A REPORT suggesting Scotland’s grouse moors are “bird sanctuaries” has been dismissed by bird charity the RSPB, which called instead for a more balanced approach to upland management.
The study by academics at Durham and Newcastle Universities, backed by pro-shooting celebrity Ian Botham, found grouse moors are home to high numbers of endangered species.
The research, published in the run-up to the start of the grouse shooting season on August 12, looked at numbers of birds on grouse moors in Scotland and England.
The study found grouse moors can have 24 times as many lapwings, six times as many endangered curlews, and extra golden plover, snipe and oyster catchers, compared to areas where fewer predators such as foxes, stoats and crows are killed by gamekeepers.
But James Reynolds, head of communications for RSPB Scotland, said: “The fact that the killing of predators reduces predation is hardly ground-breaking. This grouse-moor-funded report tells us what we’ve known for some time: grouse moors are good for grouse. Some other ground-nesting species benefit indirectly whilst others do not, most notably hen harriers, which are completely absent.
“The RSPB seeks a more balanced future for the uplands where grouse, birds of prey, mountain hares and people can all co-exist and where unsustainable management practices often carried out on intensive grouse moors, such as the illegal killing of hen harriers, are consigned to the past.”
Former cricketer Botham said “bird activists” who criticise grouse moors “should realise that without gamekeepers many of Britain’s endangered birds would not have a prayer”.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel