Inclusion of the Greylag Goose onto the General License

[House Boat]

David your bag return for the Wash is completely inaccurate, I am Chairman of one of the largest clubs on the Wash and I would think we shoot more pinks than any club in the country and you don't have our bag returns.

[David BASC]

Thank you, as I say the data we have is only for Crown land, I have asked how else we can work together to get more data - your thoughts?

[kent]

If you do not agree with the NE proposals of mallard and greylags than please say so by engaging in the consultation process as I have said before.

 

best wishes

 

David

 

 

Wise words and don't forget who did what and what you need to do about it to prevent further occurrences, if you are a wildfowler or not the next one might well land in your back yard

[Kes]

Whilst I dont want to compound the real issues here, how can anyone recommend a course of action based on incomplete data? Is the Crown Foreshore data that special or all that is available to decide policy approach?

I willingly admit to not knowing the detail of this but e.g. If Passenger Focus gave data on cross country trains and it was incomplete, the organisations would lose credibility and its authority in lobbying for change would be undermined significantly. I wonder what data the consultation proposal was based on and whether BASC took this 'as read'. I suppose I will never get to know, but I will try and find out.

 

I dont want to stir the pot anymore but I presume the BASC response to consultation is approved by Council, were there any dissenting votes - I must check the Council minutes. Forget I asked.

[House Boat]

Thank you, as I say the data we have is only for Crown land, I have asked how else we can work together to get more data - your thoughts?

Listing to the concern of wildfowlers would be a good start, it would certainly have saved a lot of this mud slinging and the reputation of the BASC.

[Kes]

Minutes of Council in March aren't posted yet and I presume that meeting would confirm response to be sent and published?

[David BASC]

Although not many areas of foreshore where pinks about is on Crown land, I think its very fair to say the Crown Data is not representative of pinks.

 

However, the information I have been given as canada and greylags both resident and migratory, are far more wide spread the Crown bag data is far more representative.

 

However it was not bag data that we are looking at here in the context of our response to NE its total population numbers, as per the background and brief on our web site

 

David

[motty]

David, I am in the Fenland wildfowlers association.

[kent]

Although not many areas of foreshore where pinks about is on Crown land, I think its very fair to say the Crown Data is not representative of pinks.

 

However, the information I have been given as canada and greylags both resident and migratory, are far more wide spread the Crown bag data is far more representative.

 

However it was not bag data that we are looking at here in the context of our response to NE its total population numbers, as per the background and brief on our web site

 

David

 

Now that is a very contradictory statement if ever I heard one.

[Old farrier]

Hi

Just wondering if a bag returne can be used as relevant data

If a club has a bag limit on a species

And that limit is larger or smaller in another club the data cannot be relevant

All the best

Of

[Terry P]

Over 200 less canadas shot on crown foreshore last season than the season before as Conor has already admitted, yet still BASC claim numbers shot are increasing. Pretty much every piece of evidence and statistics used by BASC to get greylag on the GL has been torn to shreads yet still they refuse to admit they have based their judgement on poor research.

[House Boat]

David I'll be in the grosvenor on Friday evening you are welcome to join us for light refreshments and a chat if you would like.

 

Ian.

[scotslad]

I'll just say i'm not a wildfowler and living in scotland, wot ever happens with the GL it will male absolutely no difference to me or my sport. I have no vested interest or agenda's

I'm also not usually a BASC basher either and usually stand up for them BUT i really do think they have made a mistake here.

 

As for bag returns (i think kent said the same at end of last page) they can give u a general trend but that is all without a bit more detailed analysis of them, so many other things can alter them esp on local levels, eventually on a national level if enough clubs all put returns in it should even out any errors. But weather, ammount of outings, any diference to shooting area of pressure amoung many other things could affect bag returns.

Would be very very hard to prove scientifically that the GL was soley responsible for any change in Canada numbers as so many other possibities.

 

Althou i do find it shocking that there is no proper central register of bag returns for wild fowling, it does make things very hard to argue a case if no accurate info on trends both regionally and nationally

 

Conor/David as scientist do u not think it is quite a strange stat that as succes has improved actual numbers shot has decreased? Usually if success rates are increasing u would naturally assume more birds about and more birds in the bag?

For this to be the case would mean fewer outings, does that mean fewer birds and only the more experienced/dedicated fowlers going out, so with the better field craft that explains success rise?

Or could be simply guns not reporting blanks, whereas if ur succesful it wil be reported.

