Standing in support of the badger cull activists

badgerOur focus is on the illegal persecution of raptors that is closely associated with the game-shooting industry. However, exceptional circumstances have prompted us to post this blog entry.

The badger cull in parts of south-west England is imminent, if it hasn’t already started (see here). It is a government-sanctioned cull of a protected species for spurious, non-scientific reasons. Sound familiar?

This blog entry is to show our support for the hundreds of activists who have been, and still are, doing their utmost to prevent this cull from happening.

If you can’t make it to the badger kill-zones but you want to show your support for those activists you can:

1. Sign the e-petition (well over a quarter of a million people already have) – sign it here.

2. Contribute to the activists’ wish-list of equipment to help them in the field – the cheapest item is about £3 for a pack of rechargeable batteries. View their wish-list (and buy them something) here.

For more info about the whole disgraceful issue, read the ‘Stop the Cull’ website here.

Good luck and thank you to all those activists on the ground tonight and over the following six week cull period.

48 Responses to “Standing in support of the badger cull activists”

  1. August 26, 2013 at 10:18 pm

    The cull is happening now and it is so awful and feel helpless to stop it, it is not in my name…. stupid government….

  2. 2 Rural Rascal
    August 26, 2013 at 10:39 pm

    The problem is that TB has cost £500m to control in England over the last 10 years with 28,000 cattle slaughtered in 2012 alone. It is rapidly spreading into Scotland and guess what…..so are badgers.

    • 3 Sophie Wells
      August 26, 2013 at 11:27 pm

      Breed more native cattle then and improve biosecurity measures, plus give the vaccination schemes a chance to bring results. Wanton killing is not the answer! The incidence of bovine TB is significantly lower in Scotland. Could one of the reasons be because there are more native cattle species being bred up here, and less imports of foreign breeds that are more susceptible to the disease. The territory for badger populations is certainly ideal, so there must be other reasons behind the low incidence!!!

    • August 26, 2013 at 11:29 pm

      This has all been gone over in the press but still i will repeat it. The cull is madness.
      They don’t even know how many badgers there are and yet the aim is to kill 70%. And yet this is called a test.
      Even if it works the effect will be minimal. It will not stop TB and it could even spread it.
      Man fucks up and the wildlife pays. That is just plain wrong.

    • 5 nirofo
      August 27, 2013 at 12:32 am

      Badgers have always been in Scotland! A vaccine is available for the cattle but it seems the EU are not prepared to accept cattle that have been vaccinated, they’d sooner let the Badgers be killed. It’s the £££££ calling the shots again.

    • 6 Marco McGinty
      August 27, 2013 at 1:54 am

      That’s not strictly true. The Scottish badger population is generally considered to be stable and TB free, so I’m not sure where you got that information.

    • 8 Jimmy
      August 27, 2013 at 4:29 pm

      TBH I don’t think local culls of badgers affect the overall population. That appears to be true of other countries that have similar TB control programmes for wildlife. I think we’ve enough on our plate protecting raptors that have a much more threatened conservation status and are persecuted for much more dubious reasons.

      • 9 Marco McGinty
        August 27, 2013 at 8:28 pm

        Jimmy, there are serious implications in relation to this cull. The Badger is a fully protected species in the UK, like all our raptors, but if this pro-bloodsports government can legitimise a Badger cull, completely ignoring scientific evidence and in obvious favour to landholding friends, then it is a worrying stepping stone to legalised raptor culling.

  3. 11 Marco McGinty
    August 26, 2013 at 10:55 pm

    Yes, the cull was due to start tonight, so I hope that the activists can make it as difficult as possible, whilst staying on the right side of the law.

    I signed this petition a good while back for the very reasons you mention. Britain’s “greenest Government ever” once again being environmentally and ecologically destructive in their attempts to appease their landowning friends. Blatantly ignoring science and blatantly ignoring the wishes of the electorate, this ConDem coalition has been one of the worst things to have happened to the UK. And shame on those MPs that didn’t use their vote. It must be great to be paid vast sums of money and not carry out your duties and represent your constituents

  4. 13 Chris Roberts
    August 27, 2013 at 9:05 am

    Man caused the problem the same as he did with the foot and mouth of a dozen years ago, all in the name of greed. As has been said British cattle with British Badgers, no problem. Man has caused all the problems in the countryside all the way back to introducing the American grey squirrel in the 19th century, to the detriment of our native red squirrel.

