There are some among those who shoot who so dislike the Hen Harrier that they advocate a tacit disregard of the law which protects it. This was made very clear in an article, a few years ago, by a regular contributor in the Shooting Times. His interesting and revealing argument is summed up in a final paragraph, as follows: ‘Let us take a case which is not as hypothetical as it may seem. An intelligent moorland keeper goes out of his way to protect nesting Peregrines on the border of his beat and is delighted to have Merlins nesting on his moor to the extent that he once came to fisticuffs with an egg-collector who tried to bribe him to obtain a fresh clutch of Merlin’s eggs. But this same keeper does not welcome Hen Harriers. What would happen if I could catch him shooting a Hen Harrier and a successful prosecution resulted? In the first place, the keeper would not be ostracised by the local population: he would be regarded as an unlucky martyr. Secondly, I should find myself ostracised locally and not one keeper in that district would ever confide in me again. Thirdly, it is more than probable that Peregrines and Merlins would never again nest on that moor. So that if anyone makes so bold as to tell me that I must never be reluctant in reporting any breach of the law I could, as a practical conservationist, only answer him really adequately by resorting to the use of a succinct but very vulgar five-letter word’. (Author’s italics.)
In other words it seems that the keeper should decide for himself which parts of the law he will obey, and the above writer evidently considers that most people living in the neighbourhood of moorland shooting preserves regard prosecution for killing Hen Harriers as a form of victimisation. I am not sure whether he means to imply that as a result of such a prosecution the keeper would also destroy the Peregrines and Merlins, or that he would allow others to rob their nests or otherwise prevent them from breeding. Either way, it credits the keeper with a strangely vindictive attitude. To my mind, the most disturbing feature of the article is the implication that the law is somehow an impertinence on the moorlands of Britain. A different attitude certainly holds in Holland, where Mr Schipper informs me that there is no persecution of harriers. There, in a region where Hen, Marsh and Montagu’s Harriers all thrive, he writes that the protection of these birds of prey is commonly accepted, in spite of some complaints from hunters. Evidently there is no need to fear being ostracised for upholding the protection laws! If anyone says ‘but of course harriers do not kill grouse in Holland’, my answer would be that the killing of young Pheasants by harriers there could easily be regarded as sufficient reason for their destruction.
There are other voices which are even more strongly opposed to the Hen Harrier than the writer in the Shooting Times. They would like to see a change in the law so that the species could be legally killed for at least part of the year. Suppose it is proved that predation by Hen Harriers can, even slightly, reduce the numbers of young grouse surviving until the start of the shooting season; there might then be increasing pressure from the shooting lobby to outlaw the Hen Harrier. Yet to conceal the facts of harrier predation on game birds is clearly wrong, and there is no doubt that, in the past, mutual distrust between gamekeepers and ornithologists has been fermented by dogmatic statements, from both sides, based on quite inadequate evidence. I have shown, in this book, that the food of Hen Harriers varies greatly in different localities, often covers a wide spectrum and, even where game birds are commonly taken, it is only too easy to exaggerate their importance as prey. Since game birds are comparatively large their skeletal remains are conspicuous when left at or near nests, while smaller prey may disappear without trace.
In Britain, at any rate, the only game bird which is numerous enough, on some breeding grounds of the Hen Harrier, ever to form an important part of its prey, is the Red Grouse. It is likely that adult, territory-holding Red Grouse can nearly always escape from a harrier and those which are killed are weaklings, mainly doomed to die in winter anyway. It is possible that harrier predation on adults reduces competition for winter food and helps the survival of the stronger birds. The grouse preservers’ complaint against Hen Harriers, then, is aimed mainly at predation on chicks when young harriers are being reared, and at the disturbance caused by harriers hunting over a moor immediately before or during a grouse drive. Either of these factors might result in some diminution in the numbers of grouse flying over the guns. It is probable that grouse shooters are, generally, most annoyed by the disturbance factor. As long as the economic value of grouse moors is dictated by the numbers of grouse shot, any predation is bound to tempt gamekeepers to destroy them. A day’s shooting for eight guns recently cost £2,000 on a moor in south Scotland and there is clearly no shortage of people, some of them from abroad, who are willing to pay this amount, or perhaps more. There are certainly some people who argue that if grouse moors are so economically valuable, the least suspicion of harm caused by predatory birds should be enough to justify the latter’s destruction. After all, they say, what ‘use’ is a harrier or an eagle; just as some North Sea fishermen ask what ‘use’ is a seal?
