Inclusion of the Greylag Goose onto the General License

[islandgun]

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

Its hard to imagine that NE have not consulted with WWT and RSPB , having all reached an agreement they have decided to get BASC involved who inexplicably have toed the line, The people that will be perceived as the villians will be the wildfowlers particularly and shooters secondly, Can you imagine the horror of the little lady member of the RSPB when she sees pictures of some moron standing over a pile of dead geese and mallard shot in June, BASC who stand for shooting and conservation should be fighting the GL not arguing for it, in fact all of them should be berating NE.

[David BASC]

May I remind you that this is an open consultation, NE did not 'get BASC involved'

[Kes]

It is hard not see the influence of the BASC Chairman in this - I really am trying, but no action to be taken from such a strong vocal reaction has worried me.

Is voting for a candidate really the only route for members to influence policy? Even DC consults on draft policy where it is likely to be contentious. Perhaps I have no grounds for this suspicion but it wont leave me?

[derbyduck]

Well it seems basc can breath out now ! it's all gone away ,well done david you deserve big pat on the back from the bosses ,your one of the best flim flam men working for them and I say this with admoration not condemnation.

[otherwayup]

Well it seems basc can breath out now ! it's all gone away ,...

 

what you talkin bout willis?

Edited May 14, 2014 by otherwayup

[hifly]

If this is the standard of people working for the BASC we are in real **** ! best you all stock up on steel shot, Oh no don't worry they will defend the right to use lead shot and throw any amount of money at that one.

[islandgun]

 

what you talkin bout willis?

indeed

[David BASC]

In my view this is far from over, regardless of what NE do regarding the GL. There is more to do to agree for example on a method of total bird counts and breeding bird counts that's better that the WeBs and the breeding bird surveys, there is more to do to agree a method of getting bag data that we are all happy with.

 

For the most part the vast majority of you have made passionate arguments of your case, I know that you will not agree with all of my replies although I have had them checked by colleagues way more experienced in wildfowling , research and conservation.

 

Some of you have continued this debate in a very professional and helpful way via email and PM..

 

Sadly, a few of you have done little more than fire personal insults at me and Conor, this is childish and pointless as it does absolutely nothing to help any of us or the sport, or this forum.

 

Thankfully, from my personal experience of almost 20 years working for BASC I am very sure that these few are not representative of wildfowlers.

 

David

[Konnie]

what about as wildfowling clubs we show NE and RSPB all our bag returns then they can say that's too many of this or that lets get it on the protected list. gives them lots of ammo with minimal expense !!!!! Cos non wildfowlers will slaughter greys and mallard and true wildfowlers will be blamed, end of rant BASC will do what it wants we only fund them pay up and shut up should be the moto.

[Big Mat]

BASC will do what it wants we only fund them pay up and shut up should be the moto.

 

Thats the general gist i've been getting from all this.

 

I make no apologies for what i've said or the way i've said it, quite frankly i am appalled at BASC.

 

I like many other on here am a passionate wildfowler and to see this coming from a organisation which was made great by wildfowlers puts some serious doubts in my mind about the future of the sport.

[hifly]

DAVID basc said ( I am very sure that these few are not representative of wildfowlers) Do you want to bet David, I have been a member of WAGBI then and now basc for 44 years and I am a secretary of a long standing wildfowling club and our club is totally p***** off with the basc handling of this as Mark found out at our AGM

[Guest stevo]

what about as wildfowling clubs we show NE and RSPB all our bag returns then they can say that's too many of this or that lets get it on the protected list. gives them lots of ammo with minimal expense !!!!! Cos non wildfowlers will slaughter greys and mallard and true wildfowlers will be blamed, end of rant BASC will do what it wants we only fund them pay up and shut up should be the moto.

