habitat
> argument is wrong most of the habitat is protected as SPA or SSSI so
in
> theory is not reliant on shooting. It would serve them right if we
> banned their pastime and continued to make them pay for the
management.
> There is no justification for what they do and that includes the
> "Langholm Report" if they cannot stay within the law why should we
> tolerate them the price our raptors pay is too high.
>
> Paul
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Paul Irving                         Phone:  
> Field Biologist/EBG1         GTN:    5129
> Central Science Laboratory              Fax:    
> Sand Hutton                             Email:  p.irving AT csl.gov.uk
> York YO41 1LZ                           Web:    http://www.csl.gov.uk
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Disclaimer
> The information contained in this message may include privileged,
> proprietary or confidential information. Please treat it with the same
> respect that you would expect for your own information.  If you have
> received it in error, we apologise, and ask that you contact the CSL
> sender immediately and erase it from your computer. Thank you for your
> co-operation.
>
> Further information on confidentiality of our communications, can be
> found at http://www.csl.gov.uk/email.htm
>
> _______________________________________________
> UKbirdnet mailing list
> ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
> http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet 


_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

The open mix of scrub and open heather in Scandinavia where soils are 
too wet or too thin to allow total tree cover these habitats have a more 
diverse species mix but a relatively low density of grouse. this is what 
much of our moors would become without burning and predator control.

			Paul
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Irving	                        Phone:  
Field Biologist/EBG1		        GTN:    5129
Central Science Laboratory              Fax:    
Sand Hutton                             Email:  p.irving AT csl.gov.uk
York YO41 1LZ                           Web:    http://www.csl.gov.uk
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclaimer
The information contained in this message may include privileged,
proprietary or confidential information. Please treat it with the same
respect that you would expect for your own information.  If you have
received it in error, we apologise, and ask that you contact the CSL
sender immediately and erase it from your computer. Thank you for your
co-operation.

Further information on confidentiality of our communications, can be
found at http://www.csl.gov.uk/email.htm

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

...can someone tell me what habitat is used by grouse [and the other species 
which use grouse moors] elsewhere... although 'our' grouse is considered by 
some to be speciated surely it shares habitat need with the continental 
equivalent where, so far as I know, there are no 'grouse' moors?

bo
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Caley Kevin" 
To: "Paul Irving" ; "Caley Kevin" 
; "UKBirdnet" 
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: [UKbirdnet] Only a ban on grouse shooting


> Hi Paul,
> As one in the know, then, how are the 'grouse' moors managed in areas
> where shooting doesn't occur?  Are there enough controlled fires
> produced to allow for new growth, even in 'remote' areas?  Are there
> enough wildlife corridors put in position to allow grouse (and other
> wildlife, like the insects) to continue breeding in the future?
>
> In fact, are there any papers out there on this anyone knows about?
> Would be interesting (and useful)! Particularly as, from what I
> understand, SSSI's aren't (or, possibly, weren't) that well protected -
> sure you couldn't build on them, but ploughing them up, while now made
> illegal, was something that could potentially have been done, and
> leaving them to degrade, rather than conserving / preserving their
> individual environments seems to be quite commonplace, in practice if
> not on paper.
>
> Obviously, this is different from what's been happening on our heaths
> and downlands, where the habitats were left to the rabbits (until the
> myxamatosis) and subsequent scrub & urban developments.
>
> Hm.... starting to sound like a 'UK.Conservation' chatgroup!
>
> Kevin
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Irving [mailto:p.irving AT csl.gov.uk]
> Sent: 05 December 2007 09:47
> To: Caley Kevin; UKBirdnet
> Subject: Re: [UKbirdnet] Only a ban on grouse shooting
>
> As some body who has long been involved with raptors on grouse moors
> whilst the deaths of white tailed eagles on moors due to being shot or
> poisoned( See SRG site) is absolutely appalling it is hardly surprising.
>
> These people in "Defence of their sport" kill eagles of both species,
> harriers, peregrines and absolutely hundreds of buzzards every year,
> they are to put it bluntly a national embarrassment. the real scandal is
> not just that they do this but that in 99% of cases they get away with
> it and somehow area allowed to continue. In the long term unless there
> is major change their sport has no future as a result. The habitat
> argument is wrong most of the habitat is protected as SPA or SSSI so in
> theory is not reliant on shooting. It would serve them right if we
> banned their pastime and continued to make them pay for the management.
> There is no justification for what they do and that includes the
> "Langholm Report" if they cannot stay within the law why should we
> tolerate them the price our raptors pay is too high.
>
> Paul
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Paul Irving                         Phone:  
> Field Biologist/EBG1         GTN:    5129
> Central Science Laboratory              Fax:    
> Sand Hutton                             Email:  p.irving AT csl.gov.uk
> York YO41 1LZ                           Web:    http://www.csl.gov.uk
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Disclaimer
> The information contained in this message may include privileged,
> proprietary or confidential information. Please treat it with the same
> respect that you would expect for your own information.  If you have
> received it in error, we apologise, and ask that you contact the CSL
> sender immediately and erase it from your computer. Thank you for your
> co-operation.
>
> Further information on confidentiality of our communications, can be
> found at http://www.csl.gov.uk/email.htm
>
> _______________________________________________
> UKbirdnet mailing list
> ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
> http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet 

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

For all keepers currently working in the UK except for sparrowhawk that 
was not fully protected until 1964 ALL taptors have been fully protected 
for ALL their working lives they know exactly what the law says and 
could not give a stuff as long as the detection rate for actionable 
evidence stays so low. I have been told on several occasions keepers 
persecute because they are told to so lets see lots of landowners and 
agents in court for criminal conspiracy or better still tell them if 
your house is not in order in 5 years you are banned. Pauls job argument 
does not hold there are less than 2000 grouse keepers and when analysed 
the financial argument does not hold either ( on the basis of their own 
figures )

			Paul
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Irving	                        Phone:  
Field Biologist/EBG1		        GTN:    5129
Central Science Laboratory              Fax:    
Sand Hutton                             Email:  p.irving AT csl.gov.uk
York YO41 1LZ                           Web:    http://www.csl.gov.uk
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclaimer
The information contained in this message may include privileged,
proprietary or confidential information. Please treat it with the same
respect that you would expect for your own information.  If you have
received it in error, we apologise, and ask that you contact the CSL
sender immediately and erase it from your computer. Thank you for your
co-operation.

Further information on confidentiality of our communications, can be
found at http://www.csl.gov.uk/email.htm

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Hi Paul,
As one in the know, then, how are the 'grouse' moors managed in areas
where shooting doesn't occur?  Are there enough controlled fires
produced to allow for new growth, even in 'remote' areas?  Are there
enough wildlife corridors put in position to allow grouse (and other
wildlife, like the insects) to continue breeding in the future?

In fact, are there any papers out there on this anyone knows about?
Would be interesting (and useful)! Particularly as, from what I
understand, SSSI's aren't (or, possibly, weren't) that well protected -
sure you couldn't build on them, but ploughing them up, while now made
illegal, was something that could potentially have been done, and
leaving them to degrade, rather than conserving / preserving their
individual environments seems to be quite commonplace, in practice if
not on paper.

Obviously, this is different from what's been happening on our heaths
and downlands, where the habitats were left to the rabbits (until the
myxamatosis) and subsequent scrub & urban developments.

Hm.... starting to sound like a 'UK.Conservation' chatgroup!

Kevin

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Irving [mailto:p.irving AT csl.gov.uk] 
Sent: 05 December 2007 09:47
To: Caley Kevin; UKBirdnet
Subject: Re: [UKbirdnet] Only a ban on grouse shooting

As some body who has long been involved with raptors on grouse moors
whilst the deaths of white tailed eagles on moors due to being shot or
poisoned( See SRG site) is absolutely appalling it is hardly surprising.

These people in "Defence of their sport" kill eagles of both species,
harriers, peregrines and absolutely hundreds of buzzards every year,
they are to put it bluntly a national embarrassment. the real scandal is
not just that they do this but that in 99% of cases they get away with
it and somehow area allowed to continue. In the long term unless there
is major change their sport has no future as a result. The habitat
argument is wrong most of the habitat is protected as SPA or SSSI so in
theory is not reliant on shooting. It would serve them right if we
banned their pastime and continued to make them pay for the management. 
There is no justification for what they do and that includes the
"Langholm Report" if they cannot stay within the law why should we
tolerate them the price our raptors pay is too high.

			Paul
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Irving	                        Phone:  
Field Biologist/EBG1		        GTN:    5129
Central Science Laboratory              Fax:    
Sand Hutton                             Email:  p.irving AT csl.gov.uk
York YO41 1LZ                           Web:    http://www.csl.gov.uk
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclaimer
The information contained in this message may include privileged,
proprietary or confidential information. Please treat it with the same
respect that you would expect for your own information.  If you have
received it in error, we apologise, and ask that you contact the CSL
sender immediately and erase it from your computer. Thank you for your
co-operation.

Further information on confidentiality of our communications, can be
found at http://www.csl.gov.uk/email.htm

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

As some body who has long been involved with raptors on grouse moors 
whilst the deaths of white tailed eagles on moors due to being shot or 
poisoned( See SRG site) is absolutely appalling it is hardly surprising. 
These people in "Defence of their sport" kill eagles of both species, 
harriers, peregrines and absolutely hundreds of buzzards every year, 
they are to put it bluntly a national embarrassment. the real scandal is 
not just that they do this but that in 99% of cases they get away with 
it and somehow area allowed to continue. In the long term unless there 
is major change their sport has no future as a result. The habitat 
argument is wrong most of the habitat is protected as SPA or SSSI so in 
theory is not reliant on shooting. It would serve them right if we 
banned their pastime and continued to make them pay for the management. 
There is no justification for what they do and that includes the 
"Langholm Report" if they cannot stay within the law why should we 
tolerate them the price our raptors pay is too high.

			Paul
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Irving	                        Phone:  
Field Biologist/EBG1		        GTN:    5129
Central Science Laboratory              Fax:    
Sand Hutton                             Email:  p.irving AT csl.gov.uk
York YO41 1LZ                           Web:    http://www.csl.gov.uk
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclaimer
The information contained in this message may include privileged,
proprietary or confidential information. Please treat it with the same
respect that you would expect for your own information.  If you have
received it in error, we apologise, and ask that you contact the CSL
sender immediately and erase it from your computer. Thank you for your
co-operation.

Further information on confidentiality of our communications, can be
found at http://www.csl.gov.uk/email.htm
_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

 Kevin I am not at all convinced that the advantages you and the young rascal 
in Italy claim grouse moor management deliver, outweigh the downsides such as 
the persecution of birds and other animals of prey. If artificial management is 
the only way to ensure the survival of Red Grouse than it is indeed a matter of 
national and international importance. So why not make it a responsibility of 
the nation instead of leaving it in the hands of cowardice harrier shooters and 
the likes! As for practical ideas: I rather see bands of young people carry out 
the managing of heathlands in a proper way than to see them binge drinking and 
harm themselves. Surely that can be arranged? 

  Norman

 Kevin Caley wrote:>How would you go about saving the habitat if this happened, 
when the main reason for its continuing existence disappears? I think 
grouse-shooting brings in big money, at least in the UK. The habitat is altered 
by the grouse moor managers so that there is enough new growth for the grouse 
and the insects the chicks feed on. 


 Even if a ban were possible, the RSPB would only be able to save a certain 
amount of the moorland, making the survival of an already endangered habitat 
type even more precarious. I suspect that to a large extent, the RSPB wouldn't 
be able to afford looking after the amount of land required to save the grouse, 
the specialised insects etc found there. So, I think on this occasion this 
could be regarded as a bit of fantasy (unless you have some sound practical 
ideas, Norman). 





----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 From: ukbirdnet-bounces AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk 
[mailto:ukbirdnet-bounces AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Norman D.van Swelm 

    Sent: 04 December 2007 14:57
    To: Paul Tout; UKBN
    Subject: [UKbirdnet] Only a ban on grouse shooting


 can end the illegal killing of birds of prey so that is what the RSPB must aim 
for! 

    Norman
      Paul Tout:

       http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2221331,00.html

      Police investigate alleged shooting of sea eagle
 A rare sea eagle has allegedly been shot on a grouse moor in eastern Scotland, 
four months after it was released into the wild. Tayside police said the 
killing - an offence punishable by six months in prison - had been witnessed 
but no carcass had yet been found. The estate involved in the investigation had 
been "at the centre of concerns of illegal practices in the past few years", 
the force said. It is the 60th confirmed or suspected case of bird of prey 
persecution in Scotland this year. The bird was one of 15 introduced from 
Norway in August as part of a Scotland-wide reintroduction programme. 


      http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=

      Rare sea eagle 'killed three months after its release'
 IAN JOHNSTON ENVIRONMENT CORRESPONDENT ( 
//=0;i-=2){d+=unescape('%'+e.substr(i,2));};document.write(d); //]]> 
ijohnston AT scotsman.com) 

 A SEA eagle from Norway which was released on the east coast of Scotland is 
believed to have been deliberately killed on a grouse moor, police said 
yesterday. 

 Wildlife crime officers said an informant had told them the white-tailed sea 
eagle - one of 15 set free in Fife in August as part of a reintroduction 
programme - had been killed on an estate in Angus. The informant had also named 
the person responsible. 


 The eagle's body had not been found, but a tracking device fitted to the bird 
had stopped giving out a signal, suggesting it had been disabled. 

 The last native sea eagle was shot in 1918. A reintroduction programme began 
in the 1970s on the west coast, where there are now 42 breeding pairs. 

      Alan Stewart, Tayside Police's wildlife and environment officer, said: 
 "It is really scandalous. Here we are trying to reintroduce birds that have 
been killed off 100 years ago and the allegation is one has been killed 
already, just a few months into the release programme." 

 He added: "Most shooting estates give us no cause for concern, but the 
particular estate named by the informant has been at the centre of concerns 
over illegal practices in the past few years." 

 The 12 remaining Norwegian birds - two were killed on power lines - are now 
spread from St Fergus in Aberdeenshire to Loch Leven and Perthshire. 

 Alex Hogg, the chairman of the Scottish Gamekeepers Association, doubted 
gamekeepers were involved, as eagles caused no problem on grouse moors. 

 But he added: "I thought this would lead to trouble. As soon as one of these 
birds is found dead, the finger gets pointed at a shooting estate." 

 Michael Russell, Scotland's environment minister, said that he was "deeply 
disturbed to hear reports that one of these magnificent birds has come to 
deliberate harm". 

 Stuart Housden, the director of RSPB Scotland, said: "We are shocked and 
saddened that the gift of sea eagles from the people of Norway to Scotland 
should be blighted by what appears to be a deliberate act of illegal 
persecution by this selfish estate." 

