Paul Bateman is Founder and Principal Instructor of the Independent Wildlife Crime Investigators & Trainers Association. He is a former National Park Ranger, has completed the National Police Wildlife Crime Officers Course and has particular practical experience relating to crimes against badgers and realistic mock wildlife-crime scenes. He is also Chair and Wildlife Crime Lead of the East Yorkshire Badger Protection Group. For further information about IWCITA, email iwcitauk@gmail.com.
Wildlife Crime and the First Few Minutes
Why a calm first response can protect wildlife and preserve vital information
A walker finds a dead bird of prey beside a moorland track. Someone notices fresh damage around a badger sett. A photographer comes across a suspicious trap, or a nest watcher sees signs of deliberate disturbance. In each case, concern is entirely justified. The difficulty is deciding what to do next.
The first instinct may be to move closer, touch something, release an animal, challenge a person nearby or share photographs online. Those reactions are understandable, but they can create danger, disturb wildlife and remove the context that later helps the police or another competent authority understand what has happened. The first few minutes matter, and sometimes restraint is the most useful action a member of the public can take.
This is one reason I established the Independent Wildlife Crime Investigators & Trainers Association, or IWCITA, in March 2026. It is a young, grassroots membership, networking and training association. Its purpose is not to turn people into private investigators. It is to help people recognise when something may require reporting, respond safely, preserve what they have found and understand where their own role ends.
A gap between concern and confident action
Many people who spend time outdoors develop sharp observational skills. Birders, mammal surveyors, countryside workers, photographers, volunteers and local residents often know when something does not look right. Yet wildlife crime can be confusing. An unusual activity is not automatically unlawful, and legality may depend on licences, circumstances and information unavailable to the observer.
That uncertainty can lead to two opposite problems. A person may walk away from something significant because they are unsure whom to contact, or they may become so convinced that a crime has occurred that observation gives way to interpretation. Good reporting requires a disciplined distinction between what was directly seen or heard and what the observer believes it might mean.
A useful report might record the date, time, precise location, distance from the subject, weather, people or vehicles present and any changes noticed. Photographs taken lawfully from a safe position may help, particularly when the original files are retained. Notes made at the time are more valuable than a reconstructed account written days later. None of this requires confrontation, trespass or handling an object.
Protect preserve observe report
Our practical sessions use a simple four-part framework: protect, preserve, observe and report. Protect means putting personal safety and immediate animal welfare first without creating further risk. Preserve means avoiding unnecessary contact with a carcass, trap, substance, tool mark or disturbed area. Observe means recording facts carefully and neutrally. Report means passing the information promptly to the police or other appropriate authority and following their advice.
The framework sounds straightforward, but realistic scenarios show how quickly judgement becomes difficult. Should an apparently trapped animal be released? Is it safe to approach an unknown substance near a carcass? Could a closer photograph destroy a footprint or move vegetation? Should a suspected offender be challenged? What happens if a social-media post reveals a protected nest or sett location before the authorities arrive?
There is rarely value in adding a second problem to the first. Unknown substances should not be handled. A person should not put themselves at risk or enter land unlawfully. Sensitive locations should not be publicised. If an animal is alive and suffering, the situation should be explained clearly when the incident is reported so that appropriate welfare advice can be given. The exact response belongs with those who have the legal powers, competence and responsibility to make it.
The digital scene
Modern wildlife watching produces an enormous amount of digital information. Phones, trail cameras and shared mapping tools can establish time and place, document change and support an accurate account. They can also cause harm when material is cropped, repeatedly edited, stripped of context or posted publicly before it has been assessed.
The urge to raise awareness immediately can be powerful. However, an identifiable image may disclose the position of a vulnerable nest, sett or roost. Public allegations can spread before facts are checked. A post may also alert someone connected with the incident. Keeping the original file, making a secure note of the location and reporting through the proper channel will often achieve more than an instant online reaction.
Police Primacy is not a slogan
IWCITA fully recognises Police Primacy. We have no law-enforcement powers and do not pretend otherwise. We do not seek access to police systems, live investigations or confidential intelligence. Our members and trainees must not represent themselves as police officers, statutory investigators or forensic specialists unless they separately hold that role and are acting within it.
This boundary is central to responsible training. It protects investigations, the public and the credibility of everyone involved. IWCITA exists to strengthen awareness and the quality of initial reporting, not to compete with the police, statutory agencies or established specialist organisations. Where competent authorities become involved, their directions, powers and investigative responsibilities take precedence.
Learning through realistic decisions
My own background includes work as a National Park Ranger, completion of the National Police Wildlife Crime Officers Course and practical experience relating particularly to crimes against badgers. I also serve as Chair and Wildlife Crime Lead of the East Yorkshire Badger Protection Group. These experiences have shown me that a lecture alone does not prepare people for the uncertainty and emotional pressure of a real encounter.
For that reason, I design realistic mock wildlife-crime scenes. Participants might encounter simulated interference at a badger sett, a suspected poisoning, a snare or trap, or disturbance at a protected site. The task is not to solve a crime. It is to decide where to stand, what not to touch, what to record, how to describe uncertainty and when to stop. The most important learning often comes from discussing why an apparently helpful action could have unintended consequences.
A practical contribution from a young association
IWCITA is still at an early stage, and it should be judged by the quality and honesty of what it delivers rather than by ambitious claims. We are building a network of people with relevant experience, developing regional representation and exploring constructive relationships with organisations whose expertise complements our own. We want training to be practical, accessible and clear about its limitations.
Wildlife crime will not be addressed by awareness training alone. Effective laws, properly resourced enforcement, specialist knowledge, political will and public confidence all matter. But the person who first notices something suspicious can still influence what follows. A safer, calmer and more accurate first response may protect an animal, preserve useful information and give the authorities a better starting point.
That is a modest role, but it is a worthwhile one. If more people know how to protect, preserve, observe and report – and understand when not to intervene – concern for wildlife can be turned into responsible action rather than avoidable harm.