Jump to content

PeterHenry

Members
  • Posts

    416
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by PeterHenry

  1. All ex prime ministers are offered it, but its only offered in order. So until call-me-Tony accepts his, Gordon won't be offered his, etc. It's a formality, but it stings to know its going to happen....
  2. Very nice. I've got a feeling I nearly bid on that case on ebay - or one similar.
  3. I agree with the title, but as I haven't read the article, my insight must end there
  4. As said, a Subject Access Request / Data Subject Access Resquest (SAR / DSAR) is the way to go (both the sane thing btw) Your medical records are your personal information - your GP cannot legally refuse to provide them to either yourself or another party that you designate. If you do have trouble, the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) is who you want to refer them to.
  5. My father's father use to poach (tickle) trout. When I was at boarding school, a couple of friends got caught poaching phesents from the woods around the place. One of them from a very respectable family. He now runs runs a shoot. I've got to be honest, I have little time for poaching - I've never done it, and the amount of time and effort I put into feeding wild birds along hedgerows and on flight ponds, it really winds me up when I catch someone and their whippet on one of my trail cams... I do enjoy hearing the stories though I will also add, that one of the house masters (again from a very respectable family) who ran the school clay trap and rifle range, still kept his father's folding stock .410....
  6. It's a remarkable coincidence that you have chosen this moment for such a change of heart - and I look forward to your first constructive post.
  7. In that case I agree - strange bedfellows indeed. I did know about his stance pre appointment to Natural England, but had - possibly mistakenly - presumed that he had taken up his role with a more charitable governing for all approach. But perhaps not.... I still hold that it's better to foster good general terms with someone you disagree with in principle - perhaps even more so in this case. I very much believe in dialogue between parties. Ah, I see what you are trying to say. I think sadly that more government oversite of our sport (and everything else) is the way things are going. That's the problem with Parliments - they have to be seen to do things to make themselves look busy.... but in the mean time, I don't think a stab at self regulation is a bad thing to do. Fellside put it very eloquently when he talked about a green wave. My view is the destruction of the environment is going to be at the forefront of everyone's mind for a very long time, that gives (as we have seen) governments carte blanche to do what they *need* to fix it. Hence untold meddling in all aspects of everything. Sadly I can't see things going any other way any time soon, so we need to do what best we can to carve out a niche for our sport in this new world.
  8. My understanding - and I am, genuinely, happy to be proved wrong on this point - is that the general licences are longer and more complicated as a direct result to them being made watertight. Owing to our continued adherence to the Birds Directive, and the subsequent Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, to be considered legal the General Licences had to be far more specific in relation to what would be shot and when. Obviously, they also had to be usable in practice - which is why we are where we are, and they are tempered with reasonableness clauses. That's just the way it is with a lot of law.
  9. I know he has links to the Green Party as well - and - if I was the person charged with picking someone to head up Natural England, it would not have been him. What you say about the dropping of general licences may be true - but I won't presume to infer the reasoning. Although I am not disputing that they were dropped awfully quickly. That aside, the old general licences look to have been a weak spot just waiting for someone to exploit - more of a political smudge bought in to appese the (predecessor of the) EU and people who shot. Like any smudge, no one cared until it was noticed by someone who wanted to tidy it up. Regardless, the GL's were sorted out, and they now do conform to the law, while for the large part allowing us to continue as before - so I will give him marks for that. The badger cull is still going on - as far as I am aware - so marks to him on that also. I know when he was appointed in 2019 there were fears that it would be like Chris Packham at the wheel, but those fears - as of 2022 - remain largely unfounded as far as I can tell. Edit - I know that this is digressing again, and is not specifically in relation to your point, but I'd just like to point out that BASC can either be incredibly standoffish about things and achieve nothing, or they can build bridges and achive something. BASC are not the American NRA - and despite some pepole wanting them to act like it, won't, because they know it would be entirely futile and counterproductive..
  10. I won't dispute the first part - but they are an important department from the perspective of the pigeon shooter - and one we have to deal with. I won't comment on the second half - but I don't see how basc could ever merge with it, unless I have missed your point?
