Well , it seems East Yorkshire has been swept up in the maelstrom of change and uncertainty just as much as other parts of our democratic processes!!
Today at the East Yorkshire Planning Committee meeting it was resolved to defer a decision on the Visitor Centre proposed by the Yorkshire Wildlife Trust for erection at Kilnsea at the head of the Spurn Penninsula. Not an outcome that would have been predicted with any confidence, but what major issues can be nowadays it seems?
Following short presentations by representatives of the Trust and local residents, and consideration of the recommendations by the Planning Officer, it was decided a site visit should be held to examine the location at first hand. Concerns were raised over the location of the proposed Centre and associated flood risk, and perhaps more importantly, that there needs to be certainty over the lack of ANY other possible alternative location. This is an important point for consideration as it has been repeatedly suggested suitable alternatives do exist more in keeping with development within the area but, perhaps most importantly, more realistically linked with the likely visitor attendance associated with the presence of a Centre. This is not a point the Trust appear willing to accept given their more ambitious commercial objectives and expressed confidence in visitor projections, the latter considered vastly overstated by many !
So, what next? Well, no date for a visit has been determined, so a further period will elapse before the final outcome is known. It is democracy in action after all (! ), but for those who raised objections or doubts about the proposal there is now some room for optimism.
Monday, June 27, 2016
Sunday, June 26, 2016
Conservation in chaos !
I can't say I'm pleased or comfortable with the outcome of the Referendum, particularly as I suspect the implications for "the environment" will be worse than for other sectors. But , the malleable majority have spoken and got what they wanted. Or did they ? I've a horrible suspicion many just voted Exit in the hope they'd take a swipe at the Tories as they didn't really understand the process in the first place !
But I'm not going to have the temerity of forecasting this, that and the other as others appear willing to do way before the process has even got under way. That, to me, is foolish and likely to be seriously misguided given there are no precedents or comparisons to go by. However, even sticking by the facts, the future situation appears not to be good when it comes to "the environment".
To some great extent, in my view, the EU has very often tempered and adjusted the somewhat lukewarm commitment to our natural heritage that recent UK governments have exhibited. The EU regulations have provided some constancy when it comes to environmental standards to the extent that Member States have been criticised, even fined, for given actions, all of which will now end!! The EU Birds and Habitats Directives will no longer apply. Two major pieces of legislation which have been a bedrock against which planning and performance was often judged. They weren't perfect, what system is , but they were better than what we'll have now and, worse still, better than anything one can imagine a UK Government might institute, particularly a Tory Government. And other environmental subject areas benefited too......Clean beaches, the Marine Environment, climate change, toxic chemicals....the list goes on.
And don't forget the research and conservation grants and programmes the EU funded. In this respect the RSPB and many other NGO's will find things more difficult than previously and will have to work hard to meet the financial shortfalls which will become evident, particularly if any of the predictions of austerity bite!
In my view the influence that NGO's have had on our "Government machine" in recent times has been waning rapidly. There's been a misplaced impression within their thinking that, somehow, they've been making inroads into the thinking of their chums in Government. What thinking ? There is and has been no empathy or intent when it comes to our natural heritage, particularly within the last six years ( Thanks, Dave ! ) and effusive thanks born of breeding and upbringing aren't enough set against the inputs made available and a lack of action.
My main fear in the future maelstrom of uncertainty, which is bound to follow, is that the Establishment, as always, will seek to protect its own interests ( First Principle ), but that it will deliberately exploit the opportunities that now come from a relaxation or absence of controls aimed at preserving our natural heritage. No, you might say ! Well, let's see what happens with fracking and the opportunities wee George Osborne has oft extolled in terms of economic development. He may not be directly involved, but adherence to pursuing the opportunity to create wealth will apply come what may ( Second Principle ) with little regard for the environment. OK, dismiss this as predictive rubbish if you will. I say , come back in five years and see what is in place !! Concern and provision for environmental matters will be bottom of the pile in the upcoming years and the weak approaches of NGO's in recent times need to stiffen significantly in response, otherwise their support will reduce. Let's see, it could be the making of them!!
So, a bleak picture in many senses for the environment if the current Government remains in place, They might not be, of course, but we need to ensure any alternative is better and I confess not to having a deal of confidence in that direction either. At the moment the Westminster village appears to be playing the game of " Secure a place in history, fall on your sword " which might be even something to encourage except the personalities never actually go away !
But I'm not going to have the temerity of forecasting this, that and the other as others appear willing to do way before the process has even got under way. That, to me, is foolish and likely to be seriously misguided given there are no precedents or comparisons to go by. However, even sticking by the facts, the future situation appears not to be good when it comes to "the environment".
To some great extent, in my view, the EU has very often tempered and adjusted the somewhat lukewarm commitment to our natural heritage that recent UK governments have exhibited. The EU regulations have provided some constancy when it comes to environmental standards to the extent that Member States have been criticised, even fined, for given actions, all of which will now end!! The EU Birds and Habitats Directives will no longer apply. Two major pieces of legislation which have been a bedrock against which planning and performance was often judged. They weren't perfect, what system is , but they were better than what we'll have now and, worse still, better than anything one can imagine a UK Government might institute, particularly a Tory Government. And other environmental subject areas benefited too......Clean beaches, the Marine Environment, climate change, toxic chemicals....the list goes on.
And don't forget the research and conservation grants and programmes the EU funded. In this respect the RSPB and many other NGO's will find things more difficult than previously and will have to work hard to meet the financial shortfalls which will become evident, particularly if any of the predictions of austerity bite!
In my view the influence that NGO's have had on our "Government machine" in recent times has been waning rapidly. There's been a misplaced impression within their thinking that, somehow, they've been making inroads into the thinking of their chums in Government. What thinking ? There is and has been no empathy or intent when it comes to our natural heritage, particularly within the last six years ( Thanks, Dave ! ) and effusive thanks born of breeding and upbringing aren't enough set against the inputs made available and a lack of action.
My main fear in the future maelstrom of uncertainty, which is bound to follow, is that the Establishment, as always, will seek to protect its own interests ( First Principle ), but that it will deliberately exploit the opportunities that now come from a relaxation or absence of controls aimed at preserving our natural heritage. No, you might say ! Well, let's see what happens with fracking and the opportunities wee George Osborne has oft extolled in terms of economic development. He may not be directly involved, but adherence to pursuing the opportunity to create wealth will apply come what may ( Second Principle ) with little regard for the environment. OK, dismiss this as predictive rubbish if you will. I say , come back in five years and see what is in place !! Concern and provision for environmental matters will be bottom of the pile in the upcoming years and the weak approaches of NGO's in recent times need to stiffen significantly in response, otherwise their support will reduce. Let's see, it could be the making of them!!
So, a bleak picture in many senses for the environment if the current Government remains in place, They might not be, of course, but we need to ensure any alternative is better and I confess not to having a deal of confidence in that direction either. At the moment the Westminster village appears to be playing the game of " Secure a place in history, fall on your sword " which might be even something to encourage except the personalities never actually go away !
Tuesday, June 21, 2016
Spurn Visitor Centre decision imminent.
After quite a long period for the application from the Yorkshire Wildlife Trust for its proposed Visitor Centre at Spurn to be scrutinised by the Local Planning Authority I understand there is to be a meeting of the appropriate Committee on the 27th June, 2016 at which the details will be considered.
It's over forty years since I was more closely involved with planning matters so, whilst I suspect the circumstances will be broadly similar, there might well be aspects that are new and will not necessarily result in a decision being forthcoming on the day.
The above image may not be an accurate depiction of precisely what is now being considered, but gives a general impression of what is being decided upon. I suspect, since the details were submitted in December , 2015 , that more than a few queries have been raised by the Planning Authority leading to a great deal of work and clarification by the applicant ( YWT Ltd ). I presume it is upon this updated and "refined" situation that the decision will now be taken.
So, whether we agreed or dissented as far as the details were concerned, we can now await a decision in the not too distant future. After being involved in some pretty big planning cases in the past , e.g. the Mersey Barrage, I hope that people will respect the process. Yes, there'll be elation from one side if things go through and utter disappointment, tears even, from the other side if their hopes are dashed . But the system is all we've got and far, far superior to that in many other places where no democratic system is in operation ! A few years ago I discussed the situation with several people involved with the reserve/observatory at Eilat, and discovered that Israel has no planning system equivalent to our own, no local plans, in fact, not much at all compared to our own approach. Worth thinking about and respecting ........ if that begins to be a problem, just think of some of the road systems in Spain with several main roads running in parallel to the same eventual location !! We do try, even if the system appears to be imperfect at times !!!
Whatever the outcome I hope the best outcome is worked for as far as Spurn is concerned. Given the changes that won't be easy,whatever the outcome, but it is necessary in my view.
It's over forty years since I was more closely involved with planning matters so, whilst I suspect the circumstances will be broadly similar, there might well be aspects that are new and will not necessarily result in a decision being forthcoming on the day.
The above image may not be an accurate depiction of precisely what is now being considered, but gives a general impression of what is being decided upon. I suspect, since the details were submitted in December , 2015 , that more than a few queries have been raised by the Planning Authority leading to a great deal of work and clarification by the applicant ( YWT Ltd ). I presume it is upon this updated and "refined" situation that the decision will now be taken.
So, whether we agreed or dissented as far as the details were concerned, we can now await a decision in the not too distant future. After being involved in some pretty big planning cases in the past , e.g. the Mersey Barrage, I hope that people will respect the process. Yes, there'll be elation from one side if things go through and utter disappointment, tears even, from the other side if their hopes are dashed . But the system is all we've got and far, far superior to that in many other places where no democratic system is in operation ! A few years ago I discussed the situation with several people involved with the reserve/observatory at Eilat, and discovered that Israel has no planning system equivalent to our own, no local plans, in fact, not much at all compared to our own approach. Worth thinking about and respecting ........ if that begins to be a problem, just think of some of the road systems in Spain with several main roads running in parallel to the same eventual location !! We do try, even if the system appears to be imperfect at times !!!
Whatever the outcome I hope the best outcome is worked for as far as Spurn is concerned. Given the changes that won't be easy,whatever the outcome, but it is necessary in my view.
Thursday, June 16, 2016
Lynx reintroduction a step closer.
The reintroduction of the Lynx has taken a step closer to realisation with a meeting of national stakeholders recently that addressed the possibility of releases within 2017.
Last year the Lynx UK Trust issued plans for a trial reintroduction of the Lynx, which has been absent from the UK for 1300 years. Research has shown that there is enough suitable habitat in existence for these shy animals and that the populations of deer upon which they feed are also sufficiently abundant. It is known that the animals favour large ( commercial ) forest areas and rarely stray outside of these, which results in predation on livestock being very low and of there being no recorded incident, ever, of an attack on humans.
By courtesy of Erwin van Maanen
The results of a public consultation survey showed 90% support towards the release of no more than ten individuals, which then would be the subject of intense monitoring. This week 20 of the major stakeholders came together with the Lynx UK Trust to discuss the proposals and research in more detail. The discussions were held at the University of Cumbria and covered a diverse range of subjects from eco-tourism, the potential impacts on deer populations, the selection of release sites and so on. Further discussions are to take place and will intensify once a decision has been taken on where the first potential release site will be located. It is hoped this decision will be made by mid-summer.
