How Can This be Stopped?

magicbastarder

ah - that's being spent on the parks system as a whole, not on the reintroduction project.

cfitz

magicbastarder wrote: »

ah - that's being spent on the parks system as a whole, not on the reintroduction project.

Oh ok, cheers, should have noticed that. Does anyone know about how much is spent on the eagle project or is it private investment?

LostCovey

cfitz wrote: »

This is where I read it, but that's all I know of it:

http://www.ndp.ie/viewdoc.asp?fn=/documents/featured-projects/goldeneagle.htm

It's all there alright, just the ol' speed-reading has let you down

Listen, this is a state-supported registered charity with maybe three or four full-time staff, vehicles, flights to Norway and Scotland for birds, satellite tags (at a few thousand each).

Budget? No idea. Less than €500,000/year? Maybe - TOPS. I don't know. Just a guess.

LostCovey

MB Lacey

johngalway wrote: »

Couple of things here

The legal poison was for foxes, as long as the Gardai are notified and signs erected. I haven't got a notion about what substance would be used.

Hey John, I passed a field with lambs in a few weeks ago and there was a sign 'poison laid' nailed to the gate post.
I took a photo and sent it to someone I thought would be able to look into it more as I thought this was a highly dodgy carry on.

But - from what you're saying - the sign and the poison were 'ok' as long as they informed the garda?

johngalway

MB Lacey wrote: »

Hey John, I passed a field with lambs in a few weeks ago and there was a sign 'poison laid' nailed to the gate post.
I took a photo and sent it to someone I thought would be able to look into it more as I thought this was a highly dodgy carry on.

But - from what you're saying - the sign and the poison were 'ok' as long as they informed the garda?

Dr Alan Mee was on Newstalk on Sean Moncriefs programme yesterday. He was asked about foxes and poison and he said that it's legal to do so as long as the Gardai are informed and there are signs erected on the land.

It came as a shock to me, as I had long thought the use of poison against foxes was made illegal.

Personally I don't like poison as it's so indiscriminate in what it kills - apart from it's use against rodents which I fully support though I don't use it myself, preferring trapping. Foxes can be controlled successfully using rifle/shotgun/snare/specialised dogs. If shooters in this country were allowed the use of night vision units on rifles, as they are in the UK, then the removal of problem foxes would be made a lot easier. Greycrows can be shot or trapped in a number of ways easily.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

MB Lacey wrote: »

Hey John, I passed a field with lambs in a few weeks ago and there was a sign 'poison laid' nailed to the gate post.
I took a photo and sent it to someone I thought would be able to look into it more as I thought this was a highly dodgy carry on.

But - from what you're saying - the sign and the poison were 'ok' as long as they informed the garda?

Correct. The legislation is quite clear and it looks at first glance as though this particular case is legal once Gardaí are informed.

Birdnuts

Winston Future Ear wrote: »

Correct. The legislation is quite clear and it looks at first glance as though this particular case is legal once Gardaí are informed.

Just shows what a bunch of cretins the types that make laws in this country. Do they think are endangered birds of prey are aware of the legislation here and so pass over a sheep carcass saying to themselves - "thats for foxes, not me"??. I really despair at the level of ignorance at all levels of this society when is comes to basic conservation issues - I've recently been to a number of African countries where people in rural areas seem to have more cop on when it comes to the value of protecting wildlife(therefore generating money from safari/ecotourism) compared to our so called first world educated populous:(

Birdnuts

cfitz wrote: »

I think the 167 million euro(!) that it seems was set aside for the eagle project over 7 years might have been much better spent on preserving and possibly expanding the protected areas of our natural habitats. I am very interested to know the benefits of this eagle introduction even if none were ever poisoned - how much of a positive effect do these eagles have on Ireland's ecology and biodiversity? Apart from seeing eagles in the sky, what are the predicted consequences of the reintroduction?

Well data from the project in Donegal show that Golden Eagles are major predators of vermin like fox's and crows - so if we could get rid of the gombeen attitude among some in the farming community, these eagles could potentially be a real asset to farmers and other threatened wildlife like breeding waders and Red Grouse etc. in upland areas of the country!!:)

johngalway

Birdnuts wrote: »

Well data from the project in Donegal show that Golden Eagles are major predators of vermin like fox's and crows - so if we could get rid of the gombeen attitude among some in the farming community, these eagles could potentially be a real asset to farmers and other threatened wildlife like breeding waders and Red Grouse etc. in upland areas of the country!!:)

Do you know that name calling just pushes farther away the things you want to see.

