The Real Price of Grouse: An Introduction to Driven Grouse Shooting

Sign the petition to ban driven grouse shooting:
petition.parliament.uk/petiti...

[@tiernanwearen9499]

Oh look at all those dislikes and how do you propose that the rural communities survive without the income generated by the shooting season?

[@benjaminyip9112]

Hi Chris, hope you're well. Just thought I'd share the following link with you, just to make sure you and your followers have access to the views of the opposition. Additionally at the end of the film, there are further links and studies which have been undertaken, providing some extra insight into the benefits of moor management, the work of the game keepers and what it does for species that would otherwise be on the decline. For those who may "shoot me down", just remember I've taken the time to listen to the opposing view, and I hope you can do the same.

[@alanirvine2284]

Agreed there are the odd talk of these "record" days. I, as shooter, do not think I would enjoy them despite having been on many medium sized driven days for other game birds at home. There is a point at which conscience may play a role. Few do these big big days and whether it is against conscience is a matter of opinion. However, I'm equally sure that the grouse were not extinguished on that moor: shooter and game keepers want bird numbers to remain and pay a lot in conservation terms to do so. £100m a year was mentioned in other posts but I'm not sure what that pertains to. The thing I don't agree with in this video, is the opinion of Chris and slur on shooting that lots of predators are killed wrongfully in the process. As with bird species, no game keeper wants to wipe out predators. Predators too benefit from management as lower population numbers mean more food is available per animal. Predation is always going to happen but managing it is also sustainable. Sustainable almost to the point of enhancing. Facts say there are more predator bird species on managed grouse moors where driven shooting happens than RSPB moors. Personally I've seen more eagles, buzzards and other falcons on a grouse moor, whilst shooting walked-up grouse than I ever would have imagined. This happens year on year. I'm always amazed at this. The kind game keeper generally knows how many there are. He probably even knows roughly where they nest. Does he lawfully or unlawfully kill them, it doesn't appear to me that he does. That is not to say some don't but in my experience, I would say they are a small minority and as such I don't think shooting should be attacked for it. Game keepers regularly tolerate raptor species introduction and other projects on their moors, which could affect their livelihood, with grace and poise. I personally think this is more opinion than fact. Shooting provides more conservation than any other community and it works - that is the closest fact.

[@alltoriesarescum9155]

excellent video

[@mick7460]

Well done to Chris for bringing this further into the public domain. Less than 1% of English Hen Harrier territories were used this year and the reason for that is clearly illegal persecution, even if those involved with killing for 'fun' are in denial.

[@1066wastrel]

as a Scotsman I detest the landowners most of whom aren`t Scottish to begin with, but it`s arguments like `local employment` that really lights me up!do these snooty sods think we will somehow cease to exist if they don`t run these hunting estates, & what Chris isn`t pointing out (Yet-Chris?) is that on these estates, the land is shaped & other animals are decimated for the benefit of the game!

[@StrictlyShootingUK]

Thank you for that insight into the motivation of Chris's supporters.

[@westlinwinds2202]

Basic fail in logic there, old bean, but hey ho, you can't be good at everything.

[@daleglen8840]

In England if you criticise people for not being English it's known as racism.

[@dontpanicblink]

you can get paid up to £60 a day cash 6 days a week , thats a lot for some people

[@mairil3313]

Brilliant, Chris, for showing how things really are, despite the bile and lies flung in desperation. Such people need to take their blinkers off and look at the science; only the really greedy, selfish and arrogant ones will persist .

[@StrictlyShootingUK]

That's rich. Try applying that to your own bigoted view of shooting and see where it leads.

[@johncantelo]

For more confirmation of the irresponsibility of moorland managers I recommend looking at www.uplandexposure.co.uk/

[@StrictlyShootingUK]

And here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

[@dougoutcanoe]

A very revealing web site. It needs more publicity and a wider audience. www.uplandexposure.co.uk/

[@dougoutcanoe]

James, what a load of codswallop you write or add as evidence. Bias is not required when the evidence is being brought out with increasing frequency. The estates and gamekeepers will not be able to hide behind the vastness of the land for much longer. Surveillance will get them sooner or later. The public have access and technology on their side to rid our nations of the Victorian attitudes so prevalent amongst the gamekeepers and their bosses. I do not object to a shooter getting meat for the pot and would do so myself but mass carnage is abhorrent.

