Grouse moor licencing, Scotland.

I’m quite curious about the RSPB shooting birds so a link would be good

is that you Ian?

At the beginning of this thread I said that the shooting industry in this country similar in their approach to things (if not scale) as NRA. The RSPB are their equivalent of Democrats!

Social media feeds from Moorland groups, gamekeeper associations etc are hilarious. They talk about RSPB as 'organisation' with thinly veiled agendas and always put it in hyphens or italics to make it sound conspiratorial or less credible. RSPB kill birds with heavy GPS trackers or to frame innocent gamekeepers

Cite

I’m quite curious about the RSPB shooting birds so a link would be good

Well in the year til 31 August 2018 on their own reserves they killed 526 carrion crows, destroyed over 700 goose eggs (Barnacle, Canada, Greylag), shot 10 gulls and destroyed the nests of 51 others.

Mammals shot on their reserves included over 1000 deer, 500 foxes, 4 feral goats, 97 grey squirrel, 108 mink and an unspecified number of rats. They killed a further 274 crows and 97 foxes off RSPB sites.

All done for sound conservation reasons I'm sure, but it does show that predator control is sometimes necessary.
Linky

High quality evidence on its own here is unlikely to be sufficient in my view. If you are a reasonable person it is, but this is culture war territory, so those rules are unlikely to apply. See also badger culling - not really supported by the science, happened anyway.

As for licensing not being allowed to be toothless - that depends who is influencing those that make the rules, and how well resourced the licensing authority is, as per my previous posts.

FWIW I fall firmly on the side of large grouse moors having had their day for a range of reasons. I'm not defending them.

My feelings on RSPB are that it is a large organisation with many sides. On one hand, they're are a conservation organisation that do lots of excellent work, including on raptor persecution. They're also a large landowner who manage said land to further their own agenda. A bit like the estates ironically.

Fingers crossed the proposals for licensing put a few concerns to bed.

tj, I think there's a lot more common ground here than I first thought, and can see and agree with must of your opinions. There's a lot of knowledge, salient points and healthy debate contained here if you can filter out some of us (me included) getting a bit passionate and defensive at times.

Additional regulation of grouse moors is necessary in my opinion (and personally I'd like to see that extended to all commercial driven shoots) but will only be a success if it's well formulated and properly resourced. So many times governments bring in or change regulation without considering how they'll implement it, or assuming under resourced local authorities, charities or voluntary organisations will do the leg work for them. The burden of proof discussion seems fairly simple to me, and only needing evidence of a civil standard to get a licence revoked seems a good forwards step.

The big question in my mind isn't whether grouse moors should be much more tightly regulated and monitored, it's who will do it, and how.

I think in the UK we like to look at the USA and assume they're all gun toting redneck hunters over there killing everything in sight on a whim. The reality however is that although it's easy to get guns, things are very tightly controlled once you go hunting. We really could learn a lot of lessons from their game and wildlife departments and the way they regulate.

I agree with Core here; I think some areas within Scotland would suit regulated, licensed hunting where landowners receive a fee for controlling the right to take wild game. However, I cannot see many landowners, with their frequent, anachronistic "MY land" attitudes, actually buying into a scheme like this.
Maybe in another hundred years, we'll have more widespread mixed native forests across the uplands. Healthy strong mixed deer populations, partly controlled by wolves and lynx on the one hand and by skilled, enthusiastic hunters on the other. One day.....

Thank you Core.

Ehrob - the greens in the scottish parliament have already started pushing hard on this - one advantage of having greens in parliament

Link already posted but the RSPB are well known for culling various species.
Contactors employed to shoot gulls on the Ythan estuary, deer culling on reserves alongside large number of predator culling.
They, and the SSPCA etc are political organisations as much as anything else. Do as I say, not as I do types.

Another discussion for another thread though, just pointing out the irony in citing RSPB on a bird shooting thread.

Wolves, lynx? No way*.

We got rid off them once already.

They will be used as a scam to restrict right to roam.
.
.
*Unless we are given back the right to re-arm.

Contactors employed to shoot gulls on the Ythan estuary, deer culling on reserves alongside large number of predator culling.
They, and the SSPCA etc are political organisations as much as anything else. Do as I say, not as I do types.

But the difference is that they are using contractors to remove pests presumably under licence rather than paying to shoot things that have been bred for that purpose for fun.

Cheers for the link @oldbloeuptheroad

They, and the SSPCA etc are political organisations as much as anything else

Although there’s nothing actually wrong with that. Political campaigning/lobbying is common within the charity sector (mostly with larger players) and can prove highly beneficial to an organisations charitable core aims. You get TV chefs doing just this too.

In terms of charity type, RSPB and the SSPCA are best thought of as membership organisations not political. I’ve no idea how they monitor the ‘wants’ of their respective membership but it could well be that which steers policy to some degree. I’ve no idea tbf.

Even the organisation I work for engages in political pressure, although in our case it’s trying to encourage certain treatments are available via the NHS, such as would be beneficial to those who have had Strokes.

I don't understand why Epicyclo doesn't like wolves and lynx in the Highlands; neither species are of any danger to humans, even the odd sort who trundle around the mountains on bikes. When was the last time a Great Divide rider was eaten by a wolf in Alberta/Montana/Wyoming? Or a rider in the Alps? And as for Lynx, they're just cute kitties. Even a big adult is unlikely to be more than 20kg. No threat to humans. My pet cat is 9kg..
I met a wolf out in the wild in Alberta backcountry once, on a night ski tour; I didn't feel threatened at all by it and it trundled off through moonlit glades. Awesome.
As for predation on sheep, we already know that these woolly gobblers are both harmful to the environment in numerous ways and are likely to be reducing in numbers as subsidies withdraw...

I’ve no idea how they monitor the ‘wants’ of their respective membership but it could well be that which steers policy to some degree.

I think set by annual membership conferences

Whilst rare, wolf attacks on humans continue

"The first fatal attack (in North America) in the 21st century occurred on November 8, 2005, when a young man was killed by wolves that had been habituated to people in Points North Landing, Saskatchewan, Canada[47] while on March 8, 2010, a young woman was killed while jogging near Chignik, Alaska.[48]"

Less likely than being hit by lightning but still a small risk. Having said that I'd prefer to meet a wolf in Alaska than a bear!

Highlandman - the problem with introducing apex predators like lynx and wolves is that they have a big range especially wolves and cannot be contained in an area. So who is going to pay for livestock they take?

Lynx reintroduction was not helped at all by the lynx trust ( I think they were called) who tried to get the keilder reintroduction and who spouted loads of utter nonsense and thus ruined any case they might have. Nor was the case helped by the chap on the scottish estate who wanted to fence off the estate and refuse access so he could reintroduce wolves etc

I would be in favour of apex predator reintroduction but it actually incredibly difficult to do

So who is going to pay for livestock they take?

Well aside from the minor detail we already do pay massive subsidies for the livestock Lynx are woodland creatures. In Europe outside of Sweden which has a habit of keeping sheep in woodland the impact is pretty much zero. The advantage to the country as a whole in terms of helping reduce and control deer is worth it and would also help farmers. There is also evidence that they help control fox populations.
The lynx trust is definitely problematic. The bloke in charge currently is going for a golden eagle reintroduction in Wales which is a tad dubious and might even be undermining a separate reintroduction project which was carefully and slowly building its support by making sure it involves everyone.

I think there are stronger arguments against wolves but the arguments against Lynx dont really add up and mostly seem like people think they are more like tigers.

Lynx will not take red deer. they might take smaller deer young. Lynx will take sheep and lambs.

Another discussion for another thread though, just pointing out the irony in citing RSPB on a bird shooting thread.

It isnt though. The RPSB does limited control in order to protect at risk species when other options fail. It is a problem with loss of habitat that some species are restricted to small areas and hence are highly vulnerable to attack.
There is also the problem with the loss of predators that some animals are no longer naturally controlled.
For example I would expect the RSPB site managers would prefer lynx to shooting but without that its plan b. Likewise to protect red squirrels currently shooting is pretty high on the list since the predators are unnaturally suppressed. There is evidence that if pine martins are introduced then red squirrels do better since they are more adapted to dealing with the martins than greys are.

Grouse moors on the other hand do pretty much unlimited predator control (plus anything else they feel might be a threat) in order to try and get artificially high numbers of grouse in order to shoot them.

