BY BERT BURNETT
I am reminded of a project to help one of the country’s most threatened breeding bird species, the curlew, which was awarded more than £156,000 from the Scottish Government’s Biodiversity Challenge Fund. This initiative, titled Curlews in Crisis Scotland, aimed to increase breeding areas and reduce predation for Europe’s largest wader and one of its most iconic birds.
Scotland is home to 15% of the world’s breeding population of curlews, a species that has faced severe declines due to agricultural intensification and habitat loss. However, despite these efforts, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), which has received tens of millions of pounds over the years to protect waders, including the curlew, has a controversial track record. Wader populations have dropped by 50% during this period, with curlews faring even worse.
This raises serious concerns about the effectiveness of channelling additional funding to the RSPB.
Despite their extensive funding and resources, the RSPB’s reserves have not produced sustainable wader populations.
Critics argue that the organisation’s approach—micromanaging habitats without addressing key issues like effective predator control—has failed to deliver meaningful results for curlew conservation.
The Curlews in Crisis Scotland project spans Caithness and East Ayrshire, linking efforts with 14 other initiatives funded by the Biodiversity Challenge Fund, committed £1.8 million in total. The RSPB planned to work with farmers to improve habitats through measures such as vegetation thinning and rush control. However, sceptics were and are right to point to the organisation’s longstanding policy of limited fox control as a significant limitation.
Why are curlew numbers still suffering in these areas?
Curlews nest at a time when foxes are rearing cubs, increasing predation risks to eggs and chicks. The RSPB’s policy of avoiding lethal control of lactating vixens or targeting dens further hampers predator management efforts. Critics like me have warned for a while that this “animal rights” stance – policies with unintended consequences – prioritises ideology over practical conservation, leaving curlew populations vulnerable during critical breeding periods.
Many fear that new funding for ‘conservation’ organisations like the RSPB will merely perpetuate the same ineffective strategies.
Moreover, any predator control undertaken by hired contractors often gets deflected by the RSPB, scapegoating workers for “overstepping” their mandates.
Scottish Environmental Secretary at the time of the cash injection, Roseanna Cunningham, praised the funding, stating, “The success of these projects will play a crucial role in our efforts to improve nature and help Scotland meet its international biodiversity commitments.” However, some conservationists argued that the RSPB’s track record suggests otherwise.
They were right.
What has been achieved with this project and others since?
Curlews are still a threatened species.
For the sake of the curlew’s survival, conservation funding should be directed toward organisations or efforts that prioritise effective predator control and sustainable population management, rather than repeating decades of flawed approaches.
Perhaps Mark Avery is right for once – we do need to talk about the RSPB.
They have lost the plot.
Surely all can see that it’s time for the organisation to step aside and allow others to lead the way in securing a future for the curlew and other threatened species?
Bert Burnett is a retired gamekeeper of more than fifty years experience.