Shooting Times & Country Magazine
Northern Nature Notes
Ihave been reading a book from the year of my birth written by a former Shooting Times editor, Noel M Sedgwick. He published a few during his career and this one is entitled With Dog and Gun. It’s written in a style that is hardly recognisable today. Indeed, some of the statements he makes on certain issues would result in the instant revocation of his certificates in the current climate, but that is another matter. I’m only partially into it, but already there is one issue in particular that has struck a chord.
Bearing in mind that it was written 70 years ago, he showed quite some foresight on the pressure being applied to individuals on councils and other organisations with regard to shooting rights and species. He touches on how it’s done and the lack of knowledge of those being targeted, as well as the potential impact on the species and the sport.
So what has changed? Very little in that respect. However, if he was to return to this land today, I doubt he would recognise some of it, such has been the change to the landscape and the manner in which much of it is now managed.
Sweeping changes
The 1950s were something of a turning point in agriculture, as the pressure to produce food at almost any cost resulted in huge changes to our landscape, and for the birds and animals that lived in and on it.
Agriculture changed from being pastoral employment and, in the space of a couple of decades, it became industrial, aided and abetted by a plethora of government policies. Over the course of 20-plus years, this resulted in the mass removal of hedgerows, as well as a huge increase in livestock numbers.
The latter was driven by an EU policy, but the result was the same — wholesale changes to the fabric of the countryside and a decline in bird numbers in the lowlands.
Setting ever-changing government policies to one side for a moment
— and we have more on the way soon — Sedgwick would not believe the manner in which issues are now driven by social media and the pressure, from Wild Justice and others, to change management practices that are fundamental to the survival of many species.
You only have to look to Europe to see what protectionist policies for predators have done to some species we take for granted. There is rightly serious concern over the curlew and many other waders
and ground-nesters, as well as the majority of migrants. In fact, overall, with the exception of most raptors and corvids, our birds are not in a good place, with huge reductions in far too many populations. Yet there are many who would have us follow much of Europe and add yet more protection to what are common opportunistic predators.
Despite efforts to save it, mainly through habitat improvements, the grey partridge is extinct in Switzerland. It’s also no longer found in some counties of England. The Netherlands is another classic example of ‘green’ policies driving
“We’ve modified our lowlands to the point that they aren’t suitable for waders”
management and where has it led them? Black grouse are to all intents and purposes extinct and waders are teetering on the brink.
Looking at those two countries, which have introduced widespread protection for corvids as well as foxes, as examples, why do we seem to be heading down the same path? We should learn from the mistakes of others, but sadly it seems we don’t.
I accept predation is seldom the only cause for the loss of a species, though it can happen when a predator is introduced into an environment. Rats on islands and the stoat into
New Zealand are but two.
However, there is more than enough evidence that predation has already had a huge impact on the breeding success of many of our ground-nesting birds. Added to that, the world now has quite serious erratic fluctuations in weather patterns, which have caused serious damage to some of our breeding birds for the past three springs.
In addition, we have modified our lowlands to the point where they are not suitable for wading birds, unless the land is specifically managed for them. Very often, the only thing that sits between success and failure is an electric fence to protect the sitting bird from predators. That is all very well for individual nests, such as with the stone curlew, but predation is condemning to oblivion the groundnesting birds that choose to nest on the vast majority of the countryside.
If the birds, or even bumblebees, are fortunate enough to evade the agricultural activities, then badgers, foxes and corvids, not to mention the increasing numbers of some largewinged opportunists, are pretty much wiping out the remainder.
There has also been the widespread use of a new family of insecticides, some now banned, which has done huge damage to our birds, depriving them of food, as well as impacting on water bodies and their inhabitants. Water abstraction and human pollution from treatment-plant releases play a part in the destruction of our natural world. But it does not stop. Why? It appears no one wants to upset anyone — unless, of course, they think they are an easy target.
Sportspeople seem to be the target, yet the vast majority of those involved in managing the countryside for sport are the very ones who are most concerned about the damage, as well as trying to maintain a healthy environment for their sport. Do we get any airtime on Countryfile? Not a chance. It may as well change its name to The Rural Crafts Programme.
Protection plea
George Eustice, the Environment Secretary, has announced that there will be a new range of environmental subsidies for the farming community. Will they work any better than the previous ones, some of which were a disaster? Only time will tell, but unless, or until, we stop poisoning our insects, bees and anything that requires clean air or water, and put in place protection from predation, then we have little chance of saving the majority of our birds.
I could not help notice the red grouse has been listed as ‘green’ in the latest review of species. Sadly, the data that is based on is out of date, as it relied on the high densities of a few seasons ago. As the report is based on trends as opposed to numbers, if it were done now, then the red grouse would almost certainly be in the orange to red bracket, due to the rate of decline. This is why, despite the fact that there are still hundreds of thousands of some large gull species, they are classed as vulnerable.
Despite all that’s gone before, the pressure on organisations and governments to protect very common, opportunistic predators is relentless. I fear that Sedgwick’s prediction of a gloomy future for many, made 70 years ago, will come true unless someone sees the light.