6/3/2019

Pheasant shooting ban is hammer blow for wildlife: Our letter in The Leader

It's disappointing to see emotion has overshadowed science (Ban on pheasant shooting on Welsh land now in effect, March 2).

Our scientific studies have shown that pheasant shoots, which implement good habitat management and follow codes of practice, can deliver significant biodiversity benefits.

The GWCT submitted extensive evidence to Natural Resources Wales supporting these claims, but it was ignored when the final decision was made.

We recently commissioned an independent poll which asked 1,000 people in Wales whether they wanted pheasant shooting to continue, and 61% responded yes.

The poll also showed that 57% of people say the Welsh Government was wrong to ignore the Natural Resources Wales’ evidence review and 85% say the benefits of shooting are poorly understood. This contradicts the findings from League Against Cruel Sports, as published in your article on 2 March.

Consequently, the decision not only puts many jobs at risks, but is a hammer blow for wildlife.

Sue Evans
Director of GWCT Wales

GWCT Weekly Email Newsletter

Subscribe to our FREE email newsletter today


Join over 35,000 subscribers and keep updated on our latest research, events, news and fundraising work.

✓ Get all the latest GWCT & member news and opinion
✓ Discover exciting new research findings
✓ Stay updated on upcoming events and courses
✓ Learn about fascinating new research projects
✓ Receive unique offers & promotions

Free Weekly Newsletter


*You may change your mind any time. For more information, see our Privacy Policy.

Comments

NRW "Ban on Pheasant Shooting"

at 17:05 on 12/03/2019 by Paul King

There are a couple of points here for clarity, as I understand it the ban only extends to land owned by Welsh Government or NRW not "Wales". A FOI request has revealed that this extends to not renewing two leases valued at around £10k. Secondly, when challenged Hannah Blythin denied "instructing" NRW to not renew the leases despite NRW asserting that this was the case. This presumably means that NRW are free to reverse the decision but I'm not holding my breath.

Make a comment

Cookie Policy

Our website uses cookies to provide you with a better online experience. If you continue to use our site without changing your browser settings, we'll assume you are happy to receive cookies. Please read our cookie policy for more information.

Do not show this message again