Convictions for White-tailed Eagle disturbance

[JeffH]

See here - The RSPB: News: Photographers found guilty of rare eagle disturbance on Mull

Combined total fines of £1100 is just not enough - surely all their photography equipment should also have been confiscated

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

[Naturenutz]

I agree,it should be at least £5,000 to be a deterent in my opinion.

[RobinP]

A bit insensitive (right word?) to show a close-up photo of an eagle on its nest in the article!

Robin

[dunlin]

Originally Posted by RobinP

A bit insensitive (right word?) to show a close-up photo of an eagle on its nest in the article!

Robin

Yes i thought that, i wonder how much Iain Erskine was fined. Speaking about the fine £1100 is a lot of money if you dont have any

[solus]

Originally Posted by dunlin

Speaking about the fine £1100 is a lot of money if you dont have any

But if you can afford to travel from London to Mull and own a small hide and the necessary photography equipment...

Also, the fine was "a combined total of £1100." That's a measly £550 apiece by my reckoning. Probably considerably less than petrol/rail fares + ferry crossing to Mull + B&B or self-catering accommodation.

The photo used in the RSPB report will be one of their library photos taken under all the appropriate licences.

[JeffH]

Originally Posted by dunlin

...... I wonder how much Iain Erskine was fined......

Dunlin,

For your information, Iain Erskine is the official White-tailed Eagle photographer on the Isle of Mull, holds the necessary licences from Scottish Natural Heritage and often accompanies the RSPB's licensed ringers when attending W-t Eagle nests to ring eaglets

Originally Posted by solus

But if you can afford to travel from London to Mull and own a small hide and the necessary photography equipment...

Also, the fine was "a combined total of £1100." That's a measly £550 apiece by my reckoning. Probably considerably less than petrol/rail fares + ferry crossing to Mull + B&B or self-catering accommodation.

The photo used in the RSPB report will be one of their library photos taken under all the appropriate licences.

Exactly so solus

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

[KentYeti]

It also seems they were given more than one chance by the RSPB.

Speaking following the conviction, Sheriff Douglas Small remarked that the pair had disregarded warnings from RSPB Mull Officer Dave Sexton and local holiday-makers.

So they got what they deserved. Albeit maybe not enough of a penalty.

Cheers,

Bryan

[RobinP]

Originally Posted by dunlin

Yes i thought that, i wonder how much Iain Erskine was fined.

I think 'injudicious' is probably the word I was searching for The picture in the article shows an eagle looking quite alarmed at the close proximity of the photog and I'm sure it doesn't know whether the photog owns a schedule whatever licence or not, to be that close to a nest is simply not on.

Having said that, I have never been a supporter of the re-introduction of Sea-eagles but that is another story.

Have a nice evening everybody.

Robin

[dunlin]

The problem with writing something down as opposed to actually saying it is it can easily be misunderstood.
The earlier comment i made about mr erskine was meant as a joke.

The photo of the young eagle doesnt look stressed to me and could well have been taken from a nest camera or a long lens. I'm sure the relevent licences for photographing these birds arent given out to just anyone and strict criteria and guide lines would have to be adhered to

[Jersali]

I am slightly surprised that these "photographers" were allowed to get near the nesting birds, they had already presented themselves as a risk!
With 15 pairs (2011) worth an estimated £5m to the island, I would have expected some measure of security, apparently authorities were alerted when witnesses reported distressed adults circling the nest area