71% oppose shooting fat wee birds that never fight back and that don’t even fly too well

In a typically establishment-oriented report, BBC Scotland prioritises the views of the folk who just love to shoot fat wee birds that never fight back and that don’t even fly too well.

Then the Scottish Government and the Scottish Wildlife Trust get a word in and Fergal Keane offers us what BBC Scotland love to call ‘analysis.’ He too starts of from the land-owners’ perspective.

It’s quite a long report but there are two things missing.

First, why is there no mention of the fact that 15% of all the land in Scotland, 15% of everything we have, is used by toffs to shoot fat wee birds that never fight back and that don’t even fly too well?

Is nothing more important those who own most of Scotland’s land than shooting fat wee birds that never fight back and that don’t even fly too well?

Second, as a taxpayer-funded organisation, might the BBC have searched for public opinion on shooting fat wee birds that never fight back and that don’t even fly too well?

For Magazine Reporting Scotland, did Fergal get out in the streets and ask 3 people?

There is some evidence, published on the 2nd November 2020, if I might be so bold:

New figures published by the League Against Cruel Sports Scotland show seven in ten people (71%) are opposed to grouse shooting in Scotland with only 12% in favour of the blood sport, views which are shared by those in both urban and rural locations.

Is Fergal too tired after trudging over those moors fearlessly seeking the truth from some guy that just love shooting fat wee birds that never fight back and that don’t even fly too well?

Sources:

https://www.rspb.org.uk/our-work/our-positions-and-casework/our-positions/agriculture-and-land-use/farming-land-use-and-nature/uplands/driven-grouse-shooting/#:~:text=It%20is%20true%20that%20fewer,is%20managed%20for%20grouse%20shooting.

https://www.league.org.uk/news/grouse-shooting-in-scotland#:~:text=New%20figures%20published%20by%20the,both%20urban%20and%20rural%20locations.

9 thoughts on “71% oppose shooting fat wee birds that never fight back and that don’t even fly too well

  1. Was there not a report some years back, that this was the least productive use of land possible. It also creates an ecological desert to support it, bereft of wildlife and people.
    Rural economy, my arse!

    Liked by 3 people

    1. The so called “management” of grouse moors, or as I’d prefer to call it “ecological vandalism”, boils down to heather burning.

      You’ll be told it’s to promote healthy new growth, which when taken alone doesn’t sound too bad. However, it also wipes out competing plants, in particular grasses & tree seedlings. It reduces the carbon storage capacity of the underlying peat by about ⅓, which in light of the climate crisis is a big no-no. The result is not quite desert, but monocultures don’t support much diversity. Grazing animals can eat heather & bees do like it, but that doesn’t justify turning over ⅙ of our landmass to it. It’s a lot more than ⅙ of our land, that can actually grow anything, when you consider mountains and high hills.

      A return to an approximation of the Caledonian forest in part, with a focus on food sustainability projects elsewhere would be my favoured option. One way of reducing our consumption of meat is to get more of our protein from nuts and seeds. Nuts, if not seeds so much, can definitely be produced on marginal land and may be worth consideration.

      A mixed and well managed woodland economy wouldn’t exactly (if you’ll excuse me) set the heather alight in terms of Scotland’s wider economy, but it would certainly be more productive than grouse moors. It would greatly improve biodiversity, the carbon storage capacity of the soil would increase by ½ and the woodland would also act as an additional carbon sink.

      What’s not to like?

      For the record and the avoidance of any potential misconceptions, my advocacy of nuts & seeds does not mean I’m against meat consumption although I do try to eat less of it. Even if you convinced me, you won’t, all of my dietary needs could be sourced from plants, I’d really struggle to give up bacon!

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Yes there was, and it was proven that Grouse killing is absolutely destroyong Scotand’s eco system and I am sure that would extend to other forms of violations against Scotand’s flora and fauna by the rich, the non resident landlords (land thieves) etc…it’s tragic for scotand. Just look at what the BritNats did to out peat bogs (wetlands) in the 70/80s they drained them planted pine trees, all to ofset tax, even the queen was in on that scam far as I can recall. The environmental and of course economic damage to Scotland is unimaginable, ie horrfic. Let’s not mention the environmental damage to the planet in fact. The ‘Flow country’ up in Caithness, one example it’s absolutely huge, and the amount of CO2 it holds is absolutely fckg massive. Scuse the language.
      The thing is, it’s only partly protected and much of it is ‘owned’ by the RSPB, an Eng. organisation. If you want full protection ie ‘world heritage status’, (which the area has been on the ‘tentative list’ for many years), the er, EngGov have to ‘approve’ that…so, you can bet your bottom dollar that will never happen, because below that 10mtr deep wetland, with all it’s CO2 sink, is, er coal, and of course it’s in Scotland to boot.
      That area holds more of the CO2 than all of UK forests, ( Eng hardly has any anyway) and what, 25% of the whole of Europe’s CO2, it’s massively important to the planet…in fact, Eng have been taking the soil from it and transferring it to the bogs in NW England…to regenerate them. You could hardly make it up.
      Do we live in some sort of 21st century dystopia? It would seem so. I’ve questioned it to no avail and it looks like funding project etc (Scot Gov and EU ) has all but dried up, to make a bad pun. Get out of the cesspit UKOK Scotland or be mined to hell and back again, literally.
      The EngGov have not paid a penny to restoring Scotland’s natural peat bogs after they drained and destroyed them for financial gain in the 1970/80’s. It really was another scam and still is really…

      Like

  2. This article – rightly – criticising the article, is what I have heard a BBC presenter snootily dismissing as ‘the politics on envy’. The implication is that if we had the chance we would behave like our ‘betters’, in fact, probably worse, because we are ‘not the right sort’.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. On this site many months ago, someone posted a quote from an old book, listing the huge and appalling toll on wildlife required to establish a grouse moor. I think in the 19th century.
    I wish I still had the comment.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. And, despite being called game, I understand most of the birds that are shot are not even eaten, so local shooters tell me.

    Like

  5. Most, if not all, shooting estates are owned by foreigners–that is, people who don’t live in Scotland, have no real connection with Scotland and who, in any other country you can think off, could not own vast tracts of land there , or reduce that land to ecological dereliction.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.