Category: Nature Diary

Here, there and everywhere in between

A busy week in the birding stakes with numerous trips around dear old Northumberland – as I attempt to stay true to my county year list promises – and a few jaunts further afield. This week’s haul of avian goodies taking my “Northumberland 2017” list up to a respectable (I think), 136 species for January – it would seem that I am on track, though I doubt that in the long-run I will be able to keep pace with the others attempting the same. Due to both my complete reliance on public transport and my unwillingness to hold my cards almost selfishly close to my chest. Though it is all for fun in the end and thus far, I am enjoying it.

Where to start? Well, last weekend found me dashing off for another look at the Pacific Diver languishing, at the time, at Druridge Bay Country Park. A short bus journey culminating in fantastic views of the vagrant as it fished, unphased by its admirers, some 10m offshore amid the assembled ranks of the local Tufted Ducks. The views obtained here far better than on my previous two trips and the experience amplified as the grating call of a Willow Tit emanated from the lakes scrubby peripheries. Later, a good sized flock of 80+ Siskin were noted on route home while a second Willow Tit was at Hadston.

The next (and less arduous) bus journey found me heading to Blyth; to a spot not far from my home in Bedlington where, after a few moments of gazing eagerly at some ramshackle farmland ruins, a Little Owl hopped politely into view. The first individual of this species I have seen in some time and a personal favourite to boot, despite their perpetually perturbed appearance. The trip home, after an hour alone with the owl, coming up trumps with a surprise flock of c60 Waxwing at Bedlington. The birds perched in a roadside Sycamore a mere 1/4 mile from my front door. Always nice to see and followed by a dusk jaunt to Northumberlandia where, despite missing my target species, a female Scaup and a few dozen Brambling were seen.

Next, a wander into the murky depths of Newcastle with the significant other in search of what has, for quite some time, been my nemesis species in the region: Ring-Necked Parakeet. Seventeen of which were quickly noted following a kind tip-off. The green-ones showing characteristically well as they jostled for position in their “favourite” tree, occasionally making breif flights over the nearby houses. A delightful sight in truth and always one I look forward too, despite the alien nature of the birds themselves.

Finally, the fourth bus of the week, today, took me to Morpeth; where an enjoyable few hours were spent combing through the various patches of woodland that line the banks of the River Wansbeck as it approaches the town. A dozen Brambling were nice to see here, as ever, and good counts of other common yet endearing species were obtained, with Jay, Nuthatch, Treecreeper, Bullfinch and Siskin present en-masse. Though these soon fell into obscurity when the sneezing call of my target species – Marsh Tit – was finally heard from the gnarled branches of a riverside oak. Followed, in quick succession, by an altogether surprising addition to the day’s haul: a Green Woodpecker. The bird heard on a number of occasions but giving only the briefest of views as it flew between trees. Not an easy bird to come by up here.

Sunny Morpeth this morning

 Further afield and I managed a few more prolonged jaunts this week, slotted between university commitments and other more menial tasks. The first taking both myself and Matt to the WWT’s Washington reserve where the adult drake Ferruginous Duck showed particularly well. A charming bird that I have put off going to see for some time whose copper colouring looked simply divine in the low Winter sun. A good rummage around the reserve – it would have been rude not to – turning up Willow Tit, Kestrel, Sparrowhawk, Siskin, Jay and, to my astonishment, 24 Bullfinch. I honestly don’t think I have ever seen so many in one place.

Heading even further South, this time in the company of some friends, yesterday provided another, even more alluring, lifer – White-Billed Diver. A bird that, given my unwillingness to travel to the far extremes of the country, I had accepted I would probably never seen. The quaint Lincolnshire river on which this hulking brute of a bird currently resides on a far cry from its usual abode and the views obtained – down to a matter of feet at times – superb, as opposed to distant and barely discernable. An attempt to end the day on an even higher note resulted in failure as we were outfoxed (twice) by the Yorkshire Pine Bunting; though the sight of 100+ Yellowhammer, c25 Corn Bunting and dozens of Tree Sparrow here was nice. Corn Bunting especially so, given the complete absence of the species in my local area and the woeful state of the UK population.

A few shots from Washington

Another week in Northumberland

This week has been a jolly good one; one jam-packed with exquisite encounters, cold fingers, early mornings and, of course, some brilliant birds. Each day taking me somewhere new in the local area as I attempt to get the year list off to a decent start and reacquaint myself with the local wilds from which I have been woefully far removed of late. I blame university and the general tedium of life at present.

Where to start? Well, the obvious highlight of the week has to be the Pacific Diver currently languishing on Ladyburn Lake – a little further up the coast from me. This individual, a juvenile, representing a county first; expertly identified by Alan Curry after a few days spent touring various coastal sites, including my own local patch at Blyth. I won’t live that one down in a hurry.

The diver itself really is a sight to behold: ridiculously obliging, distinctively marked and generally rather lovely. A visit to Druridge Bay earlier today providing the perfect opportunity to scrutinise the bird in greater detail. A welcome occurence given my first encounter with the bird a few days past at East Chevington; where I, along with others viewing it that day, wrongly labelled it as a Black-Throated Diver. Enjoying it and moving on absent much thought. The differences between the two species becoming much clearer today, with better views. My second visit, while conducted solely for educational purposes, also providing opportunity to silence the disparaging Twitter grumblers quick to pick up and comment on my misidentification. An added bonus, though the bird itself was well worth the trip and I even caught sight of the chin-strap!  Just look at these pictures.

On a more familiar note, my earlier trip to Chevington also came up trumps with delightful views of the seven Shorelark currently wintering near the burn mouth. A lovely species and always one to be savoured. The experience here made all the better by the appearance of 35 Twite, 19 Pied Wagtail and numerous Sanderling; all of whom seemed equally keen to exploit the festering piles of Bladderwrack here. A scan offshore here, a little later, providing a pleasant surprise in the form of 5 Scaup – four females and a rather dapper drake – as well as 13 Red-Throated Diver and a good haul of other winter goodies.  The only “new” bird for the year here consisting of a Water Rail doing its bestsquealingg stuck pig impression from the Southern reedbed.

Shorelark – East Chevington

Further south; Druridge Pools held the usual suspects – Shoveler, Tree Sparrow, Red-Breasted Merganser and some c2100 Pink-Footed Geese the best to be seen here. Though I am 99% sure I had a Tundra Bean Goose at one point too. Cresswell was quiet, the best bit coming in the shape of a female Peregrine harassing Woodpigeons in view of the Drift Cafe. Viewed and enjoyed while sampling some mighty fine carrot cake and a large Latte. A soggy trip around a flooded Stobswood later on producing little: a few Snipe, Fieldfare, Redwing and five Whooper Swans the best to be seen, while the walk home from the country park this morning yielded two separate Willow Tits and a large flock of some 100 Siskin.

Further afield, yesterday found me roaming around inner city Newcastle in the company of the significant other. Attempting to shake off a port-induced hangover with a trip around first, Jesmond Dene – where we failed to unearth the hoped for Parakeets but contented ourselves with nice views of Dipper and Jay, and, later, the housing estates of Heaton. Where perseverance paid off and we found ourselves gazing briefly at a very mobile flock of Waxwings. I do believe I am gradually converting Matt to birds…

Back home on the local patch, the winter continues to provide. Three visits proving incredibly enjoyable despite missing Glaucous Gull, Slavonian Grebe and, of course, the diver. A half hour stint at North Blyth coming up trumps with nice views of the wintering Black Redstart – at long last – in the company of a few Rock Pipit, Grey Wagtail and Linnet. And a seawatch proving enjoyable, despite the biting wind and resulting rosy cheeks. Common Scoter, Red-Throated Diver, Gannet, Eider, Razorbill, Guillemot and others all helping build this years Patchwork Challenge tally. Which reminds me, PWC have a cool new website which is well worth a visit. See here.

The estuary remained busy on Thursday: new species here for 2017 including Wigeon, Knot, Little Egret and Black-Tailed Godwit. A count of 19 Grey Plover representing a personal record, the plover ogled breifly before the birds (alongside everything else for that matter) fled upon the arrival of a male Peregrine. The outskirts of the site, later, providing nice views of Kestrel and Sparrowhawk, in addition to a wealth of common yet no less interesting passerines. The vibrant tones of Yellowhammer, Bullfinch and Greenfinch a welcome balm for eyes wearied by grey onslaught of winter.

A little further back but un-blogged, as of yet, and a trip out with Jack culminated in convincing views of the Goswick Black Scoter – at long last – with a drake Long-Tailed duck also welcome. Our journey home broken up by a trip to Prestwick Carr; where the Great Grey Shrike showed well at the top of a forlorn looking Beech and at least four Willow Tits were seen.

As you can see, I have had a whale of a time of late.

Cover image: Pacific Diver http://www.audubon.org/field-guide/bird/pacific-loon

The Waiting Game

Sometimes it is nice to just sit still; to abandon the urge to chase nature and allow wildlife to come to you. To wait; a moss-clad boulder, park bench, bank or fallen branch the ideal perch from which to watch the natural world go by, and from which to admire the myriad secretive creatures set to creep into consciousness as the minutes dwindle in quiet solitude.

This is exactly what I found myself doing yesterday evening; opting for an uncharacteristically patient approach to wildlife watching along the weathered banks of my local river, the Blyth. My seat for the duration of my stay – a mere half an hour – a fallen birch; her trunk slick to the touch and crumbling as a result of the trees prolonged and unrelenting decay. This particular tree, a favoured seat of mine for many years now, located midway through the Half-Penny Wood: a cherished childhood haunt that I discuss quite frequently on this blog, and one of only a scant few designated nature reserves in my local area. A rather nice place, in truth.

Waiting, as the light faded and the washed-out tones of the Winter day faded, gradually, into crepuscular darkness, all remained quiet. At least at first. The pronounced trickle of the Nesquick coloured river, rife with sediment, and occasional rustle in the jaded leaf-litter the only sounds to be heard. Abiotic notes, only noticed in my more quiet moments, soon cast into obscurity with a series of shrill screeches from the yellowed riverside grass. A vole, though who knows which species. The rodent clearly perturbed at the presence of some unseen being; voicing its displeasure from deep inside its fortress of rotten foliage.

A Dipper came next – though, as is often the case, I missed it. The electric call of the bird as it passed unseen, a painful indicator as to an opportunity missed. My head, on this occasion, turned the other way; the call heard once more above the soft rumble of water as the small bird, obscured by a bent, passed further upstream. The blow of its departure softened somewhat by the sight of another sought after woodland denizen. It’s arrival marked by a brief serious of maladroit notes as the bird – a bullfinch – dropped into the lower branches of a denuded alder. Watchful yet content at the far side of the river.

 Bullfinch have always been one of my favourite birds – so much to that, to my shame, I once considered a tattoo of one. The sight of the splendid little bird before me – plump, rosy red and sporting a delightfully glossy cap – a sight for Winter-weary eyes. A bird table regular whose appeal cannot be overstated: the birds themselves, resplendent in their vermillion finery (the males at least), surprisingly shy and reclusive for such a stocky songbird. Prone, at this time of year, to traversing the wood in small groups, or pairs; and rarely as single birds. The presence of the lone bachelor on this day, in this sense, somewhat surprising. Did his mate fall victim to the Winter weather? Mild though it has been. Or was it the local hawk? Maybe she is just waiting, pink feathers obscured behind the bottle-green veil of needles shrouding the nearby Yew.

Minutes pass after the finch departs, calling once more as it lifts, flying overhead and out of sight in a series of undulating motions. Gone, for now; biotic silence returned to the river and wood once again, albeit momentarily. Broken again with a sharp “zrik” and the familiar sight of a white/brown blur hurtling towards me from upstream. It is the Dipper again, flying back the way it came; seemingly having hit the invisible yet clearly defined force-field that separates his territory from that of the adjacent bird. The unseen territorial barrier than splits this small stretch of river in half – a barrier whose crossing, for the Dipper at least, carries the threat of retribution. Or, at the very least, a serious scolding courtesy of his peeved neighbour. Ready and willing to fight to maintain his borders and thus ensure his dominion over any nearby aquatic invertebrates.

The Dipper passes by in a flash; enjoyed briefly before it fades, once more, from sight. I follow suit, heading home in the same direction. My evening concluded in enjoyable fashion absent the need for far-ranging adventure nor physical excursion. The patient approach, when applied here, as with all places, forever fruitful.

Cover photo:  © Francis C. Franklin / CC-BY-SA-3.0, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=37675952

Martin Hughes-Games is wrong about Planet Earth

For clarities sake, let us get this out of the way first: I, personally, am a fan of both the Planet Earth series and presenter Martin Hughes-Games. More fond of the former than the latter, in truth, but boasting a positive perception of both. This post is not at all intended as an attack on Martin. Though, with that said…

I was a  taken aback somewhat this week when MHG took aim at Planet Earth II; setting social media ablaze as he accused natural history broadcasters of lulling viewers into a false sense of security by glossing over the woes of the natural world in favour of an enjoyable viewing experience. Openly, and rather bravely, lambasting the producers of the wildly popular BBC show for painting a false picture of the natural world and, ultimately, contributing little to the conservation of the embattled species it brings to our screens.

If the purpose of Martin’s piece was to generate debate, it was certainly successful; with many and more environmentalists discussing the Guardian piece over recent days. It was interesting and I enjoyed reading it. If only for the brief period of soul-searching which ensued upon its completion. Searching which, ultimately, did little to alter my stance on such shows; my adoration of Planet Earth and other, similar, documentaries, utterly unphased. I disagree with Martin (and others) most strongly on this matter.

In his article, MHG makes reference to a line commonly touted by broadcasters: that through showcasing the natural world in all its beauty and thus generating interest in wildlife, that more people at home will be inclined to conserve the species seen on their screens. A justification Martin labels as nonsensical yet I buy into hook, line, and sinker. For one reason alone: because of the profound effect shows such as this have had on my own life.

Of course, many things attributed to my current fascination with nature – family members, the beauty of my home county, even books – though I would be lying if I said that the sight of tigers, orca, elephants and other iconic creatures on my TV did not influence me. The beauty of such things, coupled with the unparalleled enthusiasm of Attenborough, Irwin and other childhood favourites, igniting the spark of curiosity for the wonders that lie beyond my front door. For the beauty of nature and the weird and wonderful creatures with whom we share our world. Curiosity which, later, lead me to explore the natural world for myself – propelling outwards to enjoy such things first hand; towards enjoyable encounters with wildlife which, later, attributed to a growing will to protect it. I agree fully with the BBC logic on this and I suspect many other young conservationists will too. At least in part.

That said, and while I boast sincere admiration of such documentaries, I agree with Martin that greater air-time should be dedicated to conservation. That we must present a realistic picture of what is going on in the world beyond our own ignorant bubbles. I would certainly watch shows dedicated solely to the topic of conservation and I suspect many of those reading this blog would too. Most being ecologists, nature writers or others already inspired to take up arms in defense of nature. This willingness to listen and learn does not, however, extend to all. And I suspect the vast majority of people would be turned off when faced with an hours worth of stern-faced preaching courtesy of a troubled TV naturalist.

