Inclusion of the Greylag Goose onto the General License

[Guest cookoff013]

David BASC, do you not get it?

The point is, many thousands of greylags will now get shot throughout the country, people being able to use the excuse that these geese are doing damage. I have already mentioned (different thread) that I shoot on a farm with several hundred greylags resident. The farmer will not let me shoot just one in season because they do him no harm. He grows around 1000 acres of cereals.

Anywhere that a farmer has a big problem with geese should have a different kind of special license to deal with these geese as and when.

My guess is that only a few percent of greylags in this country are doing any real damage, but i'd wager that the unnecessary cull on these birds would be majorly disproportionate.

 

+1

people would shoot them anyway.

people will charge / pay to shoot stuff.

people will spend money.

people will make money.

 

i know it, you know it.

 

hypothetical scenario.

say i farm spaghetti trees. there are greylag geese who eat spaghetti trees (or whatever).

whats to stop me setting up, a "spaghetti" protection squad for £50 a day. to shoot spaghetti eating greylag and canadas?

 

someone will abuse it in the name of crop protection.

[David BASC]

My point Scolpax is that we, the shooters need to work with the farmers as they control the access to our shooting.

 

As to abusing the licence in the way that's just been suggested, has this happened with Canada's? Not as far as I know.

 

David

[edenman]

Ok I see what your saying David, but why must they be put on general license ? I have already stated that it would've been better to have special license made easier to obtain so locations where they are causing crop damage/public health problems can be dealt with in a quicker fashion ? Was this considered by Basc ?

[David BASC]

Good afternoon edenman,

 

The proposals reflect Government’s wish to cut bureaucracy as outlined in the Red Tape Challenge. We are generally in favour of a reduction in bureaucracy relating to shooting and land management

[Grandalf]

David, BASC is not there to look after the perceived interests of farmers, they can look after themselves well enough.

 

BASC is there to support shooting and shooters, any diminution of the quarry available does not do that. Something to shoot, somewhere to shoot and something to shoot with.

This hits the crux of the matter. BASC employees are paid by the membership to represent shooters not farmers. Hardly any shooter on this forum is saying anything other than greylags should NOT be on the general licence. Instead of accepting that - BASC employees are going to great lengths to convince their employers that they don't know what they are talking about and that their arguments are just emotive nonsense.

Now I know that all you BASC chaps are super blokes (and many of you I would class as friends) and that BASC is a super organisation - but in this instance you have got it all wrong - We, the membership do not want the greylag to be placed on the general licences.

That's all there is to it. So get on with what ever you have to do to convince Natural England and any other interested parties that BASC does not want the greylag on the list.

[scolopax]

If it is was proposed it would be extremely difficult for anyone to argue against the GL being amended for shooting pheasants and redleg partridge out of season!! they can do a considerable amount of agricultural damage when in high densities, as well as being non native, 98% artifically reared etc etc.

Hypothetically how would BASC chose to oppose their addition to the GL

If they cave in on Greylags then sure as eggs is eggs it will happen

I am sure Mark Avery will be rubbing his hands over this one..........and dancing a littler jig at the same time with his mate Monbiot

[David BASC]

I cannot possibly see how the GL could cover game birds. Lets remember how the GL came about and what's its purpose is.

 

European claims that the UK was breaking the Birds Directive because of the inclusion of 13 species of birds as pests under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and could be shot all year round. The risk was that if the EU Birds Directive was enforced for these species, all pest species, including pigeon, would have long closed season...BASC led the campaign for the introduction of general licences to allow a derogation from the Birds Directive.

 

David

[kent]

My point Scolpax is that we, the shooters need to work with the farmers as they control the access to our shooting.

 

As to abusing the licence in the way that's just been suggested, has this happened with Canada's? Not as far as I know.

 

David

Excuse me but it happened not long back near the Dee estuary as the BASC guys should know well from their Dee membership deal. Guy rents the "pest shooting" charges his "clients" for the privilege of murdering Canadas. Farmer cashed in, guide cashedin, client gets some killing in before he gets to start on the pheasants

 

The GL needs an overhaul big time but BASC will fight that, but they will happily betray the wildfowlers.

