Birds: Protection (Hansard, 21 July 1989)

The Minister of State, Department of the Environment (The Earl of Caithness)
My Lords, the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 provides a comprehensive statutory framework for the protection of wild birds and their habitats, and contains additional safeguards for endangered species. Enforcement of these provisions is a matter for the police authorities and the courts.

§ Lord Somers
My Lords, I am most grateful to the noble Earl for his Answer. However, what he said does not seem to have been very effective. Is the noble Earl aware that only a few weeks ago there were between five and seven deaths of hen harriers in England? Now, owing to their destruction, there are no hen harriers.

The Earl of Caithness
My Lords, I am aware of the situation to which the noble Lord refers. However, I know that he will understand that I cannot comment on that because of the investigations being undertaken by the Cumbrian police. As a matter of principle, I am sure that I share the view of all your Lordships that the illegal killing of all species of birds, especially those which are rare and vulnerable, is deplorable; the more so when wanton cruelty is involved.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that there appears to be a remarkable increase in robbing nests and in deliberately slaying the young of endangered species? Would it not be possible for those responsible for enforcing the regulations to have discussions with organisations like the RSPB? That would be very helpful in providing valuable additional information to prevent that appalling behaviour.

The Earl of Caithness
My Lords, I reassure the noble Lord that considerable discussions already take place particularly between the NCC, the RSPB, other interested bodies and the police authorities.

The Viscount of Falkland
My Lords, can the noble Earl tell me this? What will be the result of the recently announced reorganisation of the National Countryside Commission in terms of its relationship with the EC birds directive, which seems to be an admirable measure in Europe? Will its effectiveness in any way be diminished by that reorganisation, or do the Government have something else in mind?

The Earl of Caithness
My Lords, there is not a National Countryside Commission.

§ Lord Somers
My Lords, I realise that it is quite impossible to keep a 24 hour watch over all the special protection areas. However, are the Government not being rather slow in providing only 32 out of a possible 220 sites?

The Earl of Caithness
My Lords, the noble Lord touched on the very important question of habitats. I believe that he was referring to the 33 special protection areas in the birds directive. Those are a subset of the SSSIs—sites of special scientific interest. Over 5,000 sites are now designated. That is the major work undertaken by the NCC, and that covers 1.5 million hectares.

§ Lord Graham of Edmonton
My Lords, in view of the 200 illegal bird killings which have occurred over the past eight years with only four successful prosecutions, perhaps I may ask this question. What consideration has been given to the introduction of new measures that will prevent gamekeepers who have been convicted of an illegal bird killing from being re-employed in a similar capacity? That is in line with the provisions which currently apply to falconers and taxidermists. Is the Minister aware of the very real anxiety of the RSPB? It recognises that there are ample protective provisions, but it is deeply concerned at the lack of enforcement and at ineffective deterrents.

The Earl of Caithness
My Lords, I am not sure from where the noble Lord obtains his figures.

§ Lord Graham of Edmonton
From the RSPB.

The Earl of Caithness
My Lords, the penalty under the Act is a fine of £400, but for more endangered species under Schedule 1 it is up to £2,000. According to the Home Office, which collates the statistics for enforcement under Section 1 of the Act, for the three years up to 1987, the last year for which figures are available, there were 343 prosecutions. That figure excludes the private prosecutions that might not have been recorded. Of those, 290—that is, 85 per cent.—were successful.

§ Lord Mowbray and Stourton
My Lords, is my noble friend happy in his mind that the regional authorities concerned are taking the right steps occasionally to unendanger certain species in some areas where they may not be endangered at all and in fact are becoming a pest?

The Earl of Caithness
My Lords, we continually look at our list of endangered species, but we rely on advice from the NCC on these matters.

The Viscount of Falkland
My Lords, I apologise to the noble Earl and to the House for the confusion over the initials which I always have. It was the Nature Conservancy Council to which I referred and its relationship to the EC birds directive. Perhaps the noble Earl can answer my question now that I have put that right.

The Earl of Caithness
My Lords, the noble Lord's question takes us a little wide of the Question on the Order Paper. I draw to his attention that there is an Unstarred Question next week on the subject.

§ Lord Kilbracken
My Lords, does the noble Earl accept that there are no endangered species on the list in Schedule 1 of the Act which could possibly be considered as pests? Does he further accept that much concern is felt not only for species on that list but for all other species protected under the Act, because the Act is not being enforced as rigorously as it should be?

The Earl of Caithness
My Lords, if the noble Lord knows of any occasion where the Act has not been enforced, I hope that he will draw that to my attention. However, from the letters I receive, particularly from racing pigeon fanciers, some birds on the endangered species list are considered to be pests.