Packham challenged in court

It seems more than slightly off to be writing about a vexatious attempt to judicially review the Government's approach to the release of pheasants and partridges at a time like this, but even a crisis as acute as our current situation cannot assuage the obsession of the animal rights movement.

Chris Packham and his friends in the egotistical vehicle 'Wild Justice' threatened a legal challenge to the Government in February in attempt to get the courts to halt the release of pheasants and partridges on or near 'protected areas' designated under the EU Habitats Directive. Their argument is that game bird release constitutes a 'plan or project' and that the Government must therefore be sure that such releases do not impact on any protected area. They claimed that under the precautionary principle, all releases for the 2020/21 shooting season on or within 5km of a protected area should be prohibited until such assessments had been carried out.

DEFRA have already committed, last year, to undertake a review of the regulation of the release of game birds and relevant activities, and to consider whether their effectiveness could be improved. That, however, was not enough for Wild Justice which is far more interested in disrupting shooting than it is in protecting nature reserves and other protected areas. Mr Packham and his friends, therefore, went ahead and launched their Judicial Review with the intention of trying to halt the release of pheasants and partridges for next season in many areas.

It was quite clear from the Wild Justice submission, however, that it was ignorant of many areas of game rearing and management. So, with our colleagues, at the British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC), the National Gamekeepers' Organisation (NGO) and the Game Farmers' Association (GFA), the Countryside Alliance sought permission to intervene in the Judicial Review as an interested party. The court accepted all of our relevant interests and we all subsequently submitted evidence.

As a result, Wild Justice has had to back down in its attempts to expedite the case to stop releasing for the 2020/21 shooting season, and has sought permission to substantially alter its original case in light of the response from DEFRA and shooting organisations. Wild Justice's attempt to use the current crisis to justify these retreats is rather undermined by its decision to launch another Judicial Review against Natural Resources Wales in recent weeks and we hope that the Government's lawyers will now strongly argue that permission to bring the Judicial Review should be refused and the case thrown out.

I know that many in the shooting community, like so many across the countryside, are facing difficult decisions about how to sustain shoots and businesses in the coming months. On so many of the issues created by the COVID crisis we can only point to Government advice and support. On legal challenges designed to attack our way of life, however, we can and will ensure that Wild Justice will face the most robust defence possible from the untitled front of the shooting company. And that it will find life a lot more difficult than when it bullied Natural England into withdrawing General Licences last year.