Birdnuts

johngalway wrote: »

Do you know that name calling just pushes farther away the things you want to see.

John, I have total repect for farmers like yourself that do things the right way. I was referring to the activities of a small minority in the farming community that are doing untold damage to our food production reputation, tourism and endangered wildlife. I only wish some of the major farming organisations as well as the Dept of Agriculture and Bord Bia etc. would wake up to this.:rolleyes:

Vegeta

LostCovey wrote: »

I won't call you a liar, Vegeta, but do you have figures for that?

LostCovey

Figures for what exactly? What exactly are you asking for? If I have access to whatever you want I'll provide it? That sentence makes no sense

johngalway

Birdnuts wrote: »

John, I have total repect for farmers like yourself that do things the right way. I was referring to the activities of a small minority in the farming community that are doing untold damage to our food production reputation, tourism and endangered wildlife. I only wish some of the major farming organisations as well as the Dept of Agriculture and Bord Bia etc. would wake up to this.:rolleyes:

That's fair enough, I'm getting into tourism myself and my family have been involved with it for years. And I do realise it wasn't directed at me.

What I was getting at is that it's hard enough to change attitudes if people believe they're being insulted or belittled - regardless of what they're up to. I'm partly rambling at this stage but there was a suggestion from elsewhere about an educational campaign regarding raptors, which I think if it came from the correct source i.e. not a conservationist who may rightly or wrongly be regarded as an enemy to some.

I still haven't researched it, I don't have the time at the moment, but let's take it as given that the eagles pose no threat to sheep. Then surely there's proof of that out in other countries where there are both eagles and sheep, no?

That would be assuming the poisonings were directed at the eagles, which in all honesty I find hard to believe. Poison directed at foxes indiscriminately killing eagles is another kettle of fish. If someone were setting poison in my commonages and I didn't know, if my dog got a hold of it I wouldn't be at all happy about that state of affairs.

Some comments I've seen written, such as boycotting lamb, poisoning farmers, is succeeding in doing one thing - alienating farmers attitudes. There has to be sense to any solution, and it has to be a strategy that works for the majority on both sides. Otherwise, it just won't work in this country.

OpenYourEyes

Assuming that any poison the eagles manage to get to is left in a relatively open area, if the poison is directed at foxes then why cant it be placed in a less open area like between trees or something, where the fox is still likely to get it, but the eagles arent?


Apologies if thats a really stupid question!

johngalway

OpenYourEyes wrote: »

Assuming that any poison the eagles manage to get to is left in a relatively open area, if the poison is directed at foxes then why cant it be placed in a less open area like between trees or something, where the fox is still likely to get it, but the eagles arent?


Apologies if thats a really stupid question!

I don't know the areas concerned, but I'd hazard a guess that it's blanket bog so there wouldn't be many trees at all.

BryanL

Scotland has similar problems when they reintroduced sea eagles but kept at it and were successful. I don't understand the attitude of people calling for an end to the project.
Birds were always going to get poisoned and killed by accident or not. These deaths are highlighting issues that need to be resolved and will be.
They are not a reason to give up

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

I'm getting dizzy with all the posts and duplicate threads on this issue.

I have to say I agree with 90% of what has been put here. OK, some is extreme but I think has to be taken in the spirit of the emotion involved.

Yes, Farmers lay poison. Yes, Gun Club members lay poison. Yes, this puts question marks around the whole re-introduction programmes. Yes, it's not a new phenomenon. Yes, there are rules about laying poison. And, yes the legislation is flawed in too many ways to start listing. But how do we stop it? As another thread "How can this be stopped?" proves, we all agree (because we are the kind of people who use a Nature messageboard) that it should be stopped, but finding a practical workable way of doing it is another matter. Pressure on politicians will certainly (eventually) have some effect. Enforcing the existing law is tougher than a lot of people here seem to realise and appealing to groups to see the bigger picture is laudable but again often harder than you may imagine.

