One of our readers wrote to his MP regarding the license to kill 10 Buzzards and was horrified to read that his MP, Rory Stewart, former DEFRA Minister, claimed that the loss of such a small number of birds would have no impact on their overall population! Remember Natural England said that they had received over 5500 wildlife licence applications but did not identify the number to remove Buzzards! So many people have predicted just one successful application will almost certainly open the floodgates and given that the claims states ‘no impact on the overall conservation status of the species’ then many more Buzzards will be legally killed in the future’!
Taking this theory further, 2 people have already been killed after their vehicles had collided with pheasants on our roads. With over 65 million people now living in the UK, the deaths of a small number of people killed after they had been involved in fatal road accidents involving pheasants will have no impact on the overall status of the species (people) in our country’ . Of course, no MP would ever say that, but given that 3 million livestock [pheasants] which are killed on our roads every year continue to cause road accidents, widespread damage to cars, stress to the drivers. ‘ Pheasants are now widespread in England, with over 36 million plus released in the UK each year. The loss of a small number of pheasants at the specified sites on Britain’s roads will have no impact on the overall status of the species’!
Thousands of released pheasants are annually killed by cars on Britain’s roads.
Natural England have made it clear that pheasants are ‘livestock’ as long as they are dependent on man for their food which they are. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 defines livestock as any animal which is ‘kept for the provision or improvement of shooting and fishing. Refer to Natural England’s first letter under the Freedom of Information to read this clarification.
An Interesting case happened many years ago when the RSPB took over land that had previously been a ‘pheasant’ shoot. Like most reserves administered by the charity the number of breeding species were checked each summer. Significantly, in no time at all pheasants were lost as ‘breeding birds’ on this reserve. This highlighted conclusively that pheasants, a ‘non native’ species, can not survive unless protected and fed by man. In New Zealand, part of the Commonwealth represented by the Queen, all ‘non natives’ species are to be removed from the environment. So how can an English court encourage and rule in favour of a non native species, that is dependent for its long term survival on the gamekeeper throughout the year, but then rule against a native species? Anyone would think the judge in this case had a connection with shooting!
This is the e-mail reply sent from Rory Stewart MP, former DEFRA Minister, to one of his Cumbrian constituents this week
Dear xxxxxxx
Thank you for your email.
Given my previous Ministerial role at DEFRA this is something I am of course familiar with, and I understand that it is an issue you feel very strongly about.
I am aware that Natural England has issued a licence permitting the control of up to ten buzzards to prevent serious damage to young pheasants, and I am pleased that further context has been provided, given the strength of public feeling.
Licences from Natural England are required for activities that will disturb or remove wildlife or damage habitats, and can be granted to prevent damage to agriculture, livestock, fisheries, property or
archaeology. In deciding whether a licence should be granted, all applications have to be assessed in the same way against the relevant policy and within the framework of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.
In assessing this application, Natural England took into account the legislative tests and policy guidance, the evidence received from the applicant, industry guidance, and scientific literature. The application was rigorously assessed with input from specialists across the organisation, and after other methods had been tried
unsuccessfully over a five-year period. As you know, the licence was issued to protect against serious damage to livestock. The High Court recently gave clear direction on the decision making process in cases such as this, and Natural England took account of the court’s findings in reaching its decision.
Natural England would not consider licensing any activity which would adversely affect the conservation status of a species. Buzzards are now widespread in England, with over 60,000 pairs in the UK, and the
loss of a small number of birds at the specified site will have no impact on the overall conservation status of the species.
The licence is time-limited, with stringent conditions permitting the control of up to ten buzzards that are feeding on young pheasants. The licence must be used in combination with non-lethal measures and only
on buzzards in, and immediately around, the animal pens – not on passing birds. This is to make the licensed activity proportionate and effective. Natural England will continue to work with the applicant to
assess this.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact me.
With best wishes
Rory