Our new report looks into ethics considerations for people wanting to purchase binoculars and other similar equipment.
5th March 2025
Since 2016, we have been publishing three Shooting Wildlife reports. Each has examined the ethics of optics companies; including their links with sports hunting, arms, and military sectors.
'Beyond Specs: the ethics of the optics industry' offers an updated fourth report and expands the scope of the research to consider a wider range of ethical issues, reflecting our commitment to supplying consumers with independent, comparative information that goes beyond technical specifications. It offers a response to the question “what does it mean to be an ethical wildlife watcher in a time of ecological collapse?”
This buying guide encourages customers to include ethical considerations in their purchasing decisions, expanding how we think about ‘quality’ and what makes a good pair of binoculars.
Sport optics, such as binoculars, spotting scopes and monoculars, are used by many wildlife watchers.
They are also essential pieces of equipment for conservationists, hunters and military personnel, as are rifle sights and optical rangefinders.
The report found that the majority of the UK's leading binocular and optics brands are failing to adequately address the climate crisis despite a quarter of the UK's breeding birds being negatively impacted by the warming climate.
In this report we encourage nature enthusiasts to take into account ethical considerations when buying sport optics, changing how we think about what makes a high quality pair of binoculars.
Instead of recommending optics for their magnification and light-gathering power, this guide gives wildlife watchers the information they need to choose brands that are considerate of wildlife, people and our planet.
The research findings can be grouped together under some of our key rating categories used for this equipment.
Changing marketing strategies: Our research found that many companies have removed or toned down hunting text and imagery in favour of wildlife watching or portray hunting as a glamorous and adventurous lifestyle.
Sports hunting links: The majority of optics companies continue to sell hunting-related products. However, there has been a slight increase in companies distancing themselves from sports hunting.
Arms and military links: Since our last report in 2020, the number of companies without military connections has increased.
Environmental impact: The optics sector largely scored poorly in our environmental practices category, with two-thirds of companies taking no meaningful actions to reduce their environmental footprint.
Climate: Overall, the sector did not report adequately on its climate impact and actions. Two-thirds of companies lacked detailed discussions on emissions reductions.
Workers: The industry scored poorly on workers’ rights, with only six companies achieving a score above zero.
Tax conduct: Ten companies scored zero in this category. The greater majority of companies owned subsidiaries based in tax havens.
Company ethos: The ethos rating revealed that no companies had adopted positive practices such as employee ownership.
Our convenient consumer shopping guide based on the report gives you:
Visit our consumer shopping guide on binoculars and optics to read the analysis.
You can also download the Beyond Specs report (100 pages, pdf) which has full company profiles for the brands in the report and detailed discussion of the topics involved.
This report is an update to the Shooting Wildlife series of reports, published in 2016, 2018 and 2020.
It was conducted by Shanta Bhavnani, Anna Clayton, Louisa Gould, and Marlous Veldt at ECRA.
The report was funded by Lush Cosmetics.