Well, thank heavens for that! And let’s thank the SNP government for having the balls to move decisively (after a bit of a long wait) to announce that they will bring in regulation on driven grouse shooting, muirburn and the use of medicated grit.
I was struck by the widespread support for this move from the Scottish Labour Party and the Scottish Greens, and the rather limp protestations from Scottish Conservatives. This feels like a move whose time has come, and that Scotland’s politicians recognise that public opinion has swung very decisively away from the old ways and towards a new future.
But I was also struck by the repeated condemnation of raptor persecution by many politicians across several parties (including Conservatives). We have never heard such passionate condemnation of wildlife crime in Westminster, and in the last 10+ years never from Conservative ministers.
I’d think that only a strong Conservative majority in the Scottish Parliament elections on 6 May 2021 could scupper some sort of new legislation to clamp down on the environmental damage that comes from intensive, and illegal, management for grouse shooting.
What we have seen in Scotland is an industry publicly commit suicide by failing to be honest and failing to self-regulate – even failing to give an inch. Scottish ministers, Scottish politicians and the Scottish people have lost any faith in intensive grouse shooting. This is, no doubt, mixed up with all sorts of agendas on land tenure, animal welfare and climate change as well as the persistent and totally illegal killing of birds of prey on grouse moors.
There is a long way to go before licensing of grouse shooting is a fact, but it will now happen in Scotland. So it is a day to celebrate and remember those who have contributed to this day.
There is a lot of work to be done, and it will largely be led by the larger Scottish NGOs such as the RSPB, to make sure that the licensing regime which is introduced will be as strong as possible. A weak licensing system will be almost as useless as no licensing system so we need to see something that has teeth and that is fair to land managers, and that does not unnecessarily burden the good estates, who should have nothing to fear from licensing. That is a tricky balance to strike and will require a lot of detailed, largely behind-the-scenes work. I have no doubt that the industry will use its influence and contacts, and perhaps every underhand trick in their playbook, to make licensing as feeble as possible. They too will have to be careful and strike a balance, short term weak licensing will lead to stronger licensing or even a complete ban on driven grouse shooting, just as failure to self-regulate has led to licensing.
I remain sceptical of how well licensing might work but this is an evening to be optimistic and to hope that those who can, do make the licensing system fit for the purpose of clamping down on wildlife crime and on environmental damage generally.
Many people have contributed to getting to this point and it would be impossible to thank them all. Raptor workers, often unsung heroes (of each and every gender), have amassed the data which have shown the raptor deficit on Scotland’s driven grouse moors. There must be a lot of smiles on their faces this evening. Ruth Tingay, Chris Packham and I have played our parts in publicising the issue of wildlife crime and environmental degradation and stoking the fires for legislative change. But the RSPB has led the call for licensing and although stumbling at times, particularly south of the Border, they deserve all of our thanks and support, and they will need, working with a range of other environmental groups in Scotland, to make sure that the right licensing scheme is delivered.
So let’s give them the last word this evening. Here is what the RSPB’s Scotland Director, Anne McCall said said;
[registration_form]While we commend the work of both the current Government at Holyrood and that of its predecessors in trying to tackle the illegal killing of raptors on grouse moors, 21 years of piecemeal changes to wildlife protection laws so far have unfortunately not been enough to halt this practice.
We face twin crises in nature and climate that threaten human health and wellbeing and the survival of many species across the planet. Ensuring that land is managed to protect and restore nature is essential to delivering a Green Recovery from the Coronavirus pandemic and fulfilling Scotland’s target of net zero carbon emissions by 2045.
The illegal killing of birds of prey; muirburn on peatland soils damaging our vital carbon stores; the mass culling of mountain hares; and the continued use of lead ammunition have absolutely no place in 21st century Scotland.
The Werritty Review was prompted by commissioned peer-reviewed research which showed that a significant proportion of satellite tagged golden eagles were going missing in illegal or suspicious circumstances, almost exclusively on areas intensively managed for driven grouse shooting. Self-regulation by the grouse moor industry has not tackled the issues of wildlife crime and damage to the environment by unregulated muirburn. Any future licensing scheme for grouse moors must be robust and address these issues, hopefully once and for all. Grouse moor estates who are found to be breaking wildlife protection laws should lose their right to shoot. Only this will act as a genuine deterrent to this still-widespread criminal activity.
