Natural England's U-turn on controversial scheme that allowed Peregrines to be taken from wild

                                         

Peregrine - a bird much cherished by generations of falconers

 A CONTROVERSIAL scheme that allowed falconers to take eggs or chicks from nests of wild Peregrine  Falcons has been scrapped.

There was controversy back in 2020 when Natural England acceded to a request from an individual falconer, Gary Wall, a veteran falconer who also supplied birds to the Middle East for them to be flown at Houbara’s Bustards.

At the time, he said he planned to create a stud book population of native Peregrines, providing British falconers with a native source of birds that would "reconnect with their cultural heritage".

Oversight of the project would be by him and a "co-operative" of like-minded falconers to be known as the British Peregrine Conservancy".

His intention was for up to three chicks per season to be taken over 10 years to create a "foundation stock".

Natural England was supportive with chairman Tony Juniper noting: "It is vital to highlight that Natural England, in discharging its general purpose, must take account of all the legitimate interests and points of view that exist in our society."

Organisations such as the RSPB, the BTO and the wildlife trusts stayed silent on the subject, but the charity, Animal Aid was appalled.

It stated: "Taking chicks from their nest and natural habitat to be used in needless breeding programmes is deeply unethical, and this decision must be reversed. 

"Peregrine falcons have seen an increase in their numbers in recent decades, so these breeding programmes are in no way beneficial to the species, but only humans involved in falconry.

"Natural England attempt to dignify this taking of chicks from their natural habitats, by calling falconry ‘an ancient tradition’. 

"This is a similar justification given by others for brutal blood-sports such as bullfighting and fox hunting, and should not be a valid excuse for any form of animal exploitation.

"Falconry is an  archaic sport that exploits animals and results in the human-caused deaths of other wild animals.  

"We feel that Natural England should not be supporting this industry in any way, and licensing individuals to take chicks out of the wild for this purpose is immoral and must be stopped."

Why has Natural England done a U-turn?

It states: "Natural England led a review using a mixture of methods, including social science research and participatory stakeholder approaches, to examine historical and cultural aspects of falconry practice in England and how this has changed over time. 

"The review also looked at evidence on the behaviour and genetics of captive and wild bird of prey populations. 

"The process included workshops, interviews, a literature review, and a public call for evidence."

It continues: "The review  concluded that wild take is not integral to the continued practice of falconry or aviculture in England and that suitable birds of the relevant species can be readily sourced from existing captive populations. 

"Captive-bred birds can perform to a comparable standard to wild birds when appropriately trained and handled, and there is no evidence of significant inbreeding risks in captive populations of the relevant species.

"While many falconers are clearly passionate about birds of prey and spending time outdoors connecting with nature, the review process highlighted no clear consensus within the falconry community or the available falconry literature regarding the specific cultural value or importance of wild take to British falconers. 

"The use of ‘wild’ birds of prey is not specifically referred to in most modern definitions of falconry, such as those provided by the International Association for Falconry, the British Falconers’ Club, and as part of the falconry-specific entry on the UNESCO Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity. 

"There are also limited historical references to wild take being of specific cultural importance to British falconers.

"As a result of these conclusions, it is highly unlikely that any wild take licence application will be able to satisfy the relevant licensing tests."