The gaping loophole in the Scottish grouse shoot licences is a step closer to being closed off after a Government amendment was voted through at Stage 2 of the Natural Environment Bill just before Xmas. 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. The idea was that a licence to shoot Red Grouse could be amended / withdrawn / revoked by NatureScot if evidence showed that illegal raptor persecution had taken place (importantly, based on the civil burden of proof, i.e. balance of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. Conservationists and some politicians, notably Mark Ruskell MSP from the Scottish Greens, campaigned throughout 2025 and kept the pressure on the Scottish Government to address this loophole. Mark Ruskell lodged amendments at Stage 2 and 3 of the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill during 2025 (see here) but didn’t press it because by that time, Minister Jim Fairlie had announced the Government’s intention to lodge an amendment during the Natural Environment Bill instead. (Mark also lodged an amendment (#31) to the Natural Environment Bill, just to make sure the subject was covered, but withdrew it in favour of supporting the Government’s amendment). The Government’s proposed amendment (#35) to the Natural Environment Bill was lodged on 7 November 2025 – I blogged about that here. Minister Fairlie wrote to the Rural Affairs & Islands Committee on 30 October 2025 to notify the committee of the Government’s intention: Minister Fairlie to RAI Committee 30Oct2025Download Predictably, certain members of the Rural Affairs Committee wanted to push back against the amendment, presumably at the behest of lobbyists from the grouse shooting sector, and there followed a series of back and forth letters between the Committee and Minister Fairlie, with the Committee wanting more ‘clarity’ about the need to close the grouse licensing loophole and the Minister providing the rationale behind it. That correspondence can be read here: RAI Convenor Carson to Minister Fairlie 7Nov2025Download Minister Fairlie to RAI Committee 11Nov2025Download RAI Convenor to Minister Fairlie 20November2025Download Fairlie letter to RAI Committee 21November2025Download In the middle of all this correspondence, the Scottish Government’s amendment (#35) was debated at Stage 2 of the Natural Environment Bill during a Rural Affairs Committee hearing on 19 November 2025. I’m not going to repeat the detail of that debate, nor of Conservative MSP Rachael Hamilton’s counter amendments (#35a, 35b, and 335) because you can read it in the official report of that meeting (page 78 and Cabinet Secretary Gillian Martin’s response starting on p84) and also in the official report of the continued debate on 10 December 2025 (starting at the bottom of page 124). Both reports are provided below: OfficialReport RAIC 19Nov2025 NatEnvBill Stage 2Download OfficialReport RAIC 10Dec2025 NatEnvBill Stage 2Download The Government’s amendment was pressed, as were Rachael Hamilton’s three counter amendments, and the votes went as follows: Amendments #35a, 35b and 335 in the name of Rachael Hamilton were all defeated by seven votes to two (the two Conservatives on the Committee, Finlay Carson & Tim Eagle the only ones to support the amendments). Amendment 35 in the name of Jim Fairlie was agreed by seven votes to two (the two Conservative MSPs being the only ones opposed to it). This all looks promising, assuming the Bill will progress without further new amendments at Stage 3 to sabotage progress again, although even if there are, they’re unlikely to pass given the entire Parliament can vote at Stage 3, rather than just a small cross-party committee, and the Conservatives simply don’t have anywhere near sufficient numbers to push this through against a Government-led amendment that also has the support of the Greens, Labour and Lib Dems. Good. The Scottish Government deserves credit for acting to close the loophole but massive credit also to Scottish Green Mark Ruskell MSP for holding the SNP’s feet to the fire. It won’t be the end of the story though. As I blogged in November, the effective implementation of the amended legislation will still rely heavily on NatureScot standing up to the powerful landowning lobby, who I have no doubt will try every trick in the book to avoid licence revocations when the inevitable raptor persecution crimes and other ‘relevant offences’ are uncovered on grouse shooting estates. NatureScot’s track record is not at all convincing on this (e.g. see here, here, here, here, here and here for a few examples of many). In the short term, the ineffectiveness of the licensing scheme would be frustrating if the wildlife killers were still getting away with their crimes. But in the longer term, if licensing is shown to be ineffective, as many of us think it will be, then the Scottish Government will only have one option left – a complete ban on all grouse shooting. ### Share this: * Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook * Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X * Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit * Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn * Click to share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky *

Planning lots of New Year’s revolutions? Make them less about mileage, and more about the experience you're having on two wheels, says VecchioJo

Exclusive: British students will be able to participate in EU-wide scheme from January 2027, sources say

WOMAD Festival debuts in Glasgow at Kelvingrove Park, July 2026, bringing global music, arts, dance, workshops and street food.

Iceland joins Spain, Ireland, Slovenia and the Netherlands in saying it will boycott the 2026 contest.