Inclusion of the Greylag Goose onto the General License

[Kes]

And the last one is still on the lead ammunition group.........................the new CEO isn't, so who's voice is being heard?

I am also slightly confused by this, JS was 40 years the CEO and a new CEO whose connection to shooting is less obvious, has decided lead is a big issue (he's correct of course) but how and why has he taken this view and why did the previous Council not press the issue strongly with JS or did they. I'm sorry, this does not sound like an organisation with its 'ducks in order' so perhaps comments about mallard in the GL could be expected to be confusing.

[Conor O'Gorman]

"Perhaps [/size]worth adding that the consultation is also taking views on whether the robin can also be added to the same general licences as is proposed for mallard and greylags".[/size]

 

That is true but the same proposal also includes the Pied Wagtail and Starling (red list) and, as far as I can see the inclusion is proposed simply for birds which nest in places and compromise food safety (etc.) the same (exactly) could not be said of the mallard or especially the greylag, so perhaps there is a difference, even though the mechanism of control proposed appears to be the same.[/size]

 

No comments on the Jay or hooded crow or jackdaw - what is BASC's position on those - I would appreciate knowing if those derogations have been agreed/negotiated/recommended/not recommended. [/size]

The simplification of the GL is unlikely to happen in my view since that also is being used as a means of control. [/size]

I shall measure BASC on its success in this singular recommendation.[/size]

basc's position on website on all proposals of interest.

[Kes]

basc's position on website on all proposals of interest.

Thank you.

A little more detail might be helpful, since it seems to be updated regularly.

[David BASC]

I am a bit surprized at a couple of points that people on this forum are asking.

 

Firstly why its important to help preserve and redevelop key breeding grounds on the continent for mallard and greylags? Well considering the majority of these birds we see in the UK come from overseas and winter on our shores...

 

Secondly, why national bag returns from approximately 2/3 of wildfowling clubs in the UK are seen as incorrect, but he anecdotal individual evidence of half a dozen on here is seen to take precedent.

 

Finally, if anyone on here does not think that crop and livestock protection from certain species is not high on a farmers agenda you are very much mistaken, how do I know this - well I am involved in high level meetings with farmers groups such as the NFU and FUW, and colleagues similarly with UFW and NFUS.

 

David

[Old farrier]

page 11 BASC magazine Shooting and Conservation may isue , Belarus grant will help uk wildfowl , WHCT has given a grant to restore floodplain on selected sites in Belarus,the money will help restore 500 hectares of open floodplain providing better habitat for INPORTANT UK QUARY SPECIES SUCH AS GREYLAG GEESE, MALLARD, PINTAIL, WIGEON AND TEAL. why ?

 

 

What is this realy about ? there is more to this than is being told, I am not as educated as some of the well paid people who are enployed to represent basc members but I can smell when the brown stuff is being pushed behind the door !

Hi

Thought it would be spotted eventually

Has anyone spotted that in exceed of 60% of revene for BASC goes on admin

Out of interest the RNLI keep there admistrtion costs at less than 20%

Can't comment to much as I've only just rejoined basc after a long absence

Reason for rejoining shoot rule

 

Has anyone thought to look at the areas special licences have been granted

I bet most are badly planned (conservation areas ) around large commercial entity's ponds on air fields golf courses schools collages ect

 

It is of my opinion most of these so called special licences to destroy eggs and moulting birds could be avoided by a bit of thought remove the food source nesting site and create a disturbance thereby moving them to a area there no problem

Anyway just my thoughts

All the best

Of

[Berettacocker]

I found our Canada's and greys on our 16 acre gravel pit shoot would get shot once in September then f$$k off and come back on 1st Feb!! So the trouble spots would have no trouble scaring them off.

[riptide]

Wow Houseboat -----you put ----"insedently my on local authority SELL food to the public to feed ducks"

 

So that very same local authority sells Jo public duck food then behind their backs it or ones nearby so it seems could be culling those same ducks by egg and nest destruction !!!!

 

Be cheaper to make a by law to put up signs To NOT feed the ducks or get fined ( Except in a sever weather period )

 

my reply to one of the clubs I belong to was "" I am in 4 clubs all of which are affiliated to Basc ,and even though I am a strong vocal opponent to this one major problem with the GL It does not warrant me leaving !! Basc covers so many key items to do with shooting that we still need their strong voice and backing of numbers ,some 130,000 members if we want to maintain our sport into the future ,,so leaving is not a option ,but fight hard for mine and thousands of wildfowlers beliefs from within is the only way .. They are already listening and I should think by now well rattled and that is why we are not hearing from any of the descion makers as they know the problem their view has caused... as usually we as fowlers take a while to wake up to direct attacks however thinly they are veiled but once up and in the open we respond!!!! Eloquent as their reasons are they just dont hold water .it needs a rethinking Now !

[motty]

I am just so angry with the BASC at the moment. I have never been this disappointed in them. And if someone else (from BASC) quotes how many SLs were granted for greys and mallard, I think i'm going to burst!

Please,someone answer the question, 'where is the proposal for cormorants to be included in the GL?!'.

Edited May 11, 2014 by motty

[riptide]

Sorry Conor ,but you put ----"" the issue is that a small number of people dont like the idea of species of wildfowl being on a general licence because of their pre-conceived ideas about it being a 'vermin list'.""

 

 

In my case that is not true, I am not at all concerned about any vermin list, the facts are we have in my clubs area seen a marked reduction in Canada’s which has happened over the last few years and we dont want to see the small amount of Greys we have here go the same way by increasing the shooting opportunities from the currant Open season to all year round 24/7 type shooting! We as fowlers have more respect for them...What Basc should have done after consulting its membership and telling them what its reply to the consultation was going to be before they did it ,their by allowing us to respond to Basc on it ,should have been to tell NE to simplify its SL so that they are automatically issued in January each year to currant problem sites and only inspect any new site applications , this would have reduced Red Tape at a stroke and also made it so much easier for anyone with a justifiable problem site or area to control the problem species !!!

 

 

 

And you put """People are perfectly entitled to their own opinion and to relate that in a response to a consultation, but rallying others to their cause based on misinformation about impacts on population are misplaced to say the least."""

 

 

You and I have no idea how the Greys will react if put on a GL ,but we do have the experience of how other animals do and with less Canada’s on our patch this causes us to feel that Greys could or will go the same way ! Also we have the example set by EN now NE themselves of THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE! That I am afraid speaks volumes!

 

 

And just to remind all, I was against Canards going on the GL in England back then and recently I was also vocally at a WLC meeting against them going on the GL in Scotland, so my position has not changed over the years

 

 

Riptide

 

[scotslad]

I am a bit surprized at a couple of points that people on this forum are asking.

 

Firstly why its important to help preserve and redevelop key breeding grounds on the continent for mallard and greylags? Well considering the majority of these birds we see in the UK come from overseas and winter on our shores...

 

Secondly, why national bag returns from approximately 2/3 of wildfowling clubs in the UK are seen as incorrect, but he anecdotal individual evidence of half a dozen on here is seen to take precedent.

 

Finally, if anyone on here does not think that crop and livestock protection from certain species is not high on a farmers agenda you are very much mistaken, how do I know this - well I am involved in high level meetings with farmers groups such as the NFU and FUW, and colleagues similarly with UFW and NFUS.

 

David

 

Can u not see the contridiction in ur first 2 statements?

 

So u admit the majority of the birds we see over winter (throu normal fowling season) are from oversees yet u expect bag returns to give u an accurate picture of the UK breeding population

But how does bag returns give u a picture of UK;s breeding wildfowl? Greylags have bred in England for years althou in tiny numbers yet always appeared in the returns. Wot is shot on the foreshore nationally will be mainly migrotory geese. So u could shoot every last greylag in england and if they bred well elsewhere still have returns going up.

No one is disputing the accuracy of the bag returns just how relevant it is to the UK resident population.

 

Do u also think the number of woodcock shot has any relation to the UK breeding population?

 

So the farmers are pushing for pricking eggs (which seems to be the most licences) and killing by lethal injection are they? Must be very different from all the farmers i have worked (SE in pest control almost exclusively for farmers) for over the last 25 years.

So yes i know how important pest control can be, but i don't think they will be pushing for egg pricking, shooting if/when a problem develops but egg pricking i doubt it .

 

Do farmers have a crystal ball that they can predict which nest colony (which will likely be miles away and off there ground) will hit which field/crop given the distance they will travel and all the different crop rotation weather etc. The best thing for farmers is a swift response to a SL request to shoot, so only the problem geese are shot only if a problem occurs. U could be pricking eggs that may never even become a problem

No one has a problem with problem birds being shot

 

Have Basc actually tried a FOI to see where most of the SL's go.

Is it farmers or is it councils/utility companies and conservation charities?

[hifly]

DAVID BASC SAID ( Firstly why its important to help preserve and redevelop key breeding grounds from on the continent for mallard and greylags? Well considering the majority of these birds we see in the UK come from overseas and winter on our shores...

 

Secondly, why national bag returns from approximately 2/3 of wildfowling clubs in the UK are seen as incorrect, but he anecdotal individual evidence of half a dozen on here is seen to take precedent.

 

Finally, if anyone on here does not think that crop and livestock protection from certain species is not high on a farmers agenda you are very much mistaken, how do I know this - well I am involved in high level meetings with farmers groups such as the NFU and FUW, and colleagues similarly with UFW and NFUS.

 

David )

 

So why no mention of Brent geese being brought back on the list they cause vast amounts of damage to crops ! OH I FORGOT BASC WILL DO ANYTHING FOR A QUITE LIFE .

[kent]

Canada geese were added to general licences in England from 2005 onwards. The average numbers of Canada geese shot per wildfowling visit on the Crown Estate has increased since they were added on to the English and Welsh general licences. The UK population trend has continued to increase since the addition of Canada geese to the general licences. The proportion of the Great Britain population of Canada geese using shot-over estuaries has increased in line with the population trend.

 

BEEN HERE BEFORE LOOK BACK AT THE THREAD

 

The population of breeding greylag geese has increased by 179% in the last 20 years and the breeding mallard population has increased by 20% in the same time period. 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.

 

2012 JUST 12 GREYLAG NEST LICENCES ISSUED AND ONLY 12 FOR MALLARD ! HARDLY A NATIONAL CRISIS (INFO NATURAL ENGLAND)

 

The issue is not whether the population of greylag or mallard will be affected by changes in the administration of wildlife licensing, the issue is that a small number of people dont like the idea of species of wildfowl being on a general licence beause of their pre-conceived ideas about it being a 'vermin list'. People are perfectly entitled to their own opinion and to relate that in a response to a consultation, but rallying others to their cause based on misinformation about impacts on population are misplaced to say the least.

 

WELL WE AGREE ON THE MISINFORMATION BIT! GLAD YOUR RATTLED THIS IS JUST THE START

 

The consultation is also taking views on whether the robin can also be added to the same general licences as mallard and greylags.NO ITS NOT MORE MIS INFORMATION ITS SPECIFIC TO NESTS IN FLUES AND VENT PIPES. IN REALITY I BET MOST ENGINEERS JUST GET ON WITH IT ANYHOW AND WOULDN'T KNOW ANYTHING OF THE LAW ANYHOW. DONT CLOUD THE ISSUE. I NOTE YOU DONT MENTION THE SACRID IBIS OR INDIAN HOUSE CROW (WHATEVER THOSE LOOK LIKE)

Edited May 11, 2014 by kent

[kent]

page 11 BASC magazine Shooting and Conservation may isue , Belarus grant will help uk wildfowl , WHCT has given a grant to restore floodplain on selected sites in Belarus,the money will help restore 500 hectares of open floodplain providing better habitat for INPORTANT UK QUARY SPECIES SUCH AS GREYLAG GEESE, MALLARD, PINTAIL, WIGEON AND TEAL. why ?

