Blog

£1 Million government funding to explore re-establishment of Golden Eagles in England

The UK Government has announced funding of £1 Million to explore the feasibility of re-establishing Golden Eagles in England.

Golden Eagle (photo by Pete Walkden)

Here is the Government’s press release (issued today), followed by my commentary.

ICONIC GOLDEN EAGLES TO MAKE COMEBACK IN ENGLAND

Environment Secretary approves additional £1m of government funding to explore the reintroduction of golden eagles, restoring hopes they will return to England

One of Britain’s most iconic birds, the golden eagle, is poised to make a return to England after more than 150 years after the Government paved the way for a recovery programme that could include reintroduction.  

Once widespread across England and mentioned more than 40 times by Shakespeare, golden eagles were virtually wiped out by persecution during the Victorian era. Only a handful of pairs have been seen in England since and the last eagle died in the Lake District in 2016. 

But a study published by Forestry England today confirms that England has the capacity to sustain golden eagle populations once more, with eight potential ‘recovery zones’, mostly in the north of England, identified as being the most suitable areas.

The Environment Secretary Emma Reynolds has welcomed the study’s findings and approved £1m of additional funding to explore a reintroduction programme with the potential for juveniles, six to eight weeks old, to be released as early as next year. 

Environment Secretary Emma Reynolds said:

“This government is committed to protecting and restoring our most threatened native wildlife – and that includes bringing back iconic species like the golden eagle.

“Backed by £1m of government funding – we will work alongside partners and communities to make the golden eagle a feature of English landscapes once again“.

In Southern Scotland, golden eagle populations have recovered to record numbers thanks to the restoration efforts of the groundbreaking South of Scotland Golden Eagle Project. Satellite tracking indicates that some of these translocated birds have already begun to fly across the border and explore northern England. The funding announced today will help accelerate this re-establishment and, where appropriate, further reinforce it with targeted reintroductions. Replicating their successful collaborative approach in the south of Scotland, charity Restoring Upland Nature (RUN) will lead the pioneering project in partnership with a group of core partners, including Forestry England.  

Aside from being Britain’s second largest bird of prey with an impressive 2-metre wingspan, the golden eagle is a keystone species that can play a vital role in nature recovery more widely. As an apex predator at the top of the food chain, golden eagles help to keep the whole ecosystem in balance.  

Mike Seddon, Forestry England Chief Executive said:

“It is our ambition that the nation’s forests will become the most valuable places for wildlife to thrive and expand in England. And we know from our successful reintroduction projects that returning lost species is vital for nature recovery across landscapes.

“The detailed findings of our feasibility study will guide us with our partners, Restoring Upland Nature, to take the next steps to explore the recovery of golden eagles in northern England. This Defra funding means we can build on the good work we have begun, taking the time to build support and engage with local communities, landowners and land managers and conservation organisations“.

Dr Cat Barlow, Restoring Upland Nature Chief Executive said:

“This presents a truly exciting, and potentially game-changing moment for the return of golden eagles to Northern England. Our success to date is testament to the strength of collaborative working between conservationists, raptor study groups, gamekeepers and land managers, and to the incredible support of thousands of people across communities in southern Scotland.

“With the backing of Defra and Forestry England, we now have the opportunity to replicate and build on this approach in Northern England. Our priority will be to listen, to work in partnership, and to ensure that golden eagle recovery supports both nature and the people who manage these landscapes, so that everyone can enjoy the thrill of seeing golden eagles flying high once again across the uplands of the UK“.

Forestry England’s research suggests that Scottish birds could be seen across northern England within 10 years, but it will take longer for breeding golden eagles to become established in England.  

With support from Forestry England, Restoring Upland Nature will now develop a programme of engagement with farming, game management, recreation, nature conservation, tourism and education interests in the region.   

The move to explore reintroducing golden eagles is the latest milestone as the government’s works to achieve the statutory targets set out in the Environmental Improvement Plan to halt the decline in species abundance by 2030 and to reduce species extinction risk by 2042 against 2022 levels.  

It follows the government’s landmark decision last year to allow the legal reintroduction of another keystone species, beavers, into the wild in England for the first time in hundreds of years, and a record £60m of funding announced last week to protect threatened native species.

ENDS

My commentary:

I’m pleased to see that the ecological research behind the proposal to restore Golden Eagles to England has been written by two of the leading scientific authorities on this species – Drs Phil Whitfield and Alan Fielding.

Their report showcases the depth and breadth of Golden Eagle research in the UK in recent decades, most of it led by them in collaboration with other species experts, and provides a detailed, evidence-based review of what is required for a successful reintroduction/reinforcement project.

