The fact that the parliamentary debate on banning driven grouse shooting turned into a farce was perhaps inevitable… but now it is time to stop the lies. The petition to ban driven grouse shooting was proposed by Wild Justice (CEO Bob Elliot, co-founders and directors Chris Packham, Ruth Tingay, and formerly Mark Avery), which takes legal cases and advocates for a better deal for wildlife. The petition garnered over 100,000 signatures and was debated on Jun 30 this year at Westminster Hall.
MPs Rishi Sunak (Con, Richmondshire and Northallerton), Kevin Hollinrake (Con, Thirsk and Malton), and Sam Rushworth (Lab, Bishop Auckland) and more all lined up to support a ‘field sport’ that brings environmental destruction and wildlife crime to the UK’s uplands. Only one MP, Olivia Blake (Lab, Sheffield Hallam) was there to support the petition. There were no Green Party MPs available.
Intensive management of our uplands
Moorland is burned and drained on grouse shooting estates by gamekeepers to provide a heather monoculture for the grouse. The burning contributes to flood risk and damage to carbon stores in the underlying peatland. The smoke pollution also affects members of the public in nearby villages, towns and cities.
Raptors, including hen harriers, are illegally killed or ‘disappear’ on or near grouse moors which are managed by gamekeepers. Stoats, foxes, badgers are either shot or caught in cruel traps. Carrion are targeted. Medicated grit is also left out in open trays on moors to prevent disease in grouse, meaning it can enter other species and our food chain.
All this so that, from the start of the shooting season in August (the glorious twelfth as it is more commonly known) and for around £7,000 a day, a person can dress up in plus fours, wait in a line, gun in hand, on the moors, for a beater to herd red grouse towards them to shoot – for fun. Approximately 500,000 birds are killed on average each year (estates don’t have to keep a tally of how many have been shot). Over the course of five months, until December 10th when the season ends, some are eaten by those who shot them, others end up in restaurants.
Is it any wonder that conservationists and the public have had enough?
The ban driven grouse shooting debate
Despite growing public concern, Sunak, Hollinrake and Rushworth et al trotted out familiar untruths.
One claim, such as the UK being home to 75% of the world’s heather moorland, has been debunked by Dr Steve Carver at the University of Leeds. Still, MPs (except for Blake) persisted in this assertion, and even the government repeated it in response to the petition. Sunak also stated that heather moorland is “rarer than rainforest”. It is a rather ridiculous comparison to make – rainforests are natural habitats, whereas heather moorland is an artificially-maintained habitat.
Incredible economic assertions
Hollinrake was worried about people not being able to find seasonal work as a picker-upper or loader at the weekends if grouse shooting were banned. Rushworth worried about rural schools and pubs closing, although the pro-grouse shooting Countryside Alliance doesn’t even cite grouse shooting as a reason for rural pubs being in decline.
Blake wryly pointed out that though the contribution from grouse shooting is around £52mn (it is hard to get proper figures and Chris Packham has long argued for an independent economic assessment) it doesn’t get handed down to the likes of beaters. Blake then delivered the best line of the debate by telling the beaters that if she were them, she’d be unionising. At around £20-40 a day for a beater or £60 for a loader, it’s badly paid. Go onto discussion forums and you’ll see: some people are clear they don’t do it for the pay.
Raptor persecution and controlled burning
Despite a recent RSPB report (released only days before the debate) detailing the persecution of hen harriers near or on grouse shooting estates, or the many other reports MPs could access on this issue, including Ruth Tingay’s excellent blog on raptor crime, MP after MP reiterated that gamekeepers are the hen harriers’ best ally.
One of the frustrations about raptor crime, as Bob Elliot pointed out to me, is that no representatives have come forward from grouse shooting organisations with ideas of how to prevent criminal activity –presumably because it is not good for such an expensive hobby to be seen to be ‘underpinned’ by wildlife crime.
MPs also insisted that controlled burning prevents wildfires. But 50% of wildfires are caused by controlled fires. Blake countered with accounts of increased air pollution and flooding in her constituencies, which are downstream from grouse shooting moors. Air pollution has been so harmful that the Leader of Sheffield Council, Tom Hunt, has called for a ban on the practice.
Natural England’s consultation on burning ended in May, looking at a move to ban it on peat at a depth of over 30cm. Its results are still awaited, but this would deal a hefty blow to the grouse shooting industry, as Hollinrake readily acknowledged. Perhaps this is one reason opposition MPs were pushing back so hard on burning.
Replacing grouse moors and intensive management
When Hollinrake asked what could replace grouse shooting to manage upland biodiversity, Blake cited work already being done bybodies such as the RSPB, and the National Trust, where former shooting estates are being managed successfully as reserves in their own right. One such example is RSPB Geltsdale which is being transformed from a sheep farm and former grouse shooting estate into a haven for wildlife.
Blake also wished to see the House introduce a new ‘community right-to-buy’ for nature, citing the work of Bob Berzins in Sheffield, who is driving a campaign with communities to take poorly-managed land into collective ownership, and similar work by Sheffield and Rotherham Wildlife Trust. This led to a muted response from MPs. Perhaps there’s a fear that land ownership will pass from the hands of the few (1%) into the hands of the many, shattering the feudal pattern in the uplands.
Nature reserves such asLangholm and Knepp are also good examples of this. Knepp has become a rewilding success story at the hands of Charlie Burrell and Isabella Tree, and Langholm, a “knackered grouse moor” – which the local community bought after Buccleuch Estate put it up for sale – is going from strength to strength in its conservation efforts. They even employ former gamekeepers.
Options under review
Daniel Zeichner, Defra Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs, representing the government during the debate, responded by reiterating the government’s position that there wouldn’t be a ban, but adding that “we keep options under review”. He acknowledged the extent of wildlife crime, particularly raptor persecution, and its association with grouse shooting estates. But then he stated:
“There are strong penalties in place for offences committed against birds of prey and other wildlife, and anyone found guilty of such offences should feel the full force of the law. Penalties can include an unlimited fine and/or a six-month custodial sentence.”
In fact, there is no deterrent. Only one custodial sentence has been handed down for raptor persecution. In 2014, a gamekeeper was given a four-month custodial sentence for clubbing a goshawk to death and other offences. Since then, other gamekeepers have received only small fines and/or short community service orders.
Zeichner also heaped love on the government’s new Hen Harrier Task Force, “which is using technology such as drones and strategic partnerships to detect, deter and disrupt offenders and is targeting hotspot areas and suspected hen harrier persecution”.
However, it has yet to prove itself as it has not released any figures on criminal cases. Even if some cases may still be ongoing, this would not prevent disclosure of historical crimes of over a year old.
A ban versus licensing
It might seem that, on a superficial level, the debate was a win for the pro-driven-grouse-shooting groups. But the number of MPs lining up to persuade the government not to ban driven grouse shooting suggests they are feeling worried.
Scotland has already licensed grouse shooting, although without much success, (unlike its successful ban on snares, as campaigned for by OneKind and others). Wild Justice views licensing as a licence to kill, and Elliot told me, “you can’t have a grouse moor without wildlife crime”, and that gamekeepers are “pest controllers”. The RSPB is, for now, supporting licensing in England.
What else can be done?
Here are some things you can do now to help further the campaign to ban driven grouse shooting:
- Contact your MP to express your concerns about driven grouse shooting
- Support Wild Justice by signing up for their newsletter to find out more
- Support Hen Harrier Action to protect uplands wildlife
- Check Revive Coalition in Scotland – a group of organisations that have come together with different expertise in grouse moor management to talk about how grouse estates can best be managed and revived
