You’ve got to hand it to Tim (Kim) Baynes, spokesman for the Scottish Moorland Group / Scottish Land & Estates / Gift of Grouse, his ability to spin even the worst of the grouse-shooting industry’s excesses is becoming legendary (e.g. see here, here, here). He’d probably even give Amanda Anderson (Moorland Association) a run for her money in the propaganda game.
In his latest offering, Tim (Kim) argues that managed grouse moors should be seen as a “Centre of Excellence” for mountain hares!
That’ll be the intensively-managed grouse moors that slaughter hundreds, no, thousands of so-called protected mountain hares, just to protect a ridiculously and artificially high number of red grouse which will later be used as live targets, shot for ‘sport’.
Here’s a ‘Centre of Excellence’ for mountain hares, photographed on an Angus Glens estate:
This “Centre of Excellence” nonsense is included in Tim’s (Kim’s) response to the Scottish Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee which is seeking stakeholder commentary on OneKind’s recent petition calling for greater protection of mountain hares.
Here’s Tim’s (Kim’s) submission, on behalf of the Scottish Moorland Group:
Scottish Land & Estates_Petition PE1664_mountain hare_response
There are other gems within his submission, including an argument that from an animal welfare perspective, the culling of mountain hares is “not fundamentally different” to culling deer. Quite how he reaches this conclusion is a bit of a mystery – aren’t deer carefully stalked for hours and hours, with the shooting party quietly creeping up on a single deer to get close enough for a clean rifle shot without the deer knowing anything about it? Not sure how that equates with hundreds of mountain hares being forced to run uphill, probably terrified and racing for their lives, only to be shot in the face by a line of shotgun-toting ‘sportsmen’ when they reach the top.
As usual, Tim (Kim) misses the whole point of the argument, which isn’t necessarily about whether mountain hares should be managed, but is about the questionable sustainability of large-scale culls on intensively managed driven grouse moors. Nobody disputes that mounatin hares can do very well on these grouse moors – of course they do well, all their natural predators have been removed! But there’s no way that gamekeepers can know the impact of these large culls on the wider mountain hare population, despite Tim’s (Kim’s) unsupported claim that they can, and despite his unsupported claim that “estates have operated voluntary restraint for a long time”.
Nobody knows what impacts these culls are having because there isn’t yet an effective and approved counting method for estimating mountain hare abundance, although Dr Adam Watson’s long-term scientific research on mountain hare abundance on grouse moors in north east Scotland suggests there have been significant declines (his research is due to be submitted for peer-review publication shortly, we understand).
There is currently no requirement for gamekeepers to conduct counts either before or after these culls take place, and no requirement for cull returns to be submitted to SNH, even though SNH has a statutory duty to ensure that any management of this species is undertaken sustainably! At the moment, SNH is relying upon the word of the grouse-shooting industry to assess sustainability, which is astonishing given what is known about the industry’s untrustworthiness on other conservation issues.
Here’s a topical drawing sent in this week by Mr Carbo:
Raptor Persecution UK 
Morgues are also places to observe humans but I’d avoid being there if I had a choice.
That’s a great pun. The Angus Morgues or the grouse morgues!!
Some people, including SNH, need a good shake. How can anyone take the likes of Kim Baynes seriously? His arguments are fundamentally flawed. Why can’t we impress upon any of the parties involved that the sustainability debate is becoming old hat, a cover for a multitude of sins? The grouse shooting industry is only interested in “sustaining” an unnaturally high density of Red Grouse for them to enjoy shooting. It is the industry itself which is unsustainable in the truest sense of the term. If Mountain Hare numbers are excessive (and how would that be defined?), then the simple answer is to stop killing their predators – a naturally balanced ecosystem is perfectly capable of sustaining itself, and would generate a far richer biodiversity. The management of grouse moors is so obviously unsustainable, and a return to natural lower levels of Red Grouse numbers through the ending of shooting for ‘sport’ would also produce a healthier population of grouse with no need for mass medication. Add these facts to all the other ecological and environmental issues associated with grouse moor management, and it is clear that we should have given up this harmful practice long ago. Its time is well and truly over.
Iain
That is brilliantly and succinctly put. Says it all in a nutshell. Take note T(K)B. None of your fancy, delusional, airy-fairy nonsense here.
Well said, thank you.
Well said, Iain. We are in this sorry position where science and facts are being ignored and these buffoons are given a platform to hold forth with their hogwash. It’s a sad state of affairs…
Well, if Tim (Kim) Baynes is correct and “estates have operated voluntary restraint for a long time” and if it transpires that Dr Adam Watson’s long-term scientific research on mountain hare abundance on grouse moors in north east Scotland does show that there have been significant declines – then we would be left with an inescapable conclusion. Which would be that voluntary restraint isn’t working and legislation is needed!
I rest my case m’lud.
Aching sides !
A driven grouse shooting apologist, SNH & A bunch of politicians walk into a pub …… hilarity ensues !
[with apologies to Bill Bailey ]
Keep up the pressure !
More bull shit
I’m with you on your views about hare culling, but the (Kim) is a bit petty. This frustrates me every time I see it on here or on Mark Avery’s blog.
If you haven’t yet, then sign Gavin Gamble’s e-petition to ban driven grouse shooting.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/201443
There are only a few “centres of excellence” for deer management. Those that exist, have a management plan. At the heart of the management plan is data. They count the deer annually and record its distribution… along with the condition of the habitat. The numbers and population structure are then culled in line with the condition of the habitat, Poor old Tim has a very vivid imagination to make comparison with the approach used by grouse moor managers.
Proper management plans will be key to the licensing regime when it is introduced.
lol loving the corruption of the name: “Dim Braynes”
Couldn’t ask for a better headline, Dim Braynes waxes lyrical about the Angus Morgues.
So one of the very, very few species that can incidentally benefit from driven grouse shooting, at the cost of so many others that can’t, isn’t allowed to because of a perceived or even manufactured ‘truth’ that it compromises grouse numbers. Well the pathetically weak case for saying that grouse moors have any conservation value gets even weaker, almost invisible in fact. Of course a video has been produced claiming that mountain hare culling is done for the benefit of the hares themselves – and also to protect regenerating trees and juniper stands! There was me thinking that muir burn was one of the very greatest threats to them and reasons for their scarcity in the first place, so glad that with the help of a lovely sound track I’ve been put right silly townie that I am, it’s actually mountain hares…..oh yeah and farmers watch your turnips! I suspect a puke bucket rather than a box of kleenex will be handier to those who watch this – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmLv3QpXWtM
Don’t forget the golden plover.
The video is even more entertaining if you turn the auto-subtitles on!
Can anyone tell me why the don’t show any footage of the montane turnip fields?
I’ve watched the video on mtn. hares and left a comment. Suggest others among you do likewise. The grouse gunners aren’t shy about commenting here, so we should return the favour, especially as it is posted on the very public forum of YouTube.
So, according to the video, SNH work closely with shooting estates to protect Juniper distribution in the SSSI areas.
Trees for Life has an interesting analysis of the threats to Junipers in Scotland (see below). The threats to its survival are, apparently, “THE BURNING OF MOORLAND and grazing of the leaves by red deer and rabbits” (but not hares!).
https://treesforlife.org.uk/forest/juniper/
“Juniper foliage is eaten by mammals such as red deer (Cervus elaphus) and rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus), and the current excessive populations of both of these species has contributed to the current decline in juniper’s distribution in the UK. The burning of moorland also limits the ability of juniper to regenerate.”
Which raises questions as to why SNH grant licences for muirburns especially in SSSIs for juniper and why they permit hare culls in such areas without very strong evidence that it is impossible to protect the Juniper by non lethal means.
The application form issued by SNH to “control” (ie kill) mountain hares during the closed season asks applicants to “Provide details of what measures you have taken to prevent serious damage by hares (include details of scaring or preventative methods used and their effectiveness and numbers of any hares shot during the open season).” You’d think SNH would insist that estates should first attempt to construct hare/rabbit proof fencing around the Juniper woodland or control hare numbers by supporting natural predators – especially those protected in law!
I’ve been to lectures on grants for woodland management and one of the main suggested criteria was fencing woodland off to protect the saplings from grazing farm animals. Building roads to the woods to enable access was another so fencing off Juniper woodland to protect the trees from grazing hares seems perfectly feasible – especially for caring, conservation minded millionaires! Shooting estates will be well aware of those grant opportunities. SNH will be well aware of those incentives. So why isn’t SNH taking a stand?
Excessive populations of rabbits on moorland? What have I been missing?