DYNAMIC ACTION TO HALT COUNTRYSIDE ABUSES? NO, JUST A LEISURELY REVIEW

Red grouse in Northumberland's Cheviot hills  (photo MPF via Wikimedia Commons)

THE RSPB is poised to come down off the fence in its approach to gamebird-shooting. . . or is it?

Up to now, it has always maintained a neutral stance for fear of upsetting the landed gentry and others in high places.

It has also been wary of forefeiting its Royal charter - members of the Royal Family have long been fieldsports enthusiasts.

But, bowing to publish pressure - much of it generated by TV personality Chris Packham and environmental author/ blogger Dr Mark Avery - the  charity today announced a review.

At its annual meeting and members' day in London, the chairman of its council, Kevin Cox, said: "There is growing concern about the environmental impact (including for carbon, water and biodiversity) of intensive forms of gamebird-shooting and associated land management practices.  

"This includes both driven grouse moor management (which involves shooting our native red grouse) and large scale releases (in excess of 40 million birds annually) of non-native game birds - primarily pheasants and red-legged partridges."

Kevin Cox - saying more later

Related public concerns, now acknowledged, by the RSPB include:

* The ongoing and systematic illegal persecution of birds of prey, such as hen harriers, on some sporting estates

* The ecological impact of releasing high numbers of captive-bred gamebirds  into the countryside, thereby  increasing the density of generalist predators

* The mass culling of mountain hares in some parts of our uplands

* The use of lead in ammunition

* The impact of burning peatlands 

* The medication of wild animals prior to sport shooting

Mr Cox continued: "This is an emotive and  controversial subject, but we want to use our scientific rigour to develop a set of conservation tests for management practices associated with gamebird shooting.  

"We will use these to guide the RSPB’s conservation policy, practice and communications, consistent with the ongoing climate and ecological emergency, respectful of our charitable objectives and maintaining the confidence and support of our members. 

"We intend to do this, informed by the views of members and other stakeholders, many of whom we have engaged with on these issues for decades."  

The RSPB says it intends to complete the review as soon as possible, but, in order to engage people in the right way and ensure we have the best available evidence, it might take until next year's  AGM.

Mr Cox added: "I shall say more on this subject in due course."

The Wryneck says: Is this really the best the RSPB can do?After decades of largely turning a blind eye to issues such as poor environmental practice, cruelty and crime, it has proposed  a “review” of the issues surrounding gamebird-shooting. Has it been asleep for the past 20 years? There is no need for a review. The data has long been readily  available. What is needed from the RSPB is firstly to reach a correct conclusion and secondly the political will, energy and courage to act on that conclusion.  Instead of dancing to the tune of  other pressure groups, it should be at the forefront of exerting pressure itself. Alas for her, new chief executive Beccy Speight has inherited a flabby, unfocused organisation with weak management.  Whether she can provide the dynamism and sense of purpose so desperately required remains to be seen.