 

I am going to have a closer look at the BASC articles and memorandums because I am not that sure if it was even allowable for this decision to be made. Oh and BASC are certainly out my Will.

 

The only way to fix this is a clime down, the top guys might not like to do it that is all

 

Only two years ago I got Canada breast removed from commercial sale from a retailer who was convinced it was fine to do so, because it was part of a so called licenced cull. GL is bad legislation wrapped in lies IMO.

 

Work with landowners? how when Cheque book Harry comes along (as he will) offering decent sums of cash money so he can take guys out at upwards of £50 a flight to murder them over stubbles and decoys

[David BASC]

thank you for telling me about the Dee, any one got any other examples?

[kent]

I cannot possibly see how the GL could cover game birds. Lets remember how the GL came about and what's its purpose is.

 

European claims that the UK was breaking the Birds Directive because of the inclusion of 13 species of birds as pests under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and could be shot all year round. The risk was that if the EU Birds Directive was enforced for these species, all pest species, including pigeon, would have long closed season...BASC led the campaign for the introduction of general licences to allow a derogation from the Birds Directive.

 

David

If we wanted to be governed by an unelected group of Europeans we might have well joined in with Germany in the 40's. Fact is about the GL its a broken system, so rather than work on fixing it we sacrifice our Greylags?

 

Will people please remember the European election and vote for those who wish to protect us from bother in Brussels

[kent]

thank you for telling me about the Dee, any one got any other examples?

Why don't you already know?

[David BASC]

Firstly, what's broken with the GL?

 

I have looked for examples of inland goose shooting outside of the season and cant find any, so I thought I would ask.

[kent]

Thank you for your email. BASC council decided on BASC's position re the General Licence consultation. Below is some back ground information on how the decision was made. As suggested on the BASC website http://basc.org.uk/blog/media/consultations/english-general-licences-consultation-have-your-say/ BASC does recommend that individuals respond directly to Natural England.

 

Background

There is a proposal to add feral greylag geese and mallard to general licences which deal with the specific problems of crop protection and the preservation of public health and safety. Anyone controlling these birds must comply fully with the terms of the relevant general licences and must have the full permission of the land owner or occupier.

 

BASC’s position

BASC supports the proposal to add greylag goose to general licence GL04 to prevent serious agricultural damage or disease as it applies to breeding feral greylag geese in England. BASC recognises the potential for these birds to cause serious crop damage. BASC seeks confirmation that the breeding population of greylag geese will continue to be counted annually if this proposed change is made.

 

BASC supports the proposal to add greylag goose and mallard to the general licence GL05 to preserve public health and safety as it applies to breeding feral greylag geese and mallard in England. Permitted control methods would be limited to taking, damaging or destroying greylag geese and mallard nests or to take or destroy their eggs. BASC recognises the potential for these birds to impact on public health and safety. BASC seeks confirmation that the breeding populations of greylag geese and mallard will continue to be counted annually if this proposed change is made.

 

Context to BASC’s position

 

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. We are generally in favour of a reduction in bureaucracy relating to shooting and land management.

 

• 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 does not believe that greylag geese or mallard 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.

 

• Woodpigeon can cause serious agricultural damage; and 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.

 

• 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.

 

Regards

 

Paul

 

Paul Williamson MRICS FAAV MBA

Rural Land Development Manager

The British Association for Shooting and Conservation

Marford Mill

Rossett

Wrexham

 

The above is the response I got, I have yet to fully digest it but though it useful

[The Croc]

Firstly, what's broken with the GL?

 

I have looked for examples of inland goose shooting outside of the season and cant find any, so I thought I would ask.

[kent]

Firstly, what's broken with the GL?

 

I have looked for examples of inland goose shooting outside of the season and cant find any, so I thought I would ask.

Well some areas have been "suffering" if that's the correct word for pest control a lack of pigeon and rogue guides have in the past been turfed off some ground for encouraging birds by feeding. Thread on here all the time about people wanting to know if they can kill certain birds before even establishing the why bit.

Consider Archie coats was paid by the farmer now many actually pay to shoot, that to me is a broken system. I am not anti summer GL killing and am well into the crows at present. Why? because now is when the grouse are nesting and the waders for which my home patch is an important site. In the winter there is little harm a crow can do here so its mostly let be, all said and done the void will only be filled and now numbers have been sufficiently reduced it serves no purpose.

