Questions need to be asked of the RSPB's latest report

More News

This week, the RSPB published a report: ‘Patterns of Persecution; a species-based study of the illegal killing of birds of prey in the UK (2015 – 2024)’. In the past, the organisation has published an annual ‘Birdcrime’ report, which ran along a similar vein. This latest report records 921 ‘confirmed incidents’ of illegal bird of prey persecution across the UK between 2015 and 2024, with 55 per cent occurring on or near land managed for gamebird shooting.

The NGO has long questioned the origin of the statistics and data used by the RPSB in its previous reports, and similarly with this one. Wildlife crime is not currently a recordable offence, and police forces log cases in different ways. This makes it difficult to calculate a precise national total. However, although the NGO cannot provide exact figures, we can at least attempt to introduce a robust, data‑driven benchmark – something the RSPB’s estimates notably lack.

In order to try and deliver an evidence‑based assessment of bird of prey crime in the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland we have used Freedom of Information requests (FOIs) to all police forces and reviewed publicly available data from the Wildlife Incident Investigation Scheme (WIIS). What is clear is that the figures held by police forces and WIIS do not support the high numbers frequently cited by the RSPB.

In their latest report, the RSPB characterises its figures as “the tip of the iceberg”; however, the assumptions and data supporting that interpretation are not publicly detailed in a way that allows independent verification. The NGO believes that, in the interests of transparency, the Government should request the data underpinning such statements. The RSPB also suggests that many offences occur in remote areas where they go undetected; yet if incidents are undetected, it is unclear how they can be counted or used to support national conclusions.

By definition, the RSPB is speculating about events for which no evidence exists. In past reports it has been possible to identify trends – that is, a downward trend in bird crime figures. However the latest report makes it impossible to compare figures.

It is clear to us that the RSPB benefit from portraying the situation as deteriorating, as this supports their broader objective of limiting shooting, licensing gamebird release and reducing grouse‑moor management.

The RSPB repeatedly states that 55% of bird of prey incidents occur on or near land managed for shooting. Given that birds of prey naturally inhabit these landscapes – privately funded, conservation‑rich environments – it is unsurprising that they also die there from natural causes such as disease, avian influenza, trauma, intraguild predation, weather events and, in rare cases, illegal activity. A dead bird of prey is not, in itself, evidence of a crime.

Landowners and shooting estates across the UK continue to invest heavily in conservation and habitat management. Their livelihoods - and the future of the landscapes they care for - depend on it. Without this privately funded conservation effort, the financial burden would inevitably fall to the public purse, a fact that deserves serious consideration.

The police and WIIS data is currently the only definitive measure of bird of prey crime, but as we have shown, it is flawed. The NGO believes there is an urgent need for wildlife crime, particularly offences involving birds of prey, to become a fully recordable category. Only with consistent, transparent data can the UK build an accurate national picture and ensure that policy and public understanding are grounded in evidence rather than assumption. We will be responding to the RSPB report with data-based evidence in due course.

ENDS

The National Gamekeepers’ Organisation (NGO) represents the gamekeepers of England and Wales. The NGO defends and promotes gamekeeping and gamekeepers and works to ensure high standards throughout the profession. The National Gamekeepers’ Organisation was founded in 1997 by a group of gamekeepers who felt that keepering was threatened by public misunderstanding and poor representation. Today, there are 13,000 members of the National Gamekeepers’ Organisation.  www.nationalgamekeepers.org.uk