A PRICKLY ISSUE - RSPB CONservation hooliganism at work.

From: Two Mules (TwMules_at_eeawwstrap.com)
Date: 08/09/04 

Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 12:24:59 +0100

Interesting post at Scotland oNLINE

http://www.scotlandonline.com/outdoors/columista.cfm?feature_cat_id=27&selectedfeature_id=2899

A PRICKLY ISSUE

The booming hedgehog population in the Outer Hebrides is to be culled
to protect birds on the islands but Dave Hewitt questions the policy
and urges the prickly creatures to fly, fly away.

One of the curious aspects of writing about hills and suchlike over a
number of years is how certain incidents and controversies, although
seeming significant for the writer/observer at the time, can end up
not being written about at all.

In my own case I've never produced more than a few incidental words
about the most dramatic/traumatic incident of my hill career: hurtling
200m down a rather steep slope on Braeriach 20 years ago this coming
summer. I was, as you might imagine, a tad lucky to survive relatively
unscathed (apart from a dagger-like puncture just above the waist,
deep enough that I could see something of my guts if I cared to look).
But I've never really written about this - perhaps because, even two
decades on, the psychological wound remains raw. One day though.

Similarly I'll one day have a go at recounting the angers and emotions
arising from an encounter on the Ochils in May 2001, just as the foot
and mouth mayhem was starting to calm down. I was accosted by, growled
at and generally cursed by the local hill shepherd, a man for whom I
had (and still have) the utmost respect and no little liking, but who
that day was of the opinion that I "of all people" should not have
been anywhere near what he saw as his hill. This despite the local
council having given the taxpaying public the nod to return to the
tops - and, unless I'm much mistaken, I do get to vote for/against the
council, whereas shepherds, farmers and landowners tend not to be
subject to the public mandate.

Again, this was a raw incident, one which troubled me greatly (and
which still does, not least because I've yet to bump into the shepherd
again). It troubled me on a wider-rights versus personal-hassle basis,
and again I've not yet felt able to tackle the subject in print -
mainly because the case doesn't feel closed, and won't do until I
manage to make my peace with the man in question.

The time has come, however, to mention a third incident that I've been
avoiding. In the spring of 2000 (on 18 April 2000, to be precise), I
was in the awkward-of-access southern tip of the Hebrides: the islands
of Mingulay, Pabbay, Sandray and Berneray aka Barra Head. I was there
on a newspaper commission for The Scotsman, this being in the time
before Scotland On Line took me under its benign wing. The assignment
was to team up with a group of Marilynbagging hill runners who were
keen (well, gagging, to tell the truth) to visit and bag the
high-points of the five uninhabited Marilyn-height Barra Head islands.
(As it was we reached the four already mentioned but missed out on
Muldoanich.)

It was in almost all respects a great trip. The weather was near
perfect - I sat on deck throughout the five-hour CalMac sailings from
Oban to Castlebay and back, and it was just as good during the three
days between. The various Barra Marilyns were picked off, then came
the big day down south, for which the runners had chartered a boat
from a local hotelier-cum-ferryman. Trouble was, the hoped for
smallish boat was unavailable so we ended up with a hefty inter-island
ferry. This was ideal in terms of cutting through some potentially
very choppy waters (and it cut down journey times as well), but it
cost a good deal more to hire. So we arranged to take a few paying
passengers, and this was the origin of the incident I now feel the
need to recount.

The passengers were birders, a mix of RSPB staff and members, and by
and large their heavily binoculared party and our edgy-anxious running
group didn't intermingle much. That was fine, though - they generally
seemed an OK bunch, were able to share the cost, and had no problem
with our one stricture - that their birdwatching/beachwandering
activities had to be entirely scheduled around our running/bagging
agenda. If we said Right, we're leaving Island A to zip off to Island
B, they had to jump aboard sharpish, time and tide being precious. And
jump aboard they did, no problem.