What's the answer? I don't know. But I do know that repeatedly accusing people here won't change anything.

greeneyedspirit

johngalway wrote: »

I don't know the areas concerned, but I'd hazard a guess that it's blanket bog so there wouldn't be many trees at all.

in open ground, if the person laying poison simply put the carcass underneath some sort of covering (so that it's not visible from above, but can still be reached/smelled/seen by animals on the ground), then eagles passing overhead would not see it, or be less likely to see it - and subsequently less likely to feed from it.
It's a relatively simple solution, but one that I think (hope!) would make a difference...

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

I think the problem here is that we are all preaching to the choir on this.

nilhg

greeneyedspirit wrote: »

in open ground, if the person laying poison simply put the carcass underneath some sort of covering (so that it's not visible from above, but can still be reached/smelled/seen by animals on the ground), then eagles passing overhead would not see it, or be less likely to see it - and subsequently less likely to feed from it.
It's a relatively simple solution, but one that I think (hope!) would make a difference...

Yeah that might work till the fox decided to carry it off with him and drops it when he gets scared by something like an eagle......

I don't think leaving poison out in the countryside is ever going to be a sustainable solution, as johngalway has said there are other ways and means to get rid of problem foxes and grey crows.

The lambing season should be nearly over for this year so hopefully there will be a respite from the poisonings and time for the authorities to get their house in order and put pressure on the offenders, I've said before on here that i can't believe a spate of poisonings from carbofuran hasn't resulted in a crackdown already.

Dusty87

Im not trying to start another arguement here but iv read back on a lot of the threads on the eagles.
I always believed they were scavangers, as did a lot of people giving out about farmers. Then i read they do farmers good because they control rabbits
Also that they are not going to take lambs etc but then birdnuts said they are major predators of fox and crows
Scavengers or Predators??
Something eligible of taking a fox would surely take a young lamb no??.

Im think its terrible that they're being poisoned before anyone thinks im trying to stir anything.

Birdnuts

Dusty87 wrote: »

Im not trying to start another arguement here but iv read back on a lot of the threads on the eagles.
I always believed they were scavangers, as did a lot of people giving out about farmers. Then i read they do farmers good because they control rabbits
Also that they are not going to take lambs etc but then birdnuts said they are major predators of fox and crows
Scavengers or Predators??
Something eligible of taking a fox would surely take a young lamb no??.

Im think its terrible that they're being poisoned before anyone thinks im trying to stir anything.

Theres no evidence that eagles represent a threat to live lambs given the experiance of both eagle projects over the last 3 years. A better gauge is the case in Scotland which accomadates 450 pairs of golden and nearly 40 pairs of Sea-eagles without any evidence of a threat to their sheep industry. Norway too has a signficant sheep industry which co-exists apparently happily with the largest Sea-eagle population in Europe:)

PS - Eagles tend to go for fox cubs and young adults as opposed to fully grown foxes - in any case given the sheer amount of sheep carrion scattered around most Irish uplands due to bad weather/disease etc. its hard to see even a bird with a taste for mutton would be bothered killing a live lamb given this state of affairs.

LostCovey

johngalway wrote: »

What I was getting at is that it's hard enough to change attitudes if people believe they're being insulted or belittled - regardless of what they're up to. I'm partly rambling at this stage but there was a suggestion from elsewhere about an educational campaign regarding raptors, which I think if it came from the correct source i.e. not a conservationist who may rightly or wrongly be regarded as an enemy to some.

I don't think it is fair to generalise and accuse farmers of being anti-conservation. Or anti-conservationist.

Aren't most of them conservationists in the broad sense?

LostCovey

LostCovey

Dusty87 wrote: »

Im not trying to start another arguement here but iv read back on a lot of the threads on the eagles.
I always believed they were scavangers, as did a lot of people giving out about farmers. Then i read they do farmers good because they control rabbits
Also that they are not going to take lambs etc but then birdnuts said they are major predators of fox and crows
Scavengers or Predators??
Something eligible of taking a fox would surely take a young lamb no??.

Im think its terrible that they're being poisoned before anyone thinks im trying to stir anything.

I don't think anyone doubts that a Golden Eagle would be capable of taking an odd lamb. Saying that is just being honest.

