Further to previous blogs about NatureScot’s utterly shambolic and unenforceable changes made to the grouse moor licensing scheme in Scotland following a legal threat from the grouse shooting industry (see here and here), this afternoon Scottish Greens MSP Mark Ruskell began the parliamentary process of challenging what he describes as the “vast loophole“.
Speaking during Portfolio Questions (Justice & Home Affairs) in the Chamber, Mark asked the following question:
“It’s becoming clear that the way land is defined though the Wildlife Management & Muirburn Act has severely compromised the most important legal deterrent to wildlife crime that we have.
So will the Cabinet Secretary discuss with other Cabinet colleagues with a view to bringing in an amendment to the Land Reform Bill to close the vast loophole that now exists?
The illegal persecution of birds of prey clearly must end“.
The Cabinet Secretary for Justice & Home Affairs, Angela Constance, responded:
“Presiding Officer, I will ask Ministers and the Cabinet Secretary responsible for issues in and around land reform to engage directly with the Minister“.
Bravo, Mark! Well done and thank you for picking this up so quickly.
If an amendment is feasible to close the “vast loophole” in the grouse moor licence then the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill seems the obvious vehicle. This Bill is currently at Stage 1 and that stage has to be completed by 28 March 2025. The lead committee scrutinising this Bill is the Net Zero, Energy & Transport Committee of which Mark is a member.
UPDATE 24 January 2025: NatureScot capitulated on grouse moor licensing after legal threats by game-shooting industry (here)
UPDATE 10 February 2025: Parliamentary questions lodged on grouse moor licensing shambles in Scotland (here)
Raptor Persecution UK 
Thank goodness for Mark Ruskell and RPUK. This demonstrates clearly how government has worked, or in reality has not worked, over the centuries. Many changes in legislation in Scotland have been introduced, to no avail, in the prevention of raptor persecution. This change, if allowed to stand, will continue the previous legislative failures.
Well done to Mark Ruskell. However I was expecting Jim Fairlie to do something – it was/is his Bill after all.
Even if this change is reversed, and the legislation is passed, it may not yet be successful. In 2017, the Crown Office intervened to ensure that the RSPB could not provide information to the police obtained by the investigation team, despite showing clear commission of crimes. There are many powerful people determined to ensure that this criminality can persist.
NatureScot seems to be either incompetent or content to allow criminal activity on the moors to continue.
Animal Interfaith Alliance has written to them as per Ruth’s report and also asked them to expedite the FOI she has requested.
Agree about Mark Ruskell – he is excellent in other aspects of animal welfare too.
Yes well done Mark Russell and RPUK yes the government and Crown offuce legislation needs to be challenged and changed to allow RSPB to be able to provide information things must hopefully change.
Well done Mark Russell. I have written to the First Minister (my MSP) and Board Members of NatureScot. I just can’t decide whether those involved with the obfuscation of this legislation are wilfully & maliciously disruptive by manipulating legal loopholes or just out and out incompetents. Whatever, I urge any one reading this to write to their MSP – just get the word out and kick up a stink. This is not the new era for Scottish uplands envisaged.
Easier just to ban it completely – like with the Hunting Act it is clear there is no intention on the part of the industry to do anything to put its house in order.
Totally agree, Roderick. They have had multiple chances to stop killing wildlife and taken no notice at all.
I think it is fair to say that if the Scottish Government lawyers cannot find any way to license Grouse shooting then the only recourse left to the Scottish Parliament is to ban it (or allow rampant criminality to publicly defeat its own laws and the Police).
I wonder which route the Scottish Government will choose?
Yes indeed – thank you too, Keith.
[Ed: it’s a bit premature for that & could backfire. Let’s just wait]
It’s worth remembering that a licensing scheme was very much the compromise option suggested by Werritty in order to get unanimity from its members. The majority were in favour of an outright ban. The idea was that a licensing scheme should be attempted and if persecution continued a ban would follow.
Perhaps these manoeuvers to emasculate the scheme have in effect short circuited the process and it would be best to now just move to straightforward ban.
The Werritty review group was NOT in favour of a ban, and the decision to support a licensing scheme was split (as was completely predictable given there were grouse shooting industry reps on the ‘independent’ panel).
The idea that a licensing scheme was to be tried, but if it failed then a ban would be called for, came from pragmatic conservationists. That idea is still very much in play.
You are of course correct. Apologies for the misleading comment. I had misremembered what Werritty had said.
All great comments, and I wish the MSP and RPUK the very best, but surely, even if this ‘loophole’ is reversed, we are back to the previous legislation, where there were virtually no prosecutions, despite considerable evidence. The fat landowners employ even fatter solicitors, to get them off the hook. I recently emailed RSPB on this issue, and they said they only had a small team covering such a large area. I suggested that perhaps they should concentrate all their resources in one small hot spot, and get a high profile case to Court, they said they would pass this on to the team. We really need some high level ‘naming and shaming’.