There was however one incident, or rather a series of versions of the
same incident, which marred the day for me and which has stayed with
me over the subsequent two-and-a-half years. On the initial chug south
out of Castlebay (we were going to Mingulay first, around an hour
away), I was sitting with some of the RSPBers - staff as far as I
recall. One locally-senior staffer was present, along with several
twentysomething blokes in her employ.

We must have been about halfway between Castlebay and Mingulay when
one of the RSPBers first made a joke along the lines of: Oh, and if
anyone sees a hedgehog on any of these islands, don't forget to stamp
on it. Over the next while, this joke was repeated in various forms by
various of the birders, each version involving the words hedgehog and
stamp. They all evidently thought this was hilarious, and the whole
routine had the air of not being a new idea, rather an ongoing
in-joke. It was almost as though stamp on a hedgehog was being used as
a slogan-cum-catechism by the conservationists.

This, as far as I can recall, was the first time I'd become aware of
the wader/hedgehog problem on the Uists and adjoining islands, and it
left me feeling both puzzled and ill at ease. For the record, in case
anyone has missed the story in recent news reports, there is a problem
on the Outer Hebrides whereby four non-indigenous hedgehogs introduced
into an islander's garden in the 1970s subsequently escaped and bred,
such that the local wader population has seen a great many of its eggs
munched by the rampaging hedgehogs. This in turn led to a recent
Scottish Natural Heritage edict that while some of the hedgehogs are
to be relocated to the mainland, 5000 are to be culled. Cue the
predictable outcry from the hedgehog fans.

 

All this was new to me in April 2000 however, and the profile of the
problem was at that stage very low. It didn't register enough for me
to write anything about waders and hedgehogs for the paper - my
eventual piece majored on islands and bagging and the general
trip-of-a-lifetime feelgood factor. But I was unsettled by what seemed
to be the cavalier - even callous - attitude of RSPB staff, and I feel
even more unsettled by it - angered even - now that both the RSPB and
SNH have spun their PR machines into operation to justify the culling
of hedgehogs. There has been much talk of the need to do this for the
general good of biodiversity, of how the best interests of the various
species are being considered, of how there is no other sensible
solution to the problem - and much use of the word "humane". All I can
think of however is the glee with which the RSPB staffers on the boat
chose to voice their own version of "humane killing".

Now don't get me wrong - I'm not for a moment advocating that even a
single hedgehog be left on the Outer Isles. I totally agree that there
is a problem here, that the hedgehogs ought never to have been
introduced and that they have no place on the islands. Get them out of
there, for sure. Let the waders breed in peace. But where I - and many
others - disagree with the stated SNH policy is on how the hedgehogs
ought to be dealt with. The party line is that it is
inhumane/cruel/impractical to relocate hedgehogs - I heard an SNH
spokesman say as much on Lesley Riddoch's Radio Scotland programme
last week, and a similar stance has been taken elsewhere. I'm far from
convinced by this. It could be true (although there seems to be a
singular lack of hard evidence), but it appears not to have been
tested nor is it due to be tested - and the original Uist hedgehogs
survived fine enough when they were transported there in the first
place, fine enough to breed like mad.

The hedgehog protection societies argue that hedgehogs (which are much
sought after by gardeners, due to their appetite for slugs and snails)
have often been successfully relocated, without any major trauma, and
there is material evidence for this in the form of hedgehogs placed in
gardens and woods after spells in animal sanctuaries and hospitals.
This evidence appears to be completely ignored/dismissed by SNH.

There is also an argument that to relocate hedgehogs is to upset the
delicate eco-balance between species in other areas, and that there is
a massive over-abundance of hedgehogs anyway. Again the evidence for
this looks dubious, to my eyes at least. There are plenty of hedgehogs
on the mainland, but not in overload proportions. Almost any
gardener/garden-owner will say that (a) yes please, they would like a
few more hedgehogs in their garden and (b) there don't seem to be as
many around as there used to be. In my own case, as a garden-owner in
Stirling (a pathetically small sample, I know), there seems to have
been a slight decline in the local hedgehog population and any kind of
influx would be welcome. Perhaps the experts know better, however.
Perhaps.

