BIRDCRIME 2011Offences against wild bird legislation in 2011

1

Contents

ContactsContacts

The RSPB UK HeadquartersThe Lodge, Sandy, Bedfordshire SG19 2DL. Tel: 01767 680551

Northern Ireland HeadquartersBelvoir Park Forest, Belfast BT8 7QT. Tel: 028 9049 1547

Scotland Headquarters2 Lochside View, Edinburgh Park, Edinburgh, EH12 9DH.Tel: 0131 317 4100

Wales HeadquartersSutherland House, Castlebridge, Cowbridge Road East, Cardiff CF11 9AB. Tel: 029 2035 3000

www.rspb.org.uk

The Partnership for Action Against Wildlife Crime (PAW)PAW is a multi-agency body comprising representatives of theorganisations involved in wildlife law enforcement in the UK. It provides opportunities for statutory and non-Governmentorganisations to work together to combat wildlife crime. Its mainobjective is to promote the enforcement of wildlife conservationlegislation, particularly through supporting the networks of PoliceWildlife Crime Officers and officers from HM Revenue and Customsand the UK Border Agency. Please visit www.defra.gov.uk/paw formore information.

The views expressed in Birdcrime are not necessarily those of theRSPB or PAW.

Foreword 2

A manifesto for change 4

Comment 8

Summary of reported incidents 2011 10

Poisoning 12

Shooting and destruction of birds of prey 16

Map of confirmed UK bird of prey persecution and poisoning incidents 16

Egg collecting and disturbance 22

Trade in wild birds and taxidermy 26

Prosecutions in 2011 28

Review of 2011 35

Partnership for Action Against Wildlife Crime 35

Legal issues 36

Forensic update 37

International update 38

Appendix I – Incidents reported to the RSPB 2006–2011 41

Appendix II – Regional breakdown of incidents reported in 2011 42

Appendix III – Confirmed and probable bird of prey and owl persecution during 2011 45

Appendix IV – Confirmed poison abuse incidents during 2011 48

Appendix V – Schedule 1 nest robberies during 2011 50

Appendix VI – Wild bird related prosecutions in 2011 52

32

Contents

Twelve months ago, I argued thatmore needed to be done to helpbirds of prey live in harmony withpeople. How have our birds ofprey fared since then? How havedecision-makers reacted and isthere cause for optimism?

Let’s start with the bottom lineand the fate of birds such as thehen harrier. The news, sadly, isgrim. Very few hen harriers nestsuccessfully on land managed forgrouse shooting, although itprovides the food and nestingsites they need. In England,extinction as a breeding specieslooms, with just one nestingattempt in 2012. Governmentsand their agencies across the UKacknowledge that, sadly,persecution remains a problem.

And it isn’t just hen harriers. A study of peregrines in northernEngland, by the RSPB and theNorthern England Raptor Forum,found breeding success ongrouse moors to be half that inother habitats, with peregrinepopulations unable to sustain

themselves without immigrationfrom birds nesting successfullyaway from grouse moors. Thereare those who argue that therelative rarity of prosecutions isevidence that crimes againstbirds of prey are equally rare. Yet, much persecution occurs in remote, inaccessible places.This, coupled with a shortfall inproactive enforcement activity,makes it difficult to collectevidence to supportprosecutions. The RSPB’sInvestigations team, whose work you can read about in thisreport, does an amazing job inspotlighting illegal actions. Butthe numbers and distribution ofthe birds themselves provide the clues as to the real impact of persecution.

The UK Governmentacknowledges the problem –raptor persecution is a UKwildlife crime priority. It isdifficult, however, to point tomeaningful progress against therecommendations we made inlast year’s report. The future ofthe National Wildlife Crime Unit(NWCU) is uncertain beyondMarch 2013. Opportunities, suchas implementing controls onpossessing pesticides used topoison wildlife, have beenmissed. The good news is thatthe House of CommonsEnvironmental Audit Committeeis re-visiting its 2004 inquiry intowildlife crime, scrutinising theGovernment’s performance inthis area. The Committee’s reportis due in autumn 2012 and I hope

that it makes a strong case forchange. The RSPB gaveevidence, as did the Associationof Chief Police Officers’ new leadon wildlife crime and the newhead of NWCU, and I ampleased that both bring theirperspective to these pages.

The years 2012 and 2013 areimportant ones in the fight totackle wildlife crime in the UK,particularly in England and Wales.The respective governmentshave the opportunity to improvewildlife laws and associatedenforcement structures, andmake a lasting difference to theprospects of birds such as henharriers and peregrines.

Over the next few months, theLaw Commission will consult on its proposals for reform ofwildlife protection laws inEngland and Wales. This bringsthe possibility of new offencesand penalties to aid theprosecution of those who harmwildlife. The ScottishGovernment has introduced newoffences, including that ofvicarious liability, designed totackle bird of prey persecution.The Governments of Englandand Wales have the opportunityto follow suit via new legislation.This will take time and it is worthgetting right. The police serviceis being re-organised, with thecreation of the National CrimeAgency (NCA) to tackle seriousand organised crime across theUK from 2013. The RSPBbelieves that persecution of birds

ForewordPereg

rine b

y Ben

Hall (rsp

b-im

ages.co

m)

Gra

ham

e M

adg

e (r

spb

-im

ages

.co

m)

of prey is both “serious” and“organised” and that the NCAhas a vital role to play insupporting police forces intackling it. New police and crimecommissioners will be elected inlate 2012 in England and Wales,guiding police forces inprioritising their work andensuring that criminal activitiesaffecting local communities areaddressed. Last, but definitelynot least, the future shape anddirection of the natureconservation agencies in Englandand Wales will be decided. Wewill argue that any change mustbolster our collective capacity todeliver the UK Government’sambition to “protect wildlife and... restore biodiversity”.

Collectively, this amounts to thebest chance in a generation,since the 1981 Wildlife andCountryside Act, to tackle wildlifecrime and, in particular, theintolerable Victorian throwback ofpersecuting birds of prey andother wildlife in the name ofsport. In 2010, nearly a quarter ofa million people signed an RSPBpledge calling for an end toillegal killing of birds of prey. It istime for their voice to be heard.For birds like the hen harrier inEngland, this could literally bethe “last chance to save”. Our manifesto for change isoutlined in the following pages. I hope that governments acrossthe UK seize this opportunity andstep up for nature.Martin HarperConservation Director

5

A manifesto for change

4

Improving wildlife laws

The Wildlife and Countryside Act(WCA) 1981 is at the core oflegislation to protect wild birds.A critical component intransposing the EC Birds andHabitats Directives into domesticlaw, it has stood the test of time and, while heavilyamended, remains a sound piece of legislation.

However, as this reportillustrates, crimes against wildbirds, most notably birds of prey,persist due largely to inadequateenforcement of existing laws.Governments across the UKneed to change the behaviour ofthose responsible, through betteruse of existing provisions, newoffences and stronger penalties.Those in England and Wales havethe perfect opportunity to do this.

The Law Commission isreviewing species legislation inEngland and Wales and willpropose reforms. It is essentialthat the Commission’s proposals:i) properly transpose the NatureDirectives, ii) rationalise wildlifeand game legislation into onecoherent law, and iii) achieve aframework that is fit-for-purposefor the coming decades. TheRSPB believes that the followingimprovements are necessary toprotect wild birds better, and tofacilitate the prosecution ofwildlife crime.

Recommendation 1: Introduce offence of vicarious liability.There is strong evidence of a linkbetween raptor persecution andland managed for driven grouseshooting in the uplands ofEngland and parts of Scotland.We believe the widespread andsystematic nature of this activityclassifies it as serious andorganised crime. The currentlevel of convictions and availablepenalties carry little deterrentvalue, partly because the lawdoes not target those whoencourage or require theiremployees to break the law bykilling birds of prey.

An offence of “vicarious liability”was introduced in Scotland in2011. This imposes criminalliability on persons where theiremployee or agent or contractorcommits an offence, unless theycan show they were unaware ofthe offence and had exerciseddue diligence. The RSPB believesit essential that those ultimatelyresponsible for enterpriseswhere raptor persecution can beproven to have taken place bemade accountable.

Recommendation 2: Enact possession controls on pesticides used to poison wildlife.The impact on birds of prey andother wildlife of illegal poisoningis of particular concern. It hasoften proved difficult to bring

those responsible for suchincidents to justice. TheDepartment for Environment,Food and Rural Affairs (Defra)introduced controls under theNatural Environment and RuralCommunities (NERC) Act 2006to prohibit the possession ofcertain listed pesticides withoutlegitimate reason, but did not listthe proscribed pesticides. TheScottish Government enactedsimilar legislation in 2004,resulting in 10 convictions todate. Northern Ireland hasrecently introduced similarlegislation but has yet to createthe schedule of pesticides.

Recommendation 3: Increase penalties available tocourts for wildlife offences.The current maximum fine thatcan be awarded for offences tobe tried in the Magistrates' Court under the WCA is £5,000and/or up to six months inprison. This is inadequate as adeterrent to those involved inserious and organised crime, and is out of line with penaltiesunder other environmentallegislation.

Penalties should be increased to a maximum £50,000 fineand/or up to 12 months in prisonin the Magistrates’ Court, andunlimited fines and/or up to five years in prison in the Crown Court.

Recommendation 4: Modernise regulation of game shooting.The UK is almost unique inEurope and North America inhaving no form of, or potentialfor, the regulation of gameshooting by individuals or serviceproviders. Given its potential toreduce populations of species ofconservation priority, and theserious and organised nature ofcrimes committed against birdsof prey, consideration of strongersanctions is merited. An optionto withdraw the “right” of anindividual to shoot game, orbusinesses to supply shootingservices, for a fixed periodfollowing conviction for a wildlifeor environmental offence, shouldbe considered.

Recommendation 5: Add “reckless” provisions toall “intentional” offences.“Reckless” provisions withrespect to certain disturbanceoffences already exist. Theseoriginated from the failure of anumber of wildlife cases where,although clear harm was done toprotected species and theperpetrators appeared wellaware of the risk of harm, it wasnot possible to prove beyond allreasonable doubt that theyintended harm. The ScottishGovernment added “recklessly”to all “intentional” offences in2004 – this should be the caseacross the UK.

Hen

harrier b

y Mark H

amb

lin (rsp

b-im

ages.co

m)

76

Reforming policing ofwildlife crimeWhile fit-for-purpose legislation isvital and carries a deterrent value,proactive enforcement is key tomaking a difference for wildlife.Significant progress has beenmade over the last two decades,with wildlife crime recognised asa priority by individual policeforces and the creation of theNational Wildlife Crime Unit.However, the reality of fundingconstraints has seen someforces cancel Wildlife CrimeOfficer posts, and the NWCUstruggle to meet the demandsplaced on it as a small,standalone agency.

Wildlife crime can be serious andorganised, affecting not onlywildlife itself, but communitiesthat stand to benefit from thepresence of charismatic speciessuch as birds of prey and theconsequent potential for tourismrevenue. The “opportunity cost”of birds being absent because ofsustained persecution can besignificant – white-tailed eaglesgenerate £5 million per annumfor the local economy of the Isleof Mull, Scotland.

Government intervention toensure effective enforcement ofthe laws protecting our wildlife,whether it occurs in the UK oroverseas, is justified both onconservation, economic andultimately moral grounds.

The need for positive change is supported by a largeconstituency of people – nearly a quarter of a million peoplesigned the RSPB’s pledge tostop illegal killing of birds of preyin 2010. The good news fordecision makers is that the RSPBbelieves evolution, not revolution,of existing enforcementstructures is required, as outlinedin the followingrecommendations.

Recommendation 6: Secure the long-term future of the NWCU.The NWCU provides excellentvalue for money by co-ordinatingintelligence gathering andsupporting enforcement effortsacross police forces. The RSPBbelieves it is vital that thefunction of the NWCU ispreserved, enhanced andadequately resourced beyondMarch 2013, providing stabilityand enabling long-termoperational planning to tackle the UK Government’s wildlifecrime priorities.