Golden eagle recovery feasibility in EnglandDownload

The reports shows how eight Potential Recovery Zones (PRZs) were identified, with all but one of them located in northern England: Cheviots, North Pennines, Lakes, Yorkshire Dales, Bowland, South Pennines, North York Moors, South West.

The North York Moors and the South West PRZs were considered to be geographically isolated (in terms of eagle dispersal) whereas the other six PRZs were considered as a single spatial block and therefore more preferable.

These core areas were identified as having the potential to support an upper limit of 92 Golden Eagle home ranges, but was revised 45 when ‘subjectively considering potential risk factors’.

Those potential risk factors include constraints such as renewable energy infrastructure, weather (especially spring rainfall), unintentional disturbance, e.g. through recreation, and of course the big one, illegal persecution. The revised figure of 45 home ranges assumes ‘no intentional interference which prevents a home range from being established‘.

Looking at the map of the Potential Recovery Zones, regular blog readers will know immediately that illegal raptor persecution is systemic in those northern PRZs where driven grouse shooting remains a dominant land-use.

Given the population-level effects of illegal persecution in these areas on species such as the Hen Harrier and the Peregrine (e.g. see here and here), it’s not difficult to comprehend the challenge of keeping Golden Eagles alive for long enough to establish a home range on those driven grouse moors.

Whitfield and Fielding readily acknowledge this (of course they do – they’ve been instrumental in providing the evidence to show the extent of the illegal persecution of Golden Eagles on Scottish grouse moors – see here) and specifically identify illegal persecution as a constraint in the PRZs dominated by grouse moor management, writing, “Much of the PRZ is grouse moor so success here depends on having a good working relationship with the land owners“.

The Government’s press release, and to some extent the research report, points to the success of the South Scotland Golden Eagle Project, suggesting that the same collaborative approach between conservationists and land managers could also work in northern England.

I’d argue that there are a few caveats to that claim, including the wider extent of intensive grouse moor management in northern England in contrast to that in the Scottish Borders (an issue acknowledged by Whitfield and Fielding), and also the fact that there is now a grouse shoot licensing scheme in Scotland, where the threat of losing a licence for wildlife crime offences may be acting as a deterrent (although it’s still too early to measure that, and it certainly hasn’t stopped the persecution on some estates since licensing was introduced in autumn 2024).

There’s also the recent surge in eagle persecution in the Scottish Borders (six reported incidents), four of which happened since Whitfield and Fielding wrote their report in November 2024:

Golden Eagle ‘Fred’ disappeared in an area managed for gamebird shooting in the Pentland Hills in January 2018 (his satellite tag transmitted from the North Sea a few days later – here).

Golden Eagle ‘Merrick’ was shot and killed whilst she was sleeping in a tree next to a grouse moor in the Moorfoot Hills in October 2023 (see here).

Golden Eagles ‘Tarras’ and ‘Wren’ disappeared in an area managed for gamebird shooting near Langholm in August 2025 (see here).

A White-tailed Eagle ‘disappeared’ in the Moorfoot Hills area in November 2025 (here).

Golden Eagle ‘Hamlet’ was found with shotgun injuries next to a grouse moor in the Tweed Valley in February 2026 (here).

Golden Eagles from the South Scotland project are already exploring parts of northern England, as revealed by their satellite tracking data:

Some will argue that we should leave them to it and spend the money on species that need more help. Others will argue that until the persecution issue is addressed and resolved, a reinforcement/reintroduction project is an ethical misjudgment and may even contravene IUCN guidelines that require the cause of the species’ decline/extirpation to be addressed before reintroduction can take place. Others will argue that we should just get on with it and force the issue for the sake of urgently restoring biodiversity. Others will argue that the reintroduction of an apex predator will threaten livestock and thus livelihoods.

Many of these issues are considered in the report, in both the ecological and social science sections, and it is widely acknowledged that stakeholder participation in the process will be crucial.

From my personal perspective, I’d have been happier if the Government had also put up funding to establish a national, multi-agency response unit to investigate all offences that fall under the National Wildlife Crime Priorities, which includes raptor persecution.

Continuing to ignore the extent and impact of the issue, as successive Westminster governments have done, will inevitably lead to many of those England-based Golden Eagles being shot, poisoned, trapped, or bludgeoned to death, and nobody being held to account, and it needn’t be like that.

Still waiting, 19 months on, for Natural England’s review of Hen Harrier Brood Meddling trial

Natural England’s long overdue review of the Hen Harrier Brood Meddling trial will apparently be “concluded by spring 2026“, according to a recent Freedom of Information request.

For new blog readers, the Hen Harrier Brood Meddling trial was a conservation sham sanctioned by DEFRA as part of its ludicrous ‘Hen Harrier Action Plan‘ and carried out by Natural England between 2018 – 2024, in cahoots with the very industry responsible for the species’ catastrophic decline in England. In general terms, the plan involved the removal of Hen Harrier chicks from grouse moors, they were reared in captivity, then released back into the uplands just in time for the start of the grouse-shooting season where many were illegally killed. It was plainly bonkers. For more background see here and here.

Skydancing Hen Harriers (photo by Pete Walkden)

The end of the Brood Meddling trial was formally announced by Natural England on 14 March 2025, although it had claimed to be “currently reviewing and analysing the data gathered under the trial” in September 2024; a process it said would be “concluded later this year” (i.e. by the end of 2024).

On 2nd January 2025 I submitted an FoI request to Natural England to ask whether that review had been completed. Natural England responded on 28 January 2025 and said it was in the “final draft stage” and was “being prepared for publication“.

On 14 March 2025, when Natural England announced the formal end of the brood meddling trial, it said that it had commissioned four research reports, covering population modelling, social science and evaluation. One of the reports, a population modelling review, was published, and Natural England said the other three reports “are in the process of publication“.

These reports are believed to have influenced Natural England’s decision to close the Brood Meddling trial but had not been made available to the public. I wanted to see them to draw my own conclusions about the success / failure of the trial, and I was especially interested in the social science report, given how hilariously bad an earlier social science report had been.

I submitted another FoI to Natural England on 14 April 2025 asking for a copy of this second social science report.

Natural England responded, 20 working days later on 15 May 2025, to me to tell me that a further 20 working days were needed “because of the complexity / voluminous nature of the request“. There was nothing complex, or voluminous, about my request. It was a simple ask, for a copy of a simple report that Natural England had used in its decision-making about the future of the Brood Meddling trial. Is it any wonder nobody trusts Natural England when it comes out with rubbish like this?

After trying to fob me off with an unjustified delay, Natural England eventually responded again, in June 2025, when once again it refused to release the social science report, this time because:

“This report is in final draft stage. Natural England are finalising this report and are progressing with the process of internal review required for publication. We cannot give an exact publication date due to uncertainties inherent in this internal review and publication process. This report is therefore being withheld under Reg 12(4)(d) – course of completion“.

So I waited a further six and a half months, until 5 January 2026, before asking Natural England for a status update on its now long overdue internal review.

Natural England responded on 30 January 2026, still refusing to release the documents because although the internal review had apparently been completed, the reports were now subject to something Natural England was calling a “final quality assurance“. Natural England told me, “We anticipate that the QA process will be completed by Spring 2026” and that once finalised, the reports will be published.

I think it’s Spring 2026 now, isn’t it?

These documents are going to be sensational, eh, having being subjected to ‘draft analysis and review‘, then a ‘final draft stage‘, then an ‘internal review‘, and then a ‘final quality assurance‘ process, all of which has so far taken Natural England at least 19 months to complete, and it’s now been 2.7 years since the last Hen Harrier chick was brood meddled (in 2023).

A complete joke, from the very start to the very end. And through it all, Hen Harriers have remained the victims of routine and systemic illegal persecution on many driven grouse moors throughout the country – information that Natural England has also sought to suppress, apparently on police orders (e.g. see here, here, here, here, here, here, here).

General & hazardous waste, including bags of suspected shot gamebirds, found dumped in a pit on an estate in Scotland

Last month I blogged about the discovery of a large pit containing dead Pheasants, Red-legged Partridges, Wood Pigeons, deer parts, and a lot of rubbish, including a burnt mattress, on the Glenbanchor and Pitmain Estate in the Cairngorms National Park (see here).

A pit containing dead Pheasants & Red-legged Partridges on the Glenbanchor & Pitmain Estate in the Cairngorms National Park (photo by RPUK blog reader)

I wrote about the legislation on the disposal of animal by-products and whether this dumping pit was legal or not (surely it isn’t, but the legislation is very complicated and thus confusing).

I’m pleased to report that a blog reader has drawn the incident to the attention of their local MSP (well done!) and questions are being asked in all the right places. I hope there’s some clarification soon, and if this dumping pit is illegal, that enforcement measures will follow.

On a similar theme, a blog reader has sent me images of another dumping pit, this time found outside of the Cairngorms National Park boundary, on an estate in Strathdearn, the long river valley running from Coignafearn to Moy.