However, as has been pointed out before, eagles taking lambs is simply not an issue for farmers in the heart of the release area for the project, in Glenveagh. The eagles only seem to get into trouble when they leave that area, and I believe like most, that the problem is one of reckless use of poisoned m,eat baits, not targeted persecution.

LostCovey

johngalway

I didn't generalise, I said to "some"

LostCovey

stevensi wrote: »

I think instead of releasing more of these birds into the country we would be better off in spending the money on re-introducing a species like the Corn Bunting which became extinct in the last 25 years or so in Ireland. I know they are regarded as a little brown jobs and not as 'sexy' as an Eagle but surely we stand a better chance of seeing these surviving here if the right habitats are preserved for them; and not see more images of dead eagles on tv.

What do people think?

I think it would be a far more ambitious project.

Corn Buntings clung on in areas like the Mullet peninsula and Achill Island up in Mayo because these areas hung onto traditional smallholder agriculture into the eighties, where everyone had a patch of spuds, a ridge of vegetables, a rood of oats, kept a few hens, saved hay and spread stable manure. Over miles and miles of countryside.

The Corn Bunting bit the dust when this environment changed, the rich mosaic of habitats disappeared, and it would be one mammoth task to reorganise that!

The reason the eagles were more obvious candidates for re-introduction is simple - their extinction was nothing to do with habitat change. They were obliterated by human persecution - by the Victorian mania for taxidermy & collecting, and by British landlords, through their over-zealous gamekeepers and shepherds.

The assumption was that our independent state would have left these attitudes behind.

Sadly we appear to have slavishly learned some of the worst habits of our former masters and 'betters'.

LostCovey

LostCovey

johngalway wrote: »

I didn't generalise, I said to "some"

OK, fair enough. My mistake.

LostCovey

OpenYourEyes

greeneyedspirit wrote: »

in open ground, if the person laying poison simply put the carcass underneath some sort of covering (so that it's not visible from above, but can still be reached/smelled/seen by animals on the ground), then eagles passing overhead would not see it, or be less likely to see it - and subsequently less likely to feed from it.
It's a relatively simple solution, but one that I think (hope!) would make a difference...

Thats what i was getting at alright. Minimal extra expense to the farmer and could make a substantial difference to the Raptors.

As nilhg said theres a chance that the fox will carry it away, but assuming every single fox doesnt carry it away it seems worth it.

stevensi wrote: »

better off in spending the money on re-introducing a species like the Corn Bunting

.................not as 'sexy' as an Eagle but surely we stand a better chance of seeing these surviving here ...................

What do people think?

Thats exactly the problem! Eagles would be considered a "charasmatic" species, more likely to get sympathy from the public, and therefore alot more likely to get funding to try and reintroduce!

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

OpenYourEyes wrote: »

Thats exactly the problem! Eagles would be considered a "charasmatic" species, more likely to get sympathy from the public, and therefore alot more likely to get funding to try and reintroduce!

I think Lost Covey covered that quite well above. The loss of Eagles was not related to habitat, while the Corn Bunting (and many more) were. This is much more difficult to reverse.

OpenYourEyes

Winston Future Ear wrote: »

I think Lost Covey covered that quite well above. The loss of Eagles was not related to habitat, while the Corn Bunting (and many more) were. This is much more difficult to reverse.

Only read that afterwards! Habitat being lost would obviously be the primary reason not to try and bring back the Corn Bunting. I agree that Lost Covey covered that very well and he obviously knows more about them than I do, but i maintain that my point would also have been taken into consideration when choosing to reintroduce raptors ahead of any of a long list of other birds or animals.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

OpenYourEyes wrote: »

Only read that afterwards! Habitat being lost would obviously be the primary reason not to try and bring back the Corn Bunting. I agree that Lost Covey covered that very well and he obviously knows more about them than I do, but i maintain that my point would also have been taken into consideration when choosing to reintroduce raptors ahead of any of a long list of other birds or animals.

The re-introduction of any species is not something that's taken on lightly. Many years of preparation goes into them. Habitat is vital and many of our lost species have gone because of habitat loss which is almost impossible to reverse, on a scale that would support a species re-introduction. The Eagle and Red Kite Projects were not chosen because they would look impressive or act as a flag bearer for Irish conservation. Your point about charisma and attracting more funds is not valid at all. "Sex Appeal" as you put it was not and could not be a factor.