• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

End of the road for grouse shooting? (1 Viewer)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Capercaillie71

Well-known member
I see that for the second year in a row, many shooting estates throughout the UK are cancelling red grouse shooting due to insufficient stocks on the moors:

http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article1212779.ece

Recently one of my local estates advertised a 20-year lease for their grouse moor, despite having spent many years trying to build stocks up, suggesting that they have given up grouse shooting as a waste of time and money:

http://www.thisisnorthscotland.co.u...uleName=InternalSearch&formname=sidebarsearch

I know that grouse populations are traditionally very cyclical, but everything suggests that if the climate continues as it has for the past few years with mild winters encouraging the spread of tick-borne diseases, then grouse shooting will cease to be a major driver for land use in the British uplands.

Now, part of me thinks this is a good thing - maybe the land can be put to some better use. I have nothing particularly against grouse shooting itself (although I cannot see the attraction in it), but I am angry about the wildlife crime that is committed on many grouse shooting estates.

On the other hand, grouse moor management benefits species such as golden plover, black grouse, curlew, snipe etc. and the loss of grouse moor management might be detrimental to those species. Also there is no guarantee that moors would be put to better use. Estate owners will want to do something 'productive' with the land, so they might look at planting trees or releasing non-native game birds to ensure they can still have some 'sport', in the same way that wild partridge shooting has largely disappeared in the lowlands to be replaced by reared birds.

What do you think?
 
I think that you are right - non of us will miss the "Gamekeeper fined for disturbing Hen Harrier" headlines, but will there still be harriers on unkept moorland?

There must be a limit to the amount of land that wildlife agencies will be prepared to buy and manage.
 
Like you point out, some species obviously benefit from the care provided by the landowners. However, are there any species that would benefit from the land being left to 'run wild' if no one steps in to manage it?
 
Mmmm... interesting. As is known I am no fan of 'dodgy' gamekeepers, though I have no real issue with sport shooting as long as it is conducted and managed responsibly and that our natural heritage does not suffer as a consequence.

I worry that they will (understandably) inflate the already high deer numbers as that will be their only real viability for sporting income. This already has a serious effect on the natural regeneration of ancient pinewoods at Mar and other places in Deeside. However, lack of grazing by deer can also have detrimental effects, so fine is the balance.

Gamekeepers have also been known prevent regeneration of the native woods where these are adjacent grouse moors as it supposedly encroaches on the shooting habitat.

I think if this trend continues for say 3 or 4 more consecutive years it shows that perhaps climate change is not the myth that some people think it is, and that we will reach a point of no return very soon, assuming we have not already.

Worrying.
 
PS How variable is this trend geographically ?

Last season there seemed to be grouse teeming at Invercauld ? Maybe some ground is better ( ie where there are no sheep ? ) or that some keepers are more efficient at managing ( and I don't mean killing raptors before any of you CA on here has a go ! ).
 
griffin said:
PS How variable is this trend geographically ?

I think the general trend is similar throughout the UK from the highlands right down to the Pennines, but there are some localised differences. In NE Scotland for example, there seems to be a definite altitudinal effect. Red Grouse are still quite common and productive above about 500m above sea level. That explains the higher numbers on parts of Invercauld and places like Glenshee/Glenclunie where grouse are very easily seen at the roadside. It is the lower moors below 500m which are most heavily affected (like Glen Dye, the moor which is currently available for let). This certainly favours the climate change theory.
 
CBB said:
However, are there any species that would benefit from the land being left to 'run wild' if no one steps in to manage it?

Difficult to think of any. Some grouse moors might regenerate into native woodland, which would benefit some woodland species, but that depends on there being a seed source nearby which is not always the case. Otherwise, unmanaged moorland will basically turn into rank, overgrown heather. The only vaguely interesting bird species I can think of that likes that sort of habitat is the Stonechat.
 
Wouldn't it be possible to stop shooting at all?

As I understand, it is a kind of fashion. 99% of shooters are snobs showing their status. They could as well meet on exclusive goldfish racing or bonfire festival.

Isn't enough RSPB members in high circles to promote a new posh fad? Rhino watching in Kenya or mussel curling contest or whatever?
 
Capercaillie71 said:
Otherwise, unmanaged moorland will basically turn into rank, overgrown heather.
I would seriously urge the conservation autorithies not to let the habitat slip away, as lack of moorland management (and too many dog walking tourists) has cost the Netherlands all their Black Grouse (except one tiny population).
Red Grouse is even more important globally (even if it is "just a non-changing Willow Ptarmigan"), so I can't really be happy with the demise of the Glorious 12th.
I (too) fear that even if unmanaged areas could still be rich in grouse, land owners might want to earn money and change to (unfavourable) management...
 
Does anyone know how the upland birds in question survived before Grouse shooting was taken up as a 'sport' - Gareth
 
CBB said:
Like you point out, some species obviously benefit from the care provided by the landowners. However, are there any species that would benefit from the land being left to 'run wild' if no one steps in to manage it?

