A new petition has been launched in Scotland – calling for licensing of game estates.
The name on the petition is the leading light of the Scottish Raptor Study Groups, the inestimable Logan Steele, and this e-petition does put large emphasis on the impacts of gamebird shooting, of any species of game, on birds of prey. There is less emphasis on the wider environmental impacts of grouse shooting, pheasant shooting etc.
Just as Scotland has vicarious liability and we do not have it in England, it is quite possible that Scotland will embark on licensing of game shooting before the rest of the UK – the political climate for it is much warmer. And that would be a very good thing – if done well (which is always the caveat) – because it might do some good and if not it will hasten the end of one form of gamebird shooting, the worst form of gamebird shooting, driven grouse shooting.
I am told that Scottish signatures are much more welcome than those from other parts of the United (?) Kingdom on this petition as the Scottish parliament will slightly discount signatures from elsewhere. And the Scottish system runs petitions for just six weeks so it is a sprint as opposed to our marathon. If I lived in Scotland I would certainly sign this petition and I would urge all readers of this blog based in Scotland to do the same.
I wonder how the shooting community will react to this petition? Will they welcome it as a perfectly equitable approach to wildlife crime from which only a few bad apples have anything to fear? Will they see it as a piece of extra regulation which is the price they have to pay for their massive failure of self-regulation? I’m guessing the answer to both questions is no, but we will see.
By the way, signatures from right across the UK are welcome on this e-petition to ban driven grouse shooting which is whizzing along towards 100,000 signatures.
PS yet another e-petition which is worth signing is this one which has over 80,000 signatures and over 40,000 from the UK.
[registration_form]
I think even for other people from other parts of the kingdom it may be worth signing.
Your comments might be read even if the vote effect is less.
If you have a valid comment to make I would say to go for it.
Alex – thank you. It might be. But that isn’t what I was told by those very close to this e-petition.
Large license fees, and large fines for breaking license restrictions, it could be the way to go. It would certainly be a good way to cut the cops and PF out of the loop and avoid their well known bias towards the Laird. Sure it would not leave people with criminal records, but it could be targeted very effectively at their bank accounts where it really hurts and as a pre-condition of obtaining the licence require them to disclose who owns the land. No more Cayman Isles or Channel Isles shells, named owners or no licence.
The second petition you gave a link to seems to have closed for further signatures. It’s just a got a big headline saying “We did it” and nowhere to click on to.
Yes definitely a step forward, could make having a driven grouse moor too much hassle which if they can’t comply with reasonable restrictions is their tough luck. Would still like to see a petition to ban driven grouse shooting in Scotland too. Grouse moors are inherently un-ecological and while curbing some of their excesses would be a big step, they are still in their essence and philosophy not fit to exist in the 21st century. Well done and thanks to those involved for starting this petition.
Its “you are banned…. unless”. One more step along the road.
As so many parts of Scotland rely on income from tourism, a large part of which is Wildlife related, I think they should listen to the views of everyone, no matter which part of the world they’re from.
Am I a complete sceptic by worrying that the Scottish e-petition is likely to undermine your e-petition? I can envisage a scenario whereby a Scottish licensing system is established and the English grouse shooters lobby to extend that model to England, as a compromise to avoid a ban on driven grouse shooting. Quite honestly I don’t see a licensing system being significantly more effective in protecting raptors than the current legislation, the proper enforcement of which is the real problem. Why don’t the Scots (of which I am one) go all out for a complete ban to be implemented in Scotland as well as England? That’s what I would favour, and in my view the only way to rid the UK of the scourge of grouse shooting and all the attendant environmental harm it causes. If it’s good enough for England…
Jack Snipe – the day English grouse shooters lobby for licensing will never come. That’s pretty sure. The Scottish petition has moved rather steadily to 1200 signatures so far. So why haven’t you launched a petition for an all-out ban? Only you Scots can answer that.
I’ve already asked, but received no reply as yet. It seems to me that the proper decision would have been to support the same principles as yourself, rather than muddy the waters. I’m very disappointed, and can’t help suspect you might be being very generous for the sake of maintaining unity. I’m not 100% sure I explained properly my theory that the English grouse shooters would opt for a fudge, if they feared the alternative was going to be an outright ban. Up to now I couldn’t understand why the SOC seemed less than wholly enthusiastic about promoting your petition, and in fact putting potential signatories off by saying it didn’t apply to Scotland. The 1200 signatures so far show what could have been achieved should your petition have been better supported from us up north. I’ve been doing my best personally to encourage people to vote.
The Scottish petition and the rationale behind it are far worse than I originally feared. It answers many unanswered questions as to why RSPB, and in Scotland the SOC, seemed less than enthusiastic about Mark’s petition to ban driven grouse shooting. This all becomes clear on reading the Scottish Wildlife Trust’s “50 for the Future” guest blog by Stuart Housden, Director in Scotland of the RSPB. Rather than take the bold step of committing full support to Mark’s e-petition, the organisations involved appear to have chosen to play to the RSPB tune. As a long-term enthusiastic supporter of two of the main bodies involved, namely the Scottish Raptor Study Group and the Scottish Ornithologists’ Club, it saddens me greatly that they have chosen this path, especially apparently without consulting their wider membership. I assume that at least as a matter of courtesy, the RSPB discussed this with Mark before embarking upon this alternative initiative? The idea of course is almost as old as the hills, and has been discussed quite widely in the past but never acted upon.
Personally I stuck my neck out last year and attempted to engage SOC and RSPB in Scotland more actively in Mark Avery’s campaign, but I can see now why my attempts were met with such resistance, even downright hostility. Reading Stuart Housden’s guest blog sent a shiver down my spine, and as I read through it, it became more apparent that the proposed licensing system, although not without some appeal, was like a death sentence for the campaign to ban driven grouse shooting. If introduced, I believe it will greatly reinforce the hand of the shooting set (although even they might not realise this initially), and we can forget the concerns we have about the unnecessary cruelty involved in game shooting. The management practices of grouse moors, abhorrent as they are, will continue, the licensing system giving nothing really but respectability to this disgusting and environmentally damaging human behaviour. I suspect that a period of negotiation would lead to a watering down of the proposals put forward by RSPB et al. Any hope of ending driven grouse shooting will vanish, and raptors continue to be persecuted, at least for some considerable period into the future. How can we be so naive? I can only presume that the RSPB is protecting its Royal Charter and seeking favour with the Establishment, by being at best neutral, or at worst supportive, concerning the future of game shooting in the UK. Civilisation will just have to wait a while longer, possibly a century or more.
Jack Snipe – I think it much more likely that the RSPB believes that a licensing system could do some good and might be achievable in Scotland than that the RSPB has some baser motive. As I have said before, it is a disagreement between friends on the best way forward. That doesn’t mean that I think the RSPB is right but I don’t attack their motives. If a good licensing system, for all gamebird shooting, were introduced in Scotland that would be a step forward. I do share your fears that we would be much more likely to get a poor licensing system than a good one (if we get one at all).
Why aren’t the RSPB at least being consistent and proposing a licensing system for England & Wales, then? In a sense I can agree that a “good” licensing system would be a step forward, but unfortunately it would create an even greater stalemate than we have at present, and still be wide open to abuse. I think you’re being modest, Mark, and that your proposal is by far the more constructive and plausible. However, I wouldn’t want you to fall out with friends over it. I already have and it’s most unpleasant. I find it difficult to believe SRSG, RSPB and SOC have properly thought through their proposal.