Shooting UK is your complete shooting resource. From gun reviews to shotgun licence and firearms certificate information, to clay pigeon shooting, game shooting, shooting lessons and gundog training.
Lindsay Waddell, Chairman of the National Gamekeepers Organisation I found Natural England’s new Vision for the Uplands 2060 document something of a mishmash, containing little more than contradictions.
On the one hand, it raises the spectre of drier summers and devastating fires, but I’ve yet to see the drier summers here. On the other hand, it talks about leaving blanket bog unburned to aid biodiversity. Well, sadly, the two things may not sit that easily together. If large unmanaged areas of blanket bog do catch fire during one of their dry summers, what then? The answer is that they really will have an ecological disaster on their hands, as thousands of eggs, chicks and even the insect population is burned. This is not to mention the hugely valuable resource of the peat itself, which may be damaged beyond repair in our lifetime anyway.
There is lots of stuff about the value of a vibrant rural population and all that goes with it, including the skills required to look after the countryside. Well, that is exactly what we are trying to hang on to now, and in the main, due to shooting management and the farming community, we are achieving it. It’s true that the age profile of farmers may be getting on a bit, but there are still young people coming into hill farming despite all the prophets of doom.
They say we need more trees, the right sort, of course, none of those nasty alien conifers. Again, the sporting community has been planting tens of thousands of native trees in gulleys and stream sides for a number of years now with blackgrouse in mind. Of course it would be nice to have a scattering of woodland on the upland fringe, after all it was man that chopped it all down, so why not?
It is more the manner in which this document tries to convey its message that is wrong. It is rather like a lecture from primary school; so simplistic, so ideological, and I have a feeling so out of touch with the vast majority of those who will have to put it into practice.
There’s lots about sustainable travel as well, but try getting around by bus up here. Even if transport was improved, anything more than a quick pop down the dale to the shops would require a week off. Anything more adventurous would certainly entail an overnight stop. It would take us back to a pace of life which went a good hundred years ago and, unless I am very much mistaken, is not going to return.
Whoever sat down and tried to draw this vision together has not really put themselves into the shoes of those who live here. They have not tried to make a living from the uplands. If they had, it would have read rather differently.
Have your say: if you have a view on a current news topic, send it, in no more than 500 words, to selena_masson@ipcmedia.com.
Ian Robertson of The Scottish Country Sports Tourism Group The Scottish Country Sports Tourism Group (SCSTG) was established in 2005 for the purpose of marketing and promoting Scotland’s world-class fieldsports as well as providing industry training to improve delivery to the client. When I became project manager of the SCSTG in April 2009, I decided to incorporate a new element to the purpose of the group — education and participation.
The SCSTG’s current aims are therefore delivered through two main projects: its website, which is a one-stop shop where more than 250 sporting and accommodation providers advertise their services to the sporting public around the world, and industry training through the delivery of The Excellence in Customer Care course, which highlights the importance of the customer in our traditional industry.
When I joined the SCSTG, access to fieldsports was a real issue. Education and participation therefore became an important part of increasing sporting tourism in Scotland. There was a market, but access to fieldsports was perceived to be difficult. The new Scottish Country Sports Experience should go some way to solving this access problem and help to dispel the myth that fieldsports are a closed shop.
The project is funded by Perth and Kinross Council (through EU funding) and the half-day experiences are aimed at newcomers and tourists.
Participants will learn about the different fieldsport disciplines, the relevant etiquette, the species they are likely to encounter and how their involvement in a day’s sport fits into the rural environment. They will also have the opportunity to have a go at target or clayshooting, or fishing under the supervision of trained tutors. In short, the primary focus is to equip newcomers with the necessary tools and confidence to go on to participate safely, and to progress to the next step of a “real” sporting experience.
Participants will also gain an understanding of the sporting and rural environments while enjoying an introduction to the equipment and skills required to participate safely on a shooting, fishing or deerstalking outing. Though it is currently a local project, my intention is to expand the Scottish Country Sports Experience throughout Scotland to provide tourists with easy access to fieldsports as well as creating more demand for fieldsports-related businesses.
In my opinion, all of us involved with fieldsports have a duty to promote the benefits they bring to the rural landscape, whether they are environmental, economic or social, as well as providing opportunities for newcomers to get involved to ensure the survival of these sports.
For further information or to find out more about the SCSTG, email ian.robertson@cstgscotland.com or visit www.countrysportscotland.com.
SCSTG is offering a free listing to accommodation and sporting providers until the end of June. For more information, contact Victoria Brooks, tel 01350 723226.