For the vast majority of people, documentaries must “light” if they are going to have any lasting impact. They must be fun, exhilarating, breath-taking if they are to build curiosity and, almost certainly, must showcase splendor if they are to spark any sort of interest in wildlife. Something which is particularly true for younger viewers seeking thrills and action-packed spectacle – more and more of whom are currently tuning into such shows.  I know that, in my youth, had I been presented with drier, less uplifting material, as opposed to the sight of hunting orca or displaying birds of paradise, my enthusiasm would have burnt out rather quickly. In this sense, I find it hard to fault Planet Earth; it provided all of this by the bucket-load, and I cannot begrudge the BBC for favouring such material. Better to inspire through spectacle, in keeping with what I mentioned above, than bore the nation senseless with a prolonged bout of worried grumbling.

 Reading Martin’s rather eloquent article, another thing also sprang to mind: centered on his portrayal of Planet Earth as little other than a beautifully filmed soap opera. You would be forgiven, after reading, for believing that the show had given no mention to conservation at all and that it failed, entirely, to mention the myriad problems facing the world’s wildlife. I am pretty sure it did, and recall Sir David, on a number of occasions, highlighting the woes of the species shown during the show. Were we watching the same show Martin? The end of episode segments, in particular, giving mention to climate change, habitat loss and other problems caused by mankind. Something which goes without mentioning the sight of those turtles floundering amid the blights of human dominion over the world. I could be wrong, but surely such things count as an honest portrayal of the threats facing our wildlife?

I feel Planet Earth did dedicate time to conservation – perhaps not enough to satisfy the experts, but more than enough to inform the general public that there is, indeed, a problem. With such information presented in such a way that it did not appear preachy, nor tedious; secreted amid the uplifting sight of majestic creatures in all their glory. In a similar manner to what Springwatch does, no less, when it blends fun and serious discussion – amalgamating talk of declining hen harriers with the sight of a wood mouse deftly navigating a maze. Presenting vital information in a much more palatable manner, rife with fun and appeal. I will, however, resist the urge to point out that Martin himself works on a show that, arguably, does equally as “little for conservation”.

Ultimately, Planet Earth (and similar shows) provide a vital link to the natural world for millions, many of whom lack a great deal of nature in their daily lives. They have the potential to inspire, greatly and on a number of different levels, and remind each and every one of us, through no end of breathtaking sights, just what it is we are fighting for. Alternating between beauty and honestly in such a way to keep viewers hooked and in doing so, maintaining their potential to alter lives. Often motivating people to such an extent that they delve head-first into conservation, or, at the very least, build sympathy for the plight of our wildlife. In this sense, I feel shows such as this are important, vital even, and very much disagree with Martin Hughes-Games’s dismissive and wholly negative stance.

Image: By Jo Garbutt – Flickr: Chris, Michaela and Martin, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=33044524

6 Reasons I Spend Time In Nature

I spend the majority of my free time outdoors: birding, writing, taking pictures, recording, watching and, occasionally, ambling absent any particular aim. For me, the wilds that lie beyond my front door are a second home. On in which I can be myself, think, muse and hide away from the tedium of modern life. From social media, work, deadlines, noise, concrete and the judgmental eyes of others.  The outside world provides respite, plain and simple, though I do, at times, wonder just why – beyond wildlife and my choice of career – I spend so much time caked in mud and surrounded by leaves. With the results of said pondering shown below…

Creativity

As a writer, time outside is vital to my creativity. It inspires, greatly, on so many levels that the virtues of such cannot easily be put to word. New behaviors witnessed and new locations explored providing sensory experiences to warbler about and the colours, sights and sounds of nature providing ample ammunition for my work. With such things providing the basis for further reading and exploration and thus the discovery of facts that broaden both my horizons and knowledge. Something which, in turn, often leads to the discovery of new ideas: from new means by which to watch wildlife, to new places requiring exploration. With nature, ultimately, increasing both my focus and motivation levels beyond that of anything else.

Relief

Some people head for the spa when tensed or stressed, while others simply shut themselves off and engross themselves in a good book or movie. I head for the wilds: to my local woodland – Half-Penny – or to the beach. For me, nothing helps you wind down and forget the woes of daily life quite like a walk in nature. Where the menial problems of life find themselves eclipsed by life and death dramas far greater than our own. The outdoors are therapeutic, almost medicinal, and have a habit of generating that “feel good feeling” that so many of us crave when tensions build and everything seems that little bit too much.

The stress relieving qualities of nature have also been scientifically proven, with those spending time outdoors boasting a lower level of cortisol – the hormone used as an indicator of stress. It really is rather good for you.

Concentration

Everyone is surely familiar with the regular lapses in concentration that coincide with life indoors – when your attention to detail wavers as a result of monotony and boredom. For me, regular forays into the outdoors help rectify this. The intricate nature of our wild spaces – comprised of so many facets it beggars belief – almost always warranting closer investigation, and thus encouraging no end of scrutiny. Training the eyes and mind, so to speak, to peer past the obvious and into the finer aspects of what lies before you. A trait which, proceeding time outside, carries over into daily life. Of real benefit while proof reading, writing, reviewing or any other task requiring a critical eye. With time spent away during such excursions also providing a break from the norm and a change of scenery, making unsavory tasks just a little more bearable when you are forced to face them once more.

Health

Time outside is good for you on a cellular level, we all know this – it helps you stay in shape. Though, for me, the main health benefits of a life in nature center more on the mind. With this point linking in more with the second yet deserving of a place of its own.

Anxiety and depression have a habit of creeping up on you – when things out of your control occur and leave you feeling thoroughly downtrodden. These things are, at times, inevitable. Though the blow can be softened somewhat by nature – which has a habit of putting things into perspective. The hardships faced by our wildlife, humbling and the beauty of the natural world, wholly uplifting. The outdoors provide a place to think in quiet solitude – where one can dwell, cry and vent away from prying eyes – and deliver on the quaint nothingness than so many of us crave. Simply put, nature keeps me sane, and has a knack for greatly increasing my sense of optimism when faced with troubling scenarios.

Belonging

I suspect this is a trait shared with many who enjoy the outdoors, but nowhere do I feel more at home than when out and about in nature. Perhaps this is the suppressed hippy in me talking but I truly feel myself outside. Something which manifests itself in my choice of career, education, hobbies and later, may influence my choice of home. The troubles facing the natural world – besieged on all sides by the fruits of human ignorance – solidifying my resolve and motivating. To such an extent that I feel I must dedicate my time to protecting the places I hold so dear. And, ultimately, gifting me with the quiet satisfaction that in doing so, in standing up for nature, I am part of something far greater.

Happiness

Now, this is the main reason I venture outside, and I suspect it will be for the majority of people who do the same. Outside, I feel happy. I enjoy what I do and gain great pleasure from observing the daily lives of the creatures with whom we share our world. It can be exciting – often overwhelmingly so – as you ogle life and death battles for territory, food or a mate. Nature is thrilling – more so than any TV soap or documentary. While also educational, for those, like me who like to learn, and seldom repetitive. Each day providing something alien and new. With smiles appearing frequently and the warm feeling generated when witnessing something altogether magical, as is often the case in nature, lasting for some time afterwards.

Common Blue – James Common

Dwelling on Deer: Culls and Control

There is no way around it, our small island is positively bursting with deer. So many in fact, that the issue of overpopulation and its subsequent implications are up there with the other great threats facing our countryside. And, arguably, of much greater concern than other issues prone to dominating the headlines – many of which, though emotive, result in a much more limited fallout. The issue of overpopulation is under-reported, and when it is tackled in the media, more often than not, coverage is met with a barrage of scornful comments from those who hold Bambi to heart, peeved at the notion of widespread and systematic control. The polarised views of those on both sides of the “deer debate” spilling out again this week when it was announced that the City of London Corporation had decided to allow stalking in Epping Forest.