What I don't understand here is why such an absolutist line is being
taken by SNH, especially given that it's rapidly turning into a PR
embarrassment for them. Surely a more sensible approach would be to
attempt a partial relocation of, say, 500 hedgehogs and see how that
goes. Study whether these hedgehogs survive the initial uplift and
transfer, then assess whether they fit in with the pre-existing local
population (and other species) in their new neighbourhood.

The machinery for this seems to be all there - the hedgehog societies
have expressed themselves more than willing to put people, time and
money into "salvage". And, from what I understand of the culling
process, SNH staff have to catch the hedgehogs anyway, so the most
fiddly aspect of all this needs to happen regardless of whether the
hedgehogs die or are moved to hedgerows new.

So what's actually happening? It's hard to tell, amid all the jargon
and the pleased-with-itself eco-babble of the mainstream conservation
organisations (who have learned much about evasion and
accountability-avoidance from the politicians in recent years), but
there has surely been some heavy behind-the-scenes lobbying of SNH by
the RSPB.

My partner Tessa and I holidayed on South Uist in summer 2001 and the
island had signs aplenty outlining the hedgehog/wader problem and
requesting that any hedgehog sightings be reported to SNH. No
indication was given of what would then happen to any "grassed"
hedgehog, and so, when we came across one snuffling around near our
B&B, we found ourselves discussing what best to do. Had the signs said
that the hedgehog would be relocated then we would have happily
reported its presence. We were fearful however that the RSPB
enthusiasm for stamping (or some other "humane" method) would come
into the equation at some stage, so we let the hedgehog go on its way.
If it then proceeded to eat a few waders' eggs, then that wasn't good,
but we reckoned the blame lay with the agencies and authorities for
being coy about their intentions.

As with so many things, power comes into play here. In terms of type
of organisation, the RSPB and the British Hedgehog Preservation
Society (BHPS) are basically the same: charitable bodies mainly
concerned with protecting one type of creature. Single-interest lobby
groups, if you like, although the RSPB tends to get a bit uppity if
couched in such narrow terms. The difference comes in terms of weight
of membership, amount of funds and lobbying pressure. The RSPB heavily
outscores the BHPS in all these departments, and has (over a period of
decades, fair play to it) captured and retained the ear of the
government wildlife agencies, be it SNH or English Nature down south.
I should add here that I'm a member of the RSPB - for now at least.

The BHPS is a much smaller and weaker lobby group, carrying much less
clout. They've been losing out badly here, only latterly attempting -
and largely failing - to make up lost ground. What is really needed is
for some kind of RSPM - a Royal Society for the Protection of Mammals
- to become active in the consultation by way of balancing the RSPB
input. (It doesn't help matters that another of the hedgehog
protection groupings has taken the Beatrix Potter route and included
the word "Tiggywinkles" in its name. Bad move, as it reinforces the
impression of their membership as well-meaning-but-clueless lovers of
all things cute, as against the hard-nosed realism of the RSPB. It's
been hard to find a report or a discussion on the Uist situation these
past few weeks in which the pro-cull spokesperson hasn't made some
sarcastic-dismissive reference to "the Tiggies". This doesn't feel
like playing fair - and if the hedgehog people started sneering about
"twitchers" then there would doubtless be something said.)

So this is in effect a plea for a more considered, less polarised
policy to be put in place. It appears that there is a solution which
might suit everyone - ship the hedgehogs out to the mainland woods and
gardens. If this doesn't work, then nothing appears to have been lost.
The islands will still have been cleared of hedgehogs (although in
reality, whatever happens, this looks to be an extremely optimistic
aim), and the hedgehogs will still die albeit in more ordinary and
mundane ways. But it might work, in which case everyone ought to be
happy - the islands are cleared and the gardens of middle England or
wherever acquire a few extra slug-snafflers. It's surely got to be
worth a go. What's the problem?

