RSPB/English Nature jump at the chance to coin it in yet again, and to
hell with genuine conservation.




Author: David Appleton
Date: 01-29-06 11:39

http://www.english-nature.org.uk/abo...gs/GCP0536.pdf

I find this paper very disturbing reading. It begins with the
statement, "The sea (or white-tailed) eagle should be a characteristic
feature of England's wetland habitats." To begin with such a
questionable comment stated as if it were an undisputed fact is a poor
start.

There is no evidence that White-tailed Eagle has ever existed as a
breeding species in coastal Suffolk - the paper admits there is "a
dearth of documentary evidence" (section 2.2). The word "dearth" is
ambiguous as it can mean either scarcity or lack; "a complete lack of
documentary evidence" would be a clearer way of putting it. The only
evidence referred to which suggests that the species may have ever
bred
anywhere in England relates to nest sites in the Lake District, Devon
and the Isle of Wight, all a very long way from coastal Suffolk. No
evidence is presented to suggest that even these were anything less
than
one-off events. If this proposal goes ahead, it should be described as
an introduction not a reintroduction, unless there is clear evidence
that the species formerly bred regularly in coastal Suffolk, which
apparently there isn't. Moreover, even if the species was once a
regular breeding bird in Suffolk, I suspect the habitat has changed
significantly from those days.

The paper cites 12 long-staying wintering birds in English coastal
counties in 43 years as evidence that the species' wintering habitat
requirements are met in the area (section 2.2). That's less than 1
every 3.5 years, and the majority of these ranged across more than one
county, sometimes spanning several counties, which suggests to me that
they were NOT able to find suitable habitat to sustain them for the
entire winter.

The paper admits that the species is, "not currently regarded as a
'priority' species," (section 2.4) so I would suggest that the money
and
efforts that this project would require will be better spent on
something that is a priority.

Table 1 in the paper attempts to show how the project would meet the
IUCN guidelines for reintroductions. The paper explains that English
Nature only supports translocation projects that meet these guidelines
(presumably that means all of them). In this table, the overall aim
includes the statement, "It should be reintroduced within the species'
former natural habitat and range." As discussed above, there is no
evidence that this proposal meets this first elementary requirement.
The project should not proceed any further until and unless it can be
established beyond reasonable doubt that the species was formerly a
regular breeder in coastal Suffolk.

The table goes on to say, "The factors that caused the original
decline
of the species should be identified and eliminated or reduced to a
satisfactory level before a reintroduction project succeeds." The
authors answer this stating, "The prime cause of extinction was human
persecution." No evidence is presented to back up this claim and given
the lack of evidence that they ever existed at all, it is difficult to
imagine how the cause of the original decline (assuming it really
happened) could ever be known. If it is not known, it cannot be
assumed
to be eliminated. The authors go on to say, "The current low levels of
persecution are a small fraction of those occurring when sea eagles
were
extirpated." That may be so, but of the few White-tailed Eagles that
have occurred in eastern England in recent years, one (in 1984) was
found shot and another (in 1989) was killed by poisoning. For such a
rare bird, that's a pretty high proportion of not many birds when the
criteria demand that the factors are eliminated or reduced to a
satisfactory level.

The paper admits that if the project goes ahead there is a risk that
conflict could arise from the species' diet including species of other
nature conservation interests and socio-economic importance (section
4.10). Both are particularly likely in coastal Suffolk although the
authors consider that the chances are low. Even if the chances are
low,
any incidents that are reported, whether they are real or erroneously
claimed, are likely to have a significant negative impact in terms of
public relations. That could be disastrous in such a sensitive and
important region.

The authors claim that previous high profile bird reintroduction
projects have, "proved to be a highly efficient vehicle for
reconnecting
people and nature" (section 5.1). I do not disagree with this
statement and indeed such a project will inevitably attract widespread
interest, much of it positive. However this part of the country is
already well-served in terms of public relations for wildlife with a
wealth of nature reserves including the famed flagship RSPB reserve of
Minsmere. It is questionable whether the area can even support a
massive increase in public interest. As well as being of public
relational importance it must be remembered that the area is first and
foremost of conservational importance.

I suspect that the public relations benefits that are likely to arise
as
a result of this project are the main driving force behind this
proposal. Of course I support measures that improve the public
relations of conservation bodies and conservation in general, but this
should never be the driving force behind any project of this nature.
The choice of species for reintroduction projects (e.g. Red Kite,
Osprey, White-tailed Eagle) appears to have more to do with the
potential public relations benefits than the direct conservation
benefit. The overall aim of any reintroduction project, according to
the IUCN guidelines which English Nature (and the RSPB) claim to
support, should not involve public relations but rather, "The
principal
aim of any reintroduction should be to establish a viable,
free-ranging
population in the wild, of a species. which has become globally or
locally extinct in the wild."

I hope this project does not go ahead, much as I love seeing
White-tailed Eagles.

Dave Appleton



"As I was walkin' - I saw a sign there
And that sign said - no tress passin'
But on the other side .... it didn't say nothin!
Now that side was made for you and me!"
Woody Guthrie

A prophet is only despised in his own country....
..........among his own relations...
............and in his own house