I have pigeon nesting in my trees but they pose no threat to agriculture here, yet in many areas that is overlooked. How many prosecutions have there been for mis using the GL? and why is it legal to charge the shooter yet have them shoot under GL? Don't say it wont happen please

[The Croc]

Firstly, what's broken with the GL?

 

I have looked for examples of inland goose shooting outside of the season and cant find any, so I thought I would ask.

 

David look for a post by chad 63 about geese being shot out of season, can't search well at the minute I'm working off the phone

Shooting geese out of season, because they can, " there on the GL" happens all over the country

 

As for taking over the shooting on a farm where there are irresponsible shooters, not going to happen

Getting shooting is nigh on impossible as it is, you will just told the shooting is already taken ( or paid for ) whichever, and thats that, the farmers not worried about it because they control his foxes, rabbits, or maybe even run a syndicate.

Brian

[holloway]

thank you for telling me about the Dee, any one got any other examples?

Exe estuary 12 days out of 14 on stubble August ,mass slaughter .No crop damage being done.I am amazed that BASC has no knowledge of this kind of thing its common knowledge to everyone else .That David is most peoples concern ,there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that migratory geese will be shot up North under the guise of crop protection and it will be a money trasaction .Farmers protecting their crops i have no problem with at all ,

[motty]

How are people going to abuse the general licence if the landowners won’t let them? Motty, you gave a perfect example; the farmer in your case does not have a problem, so no one is going to shoot the geese on his land.

 

Where has the figure of ‘many thousands’ come from?

 

If a farmer has a problem he should be allowed to control them without having to go through red tape and delay.

 

Back to my point, its a mater of shooters working with their landowners.

 

David

Yes, no-one will shoot the geese on his land, but what's to stop anyone on the surrounding farms shooting them if they just happen to fly over? There are plenty of responsible shooters in this country, but also there are plenty who will use the GL as a reason to shoot out of season.

[scolopax]

I cannot possibly see how the GL could cover game birds. Lets remember how the GL came about and what's its purpose is.

 

European claims that the UK was breaking the Birds Directive because of the inclusion of 13 species of birds as pests under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and could be shot all year round. The risk was that if the EU Birds Directive was enforced for these species, all pest species, including pigeon, would have long closed season...BASC led the campaign for the introduction of general licences to allow a derogation from the Birds Directive.

 

David

Excellent, very good work and you deserve all the accolades for it. But now species that were never regarded as pest species prior to 1981 and subsequently the Birds Directive are getting included, BASC need to draw a line in the sand. It is a very real possibility that some will push for the game birds mentioned previously to be included, as it is recognised that apart from agricultural damage excessive numbers of game can cause environmental damage, reptiles have been mentioned in this regard by conservationists several times, likewise various insects and rare plants. Edited April 30, 2014 by scolopax

[David BASC]

I certainly never said it did not happen I simply asked for examples.

 

I don't know off hand how many prosecutions there have been but I will see if I can find out

 

I agree that these seems to be a lack of knowledge and understanding of the GL among some shooters

 

David

[Big Mat]

I cannot possibly see how the GL could cover game birds. Lets remember how the GL came about and what's its purpose is.

 

European claims that the UK was breaking the Birds Directive because of the inclusion of 13 species of birds as pests under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and could be shot all year round. The risk was that if the EU Birds Directive was enforced for these species, all pest species, including pigeon, would have long closed season...BASC led the campaign for the introduction of general licences to allow a derogation from the Birds Directive.

 

David

 

Then how on earth can it cover wildfowl?

 

Its a damn disgrace and BASC should be ashamed of themselves

[scolopax]

Then how on earth can it cover wildfowl?

 

Its a damn disgrace and BASC should be ashamed of themselves

 

 

And that pretty much sums it up!

[anser2]

David I am not sure you really understand wildfowling from your comments. The very thought of culling geese when they are breeding is against the very nature of our sport and our shooting morals. Below is my answer to some of your questions and comments.

 

Quote “Anser, can you specify the 'holes that beggar belief' please?”

Just read my early posts.

