Anti-grouse shooting petition crushed by MPs who don’t even shoot

11-1: The crushing parliamentary defeat that killed Wild Justice’s grouse ban petition

Wild Justice’s petition to ban driven grouse shooting was heavily rejected during a Westminster Hall debate yesterday, with all MPs but one lining up in defence.

The petition, signed by over 104,000 people, claimed driven grouse shooting was “bad for people, the environment and wildlife” and “economically insignificant.”

Minister Daniel Zeichner confirmed the government has no plans to ban grouse shooting during the debate.

Non-shooters defend grouse shooting

The most powerful moment came when Labour’s Dr Sam Rushworth delivered a strong defence. He has never shot grouse and previously worked for an animal welfare charity, yet he stood firmly behind the practice.

Rushworth revealed 500 jobs in his Bishop Auckland constituency depend on grouse shooting. “I’m here as a Labour MP to represent my constituents,” he said. “My first priority will always be the jobs of people I represent.”

He called it “insulting” to dismiss workers’ wages as unimportant. “If you’re doing the job that your father did before you and your grandfather did before him, that livelihood is not unimportant. It puts food on the table.”

Rushworth also painted a vivid conservation picture. “You can come to Teesdale and Weardale – you won’t find a place where you can observe the curlew and lapwings flying past within an hour. They exist there because of predator control.”

Former PM rejects stereotypes

Former PM Rishi Sunak opened by admitting he’s “never shot grouse, pheasant, or any other bird” but maintains “total commitment to grouse shooting.”

He quashed anti-shooting stereotypes. “Advocates of a ban think only rich men in plus fours will suffer,” he said. “Nothing could be further from the truth. The real victims would be ordinary working people – the farmer’s wife who goes beating so her family can make ends meet.”

Sunak warned that Britain’s unique heather moorland would disappear without grouse shooting. The country has 75% of the world’s supply. “Without the millions spent by moor owners on land management every week, that proud heritage would come to an end.”

MPs then dismissed Wild Justice’s “economically insignificant” claims with hard data. Grouse shooting pumps £23 million annually into Scotland’s economy alone while supporting 3,000 full-time jobs nationwide.

Environmental evidence proved equally strong. Carbon-storing peat restoration has covered 27,000 hectares in 20 years, while bird populations reach five times higher levels on managed moors. Hen harrier numbers hit record levels in 2023.

Wildfire warnings over Natural England

Kevin Hollinrake MP delivered the debate’s most explosive intervention, warning his Yorkshire constituency had become “a tinderbox” due to Natural England blocking proper moorland management.

He accused the regulator of pursuing “an ideological position” to close down grouse shooting through backdoor restrictions. The devastating 2018 Saddleworth wildfire affected 5 million people and caused dozens of early deaths, he noted as evidence.

Hollinrake revealed Natural England is consulting on reducing the deep peat burning threshold from 40cm to 30cm. This would prevent management of “the vast majority of the North York moors.” He warned their mowing alternative creates danger, noting fire service warnings that “mowing excess vegetation leaves dry matter that encourages fire spread.”

MPs highlighted that fire services routinely call gamekeepers first during moorland fires because they have the expertise. When challenged, one MP noted gamekeepers are controlling a massive fire near Inverness “as we speak.”

Opposition MP struggles with alternatives

Sheffield Hallam’s Olivia Blake stood as the sole MP opposing grouse shooting, claiming it was “rooted in privilege” with estates charging “£7,000 a day.”

However, Blake struggled when MPs challenged her on funding alternatives. She offered only vague suggestions about “carbon credits.” Her calls for “community-led projects” drew sharp criticism from rural MPs who questioned whether such schemes would work.

The contrast was stark – one isolated urban MP with theoretical objections facing rural representatives armed with real-world evidence.

Countryside organisations celebrate victory

Christopher Graffius, BASC executive director of communications and public affairs, said: “This was a useful debate that exposed the weakness of the case put by those extremists who want to ban grouse shooting. Although procedure does not allow for a vote, the debate was won by those who support shooting and conservation by the strength, number and quality of their speeches. BASC welcomes the support for sustainable grouse shooting from both the government and the opposition.”

Countryside Alliance declared Wild Justice’s petition “annihilated”. They noted: “Embarrassingly, only one opponent bothered to speak in support of Wild Justice.”

The result proves that when MPs examine evidence rather than activist rhetoric, grouse shooting’s benefits become undeniable.

The full debate can be viewed on Parliament UK’s YouTube channel.

Did you like this article? Read more news from Shooting UK, or subscribe to Shooting Times & Country magazine.