Survey responses (4)

Over the Easter period we’ll post five short summaries of the responses – just for interest really.

This is the first instalment.

We asked you:

These are difficult figures to compare with UK averages but it is fairly clear that Wild Justice newsletter subscribers are likely to eat less meat than the national average.

When asked whether wildlife, the environment or animal welfare was their main concern (a difficult choice) our newsletter subscribers narrowly opted for wildlife conservation.

How does Wild Justice make you feel (just 10 comments to illustrate the range)?:

  1. I was really pleased when I heard of the formation of Wild Justice. I have in the past been on many demos/marches./protests in respect of how animals are treated. Wild Justice is using a different approach and one which I believe is making a difference. When so much is weighted against kindness and compassion for animals ie loss of habitat due to intensive development type housing , factory farming, destruction of our wildlife such as badgers, Wildlife Justice gives me hope.
  2. Excellent that you can challenge through the legal system where other charitable organisation cannot or will not. It’s interesting to read the views of the likes of Countryside Alliance who tie themselves in knots trying to ridicule what you say.
  3. Please keep up the good work! Yoiu are taking action where it is needed.
  4. I had to put I live outside the UK. I live in the Isle of Man which is the British Isles. Home to a thriving population of hen harriers whose young migrate from the island and tend to get shot/poisoned or trapped in Scotland and the Lake district. I support wild justice because it is logical in its approach, open minded and inclusive in ways the organisations I did not tick in question 5 are not.
  5. Thanks for all you are doing – you fit a campaign niche that is vital to our future countryside.
  6. Your straightforward attitude is proving to be very effective as evidenced by the significant influence your interventions and challenges are already having on government and organisations. You can be proud of your successes which are sure to increase with time. I am proud to have the opportunity to be a small part of you.
  7. So happy you exist; I’m 83, not very active now and very deaf, but Nature + same on TV and my garden gives me all I need to make me happy, though I could do without the many parakeets (which I CAN hear) and feral pigeons which consume most of the food I put out. Any advice there gratefully accepted!! Good luck and keep on the good work.
  8. So proud that you stand up for the wildlife that have no voice!
  9. I think what you are doing is amazing- it is so interesting to realise that using legal challenges is making more difference (I think) to protection of wildlife than decades of conservation attempts. I think the RSPB are genuine, and it is excellent that many species are more numerous due to their work, and big projects like rat-removal on Tristan de Cuna are surely important – but at the same time where I live in Edinburgh/Lothians, whenever there is a new house development e.g. near Roslin, huge hedges still get torn out regardless of protests, and in hills south of Edinburgh there is still hardly any wildlife..and when I read the wording of the challenges or judge’s response to the gamebird/ shooting licenses I was amazed at the gaps and vague sections. I feel sure it is the same situation as women’s rights and the law – yes there was much progress and sea changes in attitudes from 1900-the 1970s- but in 1970 my friends mum still couldn’t get a mortgage on her own – it had to be in her husband’s name. That only actually changed after it became illegal to discriminate in that way. I spent my youth hating passing building sites, because of the ubiquitous unpleasant calls from male builders – it didn’t matter if you answered or ignored – nothing made a difference – we were just expected to “put up with it”. But suddenly when there are legal frameworks that define “considerate constructors” – impacting contracts – they don’t do it(because they are not allowed to)! I know a person may not change inside, but it’s been jolly nice for me… So that’s what effect I think you are having, in a way. I don’t know if it’s a coincidence, but I am following the Scottish Creel fishermen’s legal challenge against the Scottish Government not properly considering application for 3-mile limit on dredging. I also saw news of a coastal group in Sussex getting a dredging ban in an area (not sure of all details ) by citing a bye-law (I think)- where decades of scientific reports have failed. I wonder if your work inspires those groups? My problem at the moment is I literally have almost no money – I am studying, having given up my job to return to university – so I’m not a very useful supporter at the moment where finance is concerned. But I do fill out some of the surveys/ consultation responses you suggest. I am not on twitter so can’t comment. But I can tell you I like your writing style, often I look forward to getting your newsletters because the sarky comments on misinformation etc make me laugh!
  10. Well done to a dedicated team willing to fight to protect wildlife and the environment.