[@StrictlyShootingUK]

Mass carnage would indeed be abhorrent. That's not what we're talking about here. Please wake up and realise that shooting, like the rest of the world, has moved on since Victorian times. You're simply repeating the hogwash that's put out by the anti-shooting campaigners. Go find out for yourself, first hand. Go all secret squirrel if you like and get hired as a beater. Shooting has nothing to hide, and if there are individuals breaking the law and bringing shooting into disrepute, I for one will be delighted if they are exposed.

[@markavery7481]

No grouse moor has come forward to offer its land as a location for an independent film crew to use... Where can we all go and watch grouse shooting from the road as it happens? I'd love to know.

[@raybede]

Well there is an alternative view. The grouse would be very fewer in number if it wasn't for the care of those involved in shooting. Look at the moor owned by the RSPB. not much in the way of grouse there but plenty of predators. Strange that isn't it.

[@westlinwinds2202]

Yes that's correct. Grouse numbers would fall back to a sustainable level. There's nothing natural about a driven grouse moor. It's an intensively managed habitat designed purely to produce a shootable surplus of birds. A few species that don't pose a threat to grouse benefit. Other species that do pose a threat to grouse are illegally persecuted.

[@StrictlyShootingUK]

And a sheep farm is managed to produce a surplus of sheep, an arable farm to produce a surplus of grain... etc. It's not exactly unusual for humans to manage land is it? And each of these habitats benefits some species and is less useful to others. Stop managing it and it would change over time, and the balance of species it supports would also change. Perhaps we would call that more "natural". Perhaps that would be nice, perhaps less so, depending on your point of view. And where your salary came from. But it's a bit silly to be outraged about land being managed.You might as well go shout at Tesco for keeping the weeds down in their car park.

[@kevinturner5857]

The care of those involved in shootin 😂 , its like ethnic cleansin , nothin is allowed to survive there , nothin is welcome to b there except guns & grouse

[@romanrivergundogs]

Chris, how many driven Grouse shoots have you been on? If they are shooting lots of these wild birds, how is it sustainable? What would happen to the Grouse if they were not shot?

[@markavery7481]

Well he has been filmed on a few hasn't he? What would happen to Red Grouse if they weren't shot? The same as happens to them everywhere else in the UK and in the world - they'd be fine. Thanks for your concern but you might want to get out more?

[@romanrivergundogs]

On a shoot day? Spent the day with a keeper? Without shooting the first year most would die in winter, in subsequent years habitat and predator pressure would see the loss of Red Grouse and many other species. No need for rudeness unless you have no genuine argument

[@romanrivergundogs]

I would never have guessed that all this wildlife Chris sees is on Grouse estates as he always fails to mention it!

[@flyagaric1607]

Chris, you wouldn't have been able to buy a house in the New Forest if it wasn't once a prime hunting ground where thousands of animals were sacrificed, which you now benefit from, and enjoy!!!

[@michaelwebster6219]

he is a prize plum

[@michaelwebster6219]

he is known to be wrong many times and I say itwas a sport

[@michaelwebster6219]

Chris's shit up and go a way we are fed up of you maybe I'll come and see you 1 day with mummy birds n that

[@StrictlyShootingUK]

Well that's one side of the argument. As an "impartial" BBC presenter, will you be looking at the counter arguments, and actually talking to any grouse moor managers and keepers, or just trespassing and spouting wild accusations? If not this campaigning is incompatible with your role as BBC presenter, as set out here www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/advice/offairactivities/principlesforma.shtml

[@Laughablefellow]

I wouldn't say Springwatch counts as "news or current affairs", those editorial guidelines only apply to "BBC staff and freelances primarily known as presenters or reporters on BBC news and current affairs programmes".

[@StrictlyShootingUK]

+Glyn Morgan Same principles apply www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidelines/conflicts-of-interest/other-output-areas

[@Laughablefellow]

actually nothing on that page says he can't do this. He's not representing the BBC in the video, never mentions their name or any of their shows so there's no "disrepute", and the rest of that is pretty vague. "Care should be taken", I'd assume he's checked with legal and someone has said it's fine which would count as care.

