RSPB Campaign Inciting Assaults Against Gamekeepers
THE RSPB’s continued demonisation of gamekeepers has led to an exchange of letters between the
charity’s CEO and the Moorland Association.
Since Beccy Speight took over, the charity has told the BBC’s Today Programme that gamekeepers
are a “coordinated gang of armed criminals roaming the uplands”. The RSPB’s regular “Birdcrime
Reports” repeatedly accuse gamekeepers of systematically killing birds of prey. The Moorland
Association has responded that the RSPB’s figures are completely unverified and do not fit with
official data.
The RSPB’s unceasing attacks are leading to physical attacks on gamekeepers and bullying of their
children. In a recent letter sent to the Moorland Association , Ms Speight refused to accept that the
charity has crossed the line into hate speech. The response from the Moorland Association includes
a series of interviews with gamekeepers explaining the impact of the charity’s rhetoric.
Dear Ms Speight,
RSPB campaign inciting assaults against gamekeepers
I am writing on behalf of the Chairman of the Moorland Association regarding your complaint to
him about our comments to BBC News . They were in response to your press release criticising our
sector. Our focus was on i) the reliability of your statements and ii) the real-world impact of your
repeated verbal attacks on gamekeepers and their families.
Reliability first. There has long been scepticism about RSPB pronouncements with headlines
including “ RSPB ‘twisted data’ in campaign against grouse shooting ”, ““ RSPB sidestepped law ” and
“ RSPB ‘sits on crimes for publicity ’”.[1] Scientists, judges and the police have all expressed concern.
When the BBC asked us for our views on your press release , we pointed out that your data on bird
crime is “ unverified ”]
I note that you did not respond to this in your letter. Would journalists be right to assume that
there are no independent checks on the data in your so-called ‘Birdcrime Reports’? If these are
merely a ragbag of missing bird reports from your activists then it begs the question about how
many “crimes” are taking place.
Natural England points out that birds die for many reasons including “ predation, starvation, and
disease ”.[3] For hen harriers, goshawks are a major predator and juvenile mortality is 40%. If a dead
bird had a satellite tag, it would only continue to work if it was facing sunlight. The media has also
reported that some birds you claimed were illegally killed turned out to be alive .[4]
Where there is foul play, official data suggests that your relentless desire to pin the blame on
gamekeepers is wide of the mark. The BBC reported that “of only four people convicted for bird
crime last year three were falconers and one was an egg collector and none were
gamekeepers.”[5] Furthermore, only 3% of bird crime prosecutions involve gamekeepers.[6]
Aware of that, you suggest an alternative ‘proof point’ for your hypothesis that gamekeepers
should be blamed when birds go missing. Your press release says it typically happens “on or near”
grouse moors. The enormous flaw with this argument is that that is where the birds are. Repeated
scientific studies have shown vast numbers of red-listed birds live on the million acres our members
manage. The research says it is because our keepers are so good at protecting them from predators
such as foxes and stoats .[7]
Are there any scientific studies showing how many birds you have on your 220 reserves? Perhaps
you could also let journalists know why you stopped publishing your own bird counts 14 years ago?
You are Europe’s biggest conservation charity with an income of £170 million secured from donors
and taxpayers .[8] What are they getting in return?
And in this might journalists infer a possible motivation for the relentless animus your charity has
towards our privately run nature reserves?
For animus it is. In accusing gamekeepers of “illegal killing”, your latest press release used the
word “crime” seven times and “suspicion” five. Since you took over, the RSPB has committed
atrocious slander against all gamekeepers .[9]
Given your access to social and traditional media, your repeated smearing of gamekeepers
through dozens of press releases has consequences.
A study by Professor Simon Denny found that there is a physical attack on a gamekeeper on
average every 12 days .[10] We also receive regular reports of the children of gamekeepers being
bullied at school because of their parent’s profession.
Our industry is so concerned about the impact of the RSPB’s campaign of vilification that we
recently produced this compilation of interviews with gamekeepers .
Speech that causes this degree of hatred is hate speech.
You suggested a meeting. If you agree to watch the video and to have gamekeepers attend
we would be willing to meet.
Yours sincerely,
Andrew Gilruth
Chief Executive
Moorland Association