All success !
Last year the Lynx UK Trust issued plans for a trial reintroduction of the Lynx, which has been absent from the UK for 1300 years. Research has shown that there is enough suitable habitat in existence for these shy animals and that the populations of deer upon which they feed are also sufficiently abundant. It is known that the animals favour large ( commercial ) forest areas and rarely stray outside of these, which results in predation on livestock being very low and of there being no recorded incident, ever, of an attack on humans.
By courtesy of Erwin van Maanen
The results of a public consultation survey showed 90% support towards the release of no more than ten individuals, which then would be the subject of intense monitoring. This week 20 of the major stakeholders came together with the Lynx UK Trust to discuss the proposals and research in more detail. The discussions were held at the University of Cumbria and covered a diverse range of subjects from eco-tourism, the potential impacts on deer populations, the selection of release sites and so on. Further discussions are to take place and will intensify once a decision has been taken on where the first potential release site will be located. It is hoped this decision will be made by mid-summer.
All success !
Wednesday, June 15, 2016
What goes round, comes round !!
Photograph courtesy of RSPB
In an extraordinary twist to the story the Moorland Association put out a release today that the gamekeeper involved in the setting up of poletraps on the Mossdale Estate, which actions were caught on camera by the RSPB, had resigned his appointment with the estate concerned.
Furthermore they revealed that the Mossdale Estate, owned by the Van Cutsem family, had resigned its membership of the Moorland Association. Whilst I suspect we shall never know the real background "ingredients" to either of these aspects, the revelations are quite telling in themselves. The gamekeeper may have been sacked, a situation I suspect we shall gain confirmation on in due course. Undoubtedly he brought a focus of attention on the Estate that would certainly not have been to its choosing. Whether or not he himself was a member of the National Association of Gamekeepers and, if so, what their reaction might be requires more inquiries. As importantly, whether he will gain similar employment on another Estate is also of interest.
The situation with the Moorland Association is intriguing to say the least. Having being a participant in the compilation of the DEFRA ill fated Hen Harrier Action Plan are they finally beginning to feel exposed by the
actions taking place in the grouse shooting industry by estates where persecution is proven to occur ? Are they feeling let down by their peers or are they commencing to exert peer pressure themselves on those who are letting the side down ? We shall never know I suspect until a similar incident occurs and we can monitor what happens in the aftermath. Given their lukewarm " support" for recent events , i.e. the actions by the National Trust in the early termination of a shooting lease in the Peak Park, I somehow doubt this current event has been entirely of their own making, but we'll see. It would be nice to believe that they had made an approach to the Estate owner concerned and suggested that continuing membership of the Association was untenable. But, at the end of the day, from any Estate owners viewpoint, does membership really confer any absolute benefits? I doubt it ! The converse is possibly the more important whereby the membership of the Moorland Association by estates where persecution has been proven to take place brings into doubt the credibility of the organization and its ability to be involved or included in initiatives that might affect its members ( and past members of course ! ).
The whole story may yet have a few furlongs to run!!! The review by the Police on why the gamekeeper involved was simply given a caution, and not prosecuted, has yet to make its appearance. Its eventual details will no doubt bring renewed focus on the incident and provoke further comments and inquiries.
Monday, June 13, 2016
International Flyway sites for shorebirds even more important than first thought.
I don't think there is anything more exciting than seeing a large flock of waders wheeling about in flight over the expanse of an estuary. I'm sure we've all had that experience and have also to admit that it never pales in its effect ! Over the years a large amount of time and energy has been directed towards such sites by conservation bodies, ever conscious of their importance to shorebirds moving on their migrations over various parts of the globe. Certainly in the UK the RSPB has put in a huge amount of work and resources aimed at gaining the recognition and designation of such sites and the BTO continues to place emphasis on their importance by organizing counts of birds under the WeBS ( Wetland Bird Survey ) and, in particular, the Low Tide Counts scheme. Similar work is carried out around the world by differing organizations.
One of the imperatives which continues to focus attention on such sites is that they are favoured for expansion by the petrochemical industry, hydroelectric schemes and a whole plethora of other industrial interests that require vast spaces on which to base their operations. This , of course, is often the precursor to the alteration of the areas "reclaimed" which, in turn , can have a knock on effect as far as adjacent areas are concerned.
For the first time details have emerged of how important these areas really are. It's not enough to presume that birds displaced by such industrial activities simply seek out and then continue to use some alternative. Research carried out linked with the East Asian - Australasian Flyway and, in particular, associated with the Saenmangeum reclamation scheme in South Korea has unearthed some disturbing results that show birds don't automatically switch to alternative sites and, as a consequence, pressures emerge on that particular population , with disastrous results. Here is an abstract of the research concerned kindly provided by Niall Moores
Saemangeum in the Republic of Korea (ROK, “South Korea”) was one of the most important shorebird staging sites in the Yellow Sea. It supported at least 330,000 shorebirds annually in 1997-2001 including ~ 30% of the world population of Great Knot (Calidris tenuirostris) during both northward and southward migration. Construction of a 33km long seawall was completed in April 2006. We show that shorebird numbers at Saemangeum and two adjacent wetlands decreased by 130,000 during northward migration in the next two years and that all species have declined at Saemangeum since seawall closure. Great Knot was among the most rapidly affected species. Fewer than 5,000 shorebirds were recorded at Saemangeum during northward migration in 2014. We found no evidence to suggest that the majority of shorebirds of any species displaced from Saemangeum successfully relocated to other ROK sites. Instead, by 2011-2013 nearly all species had declined substantially in the ROK since previous national surveys in 2008 and 1998, especially at more heavily reclaimed sites. It is likely that these declines were driven by increased mortality rather than movement to alternate staging sites given that other studies have revealed concurrent declines in numbers and survival on the non-breeding grounds. This is the first study in the East Asian – Australasian Flyway to confirm shorebird declines at a range of geographical scales following a single reclamation project. The results indicate that if migratory shorebirds are displaced from major staging sites by reclamation they are probably unable to successfully relocate to alternate sites.
