We have an abundance of 'rare' species

Some years back, when at Roxburgh Mains, I mentioned that only common birds came to the bird table. Try feeding nyger seed, a friend suggested. I did and soon afterwards the tiny siskins and the beautiful goldfinches appeared.

Since we moved to Upper Huntlywood, in November, the more familiar birds, such as sparrows, chaffinches, blue tits and great tits soon showed up, followed by siskins and an occasional greenfinch – a bird common in my youth, but which we rarely see now.

Co-incidentally, that’s the opposite to what has happened with its golden cousin, which is increasing and which we never saw then.

In 1889, George Muirhead, a prominent ornithologist wrote a two volume account of local birdlife called ‘The birds of Berwickshire’. It is beautifully illustrated by pen and ink drawings of local scenes and birds of the time by John Blair, whose water colours now command a considerable premium in the art market.

Muirhead wrote of how some of the birds which were common in Berwickshire in the 1820s, when he started to take an interest, were now rare and others which were seldom seen were by 1880, were more numerous.

He gives no opinion on why this was, but without doubt the enormous amount of land brought into cultivation from moorland would have been a primary cause.

The changes in sport from a stroll with a gun to massive operations of almost military organisation would be another.

Obviously, the hand of man, whether by accident or design bore considerable responsibility. Maybe there were other reasons, too, which Mother Nature kept secret then and still does today.

Muirhead’s experience is exactly the same as my own over a similar period of 60 years. Maybe changes have been clouded by my living at 920 feet then 320 feet and now 600 feet above sea level. Nevertheless, it seems that, over a long period, some species flourish, while others declined.

Organisations purporting to protect our wildlife and fauna have made millions from this fact. Omitting to mention those that have increased, they consistently remind subscribers, voters and politicians that some birds are becoming rare and action is required.

The finger is invariably pointed at farmers. Often the ‘rare’ birds are, on my own farm, fairly plentiful.

The yellow hammer is one of these. Despite being on most lists of endangered species, it is the most common hedgerow bird at Roxburgh Mains.

I wonder if some of the other birds purportedly in decline, are actually scarce or maybe it is just that the surveys are not comprehensive or countrywide.

Before the referendum on whether we should leave or remain in the EU, promises were made by those advocating Brexit that agricultural support would remain substantially unchanged, at least until 2020.

More recently, when Brexit became a fact, there has been humming and hawing with hints of competition from the NHS etc. Suggestions have been made that support should be directed away from food production and towards the ‘environment’.

The cash allocated specifically for rural projects should be split between farmers and various well funded and politically aware organisations with a self-appointed remit to preserve the countryside and save it from agricultural exploitation.

When an election is a distant prospect, politicians become fey and promises are forgotten. No doubt Mrs May’s decision to hold a snap General Election in a few short weeks and their need for our support sooner than expected, changes the dynamic.

Obviously, the negotiation of trade deals remains paramount – although I wonder if those on the EU side will, in fact, lower their expectations if Mrs May gets an increased majority at Westminster. Maybe the hardness of Brexit will be for them to decide.

Second to a good trade deal for farmers is the extent and direction of farm support. If this is to be directed away from food production and towards environmental improvement, with farmers required to do the business, then they must have a strong say in how it should be done.

The time to argue for this is now. So many regulations which are at present supposed to improve the environment – such as the three-crop rule, hedge cutting restrictions and banning drainage on fallow land – make no sense and do nothing whatsoever for the countryside.

Too often, regulations are so abstruse that I often wonder who makes them and who negotiated for them on behalf of UK farmers. They do little but increase our cost structure and hand price advantage to overseas competition.

We must argue, too, that any work which farmers are required to do must be properly funded. Too often, past schemes were only part grant aided, with the farmer required to pick up the balance.

Often, the quid pro quo for getting assistance for something he wanted was to do something which he didn’t and which he deemed unnecessary.

What is decided in the next few years, after agricultural policy is returned to the UK for the first time in 45 years, will no doubt shape farming and the countryside for the foreseeable future and must be sustainable.

Politicians must be reminded that something may be good for the environment, but if it is not profitable then it is not sustainable. The time to firm up their commitment is short – one month to be exact.