"While we welcome the study, it is a shame the government has had to commission this expensive exercise simply to appease a group of people who believe that xxxxx have a greater significance than any other bird. Such a mentality is dangerous for conservation and scarcely justifies the large cost to the taxpayer"
I had to read this twice and then again just to make sure I wasn't misreading the statement. I have removed one word as you can see and I know many at first glance will assume that the word I have removed is Pheasants as to be honest the statement above kind of neatly sums up some of the arguments against the daft DEFRA proposals.
If I tell you that the statement above came from one David Taylor, Shooting Campaign Manager for the Countryside Alliance, and that the missing word was in fact raptors you might, might just begin to detect a hint of irony.
Whilst we're on the subject of 'Who Said?' a brief morning trawl of some of the Falconry Forums revealed that amongst some who pursue that hobby DEFRA plans had been gleefully received. the prospect of once again taking birds from the wild meeting with hand-rubbing posts ranging from
"wild take could be on the cards but i think it would only be buzzards and spars (sparrowhawks) at the moment i think if it came"
"A few years and the Red Kite will need thinning out!"
Make no bones about it DEFRA by allowing capture and location and nest destruction methods to be used will open the door for the idiot fringe in both falconry and shooting to pursue what they see to be a government sponsored campaign against birds of prey. Oh and yes I have cherry picked the worst posts but it adequately demonstrates these idiots exist, even though they may be a minority and the potential consequences.