Full citation:
Moores, N., Rogers, D.I., Rogers, K. and Hansbro, P.M. 2016. Reclamation of tidal flats and shorebird declines in Saemangeum and elsewhere in the Republic of Korea. Emu, 116, 2: 136-146. Published by CSIRO. http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/MU16006
It would appear that the importance of all such Flyway sites in an international context is paramount to the future survival of many shorebird bird species and that renewed vigilance and targeted protection needs to be the order of the day !!
One of the imperatives which continues to focus attention on such sites is that they are favoured for expansion by the petrochemical industry, hydroelectric schemes and a whole plethora of other industrial interests that require vast spaces on which to base their operations. This , of course, is often the precursor to the alteration of the areas "reclaimed" which, in turn , can have a knock on effect as far as adjacent areas are concerned.
For the first time details have emerged of how important these areas really are. It's not enough to presume that birds displaced by such industrial activities simply seek out and then continue to use some alternative. Research carried out linked with the East Asian - Australasian Flyway and, in particular, associated with the Saenmangeum reclamation scheme in South Korea has unearthed some disturbing results that show birds don't automatically switch to alternative sites and, as a consequence, pressures emerge on that particular population , with disastrous results. Here is an abstract of the research concerned kindly provided by Niall Moores
Saemangeum in the Republic of Korea (ROK, “South Korea”) was one of the most important shorebird staging sites in the Yellow Sea. It supported at least 330,000 shorebirds annually in 1997-2001 including ~ 30% of the world population of Great Knot (Calidris tenuirostris) during both northward and southward migration. Construction of a 33km long seawall was completed in April 2006. We show that shorebird numbers at Saemangeum and two adjacent wetlands decreased by 130,000 during northward migration in the next two years and that all species have declined at Saemangeum since seawall closure. Great Knot was among the most rapidly affected species. Fewer than 5,000 shorebirds were recorded at Saemangeum during northward migration in 2014. We found no evidence to suggest that the majority of shorebirds of any species displaced from Saemangeum successfully relocated to other ROK sites. Instead, by 2011-2013 nearly all species had declined substantially in the ROK since previous national surveys in 2008 and 1998, especially at more heavily reclaimed sites. It is likely that these declines were driven by increased mortality rather than movement to alternate staging sites given that other studies have revealed concurrent declines in numbers and survival on the non-breeding grounds. This is the first study in the East Asian – Australasian Flyway to confirm shorebird declines at a range of geographical scales following a single reclamation project. The results indicate that if migratory shorebirds are displaced from major staging sites by reclamation they are probably unable to successfully relocate to alternate sites.
Full citation:
Moores, N., Rogers, D.I., Rogers, K. and Hansbro, P.M. 2016. Reclamation of tidal flats and shorebird declines in Saemangeum and elsewhere in the Republic of Korea. Emu, 116, 2: 136-146. Published by CSIRO. http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/MU16006
It would appear that the importance of all such Flyway sites in an international context is paramount to the future survival of many shorebird bird species and that renewed vigilance and targeted protection needs to be the order of the day !!
Sunday, June 12, 2016
National Trust v. RSPB.
The process of competition appears to have descended on us , whether we like it or not. Brexit v. Remain, and the now ongoing Euro Championship football matches proceeding in full swing. Is it appropriate to perhaps compare the respective positions and performance of two prominent national organizations caught up in the debate relating to what is needed as far as raptor persecution is concerned and the positive steps to assist what might yet be declared as an extinct breeding population in England of Hen Harrier ?
If one was to evaluate relevance and contribution towards raptor persecution and conservation to each of the above two organizations, based on Blogs, comments and references appearing on the Web this weekend, then the clear conclusion is that the RSPB's standing is in a very parlous state. It seems to stumble on from bad to worse and one is forced to conclude that the collective position of its Council and senior management is under siege and unfit for purpose when it comes to the current debate and apparent actions being taken on Hen Harriers. There are always differing opinions , of course, but the repeated low key, cautious, "we know best public" outpourings are not what is felt to be required by many. However, it must be remembered that, standing quite independently from all this , the sterling efforts of the RSPB Investigations Section staff continue against difficult odds and, for obvious reasons, largely remain outside of the public domain.
The action by the National Trust last week in curtailing one of its shooting leases in the Peak District due to , initially, suspicious activities being witnessed on site and, secondly, the fact that there has since been an apparent lack of agreement with the tenant over the National Trust's vision for its land holding and consequent management approach , is to their credit and has brought many supportive messages of congratulation. Chief among these have been the various entries appearing on the Raptor Persecution UK web site, but from various other sources as well. Whilst it is far too early to tell, the National Trust's action might yet have a far more telling influence than the single shooting lease affected. Clearly the National Trust has appreciated the depth of concern expressed by many people at the initial incident and has acted . It is not necessarily the nature of the final decision, but the fact that the NT responded to public concerns with robust timely action.
