Shooting is a key element of the rural economy. It goes hand-in-hand with the conservation of the countryside and provides a healthy and sustainable food source. But what do the political party manifestos have to say about it?
Labour
The outcome of this general election matters for the shooting community whoever wins. If the polls are correct we can expect a Labour government on 5 July. Labour’s “Change” manifesto contains two policies that would have a significant impact on shooting. The manifesto commits to full cost recovery for firearms licensing and a ban on the use of “snare traps”.
Labour puts firearms licensing under the “Take back our streets” section of their manifesto, mixed in to the sub-section on knife crime. Labour plan to use firearms licence fees to fund violent crime prevention schemes for urban youths. Full cost recovery firearms licensing will see a significant rise in the cost of a shotgun certificate or firearms licence, which will put legal and safe gun ownership out of financial reach of many. It appears that Labour wants law-abiding, rural people to be made financially responsible for combatting urban knife crime. The Countryside Alliance believes that money from firearms licensing fees should go entirely to the firearms licensing process, not to subsidising other policing issues.
The policy to ban “the use of snare traps” comes in the same paragraph as their promise to ban legal trail hunting. The terminology is unclear, but probably includes humane restraints. This mirrors Welsh Labour’s ban in 2023, where they banned the use of all types of snare and humane restraint, as well as proposing to ban the release of pheasant and red-legged partridge unless under licence, an ongoing issue. With this policy Labour is ignoring the scientific evidence which proves how important the use of humane restraints is for the effective conservation of our rarest and most treasured bird species, like the curlew. With this policy, Labour is contradicting its own pledge to halt the decline of British species.
It is significant that nowhere in Labour’s manifesto does the word ‘rural’ appear. There seems to be no recognition that the delivery of policies in rural areas needs to differ from delivery in towns and cities. Manifestos are, of course, as important for what they do not say, as for what they do. It is fair to ask what else a Labour government might do to shooting interests? Could a Labour government at Westminster adopt the same anti-shooting agenda as that of the Labour government in Cardiff?
Conservative
There is nothing in the Conservative manifesto which directly mentions shooting. There is plenty on other rural issues, including a promise to make no changes to the Hunting Act. The only other policy in the Conservative manifesto that could affect shooting is the proposal to introduce further powers to ban face coverings, which could help in combatting shoot saboteurs.
Liberal Democrat
The main policy of significance for shooting in the Liberal Democrat manifesto is the proposal to ban the “routine burning of heather on peatlands”. This would negatively affect the ability of gamekeepers in the uplands who manage moorland for grouse shooting both to ensure a good habitat for the myriad bird species which nest on them (red grouse, black grouse, curlew, hen harrier, snipe, lapwing etc.) and create essential firebreaks, to mitigate the risk of hugely damaging wildfire.
The cool burning of heather, as practised in muirburn, is a vital tool in maintaining the biodiverse and rich moorland habitat that was designated globally rare by the 1992 Rio Convention on Biodiversity. Peer-reviewed scientific research shows that the cool burning of heather, as practised by gamekeepers, sees greater carbon sequestration than either mowing or leaving it untouched. Grouse shooting supports many jobs and underpins communities in some of our most rural areas. It is regrettable that despite all the talk of the need for policies to be based on science and evidence, science and evidence are once again being ignored.
Green Party
The Green Party manifesto presents open hostility towards shooting and recreational deer stalking. This is what they say:
“The Green Party is fundamentally opposed to all blood sports and would campaign to introduce a ban on all hunting in the first year of a new parliament. This includes trophy hunting, trail hunting, where dogs are used to track foxes, and the commercial shooting of game birds. Government subsidies will no longer be given to maintain artificial landscapes designed only for hunting (such as grouse moors)…
“Where necessary for ecological reasons, or for animals described as pests, humane culling will be licensed by Natural England and carried out by trained professionals.”
These policies ignore and, indeed fly in the face of several important facts, such as that there has never been any public subsidy for the management of moorland for grouse shooting. They also seem to contradict another statement the Green party makes in its manifesto introduction:
“As a political party, we believe in […] following the science and speaking the truth, too.”
There is little more that needs to be said on the Green Party’s approach to shooting, quite simply they promise to ban it in year one of any Green government.
Reform UK
Reform UK’s manifesto, or “contract” states:
“Protect Country Sports. These increase investment and help conservation of our environment. They boost rural jobs, communities and local economies.”
Far from seeking to restrict shooting, Reform UK would seek to protect shooting and consider this to be a “critical reform needed in the first 100 days”, should they come to power.
Scottish National Party
The SNP does not mention game shooting, upland conservation or deer management in its manifesto. It does, however, call for increased funding and the protection of interests for the environmentally damaging salmon farming industry.
Plaid Cymru
Plaid Cymru’s manifesto does not mention shooting in any way. It does, however, extensively cover other rural issues in Wales, agriculture, transport and rural crime in particular.