Recommendation 7: Task the NCA with tacklingserious and organised wildlife crime. The National Crime Agency willcommence operations in 2013,with a remit to tackle serious andorganised crime across the UK.The RSPB believes that someaspects of wildlife crime,

including bird of preypersecution, fall into thiscategory. Responsibility forleading enforcement effortsshould therefore lie with theNCA, with the NWCU providingintelligence support as required.

Recommendation 8: Enable Natural England toprotect wildlife and the placeswhere it lives more effectively.Legislation for dealing with illegalactivity affecting protected sitesis broadly fit-for-purpose,although enforcement powersshould be standardised withthose for species offences.Recent events suggest apresumption against takingrobust enforcement action whendamage occurs to protectedsites in England. This iscompounded by a lack ofanalysis of compliance with, andefficacy of, restoration orders.

Recommendation 9: Prioritise enforcement inwildlife crime hotspots.Agreeing local policing prioritiesis properly done at individualforce level, but the appointmentof police and crimecommissioners should helpensure that the views of localcommunities and nationalpolicing priorities are taken intoaccount. While wildlife crime iswidespread, its impacts are oftenfocused in particular areas,depriving local communities of

the spectacle of, and economicbenefits that can flow from, thepresence of spectacular wildlife.In such hotspots, policingresources need to be protectedand, in some cases, increased, ifwildlife crime is to be tackled.

Recommendation 10: Use wildlife crime prioritydelivery groups to co-ordinate action.The UK wildlife crime priorities,which draw upon scientificevidence and prosecution dataagreed by government andenforcement agencies, remain anecessary means of prioritisingprevention, intelligence andenforcement activity. Delivery ofthe raptor persecution priorityhas been mixed, with goodprogress in Scotland but slowerprogress elsewhere. The deliverygroups must be supportedadequately by the police, andappropriate accountabilityarrangements introduced.

Recommendation 11: Improve recording andreporting of wildlife crime.The RSPB believes that reliabledata are essential to monitoringthe extent of wildlife crime andwhether enforcement and othermeasures are effective.However, statutory efforts torecord wildlife crime remaindisjointed and inconsistent.Serious wildlife crimes withmajor conservation impacts,

such as poisoning eagles, shouldbe recorded by the Home Office,in the same way as crimes suchas minor theft. A reliable systemfor retrieving wildlife relatedprosecutions is also needed, tohelp provide sentencing advicefor courts and to assesssentencing consistency.

Recommendation 12: Improve co-ordinationbetween statutory agencies. Significant sums of public moneyare provided to those managingthe countryside through SingleFarm Payments (SFPs). To targeteffectively, and penalise, thoseinvolved in perpetrating wildlifecrime, it is essential that the fullrange of relevant offences arecovered by cross-compliancerules and that the value ofgovernment interventions ismaximised. For example, allwildlife crime cases occurring on

land registered for SFP should benotified to the Rural PaymentsAgency as a matter of course.

Recommendation 13:Establish a Wildlife Crime Unitin Scotland.Combating wildlife crime hasbeen signalled as a ScottishGovernment priority, and wewelcome this support. As part ofthe current reform of policingstructures in Scotland, includingthe formation of a single ScottishPolice Service, it is essential thatfull provision is made foreffective wildlife crimeenforcement. We recommendthe establishment of a full-time,well-trained and flexible WildlifeCrime Unit, which is able tooperate across the country, aswell as the maintenance of thelocal Wildlife Crime Officernetwork.

A manifesto for change

Go

shaw

k by D

ean B

ricknell (rsp

b-im

ages.co

m)

98

The police perspective

The two newly in postsenior police officers withresponsibility for tacklingwildlife crime in the UKoffer their individualperspectives on the way forward.

In recent months I have becomethe lead on wildlife and ruralcrime for the Police service inEngland, Wales and NorthernIreland. I am very pleased tohave been asked so early on tobe asked to write an introductionfor this year’s Birdcrime report.

As a Chief Officer in a policeforce covering some of the mostbeautiful countryside in Britain,visited by millions each year, I am very conscious of theeconomic value of the landscapeand the species that inhabit it.

It is therefore disappointing toread that birds of prey arepersecuted to such a greatextent throughout the country.Such levels of persecutioncannot be tolerated andfortunately there is now evidenceto demonstrate not only thatthose who persecute birds ofprey face effective investigation,but, if brought to court, they canface significant sanction. It isevident to me that if the problemof bird of prey persecution is tobe resolved then all interestedparties, be they conservationists,land owners or land managers,need to show commitment andenthusiasm in tackling it. I amoptimistic that this will happen,with a recent meeting of thewildlife crime priority deliverygroup providing some cause forthat optimism.

The next year will see interestingdevelopments around wildlifecrime. I have recently givenevidence to the House ofCommons Environmental AuditCommittee’s inquiry into wildlifecrime and will read their reportwith interest. I am also aware ofthe current work beingundertaken by the LawCommission to consider theneed for a review of wildlifecrime legislation. I will ensurethat the Police service makesappropriate contributions to their public consultation currently underway.

Tackling wildlife crime doesrequire real partnership working.The relationship between thePolice and the RSPBdemonstrates how good this canbe. Historically, the Police servicehas also benefited from closeworking relationships withgamekeepers. There is everyreason for us to want to continuein such a mutually beneficialrelationship. Sadly, whilstwelcoming the support of thoseorganisations representingshooting interests in tacklingpersecution, the activities of afew can only undermine theefforts of the majority.

Stuart Hyde, Chief Constableof Cumbria Police andAssociation of Chief PoliceOfficers’ (ACPO) lead onwildlife crime.

Comment

Stuart Hyde

Crime against birds takes manyforms and remains a significantchallenge for us at the NWCU.As the new Head of the Unit, myaim is to reassure communitiesthat all wildlife crime involvingthe persecution of birds of preyand other crime against birds willnot be tolerated and is takenseriously. This is exemplified withthe recent conviction andimprisonment of MatthewGonshaw, a serial egg collector.He received prison sentences inEngland and Scotland as a resultof the work of Police WildlifeCrime Officers (WCOs) fromScotland and England, and theNWCU, working closely with and supported by the RSPBInvestigations Team.

In last year's Birdcrime, mypredecessor said that buildingupon previous work was vital ifthe challenge of raptorpersecution was to beovercome. My view is that

progress on this has beenpainfully slow over many years. Isay this as an experienced PoliceWildlife Crime Officer, who hasinvestigated offences over manyyears involving the deliberatepersecution of birds of prey. Inone such case the offender lacedpheasant baits with carbofuran,was arrested and came within awhisker of being imprisoned. His case received national mediaattention, bringing his professioninto disrepute and tarnishing allinvolved with it. Unfortunatelycases such as this are stillregularly reported.

Having said that progress toaddress this problem has beenslow, it is good to be able toreport that partnership work isstarting to have an impact, mostnotably in Scotland. Poisoningincidents appear to have declinedover the past year. Whilst weneed to take encouragementfrom this, we need to remainvigilant while we establishwhether this is a genuine declineor just a change of tactic bythose engaged in such activity.But it appears that the messagehas hit home – persecution isnot acceptable and we need tocontinue to build momentumaddressing it across the UK.

The NWCU will work withpartner organisations, takingpreventive measures whereverpossible to address wildlifecrime. Where this fails we will

use intelligence and take robustenforcement action, using theskills and tools available to us, to support our colleagues withinthe Police and wider lawenforcement community UK-wide. In taking a robust lineon offending I must add that thePolice role is to ensure thatthose undertaking lawfulactivities are able to do so bymaking sure that those temptedto break the law are tackled. Inorder to do this the Police needthe support of all communities. I ask that anyone who knows of,or suspects, illegal activityagainst birds of prey or any otherwild birds to make early contactwith the excellent network ofPolice Wildlife Crime Officersthat now exists across the UK.

Nevin Hunter, Head of the UKPolice National Wildlife CrimeUnit (NWCU)

Nevin Hunter

G S

ho

rro

ck (

RS

PB

)

Cu

mb

ria

Polic

e

1110

This report summarises offencesagainst wild bird legislationreported to the RSPB in 2011.Further copies are available onrequest from the RSPBInvestigations Section at TheLodge, Sandy, BedfordshireSG19 2DL, or from the RSPBwebsite (www.rspb.org.uk).

Since 2009, Birdcrime reportshave not included a “total”reported figure for all categoriesof wild bird crime. The policeNational Wildlife Crime Unit(NWCU) now receives data onincidents of all wild bird crimesfrom police forces across theUK, as well as from the RSPBand RSPCA. This enables theNWCU to publish a total figurefor wild bird crime in the UK intheir annual report, at the end ofeach financial year. With thisprocess now in place, the RSPBInvestigations team can focusfinite resources on wild birdcrime affecting species of highconservation concern, and crimethat is serious and organised.

Incidents are recorded in threecategories:

Unconfirmed – Thecircumstances indicate an illegalact has possibly taken place.

Probable – The circumstancesindicate that by far the mostlikely explanation is that an illegalact has taken place.

Summary of reported incidentsin 2011

Confirmed – The circumstancesindicate an illegal act has takenplace. These incidents aretypically substantiated byevidence such as post mortemor toxicological analysis (egshooting and poisoning cases),or reliable eye-witness evidence.

During 2011 the RSPB received:

• 100 reports of poisoningincidents, including 52confirmed incidents of abuse(see Appendix IV) involving theconfirmed poisonings of atleast 70 individual birds or animals.

• 202 reports of shooting anddestruction of birds of prey,with the confirmed shootingof 30 individual birds of prey.

• 30 reports of egg-collectingincidents. There were threeconfirmed and six probablenest robberies of eggs andchicks from Schedule 1 species.

• 18 reports relating to illegaldisturbance or photography of Schedule 1 birds.

• 26 reports of illegal taking,possession or sale of birds of prey.

• 69 reports of illegal taking,possession or sale of wildbirds other than birds of prey,predominantly finches.

It is believed that thesepublished figures represent only a fraction of the number of incidents regarding eachcategory, as many remainundetected and unreported,particularly those that occur in remote areas. Persecutioncontinues to have aconservation-level impact onseveral priority species, such asgolden eagle and hen harrier.

The UK breakdown of reportedbird of prey persecutionincidents published in this reportshows that 61% occurred withinEngland, 26% in Scotland, 6% in Wales and 6% in NorthernIreland (1% occurred in anunknown location in the UK).

In 2011, the RSPB receivedinformation on 42 individualprosecutions involving wild birds.These cases involved a total of152 charges, of which 137 wereproven. Fines for the yeartotalled £37,690 and four peoplewere given prison sentences(one of which was suspended).

Birdcrime figures may vary fromother published reports, becausedata sets compiled for differentpurposes, using very differentmethods, are unlikely to bedirectly comparable. The RSPBhas been recording wildlifecrimes for several decades usinga consistent recording format toallow trends to be detected from

year to year. NWCU data rely ona police recording system thatcannot record crimes againstwild birds in a consistent wayacross the UK. Consequently,there will be some variation inhow incidents are recorded,assessed and categorised. For example, the RSPB iscurrently the only agency to have a standardised method ofreporting wildlife poisoning casesfrom information published by

the UK Government, which issupplied as pesticide analysisdata rather than crime data.

Because of the ad hoc nature ofthe way in which offences arediscovered, the conclusions thatcan be drawn from annual crimefigures alone, however they arecompiled, will always be limited.A much more complete andstatistically robust picture of theimpact of these crimes can be

gauged though the systematicstudy of bird populationsthemselves. For example,Scottish Natural Heritage’s (SNH)“framework” analyses of goldeneagles (see Birdcrime 2009) andhen harriers (see Birdcrime 2010)are both rigorous long-termstudies that demonstrate thesevere effects that illegal killingis having on national populationsof these species.

AcknowledgementsIn addition to members of thepublic, the RSPB would like toacknowledge the followingorganisations who have supplieddata used in this report:

• All UK police forces • The Chemicals Regulations

Directorate (CRD); Food andEnvironment Research Agency(FERA); Science and Advicefor Scottish Agriculture (SASA)

• The Royal Society for thePrevention of Cruelty toAnimals (RSPCA)

• The Scottish Society for thePrevention of Cruelty toAnimals (Scottish SPCA)

• Raptor Study Group workers • Predatory Birds Monitoring

Scheme (PBMS)

Due to staffing changes, theNWCU was unable to provideincident data for 2011. Overalltotals are expected to be slightlylower as a consequence.

Go

lden

eagle b

y Stig

Frod

e Olsen

1312 13

In 2011, the 100 reportedincidents of wildlife poisoningand pesticide-related offenceswas lower than the 129 incidentsin 2010 and below the averagefor the previous five years(2006–2010 average of 157 incidents).

There were 52 incidents whereabuse of a pesticide wasconfirmed by analysis of victimand/or bait (during 2006–2010there was an average of 77 confirmed abuse incidentsper year). The confirmed abuseincidents in 2011 involved thepoisonings of at least 70individual birds or animals.

In addition to the 52 confirmedpesticide abuse incidents, therewere also five confirmedincidents of illegal possession ofpesticides connected withwildlife poisoning. There were 14confirmed incidents of birds ofprey containing secondgeneration rodenticides. Someof these led directly to the deathof the birds; in other cases theremains contained sub-lethallevels of these products and thebirds died from other causes.

Examining which pesticide wasinvolved in each of the confirmedabuse incidents revealed thatthe trend from previous yearsprevailed, with the mostcommonly abused beingcarbofuran, banned since 2001,with 24 confirmed incidents.

During 2011, a number of highprofile poisoning cases in theSouth West of England came tolight, making it the worst year onrecord for poisonings in theregion and highlighting thecontinued abuse of pesticides asa weapon to target birds of prey.

Incidents began in March, whenan online RSPB crime reportdetailed the discovery of anumber of dead birds of prey inForestry Commission woodlandto the west of Exeter. Fourgoshawks and a buzzard wererecovered by Devon andCornwall Police with assistancefrom the RSPB and the ForestryCommission. Veterinaryexamination indicated that theyhad not been shot and the birdswere passed to the WildlifeIncident Investigation Scheme(WIIS) run by Natural England.Testing proved that all five birds

Poisonings rife on the Riviera

All wildlife poisoning data issupplied by the UK Government.The RSPB remains the onlyagency to present the pesticideanalysis data in a standardised

format to reflect actual wildlifecrime incidents. Consequently,there may be some minorvariation on how data ispresented by different agencies.

had died as a result of deliberatepoisoning by a concoction ofcarbamate pesticides androdenticides. This was a verysignificant incident, whichdestroyed an adult breeding pairof goshawks, a major blow tothe small Devon population.

Hot on the heels of this, a wing-tagged red kite was founddead on 24 March, beside theTarr Steps to Withypool walk onExmoor. A partially predatedpheasant was also noted nearby,although not recovered during awider search. Tests confirmedthe presence of the bannedpesticide carbofuran and clearlythe kite had been the victim of adeliberate poisoning.

Next came two incidents on 21July, both involving peregrines.First was the discovery of abreeding pair of adult peregrines

Case studiesPoisoning1

Devon and Cornwall PoliceWCO PC Josh Marshall (left)and RSPB investigator MarkThomas holding two of thedead goshawks.

Natural E

ngland

found dead on a golf course atCape Cornwall, lying close to theremains of a dead feral pigeon.All three birds were tested byNatural England and found tocontain high levels ofcarbofuran – sadly, once again adeliberate poisoning. The finalincident involved a young femaleperegrine, which was found deadat a quarry near Buckfastleigh,Devon. Peregrines had previouslybeen poisoned at this location,so it was no surprise when theanalysis result proved the birdhad been deliberately poisonedwith residues of carbofuran and aldicarb.

A series of high profile mediaappeals and rewards forinformation were launched in connection with theseincidents but, despite a goodresponse, they failed to lead to a conviction.

RS

PB

This peregrine was found poisoned next to a woodpigeon bait lacedwith the banned pesticide aldicarb, near Louth, Lincolnshire inSeptember 2011. The bird, a juvenile, had been ringed as a nestlingearlier in the year at a nest in Kent. The incident was investigated byNatural England and Lincolnshire Police but no-one was charged withplacing the bait or killing the peregrine.

14 15

As with other incidents of raptorpersecution, there is no doubtthat only a small fraction ofoffences committed are everdiscovered and reported. The conservation impact ofpoisoning can be highlysignificant. The expansion of thered kite population around theBlack Isle, Highland, following areintroduction project whichstarted in 1989 has beenseverely affected by persecution,primarily illegal poisoning. Apaper published in the scientificjournal Biological Conservation in2010 estimated that thepopulation, which stood at just41 pairs in 2006, would havenumbered more than 300 pairsin the absence of persecution.

Poisoning incidents involvingbirds of prey in the UK areshown in the graph below.

There has been somespeculation that the lowernumber of recorded poisoningincidents relating to birds of preyin Scotland during 2011 may bethe result of concern bymanagers and landowners thatan offence of vicarious liabilitywas in preparation. This lawcame into force at the start of2012. While year to yearvariations cannot be reliablycompared statistically, the RSPBwill be watching with interest thelevels of recorded wildlifepoisoning in Scotland during thenext few years, to see if any real

trend develops. It is hoped thatthe new vicarious liabilitylegislation may make thoseultimately responsible for raptorpersecution offences moreaccountable and lead to areduction in the level of offending.

Since the first confirmed abusecase in Fife in 1988, thepesticide carbofuran has quicklybecome the product of choice forthe wildlife poisoner. Despiteapproval for any legal use beingwithdrawn in 2001, this highlytoxic product has been the mostpersistently abused product forthe illegal poisoning of wildlifeduring the last 10 years.

The pesticide was formerlyapproved as an agriculturalinsecticide for use on a numberof crops. The RSPB believes thatcarbofuran and other pesticideshave been deliberately stockpiledand distributed amongst wildlifepoisoners, with this and otherproducts sometimes beingimported from foreign countriessuch as Ireland.

Based on data gathered throughthe government Wildlife IncidentInvestigation Scheme (WIIS),during the 10-year period 2002 to2011, since the storage or use ofcarbofuran was made illegal,there have been 643 bird crimepoisoning incidents (incidentswhere birds were poisoned dueto abuse of pesticides or wherebirds were vulnerable to illegalpoisoned baits). Of these, 317 (49%) involved carbofuran.The graph above right shows the proportion of carbofuranincidents during this period.

Carrion-eating species, such askites, are particularly vulnerableto pesticide abuse, but evenactive predators such asperegrines have been poisoned.Peregrines have often been killedusing a tethered live pigeonsmeared with poison as bait.

The known totals during thisperiod for the species listed onthe UK raptor persecutionwildlife crime priority, plusbuzzard, and the numberinvolving carbofuran (62% of total), are shown in the table below.

Carbofuran – the poison of choice for morethan a decade

This red kite in Cambridgeshirewas yet another victim ofcarbofuran. It was one of 17 redkites known to have been illegallypoisoned in 2011. The real figurewas undoubtedly far higher.

Gu

y Sh

orro

ck (RS

PB

)

Pesticide abuse incidents involving wild birds, 2002-2011

Other Carbofuran

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Pesticide abuse incidents involving birds of prey in theUK, 2002-2011

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

NI Wales England Scotland

SpeciesNumber birds recorded

poisoned in UK 2002 to 2011

Number involvingpresence of pesticide

carbofuran

Buzzard 290 194

Red kite 112 55

Peregrine 44 19

Golden eagle 14 13

Goshawk 7 7

White-tailed eagle 6 4

1716

Shooting and destruction ofbirds of prey 2

In 2011, there were 202 reportedincidents of illegal shooting,trapping and nest destructioninvolving birds of prey (seeAppendix I). This is lower thanthe 235 incidents reported in2010, and lower than the lastfive-year average (2006–2010average of 248 reportedincidents).The number ofconfirmed incidents was 45,which is lower than the last fiveyear average (2006–2010 averageof 50 confirmed incidents).

Of the 202 reports, 45 wereconfirmed and 59 were probable.

The most commonly reportedcrime was shooting, with 85reports of incidents involving theshooting or attempted shootingof raptors and owls. Of these, 31 were confirmed and a further24 were probable.

There were 11 reported incidentsrelating to destruction of birds ofprey nests, eggs or chicks (ofwhich one was confirmed), 26 reported incidents (12 confirmed) in relation to theillegal trapping of birds of preyand a further 80 reportedincidents of other offences.

Note: the numberof mappedincidents is fewerthan the numberreported, as notall incidents canbe allocated a gridreference. Wheremore than oneincident occurredin the same 10 kmgrid square, therelevant symbolshave been movedslightly for clarity.

Confirmed bird of prey and owl shooting, destruction and poisoning incidents 2011

RS

PB

Sco

tland

Incident

Illegal pole/spring trapping (4)

Illegal trapping other (7)

Nest destruction (1)

Persecution other (2)

Poisoning (40)

Shooting (28)

This recently shot short-earedowl was found hidden under aboulder during the execution of asearch warrant by GrampianPolice on a grouse shootingestate in Aberdeenshire in May2011. The search followed thediscovery of a poisoned goldeneagle on the same estate.Intelligence from within theshooting community suggeststhat large numbers of short-earedowls are being killed on somegrouse moors.

Hertfordshire Police and the RSPB undertakinga line search in October 2011 following anallegation of red kite shooting.

This young marsh harrier was found shot nearBarnard Castle, Co. Durham, in September2011. It had gunshot wounds to both wingsand one leg. Despite a reward being offeredfor information, no-one was convicted of thiscrime. Happily, after successful veterinary care,it had recovered sufficiently to be releasedback to the wild in the spring of 2012.

Norfolk Police discovered this tawny owlcaught in a pole trap after a tip-off from thepublic in May 2011. The trap had been set ontop of one of the posts of a chicken run atEaston near Norwich. The owl had sufferedhorrific injuries to both legs as the trap had cutthrough the skin and flesh down to the boneon both legs. The setting of pole traps hasbeen outlawed for over 100 years. The personwho set the trap was fined just £100.

1918

Investigations into shooting andtrapping incidents in 2011

N Tu

rner

G. S

horrock (RS

PB

)

Norfolk Police

2120 2120

Raptor persecution on sportingestates remains a seriousconservation problem. But justhow many birds of prey arekilled? Some gamekeepersclaim, in confidence to theRSPB, that single estates arekilling more birds of prey thanthe total number of confirmedincidents recorded annually bythe RSPB for the entire UK.Some support for this is

apparent from “vermin books”that are occasionally recoveredby police. In 2008, for example,one such book from a lowlandpheasant shoot indicated that, in less than a year, twogamekeepers had killed 102buzzards, 40 badgers and 37 ravens.

Recently, two papers have beenpublished that shed yet more

Ste

ve K

nel

l (rs

pb

-im

ages

.co

m)

light on the scale of the killings.A study published in the journalBiological Conservation looked atperegrine nest data collected byraptor study groups acrossnorthern England. More than athousand nest histories werestudied in the north of England,over nearly 30 years between1980 and 2006. The study foundthat peregrines on or close tointensive grouse moor areas

bred much less successfully thanthose in other habitats.

Dr Arjun Amar, the paper’s leadauthor, said, “I was shocked atjust how low the bird’s breedingoutput was on grouse moors;they were significantly less likelyto lay eggs or fledge young.” Headded, “The few birds that didlay eggs or fledge young ongrouse moors did just as well asthose breeding off grousemoors, which suggests that ashortage of food supplies can beruled out of the equation. Theonly logical explanation for thesedifferences is that persecution is rife on many driven grousemoors.” Performance was so badthat peregrine populations wouldbe unable to sustain themselveson grouse moors withoutimmigration of birds from other habitats.

Another paper in Scottish Birdsrevealed that persecution ofbirds of prey on an estate inPerthshire was rife up to the late1980s. More birds of prey andowls were killed there than haveever been reported in bird crimefigures for Scotland in one year,confirming that bird crime largelygoes unreported.