 . THE Scotsman is committed to helping the Scottish Society for the Prevention 
of Cruelty to Animals catch those responsible for killing birds of prey and 
other wildlife. Information about wildlife crimes can be passed to police via 
the National Wildlife Crime Unit in North Berwick on  





 This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment 
may still contain software viruses, which could damage your computer system: 
you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the 
University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation. 
_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Leaving 'us' to our 'financial discussion' is just the sort of luxury that 
lunatic fringe enjoys. No discussion. No solutions. Just a long inchoate 
scream. 


One can indeed distinguish differences in resource management sustainability 
between 'the uncouth peasants of Southern and Eastern 

Europe' (whose hunting is based largely on migrant avifauna without regard for 
the state of the population and with supporting habitats beyond their control) 
and the 'traditional fun' enjoyed by the uncouth gentry in the North and West 
(based on resident populations managed, along with their habitat throughout 
their life-cycles). 


I could go toe-to-toe with Comrade Conlin (ex-forces IIRR... but then so is 
Billy Bragg) with talk of 'robber barons' and 'come the revolution', but this 
would be, as the Italians say, akin to discussing the sex of angels.... pretty 
bloody pointless. 


P.

Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 18:24:32 +0100
From: proact-campaigns AT online.de
To: proact-campaigns AT online.de
CC: ukbirdnet AT dcs.bbk.ac.uk
Subject: Re: [UKbirdnet] Only a ban on grouse shooting






  


Sorry - I'm obviously in the wrong "Country Life"
discussion here. 



I'll revert to unfairly interfering in the internal matters of other
countries by depriving the uncouth peasants of Southern and Eastern
Europe of their traditional fun, and let money, class and influence
rule in my own country of birth.



Why oh why did we abolish fox-hunting? We lost a potential world market
there! Might have raised a few pounds for upkeep of hedges for the
unspeakable to jump over. Instead we have effectively reduced the
potential provision of habitat for common countryside fauna and flora.
What were we thinking about?



I'll leave you to your financial discussion and kow-towing to the
robber barons (that's how they got the land in the first place); but
....... isn't HMTQ the biggest landowner in UK .... now there's a
useful job for her and the rest of the family - setting an example and
securing the future of the nation's resources.



On the other hand - just forget it - and fingers crossed that HM
Constabulary nab a nominal quota of working class poachers to keep the
nation happy. We don't want any (more) constitutional calamaties


David





_________________________________________________________________
Explore the seven wonders of the world
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=7+wonders+world&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Actually, David, I agree with you to an extent - why SHOULD
grouse-shooting  (and pheasant-shooting for that matter) be allowed to
continue?  I for one am emotionally against this, but pragmatism has to
see that not everyone - in fact rather fewer than should be - have the
wildlife issue at their centre of universe in terms of survival and
sustainability, which really gets my goat.  Also, the government should
show greater responsiblity for these 'wild' (actually managed)
areas..... As someone from the RPSB has said to me recently
'conservation doesn't appear to be one of the prime objectives of the
current government, to say the least'.  I think you'll also find that
some members of the Royal family do do a lot for conservation, but I
take your point, and perhaps they do need to get their act together a
bit more than they have currently!
 
However, if you are to ban bird-shooting and other blood sports (like
fishing ;-)), you have to be prepared for the consequences.  One of
those consequences, whether we like it or not, will be the destruction
of much of the habitat either through it just being ignored and allowed
to develop into something else or through its 'development' into
something politically more profitable, such as sheep-farming (as
mentioned by Paul) or - dare I say it - house-building or even
air-turbine 'farming'.  Look at set aside, for instance.  Whilst it was
profitable t odo so, set aside schemes appeared like wildlfire, but now
that umbrella scheme has gone, and people are looking to replough those
areas, even if a few farmers now appear in the enlightened fraternity /
sorority - however, there aren't enough.  You would need to put
something in place that financially enables the continuation of managed
burning on private land, that enables other landowners - including
English Nature - to bring in additional revenue so they can preserve
more of our land, rather than having to retract their activities just so
they can preserve a few places, etc.  Basically if you don't do this,
you'd be looking at triarging the UK countryside, and I for one am not
prepared to see our already battered environment destroyed even more,
possibly to a point of unsustainability, and the English countryside
going further down the route of Disneyisation that we're seeing at the
moment.
 
Kevin


________________________________

	From: ukbirdnet-bounces AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
[mailto:ukbirdnet-bounces AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Proact
Campaigns
	Sent: 04 December 2007 17:25
	To: proact-campaigns AT online.de
	Cc: UKBN
	Subject: Re: [UKbirdnet] Only a ban on grouse shooting
	
	
	Sorry - I'm obviously in the wrong "Country Life" discussion
here. 
	
	I'll revert to unfairly interfering in the internal matters of
other countries by depriving the uncouth peasants of Southern and
Eastern Europe of their traditional fun, and let money, class and
influence rule in my own country of birth.
	
	Why oh why did we abolish fox-hunting? We lost a potential world
market there! Might have raised a few pounds for upkeep of hedges for
the unspeakable to jump over. Instead we have effectively reduced the
potential provision of habitat for common countryside fauna and flora.
What were we thinking about?
	
	I'll leave you to your financial discussion and kow-towing to
the robber barons (that's how they got the land in the first place); but
....... isn't HMTQ the biggest landowner in UK .... now there's a useful
job for her and the rest of the family - setting an example and securing
the future of the nation's resources.
	
	On the other hand - just forget it - and fingers crossed that HM
Constabulary nab a nominal quota of working class poachers to keep the
nation happy. We don't want any (more) constitutional calamaties
	
	David
	


This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
may still contain software viruses, which could damage your computer system:
you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Bo, yes I agree.  Game-keepers - and their employers - need to be
educated.  I think the police would love to do more, but they are
overstretched with all the bureaucracy they have to deal with which just
shows how tangled up this is.  Also, someone suggested privately that
perhaps the estates in question should be banned from hunting for (at
least) a year as well, although that's more a criminal policy matter,
but it might hit the idea home!
 
But, as you say, this is all short term 'fixing' when there is a much
greater issue that needs to be resolved, not least how we can safeguard
the land when the bans finally do come into place, if we accept / wish
that this is the way things will eventually go.


________________________________

	From: ukbirdnet-bounces AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
[mailto:ukbirdnet-bounces AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk] On Behalf Of bo beolens
	Sent: 04 December 2007 16:20
	To: proact-campaigns AT online.de
	Cc: UKBN
	Subject: Re: [UKbirdnet] Only a ban on grouse shooting
	
	
	I wish this was straightforward... I too abhor shooting of birds
raised for the gun but I also acknowledge that, in some places, like
here in Kent, the rearing of pheasants for overpaid green wellie and
Berber wearing people to despatch as they speed in in their Range Rovers
at the weekends, has had brilliant knock-on effects for passerines and,
ironically, over-wintering raptors.
	 
	I think we need to concentrate on attacking the culture of
game-keeping - whereby game keepers believe, and are encouraged to
believe 'culling' and sometimes ordered to, 'cull' raptors to save their
game birds for the gun.
	 
	The outrage at Sandringham was the same as this outrage in
Scotland... 
	 
	...what really really makes the steam jet from my ears is that
these selfish bast*rds are stealing form the millions of us who love
birds and definitely champion the Hen Harrier over the captive bred
gamebird and those who think it sporting to fill them full of shot.
	 
	'Wildlife Crime' is see as on a par with motoring offences by
many rather than the deliberate destruction of our heritage. I think it
totally obvious that stealing from one person is a far lesser crime than
stealing from the many. 
	 
	There are many thousands of 'ordinary' people who 'rough shoot'
pigeons, rabbits et al and the majority of them would be our allies in
outrage against the slaughter of birds of prey who they will see as
legitimate competitors rather than enemies... I'd guess this would be
true of most wildfowlers too. 
	 
	I hate ALL killing for sport and feel it is something we should
be quietly campaigning against but the problem right now that needs
addressing is this high-handed and selfish persecution of raptors.
	 
	bo
	 
	 

		----- Original Message ----- 
		From: Proact Campaigns
  
		Cc: UKBN   
		Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 4:01 PM
		Subject: Re: [UKbirdnet] Only a ban on grouse shooting

		I see no requirement or justification for any form of
bird shooting in the United Kingdom in this day and age - even if they
are reared for the gun (which is pretty sick when you think about it).
		
		The same goes for the rest of Europe as well. 
		
		Why must a reactionary minority be permitted (indeed in
some case subsidised) to pursue this so-called sport at the expense
(financial and resources) ofthe rest of us? 
		
		David
		--
		David Conlin
		Proact International www.proact-campaigns.net/team
joining costs nothing ..... doing nothing costs birds
		Committee Against Bird Slaughter (CABS)
http://www.komitee.de/en/ .... actively operating against illegal
hunting across Europe
		Skype: david_conlin  


		Norman D.van Swelm schrieb: 

			can end the illegal killing of birds of prey so
that is what the RSPB must aim for!
			Norman

				Paul Tout:
				 
	
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2221331,00.html

				Police investigate alleged shooting of
sea eagle
				A rare sea eagle has allegedly been shot
on a grouse moor in eastern Scotland, four months after it was released
into the wild. Tayside police said the killing - an offence punishable
by six months in prison - had been witnessed but no carcass had yet been
found. The estate involved in the investigation had been "at the centre
of concerns of illegal practices in the past few years", the force said.
It is the 60th confirmed or suspected case of bird of prey persecution
in Scotland this year. The bird was one of 15 introduced from Norway in
August as part of a Scotland-wide reintroduction programme.
				
				
				

		
________________________________


		

		_______________________________________________
		UKbirdnet mailing list
		ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
		http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet
		


This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
may still contain software viruses, which could damage your computer system:
you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Sorry - I'm obviously in the wrong "Country Life" discussion here.

I'll revert to unfairly interfering in the internal matters of other 
countries by depriving the uncouth peasants of Southern and Eastern 
Europe of their traditional fun, and let money, class and influence rule 
in my own country of birth.

Why oh why did we abolish fox-hunting? We lost a potential world market 
there! Might have raised a few pounds for upkeep of hedges for the 
unspeakable to jump over. Instead we have effectively reduced the 
potential provision of habitat for common countryside fauna and flora. 
What were we thinking about?

I'll leave you to your financial discussion and kow-towing to the robber 
barons (that's how they got the land in the first place); but ....... 
isn't HMTQ the biggest landowner in UK .... now there's a useful job for 
her and the rest of the family - setting an example and securing the 
future of the nation's resources.

On the other hand - just forget it - and fingers crossed that HM 
Constabulary nab a nominal quota of working class poachers to keep the 
nation happy. We don't want any (more) constitutional calamaties

David

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

I wish this was straightforward... I too abhor shooting of birds raised for the 
gun but I also acknowledge that, in some places, like here in Kent, the rearing 
of pheasants for overpaid green wellie and Berber wearing people to despatch as 
they speed in in their Range Rovers at the weekends, has had brilliant knock-on 
effects for passerines and, ironically, over-wintering raptors. 


I think we need to concentrate on attacking the culture of game-keeping - 
whereby game keepers believe, and are encouraged to believe 'culling' and 
sometimes ordered to, 'cull' raptors to save their game birds for the gun. 


The outrage at Sandringham was the same as this outrage in Scotland... 

...what really really makes the steam jet from my ears is that these selfish 
bast*rds are stealing form the millions of us who love birds and definitely 
champion the Hen Harrier over the captive bred gamebird and those who think it 
sporting to fill them full of shot. 


'Wildlife Crime' is see as on a par with motoring offences by many rather than 
the deliberate destruction of our heritage. I think it totally obvious that 
stealing from one person is a far lesser crime than stealing from the many. 


There are many thousands of 'ordinary' people who 'rough shoot' pigeons, 
rabbits et al and the majority of them would be our allies in outrage against 
the slaughter of birds of prey who they will see as legitimate competitors 
rather than enemies... I'd guess this would be true of most wildfowlers too. 


I hate ALL killing for sport and feel it is something we should be quietly 
campaigning against but the problem right now that needs addressing is this 
high-handed and selfish persecution of raptors. 


bo


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Proact Campaigns 
  Cc: UKBN 
  Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 4:01 PM
  Subject: Re: [UKbirdnet] Only a ban on grouse shooting


 I see no requirement or justification for any form of bird shooting in the 
United Kingdom in this day and age - even if they are reared for the gun (which 
is pretty sick when you think about it). 


  The same goes for the rest of Europe as well. 

 Why must a reactionary minority be permitted (indeed in some case subsidised) 
to pursue this so-called sport at the expense (financial and resources) ofthe 
rest of us? 


David
--
David Conlin
Proact International www.proact-campaigns.net/team joining costs nothing ..... 
doing nothing costs birds 

Committee Against Bird Slaughter (CABS) http://www.komitee.de/en/ .... actively 
operating against illegal hunting across Europe 

Skype: david_conlin  


  Norman D.van Swelm schrieb: 
 can end the illegal killing of birds of prey so that is what the RSPB must aim 
for! 

    Norman
      Paul Tout:

       http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2221331,00.html

      Police investigate alleged shooting of sea eagle
 A rare sea eagle has allegedly been shot on a grouse moor in eastern Scotland, 
four months after it was released into the wild. Tayside police said the 
killing - an offence punishable by six months in prison - had been witnessed 
but no carcass had yet been found. The estate involved in the investigation had 
been "at the centre of concerns of illegal practices in the past few years", 
the force said. It is the 60th confirmed or suspected case of bird of prey 
persecution in Scotland this year. The bird was one of 15 introduced from 
Norway in August as part of a Scotland-wide reintroduction programme. 






------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  UKbirdnet mailing list
  ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
  http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

I tend to agree with Kevin. No... I don't 'tend to'... I completely and 
wholeheartedly endorse his position. There are something like 2,000,000 acres 
of maintained grouse moor in UK (about 8000km2). The sites hold a substantial 
proportion of the UK populations of a wide range of species (twite, ring ouzel, 
golden plover, dunlin*, merlin and black grouse to name but five.) The 
landscape (technically a fire-maintained subclimax) is artificially created and 
sustained and would either rapidly revert to birch scrub (the least damaging 
option) or be transferred to the next most profitable option which at the 
moment would be sheepwalk (so the moorland would be fertilised with inorganic 
fertilisers to promote grass growth), or planted up for woodchip biofuels, 
forestry or carbon offsets. All three options would lead to a drastic loss in 
biodiversity... not just birds but also reptiles, amphibians as well as 
butterfly and moth species threatened by global warming and rare arctic-alpine 
plants. 


If you aren't going to ban land-use changes you would probably have to come up 
with something like �100,000,000 a year to cover the opportunity costs to moor 
owners, hoteliers, restauranteurs , car hire, internal air travel etc. that 
would arise from banning grouse shooting. If you merely 'nationalised' the 
moors and paid the owners the sums needed to cover the costs of habitat 
maintenance you could probably get by with a tenth of that sum but about 5,000 
jobs would be lost in communities already hard-done-by and struggling to 
survive in the 21st century. 


Bird of prey protection has come a long way in a short time and some species 
have increased considerably. Others (such as Hen Harrier and Sea Eagle) which 
are still threatened in the UK are doing well elsewhere in Europe and are no 
longer in any danger at an international level. I get as angry as the next 
birder when I read about the killing of raptors, but unlike Norman and other 
dangerous lunatics (both on this list and off it), I'm not prepared (by 
supporting the banning of grouse shooting and other 'blood sports') to 
sacrifice on the altar of political correctness a substantial part of what 
survives of UK's biodiversity outside nature reserves. And do you know what? I 
don't think the RSPB are prepared to do so either! 


Paul Tout

* of the subspecies so beloved by NvS

Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 15:38:48 +0000
From: Kevin.Caley AT nottingham.ac.uk
To: Norman.vanswelm AT wxs.nl; tout AT xnet.it; ukbirdnet AT dcs.bbk.ac.uk
Subject: Re: [UKbirdnet] Only a ban on grouse shooting










How 
would you go about saving the habitat if this happened, when the main reason 
for 

its continuing existence disappears? I think grouse-shooting brings in big 
money, at least in the UK.  The habitat is altered by the grouse moor 
managers so that there is enough new growth for the grouse and the insects the 
chicks feed on.  
 
Even 
if a ban were possible, the RSPB would only be able to save a certain amount of 

the moorland, making the survival of an already endangered habitat type even 
more precarious. I suspect that to a large extent, the RSPB wouldn't be able to 

afford looking after the amount of land required to save the grouse, the 
specialised insects etc found there.  So, I think on this occasion this 
could be regarded as a bit of fantasy (unless you have some sound practical 
ideas, Norman).
 
Kevin


  
  
  From: ukbirdnet-bounces AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk 
  [mailto:ukbirdnet-bounces AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Norman D.van 
  Swelm
Sent: 04 December 2007 14:57
To: Paul Tout; 
  UKBN
Subject: [UKbirdnet] Only a ban on grouse 
  shooting


  
  can end the illegal killing of birds of prey so that is 
  what the RSPB must aim for!
  Norman
  
    Paul Tout:
     
     http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2221331,00.html
    
Police 
    investigate alleged shooting of sea eagle
A rare sea eagle has 
 allegedly been shot on a grouse moor in eastern Scotland, four months after 

 it was released into the wild. Tayside police said the killing - an offence 

    punishable by six months in prison - had been witnessed but no carcass had 
    yet been found. The estate involved in the investigation had been "at the 
    centre of concerns of illegal practices in the past few years", the force 
 said. It is the 60th confirmed or suspected case of bird of prey persecution 

    in Scotland this year. The bird was one of 15 introduced from Norway in 
    August as part of a Scotland-wide reintroduction 
    programme.

http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=

    Rare sea eagle 'killed three months after its release'
    IAN JOHNSTON ENVIRONMENT CORRESPONDENT ( 
    //
_________________________________________________________________
Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger�

http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=wlmailtagline 
_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Caley Kevin wrote:
> How would you go about saving the habita if this happened, when the 
> main reason for its continuing existence disappears?
The tail mustn't be allowed to wag the dog! Scottish moors (as other 
unspoilt natural resources) belong to all of us - and our descendants - 
regardless of whose name is on the bill of property.

It probably is the case that moorland habitat has been preserved because 
of grouse shooting. We are however living in the 21st Century and have 
hopefully learnt by now that ALL of our remaining natural resources 
require urgent conservation. We can surely protect such habitat by law 
and still phase out this unnecessary practice of killing other organisms 
for fun or other murky motives.

> I think grouse-shooting brings in big money, at least in the UK.  The 
> habitat is altered by the grouse moor managers so that there is enough 
> new growth for the grouse and the insects the chicks feed on. 
>
Money isn't everything - and I believe that nature is a better warden 
than a gamekeeper - if she is left alone. 'Altering' and 'management' 
are ultimately bad words in my book and are only mealy-mouthed ways of 
saying 'making cost-effective' or 'interfering with'.
> Even if a ban were possible, the RSPB would only be able to save a 
> certain amount of the moorland, making the survival of an already 
> endangered habitat type even more precarious.

The RSPB is not the only custodian of our countryside and natural 
resources. We spend a lot of time and money electing politicians to do 
just that.
> I suspect that to a large extent, the RSPB wouldn't be able to afford 
> looking after the amount of land required to save the grouse, the 
> specialised insects etc found there.  So, I think on this occasion 
> this could be regarded as a bit of fantasy (unless you have some sound 
> practical ideas, Norman).
See last comment.

David_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

I see no requirement or justification for any form of bird shooting in 
the United Kingdom in this day and age - even if they are reared for the 
gun (which is pretty sick when you think about it).

The same goes for the rest of Europe as well.

Why must a reactionary minority be permitted (indeed in some case 
subsidised) to pursue this so-called sport at the expense (financial and 
resources) ofthe rest of us?

David
--
David Conlin
Proact International www.proact-campaigns.net/team joining costs nothing ..... 
doing nothing costs birds 

Committee Against Bird Slaughter (CABS) http://www.komitee.de/en/ .... actively 
operating against illegal hunting across Europe 

Skype: david_conlin  



Norman D.van Swelm schrieb:
> can end the illegal killing of birds of prey so that is what the RSPB 
> must aim for!
> Norman
>
>     Paul Tout:
>      
>      http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2221331,00.html
>
>     *Police investigate alleged shooting of sea eagle*
>     A rare sea eagle has allegedly been shot on a grouse moor in
>     eastern Scotland, four months after it was released into the wild.
>     Tayside police said the killing - an offence punishable by six
>     months in prison - had been witnessed but no carcass had yet been
>     found. The estate involved in the investigation had been "at the
>     centre of concerns of illegal practices in the past few years",
>     the force said. It is the 60th confirmed or suspected case of bird
>     of prey persecution in Scotland this year. The bird was one of 15
>     introduced from Norway in August as part of a Scotland-wide
>     reintroduction programme.
>
>_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

How would you go about saving the habitat if this happened, when the
main reason for its continuing existence disappears? I think
grouse-shooting brings in big money, at least in the UK.  The habitat is
altered by the grouse moor managers so that there is enough new growth
for the grouse and the insects the chicks feed on.  
 
Even if a ban were possible, the RSPB would only be able to save a
certain amount of the moorland, making the survival of an already
endangered habitat type even more precarious. I suspect that to a large
extent, the RSPB wouldn't be able to afford looking after the amount of
land required to save the grouse, the specialised insects etc found
there.  So, I think on this occasion this could be regarded as a bit of
fantasy (unless you have some sound practical ideas, Norman).
 
Kevin


________________________________

	From: ukbirdnet-bounces AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
[mailto:ukbirdnet-bounces AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Norman D.van
Swelm
	Sent: 04 December 2007 14:57
	To: Paul Tout; UKBN
	Subject: [UKbirdnet] Only a ban on grouse shooting
	
	
	can end the illegal killing of birds of prey so that is what the
RSPB must aim for!
	Norman

		Paul Tout:
		 
	
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2221331,00.html
		
		Police investigate alleged shooting of sea eagle
		A rare sea eagle has allegedly been shot on a grouse
moor in eastern Scotland, four months after it was released into the
wild. Tayside police said the killing - an offence punishable by six
months in prison - had been witnessed but no carcass had yet been found.
The estate involved in the investigation had been "at the centre of
concerns of illegal practices in the past few years", the force said. It
is the 60th confirmed or suspected case of bird of prey persecution in
Scotland this year. The bird was one of 15 introduced from Norway in
August as part of a Scotland-wide reintroduction programme.
		
		http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=
		

		Rare sea eagle 'killed three months after its release'

		IAN JOHNSTON ENVIRONMENT CORRESPONDENT (
//=0;i-=2){d+=unescape('%'+e.substr(i,2));};document.write(d); //]]>
ijohnston AT scotsman.com
 ) 
		A SEA eagle from Norway which was released on the east
coast of Scotland is believed to have been deliberately killed on a
grouse moor, police said yesterday. 
		Wildlife crime officers said an informant had told them
the white-tailed sea eagle - one of 15 set free in Fife in August as
part of a reintroduction programme - had been killed on an estate in
Angus. The informant had also named the person responsible. 
		

		The eagle's body had not been found, but a tracking
device fitted to the bird had stopped giving out a signal, suggesting it
had been disabled. 
		The last native sea eagle was shot in 1918. A
reintroduction programme began in the 1970s on the west coast, where
there are now 42 breeding pairs. 
		Alan Stewart, Tayside Police's wildlife and environment
officer, said: 
		"It is really scandalous. Here we are trying to
reintroduce birds that have been killed off 100 years ago and the
allegation is one has been killed already, just a few months into the
release programme." 
		He added: "Most shooting estates give us no cause for
concern, but the particular estate named by the informant has been at
the centre of concerns over illegal practices in the past few years." 
		The 12 remaining Norwegian birds - two were killed on
power lines - are now spread from St Fergus in Aberdeenshire to Loch
Leven and Perthshire. 
		Alex Hogg, the chairman of the Scottish Gamekeepers
Association, doubted gamekeepers were involved, as eagles caused no
problem on grouse moors. 
		But he added: "I thought this would lead to trouble. As
soon as one of these birds is found dead, the finger gets pointed at a
shooting estate." 
		Michael Russell, Scotland's environment minister, said
that he was "deeply disturbed to hear reports that one of these
magnificent birds has come to deliberate harm". 
		Stuart Housden, the director of RSPB Scotland, said: "We
are shocked and saddened that the gift of sea eagles from the people of
Norway to Scotland should be blighted by what appears to be a deliberate
act of illegal persecution by this selfish estate." 
		* THE Scotsman is committed to helping the Scottish
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals catch those responsible
for killing birds of prey and other wildlife. Information about wildlife
crimes can be passed to police via the National Wildlife Crime Unit in
North Berwick on 
		
		


This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
may still contain software viruses, which could damage your computer system:
you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

can end the illegal killing of birds of prey so that is what the RSPB must aim 
for! 

Norman
  Paul Tout:

   http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2221331,00.html

  Police investigate alleged shooting of sea eagle
 A rare sea eagle has allegedly been shot on a grouse moor in eastern Scotland, 
four months after it was released into the wild. Tayside police said the 
killing - an offence punishable by six months in prison - had been witnessed 
but no carcass had yet been found. The estate involved in the investigation had 
been "at the centre of concerns of illegal practices in the past few years", 
the force said. It is the 60th confirmed or suspected case of bird of prey 
persecution in Scotland this year. The bird was one of 15 introduced from 
Norway in August as part of a Scotland-wide reintroduction programme. 


  http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=

  Rare sea eagle 'killed three months after its release'
  IAN JOHNSTON ENVIRONMENT CORRESPONDENT (ijohnston AT scotsman.com) 
 A SEA eagle from Norway which was released on the east coast of Scotland is 
believed to have been deliberately killed on a grouse moor, police said 
yesterday. 

 Wildlife crime officers said an informant had told them the white-tailed sea 
eagle - one of 15 set free in Fife in August as part of a reintroduction 
programme - had been killed on an estate in Angus. The informant had also named 
the person responsible. 


 The eagle's body had not been found, but a tracking device fitted to the bird 
had stopped giving out a signal, suggesting it had been disabled. 

 The last native sea eagle was shot in 1918. A reintroduction programme began 
in the 1970s on the west coast, where there are now 42 breeding pairs. 

  Alan Stewart, Tayside Police's wildlife and environment officer, said: 
 "It is really scandalous. Here we are trying to reintroduce birds that have 
been killed off 100 years ago and the allegation is one has been killed 
already, just a few months into the release programme." 

 He added: "Most shooting estates give us no cause for concern, but the 
particular estate named by the informant has been at the centre of concerns 
over illegal practices in the past few years." 

 The 12 remaining Norwegian birds - two were killed on power lines - are now 
spread from St Fergus in Aberdeenshire to Loch Leven and Perthshire. 

 Alex Hogg, the chairman of the Scottish Gamekeepers Association, doubted 
gamekeepers were involved, as eagles caused no problem on grouse moors. 

 But he added: "I thought this would lead to trouble. As soon as one of these 
birds is found dead, the finger gets pointed at a shooting estate." 

 Michael Russell, Scotland's environment minister, said that he was "deeply 
disturbed to hear reports that one of these magnificent birds has come to 
deliberate harm". 

 Stuart Housden, the director of RSPB Scotland, said: "We are shocked and 
saddened that the gift of sea eagles from the people of Norway to Scotland 
should be blighted by what appears to be a deliberate act of illegal 
persecution by this selfish estate." 

 � THE Scotsman is committed to helping the Scottish Society for the Prevention 
of Cruelty to Animals catch those responsible for killing birds of prey and 
other wildlife. Information about wildlife crimes can be passed to police via 
the National Wildlife Crime Unit in North Berwick on  

_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2221331,00.html
Police investigate alleged shooting of sea eagleA rare
sea eagle has allegedly been shot on a grouse moor in eastern Scotland,
four months after it was released into the wild. Tayside police said
the killing - an offence punishable by six months in prison - had been
witnessed but no carcass had yet been found. The estate involved in the
investigation had been "at the centre of concerns of illegal practices
in the past few years", the force said. It is the 60th confirmed or
suspected case of bird of prey persecution in Scotland this year. The
bird was one of 15 introduced from Norway in August as part of a
Scotland-wide reintroduction programme.

http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=
Rare sea eagle 'killed three months after its release'



	IAN JOHNSTON ENVIRONMENT CORRESPONDENT (ijohnston AT scotsman.com)

A SEA eagle from Norway which was released on the east coast of
Scotland is believed to have been deliberately killed on a grouse moor,
police said yesterday. 
Wildlife crime officers said an informant had told them the
white-tailed sea eagle - one of 15 set free in Fife in August as part
of a reintroduction programme - had been killed on an estate in Angus.
The informant had also named the person responsible. 

The
eagle's body had not been found, but a tracking device fitted to the
bird had stopped giving out a signal, suggesting it had been disabled. 
The last native sea eagle was shot in 1918. A reintroduction
programme began in the 1970s on the west coast, where there are now 42
breeding pairs. 
Alan Stewart, Tayside Police's wildlife and environment officer, said: 
"It is really scandalous. Here we are trying to reintroduce birds
that have been killed off 100 years ago and the allegation is one has
been killed already, just a few months into the release programme." 
He added: "Most shooting estates give us no cause for concern, but
the particular estate named by the informant has been at the centre of
concerns over illegal practices in the past few years." 
The 12 remaining Norwegian birds - two were killed on power lines -
are now spread from St Fergus in Aberdeenshire to Loch Leven and
Perthshire. 

Alex Hogg, the chairman of the Scottish Gamekeepers Association, doubted 
gamekeepers were involved, as eagles caused no problem on grouse moors. 

