Article appeared on the front page             home

 
Saboteurs risking life at game shoots      

ANTI-blood sports campaigners who are targeting East Anglian shoots on an
unprecedented scale are risking their lives.

Police fear a surge in saboteur activity at game shoots across Suffolk and
Essex could lead to a shotgun tragedy, while landowners and gamekeepers
claim it is another blow for the rural way of life.

They said protesters who believe they have already won the battle against
fox hunting are now moving on to shooting.

But anti-blood sports organisations defended the rights of protesters to
campaign peacefully against cruelty of all kinds and insist saboteurs do
not put themselves in danger.

Sgt Paul Cooper, who co-ordinates police response to the demonstrations
in Suffolk – which have hit shoots near Stowmarket, Bury St Edmunds and
Sudbury, said he had never experienced protests on such a scale.

"During the weekends in November and December we were getting a shoot a
week targeted by between six and 12 protesters.

"There were no shoots hit like this in Suffolk last season so this does
represent a serious increase."

Sgt Cooper praised shooters for their swift reactions to danger but believes
someone will be shot and possibly killed.

"This is far more dangerous than the demonstrations we encounter at hunt
meetings. It wouldn't surprise me to see someone shot accidentally before
long because with firearms there is always the element of danger no matter
how careful people are," he said.

"The shooters have been very responsible – breaking their guns and unloading
at the first sign of a protest – but sometimes they don't always see them,
they are well hidden.

"It could be disastrous if they remained like that and a shot went off.
I think if hunting is banned and this sort of protest becomes more common
someone will be killed or seriously injured."

Jeffrey Olsted, of the British Association for Shooting and Conservation,
said shooting was one of the safest sports in the country but warned: "There
is always a risk of a saboteur doing something stupid and putting themselves
in danger.

"These people are often wearing balaclavas and camouflage gear so shooters
may not know they are there."

He added any threats to shooting would jeopardise the hundreds of millions
of pounds it puts into the economy every year, and claimed it provides 26,
000 full time jobs and a further 13,000 indirect jobs, and preserves habitats
for wildlife to thrive in.

Simon Wallis, who runs Suffolk's branch of the Campaign for Shooting, said
the 250 organised shoots in the county, as well as hundreds more run by
farmers on a smaller scale, were "extremely concerned" by the rise in demonstrations.

"These people are disrupting something which has been enjoyed here for hundreds
of years," he said.

Graham Bendall, co-ordinator of the Campaign for Shooting in Essex, claimed
demonstrators had been in action at a shoot near Colchester and the self-
employed gamekeeper, who runs his own shoot, believes protests could escalate.

"It may be the lack of hunting which spurred them to try shoots but they
could get a taste for it and carry on and if there is a ban on hunting there
has always been the implied threat that shooting would be the next target.

"There are four hunts in Essex but I'm aware of over 300 shoots large and
small – so if these protests became widespread we would have a problem.
But we wouldn't let them close us down – it would give them a victory they
don't deserve."

He said there was widespread public sympathy for rural pursuits and the
latest action would be seen as a fresh blow for the countryside just as
it begins to pick itself up from the foot-and-mouth crisis.

However, Nathan Brown, press officer for the Hunt Saboteurs Association,
said shooting was in the same cruelty league as hunting. He was aware of
the increased activity of protesters in Suffolk and Essex, but dismissed
claims the recent protests represented yet another attack on rural life.

"We say the shooting of birds to provide amusement is as wrong as the chasing
and killing of a fox.

"As far as we're concerned we will take non-violent direct action to prevent
these blood sports being carried out. We are also very visible – we don't
hide away to protest.

"It's protecting rural wildlife. Wherever there are blood sports there will
be protests. And to claim shooting is good for wildlife depends on how you
look at it. Destroying wildlife is not how we see conservation."

By James Mortlock                                        

home