You may find that the following link provides a surprising answer regarding what can happen if land is allowed to 'run wild' as you put it. Rather lengthy but well worth a read I believe.

http://www.bloodybusiness.com/news/...s_articles/claws_out_on_a_silent_moorland.htm
 
Anthony Morton said:
You may find that the following link provides a surprising answer regarding what can happen if land is allowed to 'run wild' as you put it. Rather lengthy but well worth a read I believe.

http://www.bloodybusiness.com/news/...s_articles/claws_out_on_a_silent_moorland.htm

One has to wonder how bad things are if 'nature' relies so heavily on human intervention/maintenance. The article is a little one-sided as to the grouse population crash; were causes other than the harriers looked at? Reminds me of my native Finland where the elk population needs to be controlled because their natural predators, bears and wolves (still considered a problem by many) are too few in number.
 
Capercaillie71 said:
Otherwise, unmanaged moorland will basically turn into rank, overgrown heather.

Ah yes, the joys of our modern natural environment. This is where the reintroductions come in - pop some wild boar on there to thin it out a bit :)


CBB said:
However, are there any species that would benefit from the land being left to 'run wild' if no one steps in to manage it?

The heather would love it.... None of these places are going to reach any sort of natural balance, and therefore benefit any species, any time soon - left to their own devices. I'm not a fan of sport shooting, but some sort of management is needed at the moment - and if we have an idea of what helps to promote biodiversity, it needs to be done.

If one species benefits from some scenario (like the harriers in Anthony's link) it exploits the environment until it overindulges, then collapses as the resources run out. Some species do this as a natural lifecycle - take what they can then move on - but here there aren't many places to move on to. It only works in a balance....
 
Last edited:
GarethW said:
Does anyone know how the upland birds in question survived before Grouse shooting was taken up as a 'sport' - Gareth

Good question!. Clearly Red Grouse must have existed at much lower population densities in the days when Scotland was largely wooded. The present abundance of them on artificially created moors is totally unnatural, should we worry if they slip back towards their former status?.

Personally I'd like to see the moors reforested, I find them bleak and rather monotonous places.....
 
If we were to really get back to basics, we ought to scrub out all hedgerows, since these are purely a man-made device to indicate ownership of a given area. Let's face it, 99% of the UK is shaped by man, all we can do is hope to maintain the most biodiverse areas and promote as wide a spread of habitats as possible; protecting rarities will also help the commoner species in the same habitat. Grouse moor management appears to be broadly beneficial, as long as the gamekeepers do not persecute raptors!
 
Big Phil said:
Good question!. Clearly Red Grouse must have existed at much lower population densities in the days when Scotland was largely wooded. The present abundance of them on artificially created moors is totally unnatural, should we worry if they slip back towards their former status?.

Personally I'd like to see the moors reforested, I find them bleak and rather monotonous places.....

I would second that!

Forest, especially forest-meadow mosaic has bigger biodiversity. This is why moors look bleak!

I don't think Red Grouse would become extinct if moors were less managed. They would be less numerous but still not endangered. Why consider today's number of Red Grouse more appropriate? It is just result of economy, timber cutting, wool trade, hunting, which promoted Grouse over other birds.
 
Anthony Morton said:
You may find that the following link provides a surprising answer regarding what can happen if land is allowed to 'run wild' as you put it. Rather lengthy but well worth a read I believe.

http://www.bloodybusiness.com/news/...s_articles/claws_out_on_a_silent_moorland.htm

Interesting article A.M , albeit leaning towards a certain direction perhaps? Thanks. On holiday tomorrow (Symmonds Yat) so not able to digest it as much as I'd like. I do feel that the husbandry the gamekeepers provide appears to be beneficial to many species. Whether this is inflating some populations of birds (Big Phil) is also an interesting point. If this is true then should we be worried about a fall in numbers towards 'pre management' levels? Hope your eggs were well looked after A.M.

Chris
 
CBB said:
Interesting article A.M , albeit leaning towards a certain direction perhaps?

Certainly not. In fact the only reason I chose this particular link from several available was because I felt it gave both sides of the story. If you would like to read other reports/articles on the same experiment, then Google 'Langholm Moors' and take your pick!


Hope your eggs were well looked after A.M.

Chris


I don't know how to tell you this, but I was only joking! 3:)

Anthony
 
Anthony Morton said:
Certainly not. In fact the only reason I chose this particular link from several available was because I felt it gave both sides of the story. If you would like to read other reports/articles on the same experiment, then Google 'Langholm Moors' and take your pick!





I don't know how to tell you this, but I was only joking! 3:)

Anthony


Very good. :clap:
 
jurek said:
Wouldn't it be possible to stop shooting at all?

As I understand, it is a kind of fashion. 99% of shooters are snobs showing their status. They could as well meet on exclusive goldfish racing or bonfire festival.

Isn't enough RSPB members in high circles to promote a new posh fad? Rhino watching in Kenya or mussel curling contest or whatever?

It would be a disaster Jurek. 1,200,000 hectares of moorland to manage and maintain. UK would lose a huge amount of landscape and biodiversity in the space of a century.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top