  5. August 27, 2013 at 10:52 am

    I bet it won’t be long until we start hearing that raptors may be carrying TB too……

    Thoughts are with those volunteers out there protecting our wildlife from this mindless and bloody slaughter of 5000 badgers. The trauma that these badgers will go through as well as the inevitable suffering from injury that many will suffer doesn’t bare thinking about. It doesn’t take an Einstein to realise that this bloody exercise has only been implemented to appease farmers and those associated with land and farming.

    I know this is going on a tangent slightly and onto another issue, although I believe it is connected and shows how we conveniently ignore other factors that may be related to the spread of TB.

    There are 184 foxhound packs in England and Wales, 72 beagle packs and 9 fell packs. Each hunt keep approximately fifty dogs and they go out on average three times a week. These hunts operate across most of rural England and Wales in pursuit of their ‘quarry’. They meet at farms and regularly go through farms and farmland where cattle are present. They defecate and urinate on farmland. Also, following these hounds will be countless horses, off road vehicles and quad bikes.

    Here below is some interesting reading which doesn’t entirely count fox hunting and related recreational activities out in helping the spread TB across the country. DEFRA actually conclude that further studies need to be carried out.


    6 Mar 2012

    Can hunting spread bovine TB? This is an interesting question which has never been researched. For those who experience the hunt on their land, very few are likely to consider the biosecurity risks from so many dogs, horses, people and vehicles as they pass unhindered from one farm to another. Interestingly hunts were suspended for around 10 months during the Foot and Mouth outbreak in 2000-2001. In the battle against bovine TB there has been much emphasis on the importance of bio-security, so surely any potential source of bacteria spread should not be ignored if the risks of bovine TB are to be believed? However, saying that we know that some basic areas of concern, eg spreading slurry on land, whilst being recognised as potential sources of infection, have been largely ignored, with such practices continuing, presumably because this is a difficult area to control. This is extracted from an NFU advice sheet; “Bovine TB organisms can be excreted in the faeces of infected cattle – potentially contaminating the farm environment. Storing slurry or manure helps kill off the TB bacteria over time. You can use slurry or manure on your own land while TB restrictions are in place, although you should consider the risk of spreading the disease to other stock or wildlife.”

    It was VIVA, the Vegetarians’ International Voice for Animals, that posed the question recently about the potential role hunts play in spreading TB in cattle (and wildlife). Could hunting with hounds carry some of the blame? This group raised the issue with James Paice, Minister for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs. The group included a map highlighting the areas of bovine TB and hunting. Viva suggested there is a correlation between areas where hunting takes place and TB; “The South and Southwest of England and Wales appears to have a higher concentration of hunting than anywhere else in the country – and it is here where TB infection is at its highest Of course there is hunting in other parts of the country, but our suggestion is not that hunting is a lone vector but is a possible accelerant to existing disease spread.” A hunt will typically be made up of 20 horses, 20-40 dogs and quad bikes which race across the fields of about five farms on each outing and often operate over such wide areas that it can include two counties or more. They go out up to three times a week and vary their courses.

    The NFU offers this advice: “Cleansing and disinfection is an important disease control measure and may help reduce the risk of infection spreading to other cattle or to other susceptible animals on your farm. Under certain conditions, M. bovis can survive in the environment for a long time, so it is good practice, and will be a requirement under notice, served by Animal Health, to cleanse and disinfect thoroughly all buildings where reactor cattle have been kept. It is particularly important to clean and disinfect any fittings or equipment that may have come into contact with sputum, faeces or milk from TB reactors.” The NFU also says: that whilst TB bacteria may only be infectious on pasture for a few days (but potentially more depending on the weather) it can remain infectious in cattle faeces for up to 8 weeks. It can remain infectious in soil for over 12 weeks. Viva says ‘What better clod-flying rotavator (outside farm machinery) could there be than 20 galloping horses and many dogs? Is it really such a stretch to imagine that this could be a route for passing TB to presently uninfected herds (and potentially to uninfected wildlife)?’

