Fighting Fires, Saving Birds, Sustaining Jobs: The Real Picture of Grouse Moor Management

Britain’s grouse moors are often painted in stark terms, celebrated by some, condemned by others. But the truth is far more complex. These landscapes are not just sporting grounds; they are sanctuaries for threatened birds, economic lifelines for remote communities, and frontlines in the fight against wildfires.

Grouse moors are critical sanctuaries for some of Britain's most threatened birds

Land managed for red grouse has become an indispensable sanctuary for many of Britain's most threatened species. This is especially true for ground-nesting birds, which face immense pressure from habitat loss and predation elsewhere.

On grouse moors, a comprehensive management package that includes habitat enhancement and legal predator control creates conditions where these birds can thrive. Threatened species like the curlew, golden plover, and lapwing are not only more numerous but also breed more successfully here than on other moorland.

The data is striking. The distribution map of breeding curlew in the UK shows an "almost mirror image" correlation with the distribution of grouse moors. One major study found twice as many waders on grouse moors compared to non-grouse moors, with the red-listed curlew occurring four times more frequently.

It's estimated that English grouse moors alone host approximately 53% of the entire UK curlew population. This has led many conservationists to a difficult but pragmatic conclusion.

"...conservationists must choose between gamekeepers with curlew or no gamekeepers with no curlew." - Mary Colwell, founder of Curlew Action

This symbiotic relationship challenges the simple narrative that shooting is inherently at odds with conservation. In the UK's uplands, the reality is far more complex and interdependent.

The modern gamekeeper is a firefighter, conservationist, and community warden

The title ‘gamekeeper’ is misleadingly simple. It evokes a narrow role focused solely on preparing for shoot days, but the reality of the modern upland keeper is a multi-faceted, year-round commitment that extends far beyond game. Even in years when poor weather or disease means no shooting can take place, their work continues.

A survey of 58 English grouse moors, published in a 2025 report by the Regional Moorland Groups and National Gamekeepers’ Organisation, revealed a job description that looks more like a blend of several distinct professions:

• Conservation Manager: Gamekeepers are on the front line of habitat management. On those 58 surveyed moors alone, an area bigger than the county of Middlesex has been improved since 2021 through activities like peat restoration, rewetting moorland, and managing invasive bracken.

• Expert Firefighter: Recognized by the Fire & Rescue Service for their specialist knowledge, gamekeepers are crucial in preventing and fighting wildfires. By managing fuel loads and creating firebreaks, they reduce the risk of catastrophic fires. When a wildfire does break out, they are often the first on the scene with specialist equipment and an intimate knowledge of the terrain.

• Community Warden & First Responder: As a constant presence on the moors, keepers maintain paths and tracks for public access and are a vital safety resource. In just one year, keepers on the 58 surveyed moors helped members of the public in distress over 1,500 times, assisting with everything from getting lost to suffering medical emergencies.

• Educator: Breaking down the isolation of their work, keepers host hundreds of visits annually for schools, conservation bodies, and policymakers to explain the complex work involved in managing the uplands.

This commitment to public service and environmental stewardship comes at a significant personal cost. The survey revealed the shocking statistic that, on average, an upland gamekeeper is physically assaulted every 12 days while carrying out their lawful job. This reality of a diverse, demanding, and dangerous profession contrasts sharply with the narrow and often negative public perception.

Gamekeepers fight fire with fire, using controlled burns to prevent disasters

The sight of smoke rising from the moors is one of the most visually arresting and controversial aspects of their management. Heather burning is often condemned as an act of environmental destruction, but for land managers and a growing number of wildfire experts, it is precisely the opposite: a vital tool for preventing catastrophe.

The key is the difference between a controlled "cool burn" and a wildfire. A cool burn is a quick, carefully managed fire, carried out in damp conditions, that burns only the dry surface vegetation. The underlying peat soil remains cool and undamaged. A wildfire, by contrast, is an uncontrolled inferno that can ignite the peat itself, releasing vast stores of carbon and destroying the habitat for decades.

The primary modern purpose of controlled burning is to reduce the "fuel load" of old, woody heather. This creates a mosaic of younger, less flammable vegetation that acts as a firebreak, slowing the progress of wildfires and making them less severe. As the UK's Climate Change Committee has warned, we should expect more fire-conducive weather in the future.

The risks are enormous and the cost of wildfires in 2025 has reached £460 million. For this reason, expert groups like the Future Landscapes Forum state there is no scientific consensus to support a blanket ban on controlled burning.

The central paradox is that a practice widely condemned as environmental vandalism is argued by many land managers and wildfire experts to be the most effective tool we have to protect vast, irreplaceable peatland carbon stores from the far greater devastation of uncontrolled wildfire.

Grouse shooting is a privately funded economic lifeline for some of Britain's most remote areas

Driven grouse shooting is often portrayed as a niche hobby for the wealthy, detached from the realities of rural life. However, evidence shows it is a powerful economic engine that underpins the viability of some of Britain's most remote communities. The investment it brings is almost entirely private, funding work that would otherwise likely fall to taxpayers or charities.

The economic impact is far broader than the shoot itself. A "Six-Order Economic Model" helps illustrate the ripple effect: money spent on shooting supports a huge range of staff, contractors, and local businesses. This model even accounts for third- and fifth-order impacts, such as the estate's role in helping tenant farmers access conservation subsidies or the public health savings from widespread tick and bracken control, costs that would otherwise fall to individuals or the NHS.

A survey of just 58 English moors provided a snapshot of this economic ecosystem:

• In years when shooting occurs, these 58 moors generate approximately £48.7 million of economic activity. This includes over £46.9 million in direct expenditure on contractors and hospitality, plus an additional £1.7 million paid to casual staff like beaters and pickers-up.

• Extrapolated across the 140 moors represented by England's Regional Moorland Groups, the potential annual expenditure is up to £121 million.

• Crucially, this is described as "very high-value tourism" that takes place primarily outside the main summer tourist season, providing a vital source of income for local businesses during quieter months.

This private investment is significant. It not only funds local jobs but also pays for the extensive conservation work, from peat restoration to predator control, that maintains the very landscapes enjoyed by millions of walkers and birdwatchers for free. Without it, a significant funding gap for both community stability and conservation would emerge.

The "predator paradox": controlling some species is vital for helping many others thrive

Predator control is, without question, the most contentious aspect of moorland management. The idea of killing native species like foxes and crows to benefit another is deeply uncomfortable for many. Yet, land managers and conservation scientists argue it is a necessary, if difficult, tool for protecting biodiversity in the uplands.

The central argument is that generalist predators - those that can eat a wide variety of prey - are now "unnaturally abundant" in the landscape. Without legal and targeted control, their numbers can be so high that they prevent vulnerable ground-nesting birds from successfully raising young. This control is not just for the benefit of red grouse; it is a lifeline for many other species.

The evidence for this "predator paradox" is compelling:

• The Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust's landmark Upland Predation Experiment found that with predator control, threatened species like lapwing, golden plover, and curlew bred, on average, three times more successfully.

• This is not a practice exclusive to gamekeepers. Major conservation organizations, including the RSPB and the National Trust, also use predator control where necessary to protect at-risk species on their reserves.

• The benefits can even extend to other predators. A 27-year study found that ground-nesting raptors like hen harriers and merlin had higher successful nesting attempts during periods of grouse moor management, with predation by other, more common predators being their primary cause of breeding failure.

It creates a genuine conservation paradox: to save some of Britain's most beloved native birds from local extinction, land managers, from gamekeepers to the RSPB, must actively control the populations of other, more common, native predators.

A More Complex Countryside

The story of Britain's grouse moors is far more complex and nuanced than the often-simplified narratives of public debate suggest. As the evidence shows, the practice of driven grouse shooting is deeply intertwined with demonstrable conservation successes for some of the nation's most threatened birds, provides a vital economic bedrock for remote communities, and delivers environmental services like wildfire mitigation and landscape maintenance.

This does not erase the controversies, but it does challenge us to see the uplands not as a simple battle between right and wrong, but as a functioning ecosystem with deep-rooted social and economic dependencies. It forces us to ask more difficult and more practical questions.

Given these complex interdependencies, what might be unintentionally lost if this centuries-old management practice were to disappear, and who would be willing, or able, to pay the price to replace it?

📧 Keep Updated on All Moorland Issues - Sign Up For Our FREE Weekly Newsletter.