But he added: "I thought this would lead to trouble. As soon as one
of these birds is found dead, the finger gets pointed at a shooting
estate." 
Michael Russell, Scotland's environment minister, said that he was
"deeply disturbed to hear reports that one of these magnificent birds
has come to deliberate harm". 
Stuart Housden, the director of RSPB Scotland, said: "We are shocked
and saddened that the gift of sea eagles from the people of Norway to
Scotland should be blighted by what appears to be a deliberate act of
illegal persecution by this selfish estate." 
� THE Scotsman is committed to helping the Scottish Society for the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals catch those responsible for killing
birds of prey and other wildlife. Information about wildlife crimes can
be passed to police via the National Wildlife Crime Unit in North
Berwick on 

_________________________________________________________________
Discover the new Windows Vista
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

FYI

The annual CABS bird protection camp on the Italian island of Sardinia 
takes place from 1- 8 December 2007. Ten bird conservationists from 
Italy and Germany will conduct operations to dismantle illegal horsehair 
snares used to trap song birds. In addition checks will be made in 
butcher's shops and restaurants to monitor illegal sales of song birds 
for consumption. In cooperation with the local forest police the teams 
will assist in the apprehending of poachers. The operations are financed 
by the Committee Against Bird Slaughter (CABS).

Daily reports from the camp are at 
http://www.komitee.de/en/index.php?campdiary2007

David
--
David Conlin
Proact International www.proact-campaigns.net/team joining costs nothing ..... 
doing nothing costs birds 

Committee Against Bird Slaughter (CABS) http://www.komitee.de/en/ .... actively 
operating against illegal hunting across Europe 

Skype: david_conlin  
_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

FYI
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "david camilleri" 
To: 
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 5:30 PM
Subject: [Eurobirder_2004] The hour of the Harriers Downed

Harriers Down

http://blogs.rspb.org.uk/investigations/archive/2007/11/07/Harriers-Down.aspx

The evening of Wednesday 24 October is one that will live with me for a very 
long time. I had just reached home when my mobile phone rang with a call 
from the Natural England head warden at Dersingham Bog National Nature 
Reserve, a contact of mine through Operation Compass the anti-egg collecting 
initiative.

He swiftly gave me a mobile number of one of his employees and asked me to 
call him immediately as he had just witnessed the gunning down of two hen 
harriers on the Sandringham Estate.

Hardly able to speak, I rang the number, introduced myself and asked what 
was happening� He explained in a calm, yet clearly traumatised, voice that 
barely 20 minutes ago, together with two members of the public who he had 
taken specifically to look for roosting raptors, he had watched two female 
hen harriers being shot out of the sky.

He explained that it was with great excitement that he had pointed the birds 
out to the young child present and that they were all watching the birds, 
two females flying in tandem over the edge of the reserve and onto the 
Sandringham Estate.

Suddenly, all heard a loud shot and the first bird folded up and plummeted 
to the ground. This shot was then followed immediately by a second and the 
second bird fell like a stone. A third shot was then heard shortly 
afterwards, and being a shooting man, the warden said he believed this was a 
�finishing off� shot.

Just listening to this I felt physically sick, but it was not the first time 
I had heard first hand accounts of raptor killing and I focused on the job 
in hand. Even down the mobile phone, I could hear the blast of shotguns in 
the background and I was informed that the shooting was continuing, 
presumably legal wildfowling.

I took down all the details and immediately contacted a Police Wildlife 
Crime Officer at Norfolk Constabulary. Just like me, the Police Officer was 
extremely concerned and promised swift action. My telephone was red-hot all 
night and I finally went to bed around 1 am.

Early the next morning saw my colleague Guy Shorrock and myself heading 
through the quiet villages of Norfolk on our way to a Police briefing. Just 
after dawn, we were on the ground and being led by the Natural England 
warden to the scene of the previous evening�s incident.

We entered the Sandringham Estate and after a few minutes arrived at a 
duck-shooting pond. A couple of people were already present: a man and a 
woman with a Landrover and eight dogs which were busily working the ground. 
On speaking to the people, they were there on the request of the estate to 
retrieve ducks shot the previous evening. They kindly agreed to allow the 
Police to search their vehicle.

Over the next few hours, a painstaking search of the entire area took place, 
but sadly no harrier bodies were found. We did locate a number of fresh, 
recently-used lead shotgun cartridges at three points around the lake.

Being experienced investigators in these type of cases, Guy Shorrock and I 
had no doubt whatsoever that the warden had witnessed the illegal killing of 
the two harriers but that like so many cases before, these crimes are almost 
impossible to bring to court, particularly when the bodies of the victims 
are missing.

Later that day we had a debrief with a Detective Chief Inspector in the 
Norfolk Police. I was reassured by just how seriously he took the killing of 
hen harriers and the efforts he subsequently took to investigate matters, 
despite the unique circumstances in this case.

Ten days on, I am not surprised by the Crown Prosecution Service decision 
that there was insufficient evidence to bring any charges. The sick feeling 
in my stomach is still present, it just gets slightly less each day, until 
the next time my mobile rings�

The fight to save the hen harrier is a lifetime�s work, to which - with RSPB 
members� support - my colleagues and I are committed.

So that's the story of Sandringham. But the killing of hen harriers, and 
other birds of prey, is a much bigger problem countrywide, especially on 
upland grouse moors in England and Scotland where they try to breed but are 
routinely bumped off. So what should be done about it? Here are some ideas:

Back in 2000 a major government report was produced (The UK Raptor Working 
Group�s Report to Ministers). This made a specific recommendation for more 
enforcement action to tackle the problem of illegal bird of prey killing. 
The Government is not fulfilling its obligation under the EU�s Birds 
Directive to protect hen harriers. The critically low population of around 
20 pairs in England is of particular concern, around a tenth of what the 
population should be. There has been little sign of this being taken forward 
in any co-ordinated way. Political support needs to be provided to ensure 
that this problem is tackled effectively.
Operation Artemis, the police response to illegal hen harrier killing, needs 
to be properly resourced, tasked and supported by the police and Natural 
England.
The National Wildlife Crime Unit, which is facing a funding crisis, needs be 
guaranteed long term funding by the Home Office, to drive and coordinate the 
enforcement response to the illegal killing of birds of prey.
The police Wildlife Crime Officer (WCO) network is under pressure and in 
some forces full-time WCO posts are being abolished. This includes 
Northumbria Police, one of the key counties in England for breeding hen 
harriers. This policing trend needs to be reversed.
You can also watch a video comment from Mark Avery about the recent events 
at Sandringham.
Published 07 November 2007 14:45 by Mark Thomas


_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

Apologies for cross-posting



Chris







Birdwatch – issue 186 (December 2007): table of contents
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ISSN 

------------
Features
------------

 

Vinicombe, K E. Hybrid ducks [How to untangle Aythya hybrids]

 

Young, S. Class of 2007 [Account of October 2007 on the Isles of Scilly, 
including images of Wilson’s Snipe Gallinago delicata, Blyth’s Pipit Anthus 
godlewski, Blyth’s Reed Warbler Acrocephalus dumetorum, Woodchat Shrike 
Lanius senator and Blackpoll Warbler Dendroica striata] 


 

Robb, M. Petrels night and day [Sound-recording exploits at colonies of 
White-faced Storm-petrel Pelagodroma marina, with images including photos and 
sonograms of this species and Madeiran Storm-petrel Oceanodroma castro] 


 

Young, S. Don’t forget how to focus [Using manual focus in bird photography]

 

Cocker, M. Working for Africa’s birds [Profile of the African Bird Club]

 

-------------------
Better Birding
-------------------

Find your own … Water Rail

In the field – Going solo, or two’s company?

