The Release of Pheasant and Red Legged Partridge

Upwards of 60million game birds are released for shooting each year in the UK – what impact on the environment?

The RSPB and the British Trust for Ornithology recently reported that in 2016 an estimated 47million Pheasants and 10 million Red Legged Partridge were released in the autumn. At the time of release the biomass of the game birds was more than twice the biomass of all native British breeding birds (British Trust for Ornithology). The number being released is increasing year on year.

There’s nothing like a startling headline to get the reader’s interest, and it did mine, especially as we often hear and see Pheasants in and around Woodcock Wood during the winter, and we recently photographed a male Pheasant strolling past our pond.

^{The RSPB Position Statement}

In fact, the statistic is quite staggering, and was the headline of the RSPB’s recent position statement on issues relating to the release of Pheasants and Red Legged Partridge in the UK. The conclusion of the RSPB’s statement is as follows:

The RSPB would like to see the number of gamebirds released into our countryside reduced and for higher environmental standards to apply to released gamebird shooting …. However, we also recognise that parts of the shooting industry are also concerned about the environmental impacts of their activity. On this basis we are discussing these issues with BASC* and other key industry stakeholders with a view to establishing and implementing a robust set of standards to ensure that in the future, the release of gamebirds is monitored effectively. (*British Association for Shooting and Conservation).

 (see: RSPB Position Statement Oct. 2020)

The document and the research that underpins it provides an analysis of the pros and cons for the environment of the current management practices associated with the shooting of gamebirds. 

The Negative Impact on the Environment

The basic arguments are that the released Pheasants and Red Legged Partridge (both non-native to the UK) cause significant damage to the flora and fauna while their numbers are at their height during the shooting season. More than a third of released birds are not killed by guns, and continue to roam for a significant amount of time, often well away from the point where they were released. (This is a contentious issue). Their numbers abnormally skew the population of predators during the time that the number of game birds is high, and these predators then have an adverse impact on the indigenous wildlife when the game bird numbers reduce …. plus more. (see: British Trust for Ornithology).

Factory Farming

Additionally, a significant proportion of these birds are imported from Europe either as ready to hatch eggs, or young chicks, and are often bred under factory farm conditions. 

A Positive Impact on the Environment

The shooting industry accept some of the facts but argue that they are compensated by significant positive management of woodlands, hedgerows and the countryside. This not only addresses particular problems, but brings significant benefits to wildlife in general. (see: BASC’s response).

Social Benefits

In addition to positive environmental management, the shooting of game birds is a focus of social activity for many people and provides significant rural employment.

Wild Justice’s Legal Challenge of DEFRA

The key factor is that the whole process of releasing upward of 60million non-native birds into the UK every year was unregulated. However, Wild Justice, the small NGO set up by Ruth Tingay, Mark Avery, and Chris Packham, mounted a legal challenge to force DEFRA to review and regulate the position. In November 2020 DEFRA conceded, and have introduced measures to licence the process of game bird release on private land close to environmentally sensitive areas. Pheasant and Red Legged Partridge are now officially recognised as invasive and problem species that require control through regulation (see: Wild Justice position).

The Divisive Arguments

There can be nothing outside of BREXIT, marmite, and the strict political arena that is more divisive than debates around hunting. Broad-based membership organisations like the RSPB follow a careful line, and emphasise the need for dialogue with the representative bodies of the shooting industry. 

Wild Justice and others take an uncompromising line in their opposition to the shooting of game birds and methods used by the industry to manage the process of making game birds available for shooting.

The shooting industry presents itself as representing the interests of people who care for the environment and conservation, and enjoy shooting in a responsible way. The representative bodies often work collaboratively with organisations devoted to conservation purposes in order to better understand the quarry that they shoot, and the ecosystem that their quarry depends on.

And yet we know full well, that the industry as a whole is responsible for some devastating actions in relation to managing the environment, from the burning of heathland, to the poaching of rare and protected birds of prey on grouse moors. Successful prosecution of perpetrators in the courts is an unusual event, and the real perpetrators (i.e. the grouse moor owners) are even more rarely brought to account.

While the industry may be able to offer many clear examples of effective self regulation, and of best practice being adopted, we also know there is much amiss with the way that the industry conducts itself as a whole. In my view regulation and enforcement has to be the way forward.

Investment in Knowledge – Woodcocks

Over the last year or two, we have developed a “relationship” with our winter visiting Woodcock (see: On Spotting a Woodcock). Searching the internet for information on the species, leads first to the Game & Wildfowl Conservation Trust (GWCT). This organisation supports the management of game for shooting and fishing. It also supports long-term research into the reasons behind countryside management problems, and the problem of the declining numbers of indigenous game species like Woodcock and Curlew.

Similarly, those who saw the latest series of the BBC’s Winter Watch may have been struck by the fine piece of film made of the work of James O’Neill in his study of the Woodcock in Ireland. James is obviously the complete aficionado of the Woodcock, and the film of him finding them, catching them, and ringing them at night is extraordinary. His research on “The Breeding Woodcock Survey” is supported by a variety of organisations including the GWCT (see: Woodcock Survey).

Some may say this is hunting’s equivalent of “greenwash” – appearing to take a responsible position in order to be able to perpetuate the shooting of rapidly disappearing species.

Our Position

But I don’t believe we should write off this type of work and approach as cynical. We should avoid generalisation regarding people and individual’s motives.

On a Boxing Day some years ago, we stood on the South Downs and watched from afar the driving of hundreds of Pheasants onto the guns of dozens of people. Where was the joy, the skill, and the love of the countryside in this day’s “entertainment”? It was horrible to hear and watch.

At the same time, there are those who genuinely understand the countryside, who respect the natural world, enjoy it in a living form, and feel there is no problem in shooting game in a responsible way.

What do you think?

… and see also:

Release of Pheasants and Red Legged Partridge – Right of Reply!

For Site Index and Full List of Birds Discussed:

• https://woodcockwood.com/site-contents-and-index/