UKH

The recent announcement by United Utilities that it will not renew licenses to shoot game birds on its upland holdings has prompted a furious backlash from pro-shooting campaign group the Countryside Alliance.

Read more

I'll bet that grouse wished he didn't have a bright red target on his head

The CA represent very few people, yet constantly claim that they're the mouthpiece for "country folk" - whoever the heck they are. The CA are a backward organisation who say and do nothing when birds of prey are killed on and around grouse moors by people who are probably CA members. As for this childish drivel about "cancelling the countryside" - it's desperate stuff that sounds like the bizarre rantings of some right wing Tory MP about to lose their seat.

UU might be useless when it comes to leaks and sewage, but they've got this one right.

They have a "Raptor Persecution Priority Delivery Group", if the Conservatives were that brazen they would have a "Priority Abuse of Disabled Citizens Group".

As their own tagline puts it

"The Countryside Alliance is a campaigning organisation for field sports including hunting, shooting, fishing and rural communities."

Odd how the country folk in general come behind the field "sports".

100%. They are the worst sort of pretenders and hypocrites when it comes to protecting the countryside. 

Cancelling the countryside is such a laughable tagline. There are plenty of better organisations holding the UK's polluting water companies to account, and who actually do have an interest in protecting wildlife and rural communities.

Nice article!

Edit:

https://fullfact.org/environment/does-government-subsidise-grouse-shooting/...

The government currently subsidises shooting to the tune of something between £45 and £84 million via intentional loopholes in agricultural subsidy law. Public money for public good?

While I'd gladly see a complete ban on sport shooting in the UK, I can't help feeling CA are right about this being, at least partly, a diversionary/PR tactic for UU.

Is it diversionary or merely mitigatory?

Just because they are screwing things up downstream doesn't mean we should not applaud them for doing the right thing upstream.

Yes, because setting traps to kill stotes and weasels, poisoning birds of prey and basically mass-farming grouse so some knob can shoot them is fantastic for biodiversity. 

There does seem to be a lot of CA noise being generated recently. I think we're seeing some coordinated pushback. I suspect they are trying to ride on the coat tails of the anti water company rhetoric.  Which is ironic as intensive grouse management is a contributor to water quality issues and the water companies that share a catchment with grouse shoots have been trying to fix these problems for years 

They are utterly brazen. I've seen some of their propaganda left in bothies; great for getting a fire started. 

UU may be back tracking under pressure;

https://raptorpersecutionuk.org/2023/08/10/unclear-statement-from-united-ut...
 

Countryside Alliance is a misnomer. It's a Tory organisation run by a minority of wealthy Tories for a minority of wealthy Tories, centred on a deep longing for a feudal past. It should be viewed as an ultra right-wing fringe group, obsessed by a hatred of Chris Packham and bean burgers, not as a sensible forum for ideas or as in any way representing "rural communities".

You forget the bit about: Sprinkling the catchment area for water supply with little lumps of poisonous lead. A nice gift that will leach into the water supply for centuries. But its OK, because some rick folk are contributing a tiny amount to the countryside economy.

This is subject to a classic UK government soft touch regulation "voluntary ban" on lead shot which means they only use lead...  Which is daft since there are alternatives that do fine.  

I expect that if one were to apply for a licence to distribute tons of toxic metal over hundreds of km2, where there was a likelihood of it entering the food chain, it would be banned.

If we ignore the fact that people dont mind the occasional bit of shot found in their game dinner. (If we found similar in any other food product, we'd be suing someone.) I'm surprised it hasn't been challenged on environmental health grounds.  (A quick google doesnt show me anything obvious.) Perhaps there should be a decontamination clause in any licences.

Lead shot is already banned over wetlands, and legislation for a total ban could be in this Autumn (IIRC).

That's going to hack off a million air rifle owners though as, unlike shotguns and conventional rifles, there's currently no viable ammunition for target shooting and pest control/hunting available (for sub-12 foot pound non - FAC rifles anyway, which make up the majority of owners).

Studies of shot wildfowl though shows that like the law against killing raptors its considered more of a guideline than a rule.

There are lots of lead free alternatives. Pointy ones, round head, jacketed etc. I couldn't vouch for their accuracy though, as I'm a plinker. As for pest control, the lead free ones are a very similar weight to the lead ones, so should deliver the same energy.

Typo alert - there's no "o" in Countryside Alliance

There's no 'ryside' either

Plinker here too.

Apparently lead free pellets aren't accurate enough for target shooting (and IMHO that means unsuitable for pests too). Also due to lower weight the energy drops off quickly too (although pretty much irrelevant if you can't get accurate placement)

I'm interested in your similar weight comment. Just had a look at H&N FTTs in .22. Lead = 0.95g (grammes not grains), Lead free equivalent = 0.62g.

My rifle seems to prefer JSB at 1.03 g, lightest I've used are JSB RS at 0.87g

(Not to mention lead free are over double the price at present)

Don't have an issue changing pellets, provided they work (hopefully economies of scale will improve prices).

Might have to bite the bullet (no pun intended) and try some Pb free.

That's not the fault of the legislation, it's the apparent immunity of landowners to prosecution. When any lead ban comes in I envisage police raids on heinous air rifle ranges and plinkers in backyards, while lead shot (lead free might hurt the Purdeys) and dead rabbits laced with carbofuran continue unmolested on the moors.

If UU were serious about the benefits to the environment they would surely use this change of land use to plant trees and reforest the moors. Good for flood management too.

Round of applause for the headline

Prometheus G2 .22 are 1.17g. They look like they might be ok in sub 12, due to the plastic seal. HN Barracuda is 0.84g, which is in the lower range for lead.

At the moment its a niche thing. Once lead is banned, there will be more r&d going into lead free. I expect price to go down (possibly) and performance to go up.

Thanks, will check out the G2s.

Not that I'm the greatest shot in the world with a springer!

Trees drink a lot of water and dry out the ground. Bog restoration projects focus on re-wetting them. The wet peat acts like a sponge, so reduces flooding. To increase water retention, they build dams, to slow and stop streams eroding the bog. Trees help to reduce flooding, by breaking up slopes, and stopping the ground from drying out, allowing water to seep in. But bogs can absorb a lot of water quickly. We should really have more of both.

As for UU and similar, its all about wind turbines on the moors. Much more lucrative than shooting. A downside is the huge access roads they bulldoze, then reinforce with hundreds of tons of rock and gravel. Not that I'm cynical or anything, but I expect that when the turbines are decommissioned, the plots would make lovely executive housing, with commanding views.

Or even better, keep sheep away, and leave alone.  The trees will return to the appropriate places.  But perhaps a bit of planting may be needed to start things up.

It's the 'Glorious Twelfth' and it's pee-ing down - hooray!!!

Because its difficult to enforce and prove. Same way it is for lead shot over wetlands or for waterfowl in general. Bit unlikely a copper will be popping out to check whats being used.

Which is part of the argument for banning it across the board. At some point the supplies will run win although like with the banned poisons it will take time. Although I guess they could start casting their own shot and replacing the loads.