Further to Tuesday’s blog about Natural England inviting the Ministry of Defence and Yorkshire Water to participate in the highly controversial hen harrier brood meddling plan (see here), we’ve heard back from Andrew Walker, Catchment Strategy Manager at Yorkshire Water (and we thank him for his prompt & courteous correspondence).
“Natural England asked YWS to support the trial of a Hen Harrier recovery plan which comprises a six point plan. The last of these was to scope out feasibility for trialling brood management for which we sought further explanation from Natural England. The explanation we received was that a group, chaired by Natural England, was currently working up a licence application for this trial. The proposal, we understand, is that all nests in the English uplands – where the land is included within the geographical scope of the licence – could contribute to the density figure (generally expressed as 10km between nests) but that landowners will make the decision as to whether or not they wish a particular nest to be brood managed in this way.
We support hen harrier conservation and, on balance, decided to support the plan because we think that a multi stakeholder approach is more likely to be effective because we don’t see the population we may expect at this moment in time“.
It’s not clear how the temporary removal of protected hen harriers, for the sole benefit of the grouse-shooting industry, fits in with Yorkshire Water’s Biodiversity Action Plan. Nor how the later release of those brood meddled birds back to the same general area will help increase the harrier population, especially as their release will coincide with the peak period of the grouse shooting season (August, September & October) and we know from far too many examples that young harriers are ruthlessly (and illegally) targeted on grouse moors during this period, presumably as they might ‘disrupt’ the grouse drives and so reduce the number of grouse available to be shot.
It’s bad enough that Yorkshire Water permits driven grouse shooting (with highly toxic lead ammunition) on its landholdings, knowing full well the proven links between driven grouse shooting and the criminal persecution of birds of prey, especially in Yorkshire, the raptor killing capital of the UK. But to then sign up to the legal persecution of hen harriers (because effectively that’s what brood meddling amounts to) to appease the grouse shooting industry? Sorry, Yorkshire Water, your environmental credentials have just been flushed down the toilet.
Raptor Persecution UK 
Sadly, with water providers there is no free market that would allow us to switch to show our disapproval. they are wholly immune from market forces.
I for one will be switching and explaining why! If enough people switch it does have an impact! We can but try!
How can you switch?
Apologies Alf King. You are right. The water companies have a market stranglehold. I’ve just been looking for alternative suppliers. There are none! I’ll definitely be complaining though.
Interesting that according to YW, Natural England are still in the process of “working up the licence application”. Thought that was in the process of being assessed already having been submitted some months ago?
Natural England contacted Yorkshire Water in March 2017, and at that time we understand (from FoI responses) that the licence was indeed still being worked up, but was submitted (by NE to NE!) shortly thereafter.
This is a disgrace. I am surprised that Yorkshire Water appears to have been so readily misled into supporting this foolhardy and crazy project! They have been involved in some excellent and praiseworthy environmental and conservation undertakings – sadly this does not feature amongst them.
I am not in the least being sincere…. but before they allow there grouse farms to be striped of their specially protected species, have they ever insisted that their tenants implement measures that might negate any impacts? Eg have they insisted that their tenants undertake diversionary feeding? Why are they so eager to jump to the most extreme, controversial measure before trying the “proven” compromise?
A big mistake by Yorkshire Water, which may well come back to haunt them. If you support Hen harrier conservation stop illegal persecution – stopping driven grouse shooting on your land as a first step.
I was not aware that Yorkshire Water were currently inundated with Hen Harriers. How many successful Hen Harrier nests have there been on Yorkshire Water’s land in the last few years?
Perhaps we should ask them to help reintroduce this species back into Yorkshire as a first step. I was looking forward to seeing French speaking Hen Harriers on’t moors.
Here in the real world brood meddling seems light years away – not that I support it in any way shape or form.
None, the last birds that displayed here in Nidderdale on YW land had the gill they were in burnt out by the tenants keeper. That tenant still rents that land!
These people might be brain dead. The answer is to getgrouse shooting banned. Perhaps that would make some influential people sit up and take notice.
‘All (HH) nests in the English uplands could contribute to the density figure’ (sic). Ah yes, now what was that figure this year again – 3? And then release them back into the same area where they were taken from (if they survive the process of removal and captive rearing). Now that really sounds like a well thought out project for a red data species!. Do we know which primary school devised it ? However I am sure we can all see the logic of it, after all, the Yorkshire Moors have such a wonderful record of raptor conservation!!!