If that approach is contrasted against that of the RSPB at present, as far as actions for Hen Harriers are concerned, then the situation is far more diffuse. A far different scenario, of course, but one lacking in any clear cut declarations, intentions, initiatives or robust resolve. After all , we are talking of the Royal Society for the PROTECTION of Birds and ,as such, the body from whom we expect a lead. I'm sure that there will be endless discussions and debates being held within the Society, but that's where it all seems to end. Seen from the outside, and I stress that, the fact that widely read Blogs ( Raptor Persecution UK, Mark Avery, North England Raptor Forum ) are all raising concerns and calling for better defined action is surely a clarion call the RSPB needs to pay heed to. If such is ignored I fear the RSPB will be side lined and lose not only support from individuals, but recognition as the body who, hitherto, has been seen as that being primarily responsible for change. Sadly it certainly doesn't appear to be earning its keep at present, although I've no doubt many of us believe it is entirely capable of doing so. Perhaps the creation, internally, of a "Task Group", with different personalities to those engaged prominently in the process so far, might bring different perspectives and approaches to the fore ?
C'mon RSPB, let's see some of the innovative actions which have secured notable conservation successes in the past brought to bear, made public and carried forward with confidence !
If one was to evaluate relevance and contribution towards raptor persecution and conservation to each of the above two organizations, based on Blogs, comments and references appearing on the Web this weekend, then the clear conclusion is that the RSPB's standing is in a very parlous state. It seems to stumble on from bad to worse and one is forced to conclude that the collective position of its Council and senior management is under siege and unfit for purpose when it comes to the current debate and apparent actions being taken on Hen Harriers. There are always differing opinions , of course, but the repeated low key, cautious, "we know best public" outpourings are not what is felt to be required by many. However, it must be remembered that, standing quite independently from all this , the sterling efforts of the RSPB Investigations Section staff continue against difficult odds and, for obvious reasons, largely remain outside of the public domain.
The action by the National Trust last week in curtailing one of its shooting leases in the Peak District due to , initially, suspicious activities being witnessed on site and, secondly, the fact that there has since been an apparent lack of agreement with the tenant over the National Trust's vision for its land holding and consequent management approach , is to their credit and has brought many supportive messages of congratulation. Chief among these have been the various entries appearing on the Raptor Persecution UK web site, but from various other sources as well. Whilst it is far too early to tell, the National Trust's action might yet have a far more telling influence than the single shooting lease affected. Clearly the National Trust has appreciated the depth of concern expressed by many people at the initial incident and has acted . It is not necessarily the nature of the final decision, but the fact that the NT responded to public concerns with robust timely action.
If that approach is contrasted against that of the RSPB at present, as far as actions for Hen Harriers are concerned, then the situation is far more diffuse. A far different scenario, of course, but one lacking in any clear cut declarations, intentions, initiatives or robust resolve. After all , we are talking of the Royal Society for the PROTECTION of Birds and ,as such, the body from whom we expect a lead. I'm sure that there will be endless discussions and debates being held within the Society, but that's where it all seems to end. Seen from the outside, and I stress that, the fact that widely read Blogs ( Raptor Persecution UK, Mark Avery, North England Raptor Forum ) are all raising concerns and calling for better defined action is surely a clarion call the RSPB needs to pay heed to. If such is ignored I fear the RSPB will be side lined and lose not only support from individuals, but recognition as the body who, hitherto, has been seen as that being primarily responsible for change. Sadly it certainly doesn't appear to be earning its keep at present, although I've no doubt many of us believe it is entirely capable of doing so. Perhaps the creation, internally, of a "Task Group", with different personalities to those engaged prominently in the process so far, might bring different perspectives and approaches to the fore ?
C'mon RSPB, let's see some of the innovative actions which have secured notable conservation successes in the past brought to bear, made public and carried forward with confidence !
Friday, June 10, 2016
Action points for the RSPB ?
A few days ago I expressed disappointment at the apparent lack of progress exhibited within the RSPB's stance vis a vis the Hen Harrier debate ( see the Blog entitled " RSPB..... a Legion of Nero's " ) and elected to make further comments later.
Now you might believe I'm anti-RSPB ! You'd actually be very wrong ! I support the Society, worked for it for twenty years and believe in it as our premier bird conservation organization. However, on this occasion I sincerely believe they need to bone up and adopt a much more independent, easily defined stance that is communicated out, not just to their membership, but more widely, and which expressively outlines precisely what they are engaged in to gain improvement to our now extinct (? ) English breeding population. I've set out below two or three subjects which I know the Society supports, but about which I can find precious little evidence currently as far as ACTION is concerned. Brutally put, the Society expects its members to continue to provide financial support, sets out its concerns on critical subjects like the absent English harrier breeding population , but then goes anal in terms of outlining in any meaningful detail what it's doing about it ! I don't believe that's good enough. It may have put its own eggs in the DEFRA basket as far as the Hen Harrier Action Plan is concerned ( a dismal failure if 2016 is taken as an indicative benchmark ), but there are surely other initiatives it could be pursuing in parallel?
VICARIOUS LIABILITY.
Introduced into Scottish Law, with at least one successful prosecution since its inception, this was something the RSPB pursued ( advocation of its adoption into English Law, raised in the House of Commons and comments made about its potential positive influence ). The Society then trod water awaiting the results of the Law Commission Review of wildlife legislation in the hope, one imagines, that the offence of vicarious liability would be openly recommended and eventually go into law. It wasn't. Some revisions were advocated but were little more than a reiteration of previous circumstances in the opinion of many people and the whole situation sort of came to a stop.
In the meantime, following a successful prosecution in Scotland , it was seen that the owner involved also had State financial subsidies frozen due to the implications of the proven offence upon the agreement under which he received such support. Surely this is a major goal to aim for in terms of people who wish to tread their own path and risk the outcome. Financially speaking the outcome could be very serious indeed as well as the stigma of having been prosecuted.
