Tim Bonner: United Utilities shaken by growing shoot ban backlash

Those of you who have written to United Utilities’ (UU) Chief Executive, Louise Beardmore, about its ridiculous decision to ban game shooting on its land may have received an email from UU yesterday. The language of that email is noticeably different from the bullish line Ms Beardmore took a couple of weeks ago when she said that she could “confirm that we will not issue any new shooting leases as United Utilities as we go forward”. UU has clearly been shaken by the response to that announcement which has included critical national press coverage, over 6,000 emails from you and a meeting with our colleagues at BASC.

In yesterday’s email, UU said that it would “work with local communities affected and each licence holder to fully understand the impact of any proposal, to ensure we minimise the impact on livelihoods and maximise the opportunities available”. However, whilst the language has undoubtedly changed, UU’s policy has not and placatory words from the same PR machine which originally promoted UU’s ban on game shoots to divert from its terrible environmental record will not save the job of a single keeper.
 
What UU’s change of tone does tell us, however, is that it is worried. It assumed that its announcement would create a short period of not wholly negative media interest, which would distract from stories about its appalling record of pumping sewage into our rivers, and that within a few weeks game shooting on UU land would be forgotten. That was a significant miscalculation. It completely failed to understand the determination of the rural community and the effectiveness of the Alliance and our partner organisations.
 
Our message to UU is that you have not seen anything yet. The ‘Glorious Twelfth’ is the perfect opportunity to highlight the environmental and cultural vandalism of banning an activity which delivers so much in terms of environmental, social and economic benefit, something we will be doing this year, but also for as long as UU maintains its anti-shooting policy.
 
With perfect timing the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust published a new peer-reviewed study this week which shows that curlew breed four times more successfully on grouse moors than on unmanaged moorland. If UU is determined to continue with its current policy and halt the management that species like curlew rely on it will have to answer for the decline in biodiversity that is bound to result.
 
Beyond the environmental impact of closing both upland and lowland shoots, UU also faces very serious challenges in its future relationship with farmers and other landowners. For a utility company which relies heavily on access on to other people’s land, UU’s decision to alienate a very significant section of the rural community is short-sighted in the least. UU has rights of access for much of its work, but landowners have rights too, and UU should not underestimate the anger its decision has created. A campaign of non-cooperation could create as many practical problems for UU as the reputational ones it is already wrestling with.
 
UU will be relying on tactical advice from crisis communications consultants about mitigating the damage of this row and deflecting onto whichever issue it can find to try to fill some headlines next. Our message is that this is not a time for playing games, that is what got UU into this mess in the first place. This is actually the moment to make a proper strategic decision that legal activities which bring multiple benefits and do not impact on UU’s primary function as a water supplier should be allowed on its land. Of course, any such activity should be carefully conditioned and properly carried out, but if UU cannot agree that principle it is in for a long and unpleasant ride.

There's still time to stand with us in the fight against United Utilities' irrational decision to ban shooting. Sign our e-lobby now!