    In a letter dated 5 May 2011 from Professor Christianne Glossop, she says; ‘I do not deny that hunts could potentially increase the risk of spread of TB, however, there is no evidence of this. It would not, therefore, be proportionate to prevent hunts accessing the countryside, nor is it within my power to do so.’ She goes on to say; ‘… biosecirity is about putting in place measures to mitigate the risks of disease spread. I am clear that farmers should put in place appropriate measures to reduce disease transmission that are practical and proportionate. I also expect those who utilise the land for recreational purposes to be respectful and mindful of the potential for disease spread’. One does wonders just how proportionate it is to kill healthy cattle and badgers under the existing archaic policy that clearly is not working and is worse than the disease itself?

    Defra letter
    Thank you for your email of 13 February to Jim Paice about bovine TB.

You asked whether hunting has been considered as a vector for the spread of TB. There is no evidence that hunting contributes to the spread of TB. In addition, we are not aware of any evidence to indicate that hunting or any other countryside activity or recreation may be a significant factor. There is no obvious correlation on your map between the locations of hunts and high incidence of TB in cattle. The map clearly shows that hunting also takes place in areas of low TB incidence.

The M. bovis bacterium is not like the highly contagious viruses such as Foot and Mouth disease where we are concerned about spread by fomites (objects or vehicles that are capable of transmitting infectious organisms from one individual to another). This is because of differences in how well the pathogen survives in the environment and how it spreads between animals. 

You suggest that there is no evidence that hunting contributes to the spread of bovine TB because we have not looked for it. Our bovine TB Research & Development Programme is overseen by an independent TB Science Advisory Body, which provides expert oversight of Defra-funded bovine TB research, identifies gaps in the current evidence base and provides independent advice on the strategic direction of, and priorities for, all Defra-funded TB-related research.

New research ideas can be submitted by researchers as a concept note that should provide details of: any preliminary evidence to support the hypothesis put forward (including references to any relevant published scientific papers); how it is proposed to test the hypothesis including statistical justification for the proposed sample size; who would carry out this research and their expertise in this type of study; and the proposed length of time and cost of this research.

Further details and the CSG16 form are available for download via:
    VIVA http://www.viva.org.uk/campaigns/badgers/hunting.php

    • 15 Marco McGinty
      August 27, 2013 at 10:46 pm

      Very interesting, Steve. I had never considered the spread of bTB from these means, but it is certainly possible. During the foot and mouth outbreak of 2001, there were disinfectant foot baths all over the place and even some roads had disinfectant mats spread across them, all in an attempt to curtail the spread of the disease.

      It was also interesting to learn of the large police presence in the area, stopping vehicles and questioning people. I hope they are as rigorous in this pursuit when hunts and game-shooting interests routinely break the law.

  6. 16 Tony Warburton MBE
    August 27, 2013 at 12:46 pm

    Yet another example of this so called ‘greenest government ever’ ignoring the scientific evidence presented to them, and cow-towing to Defra and the NFU. It will be naive to believe that badgers will only be culled in the trial areas. The cowboys will think all their Christmas’s have come early. i.e. “we are doing you a service guv”!

  7. 17 Grouseman
    August 27, 2013 at 7:37 pm

    This country has gone nuts when an overpopulated and common creature takes all priority over people livelihoods and in many cases safety! This cull will not even remotely effect the countrywide population of badgers but something has to be done. Britains farmers have fed this nation through two world wars and in recent years have been driven to the brink by Europe and labour policies, supermarkets and the CAP. At one time specific animals or sets were targeted and discreetly desposed of by the ministry and both farmers and badgers ticked over side by side. It’s not just a case of economics how would it feel to have to see ur whole life’s work slaughtered in front of you not just once but perhaps two or three times. All for the sake of an animal whose population has exploded and is increasing every year!

    I’m sure the nations farmers are glad to have your support!

  8. 22 Marco McGinty
    August 27, 2013 at 9:08 pm

    “This country has gone nuts when an overpopulated and common creature takes all priority over people livelihoods and in many cases safety.”

    Are you talking about grouse, Grouseman?

    Grouse are overpopulated and common, they take all priority over those involved in shooting them, to the detriment of all predatory creatures, the livelihoods of many are affected by grouse shooting and its illegal activities, and there are obvious safety concerns for members of the public stumbling over deadly poisonous substances laid out illegally to kill protected species.

    “All for the sake of an animal whose population has exploded and is increasing every year!”

    More hypocrisy, Grouseman. The pheasant population explodes and increases every year, yet you and your kind get upset if a few buzzards take a few poults, ending in the usual calls for legalised raptor culls.