Like a great many people, I, personally, adore deer. The sight of a Roe buck bounding through a thicket representing one of the most inspiring sights in British nature. I do, however, also believe in deer control, for myriad reasons. Not least due to the impact of overpopulation on the countryside. I believe action must be taken against deer, on a large scale, and fully support ongoing efforts to bring down numbers across various areas of the country – despite my admiration of the beasts themselves. As such, and after catching wind that Muntjac – an invasive deer species from Asia – have been sighted in my local area for the first time in recent memory, I thought I would explain my views on the subject in a little more detail here.

The UK deer population is widely believed to be at its highest level for a millennia, with some sources claiming that numbers have effectively doubled since 1999. With numbers of our native red and roe deer soaring due to the extirpation of their natural predators – the bears, lynx, wolves and so forth which, historically, would have kept numbers in check. And numbers of our non-native species, Fallow, Muntjac, Chinese Water Deer and Sika, also on the up. The overall positive trend in deer numbers attributed, by the Deer Initiative (the body which promotes sustainable management of deer): to milder winters, changes in agriculture, increased woodland cover and greater habitat connectivity. In addition, again, to a lack of natural predators. All in all, there are estimated to be some two-million deer now residing in the UK, though given their elusive nature, there could well be many more.

But what does two-million deer mean for the ecological make-up of Britain? Surely such a monumental increase in native species – in the case of the red and roe, at least – should be celebrated? Well, no actually, it shouldn’t. At least by those who hold the best interests of our countryside to heart.

Deer, much like Beavers, are ecosystem engineers. They shape their habitat through grazing, something which would not pose a problem under normal circumstances, but can have a major impact on woodland ecosystems in the present. Selective browsing by deer hindering the growth of saplings and preventing the natural regeneration of trees. With oak, ash, hazel and rowan often hardest hit, yet not alone. And in Scotland, browsing by Red Deer has been shown to directly impact upon the growth of Scots Pine.

Deer, however, do not just rely on trees as a source of nutrition, and can impede the growth of many woodland shrubs and herbaceous plants. With Muntjac – perhaps the most problematic of our deer species – shown to directly reduce the coverage of species such as bluebell, wood anemone and dog’s mercury. The tendency of deer, when present in numbers, to quickly degrade a woodland, not very good if you are a forester, a rewilder or indeed, a conservationist seeking to restore the state of an SSSI.

Deer do not just impact upon botanical assemblages, however, and through feeding can pose a direct threat to other fauna. Through the removal of habitat, they also threaten invertebrate populations which depend on favoured plant species for food and nectar. Something which, in turn, may lead to a decrease in the number of insectivorous birds within a woodland. With deer also capable of removing the breeding habitat of many more bird species, particularly those that nest close to the ground, in thickets and low-growing shrubs. Indeed, many such birds, including the Nightingale, Willow Warbler and Wood Warbler, are facing substantial declines at present.

Finally, and through similar means, deer also decrease habitat suitability for small mammals. Which, when coupled with the other implications listed above, highlights a clear need for action to combat the problem of overpopulation. Culls are not pretty, they are not enjoyable and they are certainly not something to look upon with pride – we upset the balance after all – but they are necessary when all else has failed. And in the absence of other viable means of control.

There is more, however, and the control of deer populations may also directly benefit the deer themselves – something often claimed by sportsmen, yet dismissed by many disapproving of their antics.

Under normal circumstances – meaning in the presence of predators capable of managing deer populations – many deer would not live through to old age. The sick, the decrepit and often, many of the young taken by carnivores before they can mature. Without such predators, however, deer are living longer, often to the point of tooth erosion as a direct result of their hearty diet. This process happening over time, but ultimately, leading to the loss of said teeth and thus the drawn-out starvation of deer who, otherwise, would have met their end much earlier. With many diseases and infections also bringing about similar results. Control may, in fact, help reduce the number of deer meeting such a grizzly demise and thus benefit their welfare, who would have thought?

Control may also, and this part is solely speculation I hasten to add, provide an answer to the welfare problems predicted when Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) arrives in Britain. A disease I blogged about quite recently, which for many years has swept unchecked across America, and now, has been confirmed in Norwegian Deer populations. The disease – which isn’t really a disease as such, caused instead by a misfolding protein – resulting a prolonged death as the deer effectively “wastes” away, unable to feed. CWD spreads in a number of ways, through the soil, direct contact and via the ingestion of contaminated food items, and spreads rampantly when deer live in close quarters. Thus, culling – with the aim of thinning out populations – may help reduce the risk of a pandemic, should the disease ever arrive on our shores. Which I sincerely hope it does not. Less deer is better than no deer, right?

I am not anti-deer by a long shot, and I would hate any of those reading this post to interpret my words as such (doubtless some will regardless). I am, however, definitely of the opinion that deer, in their current populous state, require management. And implore anyone opposed to such to read further before giving in to bouts of blind range. Actions such as this, which often appear to be working to the detriment of conservation and welfare, are often far more complicated than they first appear. And in this case, I fear sustainable (yet nationwide) management, may be the only option.

An Introduction to the Youth Nature Movement – Ben Eagle

There is something notable happening in conservation. For years, conservationists have bemoaned the perceived lack of interest that younger people take in the natural world. They point to nature deficit disorder as a distinct consequence of a generation of children lacking outdoor experiences. The internet is cast as a negative force, with children spending upwards of 20 hours a week online, mostly scrolling through social media sites. 30% of 2-15 year olds are overweight or obese and, according to a 2008 National Trust survey (going back a few years here), only 2/3 of children could identify a magpie and half did not know the difference between a bee and a wasp.

However, there is another side to this story.

Every August at Rutland Water the biggest conservation event in the UK takes place – the BirdFair. In the last few years people have begun to take notice of a growing number of young people who have been attending, not just with their parents or grandparents, but often of their own volition.

Image: Young People at BirdFair (courtesy of A Focus On Nature) © Beth Aucott

Who are these young people ?

They come from all corners of the UK and have a wide range of different backgrounds, interests and training. Their strength comes in their diversity and their inclusivity. Through informal engagement, mostly outside of the ‘conventional’ and traditional nature conservation organisations, they have built their own organisations that fit their particular ways and means of connecting with each other. These include A Focus On Nature, Next Generation Birders and the youngest of the youth-led organisations, Wilder. Together, they form part of a cohesive youth nature movement. They are growing more organised and experienced as time goes on, and many of the traditional nature conservation organisations have taken note of their work.

A Focus On Nature, affectionately referred to as AFON, is the largest and most developed of the youth organisations. It is a network of young people, aged 16-30 (but realistically there are members younger than this) who share a passion for the natural world and want to connect with each other and talk about their interest. Their facebook group has been growing steadily and they organise regular events. Of particular note is AFON’s mentoring scheme, which gives the opportunity for members to connect with professionals working in all sorts of fields, from practical conservation to writing, film making, academia and campaigning. You can follow them on twitter @AFONature. If you fancy joining the network, get in touch with them at afonmembers@hotmail.com . They have members from all sorts of backgrounds, and you don’t need to have an ecology degree to join!

Next Generation Birders, whilst it may smaller than AFON and more specific, in that it is just for birders, has also had a huge impact. By bringing young birders together they can share their enthusiasm and knowledge, build experiences together and boost each other’s confidence. Often, birding or wildlife is not seen as a positive thing to be involved in at school and many young people interested in conservation suffer from bullying. Organisations such as NGB and AFON provide a safe space for them to do what they love and socialise with like-minded people, reducing their isolation.

Finally, there is Wilder, an exciting new organisation being spearheaded by James Common and others. It is a grassroots activism group, which works to support conservation efforts and argue a case for protecting wildlife legislation in the UK. In the long run, they want to run campaigns and form regional groups that bring local people together to combat localised issues.

