Year: 2019

At the weekend, the Revive coalition for grouse moor reform issued the following press release:

CAMPAIGN GROUP CALLS FOR URGENT ACTION TO END MUIRBURN ON GROUSE MOORS

A campaign group has released new footage showing parts of the Cairngorms, an area which has a high density of peat, quite literally on fire, as gamekeepers burn heather moorland as part of intensive management of grouse moors.

The footage obtained by Revive, the coalition for grouse moor reform, shows the extent land managers will go to in their quest to create a habitat suitable for just one species – the red grouse. These grouse will subsequently be shot for entertainment.

Revive campaigner Max Wiszniewski said: “The footage that we captured is extremely disturbing showing vast swathes of heather upland on fire with flames and smoke billowing for miles, all for the single purpose of protecting grouse which will subsequently be shot for entertainment.

“I’m sure the public will be shocked to see the damage which is deliberately inflicted on our uplands to create a habitat suitable for one species to the detriment of our environment and wildlife.”

Grouse moor managers routinely burn patches of heather to create a structurally diverse patchwork habitat to favour red grouse. Tall heather provides concealment from predators while younger heather provides adult grouse with more nutritious shoots for food, and short heather provides greater insect availability for chicks.

The practice known as muirburn is hugely detrimental to the environment. Moorlands are of high conservation value for their vegetation, invertebrate and bird communities with large areas given legal protection under the European Habitats Directive. Muirburn is in direct conflict with concerns about meeting global carbon emissions.

[Gamekeepers setting fire to a grouse moor, photo by Ruth Tingay]

Dr. Richard Dixon, Director of Friends of the Earth Scotland added: “We’re growing increasingly concerned about the extent and intensity of burning on grouse moors, and particularly the effects of burning over deep peat. Where blanket bog is damaged by burning, impacts include a lowered water table and breakdown of the active peat-forming structure, resulting in the carbon store in the peat being released as climate change emissions.

“There is more carbon locked up in Scotland’s peaty soils than in all the trees and vegetation in the whole of the UK. Urgent action is needed to reduce Scottish climate emissions and lock stored carbon into our environment. The Scottish Government must put in place plans to reverse the damaging environmental effects of moorland burning and protect our peatlands as the huge natural treasure they are.”

The footage also shows mountain hares fleeing for their lives as their habitat burns, illustrating the devastating impact this practice has on other wildlife.

Robbie Marsland, Director of the League Against Cruel Sports Scotland said: “To witness wild animals running for their lives to escape such willful and deliberate environmental vandalism is extremely upsetting, made worse by the complete lack of justification for this action.

“As well as the iconic mountain hares, seen on the footage, there’s also the extensive risk to many other species including ground nesting birds and all for nothing more than to line the pockets of land owners looking to enrich their stocks of game birds for paying guns.”

The Revive coalition which includes Common Weal, OneKind, Friends of the Earth Scotland, League Against Cruel Sports and Raptor Persecution UK, will set the agenda for a multi-year strategy aimed at encouraging a national dialogue about how Scotland’s moors should be utilised. It believes that a fresh look at how this land is used could lead to a better Scotland, better for its economy, its people, its environment and its fauna.

ENDS

This article, and the very angry responses from the grouse shooting industry, received extensive coverage in the news, e.g. The Ferret (here), The National (here), The Scotsman (here), The Telegraph (here) and The Times (here).

The Scottish Gamekeepers Association (SGA) also posted a statement on its website:

The SGA makes some interesting claims but the one we’re most interested in because it’s used repeatedly by those within the grouse shooting industry, is that muirburn ‘prevents’ wildfires. The Gift of Grouse (a propaganda campaign funded by Scottish Land & Estates) made a similar claim last year: they claimed that the continued burning of peatland moors is ‘one of the most effective means of reducing the risk of damage from wildfires by providing breaks in continuous moorland cover and reducing the fuel load’ (see here).

