Solway Goose Management Group - minutes of meetings

1.Present and Apologies        

Apologies were received from Quintin Donald (RPID), Jim Kirkland and James Worthington.

RPID - Michael Slaney

NatureScot - Kate Campbell (Secretary), Stuart Graham (Operations Manager), Susan Copeland (minutes).

Farmer Representatives - Alastair Martin, Steven Brown, Steven Murray, Alastair Wylie, Jamie Blackett.

Other Organisations - Dave Pickett (WWT), Colin Bartholomew (RSPB), Larry Griffin (EcoLG) , Anna Austin (Caerlaverock Est) 

2. Confirmation of last meeting minutes

Stuart Graham (SG) welcomed everybody to the meeting, the previous minutes were circulated to the group on 6 December and have been approved.

3. Review of last years counts and activity

Larry Griffin (LG) - last winter count total in England and Scotland was 40,500 across 8 sites. 20,000 in Scotland with 10,000 in fields and 10,000 on the saltmarsh.  The breeding season has been good 22% breeding, lots of breeding on Loch Leven, and a few coming northwards from the English side. The running 10 year mean varies by 10% during avian influenza it was 5%. There was nothing standing out with the field usage.

Kate Campbell (KC) - is there any difference and juvenile behaviour?

LG - they are less experienced feeders, they follow parents and stay together until February or March. Older birds have been reduced in the flocks. Greenland barnacles there is not as much reproductive success. Late Snow on the East Coast of Greenland can wipe some younger birds out.

SG - what is the typical mortality rate.

LG - 5% up or down.

4. Farm Claim Discussion – Local knowledge 

Alistair Martin (AM) – stick to the guidance, if the numbers meet the criteria, then it’s in, otherwise its out.

Steven Murray (SM) – the mapping is out of date on Cowcorse.

KC wants to take the issues of revision of field boundaries forward into the policy review; the maps are currently done manually.  The zonation and makes the count analysis difficult when the field boundaries change. NatureScots maps of field boundaries are only given annually from RPID, so there can be discrepancies. 

AP1 – KC to look at updating maps during delivery review

When using 10 year average if they were field with no geese the take a long time to bring the numbers up.

KC asked the group if they thought it should be brought back down to a 5 year average. 

SB - all schemes should be run using the same average.

AM - five years can give good counts and gets value out of the reseed.  

Alistair Wylie (AW) – If it a 5 year average then more geese in one year can make a big difference.

LG - There are 200 days and the geese are counted on 18 of these days a year.

KC – The more intervention there is on the spreadsheet there is the risk of an error

Jamie Blackett (JB) - They can do thousands of pounds of damage in a day, SB and other farmers disagree, JB says the damage is done particularly in November and December when the grass is growing. 

KC – The farmers fields around WWT are used each year at the end of the year to review worst damage areas. 

SM – Can ineligible crops be taken out of the calculation

AM – Ineligible fields should be taken out of the averages; they shouldn’t be in the 10 year average.

MS – retaining the link to the IACS boundaries would be sensible.

AW - buffer is there to protect a feeding zone. You shouldn’t have scaring zones.

KC – Will explore what the maths of that might look like. if / when get a chance to revisit the scheme KC would like to get a statistician involved to confirm the best way to calculate goose counts.

AP2 – KC to get list of ineligible fields collated from historical claims

AM – most fields have their own eligibility; he doesn’t think 14 day counts work.  Always local knowledge brings in eligibility as well, a field can be pulled out and it’s a feeding field. 

SM - field 388 appears twice 

AP3 – KC to remove duplicate from final claim 

SG - it’s a big scheme and can easily start to unravel if too many changes are made. It can become messy so should be clear across the board.

KC - Explained the representation process to Anna Austin (AA) for this year her representation can be done via email.

5. Review of the Goose Policy Delivery Plan Recommendations

Discussion

1 – MS - RPID will require a carbon audit from next year. SB - Arla require one every four years.

2 – good

3 – SB - protected species need to be a higher tier.

AM - It was already agreed that the goose scheme would be a standalone scheme.

4 – AM - meeting delivery is what we are doing today. 

AA – agreed the time to discuss delivery is not when you already have proposals.

Tourism recoup some funds, there are more wildfowler than birdwatchers.

David Pickett (DP) – The Wildgoose Festival brings in tourists to see the geese.

KC – tried to find economic reports for the area but couldn’t find anything.  DP said The Stove collects data about income generated from the Wild Goose Festival 

LG - Isla sustainable goose management plan is due for renewal 2024 it might have figures it would be a good guide.

6 - no discussion

7 - good

8 - good

9 - good

10 – SM ask for a lift in the budget.  As the numbers increased the budget hasn’t.  SM to provide neighbours with Kate’s contact details.

A request was made for the Vye Wood Gee report to be made public and for further information on the National Goose Forum to be sourced.

JB - there’s nothing about Canada geese being a problem, especially at Loch Kindar.

AP4 – KC to provide scheme details to others when contacted.

AP5 – KC to find out about the V Woodgee report & find out when the next NGF meeting is due.

