Dare I Say It

[Scully]

20 minutes ago, Uilleachan said:

I'm not a pistol shooter and, I'm only relating what I've read; but I've read that some of the individual submissions sent in during the post Dunblane consultation had quite the opposite effect than that intended by the writers. Enough to tip the balance. All it takes is one dodgy communication to spoil it for the many. Hence why I badger my shooting body and have them deal with it.    

I find that very hard to believe. I have written countless letters over the years to the media, HO ministers, MPs and Chief Police Officers. Many of the MPs and HO ministers have often remarked that when individuals fail to respond the general consensus is that they don’t care.

The lady on twitter has spread her misleading info on social media. Are BASC the CA or the NGO on Twitter? If not, and no one puts the record right, then those reading it will assume it’s true.

Leaving it to someone else is easy. 

[Uilleachan]

1 hour ago, Scully said:

I find that very hard to believe. I have written countless letters over the years to the media, HO ministers, MPs and Chief Police Officers. Many of the MPs and HO ministers have often remarked that when individuals fail to respond the general consensus is that they don’t care.

The lady on twitter has spread her misleading info on social media. Are BASC the CA or the NGO on Twitter? If not, and no one puts the record right, then those reading it will assume it’s true.

Leaving it to someone else is easy. 

Check out the OP link, the lady wrote a piece that was published by the BBC. The danger is if people start engaging with journalists directly, and they take fright, faux or otherwise, we the general shooting public pick up the flack and, if she herself is an anti we play into her hand, or the hands of those with an anti shooting agenda who'd willingly pick up her baton. 

As to the record, having read the paper, linked on page one, her piece wasn't inaccurate because the paper states that of 100+ dead kites, six were found to have had lead poisoning and it does mention lead shot (and banning it as a potential solution to lead poisoning in kites). I'd contend that it's highly unlikely that lead shot was the culprit but thats for someone with a science background to contest and contest it with the people who wrote the paper, not the journalist who wrote the BBC piece 

[CaptainBeaky]

7 hours ago, Uilleachan said:

It seems the report from "The European Journal of Wildlife Research" was published in 2010. I requested the full text but will have to wait on the outcome. There's a link here to the abstract page, which may or may not work for you. The abstract, all be it very short, makes no mention of lead shot.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232361176_Illegal_killing_slows_population_recovery_of_a_re-introduced_raptor_of_high_conservation_concern_-_the_Red_Kite_Milvus_milvus

That is an earlier report - the one I linked to is July 2017, and does deal with lead shot.

[Scully]

1 hour ago, Uilleachan said:

Check out the OP link, the lady wrote a piece that was published by the BBC. The danger is if people start engaging with journalists directly, and they take fright, faux or otherwise, we the general shooting public pick up the flack and, if she herself is an anti we play into her hand, or the hands of those with an anti shooting agenda who'd willingly pick up her baton. 

 

If we all think like this then we’ve lost I’m afraid. I will argue my corner wherever and whenever I feel it is warranted. 

The part I find hard to believe is your claim that individual handgunners campaigning against the ban did more harm than good. 

You can post a link as to where you got this info’ if you wouldn’t mind.

[Bazooka Joe]

5 hours ago, stagboy said:

large parts of the Pennines - particularly in Durham and south Northumberland - are littered with hundreds of abandoned lead mines, many with old spoil heaps which surely contain lead dust. I wonder if all this stuff, much of it lying on the surface in right-to-roam land, has ever been investigated/evaluated? 

Kites are surviving OK up here, same drivel posted by the RSPB though, nothing new.

Friends Of Red Kites.

Where's all these 100's of spoil heaps at.?

[stagboy]

1 hour ago, Bazooka Joe said:

Kites are surviving OK up here, same drivel posted by the RSPB though, nothing new.

Friends Of Red Kites.

Where's all these 100's of spoil heaps at.?

All over the uplands of Co Durham (like Weardale) and parts of Northumberland, ie Nenthead, Alston etc. I expect they have a list at the lead mining museum at Killhope, Co Durham. The lead mining industry goes back to Roman times, but the spoils heaps I am talking about are 1700s onwards. You can often spot them on large scale OS maps. They definitely have lead in them, because some have been reworked several times, whenever the price of lead ore went up. Here's a photo of one in the middle of a grouse moor. 

 http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/5539023

 

 

 

[stagboy]

Actually, it seems research into at least one site in the North Pennines was concluded by Durham University just last year (see link, below). The figures show that these loose, un-vegetated spoil heaps contain absolutely massive concentrations of lead - far worse than I imagined. 

http://dro.dur.ac.uk/18923/1/18923.pdf

The stuff is currently being spread by wind and water erosion:

" Results indicate that extensive degradation has been occurring at a number of former lead mining sites over recent decades, primarily due to fluvial erosion in the form of gullying but with slope and aeolian processes also of significance in particular locations. Soil samples taken from actively eroding areas within Fletcheras Rake, one of the earliest documented lead mines in the area, suggest that the reworking and redistribution of sediments from former mining sites are releasing heavily contaminated sediments into the wider hydrological catchment."

