Ban Driven Grouse Shooting

This is the title of a petition made to Parliament. As it has received  more than 100,000 signatures it is eligible to be debated later this year.

Meanwhile it has provoked a counter-petition, “Protect grouse Moors and grouse shooting”. Both sides will have an opportunity on Tuesday next week to present evidence to a committee of MPs. This should ensure a more informed debate, should there be one, in the House of Commons.

Here is what those in favour of banning driven grouse shooting say:

Grouse shooting for ‘sport’ depends on intensive habitat management which increases flood risk and greenhouse gas emissions, relies on killing Foxes, Stoats, Mountain Hares etc in large numbers and often leads to the deliberate illegal killing of protected birds of prey including Hen Harriers.
Driven grouse shooting uses animals for live target practice, with thousands killed every day. Native predators are killed because they eat Red Grouse. Mountain Hares are killed because they carry ticks that can spread diseases to grouse. Heather is burned to increase Red Grouse numbers for shooting. Grouse shooting is economically, ecologically and socially unnecessary. This is ‘canned hunting’.

The government seem to have made up its mind already judging by this response from DEFRA (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs):
Grouse shooting is a legitimate activity that provides economic benefits, jobs and investment in some of our most remote areas and can offer important benefits for wildlife and habitat conservation.
A report by the UK shooting community (Public & Corporate Economic Consultants report 2014: The Value of Shooting) concludes that the overall environmental and economic impact of game bird shooting is positive; the industry has estimated that £250 million per year is spent on management activities substantially benefiting conservation. For grouse shooting in particular, according to the Moorland Association, estates in England and Wales spent £52.5 million on managing 149 grouse moors for shooting in 2010. Scottish landowners manage a further 150 moors for shooting grouse. The industry also supports 1,520 full time equivalent jobs and is worth £97.7 million across Great Britain.

Grouse shooting takes place in upland areas, which are important for delivering a range of valuable “ecosystem services”, including food and fibre, water regulation, carbon storage, biodiversity and recreational opportunities for health and wellbeing. The Government is committed to helping create a more sustainable future for the English uplands, including by protecting peatlands through measures such as the Peatland Code.

The Government welcomes the proactive approach taken by game keeping organisations to ensure a sustainable, mutually beneficial relationship between shooting and conservation, for example through the British Association for Shooting and Conservation’s green shoots initiative.

The Government recognises the benefits that grouse shooting, and shooting more widely, bring to individuals, the environment and the rural economy. It is for these reasons that the Government believes shooting and other country pursuits such as hunting and fishing should be protected.

For once I wholly agree with DEFRA.

Update: 

Parliament is going to debate the petition  – “Protect grouse Moors and grouse shooting”.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/164851

The debate is scheduled for 31 October 2016.