Over 109,000

Mark 19 Comments

100,000The scores have changed quite a lot since the last update!

We are over 109,000 signatures – and our e-petition closes at midnight in five weeks’ time!

We expect that the Petitions Committee will consider our petition at a meeting on 6 September, and are very hopeful that we will be given a debate. We don’t know when that will be but late September is the earliest and that would be pretty brisk.

Anyway, I’m pleased to say that after some friendly chats over the weekend we have agreed with the RSPB to work closely together to ensure MPs are properly briefed on the facts of driven grouse shooting, and its ecological impacts, ahead of the expected and long-awaited Westminster debate.  Of course, the RSPB will  be briefing MPs on its preferred solution to the issue which is a Government administered licensing approach for all driven grouse shooting, with appropriate penalties and standards of management clearly set out.

I’ll look forward to that joint working and my aim is certainly to get the facts about driven grouse shooting and its impacts into Hansard where they will stay for ever, and to try to ensure that not too many myths about driven grouse shooting are promoted by the other side. It will be good to be working with RSPB and LACS and others on this work.

Here’s a list of all the constituencies over 300 signatures with a smattering of other constituencies:

  • Calder Valley 705
  • High Peak  501
  • Ross, Skye and Lochaber  465
  • Bristol West  434
  • Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey  432
  • Derbyshire Dales 408
  • Skipton and Ripon 402
  • Brighton, Pavilion 392
  • Sheffield Central  386
  • Westmorland and Lonsdale  374
  • Isle of Wight  373
  • Argyll and Bute  372
  • Sheffield Hallam 368
  • Edinburgh North and Leith 357
  • Stroud 354
  • Lancaster and Fleetwood  351
  • Thirsk and Malton  343
  • North Norfolk 342
  • Ribble Valley 333
  • Central Devon 324
  • Suffolk Coastal 323
  • Torridge and West Devon 323
  • Cambridge  320
  • Wells  319
  • York Central 317
  • Norwich South  317
  • Totnes  311
  • Scarborough and Whitby  311
  • St. Ives 308
  • Dumfries and Galloway 305
  • West Dorset  303
  • Penrith and The Border 302
  • Ceredigion 271 – highest scoring Welsh constituency
  • Holborn & St Pancras 234 – highest scoring London constituency
  • Corby 187 – that’s where I live
  • Belfast South  115 – highest scoring Northern Ireland constituency
  • Rhondda 65 – lowest scoring Welsh constituency
  • Motherwell and Wishaw 59 – lowest scoring Scottish and SNP constituency
  • Edmonton 33 – lowest scoring English and Labour constituency
  • Newry and Armagh 22 – lowest scoring UK constituency

 

[registration_form]

19 Replies to “Over 109,000”

  1. Hi Mark, so pleased to see that you will be working closely with the RSPB, I do think this is vital. As you rightly point out it is so important to get the true facts about the devastating effects that driven grouse shooting has on the land and its wildlife, recorded and made known to MPs and a wide audience. This is best done together with the RSPB. What the final out come on banning or controlling driven grouse shooting may be a bit further along the road after the debate. In other words one step at a time.

    1. Ian – thank you. Yes. And indeed before the Petitions Committee meets on 6 September – that is an earlier and crucial date too.

    3. More info from their petition:

      “Hear is a link to the countryside alienate website for more information on how grouse moors benefit the environment and the facts behind it”

      The countryside alienate website!! Classic 😉

      1. One thing that has really surprised me during this whole process is the pro-driven grouse shooting side’s inability to field anything approaching a first XI. I can only put that down to hubris; they haven’t had face any serious opposition before, and didn’t expect it this time. A splendid example is You Forgot The Birds; lot’s of money thrown at it but with absolutely no quality control on the output. It’s rather telling, don’t you think, when a campaign’s opposition is explicitly recommending that their supporters visit your website? So here it is again, enjoy;

        http://www.youforgotthebirds.com/

        Now, driven grouse shooting is undoubtedly hard to defend, but even the poorest positions can be argued well. That, surely, from such a well resourced activity, has to come, but no real sign of it yet.

  3. While I’m normally one for compromise, an all out ban would still seem the simplest solution. I just can’t see how licensing would be effective.
    Surely we would have all the same problems as we have now. You would still have to catch the criminals ‘at it’. You would still have the same problems trying to prosecute them. And they would still have the protection of their mates in the upper echelons.
    Would love to know your take on this aspect.

    Having said that, it’s great that the RSPB have come on board. Have always said that the clout of 1.1 million members has to be used.
    I suppose their is still no chance of them telling their members what’s going on?

    Don’t forget the frogs.

    1. Paul – I still favour a ban too. But working together on briefing MPs as to the problems and making sure that not too many lies are told by MPs briefed by the other side, and exposing those lies if theya re said, all seem good things to do.

      Although it is a long time until a general election, and Labour is in disarray, this is the time to start putting the evidence to Labour MPs (and everyone else) in the hope that they will come to see this as an issue for their manifesto.

      And there are a lot of SNP MPs in Westminster these days of course – many of whom come form constituencies in which dead eagles, dead harriers, dead kites and dead Peregrines have been found.

      Lots to do – and don’t worry, I’ve been on the phone almost since we passed 100,000 talking to people about the way forward.

  4. I can see that either route (banning or licencing) will have its practical and especially legal complications and in the end I’m always in favour of what works. So I’m very glad to see Mark continuing to work with RSPB, lobbying together on this – as long as we get one or other effective outcome in the end I’ll be delighted.

    Sadly I suspect there will have to be a lot more missing satellite tagged birds before the politicians finally get on board with us. This will be a long journey, but if we do get our debate at least it means the train is moving at last.

  6. All of a sudden the grouse moors don’t seem to be untouchable after all – they are sweating and by god making some ludicrous mistakes and just digging themselves deeper into a hole. I hope licensing conditions (I prefer a ban, but anything is progress) are very stringent. One requirement should be the need for grouse moors above urban areas, lowland farms etc implement natural flood alleviation projects – riparian tree planting, coarse woody debris in rivers etc. How can they justify NOT doing this when it has become accepted that these initiatives work and any delay in their implementation will mean the next floods will have been harder than they had to be?

  7. Good comments, Les. At this point in proceedings it’s probably worth reminding ourselves how we got this far; while my primary interest has always been about ending raptor persecution, I think we must always keep in mind the full spectrum of concerns that have motivated people to sign the petition. In particular, I would strongly suggest, representatives from Calder Valley need a seat at any negotiations.

    1. How about the debate considering all public subsidies removed from grouse moors, then any public funding made available being based on independently evaluated criteria, such as levels of public benefit (flood allieviation, water quality, carbon sequestration etc.) Hen Harrier carrying capacity etc.?

      After all, shouldn’t be an issue – which one of their spin bowlers informed us that it was gamekeepers who looked after Hen Harriers? mmmmh …..

  9. An aside; Natalie Bennett, I’m sure the red colouration to Brighton, Pavilion in the list was an oversight! Fully appreciating the Green Party support!

    1. Jim – thanks for pointing it out – corrected. And there was another one too – also corrected.

      The task of producing this simple list is more time-consuming than many might think – and mistakes do creep in. And the way one adds colour is not 100% user-friendly either. But thanks for the correction – feel free any time.

  10. I think your doing very well finding suitable shades of green, Mark (Green Party, SDLP, Sinn Fein)!

Comments are closed.