Kes

Funny you should say that .

David, you remember the thread a long time ago where we talked about Greylag Geese ? Well I do and this is a reference to that. Your reference to the mods getting tired is worrying, is it a request? Check the thread where we discussed what might happen to GL Geese if they were put on the GL and look above. Why would I lay anything 'at your door' that was not correct. Either you are unduly concerned, or your memory needs a wash and brush up. For correctnesses sake you wre taking about people respecting geese that were put on the GL. Maybe you can now recognise my, and others concerns at that time?

If you value your 'sport' and value other people shooting for years to come then you will act responsibly and read the GL. Canada's may be a non-native species and on the GL and therefore not protected but they are a part of the countryside and whilst their numbers may need to be controlled now and then in a particular area or crop we are not intending to exterminate them. Be real about this - they are not 'vermin' they are occasionally a problem for crops and need to be managed but all the time they are a beautiful, wild and thoroughly wonderful goose. Listen to them calling and compare them to rats and realise the difference. DavidBASC, you were wrong - fairly obviously here.

I've had it done twice on the same knee. The most recent about a week ago. It involves a general anesthetic and a local one in the knee or shoulder. Arthroscopy involves a relatively small tube and in my case they trimmed some cartilage, in your case it looks like they are 'browsing'. The affected joint is initally pumped up a touch with sterile fluid to give a bit of 'wriggle room' and in my case it took about an hour. The first time (15 years ago) I was in overnight and the knee had a drain, which was removed the following day - no problem at all. This time they were tidying it up as I'd had stiffness and a bit of discomfort after walking (beating) 5 or 6 miles. I went in at 7.30, was prepped for the procedure at 8.00 and collected at 2.00 pm after being cleared of drowsiness after the anesthetic. I was walking immediately. A big bandage on the knee to protect it which I took off when home. Plasters over the entry and drain holes (remember saline solution) for 7 days and that was it. The knee is better than the one which has had no surgery and I'd happily do it again. All I can say is, question your surgeon so you know he's up to the job and go for it - I can say that, apart for a swollen knee for 2/3 days it was back to normal almost immediately. Good Luck. I hope and expect your problem will be resolved an hour after you go under. Let me know !

It is always worth reading the General Licence and see what you are 'required' to do before shooting, since you may be asked.

www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/peter-oborne/why-i-have-resigned-from-telegraph I found this article disturbing because its credible. There are many parallels and I wonder if the values we used to cherish (and which this guy still has) have been sacrificed for money, or maybe influence ?

Trade your old one in and get a pulsar n870 (with in-built rangefinder - the only one to do this). At least, I'm hoping thats part of the answer, since I have just done it ! Woodies tend to fly without lights as well - walk through a wood and they'll take off in pitch black.

Thank you all, I will have a go and see what I can achieve. I'll take a few pics before and after and post them if it looks like an improvement !

I am after a little advice. I would appreciate an 'idiots guide' to ironing out stock blemishes where these are due to knocks - the gun isnt very expensive - an old Parker Hale as a 'starter' gun but I'd like it to look its best and will refurb it for the next person. Can anyone provide a simple step guide to how to do this, temperature? just steam, contact / no contact. etc. Thanks,

Probably but you get the drift.

I would suggest this too as there is a full 5 year warranty on all parts and you will pay maybe £35K max for an absolute top of the range. I have had Hyundai for 10 years and will be getting my new one soon. Fuel wise they do maybe 35 on average, not too bad. Certainly worth a look at least.

I would be very happy with that statement without the prejudicial four words at the end of it. Would you call Peter Osborne (Telegraph), the Hacked Off campaign, the usual suspects. I know I dont have to visit by the way.

My view would be that the debate is fair, since the CA's CE's comment that this all goes back 5 years to when JS was CE at BASC. To me that means that unless BASC distances itself completely from JS and his views and calls for the LAG to be disbanded or re-Chaired, there still appears to be some historic connection which has not been severed. C. Graffius attends FACE for BASC does he not, JS is treasurer I believe (from linkedin) - perhaps some comment here might be relevant? I wont talk about other aspects of F.A.C.E. It is also interesting that CA's experts see no relevant data in the LAG papers to justify a ban, so where, when he was CE of BASC, did JS get converted to the views of the WWT and RSPB ? Even DEFRA have commented on JS's leaks but not BASC. I havent seen anything coming back on that, or have I missed it? Can no-one bottom why this happened, went unnoticed, is being allowed to continue - I feel sure many orgs members feel heartened by their org's stances, some wont be.

I think you may find they dont - its interesting that the CA comment I posted confirms "leaked Wildlife and Wetland Trust documents have revealed exactly how extensive that campaign is, were set on their conclusions before LAG was even formed as, it now seems, was its Chairman. This comment alone suggests that, although ridiculed for it Gunsmoke has been correct. If this statement is true and I have no evidence to suggest it isnt, then JS was fixed in his views, now revealed, whilst CE of BASC. You tell me how BASC can fight a ban realistically when its CE was 'set on his conclusions before the LAG was formed'. I am afraid all that follows will be damage limitation in one form or another. BASC is a business - it will treat this as a 'setback', its easy however to see it as a betrayal by the organisation which still says 'no evidence-no ban' - shame the former CE wasnt 'on-message'.

David, I was going to reply to an earlier post but it is obviously pointless, since I do not know the circumstances you cannot reveal. However, I have read the full post on Shooting UK and it does seem that the applicant was never told the real reason for the possible refusal. The reasons given have been debated and a large number of other people agree he should not have compromised on the reasons he was given at the start i.e. lack of experience etc. If there is reason to compromise then I dont see it, because, perhaps, its confidential. On the facts presented he should NOT have to compromise. For me therefore the answer to your question is no and he would have been grated an SGC. If something else forms a legitimate reason for refusal then the law should be upheld. I would not trust the police in this case to make a valid judgement - I apparently do not know all the facts. I also suspect BASC would not have become involved if he didnt have a strong case - the question is perhaps best directed to BASC - why now do you believe compromise is in your members best interests ?