Tough choices

Written by: Martin Harper
Published: 2^nd August 2018
Topic: A follow up comment about values and motivations.

The group that has challenged the RSPB's predator control practices has made some sweeping statements on social media which are misleading.

Following a first meeting, predator control was discussed at length. An offer was made to meet again to discuss some of the concerns in more detail. This offer was refused.

Some highly subjective statements have also been made about the contractors employed by the RSPB to undertake predator control. The RSPB has very clear processes which are followed when recruiting contractors. Many predator control contractors have links to the shooting community, but this does not mean they are “bloodsports enthusiasts". It also has no bearing on their ability to undertake predator control for conservation purposes in a professional and humane manner.

The rationale for why the RSPB carries out predator control has been explained again below. The RSPB continues to strive to meet its conservation objectives while operating to the highest animal welfare standards. The use of Larsen traps is also specifically addressed below.

At the heart of this issue is a difference in values and motivations. As a conservation charity, the RSPB works to keep common species common and to recover threatened species. Others are perhaps more interested in the fate of individual birds. While, of course, the RSPB understands and respects these views, they differ from the RSPB's values and charitable objectives, which must guide the choices the organisation makes.

These debates will of course continue, but are best carried out through face- to-face meetings rather than through commentary on social media – or even email exchanges. The RSPB's offer to meet in person still stands.

A few queries have been raised through twitter (now X) about the RSPB's use of Larsen traps and whether there is an exit strategy for predator control.

The RSPB only resorts to lethal means when tests in the vertebrate policy are met:

- That the seriousness of the problem has been established
- That non-lethal methods have been assessed and found not to be practicable
- That killing is an effective way of addressing the problem
- That killing will not have an adverse impact on the conservation status of the target or other non-target species.
 

Sadly, Larsen traps are an effective lethal means of controlling crows during the wading bird breeding season. The call bird is seen as an intruder by territorial crows who will then try to drive it away.

Shooting is another means of controlling crows. It doesn’t require the use of call birds, but there are limitations to its use. Shooting generally takes place during the day on land that is often used by people. It can be used to supplement Larsen trapping, but is unlikely to be an effective means of controlling crows on its own.

The RSPB does, of course, ensure that the trapping of crows is carried out in accordance with General Licenses and the relevant animal welfare legislation. The RSPB's policy for the use of Larsen traps actually exceeds the legal requirements as all contractors must check traps twice a day to ensure that the call-bird has access to food and water and that suitable welfare provisions are made for any caught birds. Fresh water is provided by a dispenser attached to the trap so that it cannot be knocked over. Call-birds are also changed regularly. All contractors complete a daily checklist detailing the time that each check is undertaken and this is submitted to the RSPB. The RSPB Investigations Team regularly undertake spot checks to ensure that contractors are compliant.

Regarding the issue of having an exit strategy for predator control, the conclusions from the recent review that was published about the impact of predation on wild birds are notable. These state that   there is “a real need for research to understand how landscape-scale management could be used to provide longer-term sustainable solutions to reduce the number of generalist predators and their impact of species of conservation concern”. The RSPB  intervenes to provide a lifeline for threatened species while continuing to seek, what is inevitably a longer term ambition, to secure more fundamental change in the way land is managed.