New calls for tough crackdown on shooting grouse industry

Campaigners have made the move just a few weeks before the so-called 'Glorious Twelfth', the day in August when the grouse-shooting season opens. New restrictions are necessary, they say, because of the prolonged failure of successive governments to protect birds of prey on grouse moors.

There has long been antagonism between conservationists and shooting estates over birds of prey. Raptors can take grouse chicks, and so have been shot, poisoned or otherwise persecuted on some estates to ensure that there are enough grouse available to be shot by wealthy paying visitors.

But despite decades of increasingly tough moves to prevent the persecution, it has persisted. According to wildlife groups, last year ten birds of prey were confirmed poisoned and at least five were shot in Scotland.

Now the Scottish Raptor Study Group (SRSG), a network of more than 300 experts who monitor birds of prey, has decided to up the ante. It has lodged a petition at Holyrood calling for “urgent action to introduce a state regulated system of licensing of game bird hunting”.

Estates found guilty of wildlife crime should have their licences revoked, the group said. “Self-regulation by the game bird shooting sector in Scotland has patently failed.”

According to SRSG, there no evidence of any decline in the criminal targeting of protected raptors on driven grouse moors. There was also increasing evidence of the damaging environmental impacts of game bird management, such as the mass shooting of mountain hares.

SRSG’s Logan Steele argued that the illegal persecution of birds of prey was set to increase as the management of grouse moors became increasingly intensive. If licensing wasn’t introduced, pressure for a complete ban on driven grouse shooting would become overwhelming, he told the Sunday Herald.

“The real driver behind the illegal killing is the driven grouse shooting industry's fixation on generating an artificial surplus of red grouse at the end of each breeding season for their clients to shoot,” he said.

“This can only happen if they remove all predators, including legally protected birds of prey, such as golden eagle, hen harrier, peregrine and goshawk. Such is their fixation that this killing is now an integral part of their business model.”

Birds of prey like golden eagles and hen harriers were “routinely killed”, he contended. “Our moorland is burnt, damaging vulnerable peatland habitats, and native wildlife such as mountain hare populations have been decimated.”

Steele stressed that SRSG was not against all bird shooting. “All we are asking for is that this business abides by the law just like any other one. Is this really too much to ask?”

The petition has been backed by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds in Scotland. “We remain extremely concerned about the continuing illegal killing of birds of prey,” said the society’s head of species and land management, Duncan Orr-Ewing.

“Current voluntary approaches have failed to protect the public interest. In these circumstances game bird hunting regulation, similar to that in place in other countries and adapted for our own situation, is the only answer.”

The Scottish Wildlife Trust is also “supportive” of the petition. “Introduction of licensing for driven grouse would help protect vulnerable peatland habitats and reduce wildlife crime,” said the trust’s chief executive Jonathan Hughes.

Licensing, however, is strongly opposed by the landowning and shooting lobby. “There is no need or justification for the licensing of game bird shooting,” said Tim Baynes, director of the Scottish Moorland Group, which represents landowners.

“What lies behind this petition is a desire to ban driven grouse shooting which is a vital part of the rural economy and culture in Scotland. It brings in significant tourism income and investment and it supports many jobs and local services in remote areas.”

Grouse shooting also underpins a massive amount of conservation work “looking after rare bird species – including birds of prey - and maintaining a habitat and landscape of international renown,” Baynes maintained.

The suggestion that there was an artificial surplus of grouse bred for shooting was “untrue”, he insisted. “There is often a shortage of grouse in poor seasons such as last year.”

Dr Colin Shedden, director of the British Association for Shooting and Conservation in Scotland, thought that the petition was unlikely to succeed. He highlighted the “many soundly-evidenced environmental and societal benefits of grouse shooting”.

Scotland had some of the best wildlife protection legislation in Europe, he argued. “We are happy to work with other organisations to ensure that this legislation is respected, especially with respect to birds of prey, most of whose populations are increasing.”

The Scottish Government stressed that it took its responsibility to protect wildlife seriously. “That’s why potential new measures designed to target wildlife criminals are under constant review,” said a government spokeswoman.

Ministers had introduced legislation to make landowners vicariously liable for wildlife crime, restrictions on the general licenses given to estates and a disposal scheme for lethal, illegal pesticides. They were planning to set up a specialist unit at Police Scotland to assist with wildlife crime investigations.

“Statistics now show a sharp drop in the number of poisoning cases and thanks to our range of tough new policies we expect the number of birds of prey being illegally killed and injured to be further reduced,” the spokeswoman argued.

“Ministers recognise and value the important contribution which shooting businesses make to the rural economy and are reluctant to take any action which would affect the majority of businesses in this sector which operate within the law.

“But, as we have made clear in the past, further measures, including a licensing scheme, will be introduced if necessary.”