Very easy to manipulate stats to suit ur needs if u know wot ur doing.

 

 

As for the GL proposal itself. If u all take a step back and sort of look at the bigger picture.

 

NE claim to want to reduce red tape (Brilliant who would argue with that) but almost the only propasal in the whole 48 pages that actually reduces red tape is adding Greylags to GL1

In this same document they propose to take Hooded crows, Jackdaws and Jays of the GL

 

Are u seriously telling me that adding a species that averages 30ish SL's (which are declining) while taking of 3 species that almost every keeper/shooter and shepherd England controls, ur talking potentially thousands of SL's if not 10'000's as well as there traps will all have to be licenced. I'm no office genius but that does not sound like reducing red tape

 

My biggest problem with the whole thing is NE's (or basc's) argument's don't really hold water,

For some reason they are being encouraged to add Greylags.

The only reason that makes any sense is so the WWT,RSPB and the likes can cull geese to there hearts content knowing there is no paper trail and so can't be caught out and look bad in front of there members, costing them money, which is all they care about nowadays

 

Call me paraniod if u want but i have a severe distrust of these NGO type bodies, they may not be in bed with the so called alldeged 'conservation' charities but there certainly whispering sweet nothings in there ear

Edited May 13, 2014 by scotslad

[scotslad]

David your bag return for the Wash is completely inaccurate, I am Chairman of one of the largest clubs on the Wash and I would think we shoot more pinks than any club in the country and you don't have our bag returns.

 

Not picking on u house boat but sort of hard to critise basc for having inaccurate returns when they don't have ur's and by sounds of it a few other clubs are not sending theirs either.

 

Is here no central bag return that all clubs send there returns too? Is there a reason u don't send them al to Basc?

It would be a very useful tool for them if every wildfowling club sent there returns in so u would have enough data to try and figure out wot is going on with various populations

[riptide]

Think you will find that some clubs do their own Crown Foreshore leasing direct to crown agents or via a third party ,so their returns will go direct to JNCC /crown and not via Basc so Basc records can nevber be called compleat !!! But as all returns should end up with the Crown of JNCC or even NE (Not sure were !!! ) then that would be best place to work out data from !!

 

Riptide

[David BASC]

Thank motty I will check that our tomorrow

 

Terry, regarding canadas we are looking at the UK trends in population, which is growing, not crown bag returns alone;, although overall the trend for bag returns are on the up for canadas but of course there will be local differences.

 

Ian thanks what time will you be there?

 

Scotslad, I agree many factors can impact on bag returns, and you will note we want to see hooded crows, jackdaws and jay on the GL

 

Riptide, as far as I know and I stand to be corrected, the only bag returns I can see for Crown Land on the NE site are those sent from the BASC data compiled from all the BASC clubs who shoot on Crown leases.

 

David

[panoma1]

744 posting so far on this issue on Pigeon watch and the Wildfowling forum.........take out the one or two (at most) supportive of BASC's policy in this matter, and the defensive BASC employees comments..............and you still have a substantial number of angry and dissatisfied Members!!!

 

What you gonna do BASC? Just carry on? ignore opinion? tread water? hope it goes away?

[Konnie]

Does anyone get the opinion this is all sorted, no matter what is said if BASC was with us they would of sorted a simple easy to log your opinion petition to

register on. I get the idea wildfowlers are the equivalent of council tax payers,if you want to shoot wildfowl in a club you pay us your money and we do as we like

you have no option.

[David BASC]

What we gonna do:

 

We will carry can on doing all we can to promote shooting and sticking to our 5 key objectives

We will carry on being driven by the members that are elected to meet those objectives and grow BASC

 

PS we have had a 'send us you view' email form on our general licence consultation page since the end of February...

Edited May 13, 2014 by David BASC

[bone]

I agree with you Scotslad the only people to benefit out of GL would be RSPB, WWT.

[panoma1]

What we gonna do:

 

We will carry can on doing all we can to promote shooting and sticking to our 5 key objectives

We will carry on being driven by the members that are elected to meet those objectives and grow BASC

 

PS we have had a 'send us you view' email form on our general licence consultation page since the end of February...

Well that says it all!......"we will carry on being driven by the members that are elected" elected by whom, the membership? are these the same council members who once elected are unaccountable because they agree policy behind closed doors apparantly by "consensus" claiming "collective responsibility" ie. without a vote? and thus cannot be individually held to account by the membership who elect them?!