 

 

[bruno22rf]

You cannot walk to the end of our Garden without seeing 3 or 4 kites and Buzzards ( which I have never seen before in the 20+ years that we have lived here) are now a common sight - saw 4 in a group a few days back. So numbers are in no way declining in sunny Bucks. As for Red Kites eating lead - I shot a Pigeon a few months ago that remained on the Roof of an outbuilding at the end of our Garden until it finally rotted away (still a few feathers there) and ,despite Kites flying over it hundreds of times a day, not one of them ever showed the remotest interest in it. Different story when the fields 100 yards away are being ploughed and Worms etc are being bought to the surface - it's like a Red Kite orgy out there.

Edited November 29, 2017 by bruno22rf

[Uilleachan]

11 hours ago, CaptainBeaky said:

That is an earlier report - the one I linked to is July 2017, and does deal with lead shot.

Yeah, saw that 

10 hours ago, Scully said:

If we all think like this then we’ve lost I’m afraid. I will argue my corner wherever and whenever I feel it is warranted. 

The part I find hard to believe is your claim that individual handgunners campaigning against the ban did more harm than good. 

You can post a link as to where you got this info’ if you wouldn’t mind.

I'll PM the fellow who told me and ask. 

[wymberley]

7 hours ago, stagboy said:

Actually, it seems research into at least one site in the North Pennines was concluded by Durham University just last year (see link, below). The figures show that these loose, un-vegetated spoil heaps contain absolutely massive concentrations of lead - far worse than I imagined. 

http://dro.dur.ac.uk/18923/1/18923.pdf

The stuff is currently being spread by wind and water erosion:

" Results indicate that extensive degradation has been occurring at a number of former lead mining sites over recent decades, primarily due to fluvial erosion in the form of gullying but with slope and aeolian processes also of significance in particular locations. Soil samples taken from actively eroding areas within Fletcheras Rake, one of the earliest documented lead mines in the area, suggest that the reworking and redistribution of sediments from former mining sites are releasing heavily contaminated sediments into the wider hydrological catchment."

 

 

Will swap our arsenic for your lead.

[panoma1]

Was there not a hoo hah some time ago of a large number of red kites and buzzards dying in the North east....where the RSPB were blaming shooting interests.....when it was mooted that they did in fact die from being fed contaminated meat by, I think the RSPB? The whole thing got brushed under the carpet?

I would bet anti shooting hands are involved in this story too? Somewhere? 

Apparantly it was in Conan Bridge in the Black Isle and sixteen red kites and an unknown number of buzzards died.....my apologies to the north east!

Edited November 29, 2017 by panoma1

[thepasty]

11 hours ago, Scully said:

If we all think like this then we’ve lost I’m afraid. I will argue my corner wherever and whenever I feel it is warranted. 

The part I find hard to believe is your claim that individual handgunners campaigning against the ban did more harm than good. 

You can post a link as to where you got this info’ if you wouldn’t mind.

I'm with Scully, if we dont challenge these people no one will and they'll continue to spout bias misleading tripe to up their readers (which is what its all about in media).

In this case I wouldnt be questioning the background data but more how its been presented to the public by the media.

Edited November 29, 2017 by thepasty

[Uilleachan]

12 minutes ago, thepasty said:

I'm with Scully, if we dont challenge these people no one will and they'll continue to spout bias misleading tripe to up their readers (which is what its all about in media).

In this case I wouldnt be questioning the background data but more how its been presented to the public by the media.

Read the actual paper, supplied by CaptainBeaky, on the first page of this thread and copied below for convenience: 

The full text of the article is available here

... and then read the BBC piece in the OP and tell me where the BBC journo is misleading anyone? Having read both I can see that the Journalist has simply reported on the paper, supplying selective quotes from a contributor to the work, however what she reports tallies with what I've read in the paper. So from that perspective I'd say she's misled no one. We may not like that bit in the paper, but to report it isn't in and of it's self to misreport or mislead. 

Now I disagree with the assertion, in the paper and repeated in the BBC piece, that lead shot was the likely source of lead contamination found in the 6 lead poisoned birds. Indeed, a body doesn't have to look far for alternative sources of lead contamination, this very thread has thrown up some very real and more tangible alternative sources, in my opinion of course. 

With all that in mind, if a challenge is to be made against the lead shot analogy then it has to be made to the publishers of the paper, not the reporter reporting on the findings in the mainstream media.

If you feel qualified to challenge the scientists go for it, their names are attached to the paper. Personally I feel my shooting body are better placed resourced and equipped, than I, to take this forward on our behalf. 

 

 

 

[Bazooka Joe]

9 hours ago, stagboy said:

Quote

All over the uplands of Co Durham (like Weardale) and parts of Northumberland, ie Nenthead, Alston etc. I expect they have a list at the lead mining museum at Killhope, Co Durham. The lead mining industry goes back to Roman times, but the spoils heaps I am talking about are 1700s onwards. You can often spot them on large scale OS maps. They definitely have lead in them, because some have been reworked several times, whenever the price of lead ore went up. Here's a photo of one in the middle of a grouse moor. 

 http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/5539023

I fail to see the connection between lead spoil heaps & Red Kites, that was my point.

Not all the spoil heaps are from lead mines either, fluorspar, zinc, quartz, and calcite were also mined.

By the way, Nenthead & Alston are in Cumbria IIRC.

 

 

 

 

[Gordon R]

Quote

 

With all that in mind, if a challenge is to be made against the lead shot analogy then it has to be made to the publishers of the paper, not the reporter reporting on the findings in the mainstream media.

If you feel qualified to challenge the scientists go for it, their names are attached to the paper. Personally I feel my shooting body are better placed resourced and equipped, than I, to take this forward on our behalf. 

 

Agreed.

[stagboy]

2 hours ago, Bazooka Joe said:

I fail to see the connection between lead spoil heaps & Red Kites, that was my point.

Not all the spoil heaps are from lead mines either, fluorspar, zinc, quartz, and calcite were also mined.

By the way, Nenthead & Alston are in Cumbria IIRC.

Indeed, that's a fair point. I was simply highlighting that lead in the environment is not simply in the air, as plotted on that interesting map, but is also actually lying on the surface - in easily digested form, and in very high concentrations, too.  Somebody has now told me that a local foxhound pack always tries to ensure its hounds never enter various of these old mine working areas, because they have been know to get very sick and even die after licking their feet. (Not sure if this is true, but it's what is being said).

Yes, I know other stuff was also mined (often from the same drift), but lead was the main thing they were after. And if you look at some of the photos and maps in that Durham paper, you will see that the affected areas are huge; the tailings in the one study area alone cover hectares. Similar sites are found right across the North Pennines SPA. Indeed, it seems they may also exist in the Peak District as well. 

[stagboy]

These are one km grid squares. K Just look at the sheer size of the spoil heaps. And this study area is just one small part of the affected area, which covers a good part of the entire North Pennines AONB and SPA. The researches found very high levels of lead in the two spoil heaps they examined (marked), posing risks to livestock and also downstream communities. 

 

[Uilleachan]

19 hours ago, Scully said:

If we all think like this then we’ve lost I’m afraid. I will argue my corner wherever and whenever I feel it is warranted. 

The part I find hard to believe is your claim that individual handgunners campaigning against the ban did more harm than good. 

You can post a link as to where you got this info’ if you wouldn’t mind.

Okay, the fellow who mentioned this to me, and others as it was in a similar context to our context here i.e. an online shooting forum of which this fellow in currently on the moderation team, wasn't sure if this was the particular link in question (he's going to have another look for us) as this was all a long time ago, but it will serve to make the point:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/the-parents-the-government-and-the-gun-1359298.html 

From the link the relevant section plus context:

"By contrast, her opponents have many more resources. The British Shooting Sports Council (the umbrella organisation that put the pro-shooting case) employed a professional London consultancy, John Kendall ***ociates, to help it put its case.

A determined effort was made to groom the image of gun users, as an internal document, "A Public Relations Guide for Shooters", made clear. It warned members against "aggression or hysteria" which would confirm negative impressions, and advised enthusiasts how to cultivate their local media, presenting the right image.

"Pay attention to dress," the guide said. "Even though there is nothing inherently bad about camouflage clothing, we would strongly advise that it is not worn by non-military personnel. Casual but respectable clothing on the range or shooting ground, and a collar, tie and suit in the TV studio may be boring but it is 'safe'." When it came to actual shooting, clubs were advised: "Avoid the use of 'humanoid' targets."

Not all of the advice seems to have been taken. As one Whitehall source put it last week : "The clever game would have been to put up some reasonable and plausible people. Instead they let loose people who should never have been near a microphone."

Embarrassment turned into public relations disaster as a newsletter published by the National Pistol Association made accusations against John Crozier, whose daughter, Emma, five, was among the 16 children murdered in the Dunblane attack. Sebastian Coe, MP for Falmouth and Cambourne, felt obliged to resign as the association's honorary president.

***Nor were politicians impressed by the pro-handgun letters they received. One gun campaigner wrote to an opposition MP: "The Labour Party proposals for gun control smack of police-state tactics. Hopefully, we don't live in a police state yet. I, along with the last three generations of my family, have fought against Fascism, Communism and terrorism in their various forms. The gun-control proposals from Labour smack of the first phases of totalitarian regimes."

Even among Conservative MPs the influence of the shooting lobby proved