 |
| Lapwing - favours moorland habitat |
Extract from Rishi Sunak's contribution to MPs' debate (October 31, 2016) on grouse-shooting. Now elevated from back-bencher to Prime Minister, Mr Sunak represents the constituency of Richmond in North Yorkshire.
Whenever a ban is proposed, it is incumbent on us all to be certain about who that decision would impact on.
To many, the image of the losers of a ban on grouse shooting seems clear: old men of a bygone age, sporting tweed jackets, expensive hobbies and outdated views.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
The real victims of a ban are not caricatures; they are ordinary working people in constituencies such as mine in North Yorkshire -
* The farmer’s wife who goes beating at the weekend so that her family can make ends meet through difficult times
* The young man able to earn a living, in the community he loves, as an apprentice to a gamekeeper
* The local publican welcoming shooting parties with cold ales and hot pies.
Let us be absolutely clear: those who support a ban on grouse shooting should do so only if they are prepared to look those people in the eye and explain to them why their livelihoods are worth sacrificing.
There are some who question shooting’s contribution to the rural economy.
People suggest that the 2,500 direct jobs, and the tens of millions of pounds paid out in wages, is somehow misleading.
I agree: the truth is that the benefits created by grouse shooting go far beyond the direct employment it creates.
From the Yorkshire bed and breakfast welcoming ramblers drawn to our area by the moor’s summer blossom to the workshops of Westley Richards in Birmingham or Purdey in London whose handmade shotguns are the finest in the world, the ripples of employment that grouse shooting creates reach every corner of our country.
However, it is not only to the rural economy that grouse shooting makes an invaluable contribution; it is to our rural landscape as well.
There is a tendency among some conservationists to act as though farmers and gamekeepers are somehow trespassing upon Britain’s landscape, yet without their hands repairing our dry stone walls or their dairy cows keeping the fields lush, the rural beauty of our countryside would soon fade.
Heather moorland, as we have heard, is rarer than rainforest and 75 pe cent of it is found here in Britain.
It is a national treasure. From Heathcliff to Holmes, the moors have become a proud part of our cultural heritage.
Without the £1 million of private income spent by moor owners on land management every single week, that proud heritage would come to an end.
Overgrazed by sheep, used to grow pine timber or abandoned to the bracken, the moors, as we know and love them, would be lost.
That would be a disaster for British wildlife.
Academic study after academic study shows that endangered wading birds, such as curlew and lapwing, are much more likely to breed successfully on managed grouse moors.
Some 80 per cent of rare merlin - the UK’s smallest bird of prey - are found on grouse moors.
 |
| Old print of merlin - diminutive raptor |
There has been some discussion about the state of the hen harrier population, and, although it has increased over the past few decades, more can be done.
We must be clear: a Britain without grouse shooting is not a Britain where the hen harrier would thrive.
Research carried out on the Scottish grouse moor of Langholm, and published in the Journal of Applied Ecology, found that when gamekeeping ceased, the hen harrier population plummeted.
Without gamekeepers to control them, predators multiply and hen harriers pay the price.
That is why the participation of 1 million acres of grouse moor in a new hen harrier brood management scheme is the right approach, and why gamekeepers supporting diversionary feeding is the right approach.
Conservation will only succeed through partnership with the grouse shooting industry, and not through its destruction.
That does not just go for birdlife; it goes for the land itself.
The rotational burning used to manage heather moorland may seem odd to some, but without it our moors would not regenerate and support the rich wildlife and biodiversity that they do.
Meanwhile, contrary to what some have claimed, Natural England and others can find no specific evidence that links burning to floods.
As for the myth that grouse shooting is somehow unregulated, I would be amused to see what the gamekeepers in my constituency, with literally scores of regulations, codes, licences and Acts of Parliament to comply with, make of that.
Banning grouse shooting would undermine the balanced ecosystem of our countryside.
It would not only leave many families poorer, but leave our landscape and wildlife poorer too. A ban on grouse shooting would be a policy with no winners.
Instead, only by working together can we ensure a bright future for the rural Britain that we all care so deeply about.
 |
| Curlew on quest for something to eat |
No comments:
Post a Comment