Two more thoughts in closing. One is that before I'm accused of
po-facedness or hypocrisy, I should say that I'm not averse to jokes
being made re the hedgehog cull. This struck me last weekend while
watching Have I Got News For You, when Ian Hislop asked how the
hedgehogs were to be killed. "Lethal injection," replied the curiously
nervous and unsure host Jeremy Clarkson, who failed to follow it up
with any kind of witticism.

I found myself urging Paul Merton or someone to make the obvious
follow-up gag about how maybe they should try the electric chair
instead. No one did say this, and the subject petered out, but I
wouldn't have been offended had the joke been made. Jokes are all
about context and (that word again) power, and it's the job of media
commentators to find entertaining/informative ways into dry subjects
such as this. It's a different story however when the jokes are being
made by the people on the ground who subsequent lobby for the policy
in question. (And I bet, even now, that stamp-on-a-hedgehog jokes are
still being made by RSPB staff. Discreetly out of earshot of the
media, you'll understand.)

And finally, whatever does happen with the hedgehogs, I'll be taking a
close interest when a pair of magpies eventually makes its way out to
the Uists. As with many other gardens in west-central Scotland (they
appear to have not yet fully invaded the east), we have become plagued
by magpies. They harass and bully the smaller songbirds, which - as
with the waders on the Uists - have been reduced in number. This
problem came up in discussion with an RSPB staffer friend a couple of
years ago, and he was implacable - the arrival/invasion of the magpies
is a "natural" process, and must be allowed to take its course even if
other birds suffer.

So no trapping or lethal injections (or electric chairs) for the
magpies, which seem to enjoy the protection of the "conservationists"
simply because (a) they're birds and (b) they can fly. Come the time
they start trashing Hebridean waders' eggs however, these goalposts
might be suddenly and conveniently moved. If only hedgehogs had
wings...

Dave Hewitt
26/12/2002

You can contact Dave at Dave.Hewitt@dial.pipex.com

           SUPPORT ISRAEL

Myths & Facts Online
A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict
By Mitchell G. Bard

http://tinyurl.com/ysepr

    +------------------------+
    | NO PLONKING ZONE |
    +------------------------+
         | | |
         | | | |
       ..| |.. .| |..
     ...\| |/.... \| |/..

**********************************************

'You can't win 'em all.'
Lord Haw Haw.

Since I stopped donating money to CONservation hooligan charities
Like the RSPB, Woodland Trust and all the other fat cat charities
I am in the top 0.217% richest people in the world.
There are 5,986,950,449 people poorer than me

If you're really interested I am the 13,049,551
richest person in the world.

And I'm keeping the bloody lot.

So sue me.

http://www.globalrichlist.com/

Newsgroup ettiquette

1) Tell everyone the Trolls don't bother you.
2) Say you've killfiled them, yet continue to respond.
3) Tell other people off who repsond despite doing so yourself.
4) Continually talk about Trolls while maintaining
    they're having no effect.
5) Publicly post killfile rules so the Trolls know
    how to avoid them.
6) Make lame legal threats and other barrel scraping
    manoeuvres when your abuse reports are ignored.
7) Eat vast quantities of pies.
8) Forget to brush your teeth for several decades.
9) Help a demon.local poster with their email while
    secretly reading it.
10) Pretend you're a hard *** when in fact you're
    as bent as a roundabout.
11) Become the laughing stock of Usenet like Mabbet
12) Die of old age
13) Keep paying Dr Chartham his fees and hope one day you
    will have a penis the girls can see.

---------------------------------------

"If you would'nt talk to them in a bar, don't *uckin' vote for them"

"Australia was not *discovered* it was invaded"
The Big Yin.

Need a fake diploma for fun? contact my collegues Malcolm Ogilvie
or Michael Saunby who both bought one and got one free, only $15 each,
have as many as you like www.fakediplomas.com