How did they come together?

The answer to this has a lot to do with the very thing that many older conservationists had been vilifying – the internet. The wonders of the world-wide-web are certainly a factor in keeping many young people indoors, but the internet (specifically social media) has also brought together those interested in nature. Through posting online they are able to keep in contact with each other and the distance that is sometimes apparent between the traditional nature conservation organisations and their members completely disappears. After all, messaging is instantaneous. Social media seems to have formed a core part of the identity of the youth nature movement, in a way that it is seemingly more superfluous for the traditional conservation bodies.

Of course, the members of the youth nature movement still get involved with the ‘traditional’ organisations. They are members, volunteers and attend events along with the ‘older generations’. However, they seem most comfortable with these grass roots, more informal organisations, learning about the natural world and inspiring each other to do amazing things.

How did I get involved?

I have always had an interest in the natural world and the ‘great outdoors’ but it wasn’t until I got to university that I really started actively getting involved in nature conservation, volunteering for conservation organisations and thinking deeply about the natural world. This led to me starting my blog, thinkingcountry, in 2013, in which I started to explore a whole host of issues connecting farming (my family background) and conservation.

I can’t really remember how I was introduced to Lucy McRobert, AFON’s founder and former Creative Director, but we shared a common degree history (both environmental historians) and she was keen on getting more people involved. In September 2014 I went along to AFON’s first major conference, held in Cambridge, which aimed to spearhead a ‘Vision for Nature’. Incidentally, we went on to publish the Vision for Nature report in July of this year. The enthusiasm at that conference really spurred me on to want to get involved. Here was a young organisation that had bags of energy and made up of dozens of inspiring young people, all eager to work together for a better world. I was hooked and tried to get involved as much as possible. In January of this year I joined the committee and it is a real privilege to be at the centre of such an exciting movement.

What’s the future for the Youth Nature Movement?

The movement still looks like it is growing and more and more young people are jumping on board and getting involved. As James pointed out in a recent post, conservation has become quite fashionable, and this is certainly helping to drive the youth movement. However, it goes beyond this. I believe that the real success of bringing these people together has been to remove isolation and to exponentially advance the inspiration levels and determination of these people to get stuck in and find a way that they can make a difference, in their own way. It is about giving them confidence.

The movement seems to be growing, with new organisations, such as Wilder, making their own mark. Things could move in several different directions although I think it is most likely that it will become several things:

  • Firstly, it will continue to bring young people together through a growing network.
  • Secondly, it will be more political and provide a collective voice for young people who are concerned about the natural world.
  • Thirdly, it will become more organised and localised, with young people in the same regions regularly meeting and carrying out work together.

It is an exciting time to be a conservationist for many reasons. However, it is also a famously depressing sector to be in, with the general narrative being one of loss and destruction. The youth nature movement adds a determined optimism to conservation and this will continue as it develops. It is outward looking, inclusive and forward thinking. Yes, there are things that could be improved on, for example, a particular effort is happening right now with regards to improving diversity. However, the general momentum is positive and engaging and we all look forward to taking the movement onwards towards a brighter future.

Ben Eagle is an environmental and agricultural writer based in the South West. He sits on the committee of A Focus On Nature, the UK’s largest youth nature network, and edits their seasonal newsletter. To read more of his work visit his website www.thinkingcountry.com or follow him on twitter @benjy_eagle.

The Heralds Of Winter

When my mind wanders, I struggle to think of a bird that raises a clamour among those of an avian inclination half as much as the Waxwing. A species which, to me, embodies everything endearing about British wildlife: confiding, colourful, charismatic and a joy to behold, whatever the weather. Living on the East coast – often the best place to encounter Waxwings, should they arrive – these birds are the true heralds of Winter. And following last week’s fleeting encounter, a few days past I was lucky enough to find a flock of my own. Enjoy the visitors in welcome solitude as they fed for half an hour in the grounds of my local pub.

Setting out after first light, the jaded sun of the transitional period between Autumn and Winter ascending, I had expected to find a few Waxwings. They are, after all, rather numerous this year: with flocks numbering well into the hundreds prevalent right up the coast, and smaller parties cropping up in almost every county in Britain. I was not, however, expecting to find one such large flock mere five minutes from my front door. But I did, with over 140 Waxwings unearthed in the grounds of the Bank Top pub, in Bedlington. The birds showed marvellously in the breeze, punk-rock crests blown into a whole manner of comical shapes as they scoffed the few remaining Whitebeam berries still clinging to the denuded trees. The flock occasionally rising, calling and returning once again, as dog-walkers passed, oblivious, under their perch. It was all rather lovely.

Spurred on by the seasonal spectacle unfolding on the edge of my local patch – where urban sprawl meets Country Park. I soon opted for a walk around the estuary, where two more Waxwings fed amid a tangle of Spindle in the company of a few Redwing and a lone Mistle Thrush – yet more winter visitors to the patch. Birds which, alongside the numerous Blackbirds exploding from every thicket, made for a most enjoyable half-hour amid the thorns. The real treat, however, came on the estuary itself where yet more Winter visitors fed on mud left exposed in the wake of the retreating tide.

Here some 120 Dunlin fed, dainty feet working flat out as they swept the flats in an unruly rabble of pale feathers. Redshank were numerous, with at least 100 observed, while other familiar characters had likewise arrived in force: Curlew, Oystercatcher, Ringed Plover Turnstone and, better still, a dozen Black-Tailed Godwits. A species that I seldom recall seeing during my childhood here, that now appears to have replaced the dwindling number of Bar-tailed Godwits on the Blyth. I wonder why? Topping off the leggy smorgasbord, 50 Lapwings soon dropped in, metallic calls resounding over sludge; quickly followed by 300 or so Golden Plover. A quick scan of the flock as they descended revealed a single Grey Plover huddled amid their ranks. Surprisingly inconspicuous, despite the colour difference.

Elsewhere on the Blyth duck numbers remained low – last weeks Wigeon having departed and still no Goldeneye or Gadwall back from their travels. Sixty Teal, two-dozen Mallard and a dapper drake Red-Breasted Merganser the best I could muster. There is still time yet. The blow softened somewhat by the presence of a somewhat out of place Little Grebe in the harbour, a Little Egret and three Grey Wagtails looking far from grey in the growing light. The journey home revealed a Dipper, a little upstream, delving in and out of the river where it narrows and the saline waters of the estuary blend with the fresher outflow of the River Blyth.

Checking back in at the pub, the Whitebeams stood bare: of both berries and Waxwings. The earlier assemblage gone and two peeved birders the only indicator as to their former presence. It mattered not.

The Grouse debate: some follow-up thoughts

Alas, I have been uncharacteristically quiet on the issue of driven grouse shooting of late, though this does not mean I have not been keeping track of the proceedings. I watched the evidence session, the parliamentary debate, and have busied myself today reading through various outpourings associated with the government’s decision not to ban the practice. It’s all rather interesting: providing at times to be educational, frustrating and a little infuriating.

Anyone that knows me will know that I am rather ambivalent when it comes to DGS. I, like many others in my profession, abhor some of the negative side effects of moorland management  – the killing of protected raptors especially so. I fundamentally disagree with the mentality of some shooters and look much more favourably on traditional walk-up shoots. I do, however, and having worked on a number of driven shoots, see promise in certain sites. Having lived among gamekeepers I see the importance of grouse shooting to rural communities and firmly agree that moorland management conducted by such people can and will bring conservation benefits. For embattled Black Grouse, for wading birds, for mountain hares – when they are not exterminated – and yes, for raptors. I also do not particularly dislike shooting and am not overly opposed to the legal control of predators – if only because of the ensuing conservation benefits. All of this, conflicting views and all, has left me bouncing around in a flurry of indecisiveness, agreeing and disagreeing with arguments made by both pro and anti-shooting groups. Something I have come to believe is not necessarily a bad thing. We all, after all, have to base our views on our own beliefs, not those we are fed by others.