[@Laughablefellow]

in fact, apparently they've already made a statement saying: “If Chris Packham wishes to express his personal views outside of his employment on BBC natural history programmes, he is entitled to do so,” www.heraldscotland.com/news/14624131.M_S_at_war_with_TV_naturalist_Chris_Packham_over_selling_of_grouse/ (towards the end)

[@StrictlyShootingUK]

Indeed, someone at the BBC seems to have said that to the Herald in response to a journalist's enquiry. I don't think that's good enough. Packham is pursuing a one-sided campaign based on lies and misrepresentation. He is widely known for his appearances on Springwatch and other BBC programmes - if I asked 100 people at random 'who is Chris Packham' the majority would mention Springwatch and/or the BBC. His activism outside the BBC brings their programming into disrepute in my eyes at least.

[@johncantelo]

I see the apologists for driven grouse shooting are out in force here. When, decades ago, I started watching my local winter roost of Hen Harriers I regularly saw them in double figures (once over 20 birds) but now struggle to see more than a couple. Areas like the Forest of Bowland, where there were once 16+ pairs of Peregrine, are now empty of the species despite a significant expansion in the country as a whole (up to 200% depending on your baseline). This year we have had grouse moor gamekeepers caught setting pole traps (banned 100 years ago), mysterious armed men taking a harrier decoy for a walk on a grouse moor, belated news of the worst slaughter of protected raptors in Wales, repeated killing of Red Kites in grouse shooting areas of North Yorkshire, wholesale destruction of Mountain Hares (with no regard to sustainability), the National Trust terminating a shooting lease early, etc. Last year 5 male Hen Harriers went missing too in circumstances that strongly suggest human interference. The evidence is clear that too many in the grouse shooting industry will not tolerate any harriers, peregrines, etc on their land and are willing to break the law. Put quite simply, enough is enough - I want my harriers back.

[@StrictlyShootingUK]

And yet there's more wildlife on a grouse moor than an RSPB reserve. Funny old world innit.

[@markavery7481]

Really? Give us a reference for that - science not prejudice. And what was wrong with what Chris said? You seem to have forgotten to play the ball ...

[@StrictlyShootingUK]

+Mark Avery I see we've been joined by the arch rabble rouser. How are the book sales going Mark? Need a boost?

[@ardmaraig8232]

That's a bit pathetic isn't it? Quite honestly, you've run out of things to say to justify yourself.

[@markavery7481]

More playing the man (different man) not the ball. Which book? Remarkable Birds is my next one. Oh you mean Inglorious - conflict in the uplands, which makes the case against driven grouse shooting and which has had such good reviews? 'The logic is impeccable' - The Independent.

[@cazthebaldfox]

having walked my local grouse moor for more than 30 years i have concerns about chris s point . when i was 16 my local grouse moor was crawling with grouse, who i believe the solicitor land owner shot regularly through the season . the gamekeeper at the time was proud to tell anyone that during shooting season the sky turned black such were grouse on the smallmoor .i believe at least 200 brace were shot every day they shot. now 30 years on i can walk the same place and never see a grouse .with crows and gulls constantly patrolling up and down the fell , then theres the ground predators we cant see ! iam waitng for the day wen chris is talking on springwatch etc about the endangered red grouse .

[@westlinwinds2202]

Back in the day,when the sky was black with grouse were there any hen harriers in the locality? Or peregrine? Or anything else with a hooked beak?

[@StrictlyShootingUK]

+westlin winds Back in the day, we were merrily spreading ddt which wasn't doing raptors any good was it?

[@westlinwinds2202]

And DDT was banned, eventually.

[@StrictlyShootingUK]

+westlin winds Good thing too.

[@Paulfarnfieldmedia]

Thank you for standing up to be counted Chris. Not easy as a public figure and I salute you.

[@PeterJonesBirdGuide]

I would say, that Chris Packham is eminently more qualified to comment on the ramifications of driven grouse shooting, than those appearing to defend it on here. It says much, that defenders of the indefensible attack the man, rather than address the arguments put forward by him. Facts, not opinions should be the focus here.

[@johncantelo]

Well said, Peter.

[@PeterJonesBirdGuide]

John Cantelo thanks John..

