Do you think that driven grouse shooting should be banned?
Apparently, two-thirds of you do:
If we break that down into those who would vote Labour in preference to Conservative then 87% are in favour of a ban of driven grouse shooting:
And if we select those that would vote Conservative in preference to Labour then only 25% support a ban:
It’s hardly surprising that left-leaning and right-leaning voters think differently about an industry that makes its money out of very rich people and where the question uses the word ‘ban’.
The Conservatives don’t look as though they will ever do anything about the ills of driven grouse shooting so they are a bit of a lost cause on this subject, but if you were a Labour politician you might pause and wonder quite how many of your voters you would please and how many you would upset if you put ‘Ban driven grouse shooting’ in your election manifesto. Mightn’t you? Really?
Of course, if you want to ban driven grouse shooting then you should add your name to over 20,000 others on this e-petition on the government website.
Data come from 0ver 700 responses to a readers’ poll on this website carried out over a three week period in December 2014.
[registration_form]
I think to a fair degree, Mark, the issue of grouse shooting and the destruction it causes to the nature of our uplands, is the manifestation of a wider problem. That problem is the ever widening gap between the very rich and the rest of the community. This is happening world wide but especially in this country where top executives are paying themselves exorbitant sums while others have to exist on standard salaries etc. This increasing inbalance is meaning that a lot of old family owned and run estates are now being bought up by this recently formed class of super rich and converted into major shooting businesses with scant, if any regard, for nature. This is certainly happening here in the Chilterns where a local estate has recently lost much of is wildlife interest due to change of ownership and conversion to a major pheasant shooting business.
This creation of a super rich class is also meaning that a relatively few individuals have vested interests and influence in society far out of proportion to their numbers
This must be stopped and reversed for the benefit of society as a whole. Can you see the politicians addressing this issue? I have to say “no” to that question and this is one of the reasons why they are increasingly being held in such low regard.
So is grouse shooting and nature conservation linked to politics? It most certainly is but in a decent world it should not be.
“being bought up”
The favourable treatment of agricultural holdings under Inheritance Tax exerts a malign influence
In response Alan Parfitts comment about politicians doing so little and being held in low regard…this is a bit sweeping isnt it? The Green Party will act on this and is held in high regard by those who are concerned by these things. With a doubling of membership, regularly overtaking the Lib dems in surveys and hopes to gain 10 or more MPs next May, the Greens could sw at this. The Greens and other small parties have told Labour that the price of any support agreement with them would be abandonment of the £100 Gn trident white elephant. This is something many Labour supporters have also been calling for.
If more people stood with the greens instead of carping from the sidelines we could make a difference much sooner!
David, I will be voting Green at the next election but with the best will in the world, whilst the Greens will win Caroline Lucas’ seat, they only have a very outside chance of picking up a second seat e.g. Norwich South. In FPTP, politics needs to fragment to the point where 25% of the vote begins to win seats before the Greens would have the potential to win more – and the same broadly applies to UKIP, as things stand at the moment. The Lib Dems are different because their vote has historically been less evenly spread.
Not sure if I’m a sufficiently skilled psephologist (or political strategist) to say anything meaningful, but 25% of conservative voters prepared to ban driven grouse shooting was a bit of a surprise and looks like a solid foundation on which to try and build the case as widely as possible.
The framework in which the politics of land management currently operate is surely a major impediment to change. Alan’s “super rich” operate at a global level, our governments have little or no individual traction or constituency beyond a national level, and our electoral system puts disproportionate influence in a relatively small number of marginal constituencies. “Environment”, never mind “nature” is low down on the agendas of most voters and hence parties, if surveys are any guide. Hence the Nature & Wellbeing Act (England) and “Vote For Bob” campaigns, Rally For Nature &c. If we don’t get nature into the mix with most, preferably all, parties likely to be represented, and in power, in the UK and devolved governments then little will change.
In the case of coalition, compromise by the junior parties is necessarily greater – and one only has to look at the experience of the Green Party in Ireland (Republic) to see how that plays out when the major partner has no “buy-in” to that agenda. How it worked for the Green Party of Scotland I never heard; though its coalition withe SNP led to a majority SNP government at the next election! The Green Party in Northern Ireland has one MLA, I think, so litte influence. I’ve heard nothing in UK media of the Green Party of England & Wales in the Welsh Assembly. (There ae 3 Green parties on the UK).