This time, the dumping pit contained mostly general and hazardous waste, although the walker’s attention was first drawn to the pit by what was described as the foul stench of rotting flesh.

The photographs show items such as a large fridge, a chemical spray pump and barrel, a tyre, textiles, plastics, wood, cardboard, electrical equipment, metals, and a large number of white/green/yellow plastic sacks that had been zip-tied.

It is suspected that these sacks, which originally contained Spratts Game Food Release Pellets, now contained shot gamebirds, probably Red-legged Partridges, which are known to be released in large numbers in the area. The blog reader didn’t try to open the sacks because entering the pit would have been hazardous.

As with the dumping pit found on the Glenbanchor and Pitmain Estate, the walker thought the items had been dumped for burial because of the presence of the rubble mound at the side of the hole.

Obviously, the burial of hazardous waste (known as ‘special waste’ in Scotland) is unlawful. Items such as fridges can be taken to household waste and recycling centres where they can be disposed of for free.

If there are also dead gamebirds, there are different rules for the disposal of animal by-products (see above commentary on the pit at Glenbanchor & Pitmain Estate). There are some exemptions that permit burial, and it’s not clear to me whether any apply to this site, but the exemption available for areas classified as ‘remote areas’ in Scotland do not apply here, because the parish of Moy & Dalarossie is outside the classified area.

Unlike the pit found at Glenchor & Pitmain, the walker did not see anybody at this pit, and didn’t witness anybody adding any items in to the pit, so it is not clear who is responsible.

The pit’s location is at NH75022346, which according to Andy Wightman’s Who Owns Scotland website, is Garbole Forest, very close to the estate boundaries of Glen Kyllachy & Farr Estate, and Glenmazeran Estate.

Andy Wightman’s research indicates that the owner of Garbole Forest is a company called Newbie Ltd, listed as ‘hunting, trapping & related services activities’ and worth an estimated £13 million. Wightman’s website shows Newbie Ltd is also listed as the co-owner of Glen Kyllachy & Farr Estate, along with a company called Newbie Salmon Fisheries (Property) Ltd. Companies House records show that two of the three Directors of Newbie Ltd are also the sole Directors of Newbie Salmon Fisheries (Property) Ltd.

The walker who discovered this dumping pit told me they’d reported it as a potential fly-tipping incident to Highland Council but they didn’t receive any response.

Perhaps the blog reader who alerted the local MSP to the dumping pit on Glenbanchor & Pitmain Estate might also want to do the same with this one. It’s certainly worthy of further high level investigation.

Raeshaw Estate loses appeal against 3-yr General Licence restriction in relation to Golden Eagle Merrick being ‘shot and killed’

Good news!

Raeshaw Estate, in the Scottish Borders, has lost its appeal against its latest three-year General Licence restriction.

The restriction was imposed by NatureScot on 10 February 2026 in relation to the disappearance of Golden Eagle ‘Merrick’, who Police believe was ‘shot & killed‘ in October 2023.

Camera trap photo of golden eagle Merrick, from South Scotland Golden Eagle Project

Regular blog readers will know that General Licence restrictions, which have been available to NatureScot since 2014, are based on the civil burden of proof and are issued when NatureScot receives information from Police Scotland about wildlife crimes but where there is insufficient evidence to identify an individual offender for prosecution. (GL restrictions can also be imposed on estates where gamekeepers have been convicted of wildlife crimes).

General Licence restrictions do not prevent an estate from game-shooting, nor do they prevent an estate from carrying out [lawful] predator control – this can still be undertaken if the estate applies for an ‘individual licence’ which may restrict the amount of predator control, the estate may be subject to compliance spot checks, and the licence holder must provide NatureScot with licence returns (i.e. indicate how many birds were killed, where, and when etc).

General Licence restrictions are not perfect as an effective sanction – they are nowhere near, as I’ve written about many times before (e.g. see here and links within). They do, however, work as a ‘reputational driver’, although in some cases reputation is apparently not an issue of concern.

Regular blog readers will also know that NatureScot had been considering this particular decision for Raeshaw Estate since April 2024 (see here) when it first received information from Police Scotland about the shooting/killing of Merrick in October 2023. That’s almost two years of procrastination (e.g. see here, here).

When the decision was finally made by NatureScot to impose the three-year GL restriction, starting on 10 February 2026, a spokesperson for Raeshaw Estate, believed to be under the management of a company owned by ‘grouse moor guru’ Mark Osborne, was quoted the following day in various newspapers as saying the restriction was “wholly unjustified” and that the estate intended to appeal (see here).