 

 

What is this realy about ? there is more to this than is being told, I am not as educated as some of the well paid people who are enployed to represent basc members but I can smell when the brown stuff is being pushed behind the door !

Hey it don't take a college education to look down on others with contempt and anger, it takes insecurity and fear.

[David BASC]

Scotslad,

 

The question was asked as to why money was spend on overseas project - I answered it

 

Did I say bag returns give a picture of UK breeding levels - no I did not

 

I am not aware of any correlation between the number of woodcock shot and their UK breeding success

 

I have never said farmers are pushing for pricking eggs, I have said farmers and other landowners need the flexibility to control species with a range of methods when they need it.A SL can take up to or longer than 30 days to be granted, if you were a farmer would you want to wait this long?

 

NO FEO has bee asked for by BASC

 

David

[David BASC]

Hifly, you asked why not bring Brent back onto the list, if you look at post 222 there is a very clear answer

[edenman]

Hi David ,

 

You keep saying that sl take too long to process. Have/has basc looked into ways of having process speeded up to cut out red tape and have problem birds dealt with quicker rather than putting them on gl ?

 

Edenman.

[David BASC]

That proposal was not put forward by NE in the consultation document.

 

David

[ian g]

Iv watched this thread with intrest an how BASC can go along with this is beyond me it's disgusting the SL should be the only thing in place to take care off localised problems because that's all they are and excuses of these take 30 days to process is side stepping the issue to put these birds on the generally license open to abuse on a national scale is wrong but shows how far out of touch BASC are with certain parts of the shooting community maybe if BASC listened to its members like the RSPB do there's maybe there wouldn't be so many issues with shooting today

[joknob]

shame to say,but BASC are just the same as the major political parties,they will not listen to the common man and as long as their fat pensions are doing well.....bla bla bla. craig

[kent]

That proposal was not put forward by NE in the consultation document.

 

David

Yet BASC use it here as good reason to put these birds on GL? With evidence given by NE themselves on numbers of licences issued 2012 for Greylag a (30 ONLY) and being so pathetically low I suggest section 7 D of the consultation document "THE ACTION TO BE LICENCED IS PROPORTIONATE TO THE SCALE OF THE PROBLEM OR NEED" might be answer enough, it cuts out a whole 30 licences being issued which somebody, someplace thinks is a lot of red tape and BASC agree. Its sounds so crazy that the C might need dropping from BASC

[scotslad]

Scotslad,

 

The question was asked as to why money was spend on overseas project - I answered it

 

Did I say bag returns give a picture of UK breeding levels - no I did not

 

I am not aware of any correlation between the number of woodcock shot and their UK breeding success

 

I have never said farmers are pushing for pricking eggs, I have said farmers and other landowners need the flexibility to control species with a range of methods when they need it.A SL can take up to or longer than 30 days to be granted, if you were a farmer would you want to wait this long?

 

 

 

 

Yes but since this thread has started waaay waaay back anytime Canda goose numbers are mentioned the bag return stats come out. If u freely admit as u do above that game bag returns are not an accurate indication of UK breeding populations.

So why have u constantly trotted it out to prove Canada numbers have not declined since going on the GL?

 

I would wager i doubt u will ever see a drop in the bag returns for greylag nationally (locally very possibly) if they were added to the GL due to the ammount of migrants overwintering BUT that is no excuse to shoot our own residents on an open licence for the sake of such a tiny number of SL's. And how many farmers are actually using this licence? I notice most SL are for egg destruction so probably not farmers, the other SL's are split between lethal injection (again probably not farmers) and shooting.

Is there no split for SL's for which licence they were issued under eg Crop Protection or environmental etc

 

So tackle the problem of red tape and how complicated the GL is now and the SL's are (yet the few on here who have used them said there was no problem getting them esp if a repeat) As i said earlier that would help all bodies that need a SL for anything, like fishermen for cormorants

I have said it in most of my posts, just as eden man has above,

Try to get the process streamlined and for repeat SL's online (doing SGC/FAC's online now)

When the GL first came out it was a 1 page, basically a list of species that can be shot, it is now a 48 page consutation and gettin more complicated each year. To reply u have to go throu the whole lot, it just a ploy to discourage as many people as possible from replying with anything that doesn't fit with the staus quo

 

The GL is potentially quite a big threat to shooting, more and more add ons get added every year.

Even the shoo before u shoot, u have been assured by NE its just the wording yet they won't take it out? A clever lawyer could have a field day in the future. Who's to say won't be chaged further in the future?

Even the threat if an NE employee SUSPECTS u of a wildlife crime, no more pigeon/crow shooting, where's the innocent until proved guility?

 

Must admit think i am done with Basc after this fiasco, the more u go on the more it sounds like u have ur heads in the sand (or somewhere else)

 

Last year i wrote a check for £1200 to Basc for sub's (which will be chicken feed compared to most wildfowling clubs), shame so few other org's doing affilated shoot ins or it would make my decision very easy indeed

Edited May 11, 2014 by scotslad

[Conor O'Gorman]

scotslad, hardly any migratory greylags visit England apart from the Solway. The English greylag population is wholly resident birds.The complexity of the general licences is indeed an issue - one that BASC and many other organisations have raised in this consultation - and BASC has encourgaed members to respond to the consultation specifically on that point. The full BASC briefing as follows:

 

BASC calls for general licences to be simplified

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.

The 48 pages of proposed changes in this consultation 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 each general licence. 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.

Scaring and proofing before shooting

BASC does not support the unnecessary proposal to increase the “burden of proof” that alternative methods such as “scaring” and “proofing” have been tried before shooting.

Collared dove, jackdaw and jay

BASC supports the continued inclusion of collared doves and jackdaw on general licence GL04 to prevent serious agricultural damage or disease.

BASC supports the continued inclusion of jackdaw and jay on general licence GL06 to conserve flora and fauna.

Herring gull and lesser black-backed gull

BASC supports the proposal to create two new class Licences covering the killing and taking of herring gulls and lesser black-backed gulls for the purposes of preserving public health and public safety, and conservation of flora and fauna; with the caveat that that the default position of licencing should be general licences.

Hooded crows

BASC does not support the proposed removal of hooded crows from general licences GL04, to prevent serious agricultural damage or disease; GL05, to preserve public health and safety; and GL06 to conserve flora and fauna.

Trapping Code of Practice

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction of a trapping code of practice.

Trapped birds

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction of a maximum time for which decoy birds can be continuously kept within a trap or be kept as a decoy.

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction of wording that restricts birds caught under general or class licences to dispatch, release or keeping as a decoy.

Referenced tagging system for traps

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction a referenced tagging system for traps set under general or class licence.

Use of larsen-mate type traps

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction of wording that specifies the types of traps that can be used under general or class licence.

Humane dispatch

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction of wording stating that birds which are shot and injured are then pursued and humanely dispatched where practicable.

Read and understand licence condition

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction of a condition that requires users to have read (or had read to them) and understood general licences.

Breaching licence conditions

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction of wording that breaching the conditions of this licence means that you cannot rely on this licence to carry out an activity that would – except under the provisions of this licence – be an offence.

Sanction for breaches of general licences

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction of a statement that a person’s right to use a general licence may be rescinded if they breach a condition(s) of a wildlife licence.

Monitoring and reporting

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction of a trial voluntary reporting scheme or a mandatory scheme whereby users of general licences would submit annual bag returns to Natural England.

Greylag goose and mallard

BASC Council is aware that some concern has been expressed about BASC’s position on the Natural England consultation on general and class licences. While the consultation covers a number of proposals, wildfowlers have shown an interest in two in particular because they relate to greylag geese and mallard.

BASC, Angling Trust, Countryside Alliance and the National Gamekeepers Organisation support the following proposals relating to greylag geese and mallard:

• To add breeding greylag goose to the General Licence WML-GL04. This would permit shooting and the destruction of nests and eggs to prevent serious agricultural damage or disease.
• To add breeding greylag geese and breeding mallard to the General Licence WML-GL05. This would permit the destruction of nests and eggs to preserve public health and safety. This proposal would not permit shooting.

In determining its position, BASC Council drew on feedback from members, the Wildfowling Liaison Committee and the Game shooting and Gamekeeping Committee and considered the following:

• The proposals reflect Government’s wish to cut bureaucracy as outlined in the Red Tape Challenge. BASC Council is generally in favour of a reduction in bureaucracy relating to shooting and land management.
• Farmers are concerned about more timely action in situations when greylag geese impact on their livelihoods by competing with their cattle and sheep for spring grass.
• Local authorities are concerned about more timely action in situations where nests pose a potential health and safety hazard in villages, towns and city parks.
• BASC Council is aware that there is already licensed control of greylags and mallard taking place.
• 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.
• BASC Council does not believe greylag geese nor mallards should be viewed as pests and understands that these proposals are not about reducing the population, but about people being able to respond quickly to prevent serious problems occurring.
• The population of breeding greylag geese has increased by 179% in the last 20 years and the breeding mallard population has increased by 20% in the same time period. Because control will take place during the breeding season migratory birds will not be affected. BASC is also seeking confirmation that the breeding populations of greylag geese and mallard will continue to be counted annually if the proposed changes to the relevant licences are made.
• BASC Council is mindful that wood pigeons can cause serious agricultural damage; and notes that as a responsible organisation BASC needs to recognise the damage that feral greylag geese can cause to crops and the resultant impact on the farming community.
• BASC Council recognises that fears for the Canada goose population were also expressed by some members ahead of that species’ addition to several general licenses in England and in Wales. Those fears have not been realised, with populations continuing to grow and bag returns increasing on the foreshore.

[motty]

 

scotslad, hardly any migratory greylags visit England apart from the Solway. The English greylag population is wholly resident birds.The complexity of the general licences is indeed an issue - one that BASC and many other organisations have raised in this consultation - and BASC has encourgaed members to respond to the consultation specifically on that point. The full BASC briefing as follows:

 

BASC calls for general licences to be simplified

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.

The 48 pages of proposed changes in this consultation 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 each general licence. 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.

Scaring and proofing before shooting

BASC does not support the unnecessary proposal to increase the “burden of proof” that alternative methods such as “scaring” and “proofing” have been tried before shooting.

Collared dove, jackdaw and jay

BASC supports the continued inclusion of collared doves and jackdaw on general licence GL04 to prevent serious agricultural damage or disease.

BASC supports the continued inclusion of jackdaw and jay on general licence GL06 to conserve flora and fauna.

Herring gull and lesser black-backed gull

BASC supports the proposal to create two new class Licences covering the killing and taking of herring gulls and lesser black-backed gulls for the purposes of preserving public health and public safety, and conservation of flora and fauna; with the caveat that that the default position of licencing should be general licences.

Hooded crows

BASC does not support the proposed removal of hooded crows from general licences GL04, to prevent serious agricultural damage or disease; GL05, to preserve public health and safety; and GL06 to conserve flora and fauna.

Trapping Code of Practice

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction of a trapping code of practice.

Trapped birds

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction of a maximum time for which decoy birds can be continuously kept within a trap or be kept as a decoy.

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction of wording that restricts birds caught under general or class licences to dispatch, release or keeping as a decoy.