Bob McMillian, former ACC ofTayside Police, was allowedaccess to game and vermin listsfor the Atholl Estate, the secondlargest estate in Scotland, from1867 to 1988. Records from1867 to 1911 show that 14,386

hawks, 5,495 owls and 1,921ravens were killed on the Estate.There was considerable variationbetween gamekeepers, with afew not killing protected birds.

The study compareddocumented persecution withlong-term datasets held by the RSPB.

The “vermin” figures on just one“beat” on the estate between1980 and 1988 showed anaverage of 25 birds of prey andowls being killed each year.RSPB records of confirmedincidents of persecution for thewhole of Scotland for the sameperiod averaged fewer than 14 incidents a year, and included

none of this beat’s incidents,showing that recorded crime isjust the tip of the iceberg.Encouragingly, the Atholl estateis now heavily committed towildlife tourism and hasdeveloped a wildlife rangerservice part-funded by SNH.

The result of this relentlessonslaught is not difficult to find.In 2011, the hen harrier declinedto just four successful nests inEngland, leaving it on the brinkof extinction there. Thegovernment must find practicaland innovative methods to bringpressure to bear on thosesporting estates that continue tosanction their staff to commitcriminal acts on their behalf.

Buzzards are the most commonly persecuted bird of prey in the UK.

A recently fledged peregrine. A study showed that peregrineson some grouse moors fledged fewer young.

New studies throw further light on the extentof raptor killing on shooting estates

Mark T

ho

mas (R

SP

B)

2322

In 2011, there were 30 reportedincidents of egg collecting andegg thefts, and four reports ofeggs being sold. This is lowerthan the combined eggcollecting and egg sale total of46 incidents reported in 2010,and below the last five-yearaverage (2006–2010) of 65incidents per year.

There were three confirmed andsix probable nest robberies fromSchedule 1 species reported in2011 (see Appendix V). Theseinvolve both egg collectingincidents and eggs and chickstaken for the live bird trade.

Confirmed robberies involved thenests of three avocets. Probablerobberies involved the nests offive peregrines and oneSlavonian grebe.

These relatively low figures are agood sign, and illustrate thatsince the early 1990s thenumbers of egg collectingincidents have reducedsignificantly, and that thisdownward trend continues.However, it is clear that anumber of individuals are stillactively taking either eggs forcollections, or chicks for falconrypurposes.

Egg collecting and disturbance3 Serial egg collector “banned from Scotland”

Case studiesG

. Sho

rroc

k (R

SP

B) M

ark Thomas (R

SP

B)

J A D

avies (National N

ews)

With four previous convictions tohis name, Matthew Gonshawhas become synonymous withthe illegal taking of wild birds’eggs and in 2011 he went a stepfurther, being the first everwildlife criminal to receive anAnti Social Behaviour Order(ASBO), banning him fromScotland.

On 1 June 2011, MatthewGonshaw was intercepted byNorthern Constabulary and theNWCU on the remote Scottishisland of Rum. He was found tobe in possession of 20 wild birdeggs, including eight Manxshearwater eggs. Whilst he was

in custody in Scotland, a searchby the Metropolitan PoliceWildlife Crime Unit and theRSPB at his home address inBow, London, uncovered nearly700 more wild birds’ eggs.

RSPB staff found the collectioncontained three clutches ofgolden eagle, osprey and avoceteggs, the latter taken only a fewweeks before the searchwarrant. Notes seized fromGonshaw suggested that he hadvisited Scotland several timesand had targeted golden eaglesin the Western Isles and ospreysand redwings in the Highlands. It was also clear from his

In 2011, there were also 18 reported incidents of illegalphotography and disturbance of Schedule 1 species, (the2006–2010 average was 39 incidents).

Matthew Gonshawarriving at court

Twelve avocet eggs taken by Gonshaw fromTwo Tree Island, Essex,April 2011

Golden eagle eggs takenby Matthew Gonshawfrom Isle of Lewis,Scotland 2010. The size ofthe “blow holes”confirmed the eggs heldwell-developed embryos.

2524

notebooks that he had startedcollecting again straight after hislast conviction and jail sentencein 2004.

A large amount of egg collectingparaphernalia was found at thehouse, including egg collectingbooks, padded containers andmaps. Gonshaw was arrested inEngland and interviewed. BothScottish and English cases thenprogressed separately.

On 13 December, Gonshaw was sentenced to six months’imprisonment at ThamesMagistrates Court, London, afterpleading guilty to 10 chargesincluding taking and possessionof eggs and going equipped tocommit the offences. JudgeAshworth said that Gonshawhad targeted the rarest birds,putting them at peril andaffecting the communities inwhich the birds were found.

On 17 February 2012, Gonshawappeared before StratfordMagistrates Court, London,where a post conviction Anti-Social Behaviour Order(ASBO) was imposed upon himfor egg collecting, this being thefirst ever ASBO in a UK wildlifecase. The court had been handedstatements from ten concernedindividuals and organisations,including the RSPB, WildlifeTrusts, NWCU, raptorfieldworkers and the co-ordinators of the anti-eggcollecting initiatives “OperationEaster” and “Operation Compass”.

Operation Compass points the way

Mark T

ho

mas (R

SP

B)

East Anglia is renowned for itsdiversity of birds, particularlyscarce breeding species such asbittern, marsh harrier, little tern,Montagu’s harrier, avocet, stonecurlew and golden oriole.

Sadly, these species attract notonly birdwatchers but also eggcollectors. Over the past 20years the RSPB has been awareof a number of nest robberiesbut thankfully in recent years thesituation has improved. We thinkthis is largely thanks to theintroduction of custodialsentences for wildlife crimesunder the Wildlife andCountryside Act 1981, and to theactivities of “OperationCompass”.

Operation Compass is an anti-egg collecting initiative runby Norfolk Police and the RSPB.The success of the operation liesin the quick dissemination ofintelligence reports around anetwork of key partnerorganisations and naturereserves. The network issupported by Wildlife CrimeOfficers from Norfolk,Lincolnshire and Suffolk police forces.

In the past, egg collectors wouldvisit East Anglia for severalconsecutive days and target anumber of nature reserves.Operation Compass activelydisrupts this offending pattern,with the details of suspicious or

known egg collecting vehiclesbeing distributed around thenetwork in real time. With overone hundred subscribers, thisrepresents a significant “eyesand ears” presence on theground. Every major naturereserve from The Wash to theSuffolk Coast is involved,including multiple sites along theNorfolk Coast, Breckland and the Broads.

Over the past 15 years severalsuccessful high profileprosecution cases have comefrom Operation Compass, allattracting considerable mediainterest. These include four menfrom Essex and another eggcollector from Wales caughttaking eggs on Blakeney Point, acaptive wader enthusiast caughttaking ringed plover eggs near

WCO Steve Rodgers with birds’ eggs recovered fromGonshaw’s home.

Scolt Head to be hatched incaptivity, and the seizure of morethan 3,000 eggs from a collectorliving in a caravan park inNorwich. The latter caseattracted national mediacoverage, with the collectorreceiving a five month jailsentence, after relentlesslytargeting nightjar and nightingalenests in particular.

Operation Compass goes fromstrength to strength and thepartnership is indebted to thepast and present organisation ofthe operation by police officersAlan Roberts, Jerry Simpson, JonHopes, Jason Pegden, NigelLound, Nick Willey and RebeccaO’Neil, as well as all the reservewardens of the supportingorganisations.

Avocet eggs are sought by collectors

Ch

ris Go

mersall (rsp

b-im

ages.co

m)

The ASBO was ordered witheight conditions; mostsignificantly, Gonshaw wasbanned from entering Scotlandbetween 1 February and 31 August for 10 years.

On 11 May 2012 Gonshaw wasback in court, this time inScotland, for the offences on theIsle of Rum. At InvernessSheriffs Court he was sentencedto six months’ imprisonment andreceived a further ASBO, banninghim from Scotland between 1 February and 31 August for life.

Sheriff Neilson commented thatit was her duty to protect the

wildlife of Scotland frompredators like Gonshaw.

Gonshaw now has the notorietyof becoming the most jailed eggcollector in Britain, with fivesentences. With this backgroundit remains to be seen if theseASBOs have any effect. IfGonshaw continues to take eggsand breaks the terms of theASBO he is liable to a maximumof five years’ imprisonment and afine of £20,000.

Gonshaw has appealed againstthe conditions of the ASBOimposed on him by the English court.

2626

Skulls found at McPhail’s address

27

Trade in wild birds and taxidermy4

27

In 2011, there were 107 reportedincidents involving the taking,sale and possession of live anddead birds (2006-2010 average of125 incidents). As with previousyears, the majority of 2011incidents were cases of taking,selling and possessing live non-birds of prey (mostly finches)accounting for 69 incidents.There were 26 incidentsinvolving birds of prey and 12incidents of illegal taxidermy.

Case studiesThird conviction for taxidermist

A taxidermist from Rowelton,near Carlisle, received asurprisingly light sentence afterhis third conviction for taxidermyoffences. Gary McPhail pleadedguilty at Carlisle MagistratesCourt in January 2012 to a suiteof possession and trade offencesinvolving protected species. Hispunishment was a 12-monthconditional discharge and £85 costs.

The enquiry came to light inAugust 2011 following the sale ofa porpoise skull on eBay to a

person in Germany. Enquiriesidentified McPhail as the seller,his history showing that over a16 month period he had offeredfor sale almost 200 animalrelated items, ranging fromtaxidermy specimens to wild bird skulls.

On 23 August, Cumbria officers,along with an NWCU and anAHVLA Wildlife Inspector,executed a search warrant atMcPhail’s home address, wherethey discovered the vertebra of aporpoise along with four otter

skulls and various birdspecimens. During interview,McPhail admitted knowledge ofthe wildlife trade regulations andthat he did not have the relevantcertificate in relation to theporpoise. He could not produceany records of acquisition for anyof the species he had sold or tohaving any European ProtectedSpecies licences (EPS) topossess the otter skulls. He alsoadmitted selling parts of agannet and razorbill on eBay.

Joh

n B

ridg

es (rspb

-imag

es.com

)

Cum

bria Police

The majority of incidentsof taking and selling wildbirds involve finches likethe bullfinch. Most cases involving thesespecies are prosecuted by the RSPCA

28

Steve R

ou

nd

(rspb

-imag

es.com

)

29

The RSPB maintains a record ofprosecutions involving offencesagainst wild birds. In 2011, theRSPB was involved with, orinformed of, the prosecutions of42 individuals, includingprosecutions taken by the CrownProsecution Service, ProcuratorFiscal and the RSPCA. All ofthese individuals were convictedon one or more charges (onecase involved an acquittal on allthe wildlife related charges andone case was later overturned on appeal).

The 42 prosecutions involved atleast 152 charges;124 of thesewere under the Wildlife andCountryside Act 1981, 12 underthe Food and EnvironmentProtection Act 1985 and fiveunder the Control of Trade inEndangered Species(Enforcement) Regulations 1997.Amongst other charges was onebelieved to be the first convictionunder The EnvironmentalProtection (Restriction on Use ofLead Shot) (England) Regulations1999. Of these charges, 137resulted in a guilty outcome(90%). Fines for the year totalled£37,690 and four people wereawarded custodial sentences(one of which was suspended).

Prosecutions in 20115

Crimes againstsparrowhawks resultedin the convictions of agamekeeper and apigeon fancier in 2011.

Mute swan shot by Quince. It is illegal to shoot ducks,geese, swans, coots,moorhens, golden plovers and snipe using lead shot inEngland and Wales.

First prosecution for using lead shot to kill a bird.

On 16 May 2011, Simon Quinceof Hemingfield, Barnsley,pleaded guilty at HarrogateMagistrates Court to twocharges relating to the shootingof a swan. He was fined £445 forcausing criminal damage to aswan and a further £100 for theuse of lead shot, contrary to theEnvironmental ProtectionRegulations 1999. He was alsoordered to pay £100 costs.

Quince claimed he had shot thebird after mistaking it for a goose(which would still have beenillegal under the English leadshot regulations). After seeingfour birds in the sky during ashoot, he discharged both barrelsof his shotgun, causing one birdto fall to the ground. He thenrealised he had mistakenly shot ajuvenile mute swan, which isfully protected. The severelyinjured bird was taken to a vet,but had to be put down.

