First bus is in the garage

It seemed back before Christmas that e-petitions about grouse shooting were a bit like buses – you don’t even see one for ages and then three come along together. Well, the first bus, Gavin Gamble’s e-petition is now parked in the garage.

That means that the focus passes to the Jane Griggs pro-shooting e-petition which seems to have broken down by the side of the road and Ed Hutchings’s e-petition which can hardly be said to have benefitted very much from RSPB support so far. Ed Hutchings’s e-petition has not quite managed to catch up with the pro-shooting petition yet – after three and a half months!  But the RSPB is going to promote, or at least mention, Ed Hutchings’s e-petition in the spring Nature’s Home magazine so then we’ll see a surge. Won’t we?

Three e-petitions - how do they compare?

PositionSignaturesSigns in last weekDays left
Gavin GambleBan48,142c65000
Jane GriggsPro15,100hardly any53
Ed HutchingsLicense14,970150? Sorry - I didn't really notice!75

There is plenty of time for these two vehicles to be mended, serviced and to pick up many passengers but until they do then it is clear that despite a clear choice between three options (ban, license, leave alone) the strongest support is for the ‘extreme’ position of banning this unsustainable land use practice which is underpinned by wildlife crime. Hardly surprising is it?




8 Replies to “First bus is in the garage”

  1. To be honest, I do find it hardly surprising that the ban petition will most likely get the most signatures compared to the pro driven grouse shooting petition. Petitions are surely instruments used to attempt to instigate change, who is going to sign a petition to change nothing? Clearly not many people.
    What is perhaps surprising or perhaps not is that the ban bus appears to have lost 74,900 ish passengers since September 2016. Careless in the extreme wouldn’t you say. This despite there being plenty of ‘celebrity’ passengers and assorted hangers on still aboard this particular band wagon.
    The question needs to be asked what did happen to all those passengers? Have they found a new band wagon. Discarded the old one due to disillusionment and a distinct lack of interest in the destination, from the people who matter, after the last spectacularly unsuccessful arrival at the terminus.
    Comparing the ban petition to the pro petition is misleading, surely from a statistical perspective you need to compare like for like. Maybe you should compare one ban petition with another ban petition. Here you go I’ve done it for you. September 2016 total of 123,077 signatures against April 2018 total of 48,173 signatures – what can we learn from this analysis? I’ll leave it to the mathematicians amongst you.

    Oh and I still haven’t seen a comment regarding the cull figures for deer and other predator control released by the RSPB for measures carried out on their reserves. Look forward to it.

    1. Adrian – yes, you’re repeating yourself aren’t you? Aren’t you? Aren’t you?

      No doubt you are expecting the pro-shooting petition to burst forward and pass its predecessor’s feeble total of 25,000 ? That’s like for like, I believe. Well it has 50 days to go but will need about 6000 days, 850 weeks, 200 months, or 17 years to reach its previous total.

      I have no idea what the RSPB has said about deer but I’m sure it’s very sensible. Are you complaining about it? Are they killing too much wildlife or too little? Questioners like you usually find it difficult to make up their minds on that question.

    2. And you need to compare like for like, instead of clumsily attempting to justify the activity of the tweed disease by implying that the wholesale slaughter undertaken by these criminals is no different from targeted, last resort, science based predator control, carried out for conservation reasons, as opposed to maximising the number of targets for a bunch of degenerates to kill for their own amusement.

  2. The RSPB need to put their collective shoulder to the wheel and push their (Ed’s) petition for licensing. They should enumerate the licence conditions in their publicity so that people can see it is NOT relying on prosecutions – which are problematic with so many dishonest owners about – but on grouse moors fulfilling their potential (for biodiversity and water capacity/purity) to meet the licence conditions, which is far easier to monitor remotely! In fact, effective monitoring has to be part of the licence conditions!

    If the RSPB do not really push hard, they will end up with meddled egg on their faces. They have the clout to get this information out to the general public.

    Or, it could be that the general public and the RSPB membership are simply ahead of the organisation on this? Now, that would be something…

    1. Keith – RSPB Council ought to have realised that if they push the licensing agenda then they will either get a lot of signatures (which helps their cause) or not a get a lot of signatures (which will show that their position is unpopular). either way the result informs future decisions. If the RSPB continues not to promote their licensing option then they can pretend that everyone is right behind them but have no evidence that it is true, and there are 123,077 and now 48,173 voices that say ‘Ban’.

      Oh yes, and anyone knowing the RSPB will look at where the ‘ban’ signatures come from and realise they contain many RSPB heartland areas.

  3. Ah, there you are Mark, didn’t get much of a response last time so I thought I had better try again. Any thoughts on the missing 74,000?
    At the risk of repeating myself, did you not read my post properly I’m not expecting anything from the pro shooting petition for the reason outlined above.
    I’m sure such a well informed man as yourself knows full well the deer cull numbers on the RSPB reserves and the reasons behind them. They appear to have killed quite a few foxes as well, I personally have no qualms with wildlife management for the correct reasons and nor it seems do the RSPB, not sure about their Vice President though. Could just be it doesn’t fit in with your anti shooting agenda / nature finding it own balance etc. etc. therefore you have chosen to ignore it?

    1. Adrian – if you paid more attention to what I’ve written here you’d know that I do have qualms about wildlife management, but not anything like strong enough to rule it out as an option. A read of Fighting for Birds (published 2012), especially Chapter 5, ‘Is it ever right to be nasty to birds?’ will help you understand my position (although I’m sure you really understand it anyway) and I recommend p70 in that chapter for a fairly succinct resume of the RSPB position and some words you will find amusing (perhaps) about what nonsense people talk at the Game Fair. If you have no qualms (look it up) about killing things then that explains quite a lot.

      I’m not expecting anything from the pro-shooting petition either (although I might be wrong) because driven grouse shooting isn’t at all popular.

Comments are closed.