Lynx will take sheep and lambs.

If those sheep and lambs are in woodland yes which isnt really the case on the hill deserts is it?

Lynx is also the natural predator for the beaver. Might be handy now in some parts of Scotland, where beavers are spreading rapidly and probably need some controlling. They also take young, weak and old red deer but are no threat to healthy adults. They would be good at controlling the wild goats too.

An interesting program, touching of many of the topics we've explored on this thread.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00vnxsh/making-scotlands-landscape-2-the-land

Cheers Scotroutes, looks decent at first glance.

Only a closely related note of the landscape not being in an optimum condition

https://forestryandland.gov.scot/news-releases/rest-and-be-thankful-woodland-creation?fbclid=IwAR2MxSsJtKfD91kE3P7qNILK4FUFmNuxWU3aI3CBAxqUNMBvjaiiy_9gLc8

The first steps to a new woodland alongside the A83 Rest and Be Thankful road will begin later this month. The project will plant a variety of species across the hillside to help stabilise the slope, create new habitats, and enhance biodiversity.

Part 1 is all about trees.

Lynx will not take red deer. they might take smaller deer young. Lynx will take sheep and lambs.

A set of strong ascertains any references that support these robustly held views?

A lynx weighs 20 kilos. An adult red deer weighs ten times that. No way will a lynx take an adult red deer. Lynx do not hunt in packs IIRC

According to evidence from where there are lynx they do take sheep and lambs. Even the hopelessly optimistic lynx trust admit they will take some.

its not a reason not to introduce them but it means mitigation measures are needed and a compensation scheme which needs funds

A set of strong ascertains any references that support these robustly held views?

How many sheep/ lambs do these references estimate the lynx will kill p.a.

Could you compare to those killed by; dogs, foxes, traffic, failures in animal husbandry

TJ, you're a bit optimistic there about the size of red deer in Scotland. They probably 'should' be up to 150kg but in reality these days, it's rare for a big stag to be much more than about 90kg. There are several reasons for the substandard sizes compared to the past and to their very close genetic cousins, the elk of N America; lack of woodland shelter and overgrazing has led to a shrinking in size. Basically, they're starving, living out in the open instead of in the forests and have pygmied as a result. Plus, the Victorians and later generations have selectively shot the largest males, cutting back variation in the population significantly. Many estates are doing their best to reverse this trend (Ben Alder, Ossian, Feshie being examples) but there are still offenders yet, selling the killing of a big stag to the highest bidders.
These days, an adult hind might be as small as 8 stone/ 50 odd kg so if in any distress at all, a big strong lynx would certainly be interested.
We know that we need to cut back hill sheep numbers for environmental reasons- drainage, biodiversity/monoculture and atmospheric emissions reasons, among others. Win-win..?

I think I got my lbs and kilos muddled

Having worked with Slovak Erasmus colleagues in the Tatra and visited the Polish side as well, there's great experience of apex predators in Europe. This is in a farmer, upland area with many visitors.
They have full time monitoring of the bears and wolf pack. They advise daily where to not walk on the Polish side, Slovak was a nature reserve with a more nature is first approach.
They don't have the volume of sheep we do - the farms seemed to be more cattle and crops.
They also have marmot, chamois, goat, red deer, more rodents etc. This means that the lynx are well fed without the need to often stray out of the high hills and woods. It meant the wolves too don't range too far or run hungry. There were issues, I'm not sure if the farmers were compensated.
There was a really healthy concern about keeping the bears and humans apart.

This discussion should take notice of work all across Europe, where people live with the reality of a 'wilder', although less crowded, landscape and economy.

Just in case anyone was under any illusion about what utter shits are working and campaigning for the right to shoot. This exposes their vile psychopathic behaviour. Yes I am aware not all hunters and shooters are like this but ................

https://raptorpersecutionscotland.wordpress.com/2021/02/11/gamekeepers-lead-disgusting-hate-campaign-against-conservationists-1/

https://raptorpersecutionscotland.wordpress.com/2021/02/19/gamekeepers-lead-disgusting-hate-campaign-against-conservationists-2/?fbclid=IwAR0SoaHNwmpRk8a3mXZdEKgFVnaOUj6oxKgcJvs6Yx_04vI8Fy9uEUBZkFg

Also leadhills estate has been caught with carbofuran again. Its illegal to own and its main( only?) possible use is to poison raptors

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/illegal-toxic-poison-discovered-scots-23523011

this is after they were successfully prosecuted for using carbofuran baits to kill birds 10 ears ago.

