TWAG

I will look forward to this and read with interest.

Let's hope that I'm wrong. I would like to hear what David has to say from BASC in the form of a position statement and a commitment.

You may think that this a win it is not we have all lost thousands of acres of shooting. I could be cynical and say that we have been betrayed again by our countryside organisations. 11. European and nationally protected sites a) For protected sites with interest features that include bird species, no action authorised by this licence is permitted to take place within those sites or within 300 metres of the boundary of such site . For the avoidance of doubt, this restriction applies to: (i) all Special Protection Areas (SPAs); (ii) any Ramsar site with Qualifying Features that include bird species; or (iii) any Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) for which a bird species is a feature of special interest. For protected sites with interest features that do not include bird species but do include habitats or flora, no trapping is permitted within the boundary of those sites. For the avoidance of doubt, this restriction applies to: (i) any Special Area of Conservation (SAC) with Qualifying Features that include habitats or flora; or (ii) any Ramsar site with Qualifying Features that include habitats or flora. The restrictions in condition 11(a) and 11(b) do not apply to: (i) Ramsar sites with interest features that are solely animal species which are not birds (for example, only bat interest features); or (ii) any protected site identified on a list that Natural England may subsequently publish should it be satisfied that these restrictions can be removed. If you need to carry out action that would otherwise be permitted by this licence on land excluded on account of the above conditions you will need a consent or assent. This licence is not a consent for the purposes of Part 2 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) in respect to SSSIs. It is your responsibility to get consent or assent if required before this licence can be used on any SSSI.

Every countrymen every sportsman and every shooter now expects BASC to do its duty.

People what you are really talking about here is wounding. The use of any weapon that fires multiple projectiles will never assure a first strike kill. End of story. It doesn't matter whether is a 410 or a punt gun.

Twag is back You you have completely avoided the point I have been making! "In my opinion we as wildfowlers need BASC we simply do not have any other organisation available with the experience staff and infastructure to uphold our sport in these troubled times." Good decisions and policy are made on sound evidence not emotional and passionate beliefs. Please evidence how you came to this conclusion? Twag

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.

Let me put this another way. BASC rides high on the reliance that all its wildfowling members have blind Faith in the organisation and do not question or hold to account the council or staff. they will not leave the organisation which they believe is their spiritual alter to worship at. If Another organisation came along WAGBI 2.1 or whatever you want to call it. Wildfowlers would be for better joining both organisations and putting both of them to the test. Then the winner would be the one who had achieved the most in a set period of time for wildfowling. Competition breeds success at the moment there is no competition. Just blind faith that is being exploited. Please debate. TWAG

I always work and make decisions with the evidence provided. So far BASC has failed to get shooting included in the Conservatives last manifesto. I now find out that the advisors to the Prime Minister do not have a favourable opinion to country sports as well. Previously BASC always worked with all the political parties to make sure that shooting was recognised unbiassed in each parties manifesto. Not any more? Now that labour have a policy against caged laying and rearing of gamebirds. Then calling for a public consultation to look over the process of our wildfowling consents is just bonkers. I have seen the published output from BASC that is enough and all I need. The printed word is far better evidence than words spoken on a telephone or in person they can always be denied. In short BASC love wildfowlers they all exhibit blind faith in a Fake Deity. How many times do wildfowlers need to watch a person picking up puppy beating the puppy then picking it up and cuddling again. Not to intervene and stop the wrong happening? I hope the analogy makes sense! Other really important matters that the shooting organisation should be sorting out not navelgazing that it continues to do and has done for many years. Looking at the processes and supposedly serving the members and looking after the deerstalkers at the expense of the wildfowler. Oh yes they will present lots of statistical evidence on what they have achieved or supposedly achieved but in reality what have they actually delivered? The reality is wildfowlers have one full-time officer one part-time assistant and one land agent! Helping us please share the evidence what they have done for you recently. High-level political representation is non-existent for wildfowling. Twag

The regulatory bodies consultation on consenting process for the extraction of I notified spaces from a SSSI. Reality check! It means and I mean what it says on the box "Regulatory Body" regulators regulate. Historically when ever wildfowlers through the BASC or other persons have been imposed with "restrictions" in technical terms modification or amendment to the harvest. They have always put up an argument and tried to fight the case. At the best all that has ever been achieved is a compromise where both sides suffers some pain. Public Consultation. This means exactly that, you can be absolutely certain that all the conservation bodies have put in a negative comments which by empirical measurement will outweigh wildfowlers. This is a very dangerous path to go down when the consultation finds that the process is not robust enough. The regulator will then strengthen the process it is far easier to say no and invoke the precautionary principle. Than having to go through a very in-depth appropriate assessment using the facts and figures and manipulating the facts and figures to get the answers they want! If you are thinking we are going to get a light touch regarding consent, no chance no money and the conservation bodies have more lobbying power than we do at the moment using BASC. Will individuals and clubs come together to fight there will be some. But I fear there will not be a enough in numbers and in intellectual capacity to take on the adversarial of the statutory agencies. It will be by education by wildfowlers that will make the real difference to educate the statutory agencies local office, and employees not only the ones that directly impact upon wildfowling operations. This is where any organisation or organisations or individuals time is best spent. Statutory conservation agencies The other option would be to make sure that on the board/governing body have selected for them by the Secretary of State the appropriate persons to represent the country sports. The person or persons would need to have at the very minimum a countryside background. A farmer estate manager land agent with an interest in shooting preferably wildfowling and the appropriate university degree. I have to say to date none of our representative bodies have even considered such a radical idea let alone thought of implementing it. TWAG

