The ‘rival’ e-petition, the one which aims to protect driven grouse shooting, is half way through its six month existence. It must reach at least 100,000 signatures for respectability and to give any credence to the idea that driven grouse shooting is a remotely popular activity.
At the halfway stage it is floundering at under 25,000 signatures.
That’s a long way short of 50,000 signatures and even the 44,000 signatures that our e-petition had achieved by that time. Whereas we developed considerable momentum through months four and five of our e-petition, passing 100,000 signatures within five months, the pro-shooting e-petition has stuck obstinately in the middle 20,000s for weeks. It needs to get three times as many signatures in its second half of life than it did in its first half – and four times to surpass our total. It can obviously be done but will it be done?
I’m sure the grousers have a plan to get the necessary signatures – it would look so bad if they didn’t.
[registration_form]
They should have left it as ‘Stone Curlew’ perhaps?
For a change, it’s good news. Stephen Gethins, who is my husband’s MP, has now written to Helen Jones MP, Chair, Public Petitions Committee. She has been asked to investigate the apparent interference with the above petition and to address our wider concerns about what has happened. We received Mr Gethins’ letter and a copy of his letter to Ms Jones today. We are fairly impressed and hope that Ms Jones is also up to the task.
Question: Has there been much DGS this year? We are overrun with juvenile pheasants as usual, but there has been very little shooting outside my window so far. And no shot-at cats either.
Mark,. I don’t understand why this petition needs to get these signatures now. The aim of any petition is to get a debate. They have achieved that. The public won’t understand the subtlety of this. in effect the MPs managed to debate that one at the expense of the bigger picture.
You are assuming good faith and honest intentions there. The intent is not a debate, the intent is to win another battle in their self-declared culture war. A debate is superfluous to this, it is the ability to say they equaled or exceeded then number of signatures on the progressive petition. It is all about the optics. In fact they just need to come close, and then claim the petition to ban’s signatures were achieved through underhanded methods (a claim that was gifted to them by a troll who did try to interfere with petitions because their way of screening false candidates was not his way, too. Thanks you bastard wherever you are, may the fleas of a million goats infest your nethers and your arms grow too short to scratch).
It is all about the optics in a post-truth environment and the sooner we realize that then sooner we’ll stop losing.
Bob – I have a feeling that the supporters of driven grouse shooting won’t want to be reminded how badly-supported it has been (of course, they probably have a cunning plan).
I very much doubt they care. The evidence sessions happened, the debate happened and nothing happened.
Before they reach 100,000 you’ll be one of the celebrities on Strictly.
That is a point, Mark, how is your Gangham Style? You could do the turkey trot though?
I’m sorry, I don”t know enough about dancing to find some better puns
Dave – haha! I’ll not practice my waltz yet…
Not much incentive to sign it now though is there. They’ve already had their debate heard and recieved much support from friendly MPs.
However, although I’ve asked the question twice already, nobody has told me if that was legal or not.
I know Parliament makes the rules but, two opposing debates taking place at the same time? One of which has only achieved 25% of the signatures needed?
Certainly immoral.
“I have a cunning plan sir”
“Oh god! Go on then”
“Well sir, we could write to Victoria Atkins MP, she’s a barrister you know sir.”
“That would be the same Victoria Atkins who declined to reply to my two emails on the subject would it?”
“Er, yes sir”
“The same Victoria Atkins who sits on the APPG for shooting is it?”
“Errr, well, er yes sir”
“Baldrik, you are as useless as a ton of lead shot and twice as lethal!”
Paul – I can’t see any reason why it would be illegal.
We’ll stick with immoral then. How about a tad unsporting.
Can’t find a precedent for it though.
Paul – I’m not sure there is a precedent – but then how many other petitions have had a ‘just the opposite’ petition set up against them?
I couldn’t get a reply out of Victoria Atkins to 2 emails either. They were beautifully composed too. She had no problem in telling me why she wanted to bomb Syria but gets coy about shooting grouse. Something fishy going on?
No need for that petition to continue since the government showed their cards at the recent debate.
Free tickets for the establishment’s mates to carry on killing.
The fact that this inferior petition was allowed debate time, both at presentation of evidence and Parliamentary debate, it surely achieved an aim. My question to you Mark, were you surprised it was discussed in detail on both occasions? Should it have been mention with such a poor number of signatures? I understand the other side were allowed to attempt a defence against the petition to ban driven grouse shooting, but quoting their meagre effort in full and at length? Seemed a little puzzling to this poor soul.
Peter – I think it was probably part of the mechanism to ensure that Parliament doesn’t discuss the same thing over and over again. I’d guess, nothing more than that.