    “how would it feel to have to see ur whole life’s work slaughtered in front of you not just once but perhaps two or three times.”

    Well, if more farmers chose to vaccinate their animals, instead of taking the unscientific approach, then people would have more respect. Or is the reluctance to vaccinate anything to do with export bans and therefore a loss of revenue?

  9. 23 Jeff Smith
    August 28, 2013 at 8:18 am

    Whatever you think, the scientific investigation into Btb, conclusively proved that the cull is futile, Lord Krebbs who headed up the investigation for the Government is totally Anti-cull, the people that are saying thereis a Badger population explosion are just following the NFU propaganda line, it’s not proven….the couldn’t even agree how many Badgers are in the cull zones, but they are going to shoot 70% of an unknown figure….is that sensible??
    This week, the Cattle Association published figures that showed Btb was at its lowest for 6 Years, hardly a booming epidemic is it.
    The fact that the Government propaganda machine was allowed to roll along prior to the cull has demonised the Badger to the ignorant folk, the lies about Humane it will be, the use of trained marksmen etc is a pure smokescreen, now they blame the badgers for biting seals, eating up the Hedghog population but ten bring in the worst crime of all – they even eat game bird eggs……this sends our countryside friends into a frenzy, how dare a Badger eat something depriving them of a chance to shot it for fun!!!
    If there is a worry of it coming to Scotland, pre-empt it with improved bio security, the Farmers in the UK say they will fight any Government measures to improve matters, they just want the Badgers culled……a disgraceful episode all round……….

    • 24 Marco McGinty
      August 28, 2013 at 5:28 pm

      Jeff, shooting 70% of an unknown figure not only lacks sense, but it is simply impossible. How can they possibly calculate, or even estimate, 70% of a population if the high end figure is not known? This just proves how unscientific the whole process is. But then again, all DEFRA ministers are either shooters or farmers – none of them have a background in conservation – so there is bound to be an unethical bias.

      But with this cull, Britain’s most environmentally destructive government ever are just testing the waters. This will be seen by many of those lying, self-proclaimed (and deluded) guardians of the countryside as a valuable stepping stone towards raptor culling.

  10. 25 Rob
    August 28, 2013 at 9:00 am

    Contradiction is blatent Grouseman, givent the release of 50 million non-native pheasants into our countryside just to appease the needs of sportsmen. Native species recovering to “normalised” populations just don’t seem acceptable to people who can only reconcile their drive to control anything they see fit.
    My friendly gamekeepers I know endorse privately that they are expected to do just this and breaking the law is fine if you don’t get caught which of course, they rarely do because of when and where they carry our their work.
    The key point to all of this is that too many landowners and farmners think that they have a right to control anything they see as a threat to their livlihoods and traditions regardless of whether this is logical, ethical, advantgeous or backed up by scientific study and evidence.

  11. 26 Rural Rascal
    August 28, 2013 at 5:24 pm

    I can only comment on what I see, not on what others say. Eight years ago there were no badger setts within a two mile radius. Five years ago the first sett appeared and now I have identified three active setts each with 5 – 7 animals. And funnily enough the first positive reactors in cattle showed up 3 years ago. What’s happening?

  12. 27 Marco McGinty
    August 28, 2013 at 11:13 pm

    Perhaps the onset of bTB in your area has been down to animal movements, or has been recently suggested, through the movements of other animals and vehicles. If you can categorically state that there were no farm-to-farm animal movements, no vehicular farm-to-farm movements and no human farm-to-farm movements of any kind in those five years, then I will accept that the Badgers are the cause in your area. If not, then your unscientific guesswork is of no value whatsoever.

    However, it has been suggested in scientific papers that bTB infections can lie dormant in cattle for years, only to reactivate in old age. This could mean that the disease was already in the flock before the badgers arrived.

  13. 28 Rural Rascal
    August 30, 2013 at 8:35 pm


    Fair comment…….but look at the success of possum trapping and poisoning in controlling Bovine TB in New Zealand. DoC are streets ahead of the UK agencies in controlling issues over there.