I would not worry about BASC. They have been a sleep at the wheel as usual. If at the next general election the Labour party is elected and they implement there new animal welfare policy which prohibits caged lying of gamebirds, this will be the end of game shooting and BASC in this country. In reality there would only be one or two potentially cohesive interest groups in shooting left wildfowling being one of them dear stalking the other. All the time small minded selfish little man spread lies and deceitful comments about their fellow wildfowlers. When RPG and Stanley Duncan set up WAGBI they could never have dreams in the worst nightmares that fellow wildfowlers behaviour and loyalty to the sport could degenerate into the state is today.

Well it had to happen. With wildfowlers not prepared to represent themselves what a surprise. Don't be surprised to find more clubs disaffiliating. After they find the consultation regarding the consenting process for wildfowling on estuaries recommends more restrictions.

"I would not be surprised to see SPAs and SACs scrapped or merged into SSSIs and have much weaker protection. There is likely to be a major to boost industry to counter our loss of trade with the EU and in coastal areas this could mean pressure for developement on marshland and would be a threat to our wildfowl populations. As wildfowlers we all moan about conservation and NE , but we must never forget that without healthy wildfowl populations we will have no sport. If we want to be shooting ducks and geese in 25 years time we have to conserve our wildfowl populations." Anser2 a very interesting perspective and view on this I'm glad I posted on the forum this as another dimension to my concern I suspect if what you have predicted will happen in one way or another. Will it be a strength or a threat to us? I would like to hope the Lack of money and their ability to carryout pointless consents for shooting would go away. But as you say another door could open regarding the failure of conservation etc. I would still like to see BASC make a commitment that they are going to be proactive over this issue. Historically they have at best being reactive. European sites special protection areas special areas conservation. I can remember being lectured by BASC that this was going to be a benefit for us and nothing was going to be detrimental at all. Then look what has happened! Shooting on any of the above-mentioned sites now has to have consent from the statutory agency with all the restrictions and limitations they can master to put upon us. 20 years in BASC still hasn't managed to sort out sensible consenting arrangements for our sport. This worries me.

Fellow wildfowlers and shooting men Below is a link to the BBC website I have cut and pasted some relevant text. What really worries me is every time there has been a change of legislation or alteration of environmental legislation shooting/wildfowling has come off worse. Perhaps if BASC is proactive we can put in place that traditional coastal wildfowling and its associated conservation work. Does not constitute a plan or a project. Therefore does not need to be entered into the consenting process. In the same way that yachting is not considered a plan or project. It will be interesting to see what BASC has to say? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39439554 Thousands of EU laws on everything from workers' rights to the environment are to be scrapped or replaced with UK equivalents in a new plan. Details of the planned Great Repeal Bill are to be published shortly - the day after the UK officially began the two year process of leaving the EU. Ministers need to "copy and paste" EU laws into UK law to avoid a legal "black hole" when Brexit happens. It comes as ministers reject claims of a row with the EU over future security. In her letter on Wednesday triggering Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, Mrs May suggested cooperation with the EU on the fight against crime and terror was at risk if Britain did not agree an overall Brexit deal within the two year time limit. 'A unique challenge'The Great Repeal Bill, which Theresa May has said will make the UK an "independent, sovereign nation", would: Repeal the European Communities Act, which says EU law is supreme to the UK's Ensure the UK leaves the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice Transpose existing EU legislation into domestic UK law It would come into force the day the UK leaves the EU The Commons library anticipates it will be "one of the largest legislative projects ever undertaken in the UK" A Lords committee described it as a "unique challenge", with EU law having accumulated over decades TWAG

I could not agree more. I keep thinking to myself is an organisation run the way BASC is run fit for purpose. The answer that keeps coming back to me is no it is not. I think probably John Anderton's pyramid structure of the organisations would be better. A separate organisation for each area of shooting individually accountable to its members. Using one organization / company which would be controlled through a board of directors from the other organisations who are shareholders. Giving the one organisation all this power and responsibility can only lead them building their own muck pile to Crow from. Just some thoughts!