A few bad apples? Rogue emplyees or a concerted criminal conspiracy

what utter shits are working and campaigning for the right to shoot. This exposes their vile psychopathic behaviour

For balance, some of those campaigning against shooting are no better.

Pot and Kettle

Errmmm - its hardly equivalent to rape threats, having dead animals hung on your gate, having your personal telephone number published etc etc

The gamekeepers complaining of abuse are actually the main perpetrators of abuse. Its a hugely one way traffic. Yes there will be some the other way and yes all abuse is to be condemned. Thats a pro hunting site ( obviously) with one non corroborated report compared to many corroborated reports

its a part of their propaganda campaign to make out they are the victims

go on - where are the screenshots of this supposed online abuse? Where are the police reports? where is the evidence?

Idiots on both sides.
That said, it seems there's far more fear from the landowner/gamekeeper side, and more regular breaches of law or guidance on that side too.

I'd struggle beyond anecdotal evidence, and even if I could find statistics on "who's the naughtier", it's an irrelevance to the real debate.

IIRC Brads insists he is a responsible hunter / shooter.

should folk like you not be splitting off from the criminal conspiracies that are proven to be in grouse shooting circles?

Edit - it need not be conservationists v gamekeepers. It could be law abiding v criminals

I've no time whatsoever for imbeciles who give shooters a bad name. Anyone shooting a raptor needs a good kicking.
They should be sacked and never employed in the industry again.

But, and it's a big but, animal rights activists can be the utter scum of the earth. They are as guilty of lying and fabricating "evidence" as bad gamekeepers and shooters are for hiding evidence.

There are bad on both sides of this fence.
I'm with none of them.

Fair do's. I'm the same.

It just seems such a polarising debate, finding shared ground (literally and figuratively) is the key.

fair do indeed

They are as guilty of lying and fabricating “evidence” as bad gamekeepers and shooters are for hiding evidence.

Any evidence of this? The hunting shooting lobby keep claiming this but as far as I am aware there is no evidence of this ever been produced

Lynx will not take red deer. they might take smaller deer young. Lynx will take sheep and lambs.

Interesting

The main point still stands tho - a small number of Lynx wlll have no significant effect on red deer numbers

Would eating more venison have an effect on deer numbers, if lots of us did it?

Yup.

If estates can make money from it they will shoot it. If they can't they won't, and Govt bodies are left to step in.

Brads - I am serious about wanting to see evidence of the conservation side lying and fabricating evidence

Because of my sources of info i will never see this, rarely seeing anything other than press releases from the shooting lobby and would be really interested to see any evidence of anti shooting lies and fabrication

The main point still stands tho – a small number of Lynx wlll have no significant effect on red deer numbers

I'm not getting on to you, Im just showing there is clear evidence.

But it's not just deer is it ?, a lot of people go camping with their small children.

You introduce wolves or lynx into Scotland, it's highly likely there will be incidents involving people. How vocal would supporters be in such an instance ?, I reckon the silence would be deafening.

Personally I cant see the need to do such. I mean WHY exactly do we need wolves or lynx ?.

As regards people attacks - Lynx attacks are pretty unheard of and Wolves only attack people if they are really desperate which with all those deer and smaller game is unlikely

I would like to see apex predators reintroduced but it needs a lot more than wishful thinking and good intentions

European brown bears would be nice as well

sorry - the why:

rebalancing the ecology. wildlife tourism are two main reasons but it must be done without turing the highlands into a park or a zoo

@tjagain

Don't confuse conservationists with animal rights activists / anti shooting activists.

Google is your friend regards the latter. Not hard to find out what kind of people they are.

Even Packham (not a conservationist when talking about wild justice, purely an anti shooting outfit)
has been caught lying recently in a case concerning circus tigers in Europe.

He even had the gall to ask for help from the GCWT when his Welsh court case was flung out.

As I said. Arseholes on both sides so one is no better than the other in my book.