|
|
|
|
|
  |
|
|
||
| So is it goodbye to Tufty *Tufty - full name Tufty Fluffytail – is of course a native Red Squirrel. Tufty had his origins in 1953, created by the late Elsie Miles. In 1961, the Tufty Club was set up as a network of local groups - which at its peak had nearly 25,000 branches throughout the country. Parents would join the Tufty Club on their children’s behalf, and children would proudly wear badges showing that they were members. By the early 1970s, an estimated 2m children had been members, and the movement continued well into the 1980s. Tufty has since had a couple of makeovers, and he remains a residual icon for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, which gave him to the world. If you have got a Tufty Club Badge, send us a photo, of you wearing it, and if we publish it we’ll send you a prize. The damage caused by grey squirrels to trees in general and forestry plantations in particular have been well known for years. In addition, the catastrophic effects that greys have on their red cousins have been observed virtually since their introduction some one hundred and thirty or so years ago. Either situation should have been enough to stimulate an enthusiastic control programme to either eliminate or drastically reduce the numbers of Grey squirrels. Instead it has been an excuse for inaction, obfuscation and political gerrymandering. With new evidence coming to light of the part played by this invasive rodent in the decline of our songbird population, we have to ask if we can expect any proactive control measure or whether those responsible bodies will simply allow the situation continue to spiral out of control to such a degree that they can simply wash their hands of the problem claiming that ‘it is all too late’. Grey squirrels are an alien species and were introduced to the UK from the USA in the late nineteenth/early twentieth century. Their success has been to the detriment of our native red squirrels. Larger, stronger and more fecund they have, by a process of expansion, driven red squirrels to the brink of extinction in England and they exist only in small enclaves in Scotland and Wales. It has been estimated that without vigorous action in their defence we will lose all of our native reds in 10 to 15 years. Grey squirrels also transmit to the red the parapox virus. This is a potentially fatal virus for the red squirrel, but the grey squirrel appears unaffected, and is thought to be a carrier of the disease. The origins of parapox are unknown. Visible external signs on a red squirrel harbouring the virus include wet, discharging lesions or scabs around the eyes, mouth, feet and genitalia. A significant number of deaths resulting from exposure to the parapox virus have been recorded within the red squirrel population of Britain. Because of the nature of the disease in order to protect red squirrels from infection a cordon sanitaire has to be established, in which no grey squirrels are allowed, around the known red squirrels habitats. This alone would make a good case for control, but we need to also factor the extraordinary scale of damage to trees that is caused directly by the actions of the grey squirrel. This has to be measured not only as the material loss of value to plantation trees and the fact that active populations of squirrels will make it almost impossible to grow certain species such as Beech; but by the loss of amenity value as the mature trees in parkland and accessible woodlands are damaged. Amorous male squirrels, keen to impress females with their ability to gnaw bark, tear strips of bark from oaks and other hardwoods, leaving the trees vulnerable to disease and death. This kind of damage occurs mainly during the breeding season, but the recent warm winters and a glut of autumn fruit has led to more squirrels breeding in our forest and an increase in the damage. The problems have not been ignored by government, in January of this year Bio-diversity minister Mr Knight said: “Grey squirrels seriously threaten woodland management through damage to trees and woodlands and by squeezing out red squirrels and possibly other wildlife like woodland birds. And more…………. “Through humane and targeted pest control in the areas where this damage is most critical, local woodland and wildlife managers – with the full backing and expertise of the Forestry Commission – will be able to control and contain these threats, and preserve or rebalance some of our native ecology.” Which all sounds pretty good until you realise that this is not much different from that which Elliot Morley was spouting off back in 1997! We have to hope that these are not just weasel words and that they will prove to be the precursor to some meaningful action to solve the problem. This becomes vital when the element of predation of songbirds is brought into the equation! Which brings us to the recent report by Professor Roy Brown of Birkbeck, University of London. Professor Brown reports that on his estimates some 180 million songbirds, or their eggs or young are taken each year, in the main by squirrels, rats and cats. The report goes on to say that in areas of high density squirrel populations 93% of nests are raided. Professor Browns report has similarities with Rachel Carson’s book ‘Silent Spring’. Published in 1962 it foretold of a countryside devoid of bird life due to the residual and cumulative effects of pesticides in the food chain, namely DDT, Deildrin and Aldrin. The book galvanised opinion and was in part responsible for the birth of the environmentalist movement, as we know it. As a result, DDT has been banned along with similar products and the policy of ever-larger fields and agro/industry development has been either halted or abandoned. So why have these changes, along with the establishment of beetle banks, the imposition of ‘set-aside’ and the facilitation of varying stewardship schemes failed to halt the decline? The answer is that we are not tackling the whole problem; Professor Brown explains, “If you’ve got somebody who is sick, who is diagnosed as having cancer, diabetes and a mild form of anaemia, you’ve got to deal with the cancer first, but if you don’t deal with the other two the patient won’t get better.” We are simply not dealing with the parallel problems of mammalian predation. Even the normally squeakily politically correct RSPB has had to come out of its shell, its spokesman Grahame Madge said: “Grey squirrel predation is something we at the RSPB - and the British Trust for Ornithology, English Nature and the Forestry Commission - are beginning to think is a problem.” (Italics mine) And more………….” for [the] hawfinch and a number of other species, the grey squirrel is one factor that has been identified as part of the problem.’’ Things must be bad if the RSPB are prepared to say something even vaguely contentious. Unfortunately, nobody seems to have any real idea as to what to do. If you want to reduce the number of Grey Squirrels, or even eradicate them in specific areas or across the country you have to actually kill them. The most likely result of Professor Browns report is that it will be a cue for a fair degree of hand wringing over the right course of action, a decision to engage the relevant stakeholders in a series of overblown meetings to decide on a project strategy to come up with definitive conclusion as to how they will move to the next stage. This will take around 10 years to complete and cost millions! By the time that the initial reports are published they will be irrelevant for some species. There is another answer of course. Somebody could just make a decision and get on with it. There is a whole army of tree workers across the country whose specialist skill and intimate knowledge of trees could be utilised in any large-scale campaign. Some would not wish to take part, but many would. It would also provide some useful extra income at slack times of the year – most notably bird nesting season when much active tree-work has to cease! Rachel Carson, speaking shortly before her death, in 1964: “Man’s attitude toward nature is today critically important simply because we have now acquired a fateful power to alter and destroy nature. But man is a part of nature, and his war against nature is inevitably a war against himself…[We are] challenged as mankind has never been challenged before to prove our maturity and our mastery, not of nature, but of ourselves.” Whilst Carson was speaking quite specifically of the damage caused by chemical pesticides, her comments have relevance to the whole debate about predator management. The Grey squirrel is not a native species and its introduction was a grave error of judgement. We need to demonstrate our maturity in dealing with the problem and accept that the challenge of effective control is a difficult one, certainly the public perception of any eradication policy would be difficult to manage favourably. However, this should not be an excuse for inaction, rather a catalyst for it. Society has a duty to put right the wrongs that it has foist upon the environment, whether this is by the banning of certain pesticides and chemicals, the re-establishment of hedgerows, copses and spinney’s or the effective management of predators, whether they be introduced or indigenous. It really is time that the Grey Squirrel was eradicated in Britain and indeed Europe, or we’ll be saying goodbye to more that just Tufty. |
|||||
