AAAHHHROOOOOO! Dem Wolves!

[Wood wasp]

I didn't really read it in detail but I would say lambs seem to be a high percentage of identifiable prey. Of course it depends who was doing the counting also, was it a SNH study? Bear in mind it was a trial too, if they roll out cameras to more nests then they will obviously get more data.

 

"A camera study set up in the Lorn area of Argyll to determine what the eagles were eating found that the birds brought eight or nine lambs back to the nest, and just seven fish.

Nearly 7,000 images were taken of the nest during the breeding season earlier this year using motion sensitive cameras.

The study, carried out under a Scottish Natural Heritage licence, recorded 117 prey items being taken to the nest between January and July, nearly 70 of which were unidentifiable.

A total of 21 mammals were identified, as well as 14 birds, seven fish and a number of lambs."

[Bren.]

Sorry, I should have explained, but these articles really hack me off.

I am more than willing to accept the number of lambs brought back to the nest, but, and it's a big but, in the context of the article, where those lambs hunted' or scavenged? Has infant mortality been raised amongst sheep in the areas where Sea Eagles are nesting?

Perhaps the two most pertinent questions, however, are who paid for the study and how much compensation is being paid to local sheep farmers for losses to Sea Eagles.

I know there is a compensation scheme in place and find it hard to believe that this does not impact on reported losses.

This is (as reported) just plain bad science.

[Wood wasp]

Yes there's obviously an incentive to exaggerate losses if a compen scheme in place.