more attacks on shooting from Chris Packham

[essexfluke]

Just seen this on face book. https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/167410

 

Wont be long before they start one for every type of shooting.

[kody]

His just a piece of dirt on the bottom of a shoe

He will vanished sooner or later just give it time

[ElvisThePelvis]

Quite honestly I think this is a sensible step, if populations are indeed truly declining then they need to be reinforced, surely any conservationist would agree with this sentiment? The important thing is that any census is independent and credible, unlike for example LAG .

[scotslad]

Elvis try readig the other thread started by Basc

[Vince Green]

He just strikes me as a self publicist trying to promote his career

[norfolk dumpling]

He has a genuine mental illness and is obsessive so he won't go away. I just hope he oversteps the mark and BEEB sacks him.

[Savhmr]

He has a genuine mental illness and is obsessive so he won't go away. I just hope he oversteps the mark and BEEB sacks him.

 

Unlikely any time soon I'm afraid. He's not stupid and knows exactly what he's doing. Being in the public eye, also knows the gist of what the shooting community think of him and possibly even what we're saying about him, as he has an obvious interest in celebrity-ism and courting social media. He knows how far he can push things. Sooner or later though, his ego will get the better of him and he may get involved or go some way to inciting the less civilised elements of the anti-group into action. That's a distinct possibility. When that happens, the police, I'm sure, will want a word, and the Beeb will have to sit up and take note. Until then, he'll continue with his ranting.

[panoma1]

The support this guy can get through social media is really worrying, he starts/supports a petition and tens of thousand of people/followers believe him and sign up! They don't realise (care) that they are being duped. How many more times will the largely dishonest, spiteful anti shooting petitions he starts/supports and advocates get a hearing in the House of Commons? How much pressure does this put on the government to do something?

 

Our representative organisations have been taking our money for years now.....lets hope they have got "all their ducks in a row" and are equal to (and better than!) this venomous zealots challenge? Shooting needs leadership like never before!

[CharlieT]

Mr Packham's dream is to see shooting banned and is using every means at his disposal to achieve his wish.

 

In this instance, he is using yet another petition seeking to ban the shooting of a species that is shot in relatively small numbers as part of his campaign to chip away at quarry species.

 

Rather a clever strategy really, if he campaigned for an all out ban on shooting, he would have a hell of a fight on his hands, but by slowly picking off one species at a time he obviously hopes he will slowly achieve his game end plan.

 

It must also be pointed out that he has failed to acknowledge that even the BTO says that further research needs to be done into why numbers are declining and the GCWT, who jointly conducted the survey with the BTO, make no suggestion that Woodcock should be removed from the quarry list and they again say that further research is needed.

 

As I said on another thread, he is a clever, devious and dangerous man.

[Vince Green]

You have to remember that a lot of non quarry birds like sparrows are in rapid decline and that has nothing to do with shooting.

[clakk]

Very dangerous and devious ,just wish he,d stop using disability as an excuse for his excesses .If he truly believes his own lies then he would stand up for them and not have his publicist threatening legal action against any 1 who says he,s wrong.Sorry Mr Packham but we have freedom of speech and most of us don,t agree with the rubbish you spout so man up and shut up

[Harvey Donaldson]

Looking forward to Autumn Watch.

 

HD

[ElvisThePelvis]

Elvis try readig the other thread started by Basc

I see, thanks for the heads up.. perhaps one of our interest groups should to try to engage with this guy and try to get an open debate in the public domain.

 

Or get the Telegraph to conduct a sting, they seem quite good at it!

[Harvey Donaldson]

I wonder where he stands today on falconry? That is as someone who openly admits to robbing a kestrel nest in his teens and going into meltdown when it died some years later. Something that hasn't precluded his adoption of a Senior Post within the RSPB.

 

HD

[scotslad]

I wonder where he stands today on falconry? That is as someone who openly admits to robbing a kestrel nest in his teens and going into meltdown when it died some years later. Something that hasn't precluded his adoption of a Senior Post within the RSPB. HD

 

Despite my opinion on him i think it's a bit harsh to hold things he done as a kid against him.

 

Not sure how old he is but would imagine it was still illegal then but it was a different time in those days and most kids would collect birds eggs if they got a chance, he just took it a bit further.

 

I'd say charlie is right with his daignosis, a clever, devious and dangerous man.

Seems to have almost cult following on social media, the HH petion has ran 3 or 4 times in previous years never getting the desired ammount of signatures, year he is involved it gets them.

Plus on social media its all instant news 'fixes' no one really cares about the facts or even if there is any facts behind it.

 

The antis have got it sussed now, they realise how hard it would be to actually ban/attack shooting head on so are attacking small parts of it wether its grouse shooting now woodcock and no doubt still have lead shot in there sights too.

