A random thought on the future of wildfowling.

[Penelope]

Following the on going Brancaster, BASC Chairman and recent greylag/GL threads, is it time for one UK wide Wildfowling club bringing all existing clubs into one fold under one name an along similar lines to Duck Unlimited in the states? One club, one voice and members allowed to shoot on any former local club ground via permit scheme?

[motty]

That sounds like a nightmare to me.

[Terry P]

Sounds like wildfowling utopia to me, but will never happen, to many chiefs and ego's I reckon, plus what are the chances of getting every club let alone syndicates and individuals to join such a scheme.

[TIDES EDGE]

Penelope that is what I was thinking when I said about a Norfolk W A only I wasnt brave enoughth to say so , yes it would take some administrating but the clout it would have and the funds would be awsome, I think each county would have to have its own branch but all would be governed by the same rules and permits should be available for every one for any marsh.

[anser2]

I suspect Penelope in time that will come about , but hopefully after I have hung up my guns , that is provided wildfowling continues. In many ways it would be great to shoot what ever marsh you wanted to , but there very big buts.

 

One of the great successes of wildfowling clubs has been to bring the old free for all shooting under control. Regular gatherings of geese used to come under great pressure on the Wash , Humber and Solway as fowlers were drawn to these honey pots. The result was to make the geese very wary and difficult to bag , the flocks were scattered and in time the geese moved elsewhere , usually on preserved ground.

 

Its true a permit system would reduce the pressure to some degree , but we would lose one of the greatest freedoms in wildfowling. To be able to shoot when you want without having to book days in advance and hope to luck that the weather is right. At the moment when the wind is right I can drop everything and go wildfowling. That cant happen with a permit system.

 

There is also the risk of abuse of a permit system where I have heard of club officers booking the favourable tides first and the rank and file membership just having to grab what ever is left over.

 

We must not forget that some conservation organisations while accept small clubs knowing that they are not likely to over shoot their marsh are dead set against clubs with large memberships and their risk of overshooting . There has just been a battle along these lines and this time wildfowling won , but we cant expect that to be always so.

 

I suspect if one or two large clubs became dominant and controlled the majority of coastal wildfowling the need for BASC would lessen and may lead to it becoming redundant. The dominant clubs would handle notice of consents with NE and so on themselves. Is that a good thing or not? I am unsure, after being so badly let down by BASC it may be a good thing , but on the other hand wildfowling and the individual club system has served fowlers well over 50 years so why try to fix something that is not broken , but just in need of some tweking.

 

At the moment when the weather is right or if I just feel the need to be on the marsh I can just pick up my gun , pocket a few shells and whistle up the dog and we are off. I can pick what quarry I want to hunt , what part of the marsh I want to flight and if I want to do a tideflight or shoot the dawn or dusk. That kind of freedom is what makes real wildfowling as opposed to duck shooting and it’s a freedom I cherish.

Edited June 23, 2014 by anser2

[panoma1]

I suspect Penelope in time that will come about , but hopefully after I have hung up my guns , that is provided wildfowling continues. In many ways it would be great to shoot what ever marsh you wanted to , but there very big buts.

 

One of the great successes of wildfowling clubs has been to bring the old free for all shooting under control. Regular gatherings of geese used to come under great pressure on the Wash , Humber and Solway as fowlers were drawn to these honey pots. The result was to make the geese very wary and difficult to bag , the flocks were scattered and in time the geese moved elsewhere , usually on preserved ground.

 

Its true a permit system would reduce the pressure to some degree , but we would lose one of the greatest freedoms in wildfowling. To be able to shoot when you want without having to book days in advance and hope to luck that the weather is right. At the moment when the wind is right I can drop everything and go wildfowling. That cant happen with a permit system.

 

There is also the risk of abuse of a permit system where I have heard of club officers booking the favourable tides first and the rank and file membership just having to grab what ever is left over.

 

We must not forget that some conservation organisations while accept small clubs knowing that they are not likely to over shoot their marsh are dead set against clubs with large memberships and their risk of overshooting . There has just been a battle along these lines and this time wildfowling won , but we cant expect that to be always so.

 

I suspect if one or two large clubs became dominant and controlled the majority of coastal wildfowling the need for BASC would lessen and may lead to it becoming redundant. The dominant clubs would handle notice of consents with NE and so on themselves. Is that a good thing or not? I am unsure, after being so badly let down by BASC it may be a good thing , but on the other hand wildfowling and the individual club system has served fowlers well over 50 years so why try to fix something that is not broken , but just in need of some tweking.

 

At the moment when the weather is right or if I just feel the need to be on the marsh I can just pick up my gun , pocket a few shells and whistle up the dog and we are off. I can pick what quarry I want to hunt , what part of the marsh I want to flight and if I want to do a tideflight or shoot the dawn or dusk. That kind of freedom is what makes real wildfowling as opposed to duck shooting and it’s a freedom I cherish.

