Hunting is in a spot of bother

[Burnttoast]

Ecological tourism is the obvious successor to driven shooting in the uplands I suppose. That could involve management that doesn't include the aspects of grouse management that are really unnecessary and harmful in ecological terms (use of medicated grit, culling of mountain hares and non-target species such as hedgehogs, over-frequent and inappropriate burning) as well as reducing the problems of disease resulting from high densities of the grouse themselves (e.g. cryptosporidiosis, which is also affecting black grouse). I do find it odd that heather moorland is fetishised to such a degree. Its existence over a large fraction of the uplands is completely artificial and excludes large numbers of species (e.g. any bird that prefers not to nest on the ground and large numbers of plant species that don't thrive under intense management for grouse). Management aimed at a mosaic of habitats would benefit tourism and biodiversity without excluding say walked-up shooting.

 

[suestowford]

Bird flu is cutting a swathe through shoots around here - they apparently only have enough pheasants for two weeks' shooting as opposed to the usual 8 weeks.

 

[Burnttoast]

Bird flu is cutting a swathe through shoots around here - they apparently only have enough pheasants for two weeks' shooting as opposed to the usual 8 weeks.

Largely because a lot (and more partridge) are usually imported from intensive rearing sheds on the continent but aren't being this year because of AI. A bit less of that would be a good thing all round, for all sorts of disease control as well as UK ecology.

 

[palo1]

Ecological tourism is the obvious successor to driven shooting in the uplands I suppose. That could involve management that doesn't include the aspects of grouse management that are really unnecessary and harmful in ecological terms (use of medicated grit, culling of mountain hares and non-target species such as hedgehogs, over-frequent and inappropriate burning) as well as reducing the problems of disease resulting from high densities of the grouse themselves (e.g. cryptosporidiosis, which is also affecting black grouse). I do find it odd that heather moorland is fetishised to such a degree. Its existence over a large fraction of the uplands is completely artificial and excludes large numbers of species (e.g. any bird that prefers not to nest on the ground and large numbers of plant species that don't thrive under intense management for grouse). Management aimed at a mosaic of habitats would benefit tourism and biodiversity without excluding say walked-up shooting.

Well, that is a view but tourism would only work effectively where there were few opportunities. The example of Knepp estate where much income is now from tourism and educational courses (paid for) is interesting but I think it is widely understood that once more estates follow this model there will be less income opportunities and if this kind of wilding were common then the tourism slice of the income pie would be very difficult to maintain. I don't see the fetishisation of heather moorland though that is a view taken by some groups (thanks George Monbiot...). We have seen this issue locally where low impact glamping etc has reached and gone beyond saturation point. There are now too many glamping/eco tourism opportunities (related to dark skies and wildlife walking etc) for people to continue making an income. Costs are high, expectations are high and competition is fierce so now we are starting to see, in the Brecon Beacons, rotting railway sheds and so forth. Tourism I don't think, can replace either the employment or income of shooting or other managed land stuff.

 

[palo1]

Had a look for some of the literature if anyone’s interested. Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to find any papers comparing the biodiversity of grouse moors to areas managed for biodiversity, or anything on managed moors in Wales.

On peregrine falcons
On hen harriers
On meadow pipits
Government report

Thanks - these are quite interesting but it is frustrating and possibly telling that none of the key organisations have carried out biodiversity research. I would think that for campaigning organisations that would be a first stop?

 

[Burnttoast]

Well, that is a view but tourism would only work effectively where there were few opportunities. The example of Knepp estate where much income is now from tourism and educational courses (paid for) is interesting but I think it is widely understood that once more estates follow this model there will be less income opportunities and if this kind of wilding were common then the tourism slice of the income pie would be very difficult to maintain. I don't see the fetishisation of heather moorland though that is a view taken by some groups (thanks George Monbiot...). We have seen this issue locally where low impact glamping etc has reached and gone beyond saturation point. There are now too many glamping/eco tourism opportunities (related to dark skies and wildlife walking etc) for people to continue making an income. Costs are high, expectations are high and competition is fierce so now we are starting to see, in the Brecon Beacons, rotting railway sheds and so forth. Tourism I don't think, can replace either the employment or income of shooting or other managed land stuff.

In that case perhaps it's time to accept that financialising every square foot of land is not essential for life (in fact is inimical to it). Public money should be put into maintaining (where maintenance is actually necessary) otherwise 'unproductive' land for the benefit of species we squeeze out elsewhere.