Under NatureScot’s Framework for GL restrictions, Raeshaw Estate had to submit its appeal, in writing, within 14 days of the notification. That submission would have the effect of suspending the GL restriction, and given that the formal notification of the restriction had been removed from NatureScot’s website by 3 March 2026, it was assumed (and later confirmed) that Raeshaw Estate had indeed submitted an appeal.

Today, I noticed that the formal notification of the restriction has been put back on to NatureScot’s website, which indicates that the appeal has been considered, and formally rejected.

It’s also apparent that the representatives of neighbouring Watherston Wood also lodged an appeal against its three-year restriction, which has also been rejected. Although as far as I’m aware, the killing of so-called ‘pest’ bird species doesn’t take place in the wood anyway so perhaps the appeal was made as a matter of principle rather than an attempt to reinstate the use of General Licences 1, 2 and 3.

Screen grab from Who Owns Scotland website, annotated by RPUK, showing the proximity of Merrick’s last known location and the Raeshaw Estate (shaded in blue)

This is an unprecedented second General Licence restriction for Raeshaw Estate. It was one of the first estates to receive a General Licence restriction in 2015, based on clear police evidence that wildlife crimes had been committed although, just as with the latest GL restriction, there was insufficient evidence to prosecute any individual (see here).

Representatives of Raeshaw Estate applied for a judicial review of NatureScot’s 2015 decision but the Court of Session upheld NatureScot’s procedures and ruled the process was lawful (here).

Whilst under that first General Licence restriction, Raeshaw Estate applied for, and was granted, a number of ‘individual licences’ so the gamekeepers could continue to kill certain species as part of the estate’s grouse moor management plan (quite a lot of birds were lawfully killed – see here).

However, in 2017 the individual licence was revoked by NatureScot due to non-compliance issues and more suspected wildlife crime offences (see here). Not that the revocation made any difference whatsoever, as the estate could simply apply for another individual licence!

Inexplicably to many of us, NatureScot did not extend the length of the original General Licence restriction, which it had the authority to do, in light of the non-compliance issues on the estate’s individual licence (see here).

Raeshaw Estate in the Scottish borders. Data sourced from Who Owns Scotland website.

OPERATION EASTER: 29 years of protecting the UK’s rarest birds

Press release from the National Wildlife Crime Unit (NWCU)

Operation EASTER, the UK’s long‑running national effort to protect nesting birds from illegal egg collectors, returns for its 29th year as police and conservation agencies warn that this damaging wildlife crime remains a real and active threat.

Despite decades of enforcement, education, and public awareness, the illegal taking of wild bird eggs persists. A small number of determined offenders continue to raid nests—sometimes taking entire clutches from the UK’s rarest and most vulnerable species. These eggs often end up hidden in secret collections or traded internationally, causing long-term harm to conservation efforts and the recovery of threatened bird populations.

Recent intelligence shows the scale of the problem is evolving rather than disappearing. In 2024, Operation PULKA dismantled a major transnational egg‑trading network. Thousands of eggs—around 20,000 in total—were seized during coordinated warrants across the UK, with further high-value collections recovered in Australia and Norway. The case underscored the continued demand for wild bird eggs and the sophisticated methods used by offenders.

As the 2026 nesting season begins, police forces and partner agencies will again be out in force to disrupt, deter, and prosecute those involved in egg theft, nest disturbance, and other wildlife crimes targeting birds.

Public information remains one of the most effective tools in stopping offenders.

How the Public Can Help

If you have information about egg thieves or nest disturbance of rare birds, contact your local police on 101 and ask to speak to a Wildlife Crime Officer.
If safe to do so, note descriptions, vehicle registrations, or take photos.

Peak nesting activity begins in April, so early reporting is vital.

You can also report information anonymously via Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111.

ENDS

Welsh Government inches towards gamebird licensing, with another ‘evidence review’

Following the welcome news last week that Defra intends to explore options for the introduction of a licensing scheme for ALL gamebird shooting in England, including Red Grouse, as well as the annual release of 60 million non-native Pheasants and Red-legged Partridges for shooting (see here), the Welsh Government has also announced its intention to explore a licensing scheme for gamebird shooting and releases.

The unregulated annual release of an estimated 60 million non-native gamebirds in the UK countryside has gone on for far too long. Photo: Ruth Tingay

On 17 March 2026, Huw Irranca-Davies MS, Deputy First Minister & Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs in Wales made the following statement:

Whilst this is very welcome news, to be honest the Welsh Government should already have a licensing scheme in place because this was recommended by its own statutory nature advisor (NRW – Natural Resources Wales) over two and half years ago!

