We should be protecting our buzzards

IT was just about a year ago that I read through your excellent columns of the proposal to remove buzzards and their chicks or eggs from areas where they were supposedly laying waste to the pheasant populations.

I thought that this Government had seen the concern that this raised, and had withdrawn the proposal. Imagine my despair when I learned that Natural England (NE), an agency for the Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), had sanctioned and licensed the killing of four of these birds and the destruction of their nests in response to a request from a pheasant shoot. This has come to light after the event, only through a Freedom of Information request.

These birds are supposed to be protected in law, yet, without any public involvement, NE have judged that the activities of these particular birds has been such that they should be destroyed. Interestingly, it has been suggested that had they refused the licence application, then they may have well been challenged in the courts. Another case of those with money getting what they want? The birds have since been killed.

This business is wholly distasteful, and one can not wonder how many other shoots may try to use this “precedent” to wipe our countryside of these wonderful birds. If I had a penny for every pheasant I have missed on our local roads, I would be a very rich man indeed – perhaps rich enough to get my own way!

Maybe in future those of us who have damage done to our vehicles because of direct hits or near misses should pursue claims against local landowners for failing to control the “livestock” released on their land. Perhaps all released poults should be ringed with the owners identification for that purpose?

What I find so disappointing is that the respect I had for Natural England has all but disappeared. Some of the conservation work they are involved in has been inspiring. How strange it is now that they fail to understand that the removal of a species can badly affect a whole ecosystem. While I don’t dispute that buzzards take pheasant and poults, they also take other prey such as rabbit.

Imagine a world where rabbits are able to run wild because another one of their predators is missing from the skies? The damage inflicted on crops and other parts of the landscape could be significantly more than at present. Perhaps we could see the return of widespread use of myxomatosis to control the knock-on problems? How’s that for an idea?

Diversity in power sources

From: David H Rhodes, Keble Park North, Bishopthorpe, York.

DIVERSITY should be the basis of many aspects of life. The current threat that Drax and Eggborough power stations may switch off if no subsidies are obtained to convert them for the burning of biomass is limited thinking.

Surely all methods of energy production should be retained with a balance so that should one source become restricted the rest could fill the gap.

If the two coal-fired power stations close to coal burning, then a vast quantity of energy-producing material will lay unused underground. Once mining is closed down, I would doubt that output would ever be reviewed. Consider an improbable but yet possible scenario. Years down the line, every house roof is covered with solar panels and is the main source of energy. A complex cloud formation develops and greatly reduces the solar energy we have become dependent on. In this situation energy from coal, gas, oil etc would be very much appreciated. Think on.

In-fighting
for Tories

From: Richard Godley, Meadowfields, Whitby.

JAYNE Dowle’s column (Yorkshire Post, May 23) about despairing Tories spoke at length of her 92-year-old mother-in-law’s frustration about Tory policies. One does not have to be 92 to feel the same I can assure her!

However, I believe that her well written article did expose feelings that the vast majority of Tory supporters agree with.

Unless the Party addresses these, then there will undoubtedly be the most vicious in-fighting and blame-calling amongst the Party faithful as they try to salvage the scraps from the aftermath of what will be an election Ukip/Labour landslide in 2015.

On the same page was the article by Charlie Elphicke. He is an qualified economist, barrister and small business owner with strong views on how the economy should be run. He does not have a second rate degree in modern history, nor is he Godfather to David Cameron’s children. He is not, however, Chancellor of the Exchequer.