That is extremely unfair to primary schools.
I am absolutely sure that if it was up to primary school kids, HH persecution would finished.
As a retired primary school teacher, I’d echo anandprasad.
At the last general election, my wife’s school carried out mock elections, with Y5/6 children developing their own parties. Of the four worked up (without adult input), all of them had the environment as their priority area, and raptor persecution (we regularly see red kites overhead,being in Wharfedale) was high on the agenda . Children know the value of the environment,and are even at a young age increasingly aware of the future to make such a crass mistake as YW is making – it’s the adults who have completely lost it.
That is exactly my point but expanded eloquently.
Of course i was joking in taking Tony literally.
The problem is that raptor killers, their mafia bosses and their enablers really are the lowest of the low and leave no comparison (‘animals’ is the obviously the least accurate). Every insult just insults the object of comparison. Mafia is quite good as it fits the organized crime aspect. The HH Disastrous Plan is supporting organized crime.
Just thought; ‘scum’ is quite good. Although i have nothing against algae, fungi and bacteria.
I think criminal scum covers it very well Anand. They may not all commit the crimes but in their eyes and false beliefs system they all benefit from it.
Yes, it is this ‘they all benefit from it’ aspect that is so shocking.
I presume that walked up grouse moors will not profit from persecution because they aren’t aiming for large bags (they may even lose out through adverse publicity) but all driven grouse moors will profit.
When the innocent grouse moors start to turn against the criminals then the tide will have well and truly turned.
From my personal experience I don’t hold with the idea that harriers are less persecuted on walked-up grouse moors. I have watched what happens on three separate franchises over a period of forty-five years, got to know most of the keepers, and harriers were intensively persecuted on all three sites, one driven and two non-driven. I suggest that some research is required to discover if this observation is reflected elsewhere in the UK. It worries me that so many raptor workers seem to believe that there is a significant difference in persecution levels between driven and walked-up, because in my study areas I have never found it to be the case. Attempted elimination of foxes and hen harriers are priority objectives at both. The only positive trend appears to occur when a grouse moor goes out of business, and even then keepers from nearby estates organise culls on what they refer to as “peripheral blight.”
If this doesn’t illustrate the ludicrousness of the brood meddling scheme, what would? Did Yorkshire Water consult the RSPB to determine their views on the project proposal? Are they even aware that the RSPB withdrew their cooperation on practical and ethical grounds? I feel that as a movement we are failing the future security and conservation of hen harriers, by not convincing the various bodies of the foolhardiness and lack of any scientific basis for proceeding with such madness. The position of Natural England on the matter is untenable.
I am appalled but not surprised that Yorkshire Water have become party to this travesty sold to them as Hen Harrier conservation. This is in great contrast to their neighbours to the west United Utilities whose input into Harrier conservation has been well publicized. It has always seemed odd that they funded the EMBER report and the work that led up to that report yet still have driven grouse shooting. you would have thought that tenancies would end and not be renewed. Does anyone know if their board contains grouse shooters?I shall of course be writing to complain.
Interestingly, the list of directors on the YW board doesn’t appear to include anyone with a specific role in communications or customer relations. Probably tells us quite a bit about their culture.
There’s just no sense to removing a bird, from its natural environment, simply to return it to the same place. That’s not ‘management’: that’s environmental vandalism. I appreciate that ‘Raptor Persecution UK has decided to simply watch and wait (not much more we can do), but this REALLY stinks!
I very concerned that Natural England see that the best way of protecting a critically endangered species is helping. It would not be necessary if it was not for illegal persecution. I don’t know about after Brexit, but surely currently this would be against provisions of the EU Birds directive?
Hi Fight for Fairness,
Brood meddling is being presented as “a trial” which means the normal regulations probably don’t apply.
There may well still be a legal challenge against it though. Waiting to see the actual licence, assuming NE approves it. It should be available for scrutiny early in the New Year.
I know that this blog is keen on being scientifically accurate so please don’t take offence by me pointing out that metallic lead, the form of lead that is used in lead ammunition, is not highly toxic. Scaremongering doesn’t convert anyone to the cause.
If that’s the case, why has it been banned for use in shooting wildfowl and why do Red Kites, for example, also suffer adverse effects after ingesting it?