Following the Scottish Parliament’s approval of the Wildlife Management & Muirburn (Scotland) Act 2024, which introduces a licensing scheme for the shooting of red grouse in Scotland in another attempt to bring an end to the ongoing illegal killing of birds of prey on many Scottish grouse moors, the landowners’ lobby group, Scottish Land & Estates (SLE) hosted a Moorland Conference on 11 June 2024 and invited Minister Jim Fairlie to speak.
I was interested in what the Minister would say so I asked the Scottish Government for a copy of his notes/speech.
This is what the Scottish Government sent to me:
There was a caveat at the end of the letter from the Scottish Government that went like this:
“I would like to advise you that the actual speech by Minister Jim Fairlie, when he addressed the Moorland Conference on 11 June 2024, is likely to differ to the copy of the speech and/or prompt notes provided to him“.
I don’t think there’s anything particularly surprising in the copy of the speech that’s been provided – there’s nothing here that Fairlie didn’t say during his time on the parliamentary committee that scrutinised the Bill at stages one and two, nor during his time as Minister as he steered it through the Stage 3 debate before the Parliament voted to approve the Bill.
Nevertheless, it’s always a good idea to keep track of what Ministers are saying at private meetings, not least to be able to hold them to account if they renege on their previous commitments but also to be able to side-step any hyped-up claims of what’s been said by anyone wishing to present a distorted narrative.
For example, I read a review of the conference that focused heavily on Fairlie’s favourable comments about the grouse shooting industry but was predictably light on his comments linking illegal raptor persecution to grouse shooting.
Fairlie has always been clear about that undeniable link, especially during his time on the Rural Affairs Committee when it was scrutinising the Bill (here) so it’s good to see him reiterate that again to the grouse shooting industry, even though it was sandwiched between some top level fawning.
Raptor Persecution UK 
“The Scottish Government acknowledges the
decisive role moorland management plays when it
comes to biodiversity and nature – including its
importance for red listed ground nesting birds in
particular, such as curlew, lapwing, golden plover
and black grouse.”
That is a very narrow view of ‘biodiversity’.
“The Scottish Government acknowledge the
importance of grouse shooting when it comes to… electricians, plumbers, etc”
That’s stretching the point a bit?
“The Scottish Government understand the
importance of grouse shooting for social cohesion,
mobility and wellbeing…”
Stick together, keep schtum and you’ll get on, … here’s a handout for helping.
As if nothing else could do that, but better.
Well said, Keith. In such stormy seas it’s as well keeping a keen eye for new currents emerging that might attempt to redirect the course, given recent political developments.
The Minister reiterated the background, scope and objectives of what appears to be ground breaking Scottish .legislation. He acknowledged a government’s responsibility for the well being of all citizens including those you don’t happen to like, and he sensibly avoided any appearance of partiality, which might compromise enforcement. He was not there to fantasise about some rural revolution, which will certainly come in due course, but which will likely not involve the ritual paranoid speculation and the recycling of media corruption smears so popular here among Scotland’s less evolved neighbours. Having had to deal with the loathsome grouse industry for nearly thirty years I’m delighted to see another significant nail in its coffin and happy to trust in the good faith of the Government and NatureScot until shown otherwise and I don’t see any reason yet why you should do otherwise.
I can’t question the faith you place in the people and associated Institutions that have been proved as inadequate from the passing of the protection of wild birds act in 1954 which was serially ignored. This is a course of habitual behaviour evident over many years while those with the power to work within the law, and force their employees to do so too, have not. This is not only true of wild birds but also of Fox Hunting, muir burning, the dosing of red grouse with pharmaceuticals and much more. I find your faith lies somewhere between being touching and highlighting the position of vested interests.
The large landowners have fought this new legislation every step of the way, though it was well within their power to aid it and add new ideas of their own. This was well within their power to do so but they chose not too.
I see no reasons why their direction of travel since 1954 in regards to guidelines and legislation should be any different this time around but, unlike yourself, i choose to give them an opportunity to prove me wrong. You, however, choose to criticise and insult those who even acknowledge that this initiative might well suffer the same fate as those in the past — simply ignored and business as usual carrying on.
Your comment about “Scotland’s less evolved neigbours” simply gives credence to the attitudes I identified as existing since at least 1954 in the demographic in question. It encompasses the very soul of those so powerful they can ignore the laws and Guidelines if it goes against their own wishes. No change there then — so why should their be in their physical expression?
I’m afraid I don’t understand a word of that other than it bears no direct relationship to what I said, the gist of that being that we have ground breaking legislation which needs to be supported until shown otherwise and that the ritual paranoia about unseen dark forces conspiring against it is a waste of time. The Licensing legislation is the first time that the industry itself has been seriously targeted through the civil law instead of targeting the individual through the criminal law. By far the biggest obstacle to date over several decades has been the difficulty of obtaining convictions of individuals, which even when obtained have no impact on individual estates or the industry. You see no potential in the change, if you even recognise it, preferring to mutter about continued landowner immunity in a changed environment. I insulted no-one and I am under no illusions about landowners or about officialdom .
If we ignore the rural “businesses” of Game dealers & Gun shops since they are irrelevant to many (if not most) people, and nowadays often take place online from centralised depots anyway, it’s almost impossible in rural Scotland to obtain the services of a Builder, Plumber or Electrician.
Just another of the many flawed rural economy arguments put forward by those who seldom live in a normal rural environment (both Estate owners & politicians.)
I’m curious; Why does it always seem to be Red grouse which are shot, and not Black grouse?
Can anyone tell me? Personally, I find Black grouse more attractive, visually, but I was wondering if Black grouse use a different habitat, or something.
https://www.gwct.org.uk/advisory/guides/conserving-the-black-grouse/shooting-a-sportsman%E2%80%99s-code/#:~:text=Black%20grouse%20are%20legal%20quarry,only%20where%20productivity%20is%20high.&text=Spring%20counts%20show%20that%20leks,100%20hectares%20of%20suitable%20habitat.
https://www.gunsonpegs.com/guide-to-shooting/shooting-seasons#:~:text=In%20England%20Wales%20and%20Scotland,on%20the%2010th%20of%20December.
https://www.forestry.gov.scot/images/corporate/pdf/fcs-action-blackgrouse.pdf
https://forestryandland.gov.scot/learn/wildlife/black-grouse#:~:text=It's%20on%20the%20Red%20List,grouse%20habitat%20and%20reduce%20threats.
It is the particular way that Red Grouse can be driven in large numbers by the wide arc of a beating line over their habitat of open moor (and their speed going over the butts) that entranced the Victorians when breech loading shotguns & reliable mass produced cartridges were developed c1860s – 1880s. Black Grouse live different lives mainly on the moorland edge / among mixed (preferably natural) quite open wood/moorland mix, or slivers of regenerating scrubby birch wood in valleys and gills on the moors. GWCT study them widely. The fate of Black Grouse has rightly or wrongly become ‘owned’ by the shooting lobby – has become emblematic, literally. Many estates genuinely work to help them with planting of trees, etc, and good on them. Many who travel on the same bandwagon do not help them – and in fact adopt management practices* that harm them, all while they profess to be “saving them”.
It’s a big & highly politicised subject. Grey Partridge debate is the same with similar themes. Well worth getting into and visiting a selection of upland areas to see for yourself.
*Filling upland woods & moorland fringe with released pheasant & red leg partridges.
Maintaining a hard border between woods and heather moor on moorland edge, by burning/mowing right up to the woodland.
Burning/mowing/cutting down naturally regenerating woodland in valleys and gills. Stopping any natural spread of diverse habitat across vast bare open moor
Overgrazing and/or over “improving” rough pasture with excess vegetation control / weedwiping / diminishing diversity of grasses and plants.
That is too much for me to read: is there any mention of mountain hares? Thanks.
Should there be?
One of many such –
https://raptorpersecutionuk.org/2021/02/26/will-the-mass-slaughter-of-mountain-hares-on-grouse-moors-end-on-monday/
That is from 2021.