|
 There are many problems facing the shooting industry
at the moment and hence the gamekeepers. The foxhunting bill and firearms legislation are
two. The need to rationalise and streamline the industry to become even more cost
effective is another. The strength of the pound makes it more difficult to attract foreign
clients. Problems arise due to hostile public perception in the face of extreme
unwarranted negative publicity. However the problem most keepers report is that of
raptors.
At the moment
raptors are protected, but they are causing major damage to game stocks and other bird
numbers. Should this continue or get worse then the employment of many gamekeepers will be
put in jeopardy.
In a recent
article by Brian Mitchell,(Click
HERE to read it) ex head keeper of Langholm Estate. This estate has undergone a
tragic turn around in the last 7 years - 5 keepers’ jobs gone, no grouse, and few
small birds. All this from a previously thriving moor that shot, on average 1800 grouse
per year, and kept 5 families living in the area.
According to a
recent Raptor Working Group report raptors are causing no damage to songbirds, grouse or
racing pigeons. We, in the SGA, strongly disagree with much of this report, especially the
parts that claim low numbers of raptors and the lack of damage they do.
Raptor numbers
have soared over the past ten years. Peregrines are the highest ever recorded.
Sparrowhawks are in abundance nationwide. Buzzards have colonised everywhere in Scotland.
Yet despite this the RSPB, SNH and raptor groups insist these birds are rare and
endangered. They daily give this impression to the public through all media outlets,
totally disregarding the truth.
The
highlighting and heightening of perceived problems and fixed agenda from the RSPB and
similar organisations make it very difficult for the gamekeeper’s voice to be heard
as a representative of the Scottish countryside.
Another
problem gamekeepers face concerns the RSPB. They are keeping a database on gamekeepers,
and possibly others, whom they suspect of wildlife crime. As there is no control of these
records and no independent scrutiny it appears that they may fall outwith the Data
Protection Act. Keepers who have gone through the procedures to find out what information
is being held on them have found that the greatest percentage is anecdotal and hearsay,
with little that is factual or proven.
As the
database records are furnished to the police, either by request or volunteered, there is a
lot of concern that this often highly inaccurate and unverified information is being
offered and accepted as factual and taken seriously by the police and others in the public
domain. It seems that possibly this has led to unjustified raids on keeper’s homes by
the police, creating unnecessary friction between the police and keepers, and unwarranted
stress for the keepers and their families. |