 

[Burnttoast]

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ibi.12356
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6802035/ The latter suggests that red grouse and ground-nesting waders both benefit from predator control but that red grouse benefit more - ie, a reduction in predator control on managed grouse moors would have less impact on GNW than on red grouse, so the amount of predator control deemed necessary for a high density of RG is not necessary for conservation of other birds. Burning was considered to have relatively little impact on upland bird species, so that a reduction in burning would not adversely impact those species.

ETA the Werritty Report contains a bibliography 21 pages long which brings together the previously published literature. Its conclusion was that grouse shooting and associated practices in Scotland weren't well-enough regulated, hence the govt's acceptance of the need for a licensing system.

 

[PurBee]

The trees are cut down on moors/bogs to facilitate a clear view and clear shot for bred bird shooting sports.
I live amongst a wild, unmanaged vast area mountain range of heather land, raised and blanket bogs with streams and rivers.

Before the government decided to grow monoculture spruce forests everywhere, the areas untouched by their ‘forestry management’ practices (purely due to access problems with the forestry machines or private land) are rich in a wild salix willow, holly, pine, birch and importantly, scot’s pine.
(It has been discovered by dna research of tree species that the exact area im in, the ‘scots pine’ here are in fact ‘irish pine’ native to ireland, and not all brought here from scotland as previously thought)

The soil types vary enormously on moor/boglands and the willow thrive in the acidity. I have willow of varying ages, bushes aswell as massive trees, growing in a tested soil of ph 4!
The subsoil is often lime/clay and a rich supply of minerals for all kinds of trees. The banks of blanket bogs are full of trees, and wildlife, with willow and birch growing within the bogs. The raised bog areas kept wild, likewise have varied native trees everywhere.

My land is majority blanket bog. Trees here host an amazing array of wildlife. There’s birds of prey here, im not a bird spotter but have seen what i think are marlins, hen harriers, and heard/seen larger hawk-like birds.
I see very large hawk-types fly high with ravens flying near harassing it.
I had a spotty golden bird of prey nest in my fenced, veg plot where i have areas of it wild, long grass. The baby chick that year was hopping around eating my strawberries, and mum was always perched on tall fencepost keeping an eye-out.

There were also nesting in the scots pine near me, that later got illegally felled by a local farmer, on government land he doesnt own, and even when reported went unprosecuted/univestigated by the ‘forests fisheries and marine’ governing body.

During this tree-felling incident, which i filmed and protested while it was happening, while government employees stood and watched also!!…one was a local old boy who said the farm, once huge, the entire mountain, was covered in scots pine when he was a boy.
So within 1 generation, indigenous forestry of bogs and moors have been wiped-out, alongside many consequential species.

The shooters love this mountain, because there’s everything to shoot here, but they hate it and rarely succeed due to the trees.
Ive had shooters illegally night shoot in my back garden, as i have some acres clear.
Managed moorland doesnt have trees because theyve been felled for easier shooting sports. Trees prevent a clear shot, provide protection for birds to hide in, deer to hide behind etc etc.
Get rid of trees and you’ve got a clear shot at everything, but the balance and richness of the natural species also falls alongside them.


Truly, the wildlife of wild moors and bogs not managed at all is astoundingly rich with a huge array of plants/trees/birds/mammals. Unlike the moors of scotland ive visited that are huge bleak expanses of limited species due to tree felling.
Once the natural species trees go, many species are affected.
I saw for the first time just the other day, a pair of otters swimming down the shallow river beside the land here. I never knew otters would/could be here as i didnt think fish were in the river as its very shallow mostly, with deeper parts.

Nature does a far better job at creating a perfect balance of rural regions than man ever could, as is proven by the difference between truly wild untouched moors and bogs compared to managed areas.

People shoot whatever for whatever reasons, i am not going to judge motives. But surely, to decimate many other species of wildlife for that sport, is a line we shouldn’t cross, imo. And if we choose to kill anything, we surely would want to do that as quickly and as painless as possible?
“Do to others as you would want done to yourself” type of philosophy.

 

[Clodagh]

And that makes animal abuse ok?

I was answering a post about people not making money from shooting. I eat meat and I’d far rather live as a pheasant than a broiler hen. This isn’t some Utopian existence where everything lives to its full span in a glorious natural manner.

 

[Clodagh]

Hen harriers are ground nesting birds. Look at Langholm Moor, they did far better when it was keepered.

