Moorland Association feeling the pressure

moorland association logoLast week the Moorland Association (MA) went in to full damage limitation mode and sent around an e-newsletter to its members about recent events (e.g. here and here) that, in its view, had damaged the MA’s reputation.

It’s amusing that the MA still thinks it has a reputation to damage. Newsflash for the MA: your reputation has been in tatters for some considerable time (e.g. see here).

Anyway, back to the newsletter. Mark Avery blogged about it (here) and it’s well worth reading his thoughts.

What Mark didn’t do was publish the actual newsletter, so we thought we’d do that here: Moorland Association Newsletter June 2016

It’s interesting to read just how worried the MA is about all the adverse publicity, especially that generated on social media. For all its public spin and denials and propaganda, behind closed doors the MA is certainly feeling the pressure like never before.

Let’s help bring down the curtain on their absurd pantomime – please join 45,000+ people and sign the e-petition to ban driven grouse shooting HERE

10 thoughts on “Moorland Association feeling the pressure”

  1. I’m pleased to see you get a few mentions, along with Mark Avery.
    Well done, and keep up the good work.
    I can’t help but agree that they don’t have a reputation to damage, but they don’t seem to have realise that, even yet. They are truly on the dark side.

  2. You’ve clearly rattled the MA and not without good reason. Well done. This behaviour in base.

    Interestingly, the advice about ‘protecting your reputation,’ is all about shifting blame to ‘subordinates’. Feudalism is clearly alive and well on the moors.

  3. Such a sad statement from the MA, I almost broke into tears but I couldn’t stop the fits of giggles.

    They really are devious, demented, in denial and corrupt. Can you really imagine a gamekeeper taking any notice of the drivel published or the MA land owners trying to get their boys/girls to behave within the law?

  4. The key paradox in advising employers to affirm to gamekeepers that they must operate within the law, is how would the employers react if that led to lower grouse reproductive success? They have always claimed that is the case when there are “too many predators.” What would they say (or do) if their land became, in their language “over-run with raptors”? And if their default claims about the impact of raptors are true, won’t their income then be threatened due to a shortage of grouse to shoot? In other words, their public statement is pious, and obviously designed to placate their critics; however we won’t fall for it. From the gamekeepers’ point of view, they’re being instructed (allegedly) to operate within the law, but due to ingrained prejudice and received wisdom passed down through generations, they will fear for their jobs if raptors are left to flourish. So they will simply ignore the instruction and be even more careful not to get caught. The Moorland Association’s recommendation to employers is also a precaution against the possible introduction of vicarious liability – they can point to the terms of the keeper’s contract as a means of contesting a prosecution for that offence.

    1. Re letters from employers/MA ….this has been tried for decades without any measurable success…the gamekeepers view it as the employers covering their own backs..knowing that the same employers will ditch them if they get caught…by contrast the orders to take out raptors are never written down..

      1. I remember a case when it was written down – I made a big fuss about it at the time. It was a crying shame that the person into whose hands the document fell (a fellow RSG member btw) did not have the bollocks to allow me to have it for a couple of hours in order to photocopy it!

  5. The Countryside Alliance is also getting the wind up. Why else would they have been involved with the Yorkshire Post in producing an article saying that, notwithstanding the bad boys shooting Red Kites recently, their reintroduction is still a success story. Crocodile tears are shed for the kites which have died etc. etc. Coincidental timing? I don’t think so.
    See here:

  6. “Counter-intuitive for most when there is trouble, it is now more important than ever that estates come forward to demonstrate the huge myriad of benefits that grouse moor management delivers…”
    They’re used to clamming up over problems? I don’t think the grammatically mangled hyperbole of a ‘huge many of benefits’ can save them.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: