Press release from the campaign group Ban Bloodsports on Ilkley Moor, 15 January 2018:
Bradford councillors vote to ban grouse shooting on Ilkley Moor
Bradford Council’s Labour Group votes by overwhelming majority to not renew grouse shooting rights for Ilkley Moor, a move that has been strongly welcomed by wildlife campaigners.
Bradford Councillors voted to not renew controversial grouse shooting rights for Ilkley Moor at City Hall tonight. The decision, which was taken by the Bradford Labour Group, is understood to have been supported by an ‘overwhelming majority’ of those councillors who voted.
Bradford Labour is the largest party on the Council and ending grouse shooting is also backed by Bradford Liberal Democrats, Bradford Green Party and the majority of Independent councillors.
Ban Bloodsports on Ilkley Moor (BBIM), which has lobbied Bradford Council to end grouse shooting on the moor since its formation in May 2014, has strongly welcomed the move. The group notes that over half of protected breeding bird species have declined or become locally extinct on Ilkley Moor, government figures collated by the RSPB Northern England office show. It has urged for efforts to now be focused on reversing the wildlife crash, which has negatively impacted on the moor’s population of specialist species, including Merlin, Dunlin and Short Eared Owl, could result in the loss of the site’s conservation designations if declines continue.
Luke Steele, Spokesperson for BBIM, comments: “Bradford Council’s Labour Group decision tonight to not renew grouse shooting rights for Ilkley Moor is to be commended in the highest terms. It reflects the urgent need to reverse wildlife decline, habitat degradation and public dismay which has overshadowed this treasured moorland since grouse shooting was introduced in 2008.
“We thank all of those who have relentlessly persued an end to grouse shooting on Ilkley Moor – the strong cross-party representation of Parish and District Councillors, regional MPs including John Grogan, Alex Sobel, Judith Cummins and Naz Shah, visitors to the moor and conservation groups. This is as much a victory for them as it is for the precious wildlife and habitat. Our efforts will now turn to reversing the terrible legacy of grouse shooting on the moor in pursuit of a first-class asset for the region, which promotes wildlife biodiversity, education, leisure and the local economy.”
Bradford Council is the last local authority in the UK to allow grouse shooting to take place on public moorland. Others, including the Peak District National Park Authority and Sheffield Council, already prohibit the practice on their upland estates, having previously allowed it, and now maintain the land using other methods. During a recent consultation on the future management of Ilkley Moor, the largest number of submissions received by the local authority on any single topic urged an end to grouse shooting.
ENDS
This is a significant victory for a grassroots campaign group. Well done!
Raptor Persecution UK 
Wonderful news.
Could this be the beginning of wildlife resurrection on the grouse ridden Yorkshire Moors?
This is a Major Step and milestone,Well done to Luke Steele and all the Campaigners who have fought tirelessly for this outcome.This sends a Massive Statement out .
One more step along the road…..slowly getting closer. Well done BBIM
Superb result. Thanks for an excellent, inspiring campaign. Well done.
Amazing news. Let us hope to hear more of this sort of thing.
Doug
After a tough day and following a still tougher week, this is just the news that I needed. Well done all involved; another crack in the wall.
Great news! Let’s just hope that this happens elsewhere too! Great example of people working together to give wildlife a future! Well done!
Let’s hope this signals the beginning of the end for grouse shooting. I would like to commend Renfrewshire Council for making a bold decision, two years ago, not to permit the continuation of grouse shooting on the 8,943 hectare Special Protection Area within the Clyde Muirshiel Regional Park. The application to resurrect grouse shooting by a consortium, which proposed to develop a training programme for around a dozen apprentice gamekeepers, was kept under wraps until the last minute. It is to the credit of local residents and a handful of campaigners who lobbied the Council, that the plan was blocked. This was despite relatively little publicity and no significant input (to my knowledge) from Scottish Natural Heritage or the RSPB. The Clyde Muirshiel Regional Park management, custodians of the Special Protection Area for Hen Harriers, disappointingly were found to have been encouraging the proposed development, and they put the proposal to Council without formally consulting local stakeholders on the conservation side. At the same time they withdrew funding from a Raptor Study Group/Scottish Ornithologists’ Club research project, aimed at developing moorland management to boost the harrier population as well as enhancing overall biodiversity. The Regional Park also decided to end grant-assisting the monitoring of the breeding harriers by the same partnership, and have declared a continued interest in restoring grouse shooting. The word being that it is “on the shelf, meantime.” The local Raptor Study Group continues with vital annual monitoring on a voluntary basis, as do all of their harrier workers throughout the UK, sometimes (but not always) a thankless task.
Good news regarding Ilkley Moor but thanks for the sobering context Iain.
Well that is really interesting Iain. Don’t remember having seen anything about this previously.
Extra vigilance needed here I think, but as you say plaudits to Renfrewshire Council.
This is fantastic news & very close to my heart as the moors were very much part of my playground when I was a nipper.
This is excellent news and definitely a step in the right direction. Well done to all involved.
Great news
Wonderful news. Next for the National Trust!
Thanks Iain for highlighting the Refrewshire situation, most concerning & underhand tactics.
Excellent news. Well done.
Congratulations to all involved. A light shines.
Brilliant ,small ,local, community, led Labour controlled – the way ahead ? take note SNP.
Well done everyone. Good to see Bradford Council Labour Group taking a stand.
Need to translate this to Labour nationally now whose current position on the environment is frankly pathetic.
If politicians need a reason to take this seriously then just look at the demographic of the picture at the top of the post!
Excellent news and well done to Bradford Labour Council Group and the BBIM, and like Tim says, we need the National Executive of the Labour party to sit up and take notice; if you want the support of younger voters-wake up to the wider environmental reality; ‘a quarter century to tackle plastic pollution’, who are they kidding!
So grouse shooting brings a lot of money into the area, far more conservation goes on than credit given. When the guns stop coming, staying in local establishments, and the shoot teams (keepers, under keepers etc.) have all gone, will any one of these protesters in the photo ever be back to take their place? Will they take on all the land management the keepers do? Maintaining water coarses, etc? No, of course they won’t – they’ll be too busy trying to banning something somewhere else.
Say goodbye to likely more as you know it. In ten years it’ll be an overgrown scrubland with no grouse or ground nesting birds due to no pest control.
But you all know better. Typical weak council too, bowing down to them who shout the loudest.
Your funny.
Hugh, you should really get your facts right, rather than just ingesting the propaganda put out by organisations like the GWCT, which is all smoke and mirrors when it comes to the economic contribution of grouse shooting to the local economy. As for their contribution to conservation, that’s just a laugh, as any informed ecologist could confirm. As for future management, surely that is the responsibility of the National Park Authority and Natural England to deliver, as appropriate, for a designated Special Protection Area? There is no reason why budgets should not be assisted through public funding, donations, environmental grants and income from wildlife tourism, as it would for any other national treasure. Other responsibilities you list are covered by various other bodies such as water boards and environment agencies. I must admit I’m struggling to think what work gamekeepers do that shouldn’t be consigned to history, and taken over by professional ecologists and practical conservationists. The protesters you deride have a far more positive vision of the future than you appear to imagine.
‘likely more’ – let’s hope so! Brilliant result. Congratulations to all involved, especially Luke for his efforts. The CA would have been better off staying away. No doubt its intervention helped galvanise the opposition to DGS.
Hugh. I just wonder how the environment managed to survive without Grouse shooting. It must have been terrible. All the ground nesting birds consumed by predators – and all the predators later starving as there were no ground nesting birds to prey on.
So, you who purports to know better.. what did it look like before Grouse moors came along? I suspect instead of a desert it would look as I’d expect uplands to look like – with a mix of scrub, trees, bogs, mixed habitats, with a wide range of plants, amphibians, birds and animals returning.
I’d suggest you take a look at Coire Dhorchaill and see what does happen when the land is taken out of management for sheep or deer, or take a look at Carrifran where its recovering from years of sheep farming – both with a bit of help from volunteers. I’m sure Ilkely moor will find willing volunteers to help get it back to what it was before it was devastated and turned into a monoculture producing a bird which was then shot for fun.
Of course all of us protesters will be back,we never went away.We love Ilkley moor and I for one will be visiting Ilkley far more knowing I will not have to see various traps to kill wildlife but the chance of seeing a far greater diversity of wildlife,not just the animals that Grouse shooters and gamekeepers have decided are acceptable.Ilkley Moor will not be left to become an overgrown scrub,there are many interested stakeholders who will make sure Ilkley Moor will become the wildlife rich upland it has the potential to be.
Hugh, I’m sure that your opinions are sincerely held but I would make 2 observations.
Firstly grouse do not need heather moorland and this is misunderstood by many conservationists as well. They may well reach very high densities on what is a rather artificial habitat but you have only to go to the Taiga woodland of Norway to see them very happily wandering around under 20 m canopies – more difficult to shoot there though.
Secondly political change is never comfortable, ask the miners, but change is inevitable once public opinion becomes overwhelming and yes of course it has economic consequences for some segments of society (although we can argue about how much). I’m sure that when we stopped burning witches there were economic arguments advanced by the witch-finders, the ducking stool manufactures and operators, the pond diggers, the woodcutters and the bonfire builders all of whom no doubt advanced arguments about job losses. But in reality I’m sure most of them found alternative employment rather than starved to death.
Tim, I’m a bit puzzled in your response to Ros, whose comment didn’t make any reference to grouse requiring heather moorland. However I’m not sure a comparison with Red (Willow) Grouse in the Norwegian taiga is relevant, because I’m unaware of any Red Grouse in the UK NOT being associated with heather moorland. Correct me if I’m wrong. My interpretation of Ros’s comment is that he is looking forward to witnessing greater biodiversity on the heather moor that is Ilkley Moor, including Hen Harriers. Traditional grouse moor management strips heather moorland of many species which should be indigenous to that ecosystem.
Iain,
My mistake, I was actually replying to Hugh further up.
I think (only think mind) that you are wrong about heather moorland – what grouse need is heather not necessarily heather moorland. The Norwegian taiga is dominated by an ericaceous understorey including lots of calluna. It has plenty of Willow (Red) Grouse, Black Grouse, Capercaillies (and a few Hazel Hens) although they are admittedly at nowhere near the ridiculous densities that we find on our totally artificial heather moorland. One wonders where they lived before we created heather moorland?
Ros – your last visit to Ilkley Moor must have been a while ago or you may have been walking on an adjacent DGS estate.
For the sake of accuracy and, credit where credit is due, Bradford Council had stopped the use of traps and snares on Ilkley Moor. I assume shooting was the form of ‘pest’ control used after the trap and snare ban. I’ve not seen bird traps on this small estate but there are adjacent DGS establishments which almost certainly will be using traps, snares, bird traps, drop traps, shooting, poison etc etc. Whatever techniques were used on Ilkley Moor, and are used locally, they have been very effective at reducing raptor numbers. Nearby, you can see loads of Red Kites and Common Buzzards but the number of raptor sightings plummets on Ilkley Moor and the surrounding areas.
lizzybusy-Yes I knew that Bradford council had stopped the use of traps and snares on Ilkley Moor and I saw that as the first positive step on the road to the the complete ban we have now been promised.I was just commenting how things used to be and how unfortunately I have seen a big increase in the amount of snares and traps at some of the other Uplkand Grouse moors I frequent.I look forward to the day that this will stop.
‘In ten years it’ll be an overgrown scrubland’
###
It might well revert to its natural state, which like most grouse moors, is not heather moorland.
Dave, “…most grouse moors [are] not heather moorland.” Assuming you’re referring to the UK, please explain.
The natural state (ie the condition they would be in without human intervention) of most grouse moors is not heather moorland.
The shooting lobby emphasise how rare heather moorland is, and how important grouse shooting is to preserving the rare habitat. What they don’t say is that the heather moorland on most grouse moors is artificially created (a plagio climax plant community, which is about as natural as a putting green) and that naturally occurring heather moorland was always very rare in the British isles.
Dave, that’s a bit of a purist approach, but still doesn’t explain your statement that most grouse moors are not heather moorland. You may as well argue that improved grassland is not improved grassland, because like much of the low and medium altitude heather moorland, they used to be woodlands. Perhaps I could pose the question differently. If grouse moors are not heather moorland, what habitat type are they? The UK Biodiversity Action Plan describes them as dwarf shrub heath, under which category heather moorland falls. I have carried out research and harrier monitoring on several large grouse moors, and they were all heather moorland. Otherwise why would heather burning be such a major issue? I think we might be talking cross purposes!
What I said was that the natural state of most grouse moors is not heather moorland. They are only heather moorland because they have been turned into heather moorland by human intervention. They are artificial creations. Left to their own devices they would, in time, revert to woodland.
Facts are chiels that winna ding.
Gosh Hugh – no business consortiums made any representations to Bradford Council about Ilkley Moor. Funny that. You’d think all these companies benefitting from grouse shooting would be shouting from the rooftops to keep driven grouse shooting on Ilkley Moor! But no. Nothing! Not even a whimper! Incredible, isn’t it.
As for the wildlife/conservation groups which made comments, the consensus was that the management ‘plan’ operating under the grouse shooting business was detrimental to the environment and bird species had declined! Some groups had even done studies over years to make their point.
Silly Bradford Council, listening to local residents, conservation groups, local civic societies and, yes, campaign groups! What do they know about conservation compared to nature loving game keepers!
Suck it up, Hugh. Your bullshit won’t wash any more, so find something worthwhile to do with your time.
Beaters and gamekeepers get paid peanuts so I doubt it will make much difference Hugh
I stand in both sides of the debate as a beater and a conservationist. The moor is an ecological tundra with limited species numbers as it is, as is most managed moorland. An ecosystem exists in balance. There can only be as many predators (or ‘pests’ as you prefer to call them) as the prey will sustain. The more predators that you have therefore means the greater numbers of prey.
Wonderful, and encouraging, news. Congratulations to all the anti-hunting activists that have fought for this result. It just shows that the hunting fraternity is not that deeply entrenched in our democratic society.
The definition of a pest is similar to the definition of a weed (a plant which is not wanted in a particular place). In this instance Bradford Council have removed the primary pests of upland managed grouse moors – the keepers and the shooters. Well done! What keepers call pests is anything living which may reduce the numbers of red grouse to shoot; in most peoples minds these animals (and plants) are not pests but part of the upland ecology. Hopefully the moor will rapidly return to a natural environment with all predators and raptors present.
Fantastic news! Now let’s hope that the moor can be allowed to manage itself without humans feeling need to interfere. Why do we think we can manage nature better than nature can? Now the dream is to prevent shooting on private estates and allow the land to return to nature.
The only problem with a non-interventionist approach is natural succession, which would ultimately lead to a heather moor becoming woodland, which is no use for Hen Harriers! It would be more natural of course, but we require a degree of caution and discretion before managing (or not managing) every heather moor the same way.
I hear you, Iain and I’m not going to disagree as it is a complicated issue due to where we are today with reduced amounts of land turned over to wildlife. My concern is that we feel the need to manage every type of environment, be it woodland, moor, heath or wetland, to the finest detail. There is room an opportunity to give some areas back to nature to manage and in the process we may find out something about bio-diversity that we didn’t know.
There is plenty other hill country with low quality grassland, supporting only heavily subsidised sheep and commercial forestry, which can be restored to natural woodland and mixed habitats, without having to resort to destroying potentially high value heather moors and blanket bogs of undoubted international importance.
Agreed 100%
Be aware – Ilkley Moor was originally bought by public subscriptions over 100 years ago from a wealthy landowner to stop shooting and get the gamekeepers off the moor so that locals and visitors could enjoy access and that the flora and fauna could flourish. A lease should never have been granted to a shooting syndicate for a paltry financial gain. The syndicate has done far more damage to the moor and its wildlife than any good. The syndicate only “managed” to line their own pockets in my opinion. To paraphrase Amanda from the Moorland Association, I can see the Moor from my kitchen window , but no birds of prey.
The success of this depends on the future management of the moorland and especially nailing the perception that this might mean unlimited open access for every suburban off lead dog in the area
Assuming grouse shooting practices and not increased casual access were indeed responsible for the decline of key species, how will this be achieved, please ie ‘policed’ ?
It should be possible to manage, rather than ‘police,’ public access through strategic placing of car parks and routing of public footpaths. There will always be some people who want to venture across the rougher ground, but harriers do survive and breed successfully in some national and regional parks in Scotland. Countryside rangers can keep a lookout for any excessive disturbance of nest sites or suspicious human activity. I know it’s not quite as simple as that, but surely it is far more preferable to a continuation of grouse shooting and the inevitable ruthless persecution of raptors?
The Countryside Alliance (in the shape of Adrian Blackmore) has reacted by saying that the “taxpayers of Bradford ….. need to ask why the views of wealthy BBC presenters like Chris Packham and animal rights activists from across the country have been prioritised over local wildlife and local people”. A curious and inept reaction given the staggering wealth of prominent supporters of grouse shooting and, I gather, the strong local support for the action.
He’s talking nonsense! These local wildlife groups were consultees who expressed concern about the management of Ilkley Moor under the grouse shooting franchise – RSPB, Bradford Urban Wildlife Group, Friends of Ilkley Moor, Wharfedale Naturalists Society, Yorkshire Wildlife Trust. No wildlife groups, to my knowledge, supported the continuation of driven grouse shooting. It looks to me like the views of local wildlife groups and people have been listened to!
what a brilliant start to the year, I hope some of the moor will help to link the planned great Northern forest, massive thanks to those involved and huge congratulations.