Today Animal Aid is calling for public subsidies to be withdrawn from millionaire grouse shooters.
In its new report on grouse shooting, Calling the Shots, the UK’s largest animal rights group sets out its case. It contains extensive reference to the Walshaw Moor affair as well as to persecution of birds of prey and the climate change impacts of grouse moor management.
A few days ago, when I wrote that the RSPB was leaving a vacuum into which others would step on the issue of bird of prey persecution and grouse moor management I really didn’t know this report was even coming, yet alone imminent.
It seems that there is something of an alliance being formed between animal rights campaigners, those opposed to shooting in any form, conservationists, environmentalists and local residents; as all are losing patience with the way that driven grouse shooting is practised in the UK.
Grouse moor managers may begin to wish that they had stirred themselves to clean up their act a little before the world lost patience with them.
[registration_form]
Sick and tired of Raptor persecution , anything to help stop this cruelty is to be championed !
Do any of these estates operate in profit?
I mean do they put any money back into the economy or are they a tax sink for their rich owners?
I agree with you Peter, something has to be done as the RSPB seem to be forsaking our raptors for some reason.
Chrissie, something does have to be done but the latter part is a fairly cheap comment. I can imagine some of their passionate and dedicated staff involved in investigations, monitoring, protection and policy a little miffed with that view. They get abuse from those who hate raptors as single minded and unhelpful comments from those who should be on the same page. There have been some concrete cases of persecution of raptors made public recently by their dedicated staff and I see few others doing a great deal about it to the same extent. Maybe the sceptics should have a go at trying to secure a conviction and then realise how difficult, time and cash expensive it is.
I would also like to say as someone who isn’t the biggest fan of the rspb that the one time I needed to report a case of theft of young Little Owls from a nest the rspb were EXCELLENT, I couldn’t fault the method of reporting, the information taken and the fact someone from the organisation got the a member of the wildlife crime team at my local police force to contact and meet me and discuss what was going to happen going forward.
But also I’m not aware of any organisation nor police force in the UK that spends as much time investigating and securing prosecutions against wildlife crime, for example what’s Aniaml Aid track record?
Gongfarmer,
Well put but I think you are a little hard on Chrissie. The question is, have RSPB really done everything they could about trying to bring pressure to bear to reduce the levels of persecution in the uplands? I think the answer has to be no. There are two SPAs for Hen Harriers in England and neither have breeding harriers. One is also an SPA for Peregrine and there appears to be fewer breeding birds than at the time of classification. In Scotland, their have been all sorts of antics around harriers and SPAs over the last ten years or so. Why have RSPB not complained to Europe about this so that pressure could be brought upon the UK Government to pull its finger out and start doing something about it? We cannot expect RSPB to do the job of Government but they can help prod those involved.
I always fight shy of organisations such as animal aid, on the grounds that they can make comments that are not always backed up by evidence. Even in this report there are large sections that are written in a style that turns me off, but it has brought to light the amount of public money involved in supporting sporting rather than farming ventures and perhaps this is what is now needed. The larger and more traditional NGOs do seem to be very reticent nowadays about speaking out.
SIDE BY SIDE
I clicked on the link and downloaded the Animal Aid Report.
I paged through the report to page 13 and found a lovely picture of a relaxed gamekeeper leaning on his stick with his shotgun (broken) under his other arm – surveying the moor; but best of all – he’s got his dog – a (male?) German Shorthaired Pointer (GSP) – absolutely gorgeous – alert and ready – as always – for some action.
I had two working GSPs and with one of them (Gus) indulged competitively in Field Trials (indeed not very far away from AA’s HQ in Tonbridge Kent )
Absolutely fabulous gundogs to work!
Thank you AA !
Oh and “Who goes shooting?”
The report say:
‘Guns’ are investment bankers, stockbrokers, landowners and members of the peerage. There is more than a sprinkling of royalty and those related to royalty. They are people who enjoy each other’s company for the purpose of pecuniary as well as social advancement.
Classic classist crap from AA – in much the same vein as Mark’s recent rant on Richard Benyon – you guys just can’t help yourself can you?
Or – what should be more important to you – your cause!
But it seems that it is not!
Trimbush
I personally have no problem with wealthy people enjoying themselves lawfully. I am not filled with envy, anger or any other strong emotion at the sight of the well-to-do enjoying themselves at polo matches or regattas or whatever – good luck to them, I say. However, I do have a problem with people, wealthy or otherwise, poisoning, trapping, shooting or otherwise persecuting legally protected species of raptor in the furtherance of their own selfish interests.
Questions of class aside, where do you stand on the killing of Hen Harriers?
Hi Jonathan
http://www.countryside-alliance.org/ca/campaigns-shooting/the-rspb-and-hen-harriers
Today I write as an holistic “Systems Biologist”
My stance – no surprise – is similar to the CA view above
I think as I have stated elsewhere on this blog – Raptors – including Hen Harriers are one of Nature’s finest – an E-Type of the bird world – and must not be shot poisoned nest destroyed eggs stolen etc etc.
The RSPB successfully uses eg the Hen Harrier (project) as a fund-raising revenue source
It appears that nobody is good enough to look after the species – even the RSPB – with its 125 millions pounds turnover – fails. It can’t be trying or its people aren’t up to the job!
Telling the whole truth usually helps – so I suggest the RSPB starts doing so – instead of relying on its marketing department
As I’ve said before – the UK can afford a few HH – shooting them ‘on-sight’ should be deemed to be anti-Nature and verboten.
Running a shoot with a couple of HH should be a status symbol – but the RSPB wouldn’t understand that – it’s own signal failure generates both bitterness and class hatred!
Simple!
So what’s the RSPB etc etc doing? Asking for more money?
Trimbush,
Have you ever received public money in the form of single farm, stewardship or HLS payments?
Hi Ho Bertie !!
When I first acquired my current farm – and indeed my first Jersey cow which I hand-milked – some thirty plus years ago – I filled in the appropriate forms and remember eventually getting back a few pounds (Hill Subsidy) for ONE (COWS).
After about 3 years (and breeding a few bulls) I decided it (the small donation) wasn’t worth the trouble – so I haven’t received any govt input for as many years – I do not earn my living from farming – I am probably best described as a hobby farmer in this respect – this actually means that my income subsidises the beasts! My choice!
So to answer your question
Single farm – Hill Subs Allnce briefly
Stewardship – NONE
HLS – NONE
The above statement is consistent with what I’ve referred to here before
“Running a shoot with a couple of HH should be a status symbol”
What does this mean?
Hi Minna Landroth
“Running a shoot with a couple of HH should be a status symbol”
Just imagine a large estate with a regular moorland shooting enterprise – attempting to provide good sport for shooting / paying clients.
I’m told (by them that know) that there are not many breeding Hen Harriers around and all the NGOs (Non Govt Orgns – not National Gamekeepers) are “up in arms” about the possibility of the shoot bumping off the Hen Harriers – interfering with their business – well everybody would wouldn’t they?
Just imagine that Hen Harriers were actively encouraged to breed in such areas – just imagine an ornithological organisation (not the bird-brained RSPB) struck up a relationship with the Land Owner – and they agreed a plan to make it work
And as each group of grouse shooters were placed in their respective butts they were again reminded “not to shoot Percy or Isabel” the local Hen Harriers – and should that fatality occur the gameshot would indeed be in bad books!
This approach might change the current dilemma – where having HHs actually indicates that this shoot is of the utmost excellence and that’s why we charge you more!
How’s that for a scenario?
Just a thought!
(I hope this reply goes to Trimbush’s reply to my original question although I’m having to use the Reply button at the bottom of my own question.)
OK, thanks. I’ll tell you first that I think recreational shooting is not just insane, it’s particularly gross. To get one’s kicks from blasting life out of another creature is an abomination. Yuck. Just so you don’t need to wonder where I stand 🙂
Why does one need the right to shoot grouse to be in favour of protecting birds of prey? The logic’s weird. Just a thought.
But I get your idea that as there are people who get their kicks from killing, then it’d be better to engage them into conservation in whatever weird ways we can.
Fair enough.
On another thought, isn’t it baffling how people who want animals to gain at least basic rights, like the ones we’ve given to ourselves, are subject to anger, ridicule, disdain etc, not to mention expectations of perfectness, but those who see and use animals as possessables are somehow automatically more in the right, and endlessly excused?
Classist!? Did it not work with fox hunting? Why shouldn’t it work with this lot?
Evidence is useful but perception is more powerful.
Politics is rarely founded in evidence.
What worked with fox hunting was a £1 million bribe by the Political Animal Lobby and 700+ hours of Parliamentary ‘debate’ when it bribed the corrupt and eminently corruptible Labour Party – some things never change!
Ignorance jealousy and prejudice shouldn’t really win over truth!
I’ve come to this rather late but Trimbush just because some of us are a little pink in our views does not mean that we are exhibiting the politics of envy, would that it were so. However grouse shooting has a case to answer in terms of some very poor managent practices by some which results in coloured domestic water, flooding downstream of some moors, potential and probably actual massive CO2 emissions from habitats that should be absorbing due to oxidation and drainage, a lack of plant biodiversity due to overburning and a complete or near absence of Hen Harriers, breeding Peregrines, Golden Eagles and Short-eared Owls. There should be upwards of 300 pairs of harriers on English moors yet there are none hardly the remit of a few bad apples this implies something much more wholesale and organised. Grouse shooting has a case to answer and apart from the bleatings of a few saying they are innocent there is little real action from them. I’m sure RSPB would rather spend money elsewhere that having to combat this widespread criminality on behalf of the avian heritage of us all. All you do by not acknowledging this is damage your own credibility, from a red,anti monachist atheist who has in the past shot grouse.
I write this comment as someone who is unhappy and deeply suspicious of Defra’s involvement in the Walshaw Moor case, gravely concerned at the systematic persecution of raptors on the UK’s moorlands and implacably opposed to the burning of blanket bog.
I suppose I should welcome this report, however like Bob Philpott I also fight shy of organisations like Animal Aid, an organisation I have found on numerous occasions to be extremely economical with the truth and on many occasions down right misleading. I genuinely find it hard to trust anything that they say.
A classic example of Animal Aid propaganda is the article on veal production which contains misleading statements such as: ‘…the calves of dairy cows are reared in the UK as ‘rose’ or ‘white’ veal.’ Or snide statements such as: ‘Coughing could be heard’. Yes that’s because cows cough, a coughing cow doesn’t automatically imply that it has some sort of respiratory ailment as the result of ill-keeping.
I also agree with Trimbush; the report is laced with ‘Classic classist crap…’
I can’t help but feel the involvement of AA on this issue could well be counter-productive, which is shame as much of the reports content regarding the public subsidies paid to grouse moors is accurate. Had this information been produced by the rspb or TWT then perhaps more members of the public would be inclined to sit up and take it more notice.
I have to confess that such is my dislike and mistrust of animal rights extremists, that part of me would rather maintain the status quo of the UK’s moorlands than align myself with the likes the AA etc. I’m other reasonably minded conservationists will feel the same.
What a shame then that the larger, ‘middle ground’ NGO’s appear to have gone quiet on the Hen Harrier issue, although all some credit must be given to the RSPB for taking up the Walshaw Moor case.
I was looking on facebook recently at some charming posts from “stop the cull” giving out personal details of farmers in Somerset including phone numbers along with the message ‘don’t ring these people up in the small hours – they really won’t like it’
Do you really want to ally yourself with people like this Mark?
Giles – I am not allying myself with people like that, nor with you, nor with anyone else whose views are mentioned or highlighted on this blog.
oh that’s good! 🙂
I used to take a “live and let live” attitude to driven grouse shooting. There was obviously something deeply unpleasant about the prospect of people blasting away at frightened birds conveniently driven towards them, not for food but simply for the joy killing; but I hoped that such an apparently mediaeval practice would gradually die out in time.
However, the more I learn about the extent of year-round killing of all predators required to produce such unnaturally high grouse populations, the more I feel that it is time for the rest of society to say “Enough – this unedifying and very damaging practice should stop”. The almost complete removal of the top layer(s) of the food chains (both bird and mammalian predators) on these moors, and the damage done to vegetation and soil by repeated burning should not be tolerated in the 21st century.
I haven’t had time to read the Animal Aid paper yet, so I can’t comment on it. However, I think it is time for all wildlife NGOs and all people who are concerned about the restoration of badly damaged ecosystems to openly, and strongly, oppose the practise (you can hardly call it a “sport”) of driven grouse shooting. If this upsets a few ministers and other politicians, then they should think hard about whether they can really justify their pastime. I don’t think we will get anywhere by trying to be too polite and understanding. It certainly won’t bring back Hen Harriers to their rightful homes on British moorland.
I also dislike the persecution of raptors very much indeed. In fact my work has been focused on this very issue at times. However, one question which I think gets insufficient attention is “how could we manage the moorlands if privately funded shoots are banned or severely restricted?” The wading bird populations seem to rely on the predator control and while burning has many faults, it does stop the moors from becoming woodlands. Funding is short these days and getting shorter so I am not sure that the moors would remain as moors for another 50 years if they did not recieve the attention of private wealthy shooting enthusiasts. Do we want a managed change to upland woodland? Losing the plover and curlew? I don’t know the answer yet but this needs to be thought through before babies are thrown out with bathwater.
Oh dear,how could anyone press the dislike button on comment by Chrissie Harper,if my memory correct she set up petition for Vicarious Liability in England so that at least we were on a par with Scotland.
If that is correct surely the rspb could have given the petition absolute backing.
Well rspb have more important issues now,Hen Harriers well down the list as every small animal on the planet may bring in a couple of subs and somehow lots of rspb members cannot see the beauty in Hen Harriers,the public strangely see things in similar vein to most shooters.If it has a crooked hawk style beak then hate it.
Just wonder what part of my above comment picks up the dislikes.
Surely not the heroine Chrissie part.
RSPB part,well judging by their efforts to help Hen Harriers and only in respect of that.Their efforts do not add up to much,a flyer in mag about supporting Chrissie’s petition would have cost a miniscule amount compared to recent T V campaign.
They do say the truth hurts.
Minna – 2 comments
Since you object to killing animals so much I assume you must be vegan – otherwise you vicariously participate in killing animals in far less acceptable ways than shooting.
With rights come complimentary responsibilities. Animals do not have or show responsibilities therefore they cannot have rights. That is why we cannot give animals rights – but we can and must show responsibility in how we treat them.
Shooting – in the main, and leaving aside a small number of irresponsible idiots, who should be brought to book – shows great responsibility towards both quarry and other species. You only have to look at the numbers of waders on managed grouse moors compared to unmanaged moors, including those run by RSPB, to see the positive effects.
Michael – welcome and thank you for your comment. So, do babies have responsibilities? Do they have rights? Just asking…