So where are we now in England as far as this offence is concerned and is the Society pursuing it any further? There may be good reasons why it shouldn't, but after past actions and a fanfare of support for something hailed as a real potential breakthrough, the situation appears to have been placed on the back burner at best. Why ? Don't we at least deserve to be educated on the matter in order to understand why nothing appears to be happening ? Have I missed something?
LICENCING OF GROUSE MOORS.
When it comes to the current debate about grouse shooting this is the preferred solution of the Society. I have strong feelings of support for this approach, but that debate is for another time and I certainly wouldn't criticise the Society for its decision. However, there are aspects of its approach I just don't understand.
When I registered the E-petition calling for this line of action I advised the RSPB of what I intended, but I never really received back any detailed explanation of their position. They certainly offered no support via the membership, although many did provide signatures and, eventually, in excess of 10,000 people pledged support. I learnt informally that little confidence was placed in the process overall and that may well be the position upon which their decision was based. I've no problem with that, but in their advocating licencing as a solution what have they really done in the meantime to secure any tangible recognition of it as an alternative ? The occasional supportive mention , contact with obvious stakeholders, but little else one can unearth. I thought belief in a solution was the precursor to ACTION of some kind?
EU SUPPORT FOR HARRIER PROTECTION.
Some time ago the Society received significant monies from the EU to pursue harrier protection and combat persecution in an attempt to improve the descending fortunes ( at that time ) of the Hen Harrier population.That situation is now even worse. In my book such financial support should be used , quite specifically, for new approaches and initiatives and not for offsetting, for example, what one might best describe as routine involvements, ie the undoubted costly elongated discussions , meetings , transport expenses and so on linked to the DEFRA Hen Harrier Action Plan. I'm in no way suggesting that was an intention, or practice, of the Society, but it would be helpful to learn in what broad areas the Society saw such resources being deployed. I wouldn't expect them to disclose their plans for additional investigative work, for obvious reasons, and would equally hope that increased expenditure wasn't going the way of contract staff in Hen Harrier costumes cavorting around local fayres in North east England , but , at the same time, there needs to be some recognition that Society membership desperately needs to learn of what "its society " is doing to address a problem the RSPB itself so readily paints a dismal picture about. Given the apparent absence of breeding activity this season the potential expenditure on tracking devices is claerly a non starter. So what constitutes Plan B ?
At the moment things come over as being no better than " business as usual ", but without any definition being offered. The RSPB Blog this week, which conveniently closed with a message that an update would be provided in Autumn I found quite offensive in a way and it certainly didn't assist the declining credibility of the Society. Details which have emerged today, about which I'll Blog later, of the National Trust's action to curtail early a shooting lease associated with an area where questionable activities had been witnessed are to be applauded National Trust shooting lease. Click on this link and read full details. Laudable action from a large organization who have clearly overcome bureaucratic considerations and taken positive action. RSPB, take note !!
Now you might believe I'm anti-RSPB ! You'd actually be very wrong ! I support the Society, worked for it for twenty years and believe in it as our premier bird conservation organization. However, on this occasion I sincerely believe they need to bone up and adopt a much more independent, easily defined stance that is communicated out, not just to their membership, but more widely, and which expressively outlines precisely what they are engaged in to gain improvement to our now extinct (? ) English breeding population. I've set out below two or three subjects which I know the Society supports, but about which I can find precious little evidence currently as far as ACTION is concerned. Brutally put, the Society expects its members to continue to provide financial support, sets out its concerns on critical subjects like the absent English harrier breeding population , but then goes anal in terms of outlining in any meaningful detail what it's doing about it ! I don't believe that's good enough. It may have put its own eggs in the DEFRA basket as far as the Hen Harrier Action Plan is concerned ( a dismal failure if 2016 is taken as an indicative benchmark ), but there are surely other initiatives it could be pursuing in parallel?
VICARIOUS LIABILITY.
Introduced into Scottish Law, with at least one successful prosecution since its inception, this was something the RSPB pursued ( advocation of its adoption into English Law, raised in the House of Commons and comments made about its potential positive influence ). The Society then trod water awaiting the results of the Law Commission Review of wildlife legislation in the hope, one imagines, that the offence of vicarious liability would be openly recommended and eventually go into law. It wasn't. Some revisions were advocated but were little more than a reiteration of previous circumstances in the opinion of many people and the whole situation sort of came to a stop.
In the meantime, following a successful prosecution in Scotland , it was seen that the owner involved also had State financial subsidies frozen due to the implications of the proven offence upon the agreement under which he received such support. Surely this is a major goal to aim for in terms of people who wish to tread their own path and risk the outcome. Financially speaking the outcome could be very serious indeed as well as the stigma of having been prosecuted.
So where are we now in England as far as this offence is concerned and is the Society pursuing it any further? There may be good reasons why it shouldn't, but after past actions and a fanfare of support for something hailed as a real potential breakthrough, the situation appears to have been placed on the back burner at best. Why ? Don't we at least deserve to be educated on the matter in order to understand why nothing appears to be happening ? Have I missed something?
LICENCING OF GROUSE MOORS.
When it comes to the current debate about grouse shooting this is the preferred solution of the Society. I have strong feelings of support for this approach, but that debate is for another time and I certainly wouldn't criticise the Society for its decision. However, there are aspects of its approach I just don't understand.
When I registered the E-petition calling for this line of action I advised the RSPB of what I intended, but I never really received back any detailed explanation of their position. They certainly offered no support via the membership, although many did provide signatures and, eventually, in excess of 10,000 people pledged support. I learnt informally that little confidence was placed in the process overall and that may well be the position upon which their decision was based. I've no problem with that, but in their advocating licencing as a solution what have they really done in the meantime to secure any tangible recognition of it as an alternative ? The occasional supportive mention , contact with obvious stakeholders, but little else one can unearth. I thought belief in a solution was the precursor to ACTION of some kind?