The Environmental Protection(Restriction on Use of Lead Shot)(England) Regulations 1999banned the shooting of swans,ducks, geese and certain other

birds with lead shot. The use oflead shot over many wetlandswas also banned. Similarregulations have since beenintroduced across the UK. The aim was to prevent birdsingesting stray shot with the gritthey swallow to aid digestion. Inthe UK, tens of thousands ofbirds are estimated to bepoisoned by lead every year.Despite this, the regulations arestill being flouted. This convictionreinforces the conclusions of arecent report to Governmentstating that 70% of a sample ofducks on sale in England wereshot illegally with lead.

Recent evidence suggestsingestion of unretrieved orinjured gamebirds shot with leadammunition can cause lead

poisoning in terrestrial habitatand for scavengers, such as birdsof prey. There is some worryingevidence showing that theselead fragments are not alwaysremoved by the standardbutchering process and canpotentially contaminate thehuman food chain. TheGovernment has set up a LeadAmmunition Group to consider aproportionate response to thisnew evidence. Visit www.leadammunitiongroup.co.uk for more information.

N.Yo

rks Police

Case studies

Guy S

horrock (RS

PB

)

3130

Peak District gamekeeper loses appeal againstconviction for operating a bird of prey trap

After almost two years, the caseagainst Peak District gamekeeperGlenn Brown is finally over. InMay 2010, Brown was filmed bythe RSPB attending a cage trapbaited with a live white pigeonon National Trust land in theDerwent Valley, South Yorkshire.

This is the same valley whereanother gamekeeper wasconvicted of destroying an activegoshawk nest in 2001 and birdsof prey, including goshawks andperegrines, have sufferedcatastrophic declines.

Dead sparrowhawk onHowden Moor. This birdhad been illegally caught inBrown’s cage trap.

Cage trap on Howden Moor containing a live white pigeon.

Brown was found guilty of seven offences at ChesterfieldMagistrates Court in June 2011,after trapping a sparrowhawk andusing a baited cage trap. Hereceived a 100-hour unpaid workorder and was ordered to pay£10,000 costs.

Brown’s legal team thenlaunched an appeal, whichresulted in a full 14-day retrial atDerby Crown Court, concludingon 24 January 2012. The appealproduced no new evidence andconsisted largely of a prolongedand blistering attack on theintegrity of the RSPBinvestigators.

The appeal against all sevencharges was dismissed andBrown was ordered to pay anadditional £7,000 costs. Someestimates put the combined costof the defence trial and appeal inexcess of £100,000.

In delivering her verdict, JudgeWatson condemned Brown andfound RSPB officers to bereliable, experienced andcredible. After the appeal verdict,Brown was dismissed by hisemployer Geoff Eyre, an award-winning expert at heathermoorland restoration.

Guy

Sho

rroc

k (R

SP

B)

White-tailed eagles are a significant touristattraction on Mull.

3332

Goshawk keeper makes a bad situation worse Photographers disturb rare eagles

A goshawk keeper repeatedlyignored requests by AnimalHealth to register the goshawkshe kept – and when he didfinally apply, he lied in hisapplication.

On 13 November 2011, RyanHowells, 31, of Rhondda CynonTaff, South Wales, pleaded guiltyat Rhondda Magistrates Court totwo offences of failing toregister a goshawk, and afurther offence of furnishingfalse information in order toobtain registration for aSchedule 4 bird. He was fined£200 plus £85 costs and a £15victim surcharge.

A search of Howells’s home bySouth Wales Police and anAnimal Health Wildlife Inspectordiscovered two goshawks.Although both birds were fittedwith leg rings, neither bird hadbeen registered with AnimalHealth as is required of aspecies listed in Schedule 4 ofthe Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.

Later, Animal Health received arequest from Howells to registerthe bird. The application statedthat the bird was still being keptat his home address in SouthWales. However, Devon andCornwall Police had already

established that the bird was bythen being housed in the Tauntonarea of Devon. Action was takenagainst Howells due to a historyof failing to register Schedule 4birds despite repeated contactbeing made with him by Animal Health.

The RSPB is concerned that thenumber of Schedule 4 speciesrequired to be registered incaptivity has been reduced overthe years, making it increasinglydifficult for the enforcementagencies to detect andinvestigate crimes involving rare birds for which a blackmarket exists.

Two photographers whodisturbed nesting white-tailedeagles on the Isle of Mull wereconvicted of the offences inNovember 2011 at Oban Sheriff’sCourt. Yuli Panayotov, fromLambeth, London, and IvayloTakev, from Norwich, werecharged with recklesslydisturbing breeding birds of preynear the nest in May 2010. Theywere fined a total of £1,100.

Several witnesses had seen theadult birds circling over their nestand alarm-calling. White-tailedeagles are particularly sensitiveto nest disturbance. StrathclydePolice later discovered aphotography hide near the nest.

White-tailed eagles werereintroduced to Scotland, afterbecoming extinct in the UK earlyin the 20th century. Eagles, asignificant tourist attraction,bring £5 million to the localeconomy every year. This specieshas the highest level ofprotection of any British bird,due to its rarity and sensitivityto disturbance, particularly duringthe breeding season. It is illegalto disturb, intentionally orrecklessly, a white-tailed eagleat or near the nest without aSchedule 1 licence from ScottishNatural Heritage.

Dave Sexton, RSPB Scotland’sMull Officer, added, “Mull’s

economy depends to a largeextent on wildlife tourism andwe welcome thousands ofresponsible, law-abiding visitorswho respect and enjoy thewildlife they’ve come to see. But unacceptable behaviour frompeople who think they are abovethe law and choose to disturbprotected wildlife such as theeagles will not be tolerated –wildlife photographers inparticular need to take note.”

An attempt by the twoBulgarians to lodge an appealagainst their conviction was later declared “devoid of anysubstantial merit” by an appealcourt judge.

Wh

ite-tailed eag

le by S

tig Fro

de O

lsen

One of the unregisteredgoshawks

AH

VLA

3534

In October 2011, 110 delegatesattended the 23rd annual WildlifeEnforcers’ Conference inHarrogate, North Yorkshire. TheWWF-sponsored WildlifeEnforcer of the Year award waspresented to WCO PC JohnShaw of Cumbria Constabulary.A Lifetime Achievement Awardwas also presented to CharlesMackay of the UK Border Agency(UKBA), recognising a career-longdedication to CITESenforcement.

G S

ho

rro

ck (

RS

PB

)

G S

ho

rro

ck (

RS

PB

)

Charles McKay from UKBAreceiving his lifetimeachievement award

WCO PC John Shaw,Wildlife Enforcer of theYear, receives his awardfrom WWF’s Heather Sohl.

Partnership for Action AgainstWildlife Crime (PAW)

Review of 2011 Partnership for Action Against WildlifeCrime (PAW)

6

An Aberdeenshire gamekeeperwho admitted using a live decoypigeon in a cage trap failed toget his sentence reduced so thathe could operate traps again as a gamekeeper.

In September 2010, an RSPBofficer found an unset cage trapcontaining a live pigeon on theAswanley Estate near Huntly. Thetrap was near a partridge pen.The use of pigeons in traps suchas these poses a threat togoshawks, sparrowhawks,buzzards and other protectedspecies. When the trap wasdiscovered, a live buzzard wassitting on top. A localgamekeeper, Craig Barrie,admitted that he was responsiblefor operating the trap.

On 28 October 2011, atAberdeen Sherriff Court, Barriepleaded guilty to possession andcontrol of the live pigeon in thetrap. The Crown accepted a pleaof not guilty to a charge of usingthe trap to catch a buzzard.Barrie was fined £520. Theconviction prevented Barrie from operating under the opengeneral licences, which permitthe control of certain speciessuch as corvids.

On 1 February Barrie appealedhis conviction, and at the HighCourt of the Justiciary inEdinburgh The court heard thatBarrie had resigned from his job

on the Aswanley Estate followinghis conviction. However, theposition had been kept open forhim in the hope that thesentence would be reduced toan admonishment or an absolutedischarge. The defence claimedthat the consequence of a finewould be that Barrie would be“rendered unemployable as agamekeeper, because, unlessyou have a licence, you are nouse to an estate”.

Open general licences are issuedby Scottish Natural Heritage(SNH). They cannot be used byanyone convicted under theWildlife and Countryside Actsince January 2008, unless the

A live buzzard sitting on top of one of Barrie’s traps.

Gamekeeper loses his case and his trapping licence

offender received anadmonishment or an absolutedischarge. The individual bancontinues until the conviction is“spent” under the terms of theRehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974.

Lords Hardie and Wheatleyrejected the appeal, saying thatBarrie “must have been awarethat it was a breach of hislicence to have a live pigeon in aLarsen trap as a decoy for someother species. If he did not knowthat, it is astonishing, given his14 years as a gamekeeper, and his father a gamekeeperbefore him.”

RS

PB

Sco

tland

3736

Gu

y Sh

orro

ck (RS

PB

)

Amendments relating topossession of birds’ eggs ruled unlawful

A recent High Court ruling hasestablished that 2004 changes tothe Wildlife and Countryside Act1981 (WCA) in England andWales relating to the possessionof birds’ eggs were not properlyconsulted on, and were thereforeintroduced unlawfully.

The Protection of Birds Act 1954brought in protection for birdsand their eggs. The WCA made itillegal to possess wild birds killedor taken unlawfully since 1954.But as far as eggs wereconcerned, it only covered those taken unlawfully since the WCA came into force(September 1982).

Claiming that eggs were takenprior to the WCA has been acommonly-used defence bymodern-day egg collectors.

Statutory Instrument 2004 No. 1487 was used to amend theWCA definition of “wild bird” toensure compliance with the EU’sBirds Directive. It also closed aloophole relating to thepossession of birds’ eggs andtreated them the same as thebirds that laid them, so thatpossession of any eggs takensince 1954 became unlawful.

In September 2009, an eggcollector called John Dodsworthwas convicted of possession ofbirds’ eggs believed to have beentaken between 1954 and 1982.Solicitors on behalf of Dodsworthapplied to take the matter to

Legal issues

Judicial Review on the groundsthat there was insufficientconsultation by Government onthe changes to the defence ofpossession of the eggs leadingup to the 2004 amendment.Defra conceded this point and on12 March 2012 a Consent Orderwas issued by the High Courtruling that this change to thedefence was made unlawfully.The conviction of Dodsworthwas also quashed.

Defra has announced itsintention to consult again on thismatter and the RSPB hopes thisloophole can be permanentlyclosed. A similar amendment inScotland was brought in througha different consultation processand remains in force.

The High Court has ruledthat the legislation makingpossession of wild birds’eggs taken between 1954and 1982 an offence isunlawful. Defra intend to re-consult on this matter.

Forensic update

Forensics Working GroupForensic Analysis Fund

The Forensic Analysis Fund is an initiative driven by thePartnership for Action againstWildlife Crime (PAW) ForensicsWorking Group. It was launchedin 2008, and the fund is availableto Police and Customs officerswho require financial support touse forensic analysis in wildlifecrime investigations. Fouragencies, TRACE, WWF, RSPBand Defra, have all contributedmoney to the scheme. Themoney can be used to match upto 50% of the forensics costs ofa wildlife crime investigation. Todate, money has been providedfrom the fund in relation to morethan 20 applications. This has

supported a range of methodsincluding: - • Radiocarbon dating to age

elephant ivory and ocelot skin• Identification of rhino horn

down to species and individuallevel

• Handwriting analysis toinvestigate fraudulent datacards for birds’ eggs

• DNA profiling to check captivebreeding claims for goshawks

• Veterinary and professionalexaminations of taxidermyspecimens to provideinformation on provenance andcause of death.

• Analysis of computer records.

