Talk:Hen harrier

Persecution

In the UK, the Hen Harrier is subjected to intense organised illegal persecution by gamekeepers and their employers on shooting estates, particularly those managed for Red Grouse shooting.

I disagree with the above: the are not subject to "intense" persecution, as despite all reports, few Hen Harriers are shot in the UK. Also, i doubt that people formally organise to go out to shoot harriers. I beleive that this article is becoming biased and does not give a voice for the gamekeeping point of view. Greenfinch100 17:37, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

It's true, however much you might want not to believe it. I've reworded slightly and added two more references, one from a peer-reviewed scientific journal, another from the police, which I'm sure you'll accept are both independent unbiased sources. - MPF 18:18, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I accept the references, i just feel that stereotyping gamekeepers to make them look like indiscriminate raptor haters is unacceptable due to the number of keepers who are helping organisations such as the RSPB in conserving these birds, and the fact that without them the countryside would not have the habitats it has today Greenfinch100 18:26, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Agree with the wording about hen harrier persecution. Surely it would be better to say they are in conflict with the interests of some gamekeepers and therefore persecution is a pressure on their conservation status in the UK. At the moment, the entry is certainly biased and slightly hysterical.

Also, the police have closed the case on the harriers brought down by the royal artillery. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.152.35.199 (talk • contribs) 2007 November 18

Agreed, I will the change the article to a more neutral view now. Greenfinch100 (talk) 16:02, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I have removed the sentence that claimed that they were "very rare and in danger of extinction in the UK" as this was an exaggeration. Hen harriers are indeed very rare in England, and perhaps under threat of extinction there, where successful nests are barely in double figures and breeding populations exist on only a handful of moors. However in Scotland there are several hundreds of breeding females and while the birds are clearly under threat from persecution they can not be considered to be likely candidates for extinction. My rewording of this statement is probably less than ideal but it much more accurate than the original.--Thunderbuck ram (talk) 11:26, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

unfortunately, persecution continues. I note that this previous discussion of 2009, after "hysteria", "bias", and "more neutral", apparently led to there being no mention at all of persecution!
This article is in serious need some neutral mention of the continuing persecution of Hen Harriers (and other raptors) in the UK. jw (talk) 21:46, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

5 December 2007 edits

MPF, please do not un-do my edits where i am trying to create an neutral article. I respect your views but there is no need to totally incriminate the opposing side of the argument. Greenfinch100 (talk) 21:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, your edits were removing factual information. Killing or disturbing Hen Harriers in Britain is a crime under British law, punishable by a period of up to 6 months in jail; to remove the word 'criminal' is wrong. And it is intense and determined; at a raptor conference I attended, the professional conclusion of a scientist studying the topic was that about 90% of grouse moor owners were involved in illegal raptor killing. Note that this is not someone working for a pressure group but an independent observer. As soon as I find publication information for this data, I plan to add it. And it is organised; Hen Harriers are being deliberately shot by trespassing groups of persons who are not in the employ of the local landowner, on land that is not used for grouse shooting, including on RSPB reserves, and including, widely, at known Hen Harrier winter roosts. Obviously, police are investigating such matters (Operation Artemis http://www.nwcu.police.uk/pages/ourpriorities/henharrier.asp , ongoing, and the largest single investigation of wildlife crime ever made in Britain), but obtaining convictions is (as I'm sure you are well aware) almost impossible. By the way, I should point out that this activity is more or less unique to grouse moor owners; lowland shooting estates have a vastly better reputation in respect of raptor conservation, with numerous excellent examples. - MPF (talk) 10:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

The RSPB reference supports the content that gamekeepers are involved and describes intense human interference.[1] The NWCU reference uses the words "determined criminality.[2] Does a reliable source exist for the contrary assertion (above) that "few Hen Harriers are shot in the UK"? Walter Siegmund (talk) 11:48, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Summer 2008 edits

I'm afraid that distilling the findings of the JRS down to producing "some evidence that the two species are unable to flourish simultaneously" is grossly misleading. What the langholm study report showed was that under certain circumstances it was likely that red grouse populations would be limited by raptor predation, they made it quite clear that these circumstances may not apply to all moors. In the report summary they provide evidence to show that the long-term decline of grouse is almost certainly not due to raptor predation (it is strongly related to grazing and heather loss), but on the flip side they found evidence that when the grouse population dropped to very low densities the large raptor population was probably preventing their recovery. It is important to note that it is not neccesarily raptor populations that drove the grouse population down but that a host of other factors are involved, e.g. habitat, management, general predator levels, and importantly, disease. Population cycling in red grouse is a well studied phenomenon, when a population is at the low point in its cycle and other conditions are poor for grouse but right for raptors then it is possible that the grouse will not recover due to predation, but this does not mean that the two species cannot 'flourish simultaneously' under other conditions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thunderbuck ram (talk • contribs) 09:48, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Pictures

