Inclusion of the Greylag Goose onto the General License

[Conor O'Gorman]

thanks for the link conor, I see both spp are increasing, populations are dynamic and will expand given the right habitat they will also decrease or stabilise , but I still fail to understand the need for a GL and the stance of BASC actively encouraging it, localised control and in season shooting should be enough to ensure the status quo without open warfare, which to me will give antis yet more reason to complain

 

If there was a significant risk to the conservation status of a species it would not be added to general licence, much less proposed by Natural England. Likewise a species on the general licence would be taken off if there was evidence it was affecting the conservation status of a species. Bird counts are key in all of this and we can all play our part by getting involved, whether its wildfowl counts in winter or breeding bird surveys in the spring.

Edited May 2, 2014 by Conor O'Gorman

[islandgun]

 

If there was a significant risk to the conservation status of a species it would not be added to general licence, much less proposed by Natural England. Likewise a species on the general licence would be taken off if there was evidence it was affecting the conservation status of a species. Bird counts are key in all of this and we can all play our part by getting involved, whether its wildfowl counts in winter or breeding bird surveys in the spring.

Clearly there is no risk to Greylag or Mallard, but just because a spp increases in number it does not justify being put on a GL, the issue is not about numbers or control but more about why you endorse the GL which i think will reflect badly on shooting as a whole, considering it is the sport of shooting that you represent

[Conor O'Gorman]

Clearly there is no risk to Greylag or Mallard, but just because a spp increases in number it does not justify being put on a GL, the issue is not about numbers or control but more about why you endorse the GL which i think will reflect badly on shooting as a whole, considering it is the sport of shooting that you represent

 

The BASC statement has already been copy and pasted earlier in this thread but i would be happy to express my personal observations on the topic as its an area I have taken great interest in for over a decade across all parts of the UK and in mainland Europe.

 

The basic principle of general licences in the UK is to give authority to you and I to make a qualified decision on the management of wildlife with the minimum of red tape. Of course that trust comes with responsibility and if you get it wrong you risk prosecution.

 

The same trust by the UK government in society acting responsibly applies to the inclusion of a species on the quarry list. And the vast majority of the shooting community acts with responsibility and self-regulation. When the Canada goose was added to a number of general licences in England in 2005 there were concerned expressed about a crash in the population and bad practice reflecting on shooting as a whole.

 

Those concerns were understandable at the time, but they havent transpired, whether in England or in Wales, so why the concern now for greylag geese and mallard? What has changed? Are we saying we cant trust society to manage wildlife in a responsible way? In other words the only people that should manage wildlife are paid employees of the state? When you think about it this is a very fundamental/philosphical issue we might raise by objecting to greylag geese and mallard to the relevant general licences, given that the absolute risk to their numbers is low.

[islandgun]

I understand now ! The British government, EN,and BASC trust the shooting fraternity to shoot geese and mallard when ever they like but responsibly, why does this trust not extend to other spp from grouse to songbirds if they can be proven to be increasing and a threat to agriculture.

My own suspicions are that the agricultural fraternity have complained about the difficulties of obtaining a SL to NE, Natural England have looked at the cost of issuing a SL and thought sod this lets apply for a GL, they have then turned to BASC for support, concluding that it is the shooting fraternity that will carry out the control and that BASC have concurred with the all powerful NE,

meanwhile the moron down the road will gleefully load up and let loose on any Greylag and mallard he sees regardless of the time of year,

 

could someone please explain why Mallard are included ?

[Biddy]

David and Conor

 

With respect I suspect neither of you are Wildfowlers and have not seen the behaviour of some GOOSE SHOOTERS when out in the field , you only have to go on u tube to see evidence of some idiot bragging about slaughtering big bags, these people will now feel free to slaughter Greylag indiscriminately , and if it's about evidence the adding of Mallard to the GL is nonsense .

It would be good to get an answer to Scolopax's question and one I have asked you Conor to which way the council voted.

[David BASC]

True enough I am not a wildfowler, I have been wildfowling and we get wild duck and geese on the shoot that I help look after in Cheshire but that certainly does not make me a wildfowler! Conor can speak for himself, but I know he was a secretary of a wildfowling club for several years.

 

Contrary to what you say, I know full well, as I said earlier, that there are some people out there who film themselves shooting in a way that you or I would find totally unacceptable. I am also very aware of inland shoots that shoot in season and will bag in a day more geese than most wildfowlers will bag in a season, never the less the population of canada's and greylags remain healthy and bag returns from clubs are healthy.

