guy baxendale Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 As far as I know you can only reply once, as to the sporting press, well I am sure they are already well aware of what's going on! Possibly but not perhaps the level of anger and disappointment at BASC's actions. Oh and at least one of them is running with the story Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 Thanks strongbow - I have been into our post room and the mailing is certainly not in there so its certainly on the way. David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry P Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 Evidence based, 12 SL's issued for greylags and 7 for Mallard(which may or may not have been fulfilled) is enough evidence that Greylag need to be on the GL. Really !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strongbow Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 WOW !!!!! Unbeliveable Just go this email at 7.15pm Looks like someone is running scared and looking to rally some troops. I guess that answers the question about being able to contact members, BASC Head office, Marford Mill, Rossett, Wrexham, LL12 0HLwww.basc.org.uk Tel: 01244 573000 Email Urgent – act before 19 May to help simplify general licences Please email Natural England at wildlife.consultation@naturalengland.org.uk by Monday 19 May to call for a simplification of the English general licences. There are more than 20 English general licences and a number of them allow the management of species causing conflict with conservation or human interests. For example, the shooting of woodpigeon is permitted at any time of year to help prevent crop damage. General licences were introduced more than 20 years ago as a legal necessity to comply with European law. The reasons were complex but the principle was simple – to permit people to continue to carry out necessary control with no added burdens. As with the quarry seasons people only needed to know what species were on the list. However, following two decades of gold-plating the general licences in England are now so complex that they are confusing to the average user. Natural England is consulting on 48 pages of proposed changes to the general licences. The consultation closes on 19 May. The proposals would make the terms and conditions even more complex while also making it a legal requirement for users to have read and understood up to ten pages of legal text. In essence Natural England is continuing the trend of its predecessors in shifting national legal responsibilities onto licence users. BASC believes in reducing red tape for shooting. The situation today is far removed from 1992 when Ministers assured stakeholders that the introduction of general licences was a legal device but one which would continue to allow necessary control with no added burdens. The general licences need only to list the species legally affected and the legally permitted methods - all on a single page. If you agree email wildlife.consultation@naturalengland.org.uk by 19 May with your views. Click here for more information Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holloway Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 Sorry to sound thick ,buy in a nutshell what does it mean ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 If you read the detail on the BASC web site, you will see there were far more points reviewed than the number of SL's issued. You will also read that we want assurance that the breeding number of geese will be carefully monitored. This is an important issue, and that is why its been on our web site since the end of February, there was an alert in the issue of Shooting & Conservation that went to all members at the beginning of March asking members to keep an eye on the BASC web site, the web pages were regularly updated as the situation developed, complete with the standard 'send us your views' contact box at the bottom of the page, as mentioned some of the WLC met at the wildfowling conference, and although it was not on the agenda as an item, members at the conference were asked to email their thoughts to BASC.... As Our Chief Exec said at the conference, lets work together, invite us to club meetings, work with us on getting accurate bag returns and so on. David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 We have been asking NE for a while to simplify the GL, if you look at it its a long complex document, we want it simplified, so its easier for all to understand, this is not as some have jumped to believe anyone running scared; its common sense! David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Mongrel- Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 (edited) Right, Natural England emailed and Conor O'Gorman copied in as requested on the BASC website, just needs another 1298 to do the same now! ;-) I should add that I have stated that I DO NOT support BASC's position regarding Greylags/Mallards and the GL proposal. Edited May 9, 2014 by -Mongrel- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Boat Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 David as chairman of KL&WNWA plus Chairman of the Wash Wildfowlers JC I am yet to receive any correspondence from the BASC on this issue. Could you please tell me how many members are needed to to put in a vote of no confidence in council and how we would we go about this? Many thanks Ian Branford. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greymaster Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 Right, Natural England emailed and Conor O'Gorman copied in as requested on the BASC website, just needs another 1298 to do the same now! ;-) I should add that I have stated that I DO NOT support BASC's position regarding Greylags/Mallards and the GL proposal. I presume that by referring to 1298 you are suggesting the calling of a SGM. To my mind the way to go about this would be specify a resolution which should be the business of the SGM to consider. Such a resolution would be in the terms: Resolution: That the decision of BASC Council to support the inclusion of Greylags and Mallards on to the General Licenses* be reversed and that therefore BASC policy shall be to oppose NE so including. It is usually possible to include several resolutions for the SGM, but only those listed can be debated and determined on the day. A further resolution would be to require BASC and its Council to consult more effectively with its special interest groups on matters of such strategic importance. * will need to be more expansive and refer to the specific GL's as relates to Greylag and Mallard, etc. shooting and egg destruction etc, health and safety etc.. It is usual for such resolutions to be proposed and seconded. It will then be possible for individual members of BASC to paste the resolution into their document and state. I the undersigned wish to confirm that I am in support of the calling of a SGM of BASC Members to determine the above resolutions, and therefore join with others also in support of the resolutions for said SGM to be called according to the constitution. Perhaps the wildfowlers who have argued so eloquently and who are more versed in such matters could assist with this and co-ordinate the response, otherwise it will go off half-cocked with perhaps a dozen or so variants and with each dealt with and counted separately each failing to secure the correct number of signatures. Also someone to aggregate the submissions and provide a periodic count. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul T Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 Right, I've been following this thread with interest and I've read the info on the BASC website (no email yet..?). Anyway, I still cannot get my head round the fact that BASC is supporting the introduction of Greylags (and mallard) on the General Licence! I note that from the (revised?) text on the website: For greylag geese in the period from 2005-2011 there were 349 licences issued to destroy up to 90,448 eggs and 457 licences to shoot or kill by injection 15,647 birds. Most of these licences were to prevent serious damage to crops or to protect air safety. For mallard in the period from 2005-2011 there were 78 licences issued to destroy up to 32,440 eggs and 30 licences to shoot or kill by injection 2,471 birds. Most of these licences were to protect public health and air safety. So, that's roughly 60 licences for greylag and 13 for mallard PER ANNUM and that warrants its inclusion on the GL and especially for 'public health and air safety'? Ok, I'm not saying that flocks of resident (I've not used the word feral) geese near airstrips don't need control, but isn't this scenario exactly what the Special Licences are for - to cater for local and temporary problems? C'mon BASC, the true wildfowlers are telling you this is wrong, yet all I see is more text being added to the BASC website saying our fears are unfounded and they shouldn't be viewed as a pest species. Yeah, right, while most wildfowlers wouldn't raise a gun out of season, don't forget there are some shooters that only need the slightest excuse to able to drop a bird out of the sky! Can't you see this really is really making it 100% open season on Greylags and it won't be long before organised flights become commonplace. This needs nipping in the bud right now and there's only one sensible way to do it - retain the Special Licence. Rest assured I shall be returning my 2p worth to the parties concerned. However, I did think that's what we paid our fees for - for BASC to speak on our behalf...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 Ian, good evening, and thank you for your message, I already have it in my calendar to check on the mailing first thing Monday morning. A copy of the BASC constitution can be found here: http://basc.org.uk/about-basc/council-and-constitution/basc-constitution/ I cant see any provision in the rules and constitution for a vote of no confidence in the elected Council but I admit I am no constitutional expert but as you can see there is a provision for SGM if 1% of the members, or more, call for one. Whether or not this includes for a vote of no confidence I honestly do not know all I can suggest is you email the Chief Executive. Sorry I cant be of more help. David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Boat Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 David thank you for your prompt reply. Ian. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greymaster Posted May 9, 2014 Report Share Posted May 9, 2014 Ian, good evening, and thank you for your message, I already have it in my calendar to check on the mailing first thing Monday morning. A copy of the BASC constitution can be found here: http://basc.org.uk/about-basc/council-and-constitution/basc-constitution/ I cant see any provision in the rules and constitution for a vote of no confidence in the elected Council but I admit I am no constitutional expert but as you can see there is a provision for SGM if 1% of the members, or more, call for one. Whether or not this includes for a vote of no confidence I honestly do not know all I can suggest is you email the Chief Executive. Sorry I cant be of more help. David I have only contributed to the SGM issue because of recent experience with a Club I am a member of. I took advice from the ultimate regulator of such clubs and it was stated that Votes of No Confidence can be included as a resolution for an SGM but even so, it did not in that case imply that the ruling committee was sacked, only that individual members should consider their position. Of course, honourable members would therefore do the right thing. However, the coming AGM will probably result in a change in the composition of council in any case and rather than attempt a vote of no confidence, members can use their vote for candidates strategically. Moreover, the NE Consultation deadline will have passed by the time the SGM can come about so it might be advisable to include a resolution calling on the BASC and Council to oppose the inclusion of Greylag and Mallard at next renewal of GL's and to continue to so oppose until such time as the BASC full membership have been canvassed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandalf Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 All this talk of SGM and votes of no confidence is very sad. Are the officers of BASC really ready to tear the base fabric of the organisation apart when all they have to do is reconvene the council who made this ridiculous decision, rescind it and admit they were wrong. Come on Gentlemen - Do the honest and obvious thing and sort the problem out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happy.plinker Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 Can someone tell me what problems Mallards are causing,is it crop or public health issues? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 Dear All I have double checked the mailing, it has certainly gone out, and was sent to all club secretaries and the clubs nominated prime contact. I may have been in error when I assumed that the prime contact in all cases would be the Chairman, sorry about that. So please check with your club secretary, thanks. David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strongbow Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 The below link shows the number of licences issued for crop protection from greylags between 2005 and 2011 in a graph form. The one graph shows total licences including egg destruction and the other shows just licences for shooting. The data if sourced from NE web site http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/regulation/wildlife/licences/statistics.aspx link to photbucket http://i1240.photobucket.com/albums/gg493/strongbowrt/LicencesIssued2005-2011_zpsbdcefab0.jpg There were no licences issued in 2011 for greylags on crop protection. Not sure what the split of the 2012 licences is between egg destruction and shooting but the total was only 30. The trend seems to be one of decline so why the GL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandalf Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 Have you not had your email from BASC that came yesterday? Regards H I have now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 Can someone tell me what problems Mallards are causing,is it crop or public health issues? Say a wildfowl charity was feeding a lot of mallard at no small cost and they were occupying space that could be taken by rarer fowl, might they wish to reduce the numbers of mallard? Ok they could get a SL but then NE have to disclose the who and why under the freedom of info act. How might this sit with some of its donators if someone blabbed? Its got nothing to do with duck poop I suspect. GL will mean they just get on with it without a paper trail The crop is not a crop its free food, the public health is a smoke screen as all duck poop is the same as Mallard poop Remember we have an ex- NE fella to deal with here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandalf Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 You will also read that we want assurance that the breeding number of geese will be carefully monitored. No good to count numbers of breeding geese after they have been shot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 Say a wildfowl charity was feeding a lot of mallard at no small cost and they were occupying space that could be taken by rarer fowl, might they wish to reduce the numbers of mallard? Ok they could get a SL but then NE have to disclose the who and why under the freedom of info act. How might this sit with some of its donators if someone blabbed? Its got nothing to do with duck poop I suspect. GL will mean they just get on with it without a paper trail The crop is not a crop its free food, the public health is a smoke screen as all duck poop is the same as Mallard poop Remember we have an ex- NE fella to deal with here Now I suspect we are getting close to the real reason for this proposal! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildfowler.250 Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 To save 19 pages of reading, is there any way this idea is potentially getting rejected? Or is there a way of complaining? I could understand,(although not agree with) the inclusion of Greylags onto the licence but not the addition of Mallard. Cheers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuddonNess Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 What you have to remember is the head conchos at BASC can only be advised by council ,if they decide to ignore (which I believe they often do) then it's not council should have a vote of no confidence but the whole BASC set up they have forgotten their roots and seem to care not a jot for the ordinary member. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotslad Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 There is quite a few worrying facts came out in this thread. Quite often people like to kick and call Basc for everthing, but this thread/problem is all of there own making. I have always been a big suppoerter and defender of basc (even with lead shot, and their stance on laying crates a few years ago, they had the courage to stand alone ) The syndicate i run is Basc affilated but i'm having a severe rethink after reading this, when we first went affilaated lost 2 guns as they refused to join basc (for silly reasons i have to add) we would also save about £600 quid a year, crazy for staying with basc really. But in the past i have always thought u have done a good job and stood up for us, sadly that is no longer the case. I would be interestedin basc membership numbers but i guess they took a hammering after lead shot, took another hammering about the layering cages (both unfairly in my opinion) but i think this will be the final nail in the coffin And if the 2 small things i read here are true that will be the end for basc for me (been a member for 30 odd years) If it is true that Richard Ali the Chief exec has never fired a gun or got no interest in shooting. How the hell was he the best candidate for the job? And the icing on the cake a former labour mp is standing for the Basc council, doesn't mention the fact he voted for thet fox hunting ban on his ellection profile Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.