More information about the useand funding of forensictechniques for tackling wildlife

crime has been compiled andpublished by the PAW ForensicWorking Group (FWG). Thisincludes a list of successfulprosecutions where forensicanalysis has been used in thelast 15 years. There is asummary of the types offorensic tests currently availableand details of organisations thatcarry out these tests. The onlineresource includes the PAWWildlife Crime Forensic Guide2005; details of the wildlife DNAsampling kit; a list of approvedvets for wildlife crime casework;and contact details for FWGmembers. This information cannow be viewed on the Tools andResources for AppliedConservation and Enforcement(TRACE) websitewww.tracenetwork.org/pawforensics

TRACE is an international NGOthat promotes the use offorensic science in conservationand the investigation of wildlifecrime.

Swabbing a hare to collectforensic evidence.

SA

SA

3938

RSPB International Update

Enforcement action in Bulgaria

An ongoing EU-Life project runby the Bulgarian Society for theProtection of Birds (BSPB),assisted by the RSPB, seeks toimprove the conservation statusof threatened birds such as sakerfalcons and imperial eagles. Partof the project involves trying toimprove the ability of theBulgarian statutory agencies totackle wildlife crime. The RSPBInvestigations Section has beenassisting with this process. In2010, three Bulgarian officialsvisited the UK Wildlife CrimeConference to see at first handthe range of work beingundertaken.

In 2010, Brian Stuart, formerhead of the NWCU, attended an

enforcement workshop in Sofia.This was followed in September2011 by a presentation by AlanRoberts, an Investigative SupportOfficer with the NWCU, at aCITES enforcement conferencenear Varna, Bulgaria. Thepresentation outlined the wildlifecrime enforcement work in theUK and the role of statutory andnon governmental agencies,Partnership for Action AgainstWildlife Crime (PAW) and the useof the National IntelligenceModel (NIM).

Coincidentally, during the periodof the project, information cameto light alleging a UK nationalwas egg collecting in Bulgaria.Intelligence was passed to theBulgarian authorities by theNWCU. However, there was little

Gu

y Sh

orro

ck (RS

PB

)

sign of any action and RSPBInvestigations continued to workwith the BSPB and the BulgarianPolice. Eventually in December2011, an RSPB InvestigatonsOfficer travelled to Bulgaria toassist the police with a raid onthe apartment of a UK nationalliving in Burgas. A small numberof birds’ eggs was seized,including the egg of a griffonvulture, a very rare species inBulgaria with approximately 50 breeding pairs. Also seizedwere detailed journals,photographs and climbingequipment. The seizure receivedwidespread coverage in theBulgarian media andinvestigations are continuing.

The egg of a griffon vulturewas one of those seizedfrom a UK national inBulgaria in 2011.

In July, Cyprus hosted delegatesfrom across Europe to discussongoing problems with illegalkilling and trapping of birdsacross the continent. Themeeting, which was attended bya wide range of conservationists,hunting representatives andenforcement experts, agreed aseries of recommendations,which we hope will help addressillegal bird killing across Europe,from persecution of birds of preyin the UK, to trapping ofmigrants on Mediterraneanislands such as Cyprus andMalta. The conference was alsoaddressed by the CypriotMinister of the Interior, whopromised that Cyprus wouldstamp out illegal trapping ofmigrants on the island by theend of 2012.

The promises made at the Julyconference were swiftly followedby the stern reality test of theautumn trapping season. Autumnis the worst time for trapping inCyprus, and autumn 2011 was noexception. A BirdLife field surveyteam located some 3 km ofactive mist net rides duringSeptember and October 2011. Onthe plus side, and following theInterior Minister’s conferencevow to stamp out trapping, therewas a 40% reduction in mist netuse in areas controlled by theRepublic. But overall, trappinglevels remained at a 10-year high,with the British Sovereign Base(SBA) areas a real hotbed of mist

net use, and levels of limestickuse very high in Republic areas,in keeping with the alarmingpattern recorded since 2007.Although there were someefforts to tackle the sale ofambelopoulia in restaurants,these remained sporadic. Apositive note was the Novemberimposition of a €10,000 courtfine for a restaurateur convictedof possession of trapped birds.

With the completion of thewinter 2011/12 field monitoringseason, BirdLife Cyprusestimated the total bird death tollfor 2011 to be in the region of2.8 million birds. Clearly, there is

much work still to do if thepositive noises made during theLarnaca conference are to beturned into effective conservationaction.

In more positive news, thedeclaration made at theconference led to the Conventionon Migratory Species (CMS)adopting a new resolution totackle poisoning of wildlife acrossthe globe. The process establishedby this resolution is recognitionthat poisoning, both illegal andaccidental, is a significant problemof global conservation concern,which requires a global effort totackle it.

Cyprus conference tackles illegal bird killing

A turtle dove with an injury to its neck from an illegally set mist net

Gu

y Sh

orro

ck (RS

PB

)

4140

Appendix I – Incidents reported tothe RSPB 2006–2011

The table below shows the number of incidents reported to the RSPB for each year for the categoriesspecified.

In 2009, the RSPB ceased recording certain categories of incidents, such as the shooting and destructionof non bird of prey species. The figures supplied do not therefore give a total figure for wild bird crime inthe UK and are not comparable with figures provided for years prior to 2009.

Incident type 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Shooting and destruction of birds of prey 210 273 238 283 235 202

Theft, sale and possession of birds of prey 41 25 49 74 37 26

Poisoning and use of poisoned baits 196 172 135 153 129 100

Import and export of live or dead birds 28 2 1 3 2 0

Theft, sale and possession of non bird of prey species 67 58 69 107 65 69

Taxidermy and possession of dead wild birds 20 11 5 11 4 12

Egg collecting and egg thefts 79 48 39 64 44 30

Sale of eggs 16 18 14 2 2 4

Photography and disturbance 35 33 31 44 50 18

Total 692 640 581 741 568 461

UK breakdown for above incident types in 2011:

England 308

Scotland 94

Wales 23

Northern Ireland 25

UK unspecified 11

Total no. UK incidents recorded by the RSPB in 2010: 461

Note: Reported incident totals for previous years may have changed due to a number of belated reports oradditional information received after the publishing date for Birdcrime of that year.

Appendices7

4342

Appendix II – Regional breakdownof incidents reported in 2011

Region County Birds of prey or owls Other * Total

Eastern England Bedfordshire 2 0 2

Cambridgeshire 3 3 6

Essex 2 1 3

Hertfordshire 9 3 12

Lincolnshire 13 2 15

Norfolk 6 8 14

Suffolk 7 5 12

Total 42 22 64

Central England Buckinghamshire 3 1 4

Derbyshire 6 7 13

Herefordshire 2 1 3

Leicestershire 6 5 11

Northamptonshire 2 1 3

Nottinghamshire 7 2 9

Oxfordshire 5 0 5

Shropshire 7 8 15

Staffordshire 3 4 7

Warwickshire 5 3 8

West Midlands 2 9 11

Worcestershire 1 2 3

Unspecified 1 0 1

Total 50 43 93

Northern England Cheshire 2 1 3

County Durham 7 4 11

Cumbria 8 7 15

East Riding of Yorkshire 1 0 1

Greater Manchester 2 2 4

Lancashire 36 6 42

Merseyside 1 3 4

North Lincolnshire 1 0 1

North Yorkshire 33 7 40

Northumberland 6 1 7

South Yorkshire 6 1 7

Tyne and Wear 7 4 11

West Yorkshire 13 3 16

York city 0 1 1

Unspecified 1 1 2

Total 124 41 165

Region County Birds of prey or owls Other * Total

South East England Brighton and Hove 1 0 1

East Sussex 3 0 3

Greater London 3 9 12

Hampshire 2 3 5

Isle of Wight 1 1 2

Kent 3 4 7

Portsmouth City 1 0 1

Surrey 1 2 3

West Berkshire 4 0 4

West Sussex 1 0 1

Windsor and Maidenhead 1 0 1

Total 21 19 40

South West England Bristol City 0 1 1

Bath and North East Somerset 1 0 1

Cornwall 3 4 7

Devon 15 2 17

Dorset 7 0 7

Gloucestershire 8 1 9

Somerset 2 4 6

Wiltshire 5 1 6

Unspecified 1 0 1

Total 42 13 55

Northern Ireland Antrim 9 6 15

Armagh 2 1 3

Down 2 2 4

Fermanagh 1 0 1

Londonderry 1 1 2

Tyrone 3 1 4

Total 18 11 29

East Scotland Aberdeenshire 5 1 6

Angus 1 1 2

Fife 2 2 4

Perth and Kinross 12 4 16

Total 20 8 28

North Scotland Highland 23 6 29

Orkney 0 2 2

Shetland 0 1 1

Western Isles 1 0 1

Total 24 9 33

4544

Appendix III – Confirmed andprobable bird of prey and owlpersecution during 2011

Persecution type Month Species Confirmed Probable County

SHOOTING January Buzzard 0 1 Highland

February Eagle owl 1 0 Gloucestershire

Peregrine 1 0 Lincolnshire

March Barn owl 1 0 Shropshire

Birds of prey 0 ? North Ayrshire

Buzzard 1 0 Hampshire

Buzzard 1 0 Norfolk

Buzzard 1 0 Windsor & Maidenhead

Peregrine 0 1 Essex

Red kite 0 2 North Ayrshire

Short-eared owl 0 ? North Yorkshire

Sparrowhawk 1 0 Warwickshire

April Birds of prey 0 ? Derbyshire

Buzzard 1 0 Perth and Kinross

Red kite 1 0 Cumbria

Sparrowhawk 0 1 Derbyshire

Tawny owl 1 0 Cumbria

May Buzzard 1 0 Hertfordshire

Buzzard 1 0 Isle of Anglesey

Buzzard 0 1 Dorset

Peregrine 1 0 Aberdeenshire

Short-eared owl 1 0 Aberdeenshire

Tawny owl 0 1 Lincolnshire

June Barn owl 0 ? Dorset

Kestrel 1 0 North Yorkshire

Red kite 1 0 Buckinghamshire

Tawny owl 0 1 Hertfordshire

July Barn owl 0 1 East Sussex

Goshawk 2 0 Midlothian

August Birds of prey 0 ? Shropshire

Buzzard 0 ? Shropshire

Buzzard 0 1 Kent

Goshawk 0 ? Shropshire

Marsh harrier 1 0 County Durham

Peregrine 1 0 Cornwall

Peregrine 1 0 Scotland

September Barn owl 0 1 Northamptonshire

Marsh harrier 0 1 North Yorkshire

Tawny owl 0 1 Dorset

October Buzzard 1 0 North Yorkshire

Appendix II – Regional breakdownof incidents reported in 2011

Note: Incidents where the location was only given as “England”, “Northern Ireland”, “Scotland”, “Wales” or“United Kingdom” are not included. The regional breakdown in Appendix II includes all incidents reportedto the RSPB. Figures of reported incidents in Appendix I are for the specified categories only; thereforeAppendix I and II figures will not correlate.

*In 2009, the RSPB ceased recording certain categories of incidents, such as the shooting and destructionof non bird of prey species. The figures supplied for each region in the “other” column do not thereforegive a total figure for non bird of prey incidents and are not comparable with figures provided for years priorto 2009.

