It is biased. It fails to even see how sporting shooting and conservation can go hand in hand. I gave the example of grouse moors and suggested they look at the biodiversity of grouse moors as opposed to those that aren't shot.
Despite it being patently biased, I did fill it in. As with all these things, they are merely looking for evidence to support one point of view, whist trying (but failing dismally) to portray a balanced viewpoint. No doubt our replies will sink without trace, but it's worth doing to demonstrate to the people that have to read the replies that their biased opinions aren't universal and who knows? They might be persuaded, or give up their biased ways in trying to restrict liberty. Dreaming now....