Shooting & RSPB balance

[Davyo]

Ok I went to visit my local RSPB reserve the other day,I would normally take my other car but due to my wife having it I took the shooting bus (not the brightest thing to do).To cut a long story short when I was getting my bino's out the back I was approached by a couple who had just parked up and asked about the roof lamp and the shooting rest (permanent fixture to my mirror).I advised them that I control rabbits and pigeons on farms,and was expecting some verbals.But they seemed interested so I went on re crop damage ect,I also mentioned that I activley update my green shoots on BASC ,advising them what this was and what this entails ,re recording species of animals as well as birds ect.They were quite surprised that a shooter did this sort of thing.I informed them that I was a member of the RSPB long before I started shooting and although I don't agree with some of the statements the RSPB have made recently i will continue to support them.We also had a chat regarding the central licence as they had no idea about its existence or in fact that we had open/closed seasons other than the grouse season.

Obviously they may be just a couple with an open mind regarding the balance between responsible shooting and conservation,but this conversation has got me thinking over the last few days why can't we find a balance rather that constant confrontation.I know that we can't change the opinions of the Anti's who simply refuse to listen to shooting and conservation full stop.But its clear that not all people who have an interest in wildlife are against shooting, they just don't understand it and go away with a better understanding after a 30 minute chat.

[la bala]

A true ambassador for shooting people.

[Jay_Russell]

Good on you fella. And i whole heartedly agree

[panoma1]

It is the career protectionists that get into senior positions in these organisations that have engineered the problems between shooting and the general public, deliberately! they propagate and stir up anti shooting feelings amongst their membership for mostly financial reasons, they need someone to focus people's hatred on so they can encourage their members to contribute financially in order "protect birds!".... or more truthfully to expand the organisation! So they can spend these contributions on their property and land purchase portfolio! the ordinary member is usually ill informed about shooting and the conservation credentials of most shooting people, and when explained to them (assuming you can get them to enter into grown up debate) are not anti shooting at all!

 

This is how RSPB has transformed itself into a massive business with ownership of tens of thousands of acres of reserves and properties around the UK........by brainwashing the public into believing live bird shooting is morally wrong!

 

The RSPCA do the same and spend tens of thousands (if not millions!) of pounds of their members money on politically motivated litigation against hunting, protecting animals from real cruelty seems to come a poor second now!

[M4X]

Well said Panoma1.

and many other organisations too!

[scotslad]

Well done Davyo and very well said Pananma.

 

The rspb do far more harm than good nowadys, in the last 30-40 yrs things have changed massively with the general publics perception of fieldsports, a lot of these charities were originally started by shooters and most of the old nuaralists also shot, just as a lot of the african national parks and game reserves where started by big game hunters back in the day.

 

Unfortuanately there will never be a comprimise and some folk are so entrenched in there views they wil never change.

I;m on the local wildife trust commitee and they still wo't let me kill anyhing (mainly crows muselids throu nesting season) its not unusual to pick up 40 brocken mallard eggs a week and is very unusual to actually get any duck fledged, out of 25+ females,

Also very lucky to have a lot of red squirells yet some of the committee are against any trapping of greys in neighbouring woods despite there being a good vhance of them carrying the pox virus which would wipe out the reds very quickly,

It is like hitting ur head of a brick wall sometimes

 

I think things could be too far gone now to really change back but the more u go out of ur way to educate people the better and i think our Org's should be doing far more to educate the general public and publising green shots and other work we do.

And the rspb cannae afford to tell the truth now it needs all this money.

 

The only thing i would disagree with u on davyo is stll being a member of 'them' , i refuse to give them a penny will not vist there reserves or anything. If u want a better bird charity try Songbird survival or even GWCT both will use ur hard earned money far better and pput it to some good use

[Yellow Bear]

In line with this - the pup (sprocker) took a grey whilst out this week - some "silly" woman, when the dog returned with the carcass said " is it all right- I am against any killing". When I said it was dead the tirade was "you should stop your dog doing this, its bad for the environment" only not so polite. This is from a woman with not 1 but 2 lurchers .