It’s a fascinating claim, because it contradicts the Muirburn Code (often cited by the industry as evidence of good practice, even though the Code is rarely, if ever, enforced) which states that:

“Fires escaping from muirburn are a major cause of wildfire in Scotland“.

Let’s just repeat that, in case anyone missed it:

“Fires escaping from muirburn are a major cause of wildfire in Scotland“.

It’s not just the Muirburn Code that states this fact. The SNH-commissioned review of sustainable moorland management (published in 2015) states:

“Whilst large, intense wildfires can be destructive, many may have no greater impact than prescribed burns (Clay et al. 2010) and evidence suggests that over 50% of wildfires with known causes may themselves be caused by loss of control of prescribed burns“.

And who authored that report? None other than Professor Werritty, the Chair of the current Government-commissioned review of grouse moor management!

For anyone interested in more detail or for the full citations, have a look at the Revive report that was published at the launch in November 2018 – it’s all in there.

It’s really generous of the Shooting Times to provide supporting evidence for Wild Justice’s first legal challenge, announced two days ago.

Wild Justice’s first case challenges the casual killing of birds such as Jackdaws and Rooks under a series of General Licences (if you’re unfamiliar with General Licences, Mark Avery has written a useful blog today).

[Jackdaw, by Laurie Campbell]

Some members of the shooting community have been unable to get their heads around the legal challenge, and in amongst their predictable and lamentable personal insults and abuse towards the Wild Justice directors on social media, not many of them have been able to display the tiniest hint of comprehension.

If they’d read the latest edition of Shooting Times though, there’s a perfect example of why the Wild Justice legal challenge is long overdue.

This is p38 and is a regular column written by Liam Bell, chairman of the National Gamekeepers’ Organisation:

Who “needs” more shooting?!

And is this so-called “need” sufficient justification to kill birds under the terms of a General Licence? No, it most definitely isn’t, but that is clearly what has been going on, for decades.

Thanks, Shooting Times, for helping to frame the Wild Justice legal challenge so effortlessly.

Some on social media have been accusing the Wild Justice directors of ‘making money’ from this challenge – they seem to struggle with the concept of Wild Justice being a non-profit company. It’s not that hard to grasp, is it?

Others (although often the same!) have accused Wild Justice of wasting public funds by seeking a judicial review – that’ll be the same people who recently supported a judicial review application by the Countryside Alliance, BASC and the National Gamekeepers’ Organisation to contest a decision by Natural Resources Wales to ban pheasant shooting on the Welsh Government Estate! Gosh, the irony! Their application for judicial review was refused (see here).

Meanwhile, 737 fantastic people have contributed to the Wild Justice crowdfunder, raising £18k of the £36k target within 48 hours. That’s a brilliant start. If you’d like to support the legal challenge, please click HERE

Thank you

The non-profit company Wild Justice launched last month with the intention of taking legal action, on behalf of wildlife, against public bodies where they are failing to protect species and/or habitats.

Wild Justice’s first case has just been announced and it is a legal challenge against the casual killing of birds permitted under Natural England’s General Licences.

The statutory agency Natural England allows the unlimited killing of a wide variety of bird species under a series of ‘General Licences’ which are published at the start of each year. Birds such as Carrion Crows, Rooks, Magpies, Woodpigeons, Jackdaws, Jays and Ring-necked Parakeets can be killed without applying for a licence, without having to justify why the action is necessary, without having to explain why alternative non-lethal measures such as scaring or proofing are ineffective or impracticable, and without having to report on how many birds are killed. All a person needs to do to ‘qualify’ to kill unlimited numbers of these birds is to claim to have read and understood the relevant General Licence.

