Somebody has finally switched the lights on at Defra.
It’s been a very long time coming – too long in my opinion – but last week an announcement was made in the new Land Use Framework for England that the Westminster Government intends to explore options for the licensing of gamebird shooting and releases. This will cover gamebird shooting in both the uplands and the lowlands – in other words, Red Grouse, Pheasant and Red-legged Partridge shooting.
According to Defra, this policy paper sets out ‘How we can use our land more effectively to increase the resilience of our homes, communities, infrastructure, and food systems, while speeding up development and restoring nature‘ and comes after a public consultation last year.
There’s a good summary of some of the Framework measures, written by land reform campaigner and author Guy Shrubsole (see here), but of particular interest to this blog is the Framework section on gamebird shooting.
It says this:
It looks like the Framework is distinguishing fairly between the different types of gamebird shooting and the cost/benefit differences between them. For example, the environmental impacts of small, walked-up shoots where the emphasis is usually on the ‘experience’ of the day, is quite different to the impacts of the large, intensively managed commercial driven shoots where the emphasis (and value of the estate in the case of grouse shooting) is measured by the number of gamebirds shot each season.
But there’s no getting away from the fact that an estimated 60 million non-native gamebirds are released into the countryside every year for recreational shooting, and that is simply unacceptable and unsustainable. As is the widespread illegal killing of birds of prey on many gamebird shooting estates, both in the uplands and the lowlands.
The Government clearly recognises that the industry is incapable of self-regulation, hence a commitment to explore licensing as a form of regulation and restrictions on gamebird releases beyond those already in place on protected areas. Although we all know that the gamebird shooting industry as a whole is not celebrated for its adherence to the law, on so many levels (raptor persecution, lead ammunition, poisons caches, muirburn, tracks, rodenticides, releases on protected areas, biosecurity, illegally-set traps etc etc) so it’d be a surprise if it embraced any kind of governance, in whatever form that might take.
Indeed, the shooting industry’s response to the Framework announcement has been entirely predictable in its level of hysteria.
For example, Tim Bonner, CEO of the Countryside Alliance, is quoted in The Times saying the proposed regulation was “a declaration of war on game shooting“.
It’s not just gamebird shooting and releases on which Defra seems to have woken up.
Earlier this week there was a welcome announcement of a public consultation on greater protection for Woodcock and other protected bird species (see here) and yesterday another public consultation was announced, this time for how to implement a ban on so-called trail hunting.
Trail hunting is supposed to be a substitute for Fox hunting (which was banned under the Hunting Act 2004 by the previous Labour government) where hounds follow an artificial scent trail laid by humans. However, there has been significant evidence that trail hunting has been used by many hunts to conceal or provide plausible deniability for Fox hunting, leading to Labour’s election manifesto commitment to ban it.
Given the Government’s overall pathetic response to the continued call for a ban on driven grouse shooting last year (here), and its appalling attitude towards reducing environmental protections in its Planning & Infrastructure Act 2025 (here), it’s good to finally see some progressive thinking.
UPDATE 30 March 2026: Welsh Government inches towards gamebird licensing, with another ‘evidence review’ (here)
Raptor Persecution UK 
‘…the Westminster Government intends to explore options for the licensing of gamebird shooting and releases’.
And how long will this take the I wonder?
We still have fox hunting which has been banned for over 20 years now, and it still continues, so I won’t be holding my breath.
At least the Government clearly recognises that the industry is incapable of self-regulation, let’s hope they keep to that; although in my opinion, it should be banned completely
The hunting ban twenty years ago was to me really just a sort of “gesture ban” in the general direction of travel and without a political will to seriously enforce it. I often wonder if the laws to protect birds of prey sixty or so years ago was maybe done with just the same mindset? I would like to read contemporary accounts from that period to gauge what the intention really was and whether people thought those laws would be seriously enforced or not, and how disappointed or resigned they were in the immediate period following, but so far I have never found a book with a great lot on it.
The government has just woken up and realised that it is now under significant pressure electorily from the Green Party. Banning trail hunting was a manifesto commitment.
I put up with game bird shooting for years where I live next to a wood on the xxxxx Estate until I found a Woodcock shot for nothing. I was so angry that I decided to stand in front of the guns. They stopped and moved to another woodland. The pheasant pen they used to hold the birds for release was then damaged in storm Gorretti. They can’t even be bothered to clean it up and can ,in itself be a danger to birds. I’ve seen A kestrel trapped by the chicken wire.
Forgive me for being party political, but having a Labour government does make a difference. This wouldn’t have happened under the Tories. And heaven help us if Farage gets into No. 10.
Richard Watson
Sent from Outlook for Android
“Forgive me for being party political, but having a Labour government does make a difference. This wouldn’t have happened under the Tories”
True. Something else which wouldn’t have happened under the Tories, the Labour Government’s proposed ‘displacement’ of the Green Belt with a Grey Belt, to be specifically targeted for building:-(
‘The government has broken its promise to protect nature by weakening planning rules for housing developers”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/dec/16/ministers-weaken-biodiversity-planning-rule-nature-england
“A shameful step back for nature as UK Government pushes through damaging Planning and Infrastructure Bill”
https://www.wildlifetrusts.org/blog/public-affairs/shameful-step-back-nature-uk-government-pushes-through-damaging-planning-and
Rachel Reeves said: “So we are reducing the environmental requirements placed on developers when they pay into the nature restoration fund that we have created…
…so they can focus on getting things built, and stop worrying about bats and newts.
And to build our new infrastructure like nuclear power plants, trainlines and windfarms more quickly…
… we are changing the rules to stop blockers getting in the way of development…
… through excessive use of Judicial Review.
This Bill, the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, is a priority for this government.”
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/chancellor-vows-to-go-further-and-faster-to-kickstart-economic-growth
Just to say that the Hunt Saboteurs have announced they will be targeting game bird shooting as well as hunting now.
https://www.huntsabs.org.uk/the-silence-of-the-skies-shooting-season-end/
I wonder whether the quantity of grain fed to these multiple millions of birds is a consideration for Defra.
To be frank, this is also good politics. Nobody who is involved in driven shooting is going to be voting anything apart from Reform or Conservative.
“To be frank, this is also good politics. Nobody who is involved in driven shooting is going to be voting anything apart from Reform or Conservative.”
Probably true. Ditto hunting. One then wonders why the (Westminster) Labour Party is so luke warm to putting a firm end to blood sports, once and for all: it has all been rather like pulling teeth over the decades:-(
Not to mention its apparent disdain for our natural environment:-(