"The charity said it believed efforts to eradicate non-native American mink had helped to encourage the return of the rare animals"
So....managing one species can help to support another then...? I wonder if there is a perception shift amongst the general public that if the RSPB undertake this kind of activity = 'good', if a shooter undertakes this kind of activity = 'bad'...?
Not meant to be a snide dig at the RSPB at all, but a genuine point for discussion/consideration; perception is reality for most people, and if the good/bad issue does exist - and it may not - why should that be? Is it about marketing, positioning, etc? How many of us, when we are chatting about our pastime with non-shooters, extoll the issue of conservation being an intrinsic part of what we do? And if we do, do we do enough of it, or land it in the right way?
Food for thought.....