 

Quote “Firstly, let me be very clear indeed, BASC does not believe that greylag geese or mallard should be viewed as pests. These proposals are not about reducing the population, but about farmers being able to respond quickly to prevent serious problems occurring to crops.”

 

How can you say that David ? Species are placed on the GL because NE or DEFRA believe they are pests. If BASC does not believe that are pests then why support putting then on the pest list. I can't believe you or BASC are naive enough to think that many shooters will not view greylags in the same light as wood pigeons and treat them the same. The very reason for a species to go on the GL is to control their numbers.

 

Some farmers will see this as a green light to get rid of greylag off their farms , I will never forget one farmers comment on TV when barnacles were protected. “We need to shoot the blo*dy lot” he paused for a moment and added “ we could leave 2 and they should both be males.”

Quote “So the migratory population that is so vital to wildfowlers will not be effected and inland the farmers who’s land is so vital for shooting and conservation will have less hurdles to jump over to protect their crops.”

That is very true for wildfowlers who shoot in Scotland , but for the remainder of who shoot in England and Wales feral greylag are just as vital for our sport.

 

Quote “If Greylag or Canada geese are not causing a crop problem in your area, then the farmers will not want or need to see them shot outside of the wildfowling season” Come on get real if the pest control shooters ask the farmer if they can shoot the greylag in the breeding season how many farmers are going to say no, very, very few.

 

Quote “So lets work together to identify the farms where the farmer thinks they have a problem with geese, and let responsible shooters take on the shooting rights.”

 

Get real for gods sake. At the moment only around 50 requests are made for Special licences a year are made . If we could identify the farms then with the time and man power needed to find them the GL would not be needed the present SL would do the job.

 

Quote “As to abusing the licence in the way that's just been suggested, has this happened with Canada's? not as far as I know"

Just read some of the posts on the Canada subject. I know of one conservation body who has reduced a Canada flock from 300+ to 13 last year and there several other similar posts ie slaughter on the EXE in Devon. The Broads Authority as BASC well knows is looking for a major reduction in the greylag population in an area that covers nearly a third of the county. Their reason is the greylags are eating the reeds and opening the banks up to erosion to wash from boats. The real problem is the boat wash not the greylags and a reduction in the boat speed would cure the problem. But rather than do this they would rather get rid of the greylag.

 

 

Quote “The proposals reflect Government’s wish to cut bureaucracy as outlined in the Red Tape Challenge. “ Government departments are cutting bureaucracy to reduce costs and that is why the department is proposing to put greylag on the GL . It saves them money.

 

Quote “t possibly see how the GL could cover game birds.”

The aim of the GL is to control problem birds , but there is a lot of money in game shooting and farmers are prepared to absorb the loss by the revenue they get from game shooting.

Edited April 30, 2014 by anser2

[anser2]

The Bottom line is that Greylags do not need to go on the GL if there were only 50 requests for SL in the latest info available. The govenment wants to cut red tape so pushes for the cheapest option the GL. Basc has lost its wildfowling roots and not thought this through and landed us in a hell of a mess. What BASC must realise this will not go away. Regulary the topic of canadas on the GL comes up on the forum years after they were put on the GL and it will be the same for greylags. BASC be honest and put your hands up and say you got it wrong , withdraw your support for greylags to be on the GL and perhaps you can salavage a little self respect.

 

I have always been a staunch and active supporter of BASC , as anyone who reads past posts on here will know but unless its policy changes no longer and I will lobby my clubs to withold their membership fees as a mark of protest.

Edited April 30, 2014 by anser2

[islandgun]

The Bottom line is that Greylags do not need to go on the GL if there were only 50 requests for SL in the latest info available. The govenment wants to cut red tape so pushes for the cheapest option the GL. Basc has lost its wildfowling roots and not thought this through and landed us in a hell of a mess. What BASC must realise this will not go away. Regulary the topic of canadas on the GL comes up on the forum years after they were put on the GL and it will be the same for greylags. BASC be honest and put your hands up and say you got it wrong , withdraw your support for greylags to be on the GL and perhaps you can salavage a little self respect.

 

I have always been a staunch and active supporter of BASC , as anyone who reads past posts on here will know but unless its policy changes no longer and I will lobby my clubs to withold their membership fees as a mark of protest.

well said anser