PATRICK Stirling-Aird (Letters, November 26) kindly provides us with percentages of occupation of breeding pairs of peregrine falcons in relation to land usage but I am not quite certain what point he is trying to make
Research has clearly shown that in the last century peregrines were decimated by the use of DDT on agricultural land. This not only poisoned many birds but also made a high proportion of the remainder infertile. This would appear to be by far the most significant reason for the dramatic decline in breeding pairs.
As a species recovers it is logical to assume that they will repopulate the areas most conducive to protective cover, food supply and breeding success. This would obviously be the farmland and deer forests where food sources are much more readily available than on windswept heather-covered grouse moors. I would suggest that as overall numbers increase the percentages will even themselves out though this should be looked at in comparison to percentages prior to the impact of DDT.
Another factor which now effects peregrine numbers is the massive increase in competing raptors which is being encouraged by raptor groups at the expense of other species. Man has significantly altered the balance of nature in which peregrines thrived even to the extent of having artificial feeding stations turning the birds into tourist attractions. As an example, most people will have noticed that buzzards are now an everyday sighting in any part of the country.
I am sure Mr Sirling-Aird did not intend to suggest that grouse moors were culpable for the smaller percentage described. He is no doubt aware that there are many factors effecting peregrine numbers.
David Stubley
22 Templeton Crescent,
Prestwick.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here