For the third time, Wild Justice ran its petition to ban grouse shooting in England. Maybe Chris Packham and Ruth Tingay thought that a Labour government would produce a different result to the last two times they did this. No.
For the third time, there was a non-binding debate in Westminster Hall, a grand committee room, dressed up to make it feel like the antis have been heard in the proper chamber and, for the third time, the government said it supports grouse shooting.
The line-up briefed by BASC and the Countryside Alliance was stronger than the last two grouseshooting debates, with Rishi Sunak taking the floor – which had Chris Packham holding his head in his hands.
Labour MP Sam Rushworth won praise from the rest of the chamber for his speech. He used to work for an animal welfare charity, is anti-hunting and now represents England’s biggest grousemoors, in Teesdale and Weardale. “I am not interested in grouse shooting,” he said. “That does not mean we should ban it. I am here today as a Labour MP to represent my constituents, and my first priority will always be the jobs and livelihoods of the people that I represent.”
The only MP to make a speech in favour of Wild Justice was Olivia Blake (Labour, Sheffield Hallam). Her pitch was that grouse shooting is environmentally damaging and (shooters would agree with this but for different reasons) too expensive. She said that grousemoor owners, “routinely undertake practices that are environmentally destructive and ecologically reckless. These include the widespread burning of heather in moorlands, the draining of some peatlands and the illegal persecution of birds of prey.”
One of the favours Wild Justice did the shooting community was to give it a parliamentary platform to refute these charges. All MPs condemned the shooting of hen harriers. “It is the contention of activists that grouseshooting somehow harms the environment, the countryside and biodiversity,” said John Lamont MP. “They’re fundamentally and conclusively wrong.”
Gre Smith MP pointed out that, ‘In 2023, a record number of hen harrier chicks fledged, the majority on managed grouse moors. This is no accident. It is the product of targeted conservation partnerships, predator control and habitat stewardship. BASC and others are funding brood management, habitat creation and even southern reintroduction efforts. Gamekeepers are not the enemy of the hen harrier. They are its strongest ally in the uplands.
MP after MP pointed out that far from draining moors, Olivia Blake is out of date: grousemoor owners are rewetting moors. Rishi Sunak used the phrase “wetter is better,” which he might have avoided while in government.
The debate gave MPs the opportunity to make the case for controlled burning. Kevin Hollinrake, MP for Thirsk & Malton, brought up the potential change in definition of deep peat from 40cm to 30cm which the government’s agency Natural England wants.
“That would mean the vast majority of the North Yorks Moors would not be able to be controlled in terms of the fuel load on that moor by burning,” he said, adding that they would like to replace burning with mowing. He read the warning from the Scottish Fire & Rescue Service that, ‘Mowing excess vegetation can leave a dry layer that actually encourages the spread of fire,’ whereas, ‘winter burning is by far the most effective because it removes a fuel in its entirety’.
For the first time, MPs were able to bring up the idea that Natural England, under the chairmanship of former Friends of the Earth boss Tony Juniper, is trying to undermine hunting and shooting sports.
“I believe that the policies being pursued by Natural England are a deliberate attempt to close down things like grouseshooting in my constituency and others,” said Kevin Hollinrake. Robbie Moore MP added: “I’d also be grateful if the minister picked up the points with regard to Natural England, and what the minister will himself be doing with his ministerial colleagues to hold Natural England to account to make sure they don’t run away with the narrative of wanting to reduce deep peat from 40cm to 30c, because that will have absolutely catastrophic consequences on how moorland is managed.”
The government is not happy with criticism of Natural England. DEFRA minister Daniel Zeichner replied: “The ritualistic denunciation of Natural England is disappointing, in the sense that these are civil servants doing their best to provide sound advice to government. As the government’s advisor for the natural environment in England, Natural England provides statutory advice to ministers, but the final decision on whether to grant a licence lies with the secretary of state.”
After this, the debate cantered to victory for the shooting side. It required immense effort by BASC and the Countryside Alliance among others. In the end, it came down to this.
“A ban on grouse shooting would be a policy with no winners,” said Rishi Sunak. “It would be a small section of urban Britain imposing its views on rural Britain, and this isn’t right. The failure to appreciate other people’s views and interests won’t bring our country together. So I urge the government to stand firm and reject these ill-thought-through advocates for a ban and, instead, we should all work together to build on this quintessentially British success story.”
The government’s response, delivered by Daniel Zeichner: “While the government has no plans to ban driven grouse shooting, it is vital that wildlife and habitats are protected and the law is respected by everyone.”
A debate where everyone agrees at the end to obey the law is not world-changing. Let’s see if Wild Justice goes for a fourth petition to ban grouse-shooting.