EU SUPPORT FOR HARRIER PROTECTION.
Some time ago the Society received significant monies from the EU to pursue harrier protection and combat persecution in an attempt to improve the descending fortunes ( at that time ) of the Hen Harrier population.That situation is now even worse. In my book such financial support should be used , quite specifically, for new approaches and initiatives and not for offsetting, for example, what one might best describe as routine involvements, ie the undoubted costly elongated discussions , meetings , transport expenses and so on linked to the DEFRA Hen Harrier Action Plan. I'm in no way suggesting that was an intention, or practice, of the Society, but it would be helpful to learn in what broad areas the Society saw such resources being deployed. I wouldn't expect them to disclose their plans for additional investigative work, for obvious reasons, and would equally hope that increased expenditure wasn't going the way of contract staff in Hen Harrier costumes cavorting around local fayres in North east England , but , at the same time, there needs to be some recognition that Society membership desperately needs to learn of what "its society " is doing to address a problem the RSPB itself so readily paints a dismal picture about. Given the apparent absence of breeding activity this season the potential expenditure on tracking devices is claerly a non starter. So what constitutes Plan B ?
At the moment things come over as being no better than " business as usual ", but without any definition being offered. The RSPB Blog this week, which conveniently closed with a message that an update would be provided in Autumn I found quite offensive in a way and it certainly didn't assist the declining credibility of the Society. Details which have emerged today, about which I'll Blog later, of the National Trust's action to curtail early a shooting lease associated with an area where questionable activities had been witnessed are to be applauded National Trust shooting lease. Click on this link and read full details. Laudable action from a large organization who have clearly overcome bureaucratic considerations and taken positive action. RSPB, take note !!
Thursday, June 9, 2016
World Oceans Day
World Oceans Day is celebrated each year on the 8th June. I'm dragging my heels a little on this occasion !! It was first proposed by Canada way back in 1992 and then officially recognized at the Earth Summit held at Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in the year 2000. This year's theme is " Healthy Ocean, Healthy Planet " and draws attention amonst an array of matters to the seemingly ever increasing pollution of our oceans by discarded plastic. Plastic degrades very slowly and there are also chemicals within it that are deemed harmful to life. Microbeads, present in so many products nowadays, are also a developing worry as they can easily be ingested by marine organisms. In 2015 UC Santa Barbara produced a report stating 8 million tonnes of plastic per year enter our oceans from land. It's worth reading the summary through this link as the implications are more than frightening Pollution of our oceans by plastic
As part of this celebration there are several quite specific stories and initiatives associated with our ocean going birds that are extremely relevant. Some years ago considerable concern was voiced at the significant losses of albatrosses and petrels as bycatch associated with various fisheries. What then occurred is admirably documented by Martin Harper ( Conservation Director RSPB ) in a Blog and has to be deemed one of the most notable conservation successes of all time given the idea was only "floated" in 2006. Full details can be read by accessing this link Albatross Task Force
Black-browed Albatross Graham Madge rspb-images.com
The initiative was overseen by the RSPB as the representative partner in the UK of BirdLife International. Continuing efforts to improve matters are still being pursued and , for example, the fact that regulations requiring the use of bird-safe methods are in place in six other major fisheries augurs well for the future. Further details on the work being undertaken can be seen here Saving albatrosses from extinction
There are a lot of other links within the latter press release that are worth exploring including the latest ATF Report.
Even in these difficult days,when increasingly complicated scenarios are in place, if a workable strategy can be happened on then the seemingly most intractable problems can be resolved. Undoubtedly some will linger, but belief and focus can eventually overcome even the worst challenges. Well done all!!
As part of this celebration there are several quite specific stories and initiatives associated with our ocean going birds that are extremely relevant. Some years ago considerable concern was voiced at the significant losses of albatrosses and petrels as bycatch associated with various fisheries. What then occurred is admirably documented by Martin Harper ( Conservation Director RSPB ) in a Blog and has to be deemed one of the most notable conservation successes of all time given the idea was only "floated" in 2006. Full details can be read by accessing this link Albatross Task Force
Black-browed Albatross Graham Madge rspb-images.com
The initiative was overseen by the RSPB as the representative partner in the UK of BirdLife International. Continuing efforts to improve matters are still being pursued and , for example, the fact that regulations requiring the use of bird-safe methods are in place in six other major fisheries augurs well for the future. Further details on the work being undertaken can be seen here Saving albatrosses from extinction
There are a lot of other links within the latter press release that are worth exploring including the latest ATF Report.
Even in these difficult days,when increasingly complicated scenarios are in place, if a workable strategy can be happened on then the seemingly most intractable problems can be resolved. Undoubtedly some will linger, but belief and focus can eventually overcome even the worst challenges. Well done all!!
The Trans Pennine Trail.
Yesterday was MOT day! I've found a great garage ( CD Autos ) in the nearby village of Penistone so off I went to drop in the car. Even at 0830 hours it was shirt sleeves and hats off weather so I decided to walk back home and return by the same way later in the day. I've done this before and thoroughly enjoyed it.