[Photo of a Jay, by Laurie Campbell. This is one of several species which may be killed in unlimited numbers under the General Licence]

Wild Justice believes this system is unlawful despite the fact that it has been in existence for decades and has ‘authorised’ the casual killing of millions of birds. Wild Justice contends that it is the licensing authority’s (Natural England’s) legal responsibility to satisfy itself that killing these birds is an appropriate last resort. However, in the General Licences issued on 1 January 2019 Natural England ducks its responsibility and instead places the decision-making completely in the hands of the General Licence user.

Wild Justice is seeking a judicial review of Natural England’s decision to issue General Licences GL04, GL05 and GL06 on 1 January 2019. Similar licences apply to Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland and this case may have implications in those countries too.

Wild Justice is not asking for the 2019 General Licences to be withdrawn, but rather that Natural England does not issue further General Licences and instead develops a legal system for regulating and monitoring the killing of birds if lethal control is absolutely necessary as a last resort.

Wild Justice sees the General Licence system as a clear example of how wildlife killing is largely unregulated in the UK. The system is lax and allows gamekeepers, farmers and others to kill birds without any proper oversight or regulation.

To bring this legal challenge to court, Wild Justice is crowdfunding, with a target of £36,000 to cover all costs associated with such legal action.

If you’d like to support and contribute towards this legal challenge, please visit Wild Justice’s crowdfunder page HERE.

 

The Scotsman has published a feature article today by Robbie Marsland, Director of the League Against Cruel Sports Scotland and a partner in the Revive Coalition for grouse moor reform, outlining why grouse shooting is bad for the Scottish countryside.

You can read the article at The Scotsman here and we’ve reproduced the text below in case the link is lost somewhere in the future.

[Robbie Marsland speaking at the launch of the Revive Coalition, Nov 2018]

Here’s why grouse shooting is bad for the Scottish countryside

Problems of social justice and animal welfare trump any number of positives about grouse shooting, writes Robbie Marsland. Best estimates suggest that almost 20 per cent of Scotland is a grouse moor. In recent years, these moors have come under increasing scrutiny. The scale of wildlife crime, most notably the killing of eagles and hen harriers, has led a concerned Scottish Government to set up the Werrity Commission to review the activities on grouse moors and how this interacts with the environment and local communities.

The Commission’s brief is wider than raptor persecution and covers many of the issues of concern to Revive – a unique coalition of environmental, animal welfare and social justice organisations questioning the role grouse moors play in 21st century Scotland.

The Werrity report is expected “in the spring” and we await their conclusions with some interest. Another Government-commissioned report into the “Socio-Economic and Biodiversity Impacts of Grouse Moors” was released at the beginning of this month, produced by the James Hutton Institute and others. As with most issues to do with grouse moors, the report laments the lack of independent publicly available data to back up any findings. It also notes much of the data that is available is “self-selected” by the grouse shooting industry and has a “self-reporting bias”.

Some of that data doesn’t exactly help the grouse shooter’s cause. It was thought – again using industry figures – that the average wage of the 2,500 or so people working on grouse moors was around £11,500a year – less than the minimum wage. However, the new Government-commissioned report says that only £14.5 million is spent on wages. That’s equivalent of a lamentable £5,800 a year.

So the more grouse that can be raised and shot has a direct bearing on estate values. This confirms the Revive coalition’s opinion that the intensification of grouse moor management is aimed at maximising the numbers of grouse to be shot. This can lead to grouse population densities at around 100 times their natural state. This is achieved by the removal of anything that threatens the grouse – except of course, the people who pay to shoot them for entertainment. Foxes, stoats, weasels, and crows are ruthlessly targeted with snares and traps. Medication is left out in the open in the hope it will protect the grouse from worms. Lead shot litters the countryside and protected birds of prey continue to mysteriously disappear. And an average of 26,000 mountain hares are killed each year. Those who shoot the mountain hares say they need to because they either spread disease to the grouse or they “over graze” the heather that is the staple food of the grouse.

There is no scientific data to support either reason and the Socio-Economic and Biodiversity report explicitly backs this up. The Scottish Government, at the highest level, has made it clear that it finds this annual killing repugnant and that it intends to stop it. That was a year ago after Revive coalition members drew public attention to film of one such cull in the Cairngorms. Now that their own commissioned report confirms that it has no utility we look forward to swift Government protection of mountain hares.

Then we have the vexed issue of muir burn, where huge swathes of heather are set on fire to make life better for the grouse and so increase their numbers. The Socio-Economic and Biodiversity report sits on the fence on this issue, mentioning “positive and negative impacts” and the lack of data on the impact the burning has beneath the ground.

The report also recommends more research into the levels of the heat intensity of the burning. It does, however, note that there are examples of grouse moors where muir burn is not practised and raises the question if it is needed at all. Despite the report agreeing with the recent Common Weal report that grouse shooting provides a terrible return on investment – especially taking into account the scale of land used – it also casts doubt on possible alternatives. The Revive coalition contests those doubts.

In general, the report, as it should, looks at the “positives” and “negatives” and often declines to make a firm recommendation as there is not enough independent data. From the Revive coalition perspective, there are two elements missing from the “negative” column. These are social justice and animal welfare. That almost 20 per cent of Scotland has such a tiny comparative benefit to local communities so that a small number can shoot wild birds for entertainment are two “negatives” that we believe should trump any number of positives. And we are not alone. Benchmark polling commissioned by Revive in Scotland shows that there is already a close majority against grouse shooting and that only 0.25 per cent of Scots eat grouse more than two or three times a year.

Grouse moors are used to intensive management. Let’s see how they stand up to intensive scrutiny.

ENDS

This is a fantastic opportunity to have a real impact on the frontline of raptor conservation in one of the country’s persecution hotspots, the driven grouse moors in the Dark Peak area of the Peak District National Park.

The Upland Skies project appears to be the conservation world’s alternative to the useless pseudo-partnership known as the Peak District Birds of Prey Inititiative, which has consistently failed to meet its targets (to restore populations of raptors to the Dark Peak) and has been distracted and disrupted by the antics of the Moorland Association and others over many years.

Have a look at the organisations involved with this Upland Skies partnership project and there’s every probability that it will stay on track and achieve its objectives.

Job details below:

Salary starting at £25,463 – £27,585 per annum

Full time, 12 month contract

Closing date: 27 March 2019

Interview date: 10 April 2019

For more details and an application form, please see here

Excellent news! Highly-regarded environmentalist Tony Juniper has finally been appointed as the new Chair of Natural England and he’ll begin on 23 April 2019.

Environment Secretary Michael Gove confirmed Tony’s appointment yesterday with this press statement. It comes after a long recruitment process, including some vacuous questioning from two parliamentary committees last month (see here). It’s probably safe to say the Countryside Alliance won’t be celebrating this appointment.

Michael Gove said: “Tony will bring great experience and passion to Natural England from a career dedicated to conservation from his role at WWF to advising the Prince of Wales.

Natural England has a key part to play in the government’s 25 year plan for the environment and ensuring we can protect nature for future generations.

That is why I am looking forward to working with Tony as he leads the organisation and ensures Natural England can continue delivering the government’s environmental priorities“.

Tony Juniper said: “Natural England’s vital role in defending and enhancing our nation’s natural environment has never been more important. It is a real honour to have been appointed as the new Chair and I am very much looking forward to working with the Natural England teams and many partners across the country in delivering the biggest possible positive impact that we can.

Natural England’s work is very wide ranging, from protecting our National Nature Reserves to advising farmers and from opening England’s new coastal path to ensuring greater public access to our wonderful natural areas.

As Chair, my aim will be to celebrate, protect and deepen the impact of Natural England’s excellent work, not only for the sake of our wildlife and beautiful landscapes, but also for the huge benefits that our success brings for society“.

He’s going to be a busy guy. We look forward to seeing whether he can drag Natural England from its current disreputable position to something more like the nature conservation agency it once was and we hope can be again.