It is now over a week since the Westminster Hall parliamentary debate on the future of driven grouse shooting. I thought it would be appropriate to offer a further perspective on what the RSPB plans to do next to improve the environmental conditions of the uplands.
As many others have written, it was a deeply frustrating debate – especially to the 123,000 that called for a ban and of course those seeking reform. Our initial reaction tried to pick out some positives, but that was a real challenge. Clearly there is widespread opposition from within the driven grouse shooting community to any real reform. I think that the positioning by a majority of MPs was perhaps inevitable as it was the first proper outing of the issue in parliament. Imagine a parliamentary debate on climate change 20 years ago with lobbyists peddling their various views to MPs.
Yet, my view is that if pressure for reform remains then the quality of the parliamentary debate will inevitably improve as people won't be able to brazenly ignore the facts like some did on Monday.
Geltsdale by Chris Gomersall (rspb.images.com)
When more crimes get into the public domain it will be harder for MPs to turn a blind eye. We therefore have no intention of changing our current approach of working with local groups to deliver vital monitoring and surveillance through our Life project, and work with the police to investigate crimes. The team do a fantastic job in extremely difficult circumstances.
That is why, this week, we are raising awareness of the fate of the hen harrier Rowan, found dead in Cumbria in October, and which appears to have been shot. The fate of this bird graphically illustrates that illegal killing of hen harriers is ongoing, contrary to the impression given by some MPs in the Westminster Hall debate.
I think change will come if we can find creative and novel ways of maintaining the political and public profile of our concerns about the environmental impact of driven grouse shooting. This is not a party political issue – I am convinced that all parties want the law enforced and many want to see improved standards of land management associated with grouse shooting.
Clearly legislation is needed, as voluntary approaches have proved wholly inadequate, and Westminster is the legislature for England. That means a cross-party approach will be needed.
We will continue to keep up the pressure on these issues, and will also be talking with others to determine how best to secure reform.
In summary, we remain appalled by the environmental condition of the uplands and the ongoing illegal killing of birds of prey. Our work in the uplands remains an important strategic priority for the RSPB – we are not going to go away. We believe that licensing is the way to deliver substantial change to the way our uplands are managed and we intend to keep the pressure on to achieve that. The irony is that commitment to reform and serious discussion about licensing is the shooting industry’s best insurance against growing calls for a ban.
In Scotland, I remain hopeful that tangible reform is possible (partly in response to a petition on gamebird licensing which we supported). If change does happens north of the border, it will make it that much harder for a Westminster Government to ignore the positive direction set out in Scotland.
Our commitment is unwavering. But this won’t be a quick fight and we will take the time now to carefully consider what comes next, talking to all those with a stake in this issue.
What do you think is the next key step for delivering reform of our uplands?
It would be great to hear your views.
My view, along with many birders and RSPB members I meet whilst out and about, is that the RSPB is well behind the curve on this. Your plans for licensing were quite rightly criticised during the evidence hearing and the debate itself. It is just an idea with no further thought, detail or substance behind it and all the RSPB managed to do was shoot Mark Avery in the foot during the hearings. Jeff Knott was very disappointing in his performance. He did more harm to our cause than good.
If the RSPB is to avoid disillusionment and resentment from a substantial number of its members it needs to either a) come up with a credible thorough plan for licensing and an active, vigorous strategy to promote it or b) get behind the calls for a ban. RSPB are in danger of making themselves piggy in the middle on this issue. Disillsuioning birders and conservationists on one hand and taking a beating from the Grouse Lobby on the other (we are now in no doubt of their power and influence after the debate). So far the RSPB has been a big let down on this issue. I understand the complexities of the RSPBs situation and that this is a difficult balancing act for the Society but the tactics thus far are doing no good for the ultimate cause and are damaging the RSPB's reputation itself. If all 123000 petition signatories were RSPB members that would be over 10% of the membership. 10% the RSPB can't afford to lose. I don't ever wish to fall out with the RSPB and it's important we all stay together on this but if the Society continues to flounder and fail on this I will have no choice but to take my subs and my loyalty elsewhere. I am not the only one, some have resigned their membership already. Please don't let it come to this. The RSPB needs to get serious and get tough.