We believe that landowners and their employees who manage their shoots legally and sustainably have nothing to fear from the introduction of licensing. Indeed, gamebird shooting is licensed in some form or other in most other European countries.
We believe that what has been announced today is supported by an overwhelming weight of evidence and is entirely proportionate. We are keen to work with the Scottish Government and other stakeholders to quickly bring about an effective licensing system, to help address the nature and climate crises, to encourage sustainable management of our uplands and to consign raptor persecution to the history books.
We will see in due course how effective a licensing system is in terms of resolving the problems associated with driven grouse shooting but this is good news. The Scottish government is to be congratulated for recognising that when previous approaches have failed to achieve the desired effect a change of approach is needed. This is in contrast to the serial, bone-headed repetition by Defra ministers that killing raptors is illegal and we have strong penalties available to the courts to punish those who do persecute raptors when these penalties are rarely, if ever applied and the evidence is clear to all that they represent no sort of deterrent to raptor killers.
Truly great news. And great that not waiting 5 years either.
And while you praise others, you must take a lot of credit too. Three cheers for Wild Justice!
Progress at last! Many congratulations to everyone who has played a part in getting this far….and that definitely includes you, Mark.
Bloody Brilliant, well done to all!
Great news. We know we are all in this for the long haul so we can allow ourselves a wee dram (or fruit cocktail) to celebrate that things are moving forward. Well done everyone , all at Wild Justice, the raptor workers, the unknown thousands who care passionately and do their bit, year in year out to protect our wildlife. The arrogance and stupidity of those intractable proponents of driven Grouse shooting should hang their heads in shame. The majority now know just what kind of people they really are.
And another bonus is that this news has caused Mike the Parrot to have a complete meltdown over on RPUK. Wonder how long it’ll take him to repeat his hilarious bleating here. Come on Mike, give us all a bloody good laugh!:)
P.S. As always, he struggles to contain his admiration for you, Mark.
This is great news and very well said in your blog Mark, so, so right. You and your colleagues Ruth and Chris are to be roundly congratulated for this success as well as the RSPB. and all the other NGOs that have campaigned for this result. Also to be congratulated are the Scottish Government so well supported by the Labour Party and the Greens.
This decision will be seen to some extent as a political decision but is not really that, because first and foremost It is the RIGHT decision .
The antediluvian shooters that have shown over a very long period that they refuse or are unable to adapt to the demands of a civilised society have rightly met their Waterloo.
With this Scottish Government decision together with the departure of Trump, things are looking more hopeful today for nature and conservation.
It will be interesting to see how the rotten Government in Westminster react, badly I expect or not at all. Never mind they are more and more on the back foot now and being shown up for their Victorian attitudes and for what they are, and their alliance with the shooters.
We are on our way.
Such good news today. Thank you all so much for the tireless effort you have given.
I know there is a long way to go but at last we can see some positive action on this very important issue. Thanks again for all your efforts.
This is great news, and I think enormous credit is due to you, Mark, along with Ruth and Chris.
I also think that the recent news about trail hunting will have the raptor killers feeling just a little less cocky than usual – I’ve always thought that one influences the other.
I’m not sure that either Mark or Chris had much to do with this particular development, indeed Mark has been rather scathing and dismissive of the idea of licensing. So far as I can see the driving forces have been Ruth as an individual, the SRSGs and the RSPB.
I’d be happy to be corrected if I’ve got that wrong.
I think also some credit is due to Prof Werrity, who had a difficult path to steer, given the make up of his committee. On reflection the way he managed to get unanimity on a commitment to a licensing system provided its introduction was delayed but making it plain that he personally favoured immediate introduction, was a politically adroit manoeuvre.
There’s a long way to go yet though, but at least things seem to be moving at last.
I think you are being a little unfair on Mark and Chris here. As far I am aware neither of them is seeking credit for this decision but amongst many others they have surely played a part in bring it about. It is certainly true that Mark has lobbied hard for his preferred option of a ban and has made clear his reservations concerning the likely effectiveness of a licensing system but it is reasonable to conclude that the lobbying he has done has played some part in focusing the minds of the Scottish government and helped nudge them towards this decision. Many people would have preferred to see a ban but this is clearly a step forward.