[@thomasmarshall5082]

what facts? the only fact was a number from 1915. Please correct me if I'm mistaken and list the other FACTS

[@PeterJonesBirdGuide]

I would suggest, as was made clear in this video, that you keep an eye for the next installments as this was just an opening episode. If you pay attention to 'facts' and not opinions, then I am sure you might become enlightened. Also my post was in response to other comments made here, where several persons attacked the man for not being qualified to comment..

[@StrictlyShootingUK]

I doubt there's much enlightenment to be had. Packham is simply parroting the biased arguments constructed by Avery to feed his rather personal hatred of grouse moor owners. We've heard it all before. Is that attacking the man? My issue is with what he says and does, not who he is. I think what he's doing is divisive and irresponsible, and makes it very difficult for landowners and conservationists to move forward together.

[@grimupnorth]

I live in Greater Manchester, and have watched birds for 40 years. I've seen one goshawk, a very small number of red kites, mainly see peregrines in urban and suburban settings; even raven numbers on the sub-moorland close to my home have crashed. This is not just bad luck. It is the work of selfish people who put money and their own bloodthirsty practices before a healthy, natural environment. Hunters are relicts from an era which should be bygone who somehow hold on to the belief in God - the God in question being themselves.

[@StrictlyShootingUK]

Thank you for that insight into my personality.

[@tiernanwearen9499]

How do you propose that the rural communities survive without the income generated by the shooting season?

[@grimupnorth]

@@tiernanwearen9499 It's an old saying, but it's still true: 'Adapt to survive'. With the virus about to change our future tourism habits, now is the time for those communities to channel efforts towards catering for those of us who would flock to the wild places of the UK if only there was more wildlife to see, and if it is accessible. Grouse shooting is a barrier to that.

[@jacko3275]

Managed moorland thrives better than an unmanaged true fact so if there is no grouse shooting you get things like the hell fires of saddleworth So who did you blame for those fires that killed millions of wildlife surely it must have been the people who don’t want grouse moors managed

[@grimupnorth]

@@jacko3275 Er, grouse moors are burnt by landowners anyway to promote new heather growth! How many creatures are killed during this annual operation? This is the usual bunk spoken by shooters who are full of talk about 'true facts', but have no independent scientific evidence to back them up. You want a 'true fact'?: the Peak district is a wildlife blackspot where you can walk for hours and see maybe a few meadow pipits - nothing more.

[@user-vg1fs2uk4p]

is this the chris packham that said we should stop chasing the cure for cancer.

[@stevem3461]

well there's 2.41 seconds I wont get back what a waste of time

[@GlenislaGhillie]

Lying, twisted, biggoted I could go on all evening. The man needs to be reined in.

[@markavery7481]

Please point out all the errors - go on.

[@johncantelo]

Seconded!

[@johnhowardmorgan]

If by biggoted(sic) he means Chris's views, then I've finally found a bigot after my own heart.

[@kevinturner5857]

I think creeps who go around cruel tormenting n controlling nature need to b reining in & serving lengthy sentences behind bars !

[@TheCommunistManatee]

Hi Chris, I just wanted to say that I think it is great that you're speaking out about something you believe in. Some of my fellow commenters seem to be very pro-hunting and very anti-you and are saying some rather unkind things. I just wanted to say that you're a fantastic presenter for the BBC and a great spokesman for this issue. I'm sorry that as the public face you are receiving to much unpleasantness but that means you're ruffling the right feathers. I fully support you in this and I look forward to seeing what else you have to say. To all those saying 'grouse moors are great for the countryside' and other less savoury things - I would suggest to you that you're being as biased as you are claiming Chris is. Listen to the arguments then construct positive counter arguments if you can. If you can't then perhaps it is time to reconsider your view point.

[@michaelwebster6219]

he is nothing but a fool and looks like you are like him also

[@westlinwinds2202]

If you owned a grouse moor how happy would you be to see hen harriers attempting to breed there? And what would you do about it?

[@StrictlyShootingUK]

I'd be delighted to own a grouse moor, even more delighted to find hen harriers breeding there, and I'd make damn sure the bird botherers didn't find out and come trampling all around the nest attracting predators, handling the chicks and risking desertion. Rather like a few keepers I know. Believe that if you will, but it's true.

[@westlinwinds2202]

So the reason that hen harriers fail to breed on grouse moors is because of 'bird botherers' , not because of persecution by those employed in the shooting industry? Is that your position?

[@StrictlyShootingUK]

+westlin winds It certainly doesn't help.

[@westlinwinds2202]

One other thing. If you were lucky enough to own a grouse moor, and your grouse moor had breeding hen harriers, to what extent would the presence of hen harriers affect the success of your shooting ventures?

[@StrictlyShootingUK]

+westlin winds That would depend on many factors. See Langholm for details. What I choose to do about it is another matter. If I do something illegal I'm a criminal and deserve to be dealt with accordingly. Until then I'm innocent, something that many commenters here fail to recognise.

[@daleglen8840]

101 years ago not everyone had an indoor toilet (something we regard as a hygiene essential these days - no new house is without at least one); women were looked down on if they had the nerve to go to a pub (not so today); many girls were still educated with less rigour than boys (we now have our second female PM); some working class children left school at 13 to work (we ensure free education for all children to the same minimum age now); and unmarried women were shipped off to India where there was a high % of unmarried men (men and women are allowed to be unmarried if they want these days). Most aspects of life have moved on from 1915 - including shooting. People aren't so naive that they think something that happened in 1915 is still be the norm today.

[@LivingFreeMC]

Put the traps out of the other video in those places where they are standing to shoot the grouse. Knowing how much enjoyment they have to kill and hurt, they may enjoy that pain too...............

[@kierachapman8368]

Well done Chris! About time someone started to stand against this. Yes, moorland needs management, but we can do this in a much more balanced way.

[@7x64Brenn]

Chris Packham is a knob, take away grouse shooting and the only other income is commercial forestry and sheep farming both of which are incredibly damaging to upland habitats. Most moor drainage has it's origins in farming grants, drains are bad for grouse and many keepered moors have blocked them up.

[@AmericanHero911]

There is much more income that could be made from Tourism. you allow a diversity of predators, birds and grouse to roam freely and nature will maintain itself. Nature does not need assistance and we all know it's all about selective breeding for target practice

[@7x64Brenn]

"Nature does not need assistance" really? You have never been to the UK, our landscape is entirely artificial and man made. We have already lost many valuable species of wildlife due to habitat loss, take away the income from grouse shooting and the landowners have to find an alternative income, most likely from sheep. Most of our heather habitat has already been lost to overgrazing and it is only the grouse moors that have the money to maintain such a valuable habitat. Tourism won't work as people are already free to roam our glorious moors which only exist due to grouse shooting, but maybe you have a point if people want to enjoy our moors they should be charged to access them to help pay for the management costs though I doubt that the public will want to put their hands in their pockets.

[@AmericanHero911]

7x64Brenn Introduce deer etc, wildlife centers, hidden camera spots and watch towers with long ranged cameras etc and you'll create a magnet for tourism which will pay for the luxury to see such sights. I think because you'll then be appealing to the masses you've fetch easily over 10x the revenue with much less risk.

[@7x64Brenn]

Clearly you have no clue introduce deer? This is the UK we have a massive overpopulation of deer as they have no predators, people will not pay for what is already free, they can already go and watch the abundant wildlife. What you propose has a massive footfall and carbon footprint and doesn't really help the fact that we need to artificially manage heather habitats to maintain the vast biodiversity of species living there, that means burning the heather periodically to create a mosaic of different habitats, managing avian and mammal predators that prey not only on grouse but other rare ground nesting species such as hen harriers, lapwings, curlews etc. To think that tourism would bring 10x the income is deluded, we have lots of wildlife sanctuaries in the UK where you can go to view points etc and they cannot support themselves financially without donations, grouse shooting is entirely self funding. A single days shooting is at lease £50,000 plus it also employs a lot of people in some of the poorest rural areas.

[@AmericanHero911]

7x64Brenn I think heather burning and avian management is used as your standard moorland management due to the massive demand for extremely high grouse population. You make it sound like a much less intensive and more natural way of letting biodiversity take form would be just as expensive. Just let everything but the pathways grow long and wild like it should be. Just because the moorlands were artificially maintained it doesn't mean it has to stay that way, lets give this natural wonder to nature and let her balance things out. It wouldn't just be about wild deer, it would be about a whole range of other animals - you could even reintroduce wolves to keep the deer population down and let everything balance itself - after some tweaking here and there we'd only need to stand back and let nature keep everything in order. This idea is great because moorlands are unique and thus would be a unique tourist attraction unlike the other ones around. Bare in mind that a tourist environment on this magnitude would create many more jobs than propping up the elite few for their slaughter fix.