As for the debate, I think it is safe to say that even those at the helm of the campaign to oust DGS had predicted the result before the first words were even spoken. Many of us had accepted that a ban would not come to fruition, and I, personally, did not expect nor really hope for one. I signed the petition and wrote to my MP, yes. Because a debate on the subject, in which all were heard, and a collation of the available evidence from both sides was desperately required. But also in the hope that, as is often the case with such things, the axe would fall somewhere in the middle, leading to compromise and cooperation from both sides. This did not happen either, though unlike others I am not blogging about the proceedings overwhelmed with grief.

In my opinion, one of the most promising things about the whole ordeal was the fact a debate took place altogether. Though I disagree with some of his views, what Mark Avery has done in bringing an incredibly contentious issue into the mainstream is wholly commendable. And, values aside, given how he has acted in the face of often odious personal abuse – with integrity and fortitude – he deserves an applause. He has utilised people power perfectly to challenge the status quo in the countryside and, in doing so, has increased public awareness and opened the eyes of many. All of which is rather great, and I am sure he will continue to do so long into the future.

The debate itself followed a somewhat predictable course, I had expected many tory MP’s to turn out in defence of shooting and they did. Though unlike other environmental bloggers, I find myself unable to criticise all for doing so as some made perfectly valid points. Many of which echoing my own worries relating to a ban. Namely, what would become of the land afterwards should a ban take place – with lifeless Sitka Spruce plantations and even worse, damaging upland grazing, not what I would call an improvement. And abandonment, not overly great for upland wildlife either. Secondly, said MP’s also highlighted the positive implications of moorland management, for a number of species. Positives supported by science and not easily bypassed unless, of course, Hen Harriers are the only species on which you place any value. A stance which may be fine for some, but does not sit well with me. On the reverse,  I did, however, also feel that those arguing in favour of a ban shone, with both Kerry McCarthy and Rachael Maskell making some very valid points and the wonderful Caroline Lucus making a few decent interventions in the face of what was, undeniably, a majoritively pro-shooting assemblage. The select few echoing calls for change raising important questions much in line with my worries associated with DGS – yes, I worry about the prospects of a ban, yet, like many, am concerned with the status quo. It’s all rather challenging.

While I agreed or at least sympathised with a lot of the worries expressed from both sides, I cannot bring myself to look upon all those who attended the debate in a positive light however. Many, predominantly tory politicians, acted deplorably. There was an awful lot of rambling, scaremongering and, at times, utter nonsense spewed from amongst their ranks, and for every valid concern there appeared to be a thinly veiled and rather immature attack on either Mark Avery, Chris Packham or the RSPB. All of whom are entitled to their opinions. There were also a few who appeared to show contempt for the debate itself and the individual concerns of their own constituents who brought the issue to Westminister. Particularly from one “honourable gentleman” who appeared to buy into the CA line that many of those who signed the petition “likely know nothing of grouse shooting”. This may be true, though for whatever reason they chose to sign it – class warfare, animal rights, the list goes on – these people are equally entitled to their views. I believe that by dismissing the genuine concerns of the public and thus making a mockery of the political process, certain individuals made themselves appear utterly unfit to hold office. There was also, of course, the issue of vested interests noted by many other bloggers, but when it comes to MP’s such as Richard Benyon and Nicholas Soames were we really expecting anything different? Really, they have made their views quite clear in the past and I would be a hypocrite to criticise them for defending their own interests. We all do the same in our own daily lives.

So, where do we go from here? Well, those dedicated to the abolition of grouse shooting will likely soldier on. Hopefully deploying civilised, non-intrusive means as opposed to those advocated by certain animal rights groups I have noted voicing their displeasure over recent days. Direction intervention is both illegal and counterproductive and has no place in modern society. Others, on the reverse, will hopefully look to make changes, particularly with regards to raptor persecution. Indeed, if the views expressed by Amanda Anderson and Liam Stokes are anything to go by, the shooting industry is changing for the better. Which, unashamedly, I believe it is, albeit slowly. My experiences of eagles and other raptors accepted on sites such as Invermark, leaving me unable to disregard this.  I do hope, however, hope things change faster and feel that just maybe, Mark Avery’s work and the casting of the spotlight firmly on the workings of sportsmen may speed up the process. There will, of course, be some shooters feeling rather contented by this “victory” though that would be folly. If the campaign to ban DGS has done anything, it has cast the eyes of many onto our uplands and, hopefully, made flaunting the law even more difficult.

I have written, many times in fact, of the need for cooperation between both sides. Criticising both, on occasion, and often resulting in angry messages from both gamekeepers and conservationists – I expect more after this post. Still, I believe that cooperation is key to solving many of the problems discussed during the debate, though by my own admission, such compromise seems almost impossible at present. The polarised views of those at the extreme ends of the spectrum, whether we are talking Chris Packham or Robin Page, creating a rift that will likely take many years to repair. It is, however, up to those occupying the middle ground to attempt to mend this.

I hate to repeat myself, but in the absence of complete political overhaul, or an act of divine intervention I see little choice other than to reach a conclusion that benefits both people and wildlife. And if there was one good thing to come from the driven grouse debate, I hope it would be the realisation that we need to work together. I am not optimistic, but having spoken, quite recently, to a number of gamekeepers with a firm interest in conservation, and separately to a number of conservationists boasting an acceptance of country sports, it is clear that the foundations are there. We should never forsake our values, nor accept illegalities in our countryside, but we should at least consider the possibility that for some species, a united front may be the best option. Or, the only option.

Red Grouse – Invermark Estate, Angus.

Perceptions of Wildlife: The Young Conservationist

Another “perceptions of wildlife” guest blog this week, following the same setup as the last post by urban humanist Tayla May. This week’s post comes from young conservationist and budding scientist David Hunter, who was asked the same questions regarding his perceptions of wildlife and often controversial species. As you will see, his answers demonstrate perfectly that not all conservationists boast a positive perception of all species – and many actively agree with measures enacted to control them.

As someone who works on the science side of conservation, I rarely get to showcase my humanistic side when appreciating the natural world. I need to be detached, to be outside of the ‘feelings’ side of the argument if any headway is to be made with warring parties associated with a conservation issue. That being said, we are all emotional beings and events such as the shooting of the crane in south-west England a few days ago make me very angry, because of how senseless the violence is. The humanist approach to the natural world is one that most people who work in conservation biology and related fields have intrinsically – if we didn’t we wouldn’t have worked here (at least not for the pay…), and it is only through years of training and practice that we can learn to objectively view a situation (or as objectively as physically possible) and provide solutions to real problems in the world today. That’s especially difficult when people who you might share few to no opinions with are very emotive in their pursuit of goals.

I think the conservational approach is one that goes without saying given the career I’m representing here! The natural world provides a frankly ridiculous number of services and resources for us humans to make use of, regardless of how technologically advanced we believe ourselves to be. It would be madness to throw away such efficient and productive systems for mechanical alternatives; just because it increases profits in the short term. It is crucial that not just for an ethical standpoint but from a survival one that we maintain a healthy ecosystem with as much diversity as possible. You will notice I am not saying a ‘balanced’ ecosystem because there is no such thing. With climatic, geological and biological processes being in the constant state of flux that we are, there is no such thing as a ‘balanced’ ecosystem. We could have a healthy, productive one, or we could have an unhealthy useless one. But with either option, it is a constant changing along a spectrum on which diversity and productivity lie. – Apologies for the rant!

