Grauniad link below

http://gu.com/p/48a7y

This guy could teach stw a thing or two about arguing on the internet…

When asked by the Guardian why he had not cited any science to back up his assertion that raptors were suppressing native birds, Page replied: “I don’t want to, why should I?”

Strange double standards by the Grauniad, when they published this article blaming Buzzards for the decline of Adders, they didn’t demand the author showed anything to back it up.

Chris Packham is always good value:

“BBC wildlife presenter Chris Packham said Page’s article was “an idiotic, ill informed rant” by someone with “no qualified understanding of even basic ecology. All, repeat, all the science proves that this sort of naive proposal is utterly unfounded.”

“Nature regulates its own populations if we allow it and we are still outrageously short of top predators. No wolves or lynx – too many deer. There should be 300-plus pairs of hen harrier in England. There is one. This is an unhealthy and unsustainable situation,” said Packham.”

Considering the news about the ‘disappearance’ (or criminal destruction, more likely) of some of our last hen harriers from the Bowland Moors, Page couldn’t have timed that one worse.

Page may badge himself as a conservationist in this regard, but he’s also a hack for the Shooting Times.

ninfan – not questioning your assertion – but please tell me you didn’t read the OP then rush off to scour the Guardian site for a wildlife-related example of not meeting appropriate standards of evidence-based journalism?

Nope, sad bastard that I am I remembered that article and the uproar it caused at the time.

Post-election bloodlust from the victors?

The commentator is clearly an idiot, did you see the bit about the seagulls killing the dog, “the perpetrators need to be taken in hand”, what the entire population of seagulls ? Hw exactly do you take a seagull “in hand”, what do you do give a stern talking to ?

Post-election bloodlust from the victors?

No, just Lulu’s husband spouting rubbish as per usual.

Now why didn’t you say the Grauniad’s article was a response to the original article in a famously tawdry rag that will happily print any load of unsubstantiated tosh?

I honestly read the title as Raptors vs Conservatives.

Now there is a fight I’d pay to see.

Chris Packham pretty much sums up my thoughts on the birds of prey matter though

Coincidentally there was a pigeon-fancier on R4 a few minutes ago bleating about how his “sport” is being ruined by all the raptors scoffing his pigeons, of which he has around 1000. I don’t think many folk will lose sleep over that.

R2 (predators vs pigeon fanciers) right now ffs Jeremy V*ne.

Is disappointed.

Thought this was Raptors v Conservatives, in a celebrity deathmatch style. 😥

Dash it, beaten to it by Rich up there!

The commentator is clearly an idiot, did you see the bit about the seagulls killing the dog, “the perpetrators need to be taken in hand”, what the entire population of seagulls ? Hw exactly do you take a seagull “in hand”, what do you do give a stern talking to ?

given the way they had my entire bag of chips right out of my hand last time I was on the coast, someone bloody well should.

Piece here about Saving Our Songbirds, interesting that it features on the ShootingUK site:
http://www.shootinguk.co.uk/features/saving-our-songbirds-1840
Vested interest?
I understand that the blokes behind the Saving Our Songbirds organisation are also closely aligned with the Countryside Alliance, which supports game shooting, and other country ‘sports’.
I think one or two of these people might have a vested interest in culling raptors and other birds like Corvidae:
http://www.songbird-survival.org.uk/sbs_trustees.html

Piece here about Saving Our Songbirds, interesting that it features on the ShootingUK site:
http://www.shootinguk.co.uk/features/saving-our-songbirds-1840
Vested interest?
I understand that the blokes behind the Saving Our Songbirds organisation are also closely aligned with the Countryside Alliance, which supports game shooting, and other country ‘sports’.
I think one or two of these people might have a vested interest in culling raptors and other birds like Corvidae:
http://www.songbird-survival.org.uk/sbs_trustees.html

Countryside alliance quoted in the article…

A spokeswoman for the Alliance confirmed there were no raptor species it would currently suggest should have its protection removed.

Anyway, i think this guy being a bit bonkers has meant some of his point has been missed.

Raptors populations might balance out based on available food supply, but that would be total food supply, not just one species. Entirely possible the raptor could munch its way through the easy pickings and leave us with no lapwing or whatever it was.

Of course killing all raptors wont necessarily save the lapwing as many bird species are/were in decline anyway. We need to be sure all species are protected if possible and if studies suggest raptors need to be removed from a certain area to help protect a just-as-rare songbird then so be it, but i bet it could be done without the need load up a 12bore!