I’ve just been out and read (in the supermarket I won’t by it) the shooting times coverage of the debate, utterly awful but then it was always going to be. As to the pro petition it should be withdrawn its been debated.
I also recommend if your blood pressure needs a boost going to RPUK and reading the notes on brood meddling or as it should be known the plan to keep harriers off grouse moors.
Time to leave the petition and especially a poorly written response that was only started as a counter argument. Mark’s petition has added loads to the discussion and the appalling display display of self interest, by those individuals, actually only damaged their own argument. By all means give their petition a slow hand clap when it finally fizzles out but surely all energy needs to be focused on what to do with the huge support already amassed.
The other factor is that the pro grouse shooting was pushed very hard indeed by many of its supporting organisations and publications from the beginning – still uptake is poor. I suspect that many in the shooting fraternity are not best pleased with being dragged down by driven grouse shooting, it’s just that the field sports sector close ranks when any element of it is under attack that means there isn’t more outright condemnation by other shooters of what’s happening on grouse moors – or for that matter questions being raised as to what muirburn is doing to fish and fishing. A couple of MPs at the parliamentary mishearing brought up the old chestnut this is just the thin end of the wedge and it will be other forms of shooting and even angling for the chop next. Crap of course, they’ll all be in a weaker position if they align themselves with the mockery that is driven grouse shooting. Thirty years or so ago there were even occasional calls in the angling press that we fishers had to support fox hunting to stop the antis getting at our sport. Insane and I don’t think anyone would dare say that now, instead it would be recognised as the immoral and dangerous rubbish it is.
It seems not unreasonable to me to enquire of the administrators of the House of Commons Petitions Committee why a petition which has already been fully debated is set shown as being live.
But were it by some fluke to reach 100,000 you would, of course, be entitled to come back for an encore, Mark.
That seems a good point to me..what have we got to fear about them bringing on another debate – or even just keeping the topic live?…Our facts are strong and getting stronger with more science. The worst that can happen is that the subject goes away, so the killing can continue….
Has it been mailed out to the local conservative party groups yet? I suspect that is where it will be going, and NFU too, with a request they do a Trump and kick the greenies. We are in a really vicious part of the social cycle, which is doing a real number on empathy, right now so that wouldn’t surprise me.
How many signatures did your first attempt at a petition get Mark? Surely even you can remember that this was your third attempt and even then you needed help from animal extremists to get across the 100,000. Doesn’t even matter anyway as the debate has already been had, I am getting a little worried about you as I’m sure you were there do you not remember?
Adrian – you’ve signed the protect grouse shooting petition have you? I can see why you might not have many friends though. Thank you for your first comment here.
You conveniently ignore that Mark’s third petition generated a lot of comment and publicity. It’s not unreasonable to suggest that the meagre “success” of the pro-grouse shooting petition was attained by riding on the coat-tails of Mark’s efforts.
On the contrary you have convenitly ignored that perhaps interest has waned in signing a petition that has already been debated (or did you miss that) and no further action is to be taken in either banning or regulating driven grouse shooting? Therefore no further need for a petition to protect driven grouse shooting?
Conservationist Adrian, not animal rights extremists. Please don’t be so rude.
Maybe if it does get to 100,000 we can arrange a debate and get all the people on our side to hijack the debate – like they did to ours! Perhaps that is how Parliament works and we were not aware!
Not sure the debate got hijacked, just that more grouse shooting supporters with hard facts turned up
Hard facts? Claiming Hen Harriers do better on grouse moors when the figures prove that they do not? Quoting Viscount Ridley’s wholly unsubstantiated figures regarding breeding waders (disowned by the BTO)? Ignoring the real weaknesses in the claim that the Berwyn study proves waders disappear solely due to the absence of gamekeepers? How about explaining the fact that so many raptors are absent from grouse moors or that a disproportionate number of tagged birds vanish in their vicinity? How do you wish away the shocking written evidence presented by former pro-shooting wildlife crime officer (a Mr Stewart as I recall)? Or that of the Sheffield Bird Group and many others who testify to the malignant influence of driven grouse shooting on raptor numbers? Conservationists have played the talking to shooting interests game for decades and their reward has been no cessation (and arguably an increase in) illegal persecution. Let’s just remember which side is breaking the law here.
You seem to fail to mention that yours was only successful ( regarding numbers) on its third attempt!
But, you lost. You were humiliated and now you will continue to whinge about it in the hope your non thought out plan will work
Andrew – how fun to have A Fox follow A Bird in commenting here. Made my day.
In what way did we lose? And when is the final whistle anyway?
Will it be A Realperson next?
