Shooting Times & Country Magazine
A CLASSIC SERIES REVISITED
With increasing wildfowling regulation that is based on neither science nor proper data, a return to common sense and pragmatism is key
Experts voice worries over wildfowl harvest” goes the headline, followed by a call for wildfowlers to work with scientists to improve the quality of count data so that we can know more about the sustainability of what we do. I can go with that and I very much endorse the conclusion of the article: “If it shows our harvest is sustainable, that is excellent news, and if not…then we can act.”
On the other hand, as a passionate wildfowler whose sport is being increasingly impacted by regulation that is not based on science or proper data, I am deeply suspicious. It seems to me that there is an agenda at both Natural England and Natural Resources Wales to tighten up rules on wildfowling progressively, with ever more restrictive consents.
My first inkling of this came 40-odd years ago when I was a member of a small wildfowling group that shot over a remote corner of an RSPB reserve. When our bag returns showed we were shooting more shoveller than its average count, it wanted them removed from the quarry list. The fact that the counts were stable, and that most of the shoveller were probably keeping a low profile outside the reserve by day and only sneaking in after the birdwatchers had gone home to tea, had completely passed the reserve by.
Migratory patterns
I was reminded of all this recently while setting out on to the Medway. Out on the flats, where there had been 1,000 or so wigeon at the same time last year, there were just a few small groups. Does this mean that some disaster has struck or is it simply that the migration pattern is different this year?
Our regulators seem to think wildfowl are fixtures that can be micromanaged like orchids on a patch of downland. If there are a fewer birds in a particular part of the estuary, they want us to stop wildfowling there until the numbers bounce back.
They don’t seem to realise that ducks are very nomadic, so in a milder winter they may never reach our shores. Also, if we get some rain and a patch of attractive ground floods inland, most are likely to move there.
There is a club I have been a member of for 40 years. Our bag returns are very variable, but if you look for trends there are none, except that both Canada geese and feral greylags have increased in line with a growing home-bred population. Nevertheless, the regulators say we are shooting too high a proportion of the total duck population.
What is so distressing about this is that they are using bird counts as if they were absolute numbers, rather than an index. No one knows exactly how many are out there and they never will. Some are always hidden but on this estuary counts need to be carried out on neep tides because in the short days of winter, spring tides occur in darkness. This means that most of the ducks are out of sight in the creeks or behind the drop-off at the saltmarsh edge, making the counts a significant underestimate.
“They are using bird counts as absolute numbers, rather than an index”
Meanwhile, the figures themselves do not show any sign of a decline, which they surely would if we were shooting “too high a proportion”. Until our regulators show a bit more common sense and pragmatism, I fear that most wildfowlers will be less than keen to help with improving the data.
Mike Swan is a keen wildfowler and the senior adviser for the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust.