Jimbo57

There are a number of misconceptions on this thread - probably by Englishmen. ? The Crown "owns" very little Scottish foreshore. The point is that, in Scotland, the Crown holds in trust for the public, a right to resort to the foreshore for recreational purposes, including wildfowling, irrespective of who owns it. That is why we can go wildfowling on foreshore that is owned by the RSPB - such as on the north shore of the Tay estuary and at Skinflatts on the Forth estuary. On LNRs and NNRs, that right is taken away by the reserve byelaws and the managing agency can issue permits to do things (like shooting) which are banned in the byelaws. If SNH lack the resources to adequately manage the reserve, they should pass over the job to an agency that can do it properly. How about a consortium of local wildfowling and conservation clubs and societies? BASC must be given wholehearted support to fight this impending injustice. In-fighting between BASC members and BASC detractors will merely hasten the demise of wildfowling.

Jeff Harrison had the death many wildfowlers would envy. He died from a heart attack when coming off the marsh after morning flight on 1st September Nineteen Oatcake.

Just picked up this book on Amazon. Wish I'd found it years ago. It is not very thick but it cuts out all the **** you see in other books. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Gundog-Training-Made-Easy-Begbie/dp/1411670299/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1447345093&sr=8-1&keywords=gundog+training+made+easy

Just a wee word of warning guys. In this thread a lot of you have described practices which you correctly identify as not being unlawful or illegal. However, do remember that the grant/renewal of SGC can be refused if there is any suggestion that the applicant has acted irresponsibly. Lots of things that are not illegal might nevertheless be considered to be irresponsible. If the police took such a view about anything you have done, you might then find it awkward or expensive to contest it in Court (and if an official at BASC considered it to be irresponsible, you wouldn't expect BASC to help you).

Laird Lugton - Bathgate now. No the prettiest bit o the Lothians but handy for the motorways. Used to be Ratho. Vulpicide - The byelaws authorise the conditions of the permit which every permit holder agrees to when the apply for a permit. So it has the fuill force of the law. Max fine is £100 for breaking a byelaw (plus any addition if a national law is also being broken - like if actually shooting with lead shot on the foreshore) and the permit would be automatially revoked. If the police had to be called by the warden, it would also almost certainly lead to the offender losing his shotgun certificate. So no worth taking the risk.

Lidl will have pvc chesties in stock from Monday at £9.95 a pair

It's no just East Lothian residents that get automatic permits . Folk living in any of the Lothians - east, mid or west get them without limit. Apart from that there areb 100 allocated for non-residents. It can be good wildfowling, especially in January, but don't expect big bags. The last wardens report I saw showed 0.8 birds per fowler per day. Mainly wigeon but also a few pinks and some resident canadas and greys that usually get wiped out by the local on the first day of the season. On the other hand it is very easy fowling. The "mud " is only 2 inches deep with firm sand below and you can easily wade the river in chesties at low tide. The wardens do keep a very close watch on it and they have full powers to check permits and shells. Its against the law to even carry lead shot with you.

Got to agree with Mud Patten. If everyone on this Forum who is critical of BASC had voted for wildfowlers in the recent election, then we might not be in the horrendous situation in which we now find ourselves. However there is hope. If every member of PigeonWatch who is also a BASC member writes to Marford Mill (in writing - BASC staff don't have to read internet chat shows) raising an objection to the election of the Chairman as defying all the rules of natural justice, then maybe the NE mole can be tossed out before he emasculates our organisation entirely.

Wildfowling needs better representation. Gundogs are already well represented. BASC has been very successful at defending gundog issues. The most dramatic examples were when the draft anti-hunting bills were going through both the Scottish and UK parliaments, it was only BASC-sponsored amendments that prevented the final legislation effectively banning the use of more than one gundog when roughshooting or beating. The work done by BASC on tail docking is another example where success was obtained in England and should shortly arive in Scotland. In contrast, wildfowlers have seen their guns and cartridges retricted, their quarry species reduced and available fowling land greatly reduced. The "gundog candidate" would have more credibility if he served on BASC's gundog committee for a few years to see just how much BASC already does for gundogs. Wildfowlers have much more urgent needs. Vote for Graham and Jarrett and don't use your third vote.

Control of BASC must be wrested away from the staff and the "establishment" if we want to see real change. If John Graham and Alan Jarret are standing, they will definitely get my votes.

Beware the RSPB. They hate all shooters. They also go loopy about birds of prey because that's what their £-million subscribers like to see, never mind the fact that they kill millions of small birds every year.

Interesting that none of the three correspondents above live in Scotland and therefore know nothing about how and by whom SACS was founded. Insurance is worth about £12 a year. What do you get for the rest of your subs? If all you want is insurance, pay the £12 to get it added to your household policy. If you want to protect your shooting, then join an Association that will do that.

We all know that all lead ammunition is going to be banned sooner or later anyway. Just like lead in petrol and lead in paint. Instead of squandering our subscriptions fighting something that is totally inevitable and, at best might only be delayed by a few years, wouldn't it be better for SACS, BASC, CA and the rest to concentrate on fighting battles that we might actually win. Like opposing licensing of airguns, opposing bans on traps and snares, opposing unrestricted public access to land, restoring tail docking of working gundogs, fighting the proposed ban on decoys or tightening of the general licences for pigeons, etc. etc. We have enough to fight for to save our sport without making fools of ourselves by championing lost causes.

One owl decoy stuck on a fence post will draw crows far more effectively than a dozen crow decoys.

Have you seen the full page ads the Countryside Alliance is publishing in the comics during the past few weeks? It seems that they are trying to divide shooting right down the middle between them (the multi-millionaire public school hooray-henry landowning types) and us (the ordinary guys). One correspondent in Shooting Times this week got it right. They should rename themselves the Countryside Devisive. Another correspondent write that the CA placed their stand at the Game Fair in the best place - as far from the shooting and gamekeeping rows as possible. Looks like their devious plot has been well and truly rumbled. Who needs enemies with "friends" like that. Jim