Some of you may recall the RSPB’s frustration at the lack of progress on this issue in September 2025 (see here), where concerns were heightened due to the increased risk of Avian Influenza (Bird Flu).

I don’t know why the Welsh Government is calling for yet another evidence review; it surely has sufficient evidence by now to just get on with the job. Although I suspect it is probably in fear of a potential legal challenge (either by the gamebird shooting industry if a licensing scheme is implemented, or by conservationists if a scheme is not put in place) so its likely this latest evidence review is simply a legal arse-covering exercise.

Fine. The direction of travel is good, just slower than many of us would like. No timeline is provided for the evidence review, which may be linked to preparations for the forthcoming election. Let’s see what happens after 7th May.

Government to consider licensing for all gamebird shooting & releases in England

Somebody has finally switched the lights on at Defra.

It’s been a very long time coming – too long in my opinion – but last week an announcement was made in the new Land Use Framework for England that the Westminster Government intends to explore options for the licensing of gamebird shooting and releases. This will cover gamebird shooting in both the uplands and the lowlands – in other words, Red Grouse, Pheasant and Red-legged Partridge shooting.

An estimated 10 million non-native Red-legged Partridges are released into the countryside every year, along with 50 million non-native Pheasants (photo by Ruth Tingay)

According to Defra, this policy paper sets out ‘How we can use our land more effectively to increase the resilience of our homes, communities, infrastructure, and food systems, while speeding up development and restoring nature‘ and comes after a public consultation last year.

There’s a good summary of some of the Framework measures, written by land reform campaigner and author Guy Shrubsole (see here), but of particular interest to this blog is the Framework section on gamebird shooting.

It says this:

It looks like the Framework is distinguishing fairly between the different types of gamebird shooting and the cost/benefit differences between them. For example, the environmental impacts of small, walked-up shoots where the emphasis is usually on the ‘experience’ of the day, is quite different to the impacts of the large, intensively managed commercial driven shoots where the emphasis (and value of the estate in the case of grouse shooting) is measured by the number of gamebirds shot each season.

But there’s no getting away from the fact that an estimated 60 million non-native gamebirds are released into the countryside every year for recreational shooting, and that is simply unacceptable and unsustainable. As is the widespread illegal killing of birds of prey on many gamebird shooting estates, both in the uplands and the lowlands.

The Government clearly recognises that the industry is incapable of self-regulation, hence a commitment to explore licensing as a form of regulation and restrictions on gamebird releases beyond those already in place on protected areas. Although we all know that the gamebird shooting industry as a whole is not celebrated for its adherence to the law, on so many levels (raptor persecution, lead ammunition, poisons caches, muirburn, tracks, rodenticides, releases on protected areas, biosecurity, illegally-set traps etc etc) so it’d be a surprise if it embraced any kind of governance, in whatever form that might take.

Indeed, the shooting industry’s response to the Framework announcement has been entirely predictable in its level of hysteria.

For example, Tim Bonner, CEO of the Countryside Alliance, is quoted in The Times saying the proposed regulation was “a declaration of war on game shooting“.

It’s not just gamebird shooting and releases on which Defra seems to have woken up.

Earlier this week there was a welcome announcement of a public consultation on greater protection for Woodcock and other protected bird species (see here) and yesterday another public consultation was announced, this time for how to implement a ban on so-called trail hunting.

Trail hunting is supposed to be a substitute for Fox hunting (which was banned under the Hunting Act 2004 by the previous Labour government) where hounds follow an artificial scent trail laid by humans. However, there has been significant evidence that trail hunting has been used by many hunts to conceal or provide plausible deniability for Fox hunting, leading to Labour’s election manifesto commitment to ban it.

Given the Government’s overall pathetic response to the continued call for a ban on driven grouse shooting last year (here), and its appalling attitude towards reducing environmental protections in its Planning & Infrastructure Act 2025 (here), it’s good to finally see some progressive thinking.

UPDATE 30 March 2026: Welsh Government inches towards gamebird licensing, with another ‘evidence review’ (here)

Loophole closed in grouse shooting licences via Natural Environment (Scotland) Act 2026

Some good news!

The giant loophole in Scotland’s grouse shooting licences has been closed, via an amendment in the Natural Environment (Scotland) Act 2026.

If you recall, grouse moor licensing was introduced as part of the Wildlife Management & Muirburn (Scotland) Act 2024, as a result of the continued illegal killing of birds of prey on grouse moors and the associated difficulties of identifying an individual suspect and prosecuting them.

