Of course, much has
changed since those halcyon days over 30 years ago. Farmland bird numbers have
declined dramatically and prior to the introduction of agri–environment
schemes habitats researched by the Trust and delivered by game managers
provided the most significant on – farm habitats for many species. Today, many
of these prescriptions are at the heart of farmland conservation policies but
the contribution of game management to wildlife conservation has probably never
been higher. A further key change in that time is the significant number of
pheasants released, as shown in Table 1 below. This demonstrates the growth of
pheasant release and management in that time.
On the one hand, this provides a powerful indicator of the
potential contribution of game shooting to wildlife conservation but on the
other the key questions are now being asked about possible damaging effects of pheasant
releasing. The key challenge, of course, at national and shoot level is to
demonstrate the most sustainable levels of release which are consistent with
maximising the wider benefits for wild game and other wildlife.
Figure 1: Pheasant
releasing trends 1961-2011, GWCT National Gamebag Census (1961=1)
The factors that have produced this trend in numbers are
complex but originate in the crash of wild game and farmland birds during the modernisation
of agriculture in the 60’s and 70’s. Key nesting and brood rearing habitats
were lost and invertebrate numbers– the key resource for wild gamebird
production – were lost in the drive for food production.
Perhaps paradoxically the resulting emphasis on rearing as a
means of sustaining driven shooting had consequent detrimental effect on wild
stocks since keepers and owners increasingly managed shoots for released birds
and not for the wild ones. For example, many driving game crops such as maize
and kale provide ideal autumn and winter cover for released birds but these are
not suitable for nesting or chick rearing. Also, predator control by keepers is
concentrated in the summer to protect released poults rather than in spring to
save nests. However, many permanent pheasant coverts planted primarily for showing
released pheasants do also provide good nesting cover around the edge and
pheasant breeding densities are high in woodland designed as winter holding
cover. More worrying is that reared birds make poor parents in subsequent years,
since they are much more prone to predation, parasitism and adverse genetic
selection.
Although there may be problems associated with pheasant
releasing, the creation and management of woodland for pheasants has very
significant positive conservation benefits to other species. For example, GWCT
research has shown that woodlands managed for pheasants have greater structural
diversity, more butterflies and bird species compared to woodlands lacking game
management.
In 2011 we surveyed birds on 34 farms in Leicestershire and
recorded bird numbers on farms with and without shoots. This revealed that
numbers of songbirds on farms with shoots were 30% higher than on those without
(see Figure 2)
Mean number of
songbirds per transect (+ 1 se)
Figure 2: Songbird numbers are higher on local farms with
shoots than on those without (based on survey of 34 farms)
The obvious question is one of wider sustainability – at a
national level how long can bag levels be maintained though releasing ever
greater quantities of pheasants? This is the type of question we are starting
to see emerge from new reports from powerful and well funded organisations that
are clearly antagonistic to gamebird releasing. These reports have not been
produced for fun and may well indicate increasing pressure in the future. It’s surely
time to act. Are you ready?
Across the country we all know and celebrate individual shoots
that have been ambitious and achieved amazing conservation success, at a local
level. At some sites the results have been scientifically recorded and the
results published. Is it not time to now inspire the same success on a nationwide
scale? Should we all be more ambitious about our conservation? At the level of
the individual shoot we don’t need huge changes to demonstrate improvements in
biodiversity. But added together small local improvements, in improving the
productivity of ground nesting waders could add up to significant contribution at
national level given the sheer numbers taking part.
It will not be easy, but the results will be worth it. Nor
is it as simple as pointing a finger at the larger scale shoots with big bags;
the data show these increases can apply to all sizes of shoot. Just as with
profitable farming, successful conservation can be achieved on any scale – as
long as there is a will to succeed.
The Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust, the original source
of that science that meant so much to me thirty years ago, thinks it can be
done. It should be possible to implement effective conservation on shoots right
across the country and then measure it. Just imagine, for one moment, being
able to state the estimated net impact on nature from the combined efforts of
all shoots rather than just selected sites. Today, the GWCT’s National Grey
Partridge Count Scheme provides an example of the collective effort of farmers
and game managers to reverse declining species. It provides a useful model –
and confidence – that a broader influential statement of the benefits of game
management can be achieved.
It is lucky that the charity has a powerful reputation for
taken on daunting tasks. In 1932 the GWCT’s predecessor (ICI Game Research
Station) started with the ambition to, ‘Make
two birds fly where one flew before’. It seemed like a radical thing to do.
Stocks of wild game were down to such an extent that people considered giving
up on game shooting. Undaunted, they
launched this positive and far reaching path that paved the way for today’s
Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust.
Now we need to
reinvent that optimistic approach but within the context of a modern, more
complex world; by not only enhancing
game stocks but, on a shoot by shoot basis, demonstrating the direct
biodiversity benefits of game management. This is a call for action, to all, to
do just that – a national Campaign for Game.
Today I am proud to work for the organisation which
conducted the original scientific research that measured the local wildlife
gains from shooting and is still prepared to be ambitious enough to shape the
national picture. I hope that when my children ask how nature gains from
released game, I can repeat what I was told. More than that, I look forward to
adding that it is not just where shoots put in place best practice that nature
significantly gains but that, more importantly, there is a proven net
contribution nationally. Future generations will need thoroughly researched
scientific evidence showing the net gain to nature to counter the unpopularity
of releasing not just from animal welfare groups, but the media, politicians
and some conservation charities.
The GWCT has always brought people together to share their ideas
on best practice and demonstrate new thinking. Do get in touch with your ideas.
No comments:
Post a Comment