 

Whilst I try rto stop the dog hunting on it's own account, she is still young, and if she can take a full grown grey with a clean kill, I am not going to object, particularly as she brought it straight back to hand

[RossEM]

Our biggest problem is public ignorance. I've lost count of the amount of times I've read "sport of toffs" type statements, despite very few of us being landed gentry, or rich, or even well off. The Guardian's website is well worth a read through if you want an evening of winding yourself up. They just have to perpetuate the stereotype and it's patently wrong.

 

I'm good friends with a couple who are very active RSPB members and both completely tolerant of shooting - I suspect they are in a minority, and that minority will continue to shrink until the few enemies within shooting (namely those who take too large bags and who kill protected species) are gone. These are always going to be the examples that are used to vilify the rest of us. Of course it's no surprise that 99% of us are genuinely interested in the environment as a whole, but it will be a surprise to non-shooters as they quite reasonably assume as we're only interested in the quarry.

 

In principle, any conservation group's ownership of land is great thing - in practical terms, it depends on the quality of the management of that land. Birds, especially wildfowl, do need areas that rarely disturbed (including shooting) in order to flourish. We as shooters do indirectly benefit from that (I've shot wigeon on farmland near BBOWT College Lake and greylags on ground adjacent to the RSPB Loons Reserve, for instance.)

 

Regarding the Wildlife Trusts' management of their land, they created a wetland habitat just down the road from me in 2007, which is pretty well landscaped, very sensitively managed, and full of wildlife (and wildlife you don't normally see in the area - curlew, redshank, oystercatcher, marsh harrier.) The twist in the story is that all farms bordering the reserve are regularly shot, and predators are kept to a minimum for the benefit of sheep on those farms - thereby shooting in turn has an indirect positive effect on the reserve. It would be good if the Wildlife Trust recognised that fact, but I doubt they will.

 

The RSPB was already a massive organisation before it ceased to be 'neutral on shooting' (their term) - unfortunately they are not as neutral at the moment, but this is not set in stone. They do actually lease some of their land for shooting. I'm not going to be an apologist for the RSPB & the Wildlife Trusts, but on balance they do a lot of good conservation work. What we should be doing, and I keep saying it, is pushing BASC to merge with the other associations - with a bigger platform, we'd be better placed to effect public opinion in the way the RSPB do. Royal Society for Shooting Conservation, anyone?

[Scully]

Because the media fed public image of shooters is one of class led landed gentry quaffing Pimms while blasting anything and everything from the sky is upheld then the likes of the RSPB in particular will continue to prosper. They NEED an enemy for the unknowing public to rally against in order to gather revenue. If the nasty men in tweeds stop shooting raptors for example, then everything in the garden is rosy and there is no need to GIVE. If the RSPB were to announce that gamekeepers were no longer a threat to Buzzards for example, would result in a huge hit on RSPB revenue and exposure.

'Goshawks in danger of losing habitat due to climate change' wont get those coffers filled in quite the same way as 'Lord Snooty and his tweed clad Oxford chums overshooting of marshland threatens Goshawk habitat' will.

[scotslad]

Its the whole dishonesty of them that really winds me up, at the few reserves actually producing young birds/stable populations they do carry out predator control, but never publise it.

 

The single biggest thing the rspb could do to benefit uk's birds is hand out free cat collars with bells on and publise just how big a predator cats are and how many birds they take a year, but again that would upset there core membership. The type of people who dinae see the irony in having cats and a well feed bird table.

 

Wot about when certain undersiable BoP's go missing from there nature reserve?

Have heard of 1 pair of eagle owls suddenly dissappearing when they decided to nest to close to a HH nest. All the local keepers had been watching them for months and they just disapear overnight??

If that happened on a shooting estate doors would be flying off the hinges pretty quick