All shooters now more than ever need to back all forms of shooting

[Penelope]

no doubt still have lead shot in there sights too.

 

In this week's Shooting Times 'Shifty' Swifty says that he will still press on with LAG which has new members from the RSPB.

 

I have tried to find the link on the ST website, but it doesn't appear to be uploaded yet.

Edited September 29, 2016 by Penelope

[Adge Cutler]

I agree with Packham to be honest I don’t shoot any waders, wildfowl or game birds for that matter… cant see the point in it. I shoot pest birds on Defras list as and when I am required to. This will continue as long as it’s legal and there is a requirement to do so. That doesn’t make me an anti… far from it by my very nature I am a conservationist.

 

Grouse shooters, game shooters and wild fowlers can fight their own corner as they please, but in a democratic society if sufficient weight of public numbers demand that statute be changed so be it (fox hunting for example)

 

Would be the same with fishing. As much as I enjoy fishing if I couldn’t go I wouldn’t mither about it for long, just find something else to occupy my time.

 

I don’t quite understand the attitude towards Packham to be honest, some of the comments are extreme to say the least…he’s entitled to his opinion and to campaign for change as a voter as are all of us. At the end of the day Jefferson’s quote has never been so true “The will of the people is the only legitimate foundation of any government, and to protect its free expression should be our first object.”

 

Ive been to several conventions where Packham has spoken, and he does in fact recognise the benefits of proper wildlife management and if you read the petition carefully he’s calling for a moratorium pending independent research not an immediate ban. If that independent research can demonstrate that shooting is not affecting the decline there is nothing to worry about.

 

Rather than alienate (or annihilate as some would) Packham we should be working in collaboration to find a solution. The BBC has put him on a pedestal because he appeals to the absolute majority and that’s an undisputable fact. You never see prime time TV shows about game or pigeon shooting because the audiences would be miniscule.

 

Like I said the will of the people will prevail.

[Woodlander]

Well said Adge Cutler.

I agree,everyone is looking out for their own interests,Packham is looking out for his interests,which are conserving and protecting our dwindling bird populations,the guys that enjoy blasting small birds out of the sky(which are in sharp decline)are looking out for theirs.

I certainly dont feel inclined to put my weight behind the interests of Grouse shooters and the like.

Also,being on the Autistic Spectrum doesn't make someone insane or a figure of ridicule,this forum is a place to air your views,but some views really should be kept to yourself.

[scotslad]

While i totally agree everyone has a right to an opinion, he's delibertily lieing/mis leading others to get them to sign things.

 

I don't for 1 minute think 120k folk really care that much about grouse shooting but because it is so easy to click a button and sign a petion nowadys.I bet 90% of the folk that signed it if u asked them a simple question about it 1 month later they wouldn't have a clue, wouldn't surprise me if many had forgot they signed it.

 

Have u read the basc statement? GWCT have been doing research into woodcock for decades i'm pretty sure the info is already out there

 

Shooting will never be fashionable nowadays, i have no problem with that, at best we should be trying to portray ourselves as a neccesary evil.

If u get ur wish and shooting is banned, who will fund all the conservation work that goes on?

 

Do u really think people will put thousands if not millions of tonnes of feed into feeders scattered over vast areas? Who will pay for cover crops, headland strips, beetle banks, planting new woods, digging new ponds? Who will control the vermin?

Almost all of that will stop

 

 

I'm involved with a couple of wildlife trust/nature reserves and while they are fantastic places with quite a bit of wildlife, very little actually breeds succesfully on them as so much vermin. If it wasn't for birds moving in from neighbouring shooting estates there would be very few birds there.

Many nature resrves are doing more harm than good to wildlfe, attracting birds in only to be ate by others, while that is natural attracting them in makes it all too easy.

 

 

Woodlander which birds on the game list are in sharp decline cuased by shooting? If woodcock were taken of quarry list do u think anyone would manage woodland for them?

Greylag geese were just added to the GL/pest list depite them being amber listed and RSPB/WWT never objected to that, strange? But it also means rspb and wwt do not need to leave a paper trail when their applying to oil/inject and shoot the birds out of season.

 

As for the grouse shooting i really struggle to see wot there is to attack, it is 100% sustainable, shooting a 100% wild 100% native bird that the management protects the heather and moorland in general.

The only other potential land uses are forestry or sheep farming both of which will leave the heather/peat in a poorer state and cost jobs and money out of economy.

[Adge Cutler]

While i totally agree everyone has a right to an opinion, he's delibertily lieing/mis leading others to get them to sign things.

 

 

Is he really though ? Im sure the average adult voter is intelligent enough to make up their own mind ..after all both sets of protagonists lied comprehensively leading up to the Brexit elections, but the population still made up its own mind.. It’s called campaigning.