Summary of Group Response to the Policy Recommendations

1. Refreshment of goose policy objectives – The group is supportive of this recommendation. All businesses have undertaken carbon reporting.
2. Development of a national and international species plan – The group notes that there is no timescale given for the Solway
3. Public funding – the Solway group would like to see conflict species as a standalone concept and specific costs allocated to the needs of local businesses receiving funding as well as it being a “higher tier” in the ARP.
4. Develop future support for goose management – The group would request that management agreements should be clear and state the actions required.  See point 3 as well.
5. Goose Management Delivery – the group would be keen to have permission to review the MA in context of zonation, costs, prescriptions and eligibility of crops.  This should be Solway specific and move forward with net zero, promotion of other biodiversity and relevant to the input costs.
6. Management of Greylag geese – no comment
7. Air Safety – no comment
8. & 9 Stakeholder engagement – The group is supportive of this approach
9. Delivery Plan – The group would like to request an uplift in the budget in line with the increase in goose numbers in the area and a review of the inflationary costs to inputs
10. Integration with other wildlife approaches – no comment.

6. ANOB

SM – Would like to review historical claim unpaid for rape crops. 

It is noted that the previous meeting it was agreed and minuted that historical claims would not be paid, but the crop would be eligible for buffer in future years. 

1. Present: 

RPID - Quintin Donal (Chair)
NatureScot - Kate Campbell (Secretary), Stuart Graham (Operations Manager), Susan Hepburn (Minutes)
Farmer Representatives -  Alastair Martin, Jim Kirkland, Steven Murray, Alasdair Whylie, Stephen Brown, James Worthington
Other Organisations -  Dave Pickett (WWT), Colin Bartholomew (RSPB). Larry Griffin (EcoLG)

2. Review of goose last year 

LG – Significant uplift in numbers this year after the AI breakout with 18.5% young where normally averaging around 10/12%.  In 21/22 where it went as low as 27,000 this year has seen 34,000 which is only 11,000 short-of last peak count.  Doesn’t want to put the cart before the horse but could potentially see this being close our higher than this last peak.  October counts as expected. 

A discussion then followed around the table as to what Larry thought the impact of these increased numbers might bring in the coming few years. 

3. Goose Policy Update

QD – was expecting a copy of report by now but nothing yet.  QD & KC will keep group posted. 

4. Farm Claim Discussion – Local knowledge 

KC – Some are happy with the outcome so discussed below are only Scheme participants who had queries or wanted decision reviewed. 

5. Budget restrictions

Budget remains the same as last year at £179,000 however this means at current decision that the spend will be 104% which we can’t have as unlike other schemes there is no overspend and any underspend needs to be handed back. 

KC suggested 3 options:

1. Payments are reduced equally across the scheme members to accommodate 4% (overspend at the moment) or
2. The group look at redistributing Buffer/Feeding payments.
3. Or any other option to reallocate funds. 

The group collectively agreed that option one was the best and easiest. 

Action – KC to reduce all claims by overspend once returned agreements are in

SM – raised that his neighbours had been asking questions about the scheme and they would be interested in getting the counts data. KC said to pass on details, and she is happy give count information to whoever requests it.  It is not routinely given to people not communicating to NatureScot. 

AM – Raised the point that on fields that have been re-seeded which makes field ineligible due to requiring to scare, the 10-year average should be cut to not include that year(s) given the re-seeding will improve the field but for that year geese can’t be allowed on or there would be no grass. The rest of the group agreed.

Action - This is to be noted for further discussion after future policy is issued. 

6. Brassica Claim Eligibility 

SM & JK raised this as his reading of the eligible crops means that for 2 years of his fields should have been included. Also, that in previous very harsh or snowy winters his crop of Kale and Fodder have been decimated as it’s the only thing the geese can eat. 

SM & JK left the room to allow the group to discuss this issue in terms of their fields.

KC explained that the guidance was not particularly clear and that Kale and fodder where excluded from the last 2 years claims.  The parameters are that the group may decide to uphold the claim, and allow a back payment but the funds would have to come from this year’s budget further exceeding the 104%. 

Discussion was had around what constitutes Brassica and the only other example anyone knew of that Fodder beet was allowed on Isla for White Fronted geese which is not known to be damaged by Barnacles. Also, the fact that until SM brought it up none of the other group members were even aware of it. 

7. Outcome of discussion

The claim will be upheld for this winter at a buffer payment 

Retrospective payment for missing years will not be upheld

A decision on what is eligible needs to be made and written into agreements.

KC would be interested to know if Straight rape and Hybrid Fodder are eligible would any of the others consider growing it and to let her know if this is going to be trialled 

SM & JK brough back in the room to clarify some points and a little more discussion was had. 

SM Happy to accept The Buffer going forward and that no retrospective payment will be made. 

Action – KC to update the website and management agreement with the terms fodder rape and eligibility for buffer payment

He made the group aware that he had applied for a shooting license.  Discussion was had around the scheme rules not allowing noise disturbance in fields adjacent to Feeding.  Assessment of the license will be done with the Licensing Team at NatureScot. 

8. ANOB

Mapping – KC working with mapping team to density easier for assessing claims in fluctuating field boundaries.

Discussion was had about over reliance of the goose counts to verify claims.  KC reiterated that a number of aspects of the claims process could be reviewed once the new policy was launch by Scottish Government and all issues around current processes could be discussed and hopefully improved at that time. 

It was pointed out that JK’s map was an old on and KC confirmed this is because our system is only updated annually but that she always cross-references it with the IACs maps to verify the claims.

KC – thanked the group for anyone who is hosting the SRUC Cages for the year and explained that Prof Paul Hargreaves is looking at the soil in various locations where the Geese are.  KC is hoping to have him along to the next meeting to discuss his project work.