Your letters & photos

Tell us what you think. Write to Rebecca Armstrong, Editor, at: Birdwatch, Warners Group Publications plc, Studio 2, 3rd Floor, 40 Cumberland Road, London N22 7SG or email letters@birdwatch.co.uk www.facebook.com/birdwatchmagazine @BirdwatchExtra

Shooting concerns

SOME Red- and Amber-listed species may still be shot (Birdwatch 338:42-45), but as Julian Thomas rightly says there is no evidence it drives declines. Indeed there is strong evidence from across Europe that shooting can provide the crucial long-term motive to improve habitats and protect ground-nesting species from predation.

Clearly, those interested in shooting have a vested interest in their quarry and destroying this link would throw the baby out with the bath water. Unfortunately this has already happened in Germany which has incredibly low densities of Grey Partridges. As a result, the bird is now classified as critically endangered in three states, endangered in eight and vulnerable in three more, with shooting greatly restricted or banned by law or voluntarily across half the country.

In contrast we may shoot them in Britain and on the 900 farms in the GWCT Partridge Count Scheme we found an 81% increase in partridge pairs on count farms between 2000 and 2010, whereas national figures for the same period saw a decline of 40%. That is why the GWCT is willing to work with and encourage landowners prepared to make that commitment for a wide range of species.

Restoring wildlife on modern farmland requires serious conservation measures and somebody has to make that commitment and supply the funds in the long term. This is a complex link, but one agreed to as part of the Bern Convention on Biodiversity, so we must apply the precautionary principle and avoid dismantling an activity which is driving the local recovery of threatened species. Andrew Gilruth, Director of Communications, Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust

Naming convention

WHAT an interesting article Dominic Mitchell propagated (Birdwatch 338: 21).

While I agree we are indeed in changing times, and perhaps it is time to review some eponymous bird names, caution is needed. Some famous and recognised biologists may have overstepped the mark, or even overstated, their own contributions to natural history, we are in a place now where we are trying to erase parts of history that we no longer like or that falls short of our present-day values and standards.

Audubon, Darwin and even Attenborough have fallen short of today’s standards of inclusivity and species protection. Audubon has been castigated in some circles as a fraud and cheat and accused of plagiarism. The Darwin/Wallace debate has been brought into focus by Bill Bailey, and both Darwin and Wallace have been known to eat specimens. Attenborough’s first expeditions where funded by collecting zoo specimens. Are we at a point where we erase these pioneers’ contributions to biology and natural history for the sake of kowtowing to a minority who don’t like history?

Times then were very different and as much as we don’t like the behaviours of our ancestors, it happened. By painting over the past, we are hiding the truth that brought us to where we are now. By having eponymous names, we’re celebrating the impact that an individual brought to ornithology, not the modus operandi of how they achieved that impact.

Perhaps it is time for a review, and as Dominic suggested, a collaboration between the International Ornithological Congress and

American Ornithological Society may be the best way of achieving the right result, but let’s make sure we don’t go too far and lose sight of the history that shaped our passion. Kevin Kirkham, via email

Research request

Iwas wondering if any Birdwatch readers could provide me with some help. I am trying to research a farmer and birder called Mr Joseph P Nunn of Hoy’s Farm in Bassingbourn, Cambridgeshire, during the late 1880s. If any one has any information on him – date of birth/death, bird records, letters and so on – please do email me at colinm53@yahoo.co.uk. I feel I am getting nowhere with this small project and if anyone can help me I would be most grateful. Colin Matthews, via email

Helen King commented: “I was interested to read that “Greenfinch has become an all-to-scarce sight in recent years” in your June photo challenge winner (Birdwatch 338: 48) – fabulous photo by the way! I haven’t noticed any over the last few years; however, this year I’ve been lucky enough to have two pairs regularly on the feeder in my garden, with the birds vying for position on this particular feeder even though there is another one close by.”

Brian Lyon commented: “I work on two RAF airfields in north Shropshire. Recently the numbers of wagtails has risen dramatically, with more than 200 individuals on one airfield – 150 Pied and more than 50 Yellow. On the other airfield there were approximately 160 wagtails, with 60 of them being Yellow. Is this normal?”