I opted to use the Pennine Trail, which runs through my village of Millhouse Green, before striking off westwards over the Pennines themselves. The distance for me, including access and egress sections, is between two and three kilometres each way so plenty of time for thought. This section is based on a former railway line, so is flat, enclosed in short cuttings along part of the route and overlooking open countryside along others. It's lined with mature trees and scrub and is simply a pleasant countryside experience end to end. It's intended for walkers, cyclists, horse riders and is mainly traffic free and with a nice walking surface too. Mums and buggies, toddlers, dog walkers, joggers , old boys not getting far, but solving the world's problems.......they're all in evidence, but not really that apparent, in fact it's far less crowded that nature reserves I've been to!!
The Trans Pennine Trail essentially links the North Sea and the Irish Sea and runs from Hornsea in the east to Southport in the west. It's 215 miles ( 346 km ) long and a permanent tribute to the local authorities and other agencies who brought it into being. It's never over crowded, but here it does get used regularly by local people besides others taking on longer distances. I'm really impressed by the maintenance, absence of litter and all that this does to provide a really enjoyable countryside experience. This section, as a former "industrial" railway line, has transcended into something else, is quiet, attractive and clearly provides a valued contribution in terms of wildlife habitat.
It's quite good for birds , although I doubt it gets "covered" in any systematic sense. I mused yesterday on what might be anticipated as a final "Year List " if one walked the whole length once in each of our four seasons. I'd think a heck of a lot with probably one or two surprises too. At various locations en route it overlooks wetland areas so the potential for species variety is high ! Yesterday song had begun to diminish, but still assisted in the identification of a reasonable number of birds. Odd warblers still sang but it was the species like Blackbird and Song Thrush embarking on second breeding attempts that I guess figured most. I've written out a list at the end just to illustrate what might be encountered. Quintessential England one might say and testament to the fact that , perhaps, all is not doom and gloom amidst the all too often sad news of further reductions in bird populations that we read about too often nowadays.
In our ever increasingly busy lives we're naturally drawn to sites, usually reserves, where we can anticipate seeing a reasonable variety of species for the time invested and probably a few of particular interest. Nothing wrong with that approach at all, but I wonder how much is missed in what might be best described as the "ordinary countryside". Food for thought, but also something to be explored perhaps when time is limited. Yesterday's bonus was a Grey Wagtail on the river before the village and the welcoming sound of House Sparrows and their seemingly incessant chirping from hidden lookouts within the village buildings. Not bad for an MOT I thought !!
I'll use this list as a basis for developing what might be seen locally and endeavour to cover the area on more than one occasion per year, MOT day!! It's not in any order, just as the birds were encountered.
House Martin, Starling, Blackbird, Song Thrush, Robin, BlueTit, Dunnock, Willow Warbler, Chaffinch, Blackap, Wren, Woodpigeon, Pheasant, Greenfinch, Garden Warbler, Jackdaw, Curlew, Collared Dove, Rook, Swallow, Goldfinch, Grey Wagtail and House Sparrow.
I opted to use the Pennine Trail, which runs through my village of Millhouse Green, before striking off westwards over the Pennines themselves. The distance for me, including access and egress sections, is between two and three kilometres each way so plenty of time for thought. This section is based on a former railway line, so is flat, enclosed in short cuttings along part of the route and overlooking open countryside along others. It's lined with mature trees and scrub and is simply a pleasant countryside experience end to end. It's intended for walkers, cyclists, horse riders and is mainly traffic free and with a nice walking surface too. Mums and buggies, toddlers, dog walkers, joggers , old boys not getting far, but solving the world's problems.......they're all in evidence, but not really that apparent, in fact it's far less crowded that nature reserves I've been to!!
The Trans Pennine Trail essentially links the North Sea and the Irish Sea and runs from Hornsea in the east to Southport in the west. It's 215 miles ( 346 km ) long and a permanent tribute to the local authorities and other agencies who brought it into being. It's never over crowded, but here it does get used regularly by local people besides others taking on longer distances. I'm really impressed by the maintenance, absence of litter and all that this does to provide a really enjoyable countryside experience. This section, as a former "industrial" railway line, has transcended into something else, is quiet, attractive and clearly provides a valued contribution in terms of wildlife habitat.
It's quite good for birds , although I doubt it gets "covered" in any systematic sense. I mused yesterday on what might be anticipated as a final "Year List " if one walked the whole length once in each of our four seasons. I'd think a heck of a lot with probably one or two surprises too. At various locations en route it overlooks wetland areas so the potential for species variety is high ! Yesterday song had begun to diminish, but still assisted in the identification of a reasonable number of birds. Odd warblers still sang but it was the species like Blackbird and Song Thrush embarking on second breeding attempts that I guess figured most. I've written out a list at the end just to illustrate what might be encountered. Quintessential England one might say and testament to the fact that , perhaps, all is not doom and gloom amidst the all too often sad news of further reductions in bird populations that we read about too often nowadays.
In our ever increasingly busy lives we're naturally drawn to sites, usually reserves, where we can anticipate seeing a reasonable variety of species for the time invested and probably a few of particular interest. Nothing wrong with that approach at all, but I wonder how much is missed in what might be best described as the "ordinary countryside". Food for thought, but also something to be explored perhaps when time is limited. Yesterday's bonus was a Grey Wagtail on the river before the village and the welcoming sound of House Sparrows and their seemingly incessant chirping from hidden lookouts within the village buildings. Not bad for an MOT I thought !!
I'll use this list as a basis for developing what might be seen locally and endeavour to cover the area on more than one occasion per year, MOT day!! It's not in any order, just as the birds were encountered.
House Martin, Starling, Blackbird, Song Thrush, Robin, BlueTit, Dunnock, Willow Warbler, Chaffinch, Blackap, Wren, Woodpigeon, Pheasant, Greenfinch, Garden Warbler, Jackdaw, Curlew, Collared Dove, Rook, Swallow, Goldfinch, Grey Wagtail and House Sparrow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)