Goose management policy review 2022
Update on progress in delivering goose management policies. this sets out proposals to refresh policies for delivery of goose management over the next 5 to 10 years and highlights emerging issues that will require actions in the medium to longer term.
Annex 4. List of policy recommendations from 2017 policy review and a summary of progress.
Evidence for the following assessment comes from various sources including goose scheme annual reports, NGF minutes and informal consultations with stakeholders. These are listed in the table below and an assessment of progress is summarised using a traffic light system as follows:
(Green) = Good progress on taking forward this suggestion.
(Orange) = Some action taken on this suggestion but further actions may be required (outline given).
(Red) = No action taken on this suggestion or the situation has changed and different actions have been taken. Further actions may be required (outline given).
Suggestion from 2017 Review |
Summary of progress |
Further action required |
|---|---|---|
Retain existing National Policy Framework objectives but refine these to ensure clarity and consistent delivery. |
(Orange) Policy framework retained but objectives were not refined. |
Review and refresh objectives. |
Continue the current goose management schemes until 2021 but consider options set out for future goose management delivery to ensure a clear way forward in place by early 2020. |
(Green) Current schemes continued and then extended to 2023. Slamannan was closed in 2018 and Strathbeg in 2020. |
Development of future goose management strategy alongside review of agricultural policy and how best to dovetail with new agri-environment schemes. |
Consider emerging goose management issues, encourage self-help approaches as the initial basis for solutions but work to resolve more complex issues where required and perhaps considering interim measures to cover immediate issues. |
(Orange) NatureScot has encouraged farmers to adopt a self-help approach for greylag geese through local meetings with Caithness, Speyside, Uist, Lewis and Harris, Tiree and Coll, Orkney and Islay farmers. |
There is no long term agreement on self-help and public funding as LGMGs successfully petitioned for continued funding for RGL control. LGMGs consider self-help is not a viable option. |
Contain costs to ensure that goose management can be delivered within current budget limitations or can address future budget constraints. |
(Green) Schemes have been delivered within existing budget limitations. |
Costs associated with agricultural production have increased significantly in the last few years without an associated increase in budget. |
Contribute to international flyway planning initiatives via African-Eurasian Waterbird Agreement and share knowledge and expertise across range states. Use the protocols within international flyway planning processes to agree population range sizes and implement adaptive harvest management where appropriate. |
(Green) Ongoing work with EGMP to implement Greenland barnacle goose flyway plan, contributions to Taiga Bean Goose Plan. |
Expansion of this approach to include Icelandic greylag in response to AEWA A* classification. |
Goose Science Advisory Group to develop a detailed research monitoring plan to provide robust data to support delivery of goose policy objectives. |
(Green) ToR changed to have a framework of expertise to be called upon when required |
|
Develop Scottish Species Action Plans to ensure a consistency of approach across species and range and pull these together into a Scotland wide goose management plan. Significant stakeholder consultation should be carried out during the development of these plans. |
(Red) No progress on national plans |
Calls for plans for greylag geese as the highest priority. |
Apply lessons learned from adaptive management pilots and look to expanding the licensed sale of goose meat where possible. |
(Green) Enabling sale has expanded as far as it legally can be – within the framework of Adaptive Management. Very limited development of markets due to short term nature of EC approvals and funding for AM. |
Needs long-term AM to develop markets. |
Review National Goose Management Review Group and sub-group membership and terms of reference. |
(Green) Completed and new ToR agreed. Format now includes local group representation. |
In the medium to longer term, the key proposals are:
Implement agreed approaches to delivery of future management in goose scheme areas and elsewhere if required. |
(Orange) Ongoing. |
New approaches to be decided alongside new agri-environment options as they develop. |
|---|---|---|
Promote ongoing self-help approaches to management of quarry species. |
(Orange) Ongoing. |
There is no long term agreement on self-help and public funding as LGMGs successfully petitioned for continued funding for RGL control. LGMGs consider self-help is not a viable option. |
Develop approaches to goose management within wider agri-environment support mechanisms, taking particular note of revisions to Scottish Rural Development Programme. |
(Orange) Stalled because future framework for agri-environment support has been delayed. |
New approaches to be decided alongside new agri-environment options as they develop. |
Develop communications with stakeholders dealing with air safety, public health and animal health. |
(Green) New communications on air safety through EGMP webinar and subsequent meeting with Scottish airport safety representatives. Significant work with animal health bodies on HPAI. |
Develop new policy objective on air safety. Continue work on animal health related to HPAI outbreaks. |
Keep a watching brief on any changes to policy on use of lead shot. |
(Green) Ongoing. |
Lead shot not used by NatureScot to deliver any goose management. |
Contact
Email: Samuel.Turner@gov.scot
There is a problem
Thanks for your feedback