 

As we have said Council made their decision but neither of us were at the Council meeting, neither Conor nor I are elected or ex-officio members of BASC Council, members can contact members of Council if they wish.

 

Conor and I will do our best to answer questions that are raised, that's why we are on forums like this to interact with shooters.

 

As we have both said, there were similar fears expressed about canadas that have not come to fruition, and the population is health and growing, why should greylags be any different?

 

David

Edited May 3, 2014 by David BASC

[kent]

The BASC statement has already been copy and pasted earlier in this thread but i would be happy to express my personal observations on the topic as its an area I have taken great interest in for over a decade across all parts of the UK and in mainland Europe.

 

The basic principle of general licences in the UK is to give authority to you and I to make a qualified decision on the management of wildlife with the minimum of red tape. Of course that trust comes with responsibility and if you get it wrong you risk prosecution.

 

The same trust by the UK government in society acting responsibly applies to the inclusion of a species on the quarry list. And the vast majority of the shooting community acts with responsibility and self-regulation. When the Canada goose was added to a number of general licences in England in 2005 there were concerned expressed about a crash in the population and bad practice reflecting on shooting as a whole.

 

Those concerns were understandable at the time, but they havent transpired, whether in England or in Wales, so why the concern now for greylag geese and mallard? What has changed? Are we saying we cant trust society to manage wildlife in a responsible way? In other words the only people that should manage wildlife are paid employees of the state? When you think about it this is a very fundamental/philosphical issue we might raise by objecting to greylag geese and mallard to the relevant general licences, given that the absolute risk to their numbers is low.

WOW now hold your horses! not only is it early days to assess the impact on geese that re-produce slowly and haven't had any really bad times to contend with naturally. These bird counts are only representative long term and are well proven to be wrong - I point you back to the 100,000 pinks! When we have been asked for mispractice instances we have given examples, when asked about areas were numbers have crashed they have been given. Please start listening BASC its all over the place now and growing fast WE ARE NOT HAPPY WITH THAT WHICH YOU HAVE DONE! Count Brents and other geese and you might say Fine shoot 'em guys, yet the experts tell us this is not the right thing internationally.

[kent]

True enough I am not a wildfowler, I have been wildfowling and we get wild duck and geese on the shoot that I help look after in Cheshire but that certainly does not make me a wildfowler! Conor can speak for himself, but I know he was a secretary of a wildfowling club for several years.

 

Contrary to what you say, I know full well, as I said earlier, that there are some people out there who film themselves shooting in a way that you or I would find totally unacceptable. I am also very aware of inland shoots that shoot in season and will bag in a day more geese than most wildfowlers will bag in a season, never the less the population of canada's and greylags remain healthy and bag returns from clubs are healthy.

 

As we have said Council made their decision but neither of us were at the Council meeting, neither Conor nor I are elected or ex-officio members of BASC Council, members can contact members of Council if they wish.

 

Conor and I will do our best to answer questions that are raised, that's why we are on forums like this to interact with shooters.

 

As we have both said, there were similar fears expressed about canadas that have not come to fruition, and the population is health and growing, why should greylags be any different?

 

David

And for your info he failed to show a lot, that same club now has 50% non wildfowlers on the committee and the sectary is certainly no wildfowler! A wildfowler is someone who is connected to the marsh and its birds not someone who likes committees or thinks it might further their career to be on one. Connor should speak for himself and remember that others are lurking.

Committees and councils making bad decisions are that which some of us are angry about

[kent]

As we have both said, there were similar fears expressed about canadas that have not come to fruition, and the population is health and growing, why should greylags be any different?

 

 

I think its got a massive amount to do with the fact the lowland UK breeder was extinct 100 years ago having been hunted out. WAGBI the founders of BASC travelled out captured highland birds and travelled south with them, re-introducing them and Fowling clubs have been very active in ensuring numbers are not over exploited. One of my own clubs (lead by its Chairmans own efforts) actually reared 2o new blood birds and 13 of these are now recruited into the resident flock. Another club to which I belong had just discussed and dropped the idea of shooting one bit of ground as it was too near the roost, another bans the shooting of any Grey geese on the ground it rents from the RSPB at the request of that org. Yet BASC are painting the picture the RSPB is all out in favour for GL on Greylag, this I actually doubt but will be speaking with them after the holiday. Not a single voice has been raised against SL other than BASC (who seem intent on more killing) and NE (who are suggesting making savings, I doubt all their staff think it a great idea).

If we cannot fight with you then WE WILL BE FIGHTING AGAINST YOU HARD!

Edited May 3, 2014 by kent

[kent]

thanks for the link conor, I see both spp are increasing, populations are dynamic and will expand given the right habitat they will also decrease or stabilise , but I still fail to understand the need for a GL and the stance of BASC actively encouraging it, localised control and in season shooting should be enough to ensure the status quo without open warfare, which to me will give antis yet more reason to complain

I think the shooting bit in the name has overridden the conservation bit personally. Is this the new breed of murder death kill pay for the day shooter or is it at the very hart of BASC now? Time and outcome will tell, I have faith that some within the ranks will have the courage and we will make the right moves to sort this before the beginning of the end

Edited May 3, 2014 by kent

[here iam]

Personal wild attack s once again on a genuine bloke who takes people out young and old to give them a chance again just shows what the so called shooting community as come to .jealous self centered people with their own agendas.

[David BASC]

Kent

 

I don't think that criticising what a secretary of a club has done or not done is adding much to the discussion frankly, and after all the members of the club elect the officers, they are not self appointed are they, so if an officer is not delivering the club has the power at AGM or SGM to remove and replace them.

 

As a true wildfowler, could you explain to me as a non wildfowler, why the number of canada geese in the UK has increased and why the number taken by wildfowlers has increased since canada's went onto the GL?

 

I am still a little perplexed by your non acceptance of bird counts over the decades and bag returns from 100 clubs, I still wonder if the bird counts and bag returns were going down, would you not be SHOUTING on this forum that this proves adding canada's to the GL has harmed the population?

 

The offer for me to help put you in touch with the Chair of the WLC still stands of course by the way.

 

David

[holloway]

Kent

 

I don't think that criticising what a secretary of a club has done or not done is adding much to the discussion frankly, and after all the members of the club elect the officers, they are not self appointed are they, so if an officer is not delivering the club has the power at AGM or SGM to remove and replace them.

 

As a true wildfowler, could you explain to me as a non wildfowler, why the number of canada geese in the UK has increased and why the number taken by wildfowlers has increased since canada's went onto the GL?

 

I am still a little perplexed by your non acceptance of bird counts over the decades and bag returns from 100 clubs, I still wonder if the bird counts and bag returns were going down, would you not be SHOUTING on this forum that this proves adding canada's to the GL has harmed the population?

 

The offer for me to help put you in touch with the Chair of the WLC still stands of course by the way.

 

David

Hi David i am a Basc member who believes that BASC are wrong on this one ,but that aside i have been heartened by both yours and Conor o,gormans willingness to return time and time again to this and other forums to answer questions .The debate is now becoming stale little new information has emerged to alter either sides views.

What i would greatly appreciate is a statement from the head of the WLC to be posted on this forum so that wildfowlers can gage for themselves what action if any was taken by them i would like to think that they fought tooth and nail to change BASC councils views .

I would be extremely grateful if you could organize this as a decline would start to raise even more controversy.

[anser2]

There a couple of comments from BASC hear that Iam not happy with.

 

Quote “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:”

 

How many members I wonder ? I have always been very active on the GL issue over the past few years as BSSC must have seen and yet I heard nothing from BASC. I am not saying that they should contact me , but there a number of others with like views did you contact them ?

 

Quote “ Likewise a species on the general licence would be taken off if there was evidence it was affecting the conservation status of a species.” But in the case of greys not before populations had fallen to a level well below making them a worth wile sporting bird I expect.

[The Croc]

David down this way Canada's had finally reached a healthy population, around 1200 to 1500, until they went on the GL, now we only have around 150.

Now this is not a stable or increasing population, and our bag numbers are down. We are not the only club this way who have seen a massive drop in numbers.

As for the GL not being there to reduce numbers, I posed my feelings about the drop in numbers of Canada's to BASC in 2011, the response below I posted on the Fowling Forum in 2011

 

Quote

" I had a talk with BASC South West Regional Officer, and raised my feelings over Canada's on general licence and the selling of them thereafter; he phoned the Mill and spoke with Tim Russell (BASC Head of Conservation).

Mr Russell's response was that it was NE (Natural England) that wanted a reduction in Canada numbers, the general licence is doing this well and BASC will not be trying to get them on to special licence, as it's a battle they feel that they cannot win.