Stop blaming all of us "non wildfoulers " for the impending demise of the graylags . What make you so sure the we even give a hoot ? From what I have read you "wildfoulers should submitted your bag returns properly . Then maybe you wouldnt be in this mess

[motty]

Stop blaming all of us "non wildfoulers " for the impending demise of the graylags . What make you so sure the we even give a hoot ? From what I have read you "wildfoulers should submitted your bag returns properly . Then maybe you wouldnt be in this mess

I think Konnie meant people that don't shoot on the shore are not wildfowlers, just duck and goose shooters. There are plenty of these around and some will take advantage of having an 'open season' on mallard and greys. That is inevitable.

By they way, we do send in our bag returns.

 

David, any feedback on the bag returns from FWA?

[Guest stevo]

If that is what was ment by the comment . And I have read it wrong then please except my apologies .

[Big Mat]

Stop blaming all of us "non wildfoulers " for the impending demise of the graylags . What make you so sure the we even give a hoot ? From what I have read you "wildfoulers should submitted your bag returns properly . Then maybe you wouldnt be in this mess

 

Most clubs have a condition of having to return your bag returns by a certain date or you don't get a permit for next season

[David BASC]

HIFLY, as I would have thought you would have realised, I was referring to those who resort to searing and making personal attacks on Conor and me, if you or you club honestly think that's the best way to resolve this, I am honestly surprised and disappointed.

 

Carry on swearing and you will get this thread closed, I am sure

 

I understand that many club members are not happy, but the vast majority get their point over in a reasonable way without the personal jibes and swearing.

 

Will there be mass slaughter of greylags by inland shooters during the summer months if they go onto the GL?? I honestly doubt it, I may not be a wildfowler but I am an active inland shooter and may I say that suggesting that this is a fait accompli shows perhaps how little you know about the vast majority of inland shooters.

 

Motty, sorry I missed meeting up with my colleague from research who handles the bag returns, but I am meeting him in the morning, I promise to report back.

 

David

 

I

[David BASC]

Please remember that our proposed response on the consultation does not include the shooting of mallard.

Edited May 14, 2014 by David BASC

[Kes]

"Will there be mass slaughter of greylags by inland shooters during the summer months if they go onto the GL"??

If there is no out-of-season shooting, why put them on the GL why not rely on SL's ?

Is it really for the few who have problems so they dont have to fill in an application. Who fills in SL's and why might someone not want this ? Farmers dont mind SL's, apparently.

 

Since we have never seen Greylags on the GL how can any of us be sure that the 'vast majority of inland shooters' might not shoot at least one ? Relying on them being conservation minded suggests, since they are 'the vast majority' that those of the 'vast majority ' who are members of BASC might prefer them excluded from the general licence.

We cannot have it both ways.

It is simply unnecessary and an inglorious mistake, perhaps.

[motty]

Unfortunately, there are many unscrupulous shooters out there who will use the general license to shoot plenty of greys out of season. These are the same kind of people who choose to ignore the laws on non toxic shot.

I have had skeins of greys flying over me in March whilst after pigeons and I have obviously let them fly on. There are some who would not pass up this 'new opportunity for sport' and fill their boots, with little fear of reprisal.

Edited May 14, 2014 by motty

[David BASC]

I certainly did not say there would be no out of season shooting now did I? As you probably know there is already 'out of season' shooting under licence.

 

Species will move onto the GL for a variety of reasons, typically public health, crop damage, and if individual or class licenced are common being granted without opposition, the question rightly arises as why carry on with the need to apply for an individual or class licence when NE will almost certainly grant anyway. Hence the move to GL.

 

You ask how can any of us be sure the vast majority of inland shooters might not shoot at least 1? Well its not happened with candas has it? Is there any evidence at all you can call on Kes that suggests the vast majority of the 400,000 inland shooters have gone out and shot at least 1 Canada each year its been on GL?

 

Based on the feedback to our draft response to the current consultation, the vast majority of BASC members who have been in contact support Council's position.

