The RSPB should go and...

Yes, I can guess how some readers would complete that headline. 'Boil their heids' would be one of the more polite answers.

But it's a serious question. I was talking to the RSPB's conservation director Mark Avery - he's the one who appears at the CLA Game Fair each year, taking the inevitable flak from shooters and keepers. During the conversation, he asked me "What exactly do you want the RSPB to do?"

I was stumped, and promised to get back to him on that one. Which is why I'm asking readers of this blog to help me out.

So what do we want the RSPB to do? Realistically.

They're not going to go away. They will continue to direct their appeals at well intentioned but ill informed members of the public. And let's face it, they're not all bad by a long way. Much of their work is well directed and hugely beneficial to wildlife and the countryside.

My initial 'wish list' contains more negatives than positives: Stop using shooters and keepers as bogeymen in your fundraising and publicity; stop focusing on 'iconic' birds of prey as if nothing else matters; etc.

On its own reserves, the RSPB can run things how it likes. But in the 'real' world outside that bubble, birds must take second place to food production, commerce, transport, and the rest. The British Isles could be filled with hen harriers and all sorts of wonderful wildlife if we just cleared off all the humans, bulldozed the houses, and turned the whole place into a huge nature reserve.

Of course that won't happen, but there's much more we can do to reduce our impact on the natural world, and live alongside wildlife. And paradoxically, shooters do much better in this area than 99% of the population. I suppose what I really want is for the RSPB to acknowledge that, and stop portraying us as the enemy. Longer term, I'd like them to embrace 'harvesting nature's bounty' as an intrinsic part of conservation.

So, starting with that as a strategic objective, what do I tell Mr Avery?

Can individual shoots work more closely with RSPB officers, for the benefit of wildlife generally? (And would keepers trust them enough to allow them on the place?)

Perhaps we'd like a 'good keeper scheme' where the RSPB acknowledges the work done by individuals to improve the wildlife generally on their shoot. Heaven forbid, though, that they should see this as some sort of 'licensing' system by the back door, where they 'inspect' shoots to see that they conform to some standard.

Or do we just want them to clear off and mind their own business? Trouble with that one is, if it's got wings and a beak, they reckon it is their business.

Over to you... comments and ideas please.