There is a somewhat formulaic method by which the shooting press refer to Wild Justice. First of all, they hardly ever mention Ruth Tingay who is an integral and equal partner in Wild Justice alongside Chris and me. I wonder why they so often do this – it’s usually a man writing, maybe they just don’t see women in the world at all. Puzzling.
But the mentions are along the lines of (and obviously I exagerrate to make a point) ‘Wild Justice are nasty, extreme, anti-hunting bastards; we wildlife killers are the salt of the earth; but they do have a point‘.
With a distinct lack of Christmas cheer that is the line that The Field‘s editor, Jonathan Young, takes in his lazy editorial in the December edition. Apparently both Chris and I take care to attack driven grouse shooting, but not walked up shooting, because we are really against all shooting. That makes a lot of sense doesn’t it?
If Jonathan were a fair man (and I did think that he was, but now I’m really not so sure) then maybe he might read the 100,000 words of Inglorious – a book where I set out why I was, and am, in favour of a ban of driven grouse shooting but am in many ways fairly relaxed about walked up shooting. I cannot, and do not, speak (or write) for Chris Packham because he and I do not agree about everything, but I do speak and write for myself. And there is copious evidence that I am not against all shooting. But fieldsports aren’t too bothered about evidence – or, actually, they are very bothered about evidence because there isn’t an awful lot of it in their favour these days.
Jonathan’s article then lolls around discussing Pheasant shooting where there is also plenty of evidence that I am not wholly against shooting. Perhaps the best example might be this quote from my British Birds paper of July this year;
Since I am known for campaigning for a ban on driven grouse shooting, I should be clear that I am not in favour of banning Pheasant shooting. Grouse shooting is underpinned by widespread wildlife crime, without which it could not operate at anything like the current level, and the whole intensive-management regime causes great ecological damage to the uplands. Neither issue is anything like as severe, in my view, from Pheasant shooting.
British Birds 112 • July 2019 • 372 –389
Anyone who wishes to read what I actually think about Pheasants is advised not to seek my views in an editorial in The Field but instead to email [email protected] , simply entitling their email PHEASANTS, and they will be sent a pdf of the paper.
The fact is that Wild Justice is not anti-shooting. It has taken a legal case against the general licences and forced reviews and changes to them across the UK. These laws apply to me, you, thousands of farmers and the shooting industry but the shooting industry regards itself, it seems, as the only people affected by proper implementation of the existing laws. Funny that!
Wild Justice also challenged, successfully, the unregulated and unmonitored release of nearly 60 million gamebirds into the countryside and forced DEFRA to admit that they needed to have a think about this. That’s hardly anti-shooting.
And Wild Justice lauched an e-petition to ban driven grouse shooting – not all grouse shooting , and not all shooting (how cunning of us!) – which got its 100,000 signatures inside 20 full days. That is undeniably anti driven grouse shooting but it is not anti-shooting.
I suspect that after a bried period of thinking that the tide was turning against them on several issues, the shooting industry is now feeling rather more confident that the most right-wing government for a generation will be returned on 13 December. And so the nastiness oozes out again.
Inglorious: conflict in the uplands by Mark Avery is published by Bloomsbury – for reviews see here.
[registration_form]
Good comments Mark. I must say I anti-hunting and shooting in all forms basically because I find killing and maiming of our wildlife for fun is just not acceptable and cannot understand the mentality of those who do it. The other factor is of course the fact that game shooting leads to gross damage to the natural habitats. Our peatlands are destroyed so leading to release of CO2. Many of our wild birds and insects numbers are suppressed because the grossly elevated numbers of game birds are feeding/ taking their food. Pheasants of course are great killers of young reptiles and are largely responsible for the serious decline in our adders.
By the way, having heard Tony Juniper’s approach to game shooting I am sorry to say I regard his reputation such as it was as now being seriously in the mud.
It’s a widely-used tactic. You attack the extreme end of an activity and in response its proponents characterise it as an attack on all forms of the activity. That ensures that there is a broad defence and helps cast you as an inflexible killjoy. It’s similar to the backlash against excessive meat eating which is characterised ‘You want to turn us all vegan’, which is similar nonsense.
