BRITISH landowners have been privately told by their legal adviser that
they have no chance of winning their campaign to license the killing of birds of
prey. An internal report for landowners which was leaked to New
快猫短视频 concludes that there is 鈥渘o sound scientific evidence鈥� that
raptors are threatening the survival of grouse.
The report, which was written for the Scottish Landowners鈥� Federation (SLF)
by lawyer Duncan Thomson, demolishes the landowners鈥� claims that rare birds of
prey ought to be shot in order to preserve grouse for shooting. 鈥淚t is not
appropriate to permit licensed culling of raptors in order to replace raptors as
predator by man as predator,鈥� says Thomson.
Last October, the SLF launched a campaign to persuade the government to
legalise the killing of hen harriers and peregrine falcons in the apparent
belief that they were responsible for a sharp decline in grouse populations
(鈥淭he shooting party takes aim鈥�, 快猫短视频, 9 March, p 14). The
organisation claims credit for convincing the environment secretary, John
Gummer, to set up a working group to find out whether birds of prey need to be
controlled.
Advertisement
But Thomson鈥檚 report suggests that the working group, along with the keenly
awaited results of a grouse research project based at Langholm in the Scottish
borders, are irrelevant and that whatever their findings, he does not believe
鈥渢here is any prospect of licensed killing of raptors in the foreseeable
蹿耻迟耻谤别鈥�.
Thomson was employed as legal adviser to the SLF until two weeks ago when he
left to return to private practice. His report, which was tabled at two SLF
committees in February, says there is 鈥渘o sound scientific evidence to support
claims that raptors are endangering the survival of a sustainable grouse
population鈥�. This means there is 鈥渘o sound basis鈥� for requesting a licence to
kill raptors.
The SLF case against birds of prey is founded on the hypothesis that they can
prevent severely depleted grouse populations from recovering. This notion, known
as the 鈥減redator trap鈥�, arose from research by the Game Conservancy Trust, a
charity which preserves game birds for sport. The research suggested that when
the population density of grouse is low, hen harriers take a higher proportion
of them.
But Thomson points out that scientists 鈥渄ispute the 鈥榩redator trap鈥� argument
and say that a predation trap does not occur elsewhere in the wild.鈥� He also
says that the claim by pigeon fanciers that they should be licensed to kill
hawks in order to protect racing pigeons 鈥渉as no legal basis at all鈥�.
Raptors are protected by the 1981 Wildlife and Countryside Act, which allows
them to be killed only if they are endangering other wild birds. Thomson points
out that even if European and British laws were changed to allow raptors to be
more readily shot, public opposition would still have to be overcome. 鈥淚t seems
most unlikely that licensed killing or taking of raptors would be permitted by a
secretary of state, even if legally he or she could do so, in the face of strong
public opposition,鈥� he says. Thomson agrees with the legal analysis in a recent
report by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, which is strongly
opposed to legalising the persecution of raptors. Mike Everett from the RSPB
says he is 鈥減leased to hear鈥� that the SLF seems to be coming round to the RSPB鈥檚
way of thinking.
However, Thomson warns that if the landowners are right and raptors are
damaging grouse moors, there is a 鈥渞eal risk鈥� that more birds will be killed
illegally. The RSPB says that up to 700 known offences are committed against
birds of prey each year.
Graeme Gordon of the SLF describes Thomson鈥檚 report as an 鈥渦ntested and
unproved鈥� legal opinion. 鈥淲e condemn any illegal acts,鈥� says Gordon. 鈥淏ut we
understand how moorland managers who see their livelihood under threat are
increasingly tempted to take illegal action.鈥