great news eagle owls no cull

[captaincarot]

Eagle owls not for the chop

[ChrisJB]

Good.

Chris

[wizzo]

I'm stunned that this was even being considered

[JeffH]

Excellent news

Jeff
(Schedule 1 Licence holder for Kingfishers, Barn Owls and Avocets)

[Adam Cheeseman]

At least this time it seems as though they are trying to close the stable door before the horse has gotten too far.

[Kayleigh]

Great stuff, I personally would love to see one in the wild..

[natureshooter]

Awesome..i am very pleased about this decision,i would hope that one day they may become more plentiful so we can all share there beauty.

G

[Foz]

Should sort out the cat problem in 20 years time

[Picidae]

However, it's a 'decision' that has clearly been made on the basis of public opinion ...


The Non Native Species Risk Analysis concluded:

''The Risk Assessment area already has an established (though small)
population of Eurasian Eagle Owls, first noted breeding in 1984. The growth
of this population has been slow, but with a long-lived species like this the
establishment phase may be slow initially but then speed up. The potential
impact of an increased population on native raptor and owl species, plus a
number of other important species, is thought to be significant.
Containment/control is an option and is likely to be most effective if carried
out during the early part of the establishment phase. However, there is an
element of public support for the species and its status as a native/non-native has yet to be completely resolved despite the BOU classifying this species as non-native (Dudley et al. 2006).''

I'm afraid I tend to be a little cynical about statements from single politicians, especially one that clearly knew nothing about the issue less than a few months ago and especially one that is so overtly concerned with his voting electorate and public popularity that he actually put less weight on the 'good research' that fed into the Risk Analysis and more on his own popularity. I'm also a bit cynical about quotes taken out of context and posted on RSPB boards (Mark Avery or no) - is there a proper and full link to where he made this statement and to whom?

FROM RICHARD BENYON'S MP BLOG Tuesday, 28 September 2010 10:56

My office and Facebook page have been bombarded with furious owl lovers saying I am, apparently, keen to murder Eagle Owls. I have been accused of many things but I never saw that one coming. It stems from concerns raised by the possible destruction of a Hen Harrier nest by an Eagle Owl in the North of England. Bird watchers concerned about Hen Harrier numbers asked for “action” and I asked for expert advice. Now, apparently I am the owl murderer! Well I am fascinated to read all these posts, many of which suggest I have made a decision for a cull or, more bizarrely, want a cull.
Neither are true.

I had one submission put to me by my officials some months ago saying we should respond to ornithologists concerns that the Eagle Owl is not a native species and that Hen Harriers should receive protection from them. I have NOT taken a decision and am looking forward to reading the GB Non-native Species Risk Analysis Panel report. I would suggest anyone who is bombarding my office with furious and uninformed claims first gets the views of the RSPB and the British Trust for Ornithology. It was their members evidence about the threat from Eagle Owls to other raptors that prompted the Panel's report. I will take any decision on the basis of good research and with a calm rational understanding of the facts. I suggest everyone takes a similar approach. In the words of Michael Winner, "Calm down Madam"!

I'm afraid too there was probably an element of 'popularity' in the RSPB's final position. Both positions understandable of course, since one relies on public votes, the other relies on public funds BUT I doubt it will wash for very long with the BTO or the scientists involved in the Risk Assessment.

Further, and probably more significantly under EU Law:

The Convention on Biological Diversity emphasises the need for a precautionary approach towards non-native species where there is often a lack of firm scientific evidence. It also strongly promotes the use of good quality risk assessment to help underpin this approach. The GB risk analysis
mechanism has been developed to help facilitate such an approach in Great Britain. (taken from the NNSRA on EOs)

The EU Court may well rule further down the road that failure to 'control' the spread of EOs in GB may put Britain in breach of her obligations under European Law and contrary to the conclusions of the risk assessment.

Finally, as we all know, Government decisions are as only as good as the Ministers that make them and only last as long and this MPs recent statement is ambivalent with regard to making 'future' decisions to cull EOs, he's only said 'he's not convinced' that they need to be controlled 'immediately' and left it open for a change of opinion later. All he has done, imo, is ensured that his political image won't be tarnished with the decision to cull - at least for the time being.

As much as I welcome the current announcement, and welcome the weight of public opinion, I doubt this is an issue that has been really been resolved in the long term for the reasons I mention.

[RKB]

Public (i.e. birder/county recorder) opinion has, sadly, very likely been the deciding factor. There was no way that a cull/removal could be successful without cooperation from the public. But it's clear that this wouldn't be forthcoming, due to the peculiar climate these days. We're in the position where bird clubs and county reports wont even publicise the location of Ruddy Ducks and assist with the removal of that species, despite the very clear cut conservation issue (accepted by virtually all professional ornithologists, yet still denied by plenty of amateur comentators who think they know more), so there's no way that it would happen with a species that has even more controversy surrounding it, and is even nicer to look at (which seems to be a key factor for many). This means that a successful removal would be impossible.

When we are in a position where even Grey Squirrels and Ring-necked Parakeets have vociferous supporters and campaign groups behind them, it really is a depressing state of affairs for those trying to conserve native biodiversity against one of the biggest threats to its survival: European Commission - Environment - Nature & Biodiversity

On the basis of the risk assessment, which was very unemotive, the case for removal is pretty clear. Yet we have people like Roy Dennis coming out in support, from a largely sentimental standpoint. I was discussing this with a very experienced ornithologist and owl expert the other day. He was very much in favour of leaving them alone, but admitted that this was purely an irrational view based on him just 'liking' them, and liking the idea of seeing them around. On a clear-headed conservation argument, he admitted that there was little case for it. That about sums it up. People are fickle, and, despite what many think, society leads science, no matter what the science says.