 

[palo1]

In that case perhaps it's time to accept that financialising every square foot of land is not essential for life (in fact is inimical to it). Public money should be put into maintaining (where maintenance is actually necessary) otherwise 'unproductive' land for the benefit of species we squeeze out elsewhere.

I would love to see land that was not financialised to the last square foot too. However it absolutely is and as climate change gets worse, so will land be ever more contested. At the moment in areas I am familiar with, land is 'productive' at a low intensity; that enables both some farmed activity (such as hill grazing sheep, though it may be better if we were prepared to eat horses again as they may be better re: biodiversity) and a more biodiverse landscape. There are no easy answers to this at all.

 

[Burnttoast]

Hen harriers are ground nesting birds. Look at Langholm Moor, they did far better when it was keepered.

But conversely they also co-existed with ground predators for thousands of years before keepering was even a thing, or they wouldn't be here now.

 

[Burnttoast]

I would love to see land that was not financialised to the last square foot too. However it absolutely is and as climate change gets worse, so will land be ever more contested. At the moment in areas I am familiar with, land is 'productive' at a low intensity; that enables both some farmed activity (such as hill grazing sheep, though it may be better if we were prepared to eat horses again as they may be better re: biodiversity) and a more biodiverse landscape. There are no easy answers to this at all.

Wilderculture are doing interesting things with cattle as upland grazers, probably better than both sheep (non-native after all) and equids https://wilderculture.com/outwintering-cattle-is-revolutionising-farming-in-the-uplands/

ETA Graeme Lyons (ecologist who does a lot of surveying on rewilding projects) sees low-intensity set stocking particularly of sheep as bad for invert populations (compared with traditional transhumance-type grazing systems, eg coastal grazing marshes/hay meadows). They remove forbs preferentially.

 

[CrunchieBoi]

The trees are cut down on moors/bogs to facilitate a clear view and clear shot for bred bird shooting sports.
I live amongst a wild, unmanaged vast area mountain range of heather land, raised and blanket bogs with streams and rivers.

Before the government decided to grow monoculture spruce forests everywhere, the areas untouched by their ‘forestry management’ practices (purely due to access problems with the forestry machines or private land) are rich in a wild salix willow, holly, pine, birch and importantly, scot’s pine.
(It has been discovered by dna research of tree species that the exact area im in, the ‘scots pine’ here are in fact ‘irish pine’ native to ireland, and not all brought here from scotland as previously thought)

The soil types vary enormously on moor/boglands and the willow thrive in the acidity. I have willow of varying ages, bushes aswell as massive trees, growing in a tested soil of ph 4!
The subsoil is often lime/clay and a rich supply of minerals for all kinds of trees. The banks of blanket bogs are full of trees, and wildlife, with willow and birch growing within the bogs. The raised bog areas kept wild, likewise have varied native trees everywhere.

My land is majority blanket bog. Trees here host an amazing array of wildlife. There’s birds of prey here, im not a bird spotter but have seen what i think are marlins, hen harriers, and heard/seen larger hawk-like birds.
I see very large hawk-types fly high with ravens flying near harassing it.
I had a spotty golden bird of prey nest in my fenced, veg plot where i have areas of it wild, long grass. The baby chick that year was hopping around eating my strawberries, and mum was always perched on tall fencepost keeping an eye-out.

There were also nesting in the scots pine near me, that later got illegally felled by a local farmer, on government land he doesnt own, and even when reported went unprosecuted/univestigated by the ‘forests fisheries and marine’ governing body.

During this tree-felling incident, which i filmed and protested while it was happening, while government employees stood and watched also!!…one was a local old boy who said the farm, once huge, the entire mountain, was covered in scots pine when he was a boy.
So within 1 generation, indigenous forestry of bogs and moors have been wiped-out, alongside many consequential species.

The shooters love this mountain, because there’s everything to shoot here, but they hate it and rarely succeed due to the trees.
Ive had shooters illegally night shoot in my back garden, as i have some acres clear.
Managed moorland doesnt have trees because theyve been felled for easier shooting sports. Trees prevent a clear shot, provide protection for birds to hide in, deer to hide behind etc etc.
Get rid of trees and you’ve got a clear shot at everything, but the balance and richness of the natural species also falls alongside them.


Truly, the wildlife of wild moors and bogs not managed at all is astoundingly rich with a huge array of plants/trees/birds/mammals. Unlike the moors of scotland ive visited that are huge bleak expanses of limited species due to tree felling.
Once the natural species trees go, many species are affected.
I saw for the first time just the other day, a pair of otters swimming down the shallow river beside the land here. I never knew otters would/could be here as i didnt think fish were in the river as its very shallow mostly, with deeper parts.

Nature does a far better job at creating a perfect balance of rural regions than man ever could, as is proven by the difference between truly wild untouched moors and bogs compared to managed areas.

People shoot whatever for whatever reasons, i am not going to judge motives. But surely, to decimate many other species of wildlife for that sport, is a line we shouldn’t cross, imo. And if we choose to kill anything, we surely would want to do that as quickly and as painless as possible?
“Do to others as you would want done to yourself” type of philosophy.

Excellent post!

 

[palo1]

Wilderculture are doing interesting things with cattle as upland grazers, probably better than both sheep (non-native after all) and equids https://wilderculture.com/outwintering-cattle-is-revolutionising-farming-in-the-uplands/

ETA Graeme Lyons (ecologist who does a lot of surveying on rewilding projects) sees low-intensity set stocking particularly of sheep as bad for invert populations (compared with traditional transhumance-type grazing systems, eg coastal grazing marshes/hay meadows). They remove forbs preferentially.

Yes, I think the issues with sheep are well understood if not culturally accepted. It is fine to suggest cattle for some areas but if people like us are to sustain any kind of life then, sadly, the cattle have to at least be cost free. Many, many graziers have tried hardy cattle on the Brecon Beacons but in a difficult winter it simply creates welfare issues that are impossible to ignore. It also means that farmers are running those cattle at considerable loss. There is no incentive to do that. Ponies do MUCH better though there are casualties amongst the herds every winter. Sheep do well on the hill and also work for farmers; that is the reality. If there was money to not run sheep I am sure many hill farmers would take that.

 

[Burnttoast]

Yes, I think the issues with sheep are well understood if not culturally accepted. It is fine to suggest cattle for some areas but if people like us are to sustain any kind of life then, sadly, the cattle have to at least be cost free. Many, many graziers have tried hardy cattle on the Brecon Beacons but in a difficult winter it simply creates welfare issues that are impossible to ignore. It also means that farmers are running those cattle at considerable loss. There is no incentive to do that. Ponies do MUCH better though there are casualties amongst the herds every winter. Sheep do well on the hill and also work for farmers; that is the reality. If there was money to not run sheep I am sure many hill farmers would take that.

I do find this interesting (no relevance to the thread of course!). When transhumance was practised in the uplands (much more associated with cattle rearing) nothing would have been pastured on the hill over winter, and the breakdown of that system will have had a big impact on biodiversity years before anyone worried about that kind of thing.

 

[palo1]

I do find this interesting (no relevance to the thread of course!). When transhumance was practised in the uplands (much more associated with cattle rearing) nothing would have been pastured on the hill over winter, and the breakdown of that system will have had a big impact on biodiversity years before anyone worried about that kind of thing.

Well that practice does still happen to an extent. However, in order to make a living and to breed sheep that have both hardiness and marketable carcasses farmers have worked out that you really need to keep ewes on those hills in the winter; without that, you lose the hardiness. Not everyone wants hardy ewes of course but they are still valued by many lowland sheep farmers for breeding with bigger, less hardy sheep, because of the greater potential for easier lambing and a lower mortality. In the days when everything was brought onto the farm for winter, the welfare issues of that, on relatively small acreage, would not be acceptable now. There are other reasons too but yes, it is interesting. 2 weeks ago we went to a sale of hardy hill ewes - 7000 of them in a tiny village with many, many buyers. I guess at least part of the reason, demand, is due to consumers not wanting to go without fresh meat for weeks at a time as well...

 

[Millionwords]

I guess at least part of the reason, demand, is due to consumers not wanting to go without fresh meat for weeks at a time as well...

And therein lies the argument for less meat consumption; less livestock production and grazing.

 

[palo1]

And therein lies the argument for less meat consumption; less livestock production and grazing.

Yes, in part. IF people were prepared to pay more for their meet it would be possible for a variety of farming practices to be in place (as opposed to only practices that make farming possible). It used to be that a farm of 100 acres could support an average family in terms of food and essentials. Then it was a farm of 250 acres. Now, you need considerably more than that to keep a family. Farmers feel as trapped as anyone in all this I think. If people were prepared to accept that lamb was really only available during certain months but that mutton was also worth eating, that would help too as it would give older sheep a value other than for breeding. Beef is a whole other kettle of fish really, not least because of the madness of previous years that let to BSE and the 30 month cull requirement. That has intensified beef production and led to much less value to traditional hardy breeds of cattle (which need more than 30 months to mature to cull weight). It is complicated and not helped by the very developed global food supply chain which means that meat on the hoof can always be sold and always bought. That doesn't help in several ways. I think, essentially, in terms of meat, eating less meat, eating local, high quality meat and eating seasonally are some of the simplest environmentally friendly actions any of us can take.