Edited May 14, 2014 by David BASC

[scotslad]

After 29 pages the thing that really shocks me most over the whole 29 pages is that there is no reliable and accurate record of regional or national bag returns. As i'm sure every club keeps quite good returns.

 

 

But how the hell do u expect Basc or anyone else to fight ur corner when they don't have the ammunition or facts to do it.

Early on there was talk of Canada numbers down since they went on the GL, Basc's 'offical' figures show that is not the case, wot are they meant to believe? If they had the full returns they could at least see that the numbers are falling and try a do something about it. As it is they have to do wot the evidence tells them. Who's fault is that?

 

In this day and age u need figures to back up wot u notice out on the shore it's no good just saying wot u see.

 

Bottom line is Basc are wrong on this and they should off known the s* it storm this would cause and done some digging to find more info and not just wot NE put on there site to cover their ar *es

 

They should be trying to find wot WWT/RSPB have advised and accidently let it become public that both are wanting greylags on the GL and both kill large numbers as it is already, for Basc to take the moral high ground they have to oppose it thou.

 

Just as there is inland shooters who may abuse this should they go on the GL, there is also wildfowlers who will never be happy wot ever Basc does and i'd be surprised if they don't blame Basc when the weather isn't right, and will not be hapy until WAGBI 2014 reforms.

[Konnie]

If that is what was ment by the comment . And I have read it wrong then please except my apologies .

that's what I was trying to say those that abuse it would just make there quarry list larger

[Terry P]

I certainly did not say there would be no out of season shooting now did I? As you probably know there is already 'out of season' shooting under licence.

 

Species will move onto the GL for a variety of reasons, typically public health, crop damage, and if individual or class licenced are common being granted without opposition, the question rightly arises as why carry on with the need to apply for an individual or class licence when NE will almost certainly grant anyway. Hence the move to GL.

 

You ask how can any of us be sure the vast majority of inland shooters might not shoot at least 1? Well its not happened with candas has it? Is there any evidence at all you can call on Kes that suggests the vast majority of the 400,000 inland shooters have gone out and shot at least 1 Canada each year its been on GL?

 

Based on the feedback to our draft response to the current consultation, the vast majority of BASC members who have been in contact support Council's position.

David ,Re your last paragraph, I and many others I know have replied directly to NE and not BASC, perhaps that is why you believe the vast majority of your members support councils position.

 

Again its about having all the facts before making a statement.

 

Maybe you should have said, the vast majority that have replied to BASC.

[Kes]

David you miss my point.

We cant be sure a lot of inland shooters may not take just one, now can we, there wont be a law against it.

But if the vast majority dont (as I would hope), a large number of that majority will be BASC members - yes? so THEY will be avoiding shooting these geese - their shooting organisation BASC recommends Greylags on GL but the shooters dont shoot them, we hope, so why support the change?

Many people on here exercise their right, as far as their pest control duties permit, not to shoot pigeon at the height of their breeding season. Doesnt that suggest that adding a large bird like a goose to GL allowing it to be shot whilst caring for young might be unpopular. BASC has abrogated its conservation responsibilities to RSPB and WWT by supporting this change.

 

Why is BASC recommending the move to general licence.then; to do what members want ? - I think not. To do what someone else wants - probably, who though and why. I tend to think it relates to EN and other 'conservation' interests who dont want to explain why they protect raptors and kill breeding geese. I am guessing but I dont work for BASC so how would I know ?

[kent]

I think Konnie meant people that don't shoot on the shore are not wildfowlers, just duck and goose shooters. There are plenty of these around and some will take advantage of having an 'open season' on mallard and greys. That is inevitable.

By they way, we do send in our bag returns.

 

David, any feedback on the bag returns from FWA?

 

You see its not in and already mistakes are being made the GL on mallard is only applicable to nest spoiling the way I read the consultation, this in itself is enough reason to chuck it out "risk of non-compliance" to the terms which is a listed factor by NE