  11. But not a member of Wild Justice though. And regardless of his views, is the man in charge of the department that put the effort into the current general licences - you know, the ones that haven't been successfully challenged. I understand that Natural England is also the body responsible for the badger cull. Strange that hasn't been knocked on the head, seeing that he was appointed in 2019.... Frankly, I have given up trying to understand you. There are other people on here who I disagree with, but they all at least show some form of reason or aptitude for self reflection. You, on the other hand are a crank. Not everything is a conspiracy against you.
  12. Tony Juniper isn't a member of Wild Justice and to my knowledge never has been - he's the head of Natural England. Despite the fact that he isn't someone who can be described by any means as a field sports enthusiast - the fact that BASC have got him writing in their magazine at all is proof of their political bridge building. Would you rather BASC boycott the man in charge of the department largely responsible for issuing the general licences?
  13. I use the nice wooden boxes to store loose shotgun cartridges
  14. Sorry, I should added - the pad is thin enough so that I haven't noticed any need to have my guns refitted. Also, the Lylvale 30g '5' earthwads are very light on recoil as it is - no need for a recoil pad with them, and certainly no concern of a broken stock.
  15. I've got to say, I am a big fan - I do think that there is a bit of a macho thing about recoil, but if something improves my shooting, I'm all for it
  16. I don't know off the top of my head - but I would say closer to 6 pounds than 7. They are probably the lightest guns I own. A pair with 26" barrels.
  17. Thats true - I found it was pretty vile with my AYA no2 and steel 32g 4's. However, Musto make a fantastic thing that you put over your shoulder and the fabric locks up when the gun recoils. Using that, steel is no worse than lead recoil wise. I think you can even buy gilet's with built in pockets for them, so you don't have to mess around with the harness thingy. Edit - this is the thing https://www.amazon.co.uk/Musto-d3o-recoil-reducer-shield/dp/B005YCZTFU I'll also add that the layvale 30g '5' 2 2/1" earthwads have negligible recoil - the AYA digests the quite happily. Intfact, for the first couple of shots I struggled to get use to how light they were on the shoulder.
  18. Obviously your question wasent aimed at me, but having briefly lived there, I have a feeling all lead shot is banned in the Netherlands - even for clays.
  19. Not really, if by jumping off in your own time you get to spot where the greater dangers lie below - I would say that is the better of the two options, than falling awkwardly and increasing the chance of injury. But perhaps we would be better returning to nautical analogies? If you are on a sinking ship, are you not better jumping off and trying to swim than standing on deck and having the ship pull you down with it? Anyway, at this point, after the amount you have banged on about the ineffectiveness of steel shot, I shouldn't think you would be too bothered if you were shot in the back, as steel is going to be what accounts for the majority of our cartridges in the future.....
  20. All I will say on the matter is that its preferable to be afloat, than sitting underwater telling the tide to go back.....
  21. This is ultimately the result of things that have been moving around in the EU for a long time. BASC and the other organisations noticed this and quite sensibly tried to put forward their own time line for events. We shall see if that happens, but regardless, the organisations (for all the faults both real and imagined that some pin to them) have my gratitude for trying to do something, as opposed to the Canute like approch advocated by others. Regardless, we shall see what happens. As has been touched on - I think there are two issues - 1 - does 'non-toxic' work in old guns? This, in my mind is a technical matter. And although we may have to accept some trade-off's is certainly not the end to shooting. There is a far better choice of steel cartridges now than a few years ago - the same goes for other alternitives like Bio Ammo Blue. 2 - how are cartridge manufacturers overheads going to ripple out to retailers (as @Vince Green pointed out). I think that may be potentially a far greater problem than is being credited. Finally, I did take up BASC's offer, that can be found at the bottom of some of their articles on lead - and as a member, emailed @Conor O'Gorman who I have found to be an entirely decent sort of chap in what limited exchanges I have previously had with him. My suggestion being that a derogation is argued for homeloading lead shot - this would not lead to any great amount of lead entering the environment, due to the genreal faff involved, and in principle wouldent be any diffrent to a derogation for muzzle loaders - which I think is sensible enough. At the end of the day, this is happening in some form or another whether we like it or not. I'm going to live with it, because I'd rarther continue shooting, and if its managed sensibly, its not the end of the world that a lot of you seem to be makeing out.
×
×
  • Create New...