One rather curious reason for the unpopularity of harriers as a group, among some game shooters, is their stealthy low-level method of hunting, which does not arouse the same admiration as the stoop of the Peregrine or the dashing chase of a Merlin. The tendency to judge bird behaviour as courageous or cowardly (or is it sporting or unsporting?) dies hard.
Reluctance to accept the protected status of the Hen Harrier evidently stems from an odd mixture of reasons. It is fair, however, to consider the implications of a possible situation in which colonial breeding of Hen Harriers might reach a very high density on moors where grouse shooting was an important part of the land use. In such an event, the most ardent supporter of Hen Harriers should be prepared to listen carefully to the arguments.
My case for the defence of the Hen Harrier must rest principally on how successfully I have told the story of its life in this book. I hope that I have done enough to show that it is a beautiful and exciting bird. A pair of Hen Harriers in that wonderful manoeuvre of the food pass, or circling high in a spring sky—surely these are visual delights which must be measured far above any statistic of possible game losses? I am certain that in the years to come, as the wilderness retreats further, such experiences are going to be beyond price for more and more people. It is surely inexcusable, when so many of the world’s most splendid birds are rapidly becoming rare, that the destruction of birds such as harriers and eagles should still be tolerated. Great numbers of people, in this country, must have shared my excitement as I watched a recent, superbly photographed film of the wildlife of the Spanish forests. The sad implication of the commentary was that little of this would survive for much longer. I look forward to seeing the film which David Scott tells me is being made on the Hen Harrier in Ireland. I hope this reaches a large audience and helps to convince them that here is a bird worthy of conservation.
Some will say that in the light of the recent increase of the Hen Harrier in Britain, Ireland and Holland, I need not be so concerned for its conservation. Yet complacency should be prevented by reference to Bijleveld’s (1974) book, in which he showed that in many European countries the breeding population of Hen Harriers has decreased sharply in recent years, most notably in France where Terasse (1964) said that it had dropped by 50% between 1930 and 1964. Such decreases are partly due to reductions in suitable breeding habitat, and there is some evidence that agricultural pesticides have had an adverse effect on breeding success in France, but the devastating toll of birds of prey taken by hunters throughout most of Europe has included great numbers of harriers; as recently as 1969, 328 were named among 8,242 raptors killed in Lower Austria; while in 1959, 1,500 harriers were reported destroyed in the La Vendée district of France alone.
At the World Conference on Birds of Prey held in Vienna in October 1975, it was unanimously urged by conservationists, hunters and falconers that steps should be taken to give total protection to all birds of prey. There was also agreement on the need for conservation of
habitats, the control of pollutants, especially in tropical areas, and for more research into the causes of declining numbers of predatory birds.
One recent example, very close to my own home, must suffice to show that the protection of even our rarest birds of prey is still far from effective. In 1975, only 24 young Red Kites were reared in the British Isles, all in Wales (Lovegrove, 1976). One of these wandered in its first autumn to Kirkcudbrightshire and was shot during a Pheasant shoot. The shooter identified it as a peculiar Buzzard and promptly buried the carcase. The true identification only came to light as a result of a remarkable piece of detection by a local bird photographer who traced and dug up the remains. For reasons which are all too familiar in such circumstances, no prosecution followed. I learned, later, from a neighbouring farmer that no Buzzard (and probably no bird of prey) was safe on that shoot.
It is more than 20 years since a pair of Montagu’s Harriers attempted to nest in the same district and, then, the female was gin-trapped on the nest. The Montagu’s Harrier is an even rarer bird in Britain than the Red Kite, and its survival over much of Europe is thought to be precarious. When Hen Harriers are still commonly killed, in spite of much publicised protection laws, would the Montagu’s be spared? It is not always easy for an expert ornithologist to distinguish between the two species and it can hardly be expected that every gamekeeper would do so.