This article could do with better pictures - ideally, a fine-plumaged male, and a female showing the "ring-tail". Can anyone assist, please? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:20, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Northern and Hen Harrier

Please note that the Northern Harrier (Circus hudsonius) of America is now being regarded as a distinct species; the DNA differs about 0.8 %. See for example Robert E. Simmons: Harriers of the World (2000). I recategorized the pictures on commons, please check if they still suit the article.--Toter Alter Mann (talk) 16:20, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

If primarily based on a DNA difference of 0.8% (which really is nothing, regardless if mt or n), we're well outside the realm of the biological species concept, which (still) is the basis for major taxonomical works in birds. This has been discussed before, but in general taxonomical changes that are outside those recognized by major checklists need strong evidence for us to even consider following them. A difference of 0.8% is not strong evidence for splitting them if following the BSC; it is evidence for keeping them together. Field guides and other popular literature commonly recommend novel taxonomic treatments (for an extreme example, check König & Weick's Owls of the World), but they rarely provide hard scientific evidence. For that reason alone, they are rarely followed by major taxonomical authorities. The fact that Harriers of the World was published almost 10 years ago, and not even one major taxonomic authority has followed the split says it all. I'm not saying it couldn't happen; just that the above quoted evidence doesn't make the cut. Please also note that commons usually use the most conservative taxonomy because it otherwise rapidly can mess up the situation for the various wikipedias. For example, the commons link in the English article now only leads to photos of the European and Asian population, but not the North American population. • Rabo³ • 21:47, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes. Beringian splits are always controversial, and even if this is correct because of the genetic variation—remember that undoubtedly valued species can have a genetic difference of nil—this probably will not be considered for some time. —innotata 21:20, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Without more background, we only have the numbers. As such, 1.5-2% are standard quoted minimum. While there are numerous cases of certain species pairs with a lower divergence, nothing in the above (e.g. comparable divergence among sympatric relatives) indicates that this is the case here. Furthermore, a genetic difference of zero is not possible between two species (a few old claims of this have long since been discounted; sampling is to blame, e.g. only mtDNA in close relatives with known hybridization events). PSC species cannot, by default, have no difference, and BSC species, although not necessarily monophyletic, will still have a level of divergence. If you are aware of any animal species pair where adequate sampling has shown no genetic divergence, I would be very interested in hearing about them. • Rabo³ • 05:40, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Number of breeding pairs in the UK

The article states that only 20 pairs survive in England. This is unlikely to be the case. The RSPB estimate (http://www.rspb.org.uk/wildlife/birdguide/name/h/henharrier/index.aspx) is 749 breeding pairs in England (plus more on the Isle of Man). There is one circling the meadow at the bottom of my garden right now...

Sorry if I've misunderstood the article, but perhaps that would mean it needs a little bit more tweaking by someone with more knowledge?

Anyway, thanks for writing it and hope this helps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.8.89.178 (talk) 17:48, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Hen harrier. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.rspb.org.uk/news/details.asp?id=tcm:9-170523

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:16, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Persecution continues

cf. previous Persecution discussion in 2009, above
Somehow the very mention of persecution disappeared from this article, although persecution continues.
jw (talk) 22:01, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

I would suggest inserting information at the beginning of section Relationship_with_humans would be ideal, following on from the mention of critical status in UK (which might also be updated).
jw (talk) 22:01, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Redirect from Marsh hawk

There is currently a redirect from 'marsh hawk' to this hen harrier article. Is this correct? I have never heard that name used - does anyone use the term marsh hawk to mean hen harrier? Or should the redirect point to northern harrier? Marsh hawk seems to be common useage in Northern America for northern harrier. Masato.harada (talk) 18:16, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

On further investigation, it appears that an earlier hen harrier article was split into two articles in 2003, hen harrier and northern harrier. A redirect was created from marsh hawk to hen harrier. I think this was incorrect, and that redirect should be to northern harrier. I propose making that change, plus deleting the Redirect template currently at the top of the hen harrier article. Comments? Masato.harada (talk) 18:07, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

This duplicates an existing discussion at Talk:Northern harrier#Redirect from Marsh hawk. Please continue the discussion there instead. Thank you, Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 19:31, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

OK, I've made the changes. Masato.harada (talk) 10:34, 12 January 2024 (UTC)