    • 29 Marco McGinty
      August 30, 2013 at 10:31 pm

      Possums are an introduced species, and therein lies the problem. Non-native introductions can pose real problems. But the fact remains that bTB is a global problem and it exists in areas where there are no badgers, so to proceed with an unscientific cull in this country will prove nothing. I read somewhere that there will be no post-mortems on any badger killed during this process, and you really have to ask why. If this government, allied with the NFU, are so convinced that badgers are the problem, then why are they not even testing for the disease? What do they have to hide?

  14. 30 Grouseman
    August 30, 2013 at 9:02 pm

    Just another angle – culling badgers will also help our struggling honey bees!

    • 31 Marco McGinty
      August 30, 2013 at 10:34 pm

      Stop being an idiot.

      • 32 Grouseman
        August 31, 2013 at 7:17 pm

        It’s a serious issue they are a major food source for badgers as are slow worms (which are critically endangered) the decline of bees is a serious problem for britains countryside!

        • 33 Marco McGinty
          August 31, 2013 at 11:29 pm

          All the species you mention have co-existed for millennia. and despite your ill-informed proclamation, the effects Badgers will have on the future of these two populations will be inconsequential. Far more worrying for honey bees, is the amount of insecticides and pesticides pumped into the country each year. And far more worryingly for the slow-worm is the huge numbers of non-native pheasants released into the countryside each year.

          But then again, if people are worried about supposed burgeoning badger populations, then perhaps certain elements of society should stop killing the badger’s main predators, such as foxes and eagles.

          • 34 anon
            September 1, 2013 at 10:19 am

            Mr McGinty, on the subject of ill informed proclamations, do you seriously believe that a fox has any chance of predating on a badger? Have you seen the size difference?

            • 35 Marco McGinty
              September 1, 2013 at 6:47 pm

              Adult foxes will take young badgers.

              • 36 Marco McGinty
                September 1, 2013 at 7:14 pm

                You see, if you are prepared to take ages and sizes into account, you begin to see the fuller picture. Mice eating Albatrosses and Buzzards eating Ospreys all sound unusual to start with, but if the Albatross and Osprey are at a very early stage of development, then it all begins to make sense.

    • 37 Tiercel
      September 3, 2013 at 11:59 am

      I’d love to see the evidence for this one??

  15. 38 notmyrealname
    September 1, 2013 at 6:44 pm

    Sophie Wells, You do realise this is an anonymous blog, don’t you? If anonymity is good enough for the those posting the articles then it’s good enough for those commenting on them.

  16. 40 Grouseman
    September 1, 2013 at 9:58 pm

    Marco if foxes were really a threat to young badgers why are they prepared to co-habitate in the same set as frequently happens!?

    As for eagles predating badgers, correct me if I’m wrong but badgers are primarily nocturnal animals so do the eagles use lamps or nightvision to hunt them?! Oh and even a young badger by the time it leaves the set is still a fair challenge for an eagle it would have to be pretty desperate for food!

    Actually if u got your wishes and sporting estates and the gamekeeping industry folded that’s probably how desperate for good they would get as there would be little other prey species left!!

    • 41 Merlin
      September 2, 2013 at 8:13 am

      Grouseman wrote “ It’s a serious issue they are a major food source for badgers as are slow worms (which are critically endangered) the decline of bees is a serious problem for Britain’s countryside!”
      Couple of questions for you Grouseman, I wont hold my breath for an answer though.
      You seem to be forgetting Pheasants kill both these species too, with 35 million annually released which of the two, the Badger or the Pheasant do you think has more impact? Bearing in mind there is only so much food in the wild, and with the use pesticides and herbicides reducing this in many areas and with many farmland species in decline, don’t you think there should be a ceiling on how many of these non native birds are released?
      GWCT has called for a moratorium on Grey Partridges, its spending a fortune on looking for an answer into its decline, the answer is plain to see for anyone without blinkers. It cannot compete with the larger pheasant and the more robust Red Leg. The more of these larger birds you release, the more competition for the Grey. This is not the answer GWCT want though.
      With Woodcock and Golden Plover numbers dwindling, how long will it be before GWCT has the guts to call for a moratorium on these species too, as it had too in the case of the Curlew, or do we once again have to let numbers get critically low before you are forced to stop shooting them.

      • 42 Marco McGinty
        September 2, 2013 at 5:07 pm

        Merlin, I’ve already made some of these points to Grouseman, and unsurprisingly he has chosen to ignore the issue. I honestly can’t remember a single person having so many arguments destroyed on the one site.

