A couple of weeks ago I blogged about the Scottish Government’s and NatureScot’s decision to delay the introduction of muirburn licensing, which was due to begin on 15 September 2025 but now won’t start until 1 January 2026 thanks to lobbying by the grouse shooting industry (see here).
I wrote that as a result of this delay, we can expect to see an increase in the intensification of muirburn between 1 October – 31 December 2025 as grouse moor managers take full advantage of the opportunity to burn on deep peat until restrictions begin.
Intensification of grouse moor management looks like it’s already begun on some grouse moors.
Have a look at this satellite imagery from part of the moorland on the Raeshaw Estate in the Scottish Borders (image captured 13 May 2025, after the close of the 2024/25 muirburn season).
Look at the state of this!
According to the peat depth map that NatureScot has provided to help grouse moor managers determine peat depth for licensing purposes, this area is bang in the middle of an area defined in Scottish legislation as ‘deep peat’ (peat depth of 40cm+).
Using the timelapse function on Google Earth, it’s possible to look back at the ‘management’ of this area over the years:
Imagery date: 1 January 2007
Imagery date: 24 March 2014
Imagery date: 24 June 2018
Imagery date: 6 May 2020
Imagery date: 28 August 2021
Imagery date: 16 July 2022
Imagery date: 13 May 2025
Given the driven grouse shooting industry’s general rejection of cutting instead of burning (they claim it’s labour intensive, logistically difficult and doesn’t get rid of the ‘fuel load’ because it’s just dropped where it’s been cut), I’m guessing that this is muirburn. But it’s hard to differentiate between muirburn and cutting from satellite imagery so it really needs ground-truthing to know for sure. If any blog readers fancy a walk over to ‘The Sole’ on Raeshaw Estate to check, I’d be interested in seeing photographs.
But whether it’s cutting or burning, there’s no denying the intensification of grouse moor management here.
On 2 May 2025, Police Scotland issued a press statement about how two men had been charged in relation to the illegal killing of Red Kites in the grouse moor-dominated Strathdon area of the Cairngorms National Park in February 2025 (see here).
This general area on the NE side of the Cairngorms National Park has long been identified as a raptor persecution hotspot with several confirmed and alleged offences recorded in the area over a number of years.
The Police said the men would be reported to the Procurator Fiscal but since then there haven’t been any further updates.
NB:As two men have been charged, criminal proceedings are live so any comments about that case will not be published on this blog until proceedings have ended.
Shortly after the police issued that statement, land reform campaigner Andy Wightman published a fascinating blog about the lengths he has gone to to determine who might be the beneficial owner of North Glenbuchat Estate, one of a number of prominent sporting estates in the area – see here.
Photo by Ruth Tingay
Andy writes that he has submitted a report to Police Scotland about the estate owner’s (North Glen Estates Ltd, registered in the Turks and Caicos Islands) alleged failure to register its beneficial owner as required by recent land reform legislation in Scotland.
Andy published an update to his first blog on 13 May 2025 where he outlines how he was waiting for an interview with a Police Scotland officer about his findings (see here).
Andy’s second blog also provides commentary about someone else’s attempt to lodge a complaint about the alleged failure of another company to register the name of the beneficial owner of Craiganour Estate (see blog here).
All three blogs illustrate the ongoing complications of finding out who owns private estates in Scotland. This is of interest to RPUK readers due to the possibility of holding estate owners vicariously liable if certain wildlife crimes, but particularly raptor persecution offences, are proven to have taken place on an estate.
One investigation into alleged vicarious liability for raptor persecution has already been dropped in Scotland after the conviction of a gamekeeper on Kildrummy Estate in NE Scotland in 2014. The authorities tried to identify the owner but failed (see here). NB: The ownership of Kildrummy Estate has since changed hands and gamebird shooting is no longer permitted..
Since the 2014 Kildrummy case the rules around registering ownership have changed in Scotland and technically it should no longer be possible for beneficial owners to hide their identity behind overseas shell companies.
In 2020, Wild Justice won a significant legal challenge against Defra, forcing it to introduce a licensing scheme for the release of gamebirds (Pheasants & Red-legged Partridges) on or near Natura 2000 sites (see here).
Captive-bred non-native Pheasant poults, in pretty poor condition, being transported for release in the UK countryside. Photo by Ruth Tingay
In March this year, Defra announced that it would not be issuing General Licence 45 (GL45 – the licence under which restricted numbers of gamebirds can be released on or within 500m of Special Protection Areas) in 2025 because:
“It is currently not possible to rule out the risk of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) (which is currently very high) spreading to the bird features present on SPAs”.
That was a very sensible, precautionary decision by Defra. Protecting internationally significant bird populations is of far greater national importance than the unsustainable release of ~60 million non-native Pheasants and Red-legged Partridges by those who want to get their kicks from shooting them.
Natural England (now responsible for individual licences) went further, and on 14 April 2025 it advised the gamebird shooting industry that although they could still apply for individual licences for 2025 gamebird releases on or close to SPAs, some licences would only be permitted with a delayed release date for the poults, whereas licences for many other SPAs would be unlikely to be issued at all:
Natural England told the shooting industry that applications for individual licences could be made from 22 April 2025 and that NE aimed to determine applications within 15 working days.
Again, setting aside the absurdity of the statutory nature advisor giving permission to release millions of non-native gamebirds in to the countryside, NE’s advice to the shooting industry about limitations to individual licences was all very sensible in light of the heightened Avian Flu risk, and it gave the shooting industry plenty of time to adjust its plans for the 2025/26 shooting season.
Predictably, the shooting industry went into meltdown, with BASC claiming on 15 April 2025:
“The approach taken by Natural England risks jobs and will have a huge impact on rural economies, not to mention the conservation benefits that sustainable shooting delivers for species and habitats.
“These new restrictions risk bringing large parts of the countryside to a standstill. While we recognise the need to manage the risk of avian influenza, the damage to the countryside could be irreparable. The government should commit to revisiting licensing decisions as the risk of AI dissipates“.
Two months later on 13 June 2025, BASC announced it had started legal proceedings against Defra’s decision not to issue GL45 for the 2025/26 shooting season.
BASC has submitted a Pre-Action Protocol (PAP) letter, apparently on the basis that “Defra has still not provided the formal reason behind it or published a detailed decision-making document“.
The timing of BASC’s PAP letter appears to be just within the three-month time limit for bringing judicial review proceedings, but it’s not clear to me what the specific legal basis of the claim is, nor the remedy BASC is seeking. It looks more like a grandstanding exercise to appease BASC members, but I guess time will tell.
Meanwhile, back in the real world, it turns out that Defra’s precautionary decision not to issue GL45 this year due to the high risk of avian influenza was absolutely spot on.
Since 11 June 2025, there have been five outbreaks of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (H5N1) and protection zones have been established at all five premises, including one which is believed to be a commercial gamebird rearing facility.
The five current outbreaks are as follows:
11 June 2025 – near Ravensthorpe, Kirklees, West Yorkshire. Centred on grid ref: SE2206919016.
17 June 2025 – near Stanhope, Bishop Auckland, County Durham. Centred on grid ref: NZ0336936829.
20 June 2025 – near Linton-on-Ouse, Wetherby & Easingwold, North Yorkshire. Centred on grid ref: SE5024159461.
24 June 2025 – near Glyn Ceirlog, Wrexham. Centred on grid ref: SJ1591333699.
24 June 2025 – near Haverfordwest, Pembrokeshire. Centred on grid ref: SM8938621496.
Avian Influenza isn’t going away, and it’s not even peak season for outbreaks of this highly contagious notifiable disease (typically autumn/winter). As little faith as I have in Defra, I can’t see Ministers making a U-turn on its decision to withdraw GL45 this year, legal challenge or not.
UPDATE 31 July 2025: Four more Bird Flu outbreaks confirmed, including on a Pheasant shoot – yet selfish BASC starts another legal challenge against Govt restrictions on gamebird releases (here).
Andrew Muir MLA, Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs made the following statement in the Northern Ireland Assembly this week:
“The killing of birds of prey, whether deliberately or through improper use of pesticides or other poisons, is deplorable, it’s a crime, and it diminishes our biodiversity.
I recently met with the Northern Ireland Raptor Study Group, RSPB and Ulster Wildlife last week to discuss this issue and I recognise the need to address bird of prey persecution in Northern Ireland and am determined to take more action to help stamp out this repugnant activity.
My department is exploring ways to strengthen the enforcement and sanctions for the current plant protection product [PPP, also known as pesticides] legislation relating to storage and use of unauthorised plant protection products.
A new working group will also be established to pull together relevant stakeholders and fully consider a potential road map and requirements for any new secondary legislation to prohibit the possession of dangerous pesticides in Northern Ireland in the next Assembly mandate“.
Wow! 14 years of can-kicking by DAERA (Dept of Agriculture, Environment & Rural Affairs) seems to have finally been brought to an end by this decisive commitment to take action from Minister Muir.
Without doubt, this is a direct result of evidence-collecting and campaigning by the Northern Ireland Raptor Study Group (NIRSG), led by the wonderful Dr Eimear Rooney & Dr Marc Ruddock.
Following the discovery in May 2023 of two illegally poisoned White-tailed Eagles at Glenwherry, Northern Ireland’s only driven grouse moor, the NIRSG began a petition calling for Ministers to add a list of proscribed poisons to section 15B of the Wildlife (Northern Ireland) Order 1985, which has been missing from the legislation since it was last updated in 2011.
That petition attracted over 50,000 signatures (including many RPUK blog readers – thank you) and was handed in by the NIRSG to Minister Muir at Stormont last month, with support from the RSPB and Ulster Wildlife.
A week later, the Police Service of Northern Ireland revealed that a Red Kite had been found illegally poisoned in a raptor persecution hotspot in County Down (here).
Minister Muir’s recognition of this long-standing and ongoing issue, and his pledge to actually do something about it, is very welcome news and is in stark contrast to Defra’s pathetic filibustering on the same issue in England.
Huge congratulations to the Northern Ireland Raptor Study Group and their partners – this is a big win.
The RSPB did a fair bit of lobbying and campaigning on the back of the recent Wild Justice petition calling for a ban on driven grouse shooting.
Although agreeing with Wild Justice on the various problems associated with driven grouse moor management, the RSPB’s position was not to support a ban, but rather to push for a licensing scheme.
Calling for a licensing scheme has been RSPB policy since October 2020, after a period of internal review (see here).
It was good to see a couple of RSPB staff members attend the Westminster Hall debate last Monday, and on Friday it published the following statement (available on the RSPB website here but reproduced below because annoyingly, links to material on the RSPB website tend to break quite often).
On Monday 30 June Parliament debated the future of driven grouse shooting in England, and with it the future of vast swathes of our iconic upland landscapes. The debate was triggered by the petition launched by the campaign group Wild Justice, which was signed by over 104,000 people and called for a ban on driven grouse shooting.
Our position on shooting
The RSPB is neutral on the ethics of shooting, and concerned only with preventing the harm caused to wildlife through the management of some grouse shoots. This is why, while we support efforts that bring this important issue into the spotlight, our focus has long been on achieving a system of licensing for grouse shooting. We believe this, rather than an outright ban, is the most pragmatic way to secure a positive outcome for nature.
Licensing would raise environmental standards across the shooting industry and allow responsible shoots to continue to operate, while providing an effective deterrent for those who do harm, or worse, break the law.
Our concerns
We share the concerns of Wild Justice and all who signed the petition about the damaging and often illegal activities associated with the intensive management of land for grouse shooting:
Our latest report ‘Hen Harriers in the firing line’ highlights that there have been 102 confirmed cases of Hen Harrier persecution in the UK in the last five years, and these confirmed cases are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the true scale of this criminal activity, as many incidents happen in remote locations and go unreported. The report highlights that the average life expectancy of a young Hen Harrier in the UK is just 121 days, and that a Hen Harrier is 10 times more likely to die or disappear when on grouse moors. Despite this, there has not been a single conviction for Hen Harrier persecution in England.
More broadly, our latest Birdcrime report reveals that, between 2009-2023, there were 1,529 confirmed bird of prey persecution incidents in the UK involving 1,344 individual birds of prey, including Peregrines, Buzzards and Red Kites, as well as rare and recovering Hen Harriers and White-tailed Eagles. The majority of raptor persecution incidents are associated with land managed for gamebirds, and of all individuals convicted of bird of prey persecution-related offences between 2009 and 2023, 75% were connected to the gamebird shooting industry.
Grouse shooting estates often use burning of peatland vegetation as a land management technique intended to encourage the growth of young heather shoots on which Red Grouse feed. This practice damages the UK’s globally rare peatlands, contributing to climate change by degrading these natural carbon sinks, increasing air pollution and associated health risks, and increasing the risks of flooding for nearby communities.
Research has highlighted the scale of the use of lead shot used in the grouse shooting industry. In 2024/25, 100% of the grouse purchased from UK food retailers, and from which shot could be recovered, had been killed with lead. This is toxic to both wildlife (including birds of prey) and to humans.
And then there are other impacts including the largely unregulated use of veterinary medicines, and the damage caused by the construction of hill tracks and other infrastructure for shoots.
The Westminster debate
While there were some who spoke persuasively during the debate about the need for a robust regulatory framework if grouse shooting is to have a future, many spoke out against the calls for a ban. A wide range of arguments were given, from the socio-economic and cultural value of grouse shooting through to the often beneficial effects of legal predator control for some species of wading birds – most notably Curlews.
Importantly, however, although the concerns raised are arguments against a ban – none of them are arguments against licensing.
Almost all of those who spoke were unanimous in their outright and unequivocal condemnation of the illegal killing of birds of prey. But disappointingly few had suggestions for how this can be meaningfully addressed.
In summing up, Defra Minister Daniel Zeichner repeated the UK Government’s previous statements that they have no plans to ban grouse shooting, but acknowledged the strong opinions on both sides of the debate, and said that the Government would keep options under close review.
Licensing is urgently needed
Based on the growing body of evidence of the unacceptable and often illegal activities associated with grouse shooting, we believe grouse shoots should be licensed in England. Without change, there can be no sustainable future for our uplands.
Licensing has already been introduced in Scotland, and, as pro-shooting and anti-ban MP John Lamont stated during the debate, “that system has its flaws, but works adequately in other respects”.
We’re now calling on the UK Government to take swift action to introduce the licensing of grouse shooting in England, building on, and learning from the experience in Scotland.
Our Hen Harriers and other wildlife can’t wait. Those who operate responsible shoots would have nothing to fear, and much to gain, from a system that would make the unanimous calls for effective action on the illegal persecution of birds of prey a reality.
ENDS
I mentioned above that calling for a licensing scheme for driven grouse shooting has been the RSPB’s policy since October 2020 after the organisation undertook a comprehensive review of the evidence.
That policy was announced at the AGM in October 2020, and included the following statement:
‘Our focus is not on “walked up” grouse shooting, but we will re-double our efforts to secure effective licensing for “driven” grouse shooting, and we will learn from the developments anticipated soon on this issue in Scotland. We will provide an annual assessment of progress and review our position within five years. Failure to deliver effective reform will result in the RSPB calling for a ban on driven grouse shooting‘. [Emphasis is mine].
The findings of that five-year policy review are due to be announced in three month’s time at the RSPB’s October 2025 AGM.
It’ll be really interesting to hear what the RSPB says about the findings of it’s five-year review. I’d guess, given the RSPB’s response to the Westminster debate, that it will be sticking to its policy of calling for a licensing scheme rather than a ban, but if so, how will it justify that ‘effective reform‘ has been delivered since 2020? I don’t even know what measures it will use to assess ‘effective reform‘ but from what I’ve seen in the last five years, there hasn’t been a single bit of it.
Indeed, if you watch this (very good) RSPB video about the problems with driven grouse moor management in the Peak District National Park, which the RSPB published in January 2025, it’s quite clear that the RSPB recognises that ‘effective reform‘ has most definitely not been delivered:
Perhaps the most surprising pro-grouse shooting voice at Monday’s Westminster Hall debate on driven grouse shooting was Sam Rushworth, the Labour MP for Bishop Auckland.
Wild Justice described Rushworth’s arguments in the debate as being ‘less coherent’ than his Labour colleague’s (Olivia Blake MP):
‘Mr Rushworth’s arguments were less coherent, stating firmly his dedication to animal welfare and his stance against fox hunting, whilst also defending an industry known for its illegal persecution of birds of prey and its legal, yet unethical, killing of wildlife such as the routine killing of foxes, referred to by the industry as ‘vermin’‘.
Here’s what I wrote earlier today about Rushworth’s contribution to the debate:
‘Sam Rushworth MP (Labour, Bishop Auckland), whose constituency includes some notorious grouse moors in the North Pennines, which is another well-known raptor persecution hotspot, spoke about attending a recent ‘Lets Learn Moor’ event with primary-age schoolchildren. He also mentioned being “disgusted by the criminality that sometimes occurs on the moorland“. I wonder if he realises that these events, funded by BASC, are facilitated by the Regional Moorland Groups, many of whose members have been under police investigation into suspected and confirmed raptor persecution crimes? Awkward’.
It was all a bit odd.
But now things have become a whole lot clearer.
Here’s an excerpt from Rushworth’s list of Registered Interests on the Parliamentary website:
Well, well, well. Rushworth’s pro-shooting stance no longer looks surprising, does it?
This entry reveals that Rushworth received a £10,000 donation from the North Pennine Moorland Group in October 2023, for ‘campaign support’. Imagine that!
For those who might not know who the North Pennine Moorland Group is, it’s basically one of a large number of regional grouse moor groups that sprang up across England and Scotland several years ago, presenting themselves as ‘grassroots community groups’, purporting to represent ‘downtrodden country folk’ who were being unfairly attacked by some nasty people from the cities who didn’t understand country ways.
In reality, these groups appear to be part of a well-funded and co-ordinated astroturfing campaign for the driven grouse shooting industry, closely associated with the vile and abusive Campaign for the Protection of Moorland Communities (C4PMC) website, which specialises in publishing personal attacks and smears on anyone who dares to raise questions about the environmental unsustainability and criminality associated with driven grouse moor management. Indeed, the Chair of the North Pennines Moorland Group was listed as being one of ‘Our People’ when C4PMC lurched on to the scene in 2020 (see here).
Funny, I don’t recall hearing Rushworth making a declaration of interest about this £10,000 donation prior to his speech in the debate. As I understand it, ‘politicians must declare relevant interests that could be perceived as influencing their views or actions. This includes financial interests, gifts, hospitality, and any other interests that might create a perception of bias‘.
Perhaps, as this £10,000 donation was received in October 2023, prior to Rushworth’s election in July 2024, it doesn’t count as something he needed to declare before his speech? But then the donation is included on his official Registered Interests page on the parliamentary website so it does appear to be something he should have declared in the debate. Perhaps it was just an oversight and he’ll no doubt be grateful for the clarification here.
The donation raises a lot of questions.
The timing of it is interesting, as it was made around the same time as a £10,000 donation was made to the then Conservative MP for Hexham, Northumberland, Guy Opperman, by a company called GMS Partnership Ltd, whose sole director just happened to be one Andrew Gilruth, the Chief Executive of the Moorland Association, the lobby group for England’s grouse moor owners (see here) and prior to that he was Chair of the Regional Moorland Groups.
Opperman lost his seat in the July 2024 election.
Were these two £10,000 donations linked in any way? Are we uncovering a wider strategy of ‘donations’ from the grouse shooting industry, given to MPs in grouse moor dominated constituencies? I don’t know, I’m just speculating, but I think it’d be worth investigating the Registered Interests of other MPs in northern England, just to see if there’s a pattern.
It also raises the question of who is funding the regional moorland groups? Or are we supposed to believe that the gamekeepers in the North Pennines Moorland Group have been saving up their tips in a jam jar to then happily hand them over to support a prospective MP’s election campaign?
There have been rumours circulating for several months about who might be the actual financial backer(s) of these moorland groups, and I also have my own suspicions, but a bit more work is needed to be certain.
Meanwhile, if any of Rushworth’s constituents reading this are minded to make a formal complaint to the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority about Rushworth’s failure to declare an interest during the driven grouse shooting debate (alleged breach of Code D (6) of the House of Commons Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament), you can find out how to do it here.
Many thanks to the blog reader who provided the tip off.
The debate on banning driven grouse shooting took place at Westminster Hall on Monday 30 June 2025, as a result of Wild Justice’s petition passing 100,000 signatures.
Wild Justice shared its views on the debate in its newsletter this morning, as follows:
On Monday afternoon, and in a 34-degree heatwave, Wild Justice headed to the Houses of Parliament to watch our petition be debated by backbenchers in Westminster Hall. This is the third time in nine years that a petition on this subject has met the criteria for a debate (100,000 signatures) but the first time under a Labour government. A massive thank you to everyone who helped it past the threshold (again).
Following Labour’s woeful response to our petition when it reached 10,000 signatures – in which they stated, ‘The Government has no plans to ban driven grouse shooting’ (see our blog here) – we didn’t have high hopes for a particularly reasoned or informed debate.
Only two Labour MPs turned up to contribute on Monday – the brilliant Olivia Blake MP (Sheffield Hallam), and Sam Rushworth MP (Bishop Auckland). [Ed: actually there was a third Labour MP, Joe Morris from the Hexham constituency, who didn’t make a speech but did make one intervention to ask about introducing vicarious liability for landowners as in Scotland].
As usual, Olivia – whose constituency yielded the highest number of signatures on our petition, and whose residents have to live alongside the polluting smoke and flooding caused by driven grouse moors – was brilliant. As the standalone backer of our petition in the debate, she clearly and firmly articulated her support, highlighting the subjects of air pollution, environmental degradation and criminal activity.
An amusingly dry comment was her suggestion to those employed, often on very low wages, by the industry charging up to £7,000 for a day’s grouse shooting; “If I were a beater, I might be unionising to take more of that profit home to my family.”
Mr Rushworth’s arguments were less coherent, stating firmly his dedication to animal welfare and his stance against fox hunting, whilst also defending an industry known for its illegal persecution of birds of prey and its legal, yet unethical, killing of wildlife such as the routine killing of foxes, referred to by the industry as ‘vermin’.
Why did so few Labour MPs – and not a single Green MP – turn up to the debate? Is this subject deemed by them to be in the ‘too difficult’ category? Are Labour perhaps wary of upsetting other ‘countryside’ groups after the reprisals over their unpopular ‘family farm tax’ proposals? Or do they simply not care about the widespread criminality and environmental damage associated with driven grouse shooting?
We know lots of you contacted your MPs over the last few weeks and asked them to attend the debate on Monday – so they can’t argue that they were unaware of the issues or of the debate. It would be interesting to hear how they account for their absence if any of you decide to challenge them on it.
Ban Driven Grouse Shooting – a game of BINGO
Although there was an almost empty house to defend our petition, we did enjoy a full house of grouse shooting BINGO. When challenged on its bad practices and poor track record, the driven grouse shooting industry has a few well-rehearsed and worn-out lines it peddles on repeat. Watching the debate on Monday we enjoyed crossing off the usual list of cliches, tropes and outright lies.
Some of our highlights included:
Claims that the driven grouse shooting industry has a ‘zero tolerance for raptor persecution’. Last week the RSPB published new figures which showed 102 Hen Harriers have been confirmed or are suspected to have been illegally killed between 2020 – 2024, mostly from areas managed for driven grouse shooting in northern England.
By the way, Greg Smith MP gets the star bonus prize for the most absurd statement which made us laugh out loud during the debate: ‘Gamekeepers are not the enemy of the hen harrier; they are its strongest ally in the uplands’. Mr Smith (a self-declared member of the Countryside Alliance & BASC) can look forward to a fruitful career on the panto circuit when his parliamentary career is over.
‘The UK has 75% of the world’s heather moorland, which is ‘rarer than rainforest’’. Upland heather moorland is an artificial, man-made habitat created by management techniques including burning vegetation on vast areas of peatland, causing air pollution and increasing carbon emissions. The ‘75%’ myth is also totally inaccurate and was debunked six years ago in this excellent blog by Professor Steve Carver of Leeds University.
‘Managed grouse moorland also provides a defence against tick-borne diseases’. This desperate claim came from Shadow Defra Minister Robbie Moore MP, and its irony wasn’t lost on us. A recent scientific study suggests that ticks found in woodlands where lots of Pheasants are released are two and a half times more likely to carry Lyme disease bacteria than ticks found in woodlands where no Pheasants are released (see here). Perhaps the ‘guardians of the countryside’ should consider stopping the annual release of 50 million non-native Pheasants if they’re so concerned about the prevalence of tick-borne diseases.
Daniel Zeichner, Defra Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs, rounded off the ‘debate’ by providing the Government’s position on our petition. He repeated Labour’s earlier stance about having no plans to ban driven grouse shooting but this time adding, “we keep options under close review”. Not close enough, obviously.
He did acknowledge the cast-iron link between driven grouse shooting and the illegal persecution of birds of prey but then feebly muttered, “There are strong penalties in place for offences committed against birds of prey and other wildlife, and anyone found guilty of such offences should feel the full force of the law. Penalties can include an unlimited fine and/or a six-month custodial sentence” (emphasis is ours).
These statements are routinely trotted out by Defra in an attempt to gaslight the public into thinking there’s no need to worry about illegal raptor persecution because measures are in place to tackle it. The very reason that raptor persecution continues on driven grouse moors is because the criminals there know that (a) there is only a miniscule chance of being caught, and (b) even if they are caught, the punishment is of little consequence. The one, and only, custodial sentence ever given to a gamekeeper for committing raptor persecution offences was a case in Scotland in 2014, when a gamekeeper was filmed by the RSPB trapping a Goshawk and clubbing it to death with a stick, amongst other offences. He was given a four-month custodial sentence. Every other gamekeeper convicted since then has received either a small fine (probably covered by his employer) and/or a short community service order.
There’s no effective deterrent and Labour’s trite regurgitation of the words ‘should’ and ‘can’ demonstrates its appalling unwillingness to stop this brazen criminality. That is unforgiveable.
There was one spark of credibility in the Minister’s closing speech, and that was his referral to the Government’s recent public consultation on proposals to extend the Heather and Grass etc. Burning (England) Regulations 2021, including a change to the definition of deep peat from 40cm depth to 30cm depth, which would effectively ban the burning of heather on many driven grouse moors across northern England. It was evident from the speeches made by the Conservatives in the debate that this issue is of HUGE concern to them and their grouse-shooting mates. We look forward to hearing the Government’s announcement on those proposals in the near future.
John Lamont MP (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) first introduced and then concluded the debate, saying in reference to the petition’s 104,000 signatories, “I suspect those people will be a little surprised by the lack of balance in this debate.”
Was Wild Justice surprised at this lack of balance? No, not at all. But motivated? Absolutely. We will of course not be giving up when it comes to the fight to end this environmentally damaging and unjust so-called ‘sport’, mired in wildlife crime and savage animal cruelty.
Onwards and upwards!
ENDS
I must confess that I pretty much zoned out during the ‘debate’, such was the predictability of the propaganda/speeches from the pro-grouse shooting MPs. I was mostly interested in what DEFRA Minister Daniel Zeichner would have to say at the end of the debate. Whilst waiting for him to speak, though, my ears did prick up at the specific mention of some infamous grouse moor areas.
We had Kevin Hollinrake MP (Conservative, Thirsk & Malton) say this:
“I have beautiful moorland, including in Hawnby, Bransdale, Farndale, Snilesworth and Bilsdale—I am very proud of those areas and have visited a number of times“.
The grouse moors of the North York Moors National Park have long been identified as a raptor persecution hotspot, and North Yorkshire as a whole is repeatedly recognised as the worst county in the UK for reported raptor persecution crimes. Not much to be proud of there, Mr Hollinrake.
Sam Rushworth MP (Labour, Bishop Auckland), whose constituency includes some notorious grouse moors in the North Pennines, which is another well-known raptor persecution hotspot, spoke about attending a recent ‘Lets Learn Moor’ event with primary-age schoolchildren. He also mentioned being “disgusted by the criminality that sometimes occurs on the moorland“. I wonder if he realises that these events, funded by BASC, are facilitated by the Regional Moorland Groups, many of whose members have been under police investigation into suspected and confirmed raptor persecution crimes? Awkward. [Ed: Update 3 July 2025 – Pro-grouse shooting Labour MP Sam Rushworth received £10,000 donation from local grouse moor gamekeeper group – here].
And then there was Jim Shannon MP (DUP, Strangford, NI), a fully-signed up member of the Countryside Alliance, BASC and the Ulster Farmers Union, who treated us to this:
“I want to mention the Glenwherry shoot, which is the only grouse shoot in Northern Ireland. It is sponsored by BASC and the landowner. It is a success, but why is that? To start with, Glenwherry had no more than about 10 grouse, but it built that up. As others have said, the magpies, the crows, the greybacks, the foxes and the rats —all the predators—were controlled. It was gamekeepered, and the heath and moorland was burnt in a controlled burning, so that it could regenerate and produce the heather for the young birds and the grouse. Today, that is a successful grouse shoot. Why is it successful? Because grouse shooters know how to do it. They know how to deliver a successful grouse shoot. The lapwings and curlews also gathered momentum as a result. They have a place to breed every year because of the efforts of the gamekeeper and the landowner—the efforts of those who put money into the grouse shooting to make it a success“.
Would that be the same Glenwherry grouse moor shoot where two illegally poisoned White-tailed Eagles were found dead, side by side, in May 2023? Strange that Mr Shannon forgot to mention them.
Two illegally poisoned White-tailed Eagles found dead on Glenwherry, Northern Ireland’s only driven grouse moor. Photo by Northern Ireland Raptor Study Group.
Hen Harriers were mentioned throughout the debate but it was Minister Zeichner’s reference to the Hen Harrier Taskforce, “…which is using technology such as drones and strategic partnerships to detect, deter and disrupt offenders and is targeting hotspot areas and suspected hen harrier persecution” that caught my attention.
Zeichner claimed that, “Early signs suggest that it is having a positive impact“.
Really? That’s not my understanding. The HH Taskforce has been withholding details of multiple suspected and confirmed Hen Harrier persecution incidents over the last year. There are probably legitimate reasons to withhold information about the most recent cases as the police investigations are active but some of the other cases date back many months, some of them from over a year ago. It is simply not credible to argue that making an announcement about those cases will affect an investigation at this stage. I suspect there are other, political reasons for withholding those cases from the public and I’ll set out my reasoning in future blogs – there’s too much to include here.
For those who want to watch the recording of the Ban Driven Grouse Shooting debate you can find it here.
For those who want to read/download the debate transcript, it’s here:
NUMBER OF HEN HARRIERS KILLED OR MISSING REACHES NEW HIGH
Over the past five years, record numbers of Hen Harriers have been killed or have gone missing according to a new report from the RSPB.
Most of these incidents have occurred on or near grouse moors in northern England.
The RSPB is calling on the Westminster Government to introduce licensing of grouse shooting in England as has happened in Scotland to act as a meaningful deterrent to wildlife crime.
One of the rarest birds in the UK – the Hen Harrier – has seen record numbers being illegally killed or going missing in suspicious circumstances over the past five years.
An illegally killed Hen Harrier. Photo: Ruth Tingay
A new RSPB report – Hen Harriers in the firing line – shows that the majority of the 102 incidents occurred on or near grouse moors. Hen Harriers breed in the uplands of Britain and this is where they come into conflict with grouse shooting.
Hen Harriers are a rare, protected species, known for their acrobatic ‘skydancing’ courtship display over the uplands. The Hen Harrier is categorised as a red-listed species in the UK, due to its low breeding population levels, following historic declines as a result of human persecution.
Despite several conservation initiatives over the past twenty-five years, the Hen Harrier is now the most persecuted bird of prey in the UK for its population size.
The UK population increased between 2016 and 2023, however, 2023 was the worst recorded year for persecution. Hen Harriers remain far less abundant or widespread than they should be, and the current UK population estimate represents only a quarter of the potential population their ideal habitat can support, and in England it is less, about 10%.
Despite being legally protected, multiple studies and reports confirm that criminal activity is the main factor limiting the recovery of Hen Harrier in the UK, causing a reduction in nesting success, annual productivity, and survival of breeding birds. Despite decades of persecution no one in England has ever been convicted of an offence. Most of these crimes take place in remote areas where such activity is hard to detect and a criminal burden of proof against the perpetrators near impossible to secure.
Dr James Robinson the RSPB’s director of operations said “The last five years have seen a record number of illegally killed or disappearing Hen Harriers with 102 suspected or confirmed incidents, the majority happening on or close to grouse moors. This species will not recover until the criminal activity stops, and for this to happen we need regulation of the grouse shooting industry, specifically, the introduction of a licencing system for shoots in England, so estates proven by the Police and Natural England to be linked to raptor persecution would simply lose their licence to operate.”
Another recent study which investigated the illegal killing of Hen Harriers in association with gamebird management showed that the survival rates of Hen Harriers in the UK are “unusually low” with birds surviving for an average of just 121 days after leaving the nest, and persecution accounting for 27-41% of deaths of Hen Harriers aged under one year and 75% of deaths in birds aged between one and two years. It also highlighted a strong overlap between Hen Harrier mortality and the extent of grouse moors.
This new report contains the details of Hen Harriers being shot, their chicks being stamped on and one bird having its head pulled off whilst still alive. This alongside 112 satellite-tagged birds disappearing on or near grouse moors between 2010 and 2024 has led the RSPB to yet again call on the government to regulate the industry and licence grouse moors, as is now law in Scotland.
The Wildlife Management and Muirburn Act, passed in March 2024, means all grouse shoots in Scotland require a licence to operate, and this licence could be revoked if evidence suggests a crime has been committed. Licensing is based on evidence to a civil burden of proof, meaning that it is easier to take action when persecution has taken place. This progressive legislation will help ensure legal and sustainable management across a significant area of upland Scotland and introduces a much-needed deterrent for those who kill birds of prey for economic reasons. But England now lags behind.
This report comes ahead of a parliamentary debate at Westminster Hall on Monday 30 June on the future of Grouse Shooting, triggered by petition launched by the campaign group Wild Justice. Over 100,000 people signed their petition calling for a ban on driven grouse shooting, as they, like the RSPB, want to see an end to the illegal killing of birds of prey and other harmful practices associated with the grouse shooting industry. Action on this issue by Government in England is long overdue, and we will be expecting to hear how the Government intends to end the killing, before it is too late for England’s Hen Harriers.
The RSPB is to be congratulated for putting this report together. A lot of the information contained within it is already well-known, but this report brings it all together in one place. What is new is the hotspot mapping of satellite-tagged Hen Harriers (both RSPB-tagged birds and Natural England tagged birds), and although the detail is coarse, the overall distribution pattern is clear, showing the main hotspots in areas where the land is intensively managed for driven grouse shooting.
The timing of this publication is also very helpful, given the forthcoming Westminster debate on Wild Justice’s latest petition calling for a ban on driven grouse shooting, which takes place next Monday (30 June 2025).
It’s clear from both the press release and the report that the RSPB prefers a licensing approach to regulate driven grouse shooting, rather than a ban. There will be many who disagree with that stance, me included, although I wouldn’t object if Labour committed to bringing in a licensing scheme because it’s better than doing nothing at all and will take us one step closer to getting a ban when the licensing scheme inevitably fails. But now is not the time to argue about that.
The bigger picture here is that the Labour government, and MPs from other parties, have an opportunity to put on record what they think about the scale of the criminal raptor persecution that continues on many driven grouse moors.
The ongoing illegal persecution of raptors is the most difficult of all the issues associated with driven grouse shooting for the shooting industry to defend. It’s a crime, it’s abhorrent, the public hates it, and the evidence showing the extent of it just keeps piling up.
The shooting industry has no defence for it so instead it has resorted to a long-running campaign of smearing those of us who have brought the persecution issue to the public’s attention, in a desperate attempt to discredit our reputations and integrity.
In the run up to this latest Westminster debate, several shooting organisations have tried to play down the significance of another debate on this issue and have argued that this latest debate is pointless and that MPs have more important things to be discussing and there’s ‘no threat here to grouse shooting’. It’s telling though, the amount of pro-grouse shooting propaganda those same organisations have been frenziedly pumping out in recent weeks – it reveals that they are indeed concerned that the public spotlight will once again be on their criminal and environmentally damaging activities.
It’s also been revealing to watch the different organisations contradictorily falling over themselves in a bid to impress their members, by each claiming to be ‘leading the charge/fight’ against us pesky campaigners. For example, on 29 May 2025 the Countryside Alliance ran this headline: ‘Countryside Alliance leads charge against Westminster anti grouse shooting debate‘ and on 10 June 2025 a BASC headline read: ‘BASC leads the fight for driven grouse shooting ahead of debate‘. This level of posturing is a bit of a giveaway as to their level of concern.
This latest report on the illegal killing of Hen Harriers on grouse moors deserves widespread exposure in the run up to the debate so I’d encourage you to email a copy to your MP, ahead of Monday’s debate, and let them know that this issue matters to you and should be of deep concern to them.
I’m not expecting an immediate change of policy to result from Monday’s debate – that would be naive. And I’m fully expecting the usual sneering and snorting from certain members, especially those with a vested interest in maintaining driven grouse shooting, although a lot of those who behaved so appallingly at the first debate nine years ago will no longer be there.
But what I am interested in is listening to those MPs who can demonstrate any modicum of environmental awareness, ecological understanding and intolerance of wildlife crime. It’ll be those MPs, hopefully from across all parties, who we’ll want to work with in the future because we have no intention of dropping our campaign, no matter which party is in Government in the coming years.
Press release from Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI), 25 June 2025:
INVESTIGATION AFTER TESTING CONFIRMS RED KITE POISONED
Police have commenced an investigation after tests confirmed that a red kite which was found dead near Loughbrickland [County Down] had been fatally poisoned.
Testing determined that the legally protected bird of prey bird, which was discovered on land in the Tullymore Road area at the end of December, had died by what’s believed to have been targeted poisoning using the rodenticide Chloralose and the insecticide Bendiocarb.
Superintendent Johnston McDowell, the Police Service lead for Wildlife Crime and Animal Welfare, said: “Red kites, along with all birds of prey, are protected in Northern Ireland under the Wildlife (Northern Ireland) Order 1985, as amended by the Wildlife and Natural Environment (NI) Act 2011.
“These birds were reintroduced to Northern Ireland in 2008 after being extinct here for centuries, and tragically this is not the first time we have had reports of this nature in this same area. Two ravens were also recently found dead having been poisoned using similar chemicals [Ed: see here], and it saddens me that these incredible birds are being intentionally killed.
“Anyone who finds a dead bird of prey such as a red kite which they suspect to have been poisoned, shot or illegally trapped, or anyone with information about the illegal trade in these birds, should contact police and report their concerns. The poisons used in these most recent incidents are deadly not only to birds and wildlife, but also to humans and as such anyone who comes across the body of any of these birds shouldn’t touch them, but alert the authorities instead.
“PSNI along with Northern Ireland Environment Agency conducted a number of enquiries along with a site visit, and utilised the technical and advisory support of the UK’s National Wildlife Crime Unit throughout the time since the discovery of the Red Kite.
“The Police Service also works closely with our colleagues in the Health and Safety Executive and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development to identify poisons being used and where a crime is found to have been committed, we will take steps to identify and prosecute offenders. Those found guilty of persecution of protected birds of prey can face a custodial sentence and/or fines of up to £5,000 per offence.”
The Health and Safety Executive NI, one of the enforcing authorities responsible for Biocidal Product Regulations in Northern Ireland, said: “HSENI, who is one of the enforcing authorities responsible for Biocidal Product Regulations in Northern Ireland said: “Where duty-holders are found to have incorrectly used or have misused biocidal products or continue to use or store biocidal products that have been withdrawn from the market, HSENI will take appropriate enforcement action to achieve compliance. This highlights the importance of responsible use of all chemicals including biocidal products.”
A spokesperson for the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs said: “The intentional poisoning wildlife and birds is abhorrent. Supplying, storing (being in possession of) or using a Plant Protection Product (PPP), that has been banned, is an offence. It is also an offence to use an authorised PPP in contravention of the conditions and the specific restrictions established by the authorisation and specified on the product label. If convicted of committing an offence, fines will incur.”
Superintendent McDowell added: “Our Operation Raptor – Peregrine Watch, is an initiative between the PAW Bird of Prey Sub Group and our Air Support Unit, working alongside local police officers, which uses drones to monitor and protect the nesting sites of birds of prey, and is a direct result of birds being targeted, just like in this case, with very serious and dangerous substances in a number of areas across Northern Ireland.
“Along with our partners we will continue to investigate wildlife crime and seek to prevent further instances, whilst bringing offenders to justice.”
Please report wildlife crime by calling 101. A report can also be made online via http://www.psni.police.uk/makeareport/ or you can also contact Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111 or online at http://crimestoppers-uk.org/. If you have any information on this particular incident please quote incident number 419 24/12/24.
ENDS
Earlier this month representatives from the NI Raptor Study Group, Ulster Wildlife and the RSPB handed in a 50,000-signature petition to Environment Minister Andrew Muir, calling for a ban on the possession of dangerous, raptor-killing poisons (here).
It’s not yet clear what the Minister intends to do, if anything.
If you’re a NI resident and you’re reading this, please consider contacting your local politician and ask them to raise the issue at Stormont – all the Minister has to do is write a list of proscribed poisons and get it added to section 15B of the Wildlife (Northern Ireland) Order 1985. It really should be very simple.
The most recent summary report of raptor persecution in Northern Ireland (2021-2022, published last year by the NI Partnership for Action Against Wildlife Crime), shows that illegal poisoning is the most commonly used method of persecution in the country. The report can be read/downloaded here:
In March 2024, the Scottish Parliament voted for the Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Bill, which introduced, amongst other things, a requirement for all muirburn to be licensed (see here).
The Bill was enacted in May 2024 and became the Wildlife Management & Muirburn (Scotland) Act 2024 and since then we’ve seen the introduction of a grouse moor licensing scheme (although this still remains contentious as the licence has been significantly weakened after lobbying by the grouse shooting industry – an update on that is coming shortly) and the banning of the use of snares.
The introduction of the muirburn licence, also contentious because many conservationists didn’t believe it went far enough (e.g. see here), was due to be in place for the start of the 2025/26 muirburn season on 15 September 2025, some 18 months after the Scottish Parliament voted in favour of it.
Deliberately setting fire to vegetation on peatland carbon stores, to facilitate an artificially high number of Red Grouse for shooting, is both obscene and absurd. Photo by Ruth Tingay
NatureScot has held a series of stakeholder meetings over a period of several months to discuss the requirements of the new muirburn licence, including a revised Muirburn Code (justifiably criticised by Nick Kempe, the author of the Parkswatchscotland blog – e.g. see here, here and here) and NatureScot also ran a consultation on the new draft Muirburn Code (the consultation closed on 5 May 2025). NatureScot is currently reviewing the responses to that consultation. Here is a copy of the consultation document detailing the draft new Muirburn Code for those interested:
NatureScot has also produced an interactive map to help identify areas of what has been described in the Act as ‘peatland’ (areas of +40cm peat depth), ‘non-peatland’ and ‘uncertain peatland’ (areas that contain peat but the depth is currently unknown). Those who want to carry out muirburn will need to know the depth of the peat in the areas they wish to burn because licences will only be issued for certain purposes, depending on peat depth:
All the preparations seemed on track for the introduction of the licence before 15 September 2025 but then last week, the Scottish Government and NatureScot caved in to intensive political lobbying by the grouse shooting industry and agreed to delay the start of muirburn licensing until 1 January 2026.
The grouse shooting industry had argued that it wasn’t practical or fair to introduce the licence by 15 September because, according to BASC:
‘Proceeding with muirburn licensing in its current form would have risked confusion, undermined public trust and jeopardised effective upland management‘,
and
‘Introducing a licensing system without clear guidance, stakeholder consensus or adequate preparation would have been deeply irresponsible‘.
This wasn’t just the view of BASC – other lobbyists included the usual suspects such as Scottish Land & Estates, NFU Scotland and the Scottish Gamekeepers Association.
Had the new licence conditions been foisted on these groups with genuinely short notice I might have had some sympathy with their arguments, but given that the Act has already been on the statute books for 13 months, with another three months to go before the intended start date of the muirburn licence, I’d argue that they’ve had more than adequate time to prepare.
I can’t help but compare NatureScot’s decision to delay implementation with its recent decision to impose a new licence condition on raptor fieldworkers monitoring Schedule 1 raptors (whereby licence holders are now required to provide advanced notification to land owners of Schedule 1 monitoring visits). NatureScot imposed this new licence condition without providing adequate preparation time, without providing clear guidance, and without stakeholder consensus.
The Scottish Raptor Study Group made an entirely reasonable case to delay implementation until the 2026 monitoring season to allow its volunteer fieldworkers time to prepare but NatureScot outright refused to do this, and as far as I’m aware, didn’t provide a cogent rationale for its pig-headedness. Senior officials simply kept repeating the mantra that NatureScot had the power to impose whatever licence conditions it liked, without prior consultation.
I haven’t written about that fiasco in detail yet, for a number of reasons, but I’ll get to it soon. There’s a little bit about it here, and it sits within a wider and growing dissatisfaction amongst conservationists towards the decision-making processes in NatureScot’s wildlife management department. Its decision to delay the introduction of muirburn licensing at the behest of the grouse shooting lobby will only add fuel to the fire (pun intended).
I’m not sure whether the delay in implementing the licence will mean that muirburning can still begin on 15 September (the new opening date of the muirburn season according to the Act) or whether the old start date of 1 October will still apply given that licences will not be in place.
Either way, from 15 Sept or 1 Oct 2025, up until 31 December 2025, I’m certain we can expect to see extensive and intensive fires across Scotland’s grouse moors as gamekeepers take full advantage of the opportunity to burn on large areas of deep peat before the restrictions come in on 1 January 2026.
UPDATE 8 July 2025: Intensive grouse moor management ahead of muirburn licensing in Scotland (here)
UPDATE 9 October 2025: Scottish Government delays start of muirburn licences (for second time) after aggressive lobbying by grouse shooting industry (here)
UPDATE 30 October 2025: Scottish Govt fiddles while grouse moors burn (here)
Raptor Persecution UK 