Red Grouse. Photo by Ronnie Gilbert

The idea was that a licence to shoot Red Grouse could be amended / withdrawn / revoked by NatureScot if evidence showed that illegal raptor persecution had taken place (importantly, based on the civil burden of proof, i.e. balance of probability, rather than the criminal burden of proof, i.e. beyond reasonable doubt). It was expected that the licence would cover an estate’s entire landholding, not just the areas where Red Grouse are shot, because raptor persecution crimes often take place beyond the boundary of the moor (e.g. in woodland).

However, in November 2024, just three months after they began, the licences were significantly weakened after legal threats from the grouse shooting industry were used to successfully sabotage the licensing regime. Instead of now covering an entire estate, it was announced that the licence holder could decide on the extent of the area the licence covered, specifically the area where Red Grouse are ‘taken or killed’.

Effectively, this could mean simply drawing an arbitrary line around their grouse butts, denoting the reach of a shotgun pellet, and argue that THAT is the area where they take/kill grouse and thus that should be the extent of the licensable area:

Photo of a line of grouse-shooting butts by Richard Cross, annotated by RPUK

In addition to this, the changes made to the licence by NatureScot meant that a whole suite of other ‘relevant offences’ listed in the Wildlife Management & Muirburn Act that were supposed to trigger a licence revocation (i.e. offences on the Protection of Badgers Act 1992, Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996, Conservation (Natural Habitats etc) Regulations 1994, Animal Health & Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006, Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Act 2023) were NOT covered, which was clearly going against the intent of Parliament when the Wildlife & Muirburn Act was voted for.

Thanks to a year of campaigning, notably by Scottish Greens MSP Mark Ruskell and the RSPB, the Scottish Government introduced a proposed amendment during the passage of the Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill to close off the grouse shoot licence loophole. Despite push-back from the usual suspects, the amendment passed Stage 3 of the Bill on 29 January 2026 and the Natural Environment (Scotland) Act received Royal Assent on 12 March 2026.

The amendment empowers NatureScot (the licensing authority) to “propose a different area to which the licence is to relate from that described in the [licensee’s] application“, and if unable to reach agreement with the applicant on the area, to refuse the application. My understanding is that this can’t be applied retrospectively (i.e. to licences already granted prior to this Act) without the landowner’s permission but will apply to all new licence applications from this point onwards. Its effectiveness, of course, will rely upon NatureScot’s appetite for standing up to the powerful landowner/shooting lobby – let’s see how that works out, because recent experience doesn’t inspire much confidence.

In addition, and more importantly from my perspective, the existing legislation specified that NatureScot may modify, suspend or revoke a grouse-shooting licence if it was satisfied that the licence holder, or a person involved in managing the land to which the licence relates, had committed a “relevant offence” (a wildlife or animal welfare offence as specified in the Act) “on the land”. The amendment replaces the wording “on the land” so that section now reads “has committed a relevant offence that supports or benefits the activities permitted by the licence” i.e. a relevant offence need not have taken place on the specified licensed area for NatureScot to suspend / revoke the licence.

This is significant as not only does it reinstate all the other ‘relevant offences’ that were lost after NatureScot’s botched changes to the licence after a legal threat from the grouse shooting industry in November 2024, but importantly, it means that if NatureScot considers an offence has been committed beyond the licensable area, sanctions can still be imposed if the offence relates to grouse moor management (e.g. predator control).

My understanding is that, again, this can’t be applied retrospectively (i.e. for offences committed prior to the enactment of the new legislation, unless the offence was committed in the licensable area) but does apply from when the new legislation was enacted.

I don’t think it’ll be too long before we see its effectiveness tested.

Here is the relevant section in the Natural Environment (Scotland) Act 2026:

Game-shooting industry’s response to the recent conviction of Perthshire gamekeeper Russell Mason

Further to last week’s news that Scottish gamekeeper and convicted sex offender Russell Mason had pleaded guilty to battering a trapped Goshawk to death on a shooting estate in Perthshire, in addition to firearms offences (see here), I’ve been looking to see how the game-shooting industry has responded to this latest conviction of a member of its community.

Goshawk with Pheasant. Photo by Ronnie Gilbert

You’ll recall that this is the game-shooting industry whose organisations routinely state they have a ‘zero tolerance’ policy towards raptor persecution, and many of them are members of the Partnership for Action Against Wildlife Crime (PAW) Raptor Group, in which case you’d think they’d be quick to condemn this latest crime, and reassure the public that if Mason and/or the estate was a member of any of these organisations they’ve now been expelled, right?