 

 

 

Or in other words...................I'm alright Jack Bu??*r You!

[strangford wildfowler]

That sounds like a good idea and I think tyat if there was some advice from the heads of Ducks unlimited it could work go idea penelope imo

[edenman]

Following the on going Brancaster, BASC Chairman and recent greylag/GL threads, is it time for one UK wide Wildfowling club bringing all existing clubs into one fold under one name an along similar lines to Duck Unlimited in the states? One club, one voice and members allowed to shoot on any former local club ground via permit scheme?

I thought that BASC was meant to do this ?

Edited June 23, 2014 by edenman

[motty]

I suspect Penelope in time that will come about , but hopefully after I have hung up my guns , that is provided wildfowling continues. In many ways it would be great to shoot what ever marsh you wanted to , but there very big buts.

 

One of the great successes of wildfowling clubs has been to bring the old free for all shooting under control. Regular gatherings of geese used to come under great pressure on the Wash , Humber and Solway as fowlers were drawn to these honey pots. The result was to make the geese very wary and difficult to bag , the flocks were scattered and in time the geese moved elsewhere , usually on preserved ground.

 

Its true a permit system would reduce the pressure to some degree , but we would lose one of the greatest freedoms in wildfowling. To be able to shoot when you want without having to book days in advance and hope to luck that the weather is right. At the moment when the wind is right I can drop everything and go wildfowling. That cant happen with a permit system.

 

There is also the risk of abuse of a permit system where I have heard of club officers booking the favourable tides first and the rank and file membership just having to grab what ever is left over.

 

We must not forget that some conservation organisations while accept small clubs knowing that they are not likely to over shoot their marsh are dead set against clubs with large memberships and their risk of overshooting . There has just been a battle along these lines and this time wildfowling won , but we cant expect that to be always so.

 

I suspect if one or two large clubs became dominant and controlled the majority of coastal wildfowling the need for BASC would lessen and may lead to it becoming redundant. The dominant clubs would handle notice of consents with NE and so on themselves. Is that a good thing or not? I am unsure, after being so badly let down by BASC it may be a good thing , but on the other hand wildfowling and the individual club system has served fowlers well over 50 years so why try to fix something that is not broken , but just in need of some tweking.

 

At the moment when the weather is right or if I just feel the need to be on the marsh I can just pick up my gun , pocket a few shells and whistle up the dog and we are off. I can pick what quarry I want to hunt , what part of the marsh I want to flight and if I want to do a tideflight or shoot the dawn or dusk. That kind of freedom is what makes real wildfowling as opposed to duck shooting and it’s a freedom I cherish.

Totally with you on this. A permit system would kill my wildfowling.

[big bad lindz]

I may be wrong but I thought that the East of Scotland Wildfowling club brought a number of wildfowling clubs together, in the central east of Scotland at least I think from around Dunbar up to the Tay & Montrose. If it works for them then why not further south?

 

As you will all know we are fortunate enough to have pretty much unlimited access to the foreshore in Scotland without paying any club membership as at the moment there is no ownership or lease of the foreshore so that may be the stumbling block for the English clubs but I cannot see why clubs that have adjoining land on the same stretch of shore, marsh or river banks cannot have a reciprocating access.

 

[motty]

I may be wrong but I thought that the East of Scotland Wildfowling club brought a number of wildfowling clubs together, in the central east of Scotland at least I think from around Dunbar up to the Tay & Montrose. If it works for them then why not further south?

 

As you will all know we are fortunate enough to have pretty much unlimited access to the foreshore in Scotland without paying any club membership as at the moment there is no ownership or lease of the foreshore so that may be the stumbling block for the English clubs but I cannot see why clubs that have adjoining land on the same stretch of shore, marsh or river banks cannot have a reciprocating access.

I think I would be difficult to police the marshes. At least in my club, if people act in certain ways they can be disciplined and expelled from the club. Some of the marshes I have visited and some I've heard about have had some ridiculous things going on by visiting individuals.

[Penelope]

Can I just say that I have posted this subject for debate to see the consensus of opinion, my personal preference would be to be able to come and go as I please on ground local to me with a limited number of others able to do the same; the status quo so to speak. Having used the BASC permit scheme last season for the first time (no dog, so need others who have to go with), I think this works well too for those that wish to experience other ground.

 

My former club has a booking in process and a limit to the number of guns allowed on any one marsh, which technically is similar to a permit scheme, but in reality was very much a come and go as you please, as in all the time that I was a member I was never refused access to the marsh I wanted to go on or the time, even at short notice. I was also fortunate to have access to a small piece of marsh along with 3 others on a gentlemen's agreement and £200 pa cost where I could go as the whim took and take guests as and when. Kent now have this.

