Signed: for the sake of Hen Harriers and other slaughtered birds of prey; for the sake of slaughtered Mountain Hares; for the sake of stopping the ruination of blanket bogs and the consequent adverse effect for climate change; for the sake of better up-stream management of moorland and the reduction of flooding; for the sake of environmental improvement and helping rewiilding projects; and so on.
I am against driven grouse shooting but I really question the effectiveness of the petition. Last time it was signed by around 0.075% of the electorate so if this time it reaches 0.1% of the electorate or even 0.2%, is it going to change anything?
All the petition seems to achieve is antangonise landowners and highlight to politicians that very few people actually care enough to sign it. Remember in Malta, 15% of their electorate signed a petition calling for an end to spring hunting.
I think we need new tactics than endless petitions and daily Twitter commentaries of the number of people who have signed it.
I am against driven grouse shooting but I really question the effectiveness of the petition. Last time it was signed by around 0.075% of the electorate so if this time it reaches 0.1% of the electorate or even 0.2%, is it going to change anything?
All the petition seems to achieve is antangonise landowners and highlight to politicians that very few people actually care enough to sign it. Remember in Malta, 15% of their electorate signed a petition calling for an end to spring hunting.
I think we need new tactics than endless petitions and daily Twitter commentaries of the number of people who have signed it.
The e-petition is a good tool and helps raise awareness. It's now at poll 3, poll 2 was signed by more people than poll 1 and poll 3 is likely to be signed by more than the first 2. It is helping to raise awareness and it's also a gauge as to how the awareness is spreading.
The poll is focusing people to bring others on-board, others who want to become involved but knew nothing about the problems on the grouse moors.
I hope we have as many polls as it takes to force a debate because we need one.
I think the initial e-petition was certainly worthwhile in raising awareness but subsequent ones simply highlight that it is a minority interest. Even if it gets 100,000 signatures that does not guarantee a debate but means that a committee of MPs decide whether it is worthy of debate. Even if it gets a debate, few MPs are likely to turn up except those in constituencies with grouse moors, who are likely to defend the practice.
How can the RSPB have 2 million members but yet only a derisory 30,000 (or 0.075% of the electorate) sign this petition despite it being tweeted about 500 times by the same people every day? It highlights conservation has a problem and needs to work out how it can engage more people. Starting the petition again won't do this.
I think a more useful and interesting debate is how we as conservationists can attract more people to our cause. The current tactic of countless petitions calling to ban various things (from grouse shooting to excess packaging, baloon releases to seemingly every housing development) does not seem to be working.