Bob Chaffer As was recently reported in Shooting Times (News, 23 September), several groundnesting bird species in the Outer Hebrides, including terns and gulls, have shown a marked improvement in their breeding this year. The reasons for this are numerous, but certainly the removal of more than 1,100 mink from Harris and Lewis in the past two-and-a-half years has been a major factor.
The removal of the mink must be viewed in itself as a huge success when you consider the size, scale and remote topography of the islands. In fact, it’s the largestever trapping project of its kind.
The Outer Hebrides provides mink with 305,000 hectares of land, 3,297km of coastline, 1,831km of river and 4,721km of loch edge populated by internationally important birds and numerous salmon species. There are few of the mink’s natural competitors and predators on the islands, making it an extraordinary haven for them.
Some of the mink were trapped by conscientious keepers, some by crofters, but the vast majority were caught by the professional trappers employed by Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) on the Hebridean Mink Project (HMP). These trappers used the latest satellite technology and mapping software as well as their traditional trapping skills to locate and service all 6,995 traps currently in place.
Most of these traps are only accessible by foot, meaning every trapper walks
an average of 3,500km a year in all weather conditions.
The trappers know that the best way to catch an animal is to identify its Achilles heel. Therefore, the HMP trappers use mink gland to bait the traps for most of the year and fresh fish and lure at other times. The use of the lure saves time, money and inconvenience, and when walking up to 20km a day and servicing 25 to 40 traps, that is extremely important. Running the traps for the maximum number of nights of the year is key to the success of the project.
So why is there so much time, effort and money being put in to eradicating mink? The main reason is the devastating effects of these non-native species on indigenous flora and fauna, which is only just beginning to be fully appreciated.
Large-scale non-native species eradication projects such as the HMP and the removal of the ruddy duck from the UK can only work with the co-operation of national and international conservation bodies, governments and the general public. In many ways the biggest success of the HMP was in SNH successfully securing the necessary funds and political backing in the first place.
Have your say: if you have a view on a current news topic, send it, in no more than 500 words, to selena_masson@ipcmedia.com.
Shooting Times Columnist David Tomlinson I’m an enthusiast for reintroduction projects, which is likely to put me in a minority among Shooting Times readers. I don’t mind admitting that I get a thrill whenever I drive along the M40 and see red kites soaring overhead, and I really enjoyed watching the re-established white-tailed eagles during a visit to Mull. I have yet to see a British beaver, but my experiences in North America suggest that bringing back beavers will be a bonus for wetland creation here.
I even sympathise with those who want to bring back lynx, as I am confident that these shy and beautiful cats would fill an important role in helping to control our deer population. However, there is one reintroduction that I am convinced would be a step too far: we should never bring back the grey wolf.
I have been lucky enough to travel in many European countries where wolves can still be found, including Romania, Slovakia, Sweden and Spain. However, despite spending many hours in good wolf habitat, seeing fresh tracks and even hearing a pack howling, it was only last year that I saw my first wild wolf. This was in central Spain, where there is a growing wolf population. It is rising because large areas of land have been abandoned to nature, allowing an increase in both deer and their predators. Wolves have never been exterminated in Spain, despite centuries of persecution. Today they have a growing band of supporters and are protected by law, but they still face many threats, ranging from illegal poisoning to shooting. Not everyone loves the wolf and many still get killed.
In Sweden there are big fines for anyone who kills a wolf. However, though there is a lot of wilderness in Sweden, wolves invariably create problems, as they prefer eating domestic livestock (including reindeer) to catching wild prey. Most ruraldwelling Swedes would rather live in a wolf-free countryside.
The same is true in Norway, where I have heard first-hand accounts of dogs being killed by wolves as the latter won’t tolerate dogs in their territories. As a result, most country dwellers hate wolves and mistrust urban-based conservationists who insist that living alongside wolves is easy.
In Britain, we have far less wild land than those European countries that still have wolves. There would be nowhere for the packs to go without them coming across domestic stock. If we could have wolves trained only to kill deer that would be fine, but what wolf is going to want to dine on a tough old hind when lamb is also on the menu? Releasing wolves into the Highlands would be a disaster for the wolves, which would inevitably end up having to be shot. It would be an equally disastrous public relations move by the conservationists, as the wolves would be certain to lose them a lot of friends. So I’m a confirmed NWIMBY — no wolves in my back yard.
Have your say: if you have a view on a current news topic, send it, in no more than 500 words, to selena_masson@ipcmedia.com.
Comment and opinion on country and field sports and countryside events and issues
04th November 09:
28th October 09:
21st October 09:
14th October 09:
07th October 09:
30th September 09:
08th September 09:
02nd September 09:
Save up to 31% on a subscription to Shooting Times & Country Magazine, subscribe today and perfect gift this Christmas.