Edited June 24, 2014 by Penelope

[edenman]

I may be wrong but I thought that the East of Scotland Wildfowling club brought a number of wildfowling clubs together, in the central east of Scotland at least I think from around Dunbar up to the Tay & Montrose. If it works for them then why not further south?

As you will all know we are fortunate enough to have pretty much unlimited access to the foreshore in Scotland without paying any club membership as at the moment there is no ownership or lease of the foreshore so that may be the stumbling block for the English clubs but I cannot see why clubs that have adjoining land on the same stretch of shore, marsh or river banks cannot have a reciprocating access.

ESAWC is a single club, many of the wildfowling clubs in the geographical that ESAWC covers are still on their own like TVWA, MDWA etc Edited June 24, 2014 by edenman

[DNT]

I am not sure which marsh Penelope refers to, but I assume it is in Essex. I can confirm that all of our purchases etc there have resulted from an approach by Land Agents/Owners wishing to make arrangements with us or some similar organisation. It will always be the case that individuals will find themselves in the difficult position of finding their shooting being sold out from under them. In fact I and my Father used to shoot (35 years ago) a stretch of tidal river in North Kent. Eventually the owner (by then the son) saw an opportunity to turn this unproductive area into some cash. The land was sold and then was leased to KWCA. I'd lost my only tidal fowling. Looking ahead I could see this was going to be the future, I joined KWCA and found to my astonishment a group of decent guys trying to save land from the Conservation groups who were also very much on the march, as they are now. In addition, joining opened up so much more land for me to shoot. I guess I am making the point that what was initially a major setback turned into something I couldn't have dreamt of. KWCA operate a permit scheme which I know to some is seen as an issue. But permits to most areas are available from several sources, not least our online booking system which I think has been operating for 2/3 seasons and is becoming more popular all the time, not to mention the removal of lots of permit officers (often their wives) hand writing permits. Also on some very large areas we operate a monthly permit instead of the usual daily one, allowing members to go fowling at the drop of a hat. With the amount of land we have it is almost unheard of that anyone can't get to shoot the marsh of their choice or another somewhere near them. Also it is very likely on some days you will be the only person on the marsh. On a final point KWCA Full membership is £242, Senior (over 60) £165.50, Intermediate (18-21) £205, Junior (under 18) £31. All of those are inclusive of BASC membership, which if you are a member of another affiliated club or syndicate you can claim back in full. I am aware this is starting to read like a KWCA membership advert, but remember I am a convert from the old guard to the current system.

[Penelope]

DNT - Barling. Not saying Kent did anything underhand. Owner was in financial straights and members of his clay club were in the Leigh club which I believe amalgamated with Kent or at least have some form of agreement, which is how the word got about.

 

Shot a few times on Stoke many years ago as a guest of Mike Hunt one of Kent's marsh wardens. Lost touch, is he still about?

Edited June 24, 2014 by Penelope

[DNT]

Penelope - yes Mikes still alive and kicking, he's not so active on the estuary as he was. He's retired now, still on the committee and is site manager of one of our inland areas near his home in the Ashford area. Not sure if you know we've now obtained the marsh next to Barling which we named as Chalk Marsh in memory of LOSWA member Bob Chalk who kindly made us a beneficiary in his will. We had a site meeting recently to discuss improving the site and obviously along with the shooting we intend to add the water to our fishing section. Regards. DNT.

[Donkey]

I have shot under a permit system and did not like it as stated already you then have to book in advance and hope weather tides etc are in your favour

I prefer the freedom to go when I want

Donkey

[kent]

Firstly all systems have their downsides. Is it fair someone who hasn't shot the marsh for a number of years blocks up the membership in waiting in a club? Or someone who only shoots in Feb when pheasants are over just once or twice? What about the fowler who is lost to our sport because some old guy on the committee puts his baby granddaughter in and takes up another non fowler into the rank and as a result they cannot gain a place? The list goes on!

 

However I agree if I had too book in then it might cripple the way I go fowling now (when the weather and tide are right etc). So a national or regional club with day ticketing I shouldn't like and yes I recon all the right tides and times on paper will be taken up mysteriously by those doing the admin and their mates anyhow.

 

What might be nice is to get rid of some of the clubs currently being run by people who like being on commitees but don't actually classify as wildfowlers and those who have had their fun and broken every rule they now set as "retired fowlers" you know "do as I say not as I did" sorts.

 

There is a massive problem coming in Wildfowling and its come from a good thing. Young shots, you see for every young shot coming of age and gaining automatic full member status their is a 30 something who never got the chance being turned down on an endless waiting list. Look at you committee the average age will be over 60 and do the maths! Now consider what happens to most of us when we really start our careers, go away to Uni or buy our first home, meet our partner and yes have kids! Our sport takes a back seat to finantial matters and often just plain time often it doesn't come back, the lads I grew up with Ferreting, working dogs, fishing and shooting etc who now haven't been for decades is many. Difficult one I think

 

The long term future if there is to be one is most likely as suggested though I should hate and love to see it happen all at the same time. What I should also like to see is some good trained biologists etc setting conservation measures in place (and doing it as paid employment), Trained accountants doing their bit etc etc. all paid and all skilled at their tasks. Taking it National rather than regional and you could get some handy people steering certain matters- think on about ducks unlimited etc.

