Countryside Alliance

[DRTaylor]

In response to a request in another thread, I'm starting this one. As you may be aware (I put it on my introduction post - I admit these are hardly ever read), I'm the Shooting Campaigns Manager at the Countryside Alliance. I've only been in the post since October, but my job is focused on shooting and shooting alone.

 

I think there are a few myths surrounding the Countryside Alliance about many things that we do and don't do, mainly because there has been little presence on online forums such as this. I hope to change that. So, let's get it all out, what are people's honest opinions of the Alliance? what do/don't you like? what do you think we should/should be doing? As many people here are members and many aren't, I'm sure you all have a questions, suggestions etc...

 

I'm probably going to live to regret this but I'm pretty much starting this job from scratch, I plan build the shooting side to the needs of the members, not the Alliance. Because without members, there is no Alliance.

 

I'll now retreat to a corner and await the onslaught.

 

PS I promise to be honest and objective with everything I post, and not give a hard sell.

Edited February 15, 2011 by DRTaylor

[MC]

OK,

 

Firstly can you honestly answer where the CA stand on the lead shot issue and what research are they doing to argue against the RSPB and all the others who want to see lead banned for use in ammunition?

[OCD]

Just 3 questions

 

Why did you vehemently campaign that shooting was cruel and hunting isn't?

 

Why do you never mention Hare coursing in your attempt to gain a repeal?

 

Why do you never mention terrier work in your case for repeal?

 

Please not I mean as an organisation and not you personally.

 

OCD

[twitchynik]

I've always thought the CA had a stronger view on the whole lead issue than BASC.

 

Further reading can be found here :

 

http://www.countryside-alliance.org.uk/shooting-campaigns/shooting-views/lead-shot:-why-the-countryside-alliance-believes-it-should-not-be-banned/

 

And here :

 

http://www.countryside-alliance.org.uk/images/stories/pdf/campaigns/Shooting/2010_Is_Lead_dead.pdf

[MC]

I've always thought the CA had a stronger view on the whole lead issue than BASC.

 

Further reading can be found here :

 

http://www.countryside-alliance.org.uk/shooting-campaigns/shooting-views/lead-shot:-why-the-countryside-alliance-believes-it-should-not-be-banned/

 

And here :

 

http://www.countryside-alliance.org.uk/images/stories/pdf/campaigns/Shooting/2010_Is_Lead_dead.pdf

 

 

That is all well and good,

 

I believe that lead shot should not be banned but I don't have the scientific research to back anything up or fight against the RSPB etc. It seems that nor do the CA, which is why I asked the question.

 

 

Seems to me that they have rolled over already

 

"The Alliance has always said that if incontrovertible and peer-reviewed UK evidence of relevant environmental and health problems were to emerge, we would of course all act responsibly in seeking the adoption of high quality non-toxic humane and affordable alternatives. Until such time the status quo should prevail."

Edited February 15, 2011 by MC

[al4x]

so that rolling over quote isn't almost exactly the same as the spiel BASC quote?

[twitchynik]

You're correct that there is a lack of UK based scientific data - both for and against (there are plenty of areas of dispute from the US based studies and research in other parts of the world). As such, how can a change be proposed? Surely that is a solid stance against a ban of the use of lead shot? Why would you want to fight and argue against something if it isn't there in the first place? Yes there is pressure from some quarters to ban lead shot but it isn't based on much, if any, UK recognised facts and evidence so their arguements are fundementally weak.

[DRTaylor]

OK,

 

Firstly can you honestly answer where the CA stand on the lead shot issue and what research are they doing to argue against the RSPB and all the others who want to see lead banned for use in ammunition?

 

 

The CA is against a ban on lead ammunition. We don’t believe there is compelling UK evidence to warrant a ban, nor do we believe that a suitable alternative exists which matches lead on price and efficiency. We believe that a ban on lead would have severe implications not only for shooting, but also animal welfare and crop protection.

 

Despite being initially excluded from the group, the CA fought for a place on the Lead Ammunition Group to defend lead shot in that group. A subgroup of the LAG has been set up to look into the primary evidence available. As you are probably aware, the government has removed the secretariat from the group, implying that it is not currently considering the issue. However, we will continue to be a part of the group and defend lead.

[BlaserF3]

Re; lead shot, I have been saying for months on these forums that there is no scientific evidence at all in the U.K. that lead shot is harmful, speculation yes but nothing scientific at all.

 

What happens in the United States has no bearing at all compared to the U.K. and that's when all the talk about lead being banned started.

[DRTaylor]

Just 3 questions

 

Why did you vehemently campaign that shooting was cruel and hunting isn't?

 

Why do you never mention Hare coursing in your attempt to gain a repeal?

 

Why do you never mention terrier work in your case for repeal?

 

Please not I mean as an organisation and not you personally.

 

OCD

 

 

OCD - I don't want to sound like a new government blaming everything on the previous administration, but this was before my time. I do feel that response was wrong and did damage to the CA's reputation with shooting people. However, even in an absence of a ban, I think it is naive to think that all foxes can be controlled by hunts. There are many foxes, and hunts cannot cover all land at all times, therefore shooting is not just alternative but an integral part of fox population management.

 

As for coursing and terrier work, I have volunteered for the Alliance for several years in the Eastern region. The events trailer has many large images of coursing and terrier men at work as part of the hunting campaign. Moreover, when it comes to court cases, we have helped defend several terrier men in the courts. I think it is when the national media address hunting; they tend to concentrate on fox hunting as that is what gets most people's backs up. In a similar way they also ignore other hunts such as harrier and beagle packs.

 

I hope this answers your questions.

[MC]

The CA is against a ban on lead ammunition. We don’t believe there is compelling UK evidence to warrant a ban, nor do we believe that a suitable alternative exists which matches lead on price and efficiency. We believe that a ban on lead would have severe implications not only for shooting, but also animal welfare and crop protection.

 

Despite being initially excluded from the group, the CA fought for a place on the Lead Ammunition Group to defend lead shot in that group. A subgroup of the LAG has been set up to look into the primary evidence available. As you are probably aware, the government has removed the secretariat from the group, implying that it is not currently considering the issue. However, we will continue to be a part of the group and defend lead.

 

 

So get off the fence and stop answering questions like a politician,

 

What are the CA doing to fight the evidence being presented? I suggest that if you think there isn't compelling evidence against lead shot then you have not read anything on the subject.

 

Lead, like it or not is a toxin. This has been proved time and time again. Are you telling me that noone has died from lead poisoning? Did they just remove lead from paint for the hell of it? Maybe they stopped using lead pipes because they were heavy and plumbers were getting backache?

 

Maybe they even banned the use of solder containing lead for plumbing works because the is a r in the word Friday?

 

To say that what happens in the US does not effect us is about as blinkered as they come. The whole lead ban for wildfowl was based around this evidence and it will be used again. I suggest that you wake up and smell the coffee.

 

So as you have failed to answer the question Dr Taylor I will ask it again, WHAT IS THE CA DOING TO FIGHT THE EVIDENCE BEING PRESENTED AGAINST LEAD SHOT AND WHAT RESEARCH ARE THE CA FUNDING?

 

You could alway be honest and say that you aren't doing anything and you have no defence. I for one would give you more respect for doing so.

 

Al4x,

 

The CA statement is almost exactly the same as the BASC one but this thread was started about the CA and how they are so good at supporting shooting.

 

I for one haven't seen any evidence of that in 25+ years.

[al4x]

Its interesting when you travel round the country that the role hunts and shoots play in fox control either overlap or end up at odds with each other. We shot in Devon and the shoot welcomed the hunt as with small hilly fields lamping was difficult and they were more effective, round here in days gone by and landowners hunted the keepers used to have to leave and almost help the foxes. Now thats long gone and they are shot whenever and however and there are probably as many foxes as there ever have been. Personally I make a habit of going out lamping the night before but thats because our local lot are a pain in the backside.

as for terriers maybe the status quo works acceptably for most without highlighting any more what goes on, certainly terrier men are pretty closely linked to most fox hunts

 

MC it may be a phrase liked by the LAG, and indeed the lack of it is the fallback I would imagine without seemingly being totally closed to any evidence existing. After all the whole reason behind it is the stuff being dragged up by the Peregrine fund and the likes in the USA

Edited February 15, 2011 by al4x

[MC]

I am quite you have mentioned the peregrine fund. Have you seen the ammount of research they have done? Have you seen the ammount of scientific evidence they have?

 

The RSPB will be doing exactly the same thing, and where are the shooting organisations? They all have their heads up their arrises saying that they are against the banning of lead.

 

Like it or not the evidence and research from the US WILL be used and will be taken notice of. Why? Because noone is doing anything to stop the flow.

 

You have Gamebore wheeling out Goerge Digweed telling us all how good steel is. Yet they haven't answered my question as to whether he uses it through choice and did he use it to win any of his World Titles?

 

Lead shot was banned for shooting wildfowl. Wildfowling is probably a minority when it caome to spent shot laying around. Game and clay shooters deposit tons and tons of the stuff every day. The ban is on it's way unless the shooting organisations start defending it correctly. Instead of just saying we are against it. Start researching into the pros of using it, instead of supporting the use of the "Alternatives"

[bakerboy]

Would we not be better served to allow answers to come a little later when they can thought through, and perhaps answer numerous PW members who could be asking the same question many times over,just the once.

This would then shorten the thread but possibably make easier and more concise reading.

Just my thoughts to progress the issue.

bakerboy

Terry

[MC]

The problem is Terry, The lead shot issue is happening now. The shooting organisations should be researching and refuting the evidence NOW.