[FatFreddysCat]

I don't know how they do these bird counts to determine if they are in decline. I would agree that snipe numbers have decreased but on my patch there have been more golden plover in recent years. As for woodcock, you probably wouldn't know that they are there without a gun dog to flush them.

[scotslad]

Is he really though ? Im sure the average adult voter is intelligent enough to make up their own mind ..after all both sets of protagonists lied comprehensively leading up to the Brexit elections, but the population still made up its own mind.. It’s called campaigning.

 

Aye fair play but the problem is how often do the other side get to put there point across??? Thats the problem it an almost completely 1 sided debate and who ever shouts the loudest or has most twitter numpties following them will tend to win

Many people still believe grouse are reeased onto moors after decades of peddaling the lie.

Wot about the biggest mass poisoning of BoP's in scotland? Great initial news, headlines but all went very quet when it looks more and more likely that they accidentally posioned them themselves. They don't care about the truth

There is massive ammount of peer reviewed scientific studies showing the benfits of well amaged game shooting and the habitat work that goes with it.

But t doesnae make good headlines so isn't reported

 

Have u met an average voter?? U have far more faith and confidence in them than i do.

I doubt many ever question anything there told in the average tabloid and very sadly many of the younger generation don't seem to question anything some ****wit celebrity says on twitter.

 

In a previous thread adge u talked about all the wildlife benfits u seen at Allerton? on a farm walk. Do u really think farmers/landowners will continue to do that if it was not for the shooting? I'd guess it will all revert back to other more 'normal' agri land doing just enough to qualify for wot ever agri scheme there in.

Who will fund it all in the future? And its all very well having small isolated nature resrves but that is no goofor most species to survive

Edited September 29, 2016 by scotslad

[wymberley]

I agree with Packham to be honest I don’t shoot any waders, wildfowl or game birds for that matter… cant see the point in it. I shoot pest birds on Defras list as and when I am required to. This will continue as long as it’s legal and there is a requirement to do so. That doesn’t make me an anti… far from it by my very nature I am a conservationist.

 

Grouse shooters, game shooters and wild fowlers can fight their own corner as they please, but in a democratic society if sufficient weight of public numbers demand that statute be changed so be it (fox hunting for example)

 

Would be the same with fishing. As much as I enjoy fishing if I couldn’t go I wouldn’t mither about it for long, just find something else to occupy my time.

 

I don’t quite understand the attitude towards Packham to be honest, some of the comments are extreme to say the least…he’s entitled to his opinion and to campaign for change as a voter as are all of us. At the end of the day Jefferson’s quote has never been so true “The will of the people is the only legitimate foundation of any government, and to protect its free expression should be our first object.”

 

Ive been to several conventions where Packham has spoken, and he does in fact recognise the benefits of proper wildlife management and if you read the petition carefully he’s calling for a moratorium pending independent research not an immediate ban. If that independent research can demonstrate that shooting is not affecting the decline there is nothing to worry about.

 

Rather than alienate (or annihilate as some would) Packham we should be working in collaboration to find a solution. The BBC has put him on a pedestal because he appeals to the absolute majority and that’s an undisputable fact. You never see prime time TV shows about game or pigeon shooting because the audiences would be miniscule.

 

Like I said the will of the people will prevail.

One can't do better in this respect than to quote the BASC's "No Evidence, No Change". I have no objection to any 'anti' who can substantiate their opinion with fact, even if they were to tranfer it to the ballot box. What I will not accept is a given opinion based on lies, half truths or good old fashioned bullpoo. Until these claims can be substantiated and with regard to the above quoted sentence, where mentioned is the Government's prime duty which is to protect the rights of the minority - and in our case in the main a law abiding one?

Perhaps we are fortunate that Packham and his ilk are taking, and concentrating on, the approach that they are/do and thus missing out on the one approach that we would find almost impossible to defend - certainly far more difficult than their current approach - and if which invoked would decimate live quarry shooting in this country at a stroke.

[islandgun]

clearly if a bird is endangered it needs to be protected no one would dispute that, unfortunately it seems that almost all birds are in decline and not from shooting, I think its easier to click enter on a screen than to actually do something practical, packham's ploy of divide and conquer will prevail as is evident by some of the remarks on here

[CharlieT]

It saddens me when so much time, money and effort is ploughed in by shooting organiations, magazines and indeed the shooting community as a whole into demonstrating the benefits game shooting brings to wildlife conservation, that we cannot even get the message across to some within our own sport.

 

Quite how anyone who shoots can be minded not to support Grouse shooting or advocate the suspension of Woodcock shooting without any scientific basis is beyond me.

 

I would think the sensible answer to the Woodcock question would be to wait until the GCWT complete their research rather rely on emotive hype and lobbying from those with an agenda.