Once a licensing system has been set up the onus will be on the shooting industry and on NatureScot to make it work. If it does and we see raptor persecution come to a halt that will be marvellous and there will no doubt be much hat-eating by licensing sceptics. If it does not work there will be nowhere left to hide for the shooting industry and the arguments for a ban will be overwhelming. It remains to be seen whether the grouse shooting industry will be smart enough to see that its continued existence will depend on it ceasing to assume that it can do as it pleases and that it has an interest in making licensing work.
We won’t get a ban without licensing first being tried and failed. Britain is always terrified of big changes, no matter how needed they are, we are a nation that can only embrace small incremental “reasonable” changes in the way things work. Maybe if we stopped worrying about being civil all the time, but for now a ban is a necessary step.
We need to start compiling evidence of failures and malfeasance within the new licensing system as soon as it goes into effect, so that the next reasonable step is the ban.
I would argue quite strongly that people like Avery and Packham constantly pushing for a ban have actually been a big part of this, because their calls for a ban help push the debate in the right direction.
I don’t think I agree with a ban, but those who do agree with it and push for a ban create the atmosphere where licencing becomes widely accepted as the “compromise” solution. The choice is then licencing vs a ban, instead of licencing vs nothing.
If everyone was pushing for licencing and no one was calling for a ban it would be much easier for politicians to ignore it and carry on as normal.
Reece – thanks. And let’s be clear, Ruth has pressed for a ban too. Licensing, for all three of us, is a step towards a ban – here is the video evidence https://wildjustice.org.uk/general/wild-justice-in-conversation/ after 14min30secs
Mark this is at the very least your victory as anybody else’s. Much of the impetus for change in Scotland came originally from south of the border to be brutally honest, but fair. Even if this is yet another window dressing exercise from Scotgov it will do them no favours. We’ve had too many already and this could be the straw that breaks the camel’s back after the big fanfare about protection for beaver and mountain hare which turned out to be pretty meaningless. However, I would like to give a very special mention to Max at Revive who has done a lot to raise awareness among the SNP’s membership and showed how much the leadership was out of touch with them over this. Thanks Mark and hope this evening you’re partaking of ‘a little light refreshment’ as they call it in Edinburgh it’s very well deserved.
The remnants of the ‘Scottish Cringe’ are on full display here, from the deference to English leadership, to the gratuitous denigration of ScotGov.
The political impetus for this change came from the Scottish Raptor Group licensing petition to Parliament and their subsequent work with the Parliament’s Environment Committee all of which led to Werrity. – a contribution strangely absent from the record. That was subsequently expanded into the SNP membership and beyond by the independent Scottish bodies who make up Revive. Raptor Persecution Scotland, subsequently Raptor Persecution UK, exposed the scale of the abuse. That’s the bones of the success along with a receptive SNP membership. It was, and will be, a Scottish project, though no-one will question the public or likely private contributions of individuals like Mark and Chris or the importance of the UK perspective in finally killing off a beast which was conceived and is nourished by England.
I don’t do ‘Scottish cringe’, I don’t do everything in Scotland that’s bad is England’s fault (‘a beast which was conceived and nourished by England’) which is a bandwagon that’s become rather over crowded, I’m a better Scot than that and no kind of bigot – credit where credit’s due. I do also know there are many people in Scotland who pushed for change, in a very small way I am one of them, but acknowledge without an awful lot of impetus from south of the border the fight against DGS wouldn’t have had such a high profile. I stand by that, it’s not an insult to campaigners in Scotland. By extension I’ll point out that ‘South of the border’ could also apply to people like Ruth Tingay who after all was the driving force behind Raptor Persecution Scotland now Raptor Persecution UK. An awful lot of the most committed and successful conservationists in Scotland like Roy Dennis and Allan Bantinck are actually English. Would it be too difficult for you to admit, just possibly maybe, that England has occasionally been a positive influence on Scotland or is that heresy? Scotland is very quick off the mark to point out where it’s contributed to world culture, not so much when it comes to where we’ve benefitted from others.