Referenced tagging system for traps

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction a referenced tagging system for traps set under general or class licence.

Use of larsen-mate type traps

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction of wording that specifies the types of traps that can be used under general or class licence.

Humane dispatch

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction of wording stating that birds which are shot and injured are then pursued and humanely dispatched where practicable.

Read and understand licence condition

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction of a condition that requires users to have read (or had read to them) and understood general licences.

Breaching licence conditions

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction of wording that breaching the conditions of this licence means that you cannot rely on this licence to carry out an activity that would – except under the provisions of this licence – be an offence.

Sanction for breaches of general licences

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction of a statement that a person’s right to use a general licence may be rescinded if they breach a condition(s) of a wildlife licence.

Monitoring and reporting

BASC does not support the unnecessary introduction of a trial voluntary reporting scheme or a mandatory scheme whereby users of general licences would submit annual bag returns to Natural England.

Greylag goose and mallard

BASC Council is aware that some concern has been expressed about BASC’s position on the Natural England consultation on general and class licences. While the consultation covers a number of proposals, wildfowlers have shown an interest in two in particular because they relate to greylag geese and mallard.

BASC, Angling Trust, Countryside Alliance and the National Gamekeepers Organisation support the following proposals relating to greylag geese and mallard:

• To add breeding greylag goose to the General Licence WML-GL04. This would permit shooting and the destruction of nests and eggs to prevent serious agricultural damage or disease.
• To add breeding greylag geese and breeding mallard to the General Licence WML-GL05. This would permit the destruction of nests and eggs to preserve public health and safety. This proposal would not permit shooting.

In determining its position, BASC Council drew on feedback from members, the Wildfowling Liaison Committee and the Game shooting and Gamekeeping Committee and considered the following:

• The proposals reflect Government’s wish to cut bureaucracy as outlined in the Red Tape Challenge. BASC Council is generally in favour of a reduction in bureaucracy relating to shooting and land management.
• Farmers are concerned about more timely action in situations when greylag geese impact on their livelihoods by competing with their cattle and sheep for spring grass.
• Local authorities are concerned about more timely action in situations where nests pose a potential health and safety hazard in villages, towns and city parks.
• BASC Council is aware that there is already licensed control of greylags and mallard taking place.
• 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.
• BASC Council does not believe greylag geese nor mallards should be viewed as pests and understands that these proposals are not about reducing the population, but about people being able to respond quickly to prevent serious problems occurring.
• The population of breeding greylag geese has increased by 179% in the last 20 years and the breeding mallard population has increased by 20% in the same time period. Because control will take place during the breeding season migratory birds will not be affected. BASC is also seeking confirmation that the breeding populations of greylag geese and mallard will continue to be counted annually if the proposed changes to the relevant licences are made.
• BASC Council is mindful that wood pigeons can cause serious agricultural damage; and notes that as a responsible organisation BASC needs to recognise the damage that feral greylag geese can cause to crops and the resultant impact on the farming community.
• BASC Council recognises that fears for the Canada goose population were also expressed by some members ahead of that species’ addition to several general licenses in England and in Wales. Those fears have not been realised, with populations continuing to grow and bag returns increasing on the foreshore.

 

STOP QUOTING THIS ****. YOU JUST DON'T GET IT, DO YOU?

[ian g]

Would seem not but up on that pedestal so far above the common folk this must be hard

[House Boat]

Gentleman let not forget that Connor and David are employed by the BASC and have obviously been told to defend the council line, weather they agree or disagree with the council's decision there remit is to defened, why else would they spend there weekend defending there employer. David and Connor please don't take any of this personally but like you many of us represent club members and we are getting kicked from both directions too.

 

Gentlemen if we want change the answer is in our own hands, I know many of us feel we do enough all ready but we need as many wildfowlers as possible to stand for council. My wife has a great little saying that she tells her team "if you always do what you have always done you will always have exactly what you have right now"

 

Ian B.