Deer Cull Objections.

It's worth trying to pull together our objections to the RSPB deer cull on the Eastern Moors. So here goes:

The instinctive reaction must be the most vital, especially from those of us who have frequently looked the deer in the eye from close by and watched the way they care for their young over many months, how they live outside at all hours and in the most severe winter conditions. In a really wild landscape they would be at risk from determined and hungry predators. That’s one thing but at least it’s a kind of birthright for them and a threat their behaviour has evolved to counter. In that lies their dignity.

To be despatched with high-tech firepower by someone who will be sipping a pint in a warm pub a couple of hours later is another thing entirely especially when the shooters tell you how humane they are being – that’s maybe after having their photos taken smiling alongside the carcasses.

Other detailed objections (will be added to)

1 This is a wildlife charity shooting wildlife. It doesn't look good and it risks playing into the hands of the enemies of conservation (Countryside Alliance, Ian Botham, grouse shooting industry hardliners etc.) and various critics. These have been particularly vocal in recent times and are always looking to find a stick to beat RSPB with. Their motives are often pretty grubby but some are taken in by the publicity they can fund. One or two of them may have a point. I can just hear them crying “double standards”, when the RSPB campaigns against persecution of birds of prey for example.

2 Following on from 1 above, those of us who want more protection for wildlife don't want to see ammunition put into the hands of those who claim to speak for 'the countryside' but are actually apologists for the hunting and shooting lobby.

3 Lack of transparency. It is seriously wrong to keep this quiet. It means there can be no public debate and no open discussion of alternatives. The countryside is public land and to say or imply that the public cannot be trusted to have a say in a contentious issue because it is 'sensitive' is to make the same mistake as others who keep us in the dark in South Yorkshire - don't mention the R word, but now it's Sheffield too.

4 A proper public discussion would enable a serious questioning of the strategy and underlying assumptions behind the land management of Sheffield Moors Partnership which was not allowed to happen during their tightly controlled 'consultation'.

5 When it comes to shooting wildlife, for a wildlife charity this should only even be considered after the situation has become critical and numerous other approaches have been publicly evaluated and shown to have failed.

6 We were told in 2013 that there were not enough deer on the Eastern Moors leading to use of cows. The following year the first letter (which we didn't see until last month) was written saying that  there were too many of them. Either we were being deceived or statements are based on dodgy evidence. In the case of either that means there should be more public scrutiny because we can't depend that management is giving us accurate information.

7 For several years now a combination of farmers and conservation industry organisations dedicated to managing and intervening in the landscape has been telling us that we must have farm animals grazing the land everywhere. The story  put about was that long ago deer and other wildlife used to graze and manage the land so that there would not be too much woodland. When we complained we didn't want cows and sheep everywhere we were told we did not understand. Conservation grazing was the thing. Our pleas for a farm animal free zone were ignored and we had to put up with cowpats all over paths and around gates, barbed wire fences and other unsightly boundaries. Now, shortly after deer arrived in numbers suddenly the story has changed and the deer have to be shot. The question has to be put: is this something to do with farm subsidies for farm animals?

8 We know that deer are not safe from other threats, poachers and some farmers and landowners who cannot be prosecuted for killing much wildlife on their land. Knowing that a significant wildlife charity is saying there are too many deer and many need to be shot may well embolden others who have their own reasons for using their guns.