One wee question for you as well BSA, if anything open hill deer stalking might be an even bigger affront to Scotland than DGS, it may cover a larger area than grouse moors do (see Ben MacDonald’s ‘Rebirding’). Like grouse moors it means we have devastated tree poor ecosystems with little wildlife and in addition a greatly heightened risk of people being seriously injured or killed in a traffic collision with the severely bloated red deer population. So tell me BSA where is the Scottish campaign to rid the country of open hill deer stalking – killer of local economies, the land, wildlife and drivers as much as of stags with nice antlers? The difference is there isn’t any open hill deer stalking in England too, if there was I suspect that we might by now have a national campaign against it with perhaps a Scottish branch or derivation of it. But there isn’t one is there, it’s all down to Scotland and there’s nothing? At present Scotland’s dependent on Scandinavian billionaires buying up estates and rewilding them. And BTW an awful lot of the people fighting to keep the terrible status quo in Scotland are actually Scottish.
Bullshit. If anything the press for change from England caused hurdles not pressure. Scotland is sick of being treated as England’s colony, and sick of absentee landlords trying to treat it like a themepark.
English interference, no matter how noble the cause, is now something that hamstrings the push for change not something that empowers it. It is time for Scotland and the Scots to decide our own path, Us Alone!
What’s this, an invasion of the cybernats?
Please stop blaming everything on the English. It’s pathetic. Can’t you see it for what it is, an example par excellence of the ‘Scottish cringe’ that you’re forever banging on about?
Fergus Ewing and Alex Hogg are Scottish. Mark Avery and Chris Packham are English. Which of them is hamstringing progress?
That isn’t what a cultural cringe is, that would be cringing and saying Scotland couldn’t manage on our own and being ashamed of our citizens efforts. Which is what you are trying to inflict on us, especially with your patronising “cybernats” insult. We are stronger than that, and we don’t need England denigrating us, or demanding credit in our country.
What’s with the ‘you’ and ‘us’?
I’m Scottish and have no time for your reactionary, petty bourgeois nationalism. You, Fergus Ewing and all the rest of you.
There are only two political parties in Scotland that have representatives who speak up for the shooting lobby: the Tories and the SNP.
There’s a reason why, and even then only after relentless lobbying, it has taken the SNP government years and years to get this far. Try and work out for yourself what the reason is.
Yes indeed. Fergus Ewing is a Scot and he’s terrible, but do you agree or disagree with the posts ?
And, oh dear, is it still not ok to use the ‘English’ word ? Do we still have to accommodate an English sense that they represent the natural order of things and are not a subject for discussion? My impression is actually that we’ve all moved into a more mature phase where the ‘English’ word is now part of the debate about relationships within our precious union just as the ‘Scottish’ word has featured for many years. You see old bean, wherever you look from Brexit to Bannockburn, England is the whole issue and for most mature English and Scottish folk there is nothing hostile in acknowledging that.
‘FREEDOM!!!!!!’ Personally I think everyone should follow their own path which rules out being led by any piece of rag waved at the end of a pole because of where your mummy happened to be when you popped out of her tummy. Isn’t current landownership in Scotland due to our own history not imposition from south of the border? When it was pointed out to a rather rabid Scotnat that far from being a downtrodden country Scotland had been a very enthusiastic participant in the transatlantic slave trade she replied on social media ‘That was only because of English influence’. Aye right. It was the British Empire, not the English Empire – Scotland was part of it good and bad, and we made a fair packet, playing the oppressed colony when it suits is cheap and nasty. Everybody fighting against what’s bad wherever it and they are is what’s important, or do you think ‘interfering’ English people should be banned from Scottish litter picks? We’re aw Jock Tamson’s bairns Random.
Scotland’s role in the Empire and in slavery, good and bad, is not in dispute, but your interpretation of that, its current significance, and what constitutes a colony certainly would be, as would be your Daily Mail caricature of the movement for self determination.
And sporting estates were a product of British capitalism and the Romantic Movement which makes it difficult to talk about blame, but British sporting culture, ethics etc and their environmental consequences were the work of the Anglo British establishment in London so blame is appropriate there particularly given the unique nature of that culture in Europe.
You could hardly have missed the established Scottish view that if you live in Scotland you have the right to participate fully in Scotland and that your origins, English or whatever, are irrelevant. So it is surprising that you fill your posts with the view that the conservation work of English individuals here is unwelcome or that these somehow negate the debate which is going on (and apparently going right over your head) regarding the past and future relationship between the two countries, not to mention in Wales and Ireland also. That should be a constructive debate and for many the overdue collapse of the UK will be entirely beneficial to England which will have to come finally to terms with its reduced status and the end of the empire. Scotland came to terms with that a long time ago and has been moving on, something else that seems to have to escaped your notice.
You carry on and ‘follow your own path’ and rule out being ‘led by a piece of rag’. That is the very individualism at the core of British Tory neoliberalism. So carry on howling at the moon while they laugh at you from London’s Square Mile. Personally I see no sense or self respect in being ruled from another country which has no democracy and has no respect for us or our environment. I’ll settle for decisions made democratically in Scotland by the folk who live here. When did you last influence a decision made in Westminster and when do you seriously think it will ever be possible? I’d say that, whatever its potential shortcomings, the grouse moor licensing proposal was a fair product of Scottish democracy.
And, incidentally, I don’t need any penny lectures from you on Scotland’s ecosystems.
Thank you for providing some insight to those south of the border of the level to which public discourse in Scotland has sunk.
It maybe wasn’t your intention, but no matter.
If the SNP government was as determined to stamp out raptor persecution as its supporters are to promote their political agenda of grievance and resentment an effective and rigorous licensing system would have been introduced years ago.
Yes, this is very good news. However, once this does come in, you can guarantee that the shooting industry will set it’s stall out as a default to say that any and every snared Badger, poisoned Eagle or Fenn IV discovered atop a post, is the work of malevolent “anti’s” who have “planted” them. Do we think it will work out that the fee for the Licence to be applied for by Estates will be great enough to fund Compliance Officers / Inspectors / Rangers / Bailiffs to go around and check what is going on in remote places? I hope it will, to head off a very tedious few years of name-calling and accusations.
Though like a lot of People I don’t see how Licensing will be upheld and monitored .This is a Momentous Step in the right direction,A Very Well Done to Everyone involved.It will be really interesting to see and hear this News filtering down to Westminster !!
The wine tasted good tonight. Cheers guys, and very many thanks.
At first glance ( having not read the full download yet), i can see no mention of Red-legs ?.
Truly historical, well done to everyone who put in so much time and effort to achieve this latest victory. Maybe, just maybe, there is a shadow looking over the shoulders of those in government at Westminster now.
What’s happened to 2020?
Jacinda Ardern re-elected
Trump routed
Biden commits to re-entering Paris accord
Covid 19 vaccines
EU bans lead shot over wetlands
National Trust and Forestry England suspend trail hunting
and now the Scottish Government moves decisively against driven grouse shooting.
A little hope has been restored in the world.
As you say Mark, many congratulations and well done to all those raptor workers and the RSPB and of course to you, Chris Packham and Dr Tingay.
Its certainly a step in the right direction, but looking at the timescales, a Licensing regime will not be in place until after the next election, so 2022 at the earliest? So plenty of time for prevarication and delay as the details are thrashed out, it could well be 5 years before implementation.
Then look at who are going to be involved in agreeing the details, shooting organisations! So will any licensing regime be effective?
But for me the biggest issue is going to be enforcement. Without the resources to enforce any regime, then its will be ineffective.
So a welcome step change in government approach, but plent yof opportunities for it be watered down, under resourced and ultimately ineffective.
Matthew – yes, but that’s always the way. There is lots of work for thse in Scotland to do to make this ahppen well, but at least something is almost bound to happen. And, as I’ve said before, if licensing works brilliantly (not my expectation, but a possibility) thyen job done! If licensing works badly, the momentum behind a total ban will be huge (and it will grow over time anyway).
‘a Licensing regime will not be in place until after the next election, so 2022 at the earliest?’
The minister suggested it could take three years. So 2023 at the earliest.
Given the glacial pace to get this far I suspect the three years suggested is wildly optimistic.
Also bear in mind that the SNP are saying there will be another referendum during the term of the next parliament. In which case they’ll be reluctant to do anything remotely controversial, even if Parliamentary time allowed it, which it may well not.
The SNP are pass masters at talking a good game and delivering very little so I suggest that people maybe rein in their expectations a bit.