It was explained to him that we are seeing a massive drop in Canada numbers due to people just shooting them because they can!!! under the proviso of the general licence.

His response was that "NE wishes are working well"!!!!

He also wouldn't want to rock the boat with this regarding their core membership who might feel that they are being done out of some form of shooting.

 

 

Wildfowlers are not BASC's core members !!!!!!!!!!!!!! " unquote

[anser2]

Sorry folks I attempted to enter some graphs and data from WEBs counts that show the pouulation estimates Connor posted up the links for are questionable and need a lot deeper research than has been done , but the tables and graphs screwed up when pasted on here . Wildfowling Forum members can see the tables on there and I will make another attempt to post here later , but just spent 6 hours trawling through wildfowl counts and typing up results and the dog badly needs a walk. I keep telling her to cross her legs if she wants to ever retrieve a greylag again.

 

Back again and th dog is a lot happier.

It just cant seem to upload the data on here but its on the Wildfowling forum. What it shows that from two count areas the whole of the N Norfolk coast greylag numbers are pretty stable snce 2000 , but with an sharp increase in 2012 ,but still below the peak of 2000, most likely due to the very good breeding season is that year. In East Norfolk , Breydon and surrounding marshland greylag numbers after peaking in 2004 at 1148 have gone int steady decline to an all time low of 203 in 2010 , but an upturn to 303 the year after.

 

For canadas it shows a diffrent story with numbers since 2001 with numbers peaking in 2007 at 1182 then goinginto a shallow decline to 303 in 2011 in North Norfolk. In East Norfolk numbers show the same trend but from a peak of 286 in 2004 they have chashed to 34 in 2011.

 

The data is not available for 2013.

 

Now this data is at odds with the suposed national trend , but it agrees broadly what so many on here from NW England to Devon are saying about a decline in canadas.

 

 

Like the Canada goose indices the data for greylag in the link Connor provided does not tell the whole story by a long chalk, In the counts section of the WEBs counts looking at major English sites for the resident population 6 sites show decline and 2 show increases and overall ( 2010 data WEBS I am unable to access newer data ).

 

 

N Norfolk coast , and Nosterfield show increases Whittlesey, Wash , Humber, Dungeness top Hill , Ouse Washes and Hay a Park all show declines below the 5 year average. The N Norfolk count is interesting in that my data above is taken from peaks ( which will be higher than average ) looking at each month of the year is at odds with the data in the Webs book. The core source is the same , but comes from different publications BTO WEBs counts and Norfolk Bird Report.

 

 

At the very least BASC should look at goose counts in depth before thinking about supporting such measures as supporting the GL rather than just taking the count trends at face value.

 

It would be intersting to see the result of the club returns of canadas over the past decade which they are claiming are on the up. That is not my personel experiance or the experiance of the majority of club members from all over the country who post on here. Do they include non club members shooting them in the breeding season?

Edited May 3, 2014 by anser2

[HW682]

............. meanwhile the moron down the road will gleefully load up and let loose on any Greylag and mallard he sees regardless of the time of year,

 

could someone please explain why Mallard are included ?

 

This is the text of the proposal: (taken from the consultation document http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images/cl-consultation-document_tcm6-37389.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

 

General Licence for the purpose of preserving public health and safety

Summary: Proposal to add two further species to paragraph 2(ii) of General Licence WML-GL05, which would permit action against nests and eggs of these species for the purpose of preserving public health and safety. There are three further species where we are seeking views on their addition to this same paragraph.

Explanation and Rationale

Greylag geese and mallard. These species are regularly reported to cause public health and safety concerns, and a number of individual licences are issued for this purpose each year (in 2012: 12 licences for greylag geese and 7 for mallard). Neither species is of conservation concern.

Other species. We are seeking views on permitting under General Licence WML-GL05 the taking, damaging and destroying of nests and eggs of three other species, which present a potential hazard by their nesting locations (e.g. in ventilation flues). These species are pied wagtail, robin and starling, for which we issued 1, 5 and 4 licences, respectively in 2012. Adding these species to the General Licence – solely in respect of nests and eggs - will facilitate more timely action in situations where nests pose a potential health and safety hazard. There is no conservation concern regarding pied wagtails or robins; starlings are Red listed due to population declines, although they remain numerically abundant. We are confident that the very small number of nests potentially affected by licensing currently does not, and will not under a general licence arrangement, have a discernable impact on the populations of any of these species.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As far as I can see the proposal is to allow Mallard nests to be disturbed when they are blocking ventilation flues etc? It does not cover shooting Mallard.