One of my pet peeves is people telling me that they are annoyed with conservationists because they are stopping people from growing food, from harvesting trees, from doing blah blah blah and the list goes on! With a bulging population of 7.5 billion, we as a species are having to adapt to find new ways of farming on the same amount of land. Farmland already makes up over 37% of the world’s total landmass (192,780,000km2 give or take a few tens of millions), but without natural pollinators, predator defences, even down to the bacteria that aid in producing cloud mass to water the crops, biodiversity and the natural world are at the core of that production. A good conservationist will be able to work with people (whether it is a pharmaceutical company or local farming cooperative) to achieve goals that enable and enhance their existing plans to either accommodate for the natural world or work around it in a non (or less) damaging manner. A bad conservationist will come to these meetings shouting and wagging their fingers at the naughty farmer/company/government telling them how awful it is what they are doing, and how they need to stop. the crucial thing is that these people are going to use the natural world (just like we do!) whether you like it or not, and people are much more likely to listen to a friend than they are to an enemy!

The only truly dominionist attitude I have is when it comes to my garden, which I try and maximise the diversity found in it – bending it to my will! I get where people are coming from when they make this argument, but these are usually the same people that tell me that humans are a ‘special’ species and very different from all others. You can’t have it two ways – either man is special and therefore outside of the realm of ‘bending nature to our will’ or it is part of that system, and you need to admit we are just another mammalian ape.

As for aesthetic values – nature is beautiful, in its complexity and harsh reality. I love it all!

Deer

I feel a very mixed response thinking about deer. Red deer and Roe Deer, our only two native species, are overpopulated as we have no natural apex predators to deal with them. The other semi-natural species, fallow, are similarly at bulging levels. The only real solution, in my opinion, to all these species and the unfortunate list of invasives is either culling (in the case of the natives) or eradication. This is to ensure that the plethora of other species that are damaged, threatened or lost from deer overpopulation are protected.

Brown Rat

Non-native pest species. Should be eradicated where possible, but will be nearly impossible over large landmass other than the likes of New Zealand. The damage to the countryside, natural world and even cities of this country are not worth the continuation of tolerance to this species in any area of the country. Unfortunately resistance to rodenticides is likely to make this very difficult.

Hen Harrier (I will struggle to write this in 100 words..)

There is space (and available resources/land) in England for 300 pairs of hen harrier in England, but there are only 4 birds. The status of hen harrier in England unveils the reality of the state of our countryside, and the challenges of protecting the natural world. Basically, no one has been prosecuted for the shooting of these missing pairs, despite their national protection status. Hen harriers have been estimated to take a very low number of grouse relative to other species predation (including man!!) and if gamekeepers argue that under 2% of grouse are killed by hen harriers are causing their moorlands to be unviable, then there is a serious issue with their business model.

Badger

This is a difficult one for me, and I imagine not many of my fellow conservationists are going to like me afterwards! I love badgers very much, but the evidence that came out of a very long, and thorough historical experiment known as the Krebbs trial has shown that between 5 and 35% of all BTB accounts are caused by badgers. In some areas that could constitute over 100,00 cattle. That could constitute entire herds, and thus whole farms incomes. The current badger cull is, to be frank, a ******* disaster. There are very few controls, it has no proper taskforce, and is a disgrace to ecology. If a real cull, in a small enough scale to be measured, with sufficient funding and protection was carried out, I would be surprised if there wasn’t a reduction in BTB. That isn’t going to happen, and the Krebbs trial has its own problems, but I don’t have time to talk about that here!

Grey Squirrel

Wow, I’m talking about a lot of death in this one! Grey Squirrels are lovely fluffy animals that play an important part in the ecosystem… in North America. Forest damage, egg poaching and yet more ecological damage are all the symptoms of grey squirrels in our country. It would be eminently sensible to plan a national eradication programme to remove grey squirrels from the UK. They have already been eradicated from pockets of the country, and the rise of the pine martin in the north of the country has pushed them back. I feel there is no issue in planning to remove grey squirrels, and push for our lovely reds to come back (apart from radical animal rights people and funding!)

Pheasant

I would never shoot pheasant for sport (it’s barbaric), but many people do. I will be honest; I have had very little experience with what the impacts of pheasant farming and shooting in the UK is. I don’t doubt it results in illegal raptor persecution, which is abhorrent, but personally, I have had very little to do with pheasants and pheasant shooting – and its something I should know more about. As a scientist and a conservationist, I can’t give an opinion on something I don’t know enough about, as it would reduce my own integrity, and that of all those in my profession. I’m going to go and do some reading now, so I can be more informed for when the topic inevitably arrives again.

Perceptions of Wildlife: the Urban Humanist

Following on from a recent blog post where I looked at my own perception of wildlife and the management of opinion-splitting species, I decided to start a new series of guest blogs. Posts which, I hope, will begin to look at the differences in stakeholder attitudes towards wildlife.  With the aim of comparing outlooks between different groups with a stake in our countryside and incorporating the views individuals from a whole host of backgrounds. As such, I have asked a number of people to give a brief summary with regards to “what wildlife means to them” and offer some thoughts on the management of five often polarising species.  Though in this case only four were tackled.

First up we have the lovely Tayla May who freely identifies as somewhat of a humanist with regards to wildlife, and dwells in an urban setting. For more from Tayla, you can check out her personal blog here.

It is only when you are asked to sit down and really think do you begin to unpick what something really means to you. What is wildlife to me? How do I perceive it and its importance in my life?

It turns out it has a whole lot more value to me than even I had anticipated. I have always had a deep appreciation for nature and the wildlife that our world encompasses, a fondness that has grown and grown. For me it’s not just about the mammals, is the complexity of the plant life, the rich soil full of activity, the beautiful birds stretching across the canopy and every single little thing within that. For this I completely see myself as having a purely humanistic perception towards wildlife, but I have educated myself in the importance and necessity of conservational ways of thinking and management. I am currently an inner city dweller, having lived in the countryside most of my life, I am attempting to adapt to the seemingly lack of urban wildlife, I mean I know it’s there, but I’m trying to learn to spot it!

I know for well that the landscapes, ecology and species ratios we have here in the UK are purely the result of careful management, and although the persecution of species or numbers of, doesn’t quite agree with my moral ideologies as a humanist, I see it is currently the only way in which to manage the habitats and ecosystems we know. (Unless of course we were brave enough to step back from our dominionist approach and to just see what would happen).

Now, the management of Deer within the UK is honestly not one I have put much thought to, I grew up in the area of the beautiful Wyre Forest (Worcestershire) Deer were not uncommon in this location, but always a somewhat enchanting sight to see. Perhaps this is because even for us, the chance to see a Deer in the wild is still a very thrilling and rare occurrence. But I understand that the close management of Deer herds is important, not only for the health of the habitat they are in, but for the animals themselves. The idea of management is to be sustainable, and in this case, I believe our work to control them are beneficial in the long run.

The prevalence of the Brown Rat within the UK is another troubling invasive species, coming from a few years’ background in the catering industry, I know just what is at stake for us. But there is much more in the balance, once again the Brown Rat has made it near impossible for other species, such as the Black Rat to live in harmony. The management of these species I can agree with a lot more (perhaps hypocritical I know) Brown Rats, and others, of course, are carriers for bacteria that are significantly detrimental to our health, and thus should be dealt with to ensure the spread of harmful disease is kept at a minimum. (Well, that’s my opinion anyway!)

The protection of badgers and theirs sets under UK law is, in my opinion, one of best advances in wildlife management for some time. When the Badger often has no natural predators (other than competition between sets) and yet numbers are dwindling, we must be able to hold our own hands up and accept responsibility for the damage we have caused. And in the creation of laws to protect this UK mammal is evidence that we can step up to a problem and try to fix it. I feel that the Badgers are a prime example of the consequences of over ‘pruning’ of troublesome species, will the Deer and the Grey Squirrel meet the same fate?

