Last week I blogged about how the Moorland Association (grouse moor owners’ lobby group in England) had been booted off the ‘partnership’ designed to tackle illegal raptor persecution in England and Wales (the Raptor Persecution Priority Delivery Group – RPPDG), after the Moorland Association had published an inflammatory blog that looked to be an attempt to sabotage the National Wildlife Crime Unit’s (NWCU) new Hen Harrier Taskforce (see here).
It seems that the Moorland Association’s inflammatory blog wasn’t an isolated incident, but more like the last straw for the NWCU.
A series of FoI responses has revealed some fascinating correspondence between the Moorland Association and the NWCU, about the Hen Harrier Taskforce, in the run up to the Moorland Association being booted out of the RPPDG last week.
I’ll post some of the correspondence below (there’s more to come) and although the names of the individuals have been redacted, it’s clear to me (from some other information released) that the Moorland Association’s correspondent is CEO Andrew Gilruth.
You can see that the Moorland Association is following a familiar line that we’ve seen from shooting industry organisations in recent years – that of putting pressure on the police to change the narrative on raptor persecution crimes (e.g. BASC did it here; National Gamekeepers Organisation did it here and again here) but this time the NWCU has called it out and has suggested that the Moorland Association is “wasting time and distracting from the real work” [i.e. that of tackling illegal raptor persecution, in this case hen harriers].
The Moorland Association’s response is to accuse the NWCU of “entirely unprofessional conduct” (cue official complaint). From what I’ve read, the NWCU has acted with patience and professionalism in the face of an arrogant and disruptive influence.
The following two files show correspondence between the NWCU and the Moorland Association from 21 December 2023 – 10 June 2024 and from 20 June 2024 – 8 July 2024:
UPDATE 22 November 2024: Revealed: letter of expulsion to Andrew Gilruth (CEO, Moorland Association) from Head of National Wildlife Crime Unit (here)
Raptor Persecution UK 
Amusing that they object to “persecution”, but themselves insist on the loaded term “activist”.
Of course the Moorland Association is a neutral broker – it’s only the people on the other side that are “activists”. Our (ex) Tory MP used to observe the same strange distinction – his canvassers were “supporters” whereas their equivalents representing other parties were activists. Familiar petty semantics.
I wondered if they were maybe objecting to the term ‘raptor persecution’ directly because of this blog? If someone only half-interested reads about a Police scheme to thwart ‘illegal killing’ then they may not necessarily be inclined to type ‘raptor persecution’ into an internet search engine, see this blog and then open mouthed go “oh shit, so this is what the problem is!”
Agree with you about use of term ‘activist’ – it’s next door to ‘extremist’, or it can also be used to conjure up ‘eccentric’ which is next door to ‘nutter’ i.e . people not to be bother with, etc.
The game lobby has been using this sort of argument about semantics and phraseology for years and years in all and any “cross party” discussions. Having been party to some of it, it is both pointless and frustrating as it prevents proper discussions about the important issues. That of course is what the cynic in me says they are doing, avoiding the important issues by raising petty concerns. Then perhaps not and they genuinely thing this nonsense is important, in which case the whole exercise of discussion with them is indeed pointless.
Perhaps it shows Andrew ” Killtruth” is less adept at this than his predecessor was as at least she kept them in the “game.” Everyone is right about the word “Activist” usually used be even more scurrilous shooting groups to suggest we are all animal rights “loonies”. Perhaps in return we should be calling them Criminals, potential criminals or supporters of the criminal or perhaps just blood sport enthusiasts.
I was especially amused by the claims “I am sorry to be so blunt, but at least you can’tnow pretend to be unaware of how thousands of law-abiding citizens see it” If their membership and supporters were truly this law abiding there would be no persecution problem in the first place. Truly glad to see the back of them and their self intitled filibustering and pomposity, it should serve as a huge warning to any shooting groups still involved.
The wind always changes. The shooting lobby has done nothing whatsoever to clean up its act when it had space under a friendly Government. It will now whinge vocally about the unfairness of having to face up to its cynical inaction but I hopefully the new Government will fail to fall for the crocodile tears.
Well let’s hear some pressure being put directly on the new Labour government! (There certainly wasn’t anything from this blog – or Mark Avery’s comments on Labour’s manifesto – which certainly didn’t hold out much hope for movement on the environment or raptor persecution in particular. Let’s hear the same level of criticism that the SNP got in these blog comments over the years now aimed at the Labour government of England).
I have precious little faith in Labour prioritising the environment – in fact, they appear to be keen on targeting it (designating parts of the Green Belt as Grey Belt and building over it) in favour of unlimited economic and population/immigration growth… as if there was no such thing as an accelerating anthropogenic environmental and climate crisis threatening our continued existence.
But… they may not protect the ‘interests’ of the landed gentry, in the shorter term, quite as blatantly as Tory Defra Ministers did?
We will soon see… but they have already ditched their ‘promise’ over Leveson Part 2:-(
How interesting that the correspondence from the NWCU states that: “The “Clear Hold Build” model is another useful tool that the police use to deal with serious and organized crime, and I have incorporated those principles into the HTF (Harrier Task Force) from the very beginning”.  Why would that be?
“Why would that be?”
Good question. Because they know they are dealing with serious and organised crime, whilst Natural England – possibly under pressure from its sponsoring Department – apparently do not?