The Scottish Government has released a public consultation allowing you to have your say about grouse moor reform.
On its own, the proposed bill would make some important changes but the Government needs to go much further. This REVIVE guide will help you fill in the consultation and submit your response (*and you can find the consultation link at the bottom of this page*).
It's quite a short consultation as the 'Further Comments' sections are where we can make an impact. We hope you find this guide useful and don't forget to share it widely!
Section 1 – Licensing of Grouse Shooting
We recommend you say YES to every option in this section while also selecting "Record keeping" and "Reporting Requirements" (question 12) to be a condition of a grouse moor licence.
The Further Comments section (question 16) is our opportunity to call for more than the scope the consultation questions provide. The following are our bullet-points for you to include and expand on.
*We encourage you to not simply copy and paste what is below and to maximise the individuality of your response by adding your personal thoughts and comments:
FURTHER COMMENTS ON LICENCING (question 16)
- Your thoughts on ending medicated grit stations - the mass chemical medication of Scotland's iconic native and wild red grouse. It is toxic to humans and wildlife - just to increase grouse numbers for sport shooting
- Your view on shooters having to pass tests of shooting proficiency and relevant theory - wildlife identification and biology, firearms use and safety, hunting techniques, and rules and laws - as licence holder's responsibility to ensure they have one.
- For the code of practice to be legally enforced - not just voluntary.
Also:
- You might agree that licence fees should be implemented from the outset - or sooner rather than later - to at least cover operational, compliance and monitoring costs - to avoid costing the public money.
- You might also want to discuss your views about land reform, inequality and the negative impact and power that shooting estates have had on your life, your area of Scotland or in Scotland as a whole.
- For example: Land managed for shooting interests is a major component of inequitable patterns of land ownership in Scotland. Do you think the government should consider additional licence fees beyond being cost neutral to contribute to more community buyouts?
- You might suggest that real grouse moor reform can help the Government with land reform efforts and the Scottish Government's own stated support for "the transition to more economically and environmentally productive uses of land where appropriate".
- You may argue that the code of practice for licenced grouse moors should seek to end all unsustainable things that take place so more grouse can be shot for sport.
- Offer any more of your thoughts.
Section 2 - Muirburn
This section is about the unnecessary and environmentally damaging burning that takes place on grouse moors, just so more grouse can be shot for sport. REVIVE agrees that all muirburn should be licenced but that getting a licence just for grouse shooting is unjustifiable considering the risks. Allowing it would be jumping through hoops to allow grouse shooting to continue much as before.
*We recommend you answer YES to every question except questions 21 AND 22: "Do you agree that the definition of peat set out in the muirburn code should be amended to 40 cm?"
WHY?:
- Should be 30 cm in depth.
- To widen environmental protection far more.
- Peat currently defined at 50 cm in Scotland - 40 cm in England which is not good enough
- Peat - a vital environmental resource which sequesters huge amounts of carbon, internationally significant
- Scotland can do better than Westminster's 40 cm peat definition to protect more of it.
- You may also make the point that no peat of any depth should be burned on so more grouse can be shot for sport.
FURTHER COMMENTS ON MUIRBURN (question 24)
In the strongest possible terms, REVIVE is against allowing grouse moors to receive a licence for muirburn when the purpose is as unnecessary as increasing grouse shooting for sport - whether on peat or not. The Scottish Government will find this very hard to justify and we encourage everyone who agrees to strongly make this point.
The purpose of muirburn is to manipulate the landscape to make it more suitable for grouse, at the expense of other wildlife and the environment. You might want to reflect on this in your own comments as well as discussing that:
- Muirburn takes place upon: huge swathes of unconnected land, which you think may be difficult and expensive to police. Compliance of 'best practice' - hard to measure. A muirburn licence to shoot more grouse - not worth the risk.
- You might agree that ending muirburn for grouse shooting - helps carbon balance - more carbon sequestration potential - more biodiversity
- Discuss the significance of peat - is it worth the risk just for grouse shooting? Would re-wetting the land instead be better protection against wildfires?
- Your thoughts on moving to more wooded landscapes and how that can help the economy, wildlife and biodiversity
- Diversifying away from burned patches of heather monoculture will make those areas more resilient to climate change, flooding, pestilence and disease.
Section 3.1 Wildlife Traps
On balance, we recommend answering for all traps to be further regulated (in questions 25, 26 and 27) however regulation of traps, without questioning their purpose - to kill animals so more grouse can be shot for sport - is clearly not good enough. This is Killing to Kill.
For Question 28 we recommend you ask for record keeping and reporting requirements and answer YES to question 29.
Killing to kill is abhorent and we strongly recommend you challenge this in the Further Comments section (question 31).
You might want to discuss your views on the following :
- That hundreds of thousands of foxes, stoats, weasels, crows and even non-target species like hedgehogs are snared trapped and killed just so more grouse can be shot for sport.
- Your belief that regulation is not enough and your disappointment that the purpose behind the wildlife trapping and killing is not being considered.
- You might accept that on some occasions like ethical wildlife conservation or for protecting agriculture that wildlife management can be deemed necessary and appropriate if approached properly - but is grouse shooting a good enough reason?
- That should be a total ban on the use of decoy animals and birds in traps (like crow traps that lure other territorial birds into them).
- You think the Scottish Government should adopt the International consensus principles for ethical wildlife control to protect our wildlife.
- That the code of practice should compel the grouse moor licence holder to end the killing to kill on grouse moors.
Section 3.2 Glue Traps
We recommend answering YES to the questions in this section except for question 34 - there is absolutely no need for a delay in banning glue traps.
Section 3.3 Snares
We recommend not answering the tick box questions in this section as we are campaigning for a full snare ban and a full review on snaring is currently underway. In the further comments section you may wish to discuss in your own words that:
- You support calls from The Wild Animal Welfare Committee (WAWC) and the British Veterinary Association (BVA) to ban snaring
- That snares are cruel and indiscriminate that can hurt unintended animals - causing needless suffering
- That stink pits - piles of rotting carcasses - only exist on grouse moors to lure animals like foxes into snares
- Offer your own thoughts on this
*FILL IN THE CONSULTATION BY CLICKING HERE*
(TIP - Right-click to open the above link as a new tab to keep using this page as a guide)
Thank you for helping our people, our wildlife and the environment