The Grey Squirrel has met some harsh criticism recently, and with good reason, it is a species invasive to the UK, stripping habitats and out-competing out beautiful native Red Squirrel. But this is out of consequence for the introduction of this species to the UK as a ‘fashionable addition to estates’ I feel this just goes to show how the meddling of vulnerable eco-systems is just riddled with doubt. I feel that this guilt should lie on our shoulders. Lines must be drawn somewhere though I suppose. And I said in a blog post I recently posted on the Grey Squirrel, ‘I’m not sure where I stand on the slaughter of wildlife for the sake of conservation’.

The management of the Pheasant within British Woodland, or perhaps the intentions of, seem somewhat vapid, we now understand the importance of the conservation of this species, considering the ideal habitat to ensure their survival. And all this work is researched, and implemented, mostly to keep the age-old tradition of shooting them alive. Seems a bit ironic, right? (Or maybe that’s me and my wildly humanistic beliefs surfacing again!) Now I am not one for hunting for sport, especially for one of a beautiful, often overlooked UK bird.

Of course, these are just my views, but like I said, I’m still not sure the way to ensure conservation involves the mass butchering of specific species, or ya’know any species.

Raptor Persecution – Eleanor Upstill-Goddard

A change of pace this week as fellow Wildlife Articles blogger Eleanor Daisy Upstill-Goddard writes on the subject of raptor persecution. An issue close to the hearts of many, myself included, which has attracted a great deal of attention of late. And rightfully so, with abhorrent instances of illegal killing still seemingly commonplace in our countryside, despite the best efforts of conservationists and the supposedly stringent laws put in place to protect our wildlife. You can find about more about Eleanor on her website or follow her on Twitter for future updates, but for now, let’s get to it.

By Chuck Abbe – http://www.flickr.com/photos/chuckthephotographer/2391751046/, CC BY 2.0,https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=8689771

Britain. We have been an island nation for over 8000 years. An island nation that has played host to some of the world’s most magnificent specimens from the animal kingdom. However, as many of us are all too aware, over the past 8000 years, things have changed somewhat and we now find ourselves without many of these iconic species. In 2016, the state of British ecosystems is very different to 6000BC. Although in some respects this is down to dramatic changes in climate and the natural changes this causes to habitats and species compositions, much of it is down to something else. Down to the actions of one species. The humanoid. That’s right, over the centuries, the actions of us humans have caused many changes and problems for our wildlife and biodiversity. In recent years, we have recognised the magnitude of such changes and this has caused the growth of many campaign groups, charities and individuals who have fought to improve and save many of our species and habitats. However, when it comes to British conservation problems, there are still many hurdles we need to overcome.

So, what are these problems? Well, put it this way, if I were to list each individual topic, it would take quite some time to get through and afterwards, we would probably be left feeling very depressed and deflated indeed. So! Perhaps it would be best if we tried to tackle or address one at a time? For me, there is one that is very high on the agenda, which, if we are honest, should not really be a problem at all. Why? Because it is illegal. What am I talking about? Raptor persecution. To purposefully kill or harm any one of our raptor species (except the sparrow hawk; outlawed 1961) has been illegal since 1954. However, regrettably, it would seem that throughout the decades, their protection status has done little to shield them from persecution. But wait! Hang on there one minute! Little to protect them? Look at the Red Kite! Extinct in England in 1871 and now, in 2016, they are thriving! The same for the Buzzard! A once highly persecuted bird that is now come back with vengeance. Well, indeed and thank goodness! Now, although nobody is denying the success of these comeback kings, what about the Hen Harrier? Is that a tumbleweed? The Hen Harrier is a species, which, on our shores, cannot seem to catch a break. A species that is constantly battling extinction, predominantly due to the inability of some to accommodate this magnificent species on their land. In the case of this raptor and some others, their protection status would seem little more than a formality, a formality to be flouted and ignored. So, you say Red Kite, I say, Hen Harrier, you say Buzzard, I say Golden Eagle. Although the status of many of our birds of prey have improved, it is still not enough. It is not enough that an activity that has been outlawed for over 60 years, is still practised by some who seem to perceive themselves as above the law.

But some think we raptor lovers and conservationists are merely kicking up a stink because we like to complain (apparently). So, there are ‘a few bad apples’ (my favourite line) that commit such crimes, but most people don’t and most people work within the law. Right. It never ceases to amaze me how an activity that is labelled illegal can be so nonchalantly cast aside. I wonder if we applied the same reasoning to other crimes if the response would be quite so lacklustre. If we were talking of robbery or murder, would we say oh well! It’s only a few bad apples! With nothing done to remove them? I think not. It seems to me that because this crime concerns wildlife, the action taken to prevent it leaves a lot to be desired. But perhaps I’m being overly dramatic? Yes, raptor persecution exists, but is it really as bad as it is made out to be? As it is often argued by some, incidences of raptor persecution are falling.

In 2002, the reported incidences of raptor persecution, including shooting, trapping, poisoning, egg collecting, nest disturbance and possession was numbering 591 cases, compared with 356 in 2014. Now, I am not about to deny that 591 is indeed a higher number than 356, nor am I going to dispute that this does indeed constitute a drop in numbers. However, over a 12 year period, the drop could be greater. In fact, in my eyes 356, which is a rough estimation, is still far too high. Just because numbers seem to be falling, it does not mean that the issue is being resolved, with each year bringing new and shocking cases of persecution. In fact, many believe that numbers of persecution cases are much higher than the data suggests. Why? Is it just us conservationists being determined to take a gloomy look on life? Desperate to sit in the cloud and ignore the apparent silver lining? Not quite. In fact, that belief is quite a justified and logical one. Imagine this. You are an individual who does not look upon birds of prey with a friendly eye, in fact, you are a person who is going to harm them. But you know it is illegal, you know that the laws against such an activity are becoming harsher and you know the public are becoming more aware of the problem. You see a Red Kite. You check you have no unwanted observers and you take aim, hitting your target. Would you say job done, and go home? Or would you watch where your quarry fell, retrieve it and dispose of it, so that there was no evidence of your crime? If you were smart and had the ability to do so, you would get rid of the evidence. Your crime goes unchecked, unchallenged and falls into nothingness. So, do we believe all recorded cases of raptor persecution are the only cases? Most certainly not.

Raptor persecution is a British problem. It is not limited to one country, one county or one species. It is indiscriminate and unspecific in its nature. It could take the form of a Goshawk nest disturbed in a southern county forest, or a Hen Harrier shot in the Scottish Highlands. For some people, birds of prey will never be welcome. They are seen as crass and dangerous species who are capable of destroying business and livelihoods and unfortunately, this is enough to cement opinion against them. However, on the enlightened side of the coin, they are recognised as magnificent, unique and important species who have a crucial and rightful place within British habitats, increasing our biodiversity and improving the health of our ecosystems. They are important predators, scavengers and bio-indicators of ecosystem health, and where there are healthy populations of raptors, there are thriving ecosystems.

In Britain, we have already lost some of our important natural predators. The Brown Bear, Grey Wolf and Eurasian Lynx currently reside on the list of species that were hunted to extinction many centuries ago. Raptor species should never be allowed to be added to that list. It is time that those opinions still displayed by our wildlife criminals were cast back into the Medieval times where they belong. Birds of prey are not mindless, savage, cold killers, they are vital members of our biodiversity. Destroy a bird of prey and you are destroying the ecosystem health of your country and that is a crime that cannot be allowed.

“You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant.” – Harlan Ellison