Six days on from Mason’s conviction, here’s how those shooting organisations have responded to the news:

Scottish Gamekeepers Association – silence

Scottish Land & Estates – silence

Scottish Association for Country Sports – silence

British Association for Shooting & Conservation – silence

Countryside Alliance – silence

Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust – silence

Perhaps they’re all waiting for Mason to be sentenced next month before they denounce his criminal activities? Although I can’t think of any reasonable argument for a delay.

Or perhaps they’ll wait for the inevitable public revulsion when the RSPB publishes the video nasty showing Mason bludgeoning the Goshawk to death, before they bother to comment?

Their current collective silence speaks volumes.

Convicted Scottish gamekeeper Russell Mason – more disturbing details about this case

Further to yesterday’s news that Scottish gamekeeper Russell Mason, 49, had pleaded guilty to battering a trapped Goshawk to death on a shooting estate in Perthshire (see here), the Daily Record has published more detail about this case, which is quite disturbing.

The article is reproduced below in case this URL is broken/removed at a later date.

Russell Mason, 49, lured the protected goshawk into a baited trap before battering it several times with a cosh to cause its agonising death.

He was also found to have left nearly 200 rounds of live ammunition lying around in his bedroom and unsecured within his Polaris Ranger vehicle.

Fiscal depute Karon Rollo told Perth Sheriff Court: “Goshawks are rare birds of prey. They hunt birds and small animals. They have a wingspan of up to four feet and weigh between two and three pounds.

“They were persecuted to extinction in Scotland in the last century, but have been reintroduced, with now around 100 breeding pairs in existence.

“A crow cage trap was visited by RSPB staff on 9 January 2024. At the time this trap was set, it had a meat bait, and the door was chained and padlocked shut.

“It had a sign on the trap stating that the Scottish Government pays the estate to catch carrion crows from 1 March to 30 June to increase the chick survival rates for conservation-listed bird species.

“To continue observations and continue with this research, it was decided to install a continuous recording static camera covering this crow cage trap“.

She said RSPB staff visited the camera several times to review the captured footage and became aware of a male visiting the trap on 12 February 2024.

“At this time there was a goshawk and a crow in the trap,” Ms Rollo said. “The male opened and entered the trap. After entering he used a hand-held net to capture the goshawk and put it to the ground.

“He then struck the bird six times with a cosh. He placed the bird into a carrier bag, rolled it up and put the package under his arm.

“He left the trap, placed the net in the back of the vehicle and the bag in the cab. He locked the trap and drove off“.

The prosecutor said: “The male was identified from the footage by police officers, who knew him as being gamekeeper Russell Mason. The crow cage trap number related to the accused.

“Footage on other dates, including him putting a decoy bird in the trap, confirmed his identity. An avian vet specialising in raptors was shown the footage.

“He opined that the goshawk looked healthy and was exhibiting the normal behaviour of a captured raptor. Goshawks, in his experience, as ‘particularly flighty and stressy birds’ and this one was no exception.

“He describes it as showing a man beating a goshawk to death with a cudgel with the bird having been first netted within a crow cage trap.

“He states there were six blows to the body, which may have caused broken wings or rib fractures during the trauma, and that it was quite obviously not killed outright with one blow.

“He is of the view that it is extremely unlikely that it would have been lying passively in the net and therefore there is a high possibility that it would have sustained painful fractures and injuries before dying“.

A search of Mason’s cottage found unsecured ammunition, along with clothes matching those seen on the CCTV footage. A bag and cosh were found in his vehicle.

The bag was analysed and found to have goshawk DNA on it. The search team recovered 195 illegally stored rounds of ammunition.

Mason admitted intentionally or recklessly killing a goshawk on 12 February 2024 by seizing it with a net before repeatedly striking it with a cosh on Cochrage Moor, Bridge of Cally, Perthshire.

He also admitted breaching the terms of his firearms certificate by failing to store ammunition securely.

Sentence on Mason was deferred for the preparation of social work reports until next month by Sheriff Alison McKay and he was granted bail.

Mason was previously placed on the sex offenders register after being spotted carrying out a solo sex act in his car by a resident of a sheltered housing complex.

He was spotted by an elderly woman with his trousers down as he sat in the car beside a path used by children to walk to and from school.

When officers told Mason they were at the scene to investigate reports of someone masturbating in a car, he said: “That was me.”

Mason admitted carrying out an act of public indecency outside the sheltered housing complex in Harriet Court, Blairgowrie, and was placed on the register for a year.

ENDS

A reminder – sentencing for Mason’s latest convictions (wildlife crime & firearms offences) has been deferred until 24 April 2026 for background reports.

UPDATE 23 March 2026: Game-shooting industry’s response to the recent conviction of Perthshire gamekeeper Russell Mason (here)