Many people will say that I unduly stress the risks to rare birds of prey from hunters and game preservers. It can be argued that pesticides, destruction of breeding or hunting habitat and disturbance by all kinds of people, including bird-watchers, may present even greater threats. The importance of all these factors varies for different species but it cannot be denied that direct human destruction has been, and regrettably still is, a major hazard as far as harriers are concerned.
* See Appendix 4 for a list showing degrees of protection given to predatory birds.
APPENDIX 1
Local Names of
The Hen Harrier
All the names I have found for the Hen Harrier, in an extensive search of the literature, are given in the following list; some names referred to either Hen or Montagu’s harriers, or both.
An t eun fionn Gaelic: The White Bird.
Ash-coloured Buzzard
Ash-coloured Falcon
Ash-coloured Harrier
Ash-coloured Hawk Ash-coloured Buzzard appears in John Clare’s List of Northamptonshire Birds, but may refer to Montagu’s Harrier. Pennant gave Ash-coloured falcon as a name for Montagu’s Harrier. Later references to Ash-coloured Hawks, Falcons or Harriers certainly referred, sometimes, to Hen Harriers. For example, the large total of Ash-coloured Hawks said to have been killed in Ayrshire, 1850–54, could not have been Montagu’s. Even St John’s statement (1849) that Falco cineraceous, the Ash-coloured Harrier, ‘breeds near Bonar Bridge’, Easter Ross, seems geographically much more likely to refer to the Hen Harrier, and may derive from the rather distinct appearance of 1–2 year old males showing a good deal of dusky colour in their grey plumage, thus looking not unlike male Montagu’s.
Blue Furze Hawk Used in Devonshire for adult males.
Blue Gled Widely used for adult males.
Blue Hawk Especially in the Midlands and North of England for adult males. John Clare (1823) clearly distinguishes between Large Blue Hawks (harriers) and Small Blue Hawks (male Sparrowhawks or, in the North of England, male Merlins).
Blue Kite Adult male (Muirhead, Berwickshire, 1889).
Blue Sleeves Adult male, Perth/Angus district, Scotland.
Bod glas Welsh: Blue Kite.
Bod Llwydlas Welsh: Blue-grey Kite.
Bod tinwyn Welsh: White-tailed Kite.
Breid-air-toin Gaelic: white (rag) on rump.
Brown Gled Ringtail harrier, according to Muirhead (1889).
Clamhan Luch Gaelic name, especially in Hebrides, meaning Mouse Hawk.
Dove-coloured Falcon A. H. Evans quotes Wallis’ History of Northumberland, 1769: ‘The Dove-coloured Falcon breeds annually on Cheviot . . . among Ericae.’ Although Evans evidently considered this a reference to the Hen Harrier (adult male) it may perhaps have referred to a male Merlin.
Flapper A Caithness name: Harvie-Brown and Buckley (1887).
Furze Hawk Devonshire: D’Urban and Matthew (1895).
Gled Often used for harriers as well as kites.
Grey Gled Commonly used, particularly in south Scotland and the Borders, for adult males.
Grey-blue Hawk North Wales: mentioned by Forrest (1907).
Hebog Llwydlas Welsh name = blue-grey hawk; Forrest (1907).
Hen Harrier
Hen Harroer Turner, 1544, gives the name as Hen Harroer and says ‘it gets its name among our countrymen from butchering their fowls’. He is referring to adult males, and considered the Ringtail as a different bird, though he says it catches its prey in the same manner.
Miller Given by Yarrell, 1874. Evidently refers to adult males, as grey birds, like the ‘dusty miller’ in colour.
Mittane Dunbar (c 1500) did not include Ringtails in his extensive nomenclature of Birds of Prey and the Mittane, certainly a hawk, may have been a brown harrier, which he might be expected to have named. In ‘Forsett is ay the Falconis kynd but ever the Mittane is hard in mynd’; the Mittane might be a Goshawk, but Dunbar elsewhere refers to ‘Goshalks’.
Moor Hawk Mentioned by D. Nethersole-Thompson. Note that the Marsh Harrier was called the Moor Buzzard, formerly nesting on moorland bogs in similar situations to Hen Harriers.
Mouse Hawk English translation of Gaelic name Clamhan Luch.
Rag on Rump Probably English translation of Gaelic Breid-air-toin.
Ringtail
Ringteale
Ringtayle General name for female or brown-plumaged (young) males. Described by Turner, 1544, as follows: ‘the Subbuteo I think to be that Hawk which Englishmen call the Ringtail, from the ring of white that reaches round the tail.’ Sibbald gave a list of Hawks and Falcons in his Scotia Illustrata (1684) including the following reference to Hen Harriers: ‘Subbuteo, quibusdam Butea albus, the Ring-tail.’ This suggests that he recognised the relationship between Buteo albus (the White Hawk) and the Ringtail. Various spellings of Ringtail occur in old ‘vermin’ lists, back to the 17th century.
Saint Julian’s Bird (Saint Silin) South Wales; Forrest (1907).
Sanct Martynis Fowle
St Martin’s Fowl The modern French name is Le Busard Saint Martin, from the arrival of migrants in France about 11 November, St Martin’s Day. Sanct Martynis fowle is the form used by the Scots poet Dunbar, c 1500. It may refer only to the adult male. Dunbar travelled to Picardy as an emissary of James IV of Scotland.
Seagull Hawk Given by Thompson (Connemara, 1849) and by Muirhead (Berwickshire, 1889). An attractive and descriptive name for the adult male.
Vuzz Kite Colloquial name in Devonshire, cf Furze Kite.
White aboon Gled A common name in Scotland Old Statistical Account, Muirhead, presumably for the adult male, unless ‘white aboon’ refers to the Ringtail’s white rump.
White Hawk Used in Scotland and Ireland for the adult male; Graham, 1852–70; Thompson (1849).
White Kite Used in Marquis of Bute’s circular to lairds in Argyll (1808), which specified a reward of five shillings for a White Kite’s nest with four eggs. It seems he did not know that the Ringtail was the female Hen Harrier.
I am indebted to Dr K. W. Brewster for drawing my attention to the following piece of harrier lore, in Lloyds’ Bird Facts and Fiction c 1933: ‘We find in falconry sixteen kinds of Hawks or fowls that prey. Of which the Circos (Harrier)—which is lame and limpeth of one leg—was held in ancient time for the luckiest augury in case of weddings and of cattle.’
Pliny says it is ‘of lucky omen in nuptial affairs and money business’.
In the Hebrides, should anyone have an unusually lucky day, it is said he must have seen the ‘Clamhan Luch’ or Hen Harrier.
It used to be sai
d in Wiltshire that these birds alighted in numbers on the ground before rain.
APPENDIX 2
Avian Species Mentioned
in the Text
Bittern Botaurus stellaris.
Bittern, American Botaurus lentiginosus
Blackbird Turdus merula
Bobwhite Colinus virginianus
Bullfinch Pyrrhula pyrrhula
Bunting, Cirl Emberiza cirlus
Bunting, Corn Emberiza calandra
Bunting, Reed Emberiza schoeniclus
Bunting, Snow Plectrophenax nivalis
Buzzard, Common Buteo buteo
Buzzard, Rough-legged Buteo lagopus
Chaffinch Fringilla coelebs
Chiffchaff Phylloscopus trochilus
Condor, Californian Gymnogyps californianus
Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo
Corncake Crex crex
Crossbill, Continental Loxia curvirostra
Crow, Carrion Corvus corone
Crow, Hooded Corvus corone
Cuckoo Cuculus canorus
Curlew Numenius arquata
Dipper Cinclus cinclus
Diver, Red-throated Gavia stellata
Dove, Turtle Streptopelia turtur
Dunlin Calidris alpina
Dunnock Prunella modularis
Eagle, Golden Aquila chrysaetos
Eagle, Sea Haliaeëtus albicilla
Eagle, Serpent Spilornis sp
Falcon, Greenland Falco rusticolus
Fieldfare Turdus pilaris
Flicker Colaptes auratus
Flycatcher, Spotted Muscicapa striata
Goldcrest Regulus regulus
Goldeneye Bucephala clangula
Goldfinch Carduelis carduelis
Goosander Mergus merganser
Goose, Greylag Anser anser
Goshawk Accipiter gentilis
Grebe, Little Tachybaptus ruficollis
The Hen Harrier Page 31