 

BASC? No sorry they have showed their colours they will now just go with the membership numbers, for now they are a loose cannon acting politically and fanatically for their own good, understandable and just at this moment in time I don't think we can do without them but their have proven to be something of a poisonous friend in my opinion of recent. A bit like the only gundog you have available but one that has some real bad quirks of nature

[Donkey]

I'm not talking of reserecting WAGBI but wildfowling needs a body to represent fowling clubs a closed shop where all bag returns can be submitted each season so data is available to relevant organizations when it is needed

I know BASC does get some but after the greylag scenario where they actually never had correct figures

A body who can deal with NE and land issues and leases

I know if all clubs north and south of the border were to buy into this it would go along way to start helping to secure fowling for the future

I have always belonged to BASC and have been a member of other organizations at the same time we do not have to break from BASC but we do need to start looking after our own affairs as one wildfowling body

Just my take on it

[Charlie R]

I do all of my wildfowling in Scotland and although it's a 565mile trip it's worth it. At present I am free to go where I want and it would be shame if that was to end. Having clubs means burecracy as well as conservation. The big difference in the US iis that the have a lot more public land where provided you stick to rules you can shoot a limit of x species. If there was more public freed up I could see the appeal of an organisation like ducks u limited. BASC has seriously let us wildfowlers down and the founder members of WAGBI must be turning in their graves.

[Diabolo]

Totally with you on this. A permit system would kill my wildfowling.

 

Eventually not having one will kill yours and everybody else's wildfowling.

[motty]

Diabolo, on 29 Jun 2014 - 9:40 PM, said:

 

 

Eventually not having one will kill yours and everybody else's wildfowling.

Care to explain why you think this? Edited June 29, 2014 by motty

[Big Mat]

 

Eventually not having one will kill yours and everybody else's wildfowling.

 

Its done everyone fine for the last who knows how long so why is it suddenly going to kill everyones fowling?

 

Personally have a permit system on the shore would near enough end my fowling.

[Diabolo]

You're already shooting under a permit system - where and when you can shoot isn't up to you, it's dictated by close seasons, club shooting boundaries, the quarry list, and you (hopefully) accept and abide by these as being common sense and necessary, well, for the most part common sense at least. As pressure on shooting wild creatures for sport comes under more and more pressure from so many directions, the need to provide evidence that it is justifiable will have to be refined and turned to our advantage. For example when NE started looking at the possible shooting pressure on pintails on KWCA marshes being detrimental, the statistics from individual permit returns demonstrated that this was not an issue.

 

Look at how tightly controlled shooting is in the US and Canada, and that's where Ducks Unlimited and the NRA with their massive memberships and resources still have to fight tooth and nail and with hard evidence to keep their guns and their shooting. We've still got it very cushti here for the time being, but not being prepared to take the fight for our right to party, sorry, keep shooting, will be our undoing, and small-minded complacency (what was good fer me Dad is good enough for me - taps out briar on heel of shoe) ain't going to do us any favours.

[Big Mat]

You're already shooting under a permit system - where and when you can shoot isn't up to you, it's dictated by close seasons, club shooting boundaries, the quarry list, and you (hopefully) accept and abide by these as being common sense and necessary, well, for the most part common sense at least. As pressure on shooting wild creatures for sport comes under more and more pressure from so many directions, the need to provide evidence that it is justifiable will have to be refined and turned to our advantage. For example when NE started looking at the possible shooting pressure on pintails on KWCA marshes being detrimental, the statistics from individual permit returns demonstrated that this was not an issue.

 

Look at how tightly controlled shooting is in the US and Canada, and that's where Ducks Unlimited and the NRA with their massive memberships and resources still have to fight tooth and nail and with hard evidence to keep their guns and their shooting. We've still got it very cushti here for the time being, but not being prepared to take the fight for our right to party, sorry, keep shooting, will be our undoing, and small-minded complacency (what was good fer me Dad is good enough for me - taps out briar on heel of shoe) ain't going to do us any favours.

 

Your idea of permit is a little different to what myself and motty are on about.

 

Around here you are a member of a club and you can come and go on the shore in the season as and when you wish ( observing sunday shooting laws ). Mentioning permits makes us think of a system much like is in place on the Ouse washes owned by the club i am a member of and the club motty is a member of, where you ring up the day before or even further in the past to get a permit.

 

I suspect most people would have that understanding and you are muddying the water somewhat.