 

[suestowford]

Yes, this is what we have been doing. Buy it straight from the farm that is. This farm is local, they produce meat from local native breeds of sheep & cattle, and they use the tiny abattoir just along the road. The food miles are therefore minimal, also the stress on the animals is minimal. It's very good meat but also expensive, so we don't eat it more than once a week.

 

[Burnttoast]

Me too. We spend a lot on meat (my IBS needs it and the ethical side is very important to me as I'm sure to everyone here) and get it from Knepp (buy venison from them, in bulk because of the delivery) and from a local farm that also does raw calf-at-foot milk.

 

[Tiddlypom]

Oh, I fully agree that people make money from shooting. That is what shooting is all about - providing a paid service to those who delight in standing around blasting artificially reared game birds out of the sky.

The shooting industry does nothing to benefit countryside management and natural life in the way that pre ban fox hunting with hounds did. It's all about the £££s.

 

[palo1]

Oh, I fully agree that people make money from shooting. That is what shooting is all about - providing a paid service to those who delight in standing around blasting artificially reared game birds out of the sky.

The shooting industry does nothing to benefit countryside management and natural life in the way that pre ban fox hunting with hounds did. It's all about the £££s.

Well those £££s do benefit the rural economy and those local people who get paid employment in shooting.

 

[Koweyka]

What sort of trail puts a full pack of hounds on a train track and allows perhaps 60 hounds to be killed and potentially derail a train and kill potentially kill people.

Hounds and wildlife innocent victims of a god awful pastime, heartbreaking.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?st...fi2MX6AHhK2f8LDCynUgYuLFYl&id=689290157758386

 

[Tiddlypom]

I feel sick ?.

https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/dogs-hit-by-train-between-norwich-and-london-9351984

A number of hunting dogs have been killed after being hit by a train on the Norwich to London line.

Services have been disrupted this morning (October 31) after the 8.30am Norwich to London Liverpool Street service struck the dogs on the track near Diss.

Greater Anglia said they are looking into how the dogs came to be on the tracks, with strong suggestions the dogs came from a local hunt.

According to some reports about 100 dogs crossed the line, with about 20 being struck.

A woman who was travelling on the train which hit the dogs said an announcer told travellers they had "hit a pack of dogs".

 

[Koweyka]

I feel sick ?.

https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/dogs-hit-by-train-between-norwich-and-london-9351984

A number of hunting dogs have been killed after being hit by a train on the Norwich to London line.

Services have been disrupted this morning (October 31) after the 8.30am Norwich to London Liverpool Street service struck the dogs on the track near Diss.

Greater Anglia said they are looking into how the dogs came to be on the tracks, with strong suggestions the dogs came from a local hunt.

According to some reports about 100 dogs crossed the line, with about 20 being struck.

A woman who was travelling on the train which hit the dogs said an announcer told travellers they had "hit a pack of dogs".

It’s awful, I am literally sat sobbing at this waste of life

 

[Clodagh]

That’s really awful. Poor, poor things. No hunt would hunt with 100 hounds though, unless it looked like a hundred which I guess is possible.

 

[Burnttoast]

What sort of trail puts a full pack of hounds on a train track and allows perhaps 60 hounds to be killed and potentially derail a train and kill potentially kill people.

Hounds and wildlife innocent victims of a god awful pastime, heartbreaking.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?st...fi2MX6AHhK2f8LDCynUgYuLFYl&id=689290157758386

Poor poor things, and poor train driver and passengers And what a massive waste of the time and resources of other people cleaning up after this for what reason? The DH have a lot of form unfortunately.

 

[Millionwords]

I feel sick.
If they weren't hunting illegally, then whats their reason for crossing the tracks?
"Confused hounds in difficult scenting conditions"? Even though the huntsman should know the route?

A horrific waste of life by some criminals who think they're above the law.

 

[palo1]

That is awful. I cannot imagine a huntsman worth the name allowing hounds anywhere near a railway line. The number of hounds suggested in the pack is huge which is very odd too. How awfully sad and utterly unnecessary.