[@henrypalmer5553]

It's not just sport its managing the land

[@averagepantherenjoyer6995]

Yeah it is he doesn’t know what he’s talking about

[@kevinturner5857]

Control freaks , nature wud manage itself , all you folk do is interfere wth nature causing misery n mayhem , you r a big part of the problem why there is so little of anything left , except your bloody partridges n frankenpheasants 🙄

[@The222Fox]

A pseudo naturalist explaining something he knows nothing about. I find it strange he is happy to fondle an eagle for the public on a shooting estate, that and film on grouse moors for winter watch. Will you be filming on these moors in the future? That's the question.

[@johncantelo]

Pseudo naturalist? Really? He's been watching and studying wildlife since he was a teenager, gained a BSc in a relevant area, was considered good enough to do a PhD and regularly displays a remarkable depth of knowledge on TV. By all means criticise his views on shooting but don't make yourself foolish by suggesting he hasn't got a great depth of knowledge and is the real deal.

[@markavery7481]

Andy - what a huge surprise to find you commenting here. Quite what errors were there in what Chris said? You were so keen to have a rant that you forgot to correct any errors. Were there errors? Any errors? I mean errors not things you disagree with. It's called freedom of speech - that's what allows you to spout nonsense and Chris to talk sense.

[@Dressagevids]

More dislikes than likes, first time I have seen this on youtube

[@prestons3400]

Yeah people like it when are native wildlife is killed so people can kill grouse

[@patriciaorlando2380]

Thank you Chris for speaking up against Grouse shooting along with other wildlife. You know what you are talking about. The wildlife programmes you are in are so interesting . Best Wishes to you Chris.

[@averagepantherenjoyer6995]

I think you don’t know what your talking about

[@patriciaorlando2380]

👎👎👎

[@salliecordery5417]

I am sorry but this is rubbish. Chris Packham is reporting from a biased and poorly educated viewpoint. He should be sacked by the BBC for the harm he s doing to the countryside.

[@markavery7481]

You seem to have forgotten/neglected to point out any errors. You might just be saying that you are on the other side of the argument but can't actually argue your case?

[@johncantelo]

And what harm would that be? Do tell us.

[@chrisellis1089]

Once again Chris has used his fairly high media profile to campaign and educate people about these activities . .hats off to him . .Ricky Gervais is the same with regards to the campaign to abolish bullfighting ( and its having an effect too . .) what do other people in the public eye do . .? oh heres a 'bikini moment' selfie/selfish pic and heres a video of me me me doing stuff etc etc . .Chris Packham has my full respect and admiration, and besides I'm not sure I could handle a Chris Packham 'bikini moment' anyway . .lol

[@johncantelo]

Please can those complaining explain why it is wrong for Chris Packham to do what he does in his own time whilst it's perfectly OK for BBC personality Alexander Armstrong to appear, gun over arm, in adverts for the CA? How can Chris Packham's actions be so outrageous that he deserves to be sacked when the CA et al were quite happy to exploit the late Clarissa Dickson Wright (another BBC personality) as a vocal and prominent supporter? Further, why should Packham's activities be deemed more of an 'abuse of his position' when the aforementioned lady used her position to star in a peon of praise for all things field sporty "Clarissa and the Countryman' (inc. hare coursing just prior to it being banned) which was actually screened by the BBC and a book of the same name published by them? I don't recall any demands for her to be sacked. Or is it a case of one rule for the plebs and another for us?

[@StrictlyShootingUK]

Careful John, your class prejudice is showing. Just a helpful bit of advice from one pleb to another.

[@johncantelo]

Exactly as I surmised, no answer to the substantive points I made only a petty jibe. if you don't recognise the reality of the rich and powerful using their position not only to ride roughshod over bird and environmental laws in this area but also in attempting to close down criticism then you really aren't going to get very far.

