A time to share and celebrate the conservation achievements from game management?

We can all recall memorable occasions from our childhood. For me, one of these took place whilst shooting with my father on a sunny winter’s day. I can remember the exact spot on a woodland ride, where I plucked up the courage to question him about how nature benefited from shooting. I doubt my father recalls the moment in as much detail, but for me, it was pivotal. He talked me through what exactly a keeper does, showing me the pens, feeders and cover crops. Most importantly he explained how the woods supported a wide range of species as a result of this activity –  subsequently proven by Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust (GWCT) research.  In later years I began to recognise the subtle changes between individual shoots and the contribution they made to wildlife conservation.

Of course, much has changed since those halcyon days over 30 years ago. Farmland bird numbers have declined dramatically and prior to the introduction of agri–environment schemes habitats researched by the Trust and delivered by game managers provided the most significant on – farm habitats for many species. Today, many of these prescriptions are at the heart of farmland conservation policies but the contribution of game management to wildlife conservation has probably never been higher. A further key change in that time is the significant number of pheasants released, as shown in Table 1 below. This demonstrates the growth of pheasant release and management in that time.

On the one hand, this provides a powerful indicator of the potential contribution of game shooting to wildlife conservation but on the other the key questions are now being asked about possible damaging effects of pheasant releasing. The key challenge, of course, at national and shoot level is to demonstrate the most sustainable levels of release which are consistent with maximising the wider benefits for wild game and other wildlife.

 

Figure 1: Pheasant releasing trends 1961-2011, GWCT National Gamebag Census (1961=1)

The factors that have produced this trend in numbers are complex but originate in the crash of wild game and farmland birds during the modernisation of agriculture in the 60’s and 70’s. Key nesting and brood rearing habitats were lost and invertebrate numbers– the key resource for wild gamebird production – were lost in the drive for food production.

Perhaps paradoxically the resulting emphasis on rearing as a means of sustaining driven shooting had consequent detrimental effect on wild stocks since keepers and owners increasingly managed shoots for released birds and not for the wild ones. For example, many driving game crops such as maize and kale provide ideal autumn and winter cover for released birds but these are not suitable for nesting or chick rearing. Also, predator control by keepers is concentrated in the summer to protect released poults rather than in spring to save nests. However, many permanent pheasant coverts planted primarily for showing released pheasants do also provide good nesting cover around the edge and pheasant breeding densities are high in woodland designed as winter holding cover. More worrying is that reared birds make poor parents in subsequent years, since they are much more prone to predation, parasitism and adverse genetic selection.  

Although there may be problems associated with pheasant releasing, the creation and management of woodland for pheasants has very significant positive conservation benefits to other species. For example, GWCT research has shown that woodlands managed for pheasants have greater structural diversity, more butterflies and bird species compared to woodlands lacking game management.

In 2011 we surveyed birds on 34 farms in Leicestershire and recorded bird numbers on farms with and without shoots. This revealed that numbers of songbirds on farms with shoots were 30% higher than on those without (see Figure 2)

 Mean number of songbirds per transect (+ 1 se)

Figure 2: Songbird numbers are higher on local farms with shoots than on those without (based on survey of 34 farms)

The obvious question is one of wider sustainability – at a national level how long can bag levels be maintained though releasing ever greater quantities of pheasants? This is the type of question we are starting to see emerge from new reports from powerful and well funded organisations that are clearly antagonistic to gamebird releasing. These reports have not been produced for fun and may well indicate increasing pressure in the future. It’s surely time to act. Are you ready?

Across the country we all know and celebrate individual shoots that have been ambitious and achieved amazing conservation success, at a local level. At some sites the results have been scientifically recorded and the results published. Is it not time to now inspire the same success on a nationwide scale? Should we all be more ambitious about our conservation? At the level of the individual shoot we don’t need huge changes to demonstrate improvements in biodiversity. But added together small local improvements, in improving the productivity of ground nesting waders could add up to significant contribution at national level given the sheer numbers taking part. 

It will not be easy, but the results will be worth it. Nor is it as simple as pointing a finger at the larger scale shoots with big bags; the data show these increases can apply to all sizes of shoot. Just as with profitable farming, successful conservation can be achieved on any scale – as long as there is a will to succeed.

The Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust, the original source of that science that meant so much to me thirty years ago, thinks it can be done. It should be possible to implement effective conservation on shoots right across the country and then measure it. Just imagine, for one moment, being able to state the estimated net impact on nature from the combined efforts of all shoots rather than just selected sites. Today, the GWCT’s National Grey Partridge Count Scheme provides an example of the collective effort of farmers and game managers to reverse declining species. It provides a useful model – and confidence – that a broader influential statement of the benefits of game management can be achieved.

It is lucky that the charity has a powerful reputation for taken on daunting tasks. In 1932 the GWCT’s predecessor (ICI Game Research Station) started with the ambition to, ‘Make two birds fly where one flew before’. It seemed like a radical thing to do. Stocks of wild game were down to such an extent that people considered giving up on game shooting.  Undaunted, they launched this positive and far reaching path that paved the way for today’s Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust.

Now we need to reinvent that optimistic approach but within the context of a modern, more complex world; by not only enhancing game stocks but, on a shoot by shoot basis, demonstrating the direct biodiversity benefits of game management. This is a call for action, to all, to do just that – a national Campaign for Game.

Today I am proud to work for the organisation which conducted the original scientific research that measured the local wildlife gains from shooting and is still prepared to be ambitious enough to shape the national picture. I hope that when my children ask how nature gains from released game, I can repeat what I was told. More than that, I look forward to adding that it is not just where shoots put in place best practice that nature significantly gains but that, more importantly, there is a proven net contribution nationally. Future generations will need thoroughly researched scientific evidence showing the net gain to nature to counter the unpopularity of releasing not just from animal welfare groups, but the media, politicians and some conservation charities.   

The GWCT has always brought people together to share their ideas on best practice and demonstrate new thinking. Do get in touch with your ideas.