Region County Birds of prey or owls Other* Total

South & West Scotland Argyll and Bute 1 0 1

Dumfries and Galloway 8 3 11

East Ayrshire 3 0 3

East Renfrewshire 0 1 1

East Dunbartonshire 1 0 1

Edinburgh City 0 2 2

Midlothian 2 0 2

North Ayrshire 1 0 1

North Lanarkshire 1 1 2

Scottish Borders 5 4 9

South Ayrshire 2 0 2

South Lanarkshire 9 3 12

West Lothian 0 1 1

Total 33 15 48

Wales Carmarthenshire 2 2 4

Ceredigion 3 0 3

Conwy 1 0 1

Denbighshire 1 0 1

Gwynedd 1 0 1

Isle of Anglesey 1 0 1

Merthyr Tydfil 0 1 1

Monmouthshire 3 1 4

Newport 1 1 2

Pembrokeshire 1 0 1

Powys 3 1 4

Rhondda Cynon Taff 4 0 4

Torfaen 2 0 2

Vale of Glamorgan 1 0 1

Wrexham 0 1 1

Total 24 7 31

4746

Appendix III – Confirmed andprobable bird of prey and owlpersecution during 2011

Persecution type Month Species Confirmed Probable County

OTHER January Buzzard 0 1 South Lanarkshire

March Buzzard 0 2 South Lanarkshire

Buzzard 0 2 South Lanarkshire

Buzzard 0 1 South Lanarkshire

Hen harrier 0 ? Dumfries and Galloway

Peregrine 0 2 Dumfries and Galloway

Peregrine 0 ? Lancashire

Peregrine 0 ? South Lanarkshire

Tawny owl 0 1 South Lanarkshire

April Hen harrier 0 1 South Lanarkshire

Hen harrier 0 ? Lancashire

Hen harrier 0 2 Lancashire

Peregrine ? 0 Fife

Peregrine 1 0 Fife

Peregrine 0 2 Dumfries and Galloway

Peregrine 0 ? Dumfries and Galloway

Peregrine 0 ? Lancashire

Peregrine 0 ? Lancashire

Peregrine 0 ? Lancashire

Peregrine 0 ? Lancashire

May Birds of prey 0 1 East Ayrshire

Red kite 0 1 Highland

June Kestrel 1 0 Highland

July Peregrine 0 2 West Yorkshire

Birds of prey ? 0 Powys

August Red kite 0 1 Highland

September Golden eagle 0 1 Aberdeenshire

November Golden eagle 0 1 Highland

December Peregrine ? 0 Merseyside

Number of birds 2 21

For definitions of the categories “confirmed” and “probable” please see page 10.

? – no bird found, but the most likely/known target is listed.

Persecution type Month Species Confirmed Probable County

Short-eared owl 1 0 Essex

Sparrowhawk 0 1 Dorset

Sparrowhawk 0 1 Greater Manchester

November Barn owl 1 0 Suffolk

Barn owl 1 0 County Durham

Barn owl 1 0 Cambridgeshire

Buzzard 1 0 Isle of Wight

Goshawk 1 0 Wiltshire

December Barn owl 0 1 Buckinghamshire

Buzzard 1 0 South Lanarkshire

Unspecified Buzzard 1 0 South Yorkshire

Unspecified Short-eared owl 0 ? Scottish Borders

Number of birds 30 16

NEST DESTRUCTION April Peregrine 0 ? Scottish Borders

May Barn owl 1+ 0 Gwynedd

Hen harrier 0 ? Highland

Hen harrier 0 ? Highland

Hen harrier 0 ? East Ayrshire

June Goshawk 0 ? Wiltshire

July Peregrine 0 2 West Yorkshire

Number of birds 1+ 2

ILLEGAL SPRING May Tawny owl 0 1 Lancashire

TRAPPING Buzzard ? 0 Dorset

Tawny owl 1 0 Norfolk

June Birds of prey ? 0 Nottinghamshire

August Birds of prey 0 ? Devon

Owls 0 ? Devon

Number of birds 1 1

ILLEGAL TRAPPING February Buzzard 1 0 Perth and Kinross

(OTHER) Buzzard 1 0 Perth and Kinross

Sparrowhawk 1 0 Perth and Kinross

March Birds of prey ? 0 South Lanarkshire

Buzzard 3 0 Perth and Kinross

May Peregrine 1 0 Torfaen

June Birds of prey 0 ? Antrim

Kestrel 1 0 Angus

Number of birds 8 0

4948 4948

Appendix IV – Confirmed poisonabuse incidents during 2011

Month Victim Number Poison County BaitNovember Magpie 1 Bendiocarb Buckinghamshire -November Red kite 1 Bendiocarb Buckinghamshire -November Rook 1 Bendiocarb Buckinghamshire -November Red kite 1 Alphachloralose North Yorkshire -November Dog 1 Aldicarb County Durham -December Red kite 1 Carbofuran Hertfordshire -

Number of victims 70

Month Victim Number Poison County BaitJanuary Buzzard 1 Carbofuran Scottish Borders -January Red kite 1 Bendiocarb Cumbria -January Fox 2 Aldicarb North Yorkshire -January Cat 1 Carbofuran Northern Ireland -February Red kite 1 Alphachloralose Highland -February Peregrine 2 Strychnine North Lanarkshire -February Cat 1 Coumarin/Coumatetralyl Tyrone -March Buzzard 1 Alphachloralose Hampshire -March Golden eagle 1 Carbofuran Aberdeenshire -March Red kite 1 Carbofuran Somerset -March – B Bendiocarb West Yorkshire Hen/chicken baitMarch Buzzard 1 Carbofuran Devon -March Goshawk 2 Carbofuran Devon -March Buzzard 2 Alphachloralose Perth and Kinross Pheasant bait x 2March Goshawk 2 Carbofuran Devon -March Buzzard 1 Carbofuran Antrim -March Buzzard 1 Bendiocarb Monmouthshire -March Red kite 1 Fenthion Pembrokeshire -March Cat 3 Aldicarb Lincolnshire -March – B Aldicarb & Bendiocarb Suffolk Pigeon baitApril Buzzard 1 Aldicarb/Carbofuran Highland -April Carrion crow 1 Alphachloralose Perth and Kinross -April – B Carbofuran Tyrone Pigeon baitApril Peregrine 1 Diazinon/Dimpylate Shropshire -April Red kite 1 Carbofuran Down -April Carrion crow 1 Alphachloralose Perth and Kinross -April – B Metaldehyde Greater London SausagesMay Red kite 1 Carbofuran Highland -May Dog 3+ Strychnine North Yorkshire -May Red kite 1 Bendiocarb Gloucestershire -May Raven 1 Carbofuran Dumfries and Galloway -May Buzzard 1 Carbofuran Aberdeenshire -June Red kite 1 Aldicarb Cambridgeshire -June Red kite 2 Fenthion Carmarthenshire -July Peregrine 2 Carbofuran Cornwall -July Peregrine 1 Aldicarb Devon -July Buzzard 1 Carbofuran MonmouthshireJuly Raven 2 Carbofuran MonmouthshireJuly – B Bendiocarb Monmouthshire 2 x pigeon baitJuly Red kite 1 Carbofuran Dumfries and Galloway -July Cat 1 Carbofuran Antrim SausagesAugust – B Aldicarb Highland Grouse baitAugust Magpie 1 Alphachloralose Armagh -August Red kite 1 Carbofuran East Aryshire -September Peregrine 1 Aldicarb Lincolnshire Pigeon baitSeptember Buzzard 2 Carbofuran Lincolnshire Pheasant baitSeptember Red kite 2 Carbosulfan/Benfuracarb Cambridgeshire -September Buzzard 1 Carbosulfan/Isofenphos/ North Yorkshire -

AlphachloraloseSeptember Buzzard 2 Carbofuran Midlothian -September Sparrowhawk 2 Carbofuran Midlothian -September Raven 1 Bendiocarb Scottish Borders -October Buzzard 2 Aldicarb Staffordshire -October Hedgehog 1 Aldicarb Staffordshire -

Items grouped by shading refer to one incident involving more than one species.

“B” indicates that a bait, but no victim, was found.

5150

Appendix V – Schedule I nestrobberies during 2011

Species No. of nests Nest content CountyAvocet 3 Eggs EssexTotal 3

Confirmed

Species No. of nests Nest content CountyPeregrine 1 Chicks South AyrshirePeregrine 1 Chicks LancashirePeregrine 1 Chicks LancashirePeregrine 1 Chicks LancashirePeregrine 1 Eggs South AyrshireSlavonian grebe 1 Eggs HighlandTotal 6

Probable

For definitions of categories please see page 10

Prosecutions in 2011

5352

Appendix VI – Wild bird relatedprosecutions in 2011

Date Act Section Charges Prosecutor Court Surname Plea Outcome Penalty type PenaltyPenalty type2

Penalty 2 Details

06-Jan-11 Control of trade in EndangeredSpecies (enforcement) Reg 1997

8(1) 2 CPS Hexham Magistrates Pyle G G Fine £500 Defendant (falconer) pleaded guilty to illegally purchasing two goshawks.Ordered to pay £120 costs and forfeit both goshawks.

14-Jan-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 18(2) 1 RSPCA DarlingtonMagistrates

Dugdale NG G CD 1 year Defendant found guilty of possessing glue sticks and traps to take finches.Ordered to pay £100 costs.

Defendant pleaded guilty to illegally possessing five goldfinches and a cagetrap capable of taking wild birds.

19-Jan-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)(a) 1 RSPCA WorcesterMagistrates

Davies G G CD

19-Jan-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 18(2) 1 RSPCA WorcesterMagistrates

Davies G G CD 1 year

02-Feb-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)(a) 5 RSPCA Aberystwyth Harty NG G CO 225 hours’unpaid work

Defendant found guilty of possessing wild birds including ravens, othercorvids and a woodpecker. Also convicted of a number of animal welfareoffences. Ordered to pay £13,853.90 in costs.

Defendant (aviculturist) pleaded guilty to possessing number of wild birdsincluding red-backed shrikes, nightingales, skylarks, wagtails, nuthatches,stonechats, goldfinches and spotted flycatchers. Also possession for sale oftwo garden warblers. Ordered to pay £10,000 costs

24-Feb-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)(a) 13 RSPCA King’s LynnMagistrates

Easter NG G Fine £9,750

24-Feb-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 6(1)(a) 1 RSPCA King’s LynnMagistrates

Easter NG G Fine £750

24-Feb-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)(a) 1 CPS Wirral Magistrates Bowen G G Jail 22 weeks(concurrent)

24-Feb-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(1)(a) 2 CPS Wirral Magistrates Bowen G G Jail

25-Feb-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(1)(a) 1 CPS Liverpool Magistrates White G G Jail 10 weeks Defendant pleaded guilty to offence of killing a juvenile herring gull by kickingand stamping on it.

28-Feb-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)(a) 1 RSPCA Teesside Magistrates Bright G G CD 2 years CO Defendant pleaded guilty to finch trapping offences and illegal possession oftwo bullfinches and a brambling. Ordered to pay £3,657 costs.

18-Apr-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)(a) 7 RSPCA Harlow Magistrates Smithson S G G Fine £2,400 Defendant pleaded guilty to possession and sales offences relating to wildbirds. Eleven species involved included crossbills, hawfinches and a serin.Ordered to pay £5,097.18 costs.

18-Apr-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 6(1)(a) 9 RSPCA Harlow Magistrates Smithson S G G Fine

18-Apr-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 6(1)(a) 1 RSPCA Harlow Magistrates Smithson S G G Fine

18-Apr-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)(a) 7 RSPCA Harlow Magistrates Smithson B G G Fine £2,400 Defendant pleaded guilty to possession and sales offences relating to wildbirds. Eleven species involved included crossbills, hawfinches and a serin.Ordered to pay £4,000 costs.18-Apr-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 6(1)(a) 9 RSPCA Harlow Magistrates Smithson B G G Fine

18-Apr-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 6(1)(a) 1 RSPCA Harlow Magistrates Smithson B G G Fine

5554

Appendix VI – Wild bird relatedprosecutions in 2011

Date Act Section Charges Prosecutor Court Surname Plea Outcome Penalty type Penalty Penalty type 2 Penalty 2 Details

21-Apr-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 5(1)(b) 1 CPS Market HarboroughMagistrates

Crane IP G G Fine £500 Defendant (part-time gamekeeper) pleaded guilty to using a pole-trap at apheasant release pen and offences relating to unapproved and unsafestorage of pesticides. Ordered to pay £80 costs.

21-Apr-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 18(2) 1 CPS Market HarboroughMagistrates

Crane IP G G Fine £500

21-Apr-11 Food and Environment Protection Act1985

16(12)(a) 2 CPS Market HarboroughMagistrates

Crane IP G G Fine £2,000

Defendant (part-time gamekeeper) pleaded guilty to possessing item(pole-trap) capable of being used to commit an offence. Ordered to pay£80 costs.

Defendant pleaded guilty to two charges relating to shooting a swanduring a pheasant shoot. Ordered to pay £100 costs. Believed to be firstconviction under the lead shot regulations. Ordered to pay £100 costs.