[@daleglen8840]

I don't agree with Mr Packham's views but I agree that he is entitled to voice his own opinions in his own time. I don't believe that's what he's doing; I believe he's campaigning for support for a petition. Clarissa Dickson-Wright was known to be a country sports supporter privately in her personal life and publicly in her working life for the BBC and others. Not a lot of contradiction there. In his public life Mr Packham is presenting wildlife programmes for the BBC which rely in part on shooting; in his personal life he is condemning the same professional and cultural community which enable the BBC to produce programmes with such a diversity of wildlife and seeking to cause real harm to the lives of those men, women and children involved in that community. A fair bit of contradiction there. I do think Mr Packham or the BBC should make it clear that the programmes he presents owe part of their success to shooting estates for providing the range of wildlife.

[@Ametomasu]

Thank you very much for speaking out about this, Chris.

[@jim9240]

When over 70% of the world's heather moorland exists in the UK, why does Packham insist on banning the ONLY industry that supports its conservation? What use is this landscape for anything else? If commercial shooting was banned, our moorland would be over-grazed, under-burned and devoid of the diverse species that inhabit it. Unless all of you here are willing to fork out the money to PROPERLY manage our uplands, stop complaining and let the shooting industry get on with it. Or shall we intensively graze livestock all year round on it so it resembles a cricket pitch? Who here is willing to spend they're weekends burning heather and spraying bracken which encroaches on the heather habitat? Who else will control the foxes, crows and stoats which not only predate grouse, but also our waders and other species?! Who will pay you for it if not the shooting industry? So please stop complaining about matters you are unqualified to advise on. By the way, I'm a gamekeeper on a 6000 acre driven grouse moor and have contributed to this environment for several years.Thank you Christopher ;)

[@westlinwinds2202]

The vast majority of heather moorland in the UK is man made, there's nothing natural about it. Left on their own grouse moors would revert to tree cover.

[@benjaminshepherd2988]

Jim stop thinking that you know what’s best for nature. This is everyone’s land not just your own.

[@kevinturner5857]

It's an unnatural landscape which is mercilessly & strictly controlled by a group of outdated old(e) Tories who don't give a hoot about nature only killing , controlling & profit

[@civilrightspaulus3865]

I was informed the other day of the slaughter of rabbits at my local warren. This warren is situated away from any Farm or populous. The slaughterers will forget this in a hurry and move to the next warren for their so called joy of killing. All the young were wiped out in 2 days as well as most of the elders. I often watched the rabbits with joy get on with their lives and play. There were about twelve rabbits before now there are only 3, one of them has been injured and is struggling to get on. This I will never forget. Shame on you. Karma to you and yours...

[@timkelly633]

What a feeble minded film! Grouse shooting is the only reason the moors are there and a habitat for untold numbers of other upland birds. The colossal expense of running a moor is not something that a charity or other "worthy" organisation could or would meet, so the moors would vanish along with the habitat they provide.

[@westlinwinds2202]

1. You're right. There's nothing natural about the heather moorland habitat on grouse moors. It's man made to allow grouse shooting to take place. 2. Why is it that if grouse moors provide a habitat 'for untold numbers of other upland birds' there's an almost total absence of birds of prey? Is it because the shooting estates make sure there are no birds of prey?

[@timkelly633]

I think it depends on the moor just how many raptors there are. In the moors that are devoid of raptors it's probably down to shady practises, which are becoming rarer. The point though is that without the moors, there wouldn't be any raptors anyway as there would be nothing much for them to eat. Raptors are fantastic birds, but if there are too many they are as a big a threat to all the upland birds as the foxes, stoats etc, so it seems logical, if we accept that the unique moorland habitat is something to be treasured, that they should be able to be controlled to some extent. If the aim is only to have an increased raptor population then they need to be fed artificially, as people do with the Red Kites. So the end game is desolate moors, no upland bird species and a semi tame population of raptors only surviving on hand outs from humans. A bizarre future.

[@westlinwinds2202]

If the shady practices are becoming rarer, as you claim, then there should be more birds of prey in and around grouse moors. But there aren't. There are fewer. Grouse moors (ie heather moorland) are, in ecological terms, a new development and in almost all cases, an artificial, man made habitat. Hen harriers were there before the grouse moors and they will survive when the grouse moors are gone.

[@timkelly633]

I'm sure they will, but in very small numbers as there won't be much for them to eat.

[@westlinwinds2202]

'Very small numbers.' More than there are at the moment then.

[@ionamcg622]

There is reason for the shooting and it is not just a sport, every inch of the birds get used even the feathers, he needs to do more research and get correct facts first,

[@benhadnam4131]

rubbish