Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: Government comes out in support of grouse shooting.

  1. #1

    Government comes out in support of grouse shooting.

    Off the back of recent petitions, the debate in Parliament concluded in favour of grouse shooting.
    Grouse shooting is a legitimate activity that provides economic benefits, jobs and investment in some of our most remote areas and can offer important benefits for wildlife and habitat conservation.
    A report by the UK shooting community (Public & Corporate Economic Consultants report 2014: The Value of Shooting) concludes that the overall environmental and economic impact of game bird shooting is positive; the industry has estimated that 250 million per year is spent on management activities substantially benefiting conservation. For grouse shooting in particular, according to the Moorland Association, estates in England and Wales spent 52.5 million on managing 149 grouse moors for shooting in 2010. Scottish landowners manage a further 150 moors for shooting grouse. The industry also supports 1,520 full time equivalent jobs and is worth 97.7 million across Great Britain.
    Grouse shooting takes place in upland areas, which are important for delivering a range of valuable “ecosystem services”, including food and fibre, water regulation, carbon storage, biodiversity and recreational opportunities for health and wellbeing. The Government is committed to helping create a more sustainable future for the English uplands, including by protecting peatlands through measures such as the Peatland Code.
    The Government welcomes the proactive approach taken by game keeping organisations to ensure a sustainable, mutually beneficial relationship between shooting and conservation, for example through the British Association for Shooting and Conservation’s green shoots initiative.
    The Government recognises the benefits that grouse shooting, and shooting more widely, bring to individuals, the environment and the rural economy. It is for these reasons that the Government believes shooting and other country pursuits such as hunting and fishing should be protected.
    Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

  2. #2
    Great news ! Thank goodness they have seen sense. Well done to all who provided supporting information for the debate.

  3. #3
    good stuff

  4. #4
    Over to YOU!, Kwisss
    (The Unspeakable In Pursuit Of The Uneatable.) " If I can help, I will help!." Former S.A.C.S. member!

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by finnbear270 View Post
    Over to YOU!, Kwisss

  6. #6
    Good news, but be on your guard, the bile brigade will be out to discredit us at every opportunity.

  7. #7
    Uh-Oh. This is going to make certain people weally weally gwumpy
    A Man should be wise, but never too wise. He who does not know his fate in advance is free of care

  8. #8
    I think that this response was to the petition to "Protect Grouse moors and Grouse shooting" petition, not the more direct petition from Messrs Packham & Avery to ban driven grouse shooting, that one is scheduled for a parliamentary debate unless Im mistaken? MP's are hearing evidence on the 18th Oct before a debate
    Obviously this is response is positive but as others have said, its not the end of the matter!

  9. #9
    SD Regular
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    East Midlands M1/M69 Junction 21
    Yes and never forget that by actions, not words, the Tories have continually shown they are not the friends of gun owners in Great Britain.

  10. #10
    Sorry to rain on the parade, but unless I've missed something, there has not yet been the debate in response to the anti driven grouse shooting petition. Apparently, it will occur some time after 18 Oct. I know that the government can be 'efficient' but, unless we've appointed Mr Mugabe as head of DEFRA, announcing the result of a debate before it has been conducted is rather unusual.

    Co1 - where did you get that text from?

    Whilst it would be good for parliment to decide to reject the petition (as it likely will - these sorts of things are basically sops so that 'something is seen to be done'), I hope that the concluding statement will not be quite as blase as this one. Sure, all those facts may well apply, but even from the perspective of one who DOES NOT WANT grouse or any other shooting to be banned, I'd like to see a warning shot put across the bows of SOME of the moor owners. OVer the past few years there have been a surprisingly high number of raptors disappearing from areas where grouse shooting occurs. I have radiotracked hundreds (yes - literally) of birds and the rates of natural tag failure are low, so if a tag vanishes it is likely to have been tampered with. Either it is 'antis' who are deliberately killing raptors in order to pile pressure on shooting interests, in which case keepers should be out there keeping a closer eye on their land, because a single instance of this would completely destroy the case (but I think this is a bit too conspiracy theoryesque to be true). Or keepers are deliberately killing protected raptors. Which is illegal. I know the arguements about how a raptor can wreck a drive, a day or even a season, and I don't dispute them. However, it is still the law, agree with it or not. Killing raptors just draws adverse attention to shooting and in the end will lead to further restrictions or bans on all kinds of shooting. So whilst it may suit a single moorland keeper to kill off their own problem raptor, it's going to wreck things for everyone else. My advice would be obey the current law, remove a target for the anti's to attack, emphasise and demonstrate the positives from moorland management and campaign for a change if necessary.

    A whitewash by DEFRA/Parliment will just give grist to the anti mill and reinforce their perception that 'the establishment' is out to get them and it's all so unfair and will serve as a recruiting flag.... Think of what the ban on hunting did to galvanise hunt participation.

    If the anti's concern is purely driven by worries over raptor numbers, then removing this legitimate targets of complaint effectively shoots their fox (oh, the irony). If they are just trying to ban shooting in general, removing a legitimate target forces them to focus on more spurious areas (effects on other wildlife, muirburn, class war etc) which are much easier for us to defend. Pick your battles carefully.

Similar Threads

  1. Support Grouse Moors and Grouse Shooting
    By Scotty99 in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 28-08-2016, 18:24
  2. MP's Support for Shooting
    By Tom270 in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-12-2014, 00:47
  3. Survey (pre election) in Support of Shooting Sports
    By urx in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-03-2014, 20:54
  4. What price for shooting Grouse
    By wildfowler1 in forum Other Shooting & Keepering
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 20-09-2012, 18:30
  5. gun support whilst shooting
    By david1976 in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-06-2011, 16:49

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts