Is the 'gamekeeper' a thing of the past?

Recent research by BASC revealed that gamekeepers have been subjected to an increasing amount of abuse, both online and in real life. Shooting, stalking and other country pursuits have been coming under increasing attack in the media over the last few years, with ‘keepers, and by extension shooting the entire shooting community, characterised as persecutors of everything from raptors to feral cats, while the valuable conservation work carried out by shoots and shoot employees is glossed over or dismissed.

Does 'gamekeeper' undervalue their hard work?

As such, the term gamekeeper has become something of a loaded term, with lots of negative connotations in the eyes of the public, or more importantly, newspaper editors. “Gamekeepers accused of x” or “Raptor goes missing over grouse moor” are compelling headlines. Attempts by shooting organisations to draw attention to the positive impacts of managing land for shooting and stalking rarely cut through this. As the saying goes: “never let the facts stand in the way of a good story.”

But perhaps part of the problem is that the term ‘gamekeeper’ doesn’t actually do justice to what these hardworking individuals contribute to the countryside. The uninitiated man or woman on the Clapham Omnibus, whose entire understanding of game shooting is derived from what they read and see in the press, could be forgiven for arriving at the conclusion that managing landscapes for game means “killing predators”, something that the general public finds, at best, distasteful.

The 'keeper is dead, long live the ...

Is it perhaps time that the terms we use more accurately reflect the important contribution that those who manage the countryside for the benefit of wildlife make towards conservation? After all, the days of shoots attempting to rid their patch of every raptor, fox and corvid are long gone, with most seeking a carefully managed, balanced ecosystem. From woodland management and tree planting to supplementary feeding for farmland birds and the cover crops selected with more than just pheasants in mind, there's far more to the job than predator control. You, the well-informed GunsOnPegs reader, don't need me to tell you that, but perhaps the we could spell it out a bit more for the wider public.

It is notable that many of the courses available to young would-be ‘keepers highlight the broader nature of the role, with course titles like “Land and Wildlife Management” (Myerscough) and “Game and Wildlife Management” (Sparsholt) and “Countryside Management” (Harptbury). 

Lewis Steward the 2020 winner of the prestigeous Frank Jenkins Memorial Trophy for aspiring keepers, studied Game Management at Newton Rigg

Wildlife Rangers?

As to what term should replace ‘gamekeeper’... well, that’s up for debate. Perhaps we can look overseas for inspiration. In the more wooded parts of Europe, those who manage game and the landscapes in which it thrives are often referred to as ‘foresters’, but in the largely deforested UK, where most of the land is farmed, the term probably doesn’t apply, and besides, has connotations with the world of commercial forestry for timber. Looking to Africa, the term “professional hunter” has obvious problems. In the USA, game isn’t really managed in the same way, though the Fish and Wildlife Service does have “rangers” which has a nice ring to it. Ranger is also the term used in Africa for members of anti-poaching units.

None of these terms really seem to cut the mustard in terms of describing the unique role of those who manage game and land in the UK. So perhaps we need to refer back to those course titles. The young keepers of tomorrow will hold qualifications in Countryside Management or Land and Wildlife Management. Perhaps combining elements of this with "ranger" might do the trick: Countryside Ranger or Wildlife Ranger seems to maintain some of the romance of 'gamekeeper' and while highlighting the broad range of the role.

While this change in terminology isn’t a silver bullet that will make opposition to shooting disappear overnight, there is no denying that in the eyes of many ‘gamekeeper’ and ‘gamekeeping’ are toxic terms. Using terminology that better reflects the importance of these people in maintaining and promoting healthy ecosystems in our overpopulated and intensively managed landscape could help restore respect and appreciation for their work. Gamekeepers are not obsolete, if anything, their work is more important today then it ever has been, but the role has changed. Long live the Wildlife Ranger.