The Scandi approach

Patrick Laurie returns from Finland with great respect for Nordic curlew conservation, but what can we learn from them?

- Patrick Laurie

Beset by mounting controversy, grouse moor management often seems boxed into a corner by a range of hostile forces. Over the past few years, it has become fashionable for rewilders to present an alternative model for land use in the uplands. They argue that if grousekeepers could only slacken their grip on the hills, nature would rebound in full and splendid glory. This idea gets a surprising amount of traction, particularly since the benefits are almost entirely speculative and imagined. Rewilders can guess at what that transition might look like, but these guesses are often based on models borrowed from Scandinavia and Finland.

It’s fun to realise that while British ecologists hold the Nordic countries in high esteem as an exemplar for the UK, many Nordic ecologists have a very different take on their own home turf. We might perceive their ecosystems to be uniquely pristine or pure, but the reality is far more complex. They have their own fair share of conservation problems too; there are problems with deer and overgrazing in Norway, and while there are wolves, bears and beavers in Sweden, these animals all present thorny issues of their own. When British ecologists express a desire for this country to be “more like Scandinavia”, many Scandinavians wonder why.

Against wider narratives of decline and collapse in the UK, curlew that breed on grouse moors seem to go from strength to strength. The link between curlew and grouse moors is so strong, it’s reasonable to be concerned that if grouse moors are abolished, curlew will suffer.