        But anyway, back to you Grouseman. My statement was factual – Badgers can be predated by eagles and foxes. But then again, I shouldn’t be surprised that someone from the shooting lobby chooses to ignore scientific evidence in favour of unscientific, outdated, mythological nonsense.

        Yes, co-habitation of foxes and badgers does occur, but this doesn’t rule out the fact that foxes can and will take badger cubs (or badgers can and will take fox cubs). Just the same as snakes and amphibians can be found hibernating together. So, as a result of this reptile/amphibian co-habitation, are you seriously trying to suggest that snakes do not predate amphibians?

        And as for your facetious response about eagles using lamps or nightvision, well, you managed to destroy your very own argument. You did say that badgers are “primarily nocturnal”, and therein lies the very proof of your self-defeat. Primarily, not strictly, nocturnal – that means that the species can be active at dawn, dusk, or even in broad daylight.

      • 43 Grouseman
        September 2, 2013 at 9:53 pm

        To be honest my comment about the badgers predading bees was slightly tongue in cheek but I am more than happy to reply to your questions.

        One pheasants do not go round digging up bee hives in the way badgers do but even if they did what volume of food would a badger need in comparison to a pheasant!? The difference I’m quantity would be huge!

        As for the threat to grey partridge I totally agree with you in terms of their relationship with pheasants and red-legged partridge. They are a species which reacts more favourably without having to compete with the other two. The other factors reducing numbers of greys in more intensive farming practices and a reduction in predator control/intensive management.

        You will find that most shoots with put a voluntary ban on shooting vulnerable game without it ever being enforced. Removing species from the game list is unlikely to ever help its recovery, take capercaillie for example. Bearing in mind it wasnt that long ago they were shot as vermin by a government agency and forestry companies not overshot for sport.

        • 44 Marco McGinty
          September 3, 2013 at 5:47 pm

          Considering it was you that highlighted the Badger/Slow-worm issue, you have conveniently ignored the greater problems that non-native pheasants have on slow-worms. Would you care to comment on that?

    • 45 Marco McGinty
      September 2, 2013 at 9:53 pm

      Just to answer you final point Grouseman, which has to rank as one the most ridiculous statements I’ve ever read. As I’ve said before, I am not offended by those that want to shoot for the pot, and I do not object to walk-up shooting, however I do object to those estates that wantonly and deliberately persecute raptors and completely ignore the laws of the land.

      I believe that if those sporting estates and that section of the gamekeeping industry folded, we would finally see a resurgence in predators, when several species would be able to reclaim territories, territories that have been denied to them for decades due to relentless persecution.

      And exactly how did you arrive at your final point? Predators and prey have co-existed for millennia, long before the arrival of the environmentally-destructive game estates. That’s an absolute fact, so this obscene idea of yours that game estates are good for raptors clearly illustrates your lack of knowledge and your total disregard for scientific understanding.

    • 46 nirofo
      September 3, 2013 at 3:35 pm

      Yes, Badgers do cohabit with Foxes, they also predate one another at times.

      Golden Eagles regularly prey on Badgers an Foxes, I have seen many an eagles dining table, (plucking platform) littered with the remains of Badgers and Foxes, and no, the eagles weren’t wearing night vision goggles, they caught their prey in the daylight.

      If the gamekeeping industry were to fold untold amounts of wildlife would heave a sigh of relief, the prospect of such an event taking place is frankly quite orgasmic! Recovery of the estate lands would take many years but slowly the upland areas of the country would return to what they should have always been, a haven for all sorts of wildlife, including Raptors. I think I must go away for a while and sit in a corner to weep over the untold amount of destruction heaped on our environment and it’s wildlife by the grouse shooting fraternity and witnessed by my own eyes !!!

  17. 47 Stewart Love
    September 2, 2013 at 10:15 pm

    Have encountered a Badger in daylight before. Both myself and my dog a Border Terrier came face to face with one in woods at Chatelherault Country Park one morning around 9am in the autumn. The badger shot into the trees followed by the dog who fortunately came back to my call before any damage was done on both sides. so it does happen, may not be the rule but it can happen.

  18. 48 Tiercel
    September 3, 2013 at 11:58 am

    Today badgers, tomorrow hen harriers, sparrowhawks, buzzards & peregrines.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Blog Stats

  • 7,380,065 hits


Our recent blog visitors