21-Apr-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 5(1)(b) 1 CPS Market HarboroughMagistrates

Crane IM U D Fine

21-Apr-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 18(2) 1 CPS Market HarboroughMagistrates

Crane IM G G Fine £500

16-May-11 The Environmental Protection(Restriction on Use of LeadShot) (England) Regulations 1999

3(c) 1 CPS HarrogateMagistrates

Quince G G Fine £100

16-May-11 Criminal Damage Act 1971 1(1)(a) 1 CPS HarrogateMagistrates

Quince G G Fine £445

26-May-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 15(a) 1 Fiscal Inverness Sheriff Barr G G Fine £3,300 Defendant (gamekeeper) pleaded guilty to possessing 10.5 kg ofcarbofuran.

26-May-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)(a) 1 Fiscal Inverness Sheriff Rolfe G G Fine £1,500 Defendant (gamekeeper) pleaded guilty to possessing a dead red kitefound in the back of his Land Rover.

26-May-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)(b) 1 Fiscal Inverness Sheriff Grant NG NG Defendant (gamekeeper) pleaded not guilty to possessing a bucket of56 black-headed gull eggs. Plea accepted following guilty plea by co-defendant.

09-Jun-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(1)(a) 1 RSPCA Derby Magistrates Boswell G G CD Defendant pleaded guilty to finch trapping. Ordered to pay £875 costs.

Defendant (gamekeeper) convicted of seven charges. Three related to theillegal use of a cage trap using a live pigeon as bait and the taking of asparrowhawk. The other four charges were animal welfare mattersrelating to the keeping of birds in the cage trap, involving a pigeon andpheasant and a carrion crow. Defendant was banned from keepingpigeons for five years and ordered to pay £10,000 costs. Subsequentappeal in Januray 2012 failed and defendant ordered to pay a further£7,000 costs.

09-Jun-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)(a) 1 RSPCA Derby Magistrates Boswell G G CD 1 yearconsecutively

09-Jun-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 18(2) 1 RSPCA Derby Magistrates Boswell G G CD

13-Jun-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 5(1)(b) 1 CPS ChesterfieldMagistrates

Brown NG G CO 100 hours’unpaid workconc13-Jun-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(1)(a) 1 CPS Chesterfield

MagistratesBrown NG G CO

13-Jun-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 18(2) 1 CPS ChesterfieldMagistrates

Brown NG G CO

13-Jun-11 Animal Welfare Act 2006 4(1) &32(1)

1 CPS ChesterfieldMagistrates

Brown NG G CO

13-Jun-11 Animal Welfare Act 2006 9(1) &32(2)

3 CPS ChesterfieldMagistrates

Brown NG G CO

5756

Appendix VI – Wild bird relatedprosecutions in 2011

Date Act Section Charges Prosecutor Court Surname Plea Outcome Penalty type Penalty Penalty type 2 Penalty 2 Details

08-Jul-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)(a) 1 CPS ScarboroughMagistrates

Farrow G G Fine £200 Defendant pleaded guilty to possession of a goldfinch and also tousing a trap to catch wild birds. Ordered to pay costs of £100.

08-Jul-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 5(1)(b) 1 CPS ScarboroughMagistrates

Farrow G G Fine £200

15-Jul-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(1)(a) 1 CPS Norwich Magistrates Parker NG NCA Defendant (gamekeeper) pleaded guilty to single charge ofpossessing ammunition in excess of quantity authorised. Othercharges discontinued or no case to answer.15-Jul-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 18(2)(a) 1 CPS Norwich Magistrates Parker NG NCA

15-Jul-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 18(2)(a ) 1 CPS Norwich Magistrates Parker NG D

15-Jul-11 Firearms Act 1968 1(1)(b) 1 CPS Norwich Magistrates Parker G G CD 12 months

15-Jul-11 Firearms Act 1968 2(1) 1 CPS Norwich Magistrates Parker NG NCA

25-Jul-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)(a) 1 RSPCA Derby Magistrates Devine G G CD 6 months Defendant guilty of illegally possessing of goldfinch. Ordered to pay£500 costs.

10-Aug-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(1)(a) 1 RSPCA Leamington Spa Pike G G Fine £205 Defendant (pigeon fancier) pleaded guilty to three charges relatingto the shooting of a sparrowhawk with an air rifle. Ordered to pay£986 costs.

Defendants found guilty of taking 49 eider and four lesser black-backed gull eggs.

Defendant pleaded guilty to finch trapping offences includingcapturing and possessing equipment for trapping. Ordered to pay£610 costs.

Defendant convicted re possession of a goldfinch and a relatedmatter. Ordered to pay £500 costs.

Defendant pleaded guilty to possession of 48 birds’ eggs. Orderedto pay £1,200 costs.

*Later overturned on appeal

10-Aug-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 18(1) 1 RSPCA Leamington Spa Pike G G Fine £205

10-Aug-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 5(1)(c) 1 RSPCA Leamington Spa Pike G G Fine £205

11-Aug-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(1)(c) 1 Fiscal Kirkcaldy Sheriff Peggy J G G Fine £350

11-Aug-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(1)(c) 1 Fiscal Kirkcaldy Sheriff Peggy G G G Fine £250

11-Aug-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(1)(c) 1 Fiscal Kirkcaldy Sheriff Adamson G G Fine £250

12-Aug-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)(a) 1 RSPCA Stafford Magistrates Bath G G CD 1 year (concurrent)

12-Aug-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 5(1)(b) 1 RSPCA Stafford Magistrates Bath G G CD 1 year (concurrent)

12-Aug-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 18(1) 1 RSPCA Stafford Magistrates Bath G G CD 1 year (concurrent)

16-Sep-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)(a) 1 RSPCA NorthamptonMagistrates

Krasquni G G Fine £230

16-Sep-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)(a) 1 RSPCA NorthamptonMagistrates

Krasquni G G Fine £230

29-Sep-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)(B) 2 CPS Burton upon TrentMagistrates

Edgley G G* CD 18 months(concurrent)

29-Sep-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 18(2) 1 CPS Burton upon TrentMagistrates

Edgley NG D

5958

Appendix VI – Wild bird relatedprosecutions in 2011

Date Act Section Charges Prosecutor Court Surname Plea Outcome Penalty type Penalty Penalty type 2 Penalty 2 Details

06-Oct-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 18 (2) 1 RSPCA Manchester Magistrates Smith U D Defendant pleaded guilty to single charge of finch trapping. Orderedto pay £1,551 costs.

06-Oct-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2) (a) 1 RSPCA Manchester Magistrates Smith G G CO Unpaid work150 hours

10-Oct-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(1)(a) 1 RSPCA Ipswich Magistrates Doughty G G CD 2 years Defendant convicted in relation to a gull (species unknown). Orderedto pay £200 costs.

Defendant convicted in relation to a gull (species unknown). Orderedto pay £100 costs.

10-Oct-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(1)(a) 1 RSPCA Ipswich Magistrates Smith G G CD 1 year

13-Oct-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 7(1) 2 CPS Rhondda Magistrates Howells G G Fine £100 Defendant (falconer) pleaded guilty to possession of a non-registeredgoshawk and fabricating false information for a goshawk registrationapplication. Ordered to pay £85.

13-Oct-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 17(a) 1 CPS Rhondda Magistrates Howells G G Fine £100

Defendant convicted in relation to a woodpigeon.19-Oct-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(1)(a) 1 RSPCA Sunderland Magistrates Miller G G Jail 26 weekssuspended

CO 100 hours’unpaid work

28-Oct-11

28-Oct-11

Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981

Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981

1(2)(a)

5(1)(b)

1

1

Fiscal

Fiscal

Aberdeen Sheriff

Aberdeen Sheriff

Barrie

Barrie

G

U

G

D

Fine £520

02-Nov-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)a 1 RSPCA Bristol Magistrates Grievelle G G Fine £400 Defendant pleaded guilty to two welfare offences and possession of23 birds including house sparrows, greenfinches, goldfinches and ablackcap. Banned from keeping birds for five years. Ordered to pay£500 costs.

Defendant found guilty of reckless disturbance while photographingwhite-tailed eagle with young in nest.Defendant found guilty of reckless disturbance while photographingwhite-tailed eagle with young in nest.

Defendant (falconer) pleaded guilty to the prohibited sale of agoshawk and a saker falcon plus the unlawful purchase of agoshawk.

Defendant pleaded guilty to three charges of possessing goldfinchesand a single charge relating to a using a finch trap.

Defendant (part-time gamekeeper) pleaded guilty to seven chargesrelating to the possession of a large quantity of banned pesticides(active ingredients sodium cyanide, aluminium phosphide, strychninehydrochloride and mevinphos). Three firearms charges relating toholding three shotguns and Section 1 ammunition withoutcertificates. Ordered to pay £2,315 costs.

02-Nov-11 Animal Welfare Act 2006 4(1) &31(1)

2 RSPCA Bristol Magistrates Grievelle G G Fine £800

24-Nov-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(5)(a) 1 Fiscal Oban Sheriff Panayotov NG G Fine £500

24-Nov-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(5)(a) 1 Fiscal Oban Sheriff Takev NG G Fine £600

25-Nov-11 Control of trade in EndangeredSpecies (enforcement) Reg 1997

8(1) 3 CPS Skipton Magistrates Hurst G G Fine £700

06-Dec-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)(a) 3 RSPCA Highgate Magistrates Yildiz-Coban G G 3 months(concurrent)

CU

06-Dec-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 5(1)(b) 1 RSPCA Highgate Magistrates Yildiz-Coban G G CO 3 months(concurrent)

CU

06-Dec-11 Food and Environmentalprotection Act 1985

16(12)(a) 7 CPS Preston Crown Court Armistead G G Fine £7,000

06-Dec-11 Food and Environmentalprotection Act 1985

16(12)(a) 3 CPS Preston Crown Court Armistead NG D

Defendant pleaded guilty to possession of a pigeon which waspresent inside a set cage trap.

6160

Appendix VI – Wild bird relatedprosecutions in 2011

Date Act Section Charges Prosecutor Court Surname Plea Outcome Penalty type Penalty Penalty type 2 Penalty 2 Details

06-Dec-11 Firearms Act 1968 2(1) 2 CPS Preston Crown Court Armistead G G CO 140 hours’ unpaidwork (concurrent)

(see above)

06-Dec-11 Firearms Act 1968 1(1)(a) 1 CPS Preston Crown Court Armistead G C CO 140 hours’ unpaidwork (concurrent)

13-Dec-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)(b) 5 CPS Thames Magistrates Gonshaw G G Jail 4 months (concurrent)

13-Dec-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(1)(c) 3 CPS Thames Magistrates Gonshaw G G Jail 4 months (concurrent)

13-Dec-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 18(2) 2 CPS Thames Magistrates Gonshaw G G Jail 2 months(consecutive)

Defendant pleaded guilty to collection of six eggs with a five-week curfew imposed between 8 am and 6 pm. Eggs forfeited and destroyed.

22-Dec-11 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 1(2)(b) 1 CPS Carlisle Magistrates Hawman G G CU 5 weeks

CD Conditional DischargeCO Community OrderCU Curfew OrderD DiscontinuedG GuiltyNCA No Case to Answer

NG Not GuiltyNP Not ProvenNSP No Separate PenaltyTIC Taken Into ConsiderationU Unknown

Key to Appendix VI

Defendant pleaded guilty to 10 charges. These related to thepossession of 697 eggs (including 45 Schedule 1 eggs), thetaking of 8 Schedule 1 clutches (two golden eagle, threeosprey, three avocet) and possession of items capable ofbeing used to take and possess birds’ eggs. This was thedefendant’s fourth custodial sentence for such offences.

The RSPB speaks out for birds and wildlife, tackling the problems that threaten our environment.

Nature is amazing – help us keep it that way.

Cover image: hen harrier by Michel Geven (Alamy)

The RSPB is part of BirdLife International, the global partnership of bird conservation organisations.

The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) is a registered charity: England and Wales no. 207076, Scotland no. SC037654.232-0703-11-12