Humiliation? The dominating emotion should have been one of shame on the part of the Tory claque that turned up at a debate without any evident attempt to digest the written evidence in the petition’s favour or the very serious questions it raised. Shame that they ignored evidence of widespread persecution, that numbers Hen Harriers (and other raptors) are ruthlessly and illegally suppressed on grouse moors and that so many speakers were happy to wilfully mislead the public on several issues (e.g. falsely claiming that Hen Harriers do better on grouse moors). Shame too that what, by any reasonable expectation, should have been a balanced introduction was heavily biased and that so many speakers showed such undemocratic contempt both for the petitioner and the 120,000+ who signed the petition. It confirmed beyond refutation that the narrow, wealthy elite behind driven grouse shooting are happy to see protected birds illegally killed since the evidence demonstrated that supporting the status quo is untenable as it will inevitably suppress the number of raptors on grouse moors to an entirely unacceptably low level (if any survive at all). Why else are Hen Harriers so prominent by their absence on so many of England’s grouse moors? Why too are Peregrines absent when they thrive nearby? Why does it seem that the only areas where Red Kites are struggling to expand are areas where grouse moors dominate? Shame on all those who, knowingly or through ignorance, were blind to the criminal reality.
Yes I have signed the protect grouse moors petition, I’ve got about as many friends here as you had during the debate! Just to remind you I have found the stats on your 2 earlier attempts at petitions that you seem to have forgotten about. First attempt got you 22,399 signatures must have been the lack of celebrity backing on that one. Attempt 2 got you 33,655 signatures but you did mention a couple of celebrities on that one. But the one where you got megastars Chris Packham and Bill Oddie to name check your petition, oh and not to forget the League Against Cruel Sports (well known animal extremists) involved made the 100,000, what conclusions can we draw from that then? Leave you to work that one out for yourselves!!
A Bird – those figures and more can be found on this site https://markavery.info/grouse-shooting-hen-harriers/ – they’ve always been there so no-one forgets the rise in popularity of the idea of banning driven grouse shooting.
Think I just caught a whiff of fear!
Glad you still have the figures available perhaps you should compare like for like then instead of distorting facts. Popular only when the animal extremists and celebrities get involved it seems and yes I am a real person it may surprise you to find! We could draw parallels between Avery (sic) and someone interested in birds could we not?
It’s good you highlight the extremists Adrian, I too have no time for thugs like those either, you know the type I mean, it’s just normal for them to set barbaric traps, lay poison baits, and shoot specially protected, rare birds of prey. Yeah, those extremists you mention are certainly serial criminals and have to hide their activities from the public and all decent citizens.
Dave any criminals convicted of any of those offences within the shooting industry would certainly lose their livelihoods and be shunned by the rest of the community, doesn’t seem to work like that on the pro ban side though does it? The prominent figures are quite prepared to associate with 3 time convicted criminals and even pose for photos! Amazing what some people do for support from what are obviously celebrity led keyboard warriors!!
All that shunning must explain why there are so many successful hen harrier nests on driven grouse moors then. And those eight golden eagles that mysteriously didn’t disappear. I also hear that red kites in the northeast are doing really really well, and the sky above the Peak District is thick with peregrines and goshawks – how absolutely splendid!
Not exactly flourishing on RSPCA moors either though are they? Golden eagles seem to be doing rather better though as latest figures show.
Adrian – which RSPCA moors are they then?
Apologies RSPB getting my charities confused but I’m sure even you knew what I meant. Although the RSPCA could be branching out if they are no longer able to prosecute, but that’s a whole other can of worms.
Adrian – that’s OK, I can see you are confused. Last year a third of English Hen Harrier nests were on the3 tiny proportion of English upland owned by RSPB whereas no Hen Harriers were on the really rather sizeable area managed as driven grouse moors. But the point is that there really aren’t many hen Harriers anywhere in England and there could be c300 pairs. They are missing because driven grouse shooting depends on getting rid of raptors like Hen Harriers and that is a fact that won’t go away and can only be ignored by decisionmakers for so long. Time is running out.
Slightly confused over a couple of charities granted, but not as confused as you appear to be. Time is running out for whom? I know you did look like you had nodded off a couple of times during the debate but surely even you cannot have failed to notice the overwhelming support for taking no further action against driven grouse shooting, against the complete dearth of support for any of your proposals. After gaining the support of over 100,000 people prepared to click a petition online from the comfort of their armchair after being exhorted to by “celebrity” non BBC employees and failing to get anywhere in Parliament, (that’s where laws are changed in case you are confused) where do you go from here? Time is indeed running out.
Adrian – well don’t you worry about it then.
Mark – To be brutally honest after watching the debate I’m not worried in the slightest
I don’t see that changing under the current government and I don’t see that changing for quite some time either.