Archivos de registro de formato binario

As the researcher had never been involved in DGS, the first step entailed developing an understanding of the history, context and practice of DGS, as detailed in section 3.1 of Chapter 3. Online resources were limited or of commercial nature, with only one relevant journal article being sourced (Martin, 2011), therefore two books were acquired for this purpose:

• The Big Shots, Edwardian Shooting Parties by J Garnier Ruffer (1978)

• Game Shooting: An Illustrated History by D S D. Jones (2015)

A selection of information leaflets provided by the British Association Shooting and Conservation (BASC) proved useful in gaining an understanding of the sport as it stands today (British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC), 2009; British Association for Shooting & Conservation (BASC), 2010, 2011). Utilising the key words ‘Driven Game Shooting’

and ‘shooting social impacts’ the Northampton Electronic Library Online (NELSON) service did not provide any results but a subsequent search of Google and Google Scholar revealed three key reports: an exploration of the personal value of shooting and two reports reviewing the economic, environmental, and social benefits of shooting sports in the UK overall and in Exmoor, all funded by the shooting industry (Public and Corporate Economic Consultants (PACEC), 2012, 2014a; British Association for Shooting & Conservation (BASC), 2016). The researcher also sourced a review of one of these reports, along with an earlier report by the same authors, sponsored by the League Against Cruel Sports, which disagreed with the interpretation of the data and the statistical extrapolations regarding financial benefits (Cormack & Rotherham, 2014). This highlights an issue of bias within this contentious

111

research area where opposing voices in an argument can manipulate statistics to suit their argument. During the review period, National Resources Wales (NRW) was completing a consultation into shooting over its land. This evaluation provided several resources for research (Committee of Inquiry into Hunting with Dogs, 1999; Ward, 1999; Milbourne, 2003;

Bicknell et al., 2010; Callegari et al., 2014; Lead Ammunition Group, 2015)

A search using NELSON revealed only three articles relating to the rural identity and the sociological aspects of shooting, one of which was co-authored by an Dr S Hillyard, who was co-author of the NRW consultation evidence evaluation (Heley, 2010, 2011; Hillyard and Burridge, 2012). The economic impacts of shooting, which had been explored in depth by both the NRW consultation and the previous shooting industry funded reports, were reviewed and linked to social capital and the social determinants of health where applicable as summarised in Chapter 3 section 3.5.

The lack of game shooting research papers led to the researcher reviewing earlier works via the reference lists of identified studies and searches on the key works of authors. This led to the discovery of what appears to be the last, independent, unbiased study involving game shooting which published a number of reports as part of an ESRC study looking into game management and property rights: implications for the rural economy and social relations (Cox et al., 1996; Cox, Watkins and Winter, 1996a, 1996b).

There is a large body of research into the environmental impacts of DGS, some of which has been carried out by the GWCT. The 245 research papers listed on their website for 2012 to 2017 were reviewed, revealing an initial 12 key papers of significance specifically relating to land management for DGS. To ensure that no potential negative impacts were missed and bias was minimised, the researcher also checked the RSPB and the League Against Cruel Sports websites to identify any themes around environmental impacts that may not have been identified, sourcing any academic works referred to and reading them directly for the purposes of the study. Environmental impact areas reviewed included countryside

112

management and biodiversity (European Commission, 2004; Sage et al., 2009, 2018; British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC), 2009, 2018c; Bicknell et al., 2010; Defra, 2011; Martin, 2011; British Association for Shooting & Conservation (BASC), 2011; Draycott, 2012; Draycott et al., 2012; Ewald, Potts and Aebischer, 2012; Callegari et al., 2014; Cormack

& Rotherham, 2014; Baines et al., 2014; Public and Corporate Economic Consultants (PACEC), 2014a; White et al., 2014; Wolton et al., 2014; British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC) and Natural England, 2015; Gethings, Sage and Leather, 2015; Glaister, 2015; National Trust, 2015; Neumann et al., 2015; Sánchez-García, Buner and Aebischer, 2015; Whiteside, Sage and Madden, 2015; Gethings et al., 2016; Aebischer et al., 2017;

Ludwig et al., 2017; Morante-Filho and Faria, 2017; P. A. Robertson et al., 2017; Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), 2017, 2018a; Scottish Government, 2017; British Game Alliance, 2018; Avery, 2018; Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust (GWCT), 2018, 2020d;

BASC et al., 2018; Starkey, 2018a, 2018b; Stephens, 2018; Aebischer, 2019; Capstick et al., 2019; Capstick, Sage and Hoodless, 2019; Grouse Moor Management Review Group, 2019;

Langholm Moor Project Demonstration Board, 2019; Pringle et al., 2019; Birdlife International, 2019; UK Government, 2020a, 2020b; Wild Justice, 2020), lead ammunition (Quy, 2010; Pain et al., 2010; Shooting Times, 2013; Trinogga et al., 2013; Ares and Baker, 2015; Swift, 2015; Food Standards Agency (FSA), 2015; Lead Ammunition Group, 2015;

Department of Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), 2016; Kanstrup et al., 2016;

European Commission, 2018; National Health Service (NHS), 2018a; British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC), 2019; Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust (GWCT), 2020c), heather burning, flooding and climate change (Ewald et al., 2010; Murray C Grant et al., 2012b; Baines et al., 2014; University of Leeds, 2014; Fletcher, Newborn and Baines, 2014;

Lester, 2014; Defra, EAFRD and Natural England, 2016; G. S. Robertson et al., 2017; Ludwig et al., 2017; BBC, 2018a; Oxford Dictionary, 2018a; North York Moors National Park, 2018), soil quality (Crotty and Stoate, 2017; Reynolds et al., 2017) and anti-microbial resistance (Davies, 2011; Department of Health and Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, 2013;

Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA) Avian Expert Group, 2015; BASC et al., 2018).

Shooting birds for sport is a controversial topic and is often in the news, therefore, a number of magazine and newspaper articles, predominantly on websites, were reviewed (Lester,

113

2014; Glaister, 2015; Milmo, 2015; Knapton, 2017; BBC, 2018b; Blackmore, 2018; Starkey, 2018a, 2018b; Stephens, 2018; Bodkin, 2018; British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC), 2018a; Smart, 2018; Forgrave, 2019). After initial scoping visits the researcher returned home and used web searches to identify any particular press stories identified by participants, referring back to source academic research papers where applicable. The researcher also signed up for a number of newsletters including Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust (GWCT), Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), GunsOnPegs (a shooting industry website) and the Countryside Alliance to keep abreast of developments that would be of interest, again finding the source reports where applicable to ensure risk of bias was minimised. The websites of the RSPB and National Trust were also utilised to ascertain their policies on shooting which are explored in Chapter 3.