[anser2]

General Licence for the purpose of preserving public health and safety

Summary: Proposal to add two further species to paragraph 2(ii) of General Licence WML-GL05, which would permit action against nests and eggs of these species for the purpose of preserving public health and safety. There are three further species where we are seeking views on their addition to this same paragraph.

Explanation and Rationale

Greylag geese and mallard. These species are regularly reported to cause public health and safety concerns, and a number of individual licences are issued for this purpose each year (in 2012: 12 licences for greylag geese and 7 for mallard). Neither species is of conservation concern.

Has anyone ever come across a case of a human ever contracting any sort of disease from mallard or their droppings? I have been handling waterfowl for 35 years , dead and alive and worked in collections where droppings abound and one I had a problem where I caught ornithosis , but that is a lung disorder caused from the dust of drying blood quills. Unless you handle the birds in a confined space I would guess the odds of suffering from it are millions to one .

[islandgun]

 

This is the text of the proposal: (taken from the consultation document http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images/cl-consultation-document_tcm6-37389.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As far as I can see the proposal is to allow Mallard nests to be disturbed when they are blocking ventilation flues etc? It does not cover shooting Mallard.

Thats reassuring the next time i get a greylag or mallard nesting in my ventilation flue I will be at them with a big stick

 

same can be said for those flocks of robins any recipes for robin anyone

[David BASC]

Holloway, I will gladly pass on your request.

 

As far as I know the bag returns from the 100 clubs account for geese shot in season, on the foreshore ,but I will double check.

 

I recall at a wildfowling conference a few years ago, that there was a chap giving a very interesting talk on bird counts and as he said the duck and goose population will always be prone to local as well as regional and national fluctuations as the birds move around to preferential sites etc.

 

David

[Conor O'Gorman]

David and Conor

 

With respect I suspect neither of you are Wildfowlers and have not seen the behaviour of some GOOSE SHOOTERS when out in the field , you only have to go on u tube to see evidence of some idiot bragging about slaughtering big bags, these people will now feel free to slaughter Greylag indiscriminately , and if it's about evidence the adding of Mallard to the GL is nonsense .

It would be good to get an answer to Scolopax's question and one I have asked you Conor to which way the council voted.

 

Biddy, apologies if i missed a direct question from you on the way in which council voted.

 

A BASC member emailed me a similar request recently about how Council members voted and I referred the query to the Chairman. He confirmed that BASC's Council operates on the basis of collective responsibility with decisions made after consideration of all available evidence. In this case Council did not vote as consensus was reached.

 

[Biddy]

Thank you Conor,

I too as Holloway appreciate yours and David's willingness to engage. There is nothing personal intended in my remarks, it is directed at you as a representative of BASC.

[Conor O'Gorman]

Thank you Conor,

I too as Holloway appreciate yours and David's willingness to engage. There is nothing personal intended in my remarks, it is directed at you as a representative of BASC.

 

Happy to help where I can, and your expressed appreciation and that of Holloway means a lot and thank you both for doing so.

[kent]

Kent

 

I don't think that criticising what a secretary of a club has done or not done is adding much to the discussion frankly, and after all the members of the club elect the officers, they are not self appointed are they, so if an officer is not delivering the club has the power at AGM or SGM to remove and replace them.

 

As a true wildfowler, could you explain to me as a non wildfowler, why the number of canada geese in the UK has increased and why the number taken by wildfowlers has increased since canada's went onto the GL?

 

I am still a little perplexed by your non acceptance of bird counts over the decades and bag returns from 100 clubs, I still wonder if the bird counts and bag returns were going down, would you not be SHOUTING on this forum that this proves adding canada's to the GL has harmed the population?

 

The offer for me to help put you in touch with the Chair of the WLC still stands of course by the way.

 

David

 

I have already

[holloway]

Holloway, I will gladly pass on your request.

 

As far as I know the bag returns from the 100 clubs account for geese shot in season, on the foreshore ,but I will double check.

 

I recall at a wildfowling conference a few years ago, that there was a chap giving a very interesting talk on bird counts and as he said the duck and goose population will always be prone to local as well as regional and national fluctuations as the birds move around to preferential sites etc.

 

David

Thankyou David i will remind you after the bank holliday ,In 1975 my club was awarded the prestigious Stanley Duncan award from WAGBI ... guess what for ? yes you guessed .Breeding and release of Mallard and Greylag .How times change ,very sad .