It shows you’ve rattled them.
I would keep at it (I know you will).
Alick – indeed, and I (we) will, but it’s woorth calling out now and again.
As a regular reader of RPUK’s blog I think Ruth is a lot more scary than you or Chris. As usual Shakespeare has a good line: ‘Though she be but little, she is fierce’ A Midsummer Night’s Dream
Lyn – scarier than the two men put together I’d say, though as I recall Hermia wasn’t too thrilled by the description.
She is a woman after my own heart. I was very pleased when one of my male colleagues told me he found me scary – that was exactly my intention!
Wow, five dislikes Lyn, all male colleagues?
I don’t find Ruth scary, but that’s because we’re on the same side. I would if we were on opposite sides though.
Lazy indeed. I suspect it all stems from their feelings of entitlement, w which for many of them means they do as they damned well please and they find it almost incomprehensible that many of us not only don’t feel OK about it but are prepared to stand up and say so.
I too am not entirely anti shooting, I used to shoot occasionally mainly for the pot and still ” control” Grey Squirrels and Pheasants in the garden and on our small holding.
I am against DGS, actually any wildlife enthusiast who has experience and knowledge of this sort of shooting ought to be and mainly are opposed to it. I also don’t like driven pheasant and RLP shooting, to me it is “canned hunting” no different to Lions and other creatures on game farms in southern Africa. The way to solve all the problems in the “Pheasant industry” is to severely control or even ban the release of these aliens not the shooting of them, rather as I understand the Dutch have done.
Shooting should be entirely sustainable without the damaging practices of DGS, which effect us all or the totally unsustainable release of millions of targets per annum. It should be about the experience not bag size and at the end of the day there should be game to be eaten.
What is that native Amerindian phrase and they were largely hunting cultures with huge reverence and respect for their quarry ( something often apparently lacking in our culture)— we should leave the earth as we found it, with only our footprints to show we were ever here.
The comment about the restriction of the release of non-native birds in NL is interesting. Do you have information about the nature of this or the rationale?
Hi Alick, the Dutch have apparently banned the release of all non-native game birds but not the shooting of them. Not sure of the rationale behind it or that I would do it here although I would certainly ban releases on the sort of scale we have now and for the big commercial shoots. We live in the middle of one of those, hundreds of birds shot two or three times a week, sounds like a re-enactment of the Somme. To do this they release thousands of birds which totally trash most of the local habitats and gardens, that should certainly be banned. locals also claim that apart from a few taken by the guns the rest are buried. No respect for the quarry just so many living targets, words fail me.
Thank you. Judging by correspondence and posts I am seeing elsewhere about people living close to shoots the problem is not simply a lack of respect for the quarry but a lack of respect for other people.
Ironic laughter from Simon: we should leave the earth as we found it, with only our footprints to show we were ever here. Would you believe I read this only yesterday on a sign at a parking area on the Abbeystead Badlands in Forest of Bowland. (No raptors seen of course, only pheasants and some winter thrushes)
Let me guess Simon at the roadside parking area at Marshaw, know it well although I don’t know that particular sign. More appropriate for that estate might be– “How can you say you own this land, it was given to all his children by the creator so that they might wander upon it and live on the game he put there” Or considering how they and the rest of the Aristos got so much land and wealth through theft during the enclosures. ” they made us many promises and broke all but one. the promised to take our land and they took it.”
‘Mine’ is on the road below Catshaw Fell leading up to Grizedale Head. It looks up to a deep vehicle track which scars the fell. A depressing place. The Welcome sign for the Open Access area has a heavy padlock over the locked gate!
If that gate is the access point it is worth reporting the padlocked gate as it would under those circumstances be an offence. However if, and I cannot remember there is no fence it is to stop unauthorised vehicular access.
The famous Mr Osborne charges roughly £38 per bird shot on his commercial shoots and thinks people should be allowed to release – and shoot – as many as they can afford. So what I’d suggest is a £5/released bird tax – after all, shooting is a super luxury, so why not tax it the way we now tax expensive/high emission cars ? The money should be hypothecated to conservation, with any excess going to climate change.
Surely Rod that should be infamous or even notorious.