 

There is not time to think about things, The peregrine fund and not sitting around having a think, they are acting now and researching the hazards and dangers of lead.

 

If you read the minutes of the LAG all it consists of is people not turning up to meetings and not doing what they are supposed to be doing.

 

Our anti shooting opponents do not stop, they will keep on pushing the message until enough people listen and shooters suffer.

 

The biggest mountain I see that needs to be climbed is the issue of alternatives, the lead ban is on it's way and steel works. There is no doubt about that. I have been using it for nearly a decade and while the early stuff was awful the latest releases from Remington and Gamebore does the job.

 

The way I see it is lead is a toxin, it has been banned from every other product and now we have an alternative. That is why I am asking what is being done to counter the evidence that is being presented.

[BlaserF3]

As far as I can see sweet F.A. is being done

[MC]

As far as I can see sweet F.A. is being done

 

 

And that is the truth,

 

Well,

 

A lot is being done to try and get rid of lead shot, nothing is being done to defend it's use.

[bakerboy]

I did not mean to place the issue on the back burner, more that instead of answering each comment as it arrives on PW that it is answered the next day perhaps.

I am not one for dithering (you will see that in a week or two's time when I have pint in my hand)but feel that the responses may well be better thought out and easier for everyone to take on board, and of course, if we know the answer is going to be there the next day we will not get angry responses. agree a response time with DRTaylor (if I am correct) and lets all stick to it.

[David BASC]

I accept David, that you have only been with the Alliance at HO for a short while, but I must correct one of your statments, the Chairman of the LAG assures me that hte CA were invited onto the group at the same time as everyone else. Maybe there was a breakdown of communication within the CA that meant the invite did not get to the righ people at the right time - I dont know.

 

If you want to check this out please contact the Chairman of the LAG.

 

David

[DRTaylor]

MC - If it will make you feel any better, no we are not currently funding any research. Why? Because at the moment the group is in risk assessment phase and therefore only looking into the key risks. There is no point rushing off and spending thousands of pounds on research until we know what (or even if) these key risks are.

 

Bakerboy, you have a good point. I will monitor this thread for updates.

[MC]

MC - If it will make you feel any better, no we are not currently funding any research. Why? Because at the moment the group is in risk assessment phase and therefore only looking into the key risks. There is no point rushing off and spending thousands of pounds on research until we know what (or even if) these key risks are.

 

Bakerboy, you have a good point. I will monitor this thread for updates.

 

Oh no absolutely no point at all,

 

What is that saying? Oh yes "To fail first you have to try" or " You cannot lose if you throw the race"

 

What the key risks are? I suggest you start reading as these have been public knowledge for years. The ban on shooting wildfowl only came into effect in 1999. How much longer do you need?

 

So BlaserF3 was right, sweet FA is being done.

 

Just because the LAG is in "Risk assesment" stage do you think that organisations like the peregrine fund and the RSPB are sitting back and thinking the same?

 

If you do you are very naive.

 

There isn't going to be any updates if you won't answer the questions put to you.

 

Or did you just join up to have a virtual punch up with DavidBASC?

Edited February 15, 2011 by MC

[Cookiemonsterandmerlin.]

With respect to shooters fears on any given subject say the lead ban issue.

 

Have any of you written to any shooting bodies or goverment bodies with your views .

 

How do we get our views ETC across to BASC or CA or goverment as it seems that posting about our fears for the future on our sport is only constructive if they take on board and report our views .

 

I have myself writen to my local MP on the subject of lead ban ETC.

 

Cheers OTH

[Cranfield]

MC - If it will make you feel any better, no we are not currently funding any research. Why? Because at the moment the group is in risk assessment phase and therefore only looking into the key risks. There is no point rushing off and spending thousands of pounds on research until we know what (or even if) these key risks are.

 

 

This seems to be a very logical response and as a member of the Countryside Alliance, I am pleased with it.

I would also add that as a member of the BASC, I believe their stance is identical.

I am not a member of the CPSA, so I do not know (or care) what their response is.

[Cookiemonsterandmerlin.]

As far as I can see sweet F.A. is being done

 

Its could be us as a community who are doing sweet FA rather than BASC or CA or any other group that should be supporting our sport.

 

We can challenge goverment descisons, but not as single shooter but as a community be you a member of BASC or CA or NGO or even not a members of any them.

 

We got to unite on the matters that threaten our sport without inhouse fighting between ourselves EG which is the best insurance ETC.

 

Cheers OTH

Edited February 15, 2011 by Over the hill

[bakerboy]

Having read and I think understood everyones veiws, it is about time the politicing stopped and a united front was put into place, no more point scoring, no more argueing, it seems we all want the same thing, lets hold hands and move forward together or is that naive and too simplistic.