Garden Birdwatch – Practise on winter diners

Must see – Shore Lark

How to … Choose a place to bird

Birding equipment – Keeping it clean

Tip from the top – Dave Gosney

What’s on – December events
Optical events – December guide
Birding courses and workshops
December high-tide tables for Britain and Ireland

----------------------------
Where to watch birds
----------------------------

Pullen, D. The Black Isle, Highland

Wormwell, C. Isle of Man

Donaghy, N. Kenfig, Glamorgan

Scott, B. Little Paxton, Cambridgeshire

 

-----------------
Competition

-----------------



Win Kowa prizes worth over £2,400

 

Birdwatch Artist of the Year 2007 – a selection of the best entries, in 
association with the Society of Wildlife Artists and Swarovski Optik 


 

---------------------------------
News and related items
---------------------------------

News digest – 2007 breeding season; storm is bad new for Bitterns; green 
light for oil platforms; reprieve for African flamingos 


 

Fraser, M. ListCheck – updating the world view of birds. [New species: 
Sincora Antwren Formicivora grantsaui. National list: Britain, including 
recommendations from the BOURC’s Taxonomic Sub-Committee such as 
species-level recognition of Caspian Gull Larus cachinnans and American Herring 
Gull L smithsonianus. Relationships: Barbtails and treerunners Margarornis 
complex; Starling and mockingbird families Sturnidae and Mimidae] 


 

------------------------
Tools of the trade 
------------------------

Product review: Nikkor 300mm AF-S VR f2.8 G IF-ED telephoto lens

 

Brochure watch: Limosa Holidays

 

Internet: updates and new websites, plus website of the month.

 

Book reviews and previews: Flight Identification of European Seabirds by Anders 
Blomdahl, Bertil Breife and Niklas Holmstrom (Christopher Helm); 


John Kirk Townsend by Barbara and Richard Mearns (Barbara and Richard Mearns); 
The Lapwing by Michael Shrubb (T & AD Poyser); Watching British Dragonflies by 
Steve Dudley, Caroline Dudley and Andrew Mackay (Subbuteo); The Bird Songs of 
Europe, North Africa and the Middle East by Andreas Schulze and Karl-Heinz 
Dingler (Musikverlag Edition Ample) 


 

---------------------------------------------------------------
Accounts of recent rarities in Britain and Ireland
---------------------------------------------------------------


Spurrell, B. Grosbeak’s late show on St Agnes [Rose-breasted Grosbeak 
(Pheucticus ludovicianus), Grinlington Farm, St Agnes, Scilly, 23-29 October 
2007] 


Moore, I. ‘Squeaker’ calls in Yank warbler [Blackpoll Warbler Dendroica 
striata, The Garrison, St Mary’s, Scilly, 9 October 2007] 


Shaw, K. Foula - twinned with Siberia [Siberian Rubythroat Luscinia calliope, 
Foula, Shetland, 5 October 2007] 


Lidster, J. Snipe strikes again on Scilly [Wilson’s Snipe Gallinago delicata, 
Lower Moors, St Mary’s, Scilly, from 11 October 2007] 


Baines, R. Easterlies blow in surprise from Asia [Brown Flycatcher Muscicapa 
dauurica, Flamborough, Yorkshire, 3-4 October 2007] 


Mullarney, K. Shy Blyth’s joins the Irish list [Blyth’s Reed Warbler 
Acrocephalus dumetorum, Mizen Head, Co Cork, Ireland, 10-11 October 2007] 


 

Monthly highlights summary: October 2007


--------------------
Recent reports
--------------------

Monthly round-ups from eight regions in Britain, and from Northern Ireland and 
the Republic of Ireland, October 2007, including photos of Little Bunting 
Emberiza pusilla, Blackpoll Warbler Dendroica striata, Pectoral Sandpiper 
Calidris melanotos, Radde’s Warbler Phylloscopus schwarzi, Buff-bellied Pipit 
Anthus rubescens, Red-flanked Bluetail Tarsiger cyanurus, Least Sandpiper 
Calidris minutilla, Pine Bunting Emberiza leucocephalos, American Mourning Dove 
Zenaida macroura and Blyth’s Reed Warbler Acrocephalus dumetorum. 


 

Highlights summary for the Western Palearctic in October 2007, including photos 
of Tree Swallow Tachycineta bicolour, Scarlet Tanager Piranga olivacea, 
Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus, Common Nighthawk Chordeiles minor and 
Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus on the Azores, Goliath Heron Ardea goliath in 
Egypt, Long-tailed Shrike Lanius schach in Denmark, and Eastern Crowned Warbler 
Phylloscopus coronatus in The Netherlands. 








For the latest bird news stories visit: www.birdwatch.co.uk_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet

*"A **Golden Eagle Killer* - In 2003 the area contained 5 breeding pairs of
Golden Eagles and was ranked among the top 4 most productive areas in
Scotland. The area has been selected as  a candidate Special Protection Area
for Golden Eagle. Even by the developers own estimates one Golden Eagle
could be killed each year - We must not let this happen ."
http://www.stopstacain.com/

But it did happen. Argyll & Bute councillors voted in favour of this
development against all independent expert advice, including against the
advice of their own Chief Planning Officer.

When the wind developer was asked at the public meeting on 20th Nov about
the 801 letters of support that was apparently delivered in one batch to
Argyll & Bute Council Offices, the developer allegedly claimed in front of
everyone at that meeting that "Greenpeace" did the survey and that the
response was a 100% hit rate.

*With the RSPB + Greenpeace as part of the Big Four  'Stop Climate Chaos'
Campaign does this mean chaos within 'Stop Climate Chaos'?*

*Afterall, Stacain was a site that a 'Stop Climate Chaos'  partner, RSPB
objected to!*

Based on the public declaration at the meeting by the developer, it would
seem that a Climate Chaos partner, Greenpeace, was out in the streets of
Oban and Inveraray in Scotland gathering signatures for...erm, a wind
developer.  Is this charitable activity?  Was the charity paid money or
given a donation by the developer?

What exactlly was said to members of the public in order to canvass a
signature and were members of the public made aware that the charity was
carrying out work for a wind developer regarding a particular wind farm in
the area or was this the work or someone claiming to be a member of the
charity?

Does this claim (mentioned at the Stacain meeting) mean that Greenpeace, a
charity, has been decending on small towns and communities in rural areas of
Scotland to help gather signatures for a wind developer or wind developers
in general?

|nterestingly when two Argyll & Bute taxpayers wanted to ask a
question about money and  "Who Pays any potential EU fine" the Chair said:
"money was not a topic to be discussed at the meeting" . If  so, why did the
Chair ask the applicant during the meeting... if a wind farm on the Estate
would help the commercial viability of the Estate?   Is the commercial
viability of one estate owner more important than the concerns of local
taxpayers who may have to foot the cost of any EU fine?

I guess those shooting estates with turbines on them can now be as killing
fields for birds.  If the hunters don't get the birds, the turbines will
kill them.

Why are EU taxpayers paying to protect "protected"  birds and their pristine
wild habitats whilst there appears to be an absolute failure to protect them
here in Scotland?  Doesn't this sorry saga make a complete mockery of the
legislation that is meant to protect our wild birds and their protected
habitats?

Sylvia.

The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of
private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic
state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism -- ownership of government by

an individual, by a group, or any controlling private power."

Franklin Delano Roosevelt,
"Message to Congress on Curbing Monopolies",
April 29, 1938


-- 
The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of
private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic
state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism -- ownership of government by

an individual, by a group, or any controlling private power."

Franklin Delano Roosevelt,
"Message to Congress on Curbing Monopolies",
April 29, 1938_______________________________________________
UKbirdnet mailing list
ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk
http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet