Tag: gamekeeper

While we’re all waiting for Scottish Ministers to turn twenty years’ worth of hollow promises in to tangible and effective action against the rampant criminality still all-too evident on many grouse and pheasant-shooting estates, the Scottish Government has decided to invite tenders for some new research in to the ‘rights and aspirations’ of gamekeepers.

Yes, it’s easy to see why this would be a priority for the Government. Those poor, misunderstood raptor haters, who do so much in their role as custodians of the countryside….

[Pie chart from RSPB Birdcrime report: The occupations/interests of the 176 individuals convicted of bird of prey persecution-related offences 1990-2015]

Does this look like the actions of a Government ready to crack down on criminals in an industry known to be heavily involved in the illegal killing of birds of prey?

Although to be fair, the new research isn’t just about gamekeepers. The full title of the research contract up for grabs is this:

To fill gaps in existing knowledge on the socioeconomic and biodiversity impacts of driven grouse moors and to better understand the rights, benefits, attitudes, working conditions and future aspirations of gamekeepers.

This has come about following the publication earlier this year of the Government-commissioned Socio-economic and Biodiversity Impacts of Driven Grouse Moors in Scotland. That research identified a load of gaps and this latest research opportunity aims to fill some of those gaps as well as to look at the game-keeping profession, as Roseanna Cunningham had indicated way back in 2017 when she first announced the Werritty Review in to grouse moor management.

The invitation for tender can be found here with a closing date for applications at midday on 7th July 2019.

The research contract is worth £80,000 and begins on 24th July and ends on 20th December.

The tender document can be downloaded here: Research to assess the socioeconomic and biodiversity impacts of driven grouse moors

Most of the detail is dull and tedious and only relevant to those submitting a tender, but this short summary of what is expected from the work is useful:

Sarcasm and irony aside, some of this research is actually long-overdue and should make a significant contribution to the discussions about the so-called benefits of grouse moor management, assuming there are sufficient and reliable data sources available. However, the usual caveat applies – it all depends on which organisation wins the tender and whether they are sufficiently independent and robust for the research to withstand scrutiny. If it’s anything as bad as the GWCT’s research proposal to kill ravens in Strathbraan (described as “completely inadequate” and “seriously flawed” by SNH’s own Scientific Advisory Committee) then we’ll be no further forward.

The timing is interesting though. This research will clearly feed in to the long-awaited Werritty Review, which was supposed to have been submitted by now but we understand has been delayed due to ill-health. For how long remains to be seen.

The weekend before last we were out filming in Scotland with Chris Packham, at a number of locations and with a number of experts. We’re not going to say too much about that at the moment because….well, you’ll see in due course.

At one particular location we were followed and filmed by an individual. Those photographs were subsequently doing the rounds on social media last week – some of you may have seen them – and they led to a wide range of absurd accusations and claims, including one particular favourite – that Chris was ‘caught filming on a grouse moor and as soon as he was spotted by the gamekeeper he literally ran back to the car and hid his face’.

Now, what was it that Scottish gamekeepers have been accused of doing recently? Was it something about making “greatly exaggerated” claims? Have a look at this video that WE filmed of us leaving that grouse moor, having been followed and filmed by this gamekeeper for at least half an hour – can you see anyone “literally running back to the car to hide their face”?

Note the gamekeeper filming us, sitting in the black 4×4 parked in the lay by behind our two vehicles.

There have also been claims that we were filming “illegally” on the grouse moor. No, we weren’t. Our accusers would do well to read the Land Reform Act and learn about public rights of access in Scotland.

There have also been claims that Chris broke BBC guidelines by filming with a BBC film crew without landowner permission. No, he didn’t. This wasn’t a BBC film crew and landowner permission was not required (see above).

There have also been claims that Chris broke BBC guidelines by ‘campaigning on social media’ during his Springwatch contract. No, he didn’t. Chris wasn’t the one who posted the photos and associated commentary on social media (i.e. ‘campaigning’) – that was done by those in the game-shooting industry, who shot themselves in the foot by bringing it to the attention of Springwatch viewers while the series was still on air! How can Chris be held responsible for someone else’s decision to post photographs of him on social media, accompanied by a string of false accusations?!

There have also been claims that one of the people involved was (a) a security guard or (b) an ‘animal rights extremist/thug’ – no, he wasn’t either of those. It’ll become apparent later in the year exactly who he was and what he was doing there!

There have also been claims that this particular member of our team was violently intimidating towards the gamekeeper, and that he “wouldn’t back down against him”. Have another look at our video – can you see any evidence of violent intimidation or can you see a man walking back to his vehicle and immediately getting in to avoid any confrontation with the gamekeeper who was filming him?

On something of a tangent, it has also been claimed that Environment Cabinet Secretary Roseanna Cunningham and Ruth Tingay of RPUK are “shagging”, which is apparently why the Cabinet Secretary agreed to appear in our Fred video last year. Erm…..

It’s pretty clear that there are some within the game shooting industry who are so terrified about our work and the impact we are having they’ll try anything to discredit us, no matter how pathetic or defamatory the accusations.

It looks like they’re the ones running scared….and so they should be. Some of the footage we filmed in Scotland will be devastating to the grouse shooting industry. Forget Werritty and the long-awaited review – what we have transcends anything that Professor Werritty can report.

Here’s a shocker. Scottish gamekeepers have been accused of making ‘misleading’ and ‘greatly exaggerated’ claims about mountain hares, according to SNH staff emails, uncovered by a Freedom of Information request from Scottish animal welfare charity OneKind.

Gamekeepers accused of making stuff up? Shurely shome mishtake.

This news was revealed in an article in yesterday’s Sunday Times, and the SNH staff comments are alleged to refer to a propaganda video on grouse moor management, produced by the Grampian Moorland Group.

Here’s the article (illustrated by what looks like a brown hare, not a mountain hare).

Gamekeepers have made “misleading” and “highly questionable” claims over mountain hares, according to Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) staff emails passed to The Sunday Times.

In recent years sporting estates have defended mass culls of mountain hares in Scotland, an iconic species that animal welfare groups claim is under threat due to large-scale killing.

This newspaper revealed last year that up to 38,000 mountain hares a year had been killed on Scottish estates, some of which have charged people thousands of pounds a day to shoot the animal. More than 1.3m hares have been killed in Scotland over the past 50 years.

Mountain hare killing is unregulated during the open season, but although there has been a sharp decline in hares in northeast Scotland, there is an ongoing dispute as to whether the species is in decline overall.