New YouGov poll shows strong support for ban on driven grouse shooting

The message is definitely getting out there! A new YouGov poll, commissioned by Animal Aid, shows that 48% of those polled (2033 people) last month would support a ban on driven grouse shooting, compared to 28% who would oppose a ban.

When counting only those who expressed a view, those in support of a ban rose to 63%, with 37% opposed to a ban.


Some quotes in response to these results:

Mark Avery:

We’re leaving the EU on 52% of the vote – we should ban driven grouse shooting on 63% of views. Intensive grouse shooting damages our environment, depends on killing our protected species, and benefits from our taxes. We want it to end.

MPs will debate this issue later this autumn. They must rise to the challenge of ending wildlife crime and ending unsustainable moorland management”.

Mark McCormick, Head of Campaigns for the League Against Cruel Sports:

“The momentum to ban driven grouse shooting is growing and this polling is a clear indicator of this trajectory. The public are clearly becoming wise to the devastating impacts of this brutal industry. When you consider the potential benefits of wildlife and eco-tourism in contrast to the dubious and overstated economic benefits of driven grouse shooting it is absolutely clear that this is an industry only interested in protecting its own profits at the expense of wildlife and the environment. The uplands should be a place whereby nature and wildlife thrive free from persecution and destruction and can be of joy and benefit to everyone rather than just a few”.

Animal Aid Director, Isobel Hutchinson:

These latest poll results reflect the rising tide of opposition to grouse shooting. The public is becoming increasingly aware that this is a sport which inflicts appalling suffering on animals, and can have devastating consequences for the environment. It is high time that the barbaric bloodsport of grouse shooting was consigned to the history books”.

Raptor Persecution UK:

“It’s good to see an increased public awareness and condemnation of driven grouse shooting. Those who want it banned understand the immense environmental damage it causes and know that this industry has refused, point blank, to voluntarily put its house in order. Those who continue to support driven grouse shooting either have a vested interest or are yet to be made aware of its devastating impact on our upland habitat and wildlife”.

Read the full press release here

Photo: grouse butts on a North Yorkshire grouse moor (RPUK)


11 Responses to “New YouGov poll shows strong support for ban on driven grouse shooting”

  1. 1 Peter
    October 11, 2016 at 7:45 pm

    It’s time we understood the definition of sport.
    Sport definition

    The precise definition of what separates a sport from other leisure activities varies between sources. The closest to an international agreement on a definition is provided by SportAccord, which is the association for all the largest international sports federations (including association football, athletics, cycling, tennis, equestrian sports, and more), and is therefore the de facto representative of international sport.
    SportAccord uses the following criteria, determining that a sport should:[1]
    • have an element of competition
    • be in no way harmful to any living creature
    • not rely on equipment provided by a single supplier (excluding proprietary games such as arena football)
    • not rely on any “luck” element specifically designed into the sport

    No “blood sports” qualify.

    • 2 AlanTwo
      October 12, 2016 at 11:06 am

      I totally agree Peter, and we should stop doing their PR for them by using their euphemisms and cosy words like sport and cull.
      Shooting comes much closer to the Oxford online dictionary definition of the verb ‘slaughter’ – ‘Kill (people or animals) in a cruel or violent way, typically in large numbers.’
      ‘Outdoor recreational slaughter’ seems more precise than ‘country sports’, although, given the passion that shooters apparently have for their activities, I often prefer the less technical phrase ‘rural perversions’.

    • 3 Craig
      October 12, 2016 at 11:54 am

      That rules out boxing, MMA and other combat sports then.

  2. 4 Chris Roberts
    October 11, 2016 at 10:31 pm

    Fantastic that the general public are now getting wise to this barbaric, shameful, destructive use of our uplands. I myself didn’t comprehend the damage that this disgusting pastime did until late in life.

    As far it taking place in our National Parks, it is totally wrong in every way. I was driving yesterday towards Dalwinnie, and was ashamed to witness the amount of muirburn taking place in the Cairngorms, a place that should be protecting our precious wildlife, not allowing it to be poisoned, trapped, snared and shot, just so another species can be shot for fun and (blood money) profit for the few.

  3. October 12, 2016 at 8:55 am

    Landowners who run pheasant shoots, National Parks used for Grouse shoots are no longer acceptable. Natural England is abusing their powers in issuing licences to kill our birds of prey and the continued legality of snares is truly something to be ashamed of as we see other European countries ban them. We need to continue to get across to schools, colleges what really goes on in the countryside. Laws broken all the time and police stand by and do nothing.

  4. 6 Dylanben
    October 12, 2016 at 12:30 pm

    Natural England’s hands are tied in this matter. They refused such licences in 2013 and 2014 but were adjudged to have done so unfairly. See – http://www.rarebirdalert.co.uk/v2/Content/Raptor_Persecution_Scotland_Licences_to_kill_buzzards_were_unlawfully_refused.aspx?s_id=76710491

    • 7 Michael Watts.
      October 12, 2016 at 5:48 pm

      I have extensive knowledge of how the conservancies work, if you can call them that any more. What you have to bare in mind is that they are at the beck-and-call of Politicians and their masters. You don’t think for a moment that NE farts without getting political approval first!

  5. October 12, 2016 at 12:34 pm

    I doubt the MPs would vote the same way though – sadly.

    • 10 Dylanben
      October 12, 2016 at 12:55 pm

      They might if they were sufficiently well informed of the reality of the matter. It’s down to us to be part of that information process, in terms of both content and numbers. It will be interesting to see what questions are asked by the Petitions Committee at next week’s hearing. See http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Guide

  6. October 12, 2016 at 7:03 pm

    We must eat food! But we need not be cruel to produce it,very few people eat grouse, all wild life needs our love and support ,and the magic world it gives us in return,,,reformed shooter””no religion,just logical common sense!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Blog Stats

  • 4,162,344 hits


Our recent blog visitors