23 Replies to “Wild Justice wins latest legal challenge – impacts of non-native gamebird releases to be assessed”

  1. But only in relation to Natura?

    Oh well it’s solid start….once the principal is established they will widen the net.

    1. Circus – that is what we asked for because that is what the Habitats Directive requires (we argued – correctly it seems). But not just plans or projects in Natura sites, but also plans or projects in the neighbourhood (how big might that realistically be biologically?) which widens the net considerably. And is a good start.

  2. “While not accepting the argument that current laws do not provide for appropriate assessment in such cases, Defra proposes to undertake a review to consider the legislative arrangements around the relevant activities and whether there are ways in which their effectiveness could be improved. ”
    The above statement seems to imply that the activities are regulated in some way by “current laws” . Anybody aware of what regulatory framework (that could be used to require appropriate assessment) they are hinting at?

    1. Circus – I agree it’s more than a little opaque! They seem to be saying that they could have made an assessment earlier but they hadn’t, so they will. Maybe?

      1. If the release was on the site, it would require a wildlife and countryside act consent and i suppose you could attach an HRA to the application process. If the release was outside the site and the birds stray onto the site….. does the person undertaking the release have control over where the birds go….. are they wild or are they livestock? I like where this is going!

  4. Great stuff! Well done – again. The Defra response includes this; “The legislative regime surrounding gamebird releases will remain unchanged in the immediate term and there will be no impact on the industry.”. Fair enough. I didn’t actually know what the legislation regime was, so I Googled it. Within the government’s Code of Practice for the Welfare of Gamebirds Reared for Sporting Purposes it says “No specific legislation regulates the breeding and rearing of birds for sporting purposes.” so it falls within the Animal Welfare Act of 2006. However, the Defra response refers to gamebird releases, not rearing – there is, as far as I can tell, no legislation covering the birds once they have left ‘release pens’ so how can the regime remain unchanged?

    1. Andy – Defra have admitted that the Habitats Directive reuires an assessment of plans or projects that may have impacts on protected sites (notably SACs) and that gamebird releases are plans or projects and that these do not have to take place on protected sites to need to be assessed for their impacts on protected sites. So, if you are letting lots of Pheasants go down the road from a protected site you may be caught up in this. How far down the road? Let’s see.

      this is a bit like the fact tha a housing develoment nea a heathland mighht have impacts on the heathland – more disturbance, domestic cats, higher fire risk etc etc

  5. This is certainly very welcome news, however, perhaps I’ve missed something. Wasn’t WJ asking for a general review, and not specifically on or near SPAs or SACs?

    1. Paul – we asked for a review of the impacts on protected sites (because that is what we said the Habs Directive requires – seems we were right) but that includes, as Defra now admits, actions taken off protected sites which might have an impact on protected sites. How broad that assessment needs to be is up for grabs now, we hope.

    1. Trapit – it should. But actions off protected sites need to be assessed for their impacts on protected sites too.

  7. More great stuff Mark byWild Justice. I am not sure how big a step forward this is, Government Departments are as slippery as a piece of soap but on the face of it it looks promising. There is no doubt that Wild Justice is now having a very significant effect on Defra et al and making them realise they will find it very difficult to ride rough shod over wildlife defenders in favour of what are the vested interests of the shooters and most Tories.

  8. On initial reading this seems quite a pragmatic response unlike the rushed one from NE on general licences. It all depends on how the consultation is undertaken.

    I did wonder whether the rspb would be precluded from taking a view on this because of their charter, but having read it again I think any comments will fall into the habitat question rather than the question of the killing of game birds.

    1. Bob – the RSPB is not precluded from much by its Charter. It can get involved in any issue that affects the objects of the charity. And since those objects include conserving species and habitats there really isn’t any problem (except, sometimes, of will and nerve).

  9. Does this include SSSIs? There are pheasant shoots adjacent to at least three in our neighbourhood, mostly ancient woodland but also heathland.

      1. Mark, don’t forget a lot of SSSI are also covered by the other designations so the answer to Lyn is more like ” possibly, it depends on how the land was designated”.

        1. Indeed, SAC/SPA/NNR Will be a subset of SSSI. You can look up where any statutory designated site is in the UK (or maybe its down, those websites often are?…) the three bodies NE, NRW and SNH have websites for looking these things up. Last time I checked it was quite hard to do it in England, the other two were easier….
          These sites will also tell you in broad terms how much land is in each designation. You can sometimes find this stuff at county level, too but not necessairly; depends on the local authority. In terms of area around a site being affected, many small to medium-scale planning searches for environmental information have 2 or 5km search radius, so that would seem appropriate for this sort of review.

          Well done on getting a review underway.

  10. Congratulations WJ, well done to all.

    Let’s hope there is tangible progress not just another of their box ticking exercises

    Wonder how the shooting press and the ‘sport’s’ advocates will respond …. one would like to think they’d be supportive, but they don’t seem to have taken on board the lead issue properly yet, so ….

  11. If Wild Justice was a football team it would be top of the Scottish Premier Division now. What an amazingly successful organisation and concept!

    1. Whilst this is absolutely great news for those of us who believe Game bird releases should be heavily ” policed.” Surely Les you mean English Premier League as it doesn’t take much to be top of the one in Scotland.

Comments are closed.