Further to my blog on Monday (here) outlining how Scotland’s grouse moor licensing scheme had already been sabotaged by the grouse shooting industry, today NatureScot has announced the commencement of its utterly shambolic and unenforceable changes made to the licence:
NatureScot is still stating, “We expect the area covered by the licence to be the full extent of the grouse moor“. This ‘expectation’ has no legal weight whatsoever.
As I discussed previously, the grouse moor owners can simply draw an arbitrary line around their grouse butts, denoting the reach of a shotgun pellet, and argue that THAT is the area where they take/kill grouse and thus that should be the extent of the licensable area:
What this means in practice is that if any raptor persecution offences take place outside of that licensable area, the grouse moor/licence holder will not lose his licence because there won’t have been a breach of the new licensing condition.
NatureScot has tried to address this loophole by introducing a second change, which, according to NatureScot, “Will allow us to revoke the licence if raptor persecution which is connected to the grouse moor takes place outside of this licensed area“.
Actually, it won’t, because how on earth will the authorities demonstrate that the raptor persecution crime was “connected to the grouse moor“? On a mixed shooting estate (i.e. the estate hosts grouse, pheasant and red-legged partridge shoots), how will NatureScot determine whether a poisoned golden eagle, found on a different part of the estate away from the grouse moor, was killed in connection to the grouse moor as opposed to ‘in connection with’ the pheasant or red-legged partridge shoot? How will NatureScot determine who laid the poisoned bait?
All the licence holder has to prove in their defence is that they’ve taken “reasonable steps” to prevent raptor persecution on their estate (e.g. their employees all sign contracts swearing to uphold the law), the gamekeepers will all give ‘no comment’ police interviews, and it will be virtually impossible to identify the perpetrator. Any half-decent defence lawyer will shred any attempt made by NatureScot to revoke a licence based on such uncertainty.
It’s exactly the same situation we had before the licencing scheme became enacted, and, incidentally, is exactly WHY the licensing scheme was introduced, to get around these issues!
The other big shocker within these new changes is that all the other offences listed in the Wildlife Management & Muirburn Act that are supposed to trigger a licence revocation (i.e. offences on the Protection of Badgers Act 1992, Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996, Conservation (Natural Habitats etc) Regulations 1994, Animal Health & Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006, Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Act 2023) are NOT covered by this second change to the licence. That second change ONLY applies to raptor persecution offences.
Honestly, these new changes are so, so poorly thought through, and so, so far away from the Scottish Parliament’s intention when passing the Bill, it’s astonishing.
Stand by for more news about this later today…
UPDATE 13 November 2024: Mark Ruskell MSP starts parliamentary process of challenging the “vast loophole” in new grouse moor licence (here)
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)
UPDATE 14 November 2025: Scottish Minister Jim Fairlie provides rationale behind proposed amendment to close loophole on grouse shoot licence (here)
Raptor Persecution UK 
Admittedly I know nothing of naturescot the amendments to the grouse moor licensing bill is the biggest load of bollocks I’ve read in a long time it actually makes the whole thing worthless even to a lay man with no legal knowledge just read it and it’s simple basically gunnies do what you like !!!!! I had a look at naturescots promotional bullshit and one thing was they say they want to help people enjoy nature responsibility, REALLY !!!! fuck me Someone explain to me how responsible it is to water down the bill passed through scottish parliament to actually give the grouse shooting scum free rain on our wildlife . How does naturescot leave itself open to threatened legal action from the gunnie scum in the 1st place do they not have legal people who would make sure the bill is watertight and could not be challenged? As a consequence of these amendments every wild animal and raptor shot or piosioned on grouse moors which will be many No doubt is a direct result of this Blood on your hands naturescot you are as bad as the scum with guns . Sent from AOL on Android
you are completely right. Bloody waste of lawyers fees, charity fees and everyone’s time and money…..from a non shooting person. Time the Scottish government actually did the job they have been handsomely paid for. Stand up and be accountable!
these rules were written by snowflakes for snowflakes!
Surely it’s time for a whip round for Wild Justice?Sent from my iPad
Utter bullshit is this what came down from the Scottish Parliament ….No so get naturescot(idiots) sorted out NOW.
Please excuse my ignorance but how did the Scottish Government allow NatureScot to make these changes? Surely the SG must have known what was going on?
That’s unclear (to me) at the moment. Waiting for NatureScot to respond to my FoI request to find out just what went on. Unsurprisingly, they’ve already told me they need another 20 working days (in addition to the 20 they’ve already had) to send me the docs.
NatureScot continues to disappoint. I frequently ‘bump into’ its staff, and take the opportunity to inform them of damage being done to NNRs etc. Their response is always the same: ‘phone the police’. They don’t even bother putting signs up to inform people that they’re going onto a protected site. Pathetic.
The predecessor to Nature Scot, certainly in the higher echelons, has form in this area. The ludicrous events in Strathbaan where, somewhat as in England, the organisation conspired with the criminals, to provide cover for killing of wild birds.
As the old song says” Money talks, money talks, dirty cash they need you, dirty cash they want you. And as long as the brown envelopes fly around more than the raptors, it would appear to be a lost cause
I don’t think NatureScot is the ‘bad guy’ here. They can only do the best within the limits of the legislation. I would be interested in seeing the legal advice on this, which I appreciate you have requested in your FOI.
I haven’t looked into the nuts and bolts of the legislation but I think that it comes down to the wording inserted by section 10 of the Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Act 2024 into the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981:
16AA Licensing: land on which certain birds may be killed or taken
(1)The relevant authority may, on the application of an owner or occupier of an area of land, grant a licence for the purposes of permitting the killing or taking of any type of bird included in Part 1B of Schedule 2 on the land (a “section 16AA licence”), if it is satisfied that it is appropriate to do so.
The application is made by the landowner/occupier and it is for them to specify the area of land to which the application relates. The licence is for the purposes of “killing or taking of any type of bird”. Therefore the application only requires to extend to the relevant area of land for those purposes. I think an attempt to amend legislation that a licence must cover the entirety of the landowner’s interest will be challenged. There may also be a further loophole by having the occupier of land be the applicant and the occupier’s interest is limited to smaller areas. I haven’t looked at the legislation properly to say whether that is feasible.
I agree with you to a point, Winston. The legislation as drafted left the gaping loophole and NatureScot, after taking legal advice, chose to change it. However, it’s the way NS has gone about making those changes that is the problem – the changes are simply unenforceable and take us back to the position we were in pre-licensing. The changes are nowhere near tight enough, and had NS consulted with others other than the grouse shooting industry, those changes could have been written in a way that leaves the criminals with no escape route. As they stand, they aren’t worth the paper they’re written on, and significantly narrow the intention of the Act as passed by the Parliament.
If the legislation is too loosely drafted to be effective that is the fault of the Scottish Parliament, not SNH.
So amend the legislation to make it fit for purpose, and let the shooting industry know that if they insist on making a licensing system too complex to work properly a sword will be taken to the Gordian knot and an outright ban introduced.
This because all the people with the power to make change happen, have invested interests with in the grouse moor industry.
They/him/her have too much to lose.
It will never change as along as these people remain in these positions of power & influence.
Yet we are told there’s no corruption in the UK!!
Really!
I think it is more down to the funny handshake and rolled up trouser leg brigade as they wield huge influence in Scotland. There is more than a whiff of corruption about this. Scottish Rite Freemasonry is the premier Rite in the UK. The head of it is our dear (said sarcastically) King Charles.
King Charles is not a freemason also his two brothers are not.
There are other members of the royal family that are.
Say the Grouse moor industry did have a way of just being licenced for the area around a shooting butt does that mean if a licence were revoked that they would just be able to move or re-build the butts elsewhere and carry on regardless ?
Every person and their families connected with nature Scotland need to be investigated thoroughly urgently to establish any connections with the shooting lobby AND the Scottish Government.
It says ‘leave a comment’ but tbh I’m speechless. The self-serving authorities, from the Scottish govt down, to the so called wildlife charities are in hock to the xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx. As far as grouse moors, Hen Harriers are routinely shot or poisoned, putting all the good work by people like Jemima Parry-Jones who breeds them for reintroduction. It’s literally hearbreaking seeing the love and devotion, with a lifetime of knowledge, being blasted out of the sky by shoot managers, so corrupted by money, they are blind to the ruination of the eco-system. It’s true, mankind f***s up EVERYTHING it touches.
“The self-serving authorities, from the Scottish govt down, to the so called wildlife charities are in hock to the xxxxx ”
Here we go, attacking wildife charities…
“As far as grouse moors, Hen Harriers are routinely shot or poisoned, putting all the good work by people like Jemima Parry-Jones who breeds them for reintroduction.”
Can this be the same Jemima Parry-Jones who so vociferously ‘supported’ the brood-meddling scheme and is a prominent member of its Project Board as Head of Bird Management? I wonder how much she was paid?
Click to access ne-hen-harrier-brood-management-project-plan.pdf
“Jemima Parry Jones, CEO, International Centre for Birds of Prey, brood management licence holder and raptor expert said: “Having been dubious about the project at the outset it has proved to be far more successful than I had dreamed. It is an honour to be working on this groundbreaking project that is clearly working, with no welfare issues and great survival rates”
I wonder what ‘no welfare issues’ mean in Jemima’s world?
See https://www.moorlandassociation.org/2022/05/new-milestone-passed-for-hen-harrier-scheme/
And this: https://www.nationalgamekeepers.org.uk/articles/a-promising-first-year-of-the-hen-harrier-conservation-breeding-programme-and-reintroduction
“Jemima Parry-Jones, chief executive of the International Bird of Prey Centre, Gloucester, said: “When I first heard of the brood management scheme, I was sceptical about if and how it would work but I am so happy to see that, year after year, it has delivered, taught us a great deal and given hen harrier chicks the best possible start to their lives.”
From: https://www.gwct.org.uk/blogs/news/2022/august/return-of-the-hen-harrier-%E2%80%93-new-chicks-take-off-as-pioneering-trial-reaches-key-milestone/
“given hen harrier chicks the best possible start to their lives.” I wonder if Jemima bothers to follow what happens to her Hen Harrier chicks later in life?
i take it that it would be ok for a person to stand on the red line during a shoot day and they would be safe???
NatureScot continues to disappoint. I frequently ‘bump into’ its staff, and take the opportunity to inform them of damage being done to NNRs etc. Their response is always the same: ‘phone the police’. They don’t even bother putting signs up to inform people that they’re going onto a protected site. Pathetic.
NatureScot seem to do very little to protect or encourage wildlife or biodiversity here. It’s disappointing to see them side with wherever the power and money is, time and time again.