Mark Pritchard - Member of Parliament for The Wrekin

The Bill seeks to give added protection to birds and their nests and to regularise existing law, which currently gives birds that nest in Scotland more protection than those that nest in England.

People in the United Kingdom like birds. About 210 species of bird breed in the UK every year, many of which are rare. The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds has around 1.1 million members. Last Januaryup to 470,000 people took part in the Big Garden Birdwatch, and it is estimated that 2.85 million people regularly go birdwatching. This love of birds and nature contributes greatly to local economies, helping to attract tourists and day visitors, often to remote parts of rural England and Wales.

Shropshire, like Devon, has its fair share of birdwatchers. Let me record my thanks to Shropshire’s “twitchers” for their support for my campaign to obtain county wildlife status for Priorslee lake, home to the occasional visiting purple heron and pectoral sandpiper.

In these days of contemplating the possible effects of climate change, birds and their behaviour are helpful indicators to scientists and Governments alike—perhaps even more reliable, and certainly less expensive, than multi-million-pound meteorological satellites. It may be an inconvenient truth for unscrupulous local authorities and developers, but birds matter.

There is evidence that some winter visiting birds, particularly waders and wildfowl, are coming to Britain in smaller numbers. That may be because the climate in continental Europe is becoming warmer, which means that birds have no need to migrate so far, and engage in so-called short-stopping.

There is also pressure on breeding birds; when feeding and nesting cycles begin to change, it creates new life challenges for all our feathered summer visitors, who may return to find the best breeding sites occupied by resident birds, and the first flash of caterpillars already gone. Much important monitoring work is undertaken by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, which owns or manages 200 nature reserves. I am grateful for its support for my Bill, and to the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. The Government rightly made bird populations one of their quality-of-life indicators, but that indicator all too often reveals that some birds, particularly those on farm land, have yet to recover from the major declines of the 1970s and 1980s. It is therefore incumbent on us all, including the Government, to do all that we can to protect and nurture species that are few in number, as well as those that are plentiful, but whose loss would diminish our countryside and our great nation.

With the demand for residential and commercial building growing, the need to protect the country’s birds has never been so pressing. Will the Minister today give an undertaking to ensure that bird populations are not affected by the demand for 135,000 new homes in Shropshire in the next decade, or the excessive new homes target for the rest of England and Wales? Britain’s most common and best-loved birds that breed in hedgerows and trees all too often fall victim to developers and local authorities, who remove trees and hedges without due diligence and rightful consideration of birds’ nests and the important breeding season. Just imagine if there was no more symphony of the song thrush, no more rhapsody in yellow of the blue tit, no more Mendelssohnian accompaniment of the blackbird, no more red rapturous reaches of the robin, and no more soprano sonnets of the swallow. Imagine a world without birdsong—a desolate landscape, souls unrevived, a gnawing and bereft silence. The Bill seeks to give added protection to those and other birds and their nests.

Under the provisions of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, amended by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 and the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006, it is an offence deliberately to damage or destroy wild birds and their nests, with certain exceptions, for which a licence is required. However, it is not an offence to do so if the accused can demonstrate that they were unaware of the consequences of their actions. The Bill would close that loophole by making reckless damage an offence, and it would require local authorities, developers and others to be far more careful in their local development, particularly in breeding season.

I remind the Minister for Local Environment, Marine and Animal Welfare that introducing an offence of recklessness in wildlife legislation would not be an innovation. Some offences in schedule 1 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, as amended, include “recklessness”, but the schedule does not apply to the more serious offences of destruction and reckless damage of birds’ nests. We might also look to Scotland, where the Scottish Parliament has rightly given birds added protection. The Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003 and the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 amended the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, making reckless damage an offence north of the border. Scottish legislation says that all birds, and their nests and eggs, are protected by law, and it is an offence, with certain exceptions, to intentionally or recklessly take, damage, or destroy or otherwise interfere with the nest of any wild bird while the nest is in use or being built.

The next time that colleagues see birds flying north, they should reflect that they might just be flying north to escape the weak wildlife laws in England and Wales. Closing the loophole would make it easier to deal with unscrupulous individuals who kill protected birds, sometimes rare species, and then claim that it was an innocent mistake. One example of such an occurrence was the shooting of a bittern, a rare heron, of which there are only about 50 breeding males left in the country. The individual who shot the bird claimed that he thought it was a pheasant.

On another occasion in 2005, two people who were apparently shooting rooks shot a rare marsh harrier, claiming that they thought it was a rook. Demonstrating intent in such cases is difficult, so closing the recklessness loophole would make people far more careful when shooting birds. That change could help, too, to protect rarer birds that nest on industrial sites, quarries and wasteland such as the black redstart, the UK population of which consists of fewer than 100 pairs. Other species that nest in those areas, usually near water, include the little ringed plover—another scarce bird—and the sand martin.

That leads to the thorny issue of enforcement. While I welcome the fact that the Countryside and Rights of Way Act increased penalties for wildlife crime—offenders now risk being jailed for up to six months or being fined up to £20,000 for damaging sites of special scientific interest—those laws must be enforced, and the police, Natural England and the Countryside Council for Wales must take wildlife crime far more seriously.

In conclusion, will the Minister consider introducing measures to require local authorities and developers to carry out nest surveys before commencing works? The survey need not be complicated, but, if a development is likely to impinge on a habitat with nesting birds, surely developers should have to demonstrate that a bird survey had been undertaken. Will the Minister work with the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds to agree what constitutes the breeding season? Currently, the breeding season is not defined in UK law, but the law does give protection to a nest while it is being built or is in use. That confusion does not help to reduce wildlife crime.

Bird populations should become quality-of-life indicators for local authorities, perhaps audited by the RSPB or by local wildlife trusts, and wildlife crimes should become performance indicators for police forces. Unless that happens, wildlife crime will continue to remain low on the police’s list of priorities. There should be a standard police reporting format, which would allow greater transparency and traceability of action taken—or not taken—by police forces. The Government say that they want to save the planet, but if they cannot save the thousands of trees and hedges that are destroyed each year, and the bird species that rely on them, what real hope is there for any of us? Mankind does not own nature—we are its custodians—so it is the duty of all of us, including Government, to ensure that birds throughout England and Wales live to sing another day.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill ordered to be brought in by Mark Pritchard, Mr. Kenneth Clarke, Mr. John Randall, Mr. Eric Pickles, Mr. Stewart Jackson, Mr. Elliot Morley, Lyn Brown, David Taylor, Mr. David Drew, Mr. Tom Watson and Tim Farron.

Wild Birds (protection)

Mark Pritchard accordingly presented a Bill to make further provision for the protection of wild birds’ nests: And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time on Friday 19 October, and to be printed [Bill 83].

Click here for Hansard

Click here for Homepage.