One would have thought that tackling our increasing wealth imbalance and the inequalities associated with it was at the core of the Labour Party raison d’etre. As you say above, the problem is that national Governments seem unable to create safeguards around taxation that enable their people to be protected in a globalised economy. Our deficit is caused by reduced tax take, as much as it is caused by public spending; hardly surprising when business in the UK is driven by multinationals and not home grown industries. Building a taxation system that works within a global economy is something to which Labour should be absolutely committed. We must stop the way of thinking that multinationals are doing us a favour by doing business in our country; their executives and accountants are laughing at us.
The breadth of support for ending an elite and destructive practice few people indulge in is unsurprising. I write from my perspective as a rural child of subsistence farmers now advising politicians and property sector clients on positively developing suitable sites (doing good, not just doing less harm).
With my farmer’s son hat on, the question arises in my mind of how to do good in the upland areas used for driven grouse killing, when current investment in low yield land is by those keen to profit from murdering defenceless birds.
I agree that all bloodsports should be illegal. It’s just that 87% of urban Labour voters should not determine what country folk can or can’t do to provide for their families.
A vote for a Green Party candidate is the only reasonable choice, not just on animal welfare, but any ecological issue you care to consider. Not without due consideration of the consequences, intended or otherwise.
Dan – welcome! and thank you for your comment.
Is there a breakdown for Scotland, where I live? Given that the SNP have by far the biggest and growing support in Scotland, as well as being the 3rd Largest Party in the UK. Let us remember that it is a Conservative and Liberal Democrat Coalition Government in Westminster, not just Conservative. They are both in this together! ” The Conservatives don’t look as though they will ever do anything about the ills of driven grouse shooting so they are a bit of a lost cause on this subject,The Conservatives don’t look as though they will ever do anything about the ills of driven grouse shooting so they are a bit of a lost cause on this subject”. Wait until May and we shall see Labour, and the Con-Dems all obliterated in Scotland. The SNP have already taken the first steps to end the Tax advantages given to the Shooting Estates by the Tories. Labour also supported the same Tax advantages by not repealing them, despite having a massive majority throughout their tenure. So we in Scotland cannot depend on the Westminster Parties to do anything meaningful to put an end to Raptor persecution meted out on the Grouse muirs of Scotland. Believe me there is much more to come on this matter from the SNP Scottish Government. We shall then see if England follows suit. Have they, for instance removed the Tax Advantages, paid for by the rest of us UK taxpayers, in England?
You pay out £5 billion a year to manicure your gardens most of which is against supporting nature and then expect every one owning larger tracts of land to know about how to manage for nature. Yes there are those who don’t care but how many of you really care given your garden is a desert!! Due to chemicals in beef and sheep Islay’s Chough are now being fed to keep a viable population alive! £400 million out of the £5 billion spent on bird food and all you really have to do is manage your garden properly . How much land could that buy to enhance nature!
Mm, I wonder if you’re overegging the data a bit in concluding that two-thirds of us, your readers, think that driven grouse shooting should be banned.
Rather, two thirds of the 654 self-selecting responses that answered this particular question supported your ban. (I’m not sure whether 54 abstentions out of 708 would be regarded as scientifically significant).
That in turn is out of your total audience this year of 135,053 unique readers.
Regardless of the merits of the substantive argument – and my views are well known on that – I suggest some perspective is called for if you’re seriously minded to extrapolate from your questionnaire.
Incidentally, I get the impression that a significant number of your contributors are planning to vote Green. That came across too a few months ago when you posted a blog expressing your disappointment in the Labour Party. I fear that those who are hoping for a substantial increase in Green representation are going to be disappointed, at least on the basis of the latest independent forecast: http://electionforecast.co.uk/
Lazywell – well, you may be in danger of under-egging it. Of course these results are only of a relatively small number of people but they are the people who responded.
And the interesting thing was that there was a distinct pulse of anti-RSPB, pro-BASC, pro-grouse shooting, quite pro-UKIP, and interestingly for you, rather anti-GWCT votes that all came in in one shortish period. I wonder what was going on there?
Happy New Year!