|
Our main obstacle is the law concerning the protection of
raptors. According to the RSPB and SNH raptors at the moment cannot be
controlled no matter how much damage they are doing to private stock.
However there is a derogation in the law allowing the control of raptors
should the need arise. This allows raptors to be controlled providing it is
proved that controlling them is:
-
in the interests of public health and safety
-
in the interests of air safety
-
to prevent serious damage to crops, livestock,
forests, fisheries and water
-
for the protection of fauna and flora
-
for the purpose of research and teaching, of
repopulation, of reintroduction and for the breeding necessary for
these purposes.
Under this law nos. 3 and 4 if implemented could allow
protection of stock.
 Birds are protected both under UK law (Wildlife and
Countryside Act 1981) and European law (Wild Birds Directive 1979). The 1981
Act was intended to implement the 1979 Directive and, as UK law is subject
to the 1979 Directive. Article 2 of the 1979 Directive requires Member
States to take requisite measures to maintain the population of bird species
at a level that corresponds to ecological, scientific and cultural
requirements, while taking account of economic and recreational
requirements or to adapt the population of these species to
that level.
The Act sets out at length the circumstances under which
its terms would not apply provided that any action taken against wild
birds was within the terms of a licence granted in accordance with the
provisions of the Act. At present it is also permissible under the terms of
the 1981 Act for a protected bird, other than one listed in Schedule 1 to
the Act, to be killed without a licence if it can be shown that the action
was necessary for the purpose of preventing serious damage to livestock,
foodstuffs for livestock, crops, vegetables, fruit, growing timbers or
fisheries.
Our second obstacle to raptor control is the RSPB and
SNH.
SNH is advised by the RSPB who, because of their financial interest in
birds, have always advised against bird controls. The RSPB have for years
led their members to believe that all birds need protection.
We believe the RSPB fear any deviation from this line
could lead to a drop in subscriptions. As the RSPB are now one of the
largest landowners in the UK any drop in their finances could lead to major
changes in their structure. We find it incredible that the RSPB are the main
advisors to the government given this personal interest. We think that they
cannot, under the circumstances, be seen as an impartial advisor, especially
on predatory species of birds.
We are continuously told by SNH and RSPB that the general
public would not tolerate a controlled cull of raptors. The SGA disagree
with this statement. If the public were told the truth about predation and
winged predator numbers we are sure they would see the need for some species
of raptors and fish eating birds to be controlled in the interests of good
countryside management.
In the past and present the RSPB and SNH have controlled
predatory gulls and ravens to reduce predation on other species, although
they do not publicise this fact. For SNH and RSPB to block any proposals put
forward by keepers to protect their stock and maintain a balanced
countryside is, to say the least, hypocritical. |