Edited May 14, 2014 by panoma1

[islandgun]

I agree with you Scotslad the only people to benefit out of GL would be RSPB, WWT.

I can find nothing about the GL from RSPB or WWT and I would have thought that there members wouldn't be very impressed, Do they know ?

[David BASC]

Panoma1

 

Yes the members of BASC Council are elected by the members of BASC. All members are entitled to vote. Voting papers and a list of Council members standing for election or re-election are sent to all members with their magazine and are also on the BASC web site. Votes for Council members can be made by post or online. See here for more information: http://basc.org.uk/about-basc/council-and-constitution/basc-council-elections-2014/

 

All Council meetings are held in accordance with the Rules and Constitution of BASC, a copy of which is sent to all members when they join and is also on the BASC web site.

See here for more information: http://basc.org.uk/about-basc/council-and-constitution/basc-constitution/

 

I hope that helps you.

 

Best wishes

 

David

[panoma1]

Panoma1

 

Yes the members of BASC Council are elected by the members of BASC. All members are entitled to vote. Voting papers and a list of Council members standing for election or re-election are sent to all members with their magazine and are also on the BASC web site. Votes for Council members can be made by post or online. See here for more information: http://basc.org.uk/about-basc/council-and-constitution/basc-council-elections-2014/

 

All Council meetings are held in accordance with the Rules and Constitution of BASC, a copy of which is sent to all members when they join and is also on the BASC web site.

See here for more information: http://basc.org.uk/about-basc/council-and-constitution/basc-constitution/

 

I hope that helps you.

 

Best wishes

 

David

David

 

Thank you for your patronising reply, but I would be obliged if you would respond and comment on the actual content of my posting!! or on second thoughts do not bother! my posting contains rhetorical questions to which we both know the answers!! and I doubt I will get a straight response/opinion/comment as I suspect from your overall evasiveness throughout this thread that you have no brief other than to defend BASC's party line.....

 

P1

[scotslad]

I have been very critical of Basc and still firmly believe they are wrong on this matter BUT the fact that there seems to be no 1 organisation or central point for collecting all the bag returns from all wildfowling clubs and assicitions nationally seems completely crazy.

I am sure all the clubs will hold quite decent records going well back that would be very useful, i can imagine some clubs guard there returns as a closely guarded secret but there must be some way they could annonomusely hand there returns in on a regional basis.

 

They're has been a lot of critism of BASC over the bag returns being fictional/unaccurate BUT u have only yourself's to blame if u are not giving BASC the full returns.How are they expected to make informed decisions with only a token idea of wot's going on.

But to be fair as long as it is a consistant token view there figures should still show any trends just not the numbers

 

For me i would be very intrested to know if it is possible to find out how many SL's were issued under the specific licences ie crop protection licence, environmental and conservation, so far all the info seems to be mixed by the method of control rather than the reason.

 

I'm just not convinced that the greylags are causing enough of a problem for farmers on a national level to warrant them going on the GL, and from wot i can gather the SL system seems to be working reasonably well.

Bear in mind i live near the solway and do a lot of work along that coast for farmers who can have tens of thousands of Barnacles on the crops so i do know how damaging they can be and not dismissing farmers with genuine problems. If u got some of them on here on about SL's and Barnacles ur swear filter would blow up

 

For me the evidence is simply not there that the SL system is not working as it is. So why change

 

 

 

David I know basc are opposing the removal of Hoodies, Jackdaws and Jays (quite rightly) but it was the intent i was trying to highlight. NE are proposing adding Greylags to save 30ish SL's a year, yet removing those 3 corvids ur talking potentially creating thousands of SL applications annually and they're trying to save 30. It clean crazy only a civil servent come come up with logic like that

 

Island gun i bet the WWT and RSPB there never going to mention it, wonder if anything in there magazines? Any members on here? Bet they are laughing there t* ts off, they will be over the moon if this goes throu and as a bonus they have got the biggest shooting org in near civil war.

This is the exact time u should be digging dirt on those 2 org's and trying to embarass them, they will be secertly encourging this change without informing there members yet i bet they are also in favor of the corvids coming of too.

 

I just feel Basc has swallowed the NE line and done no exrta research or checked into anything and has made a decision it is now struggling to find evidence to justify it, i think basc have been very naive.

I don't expect to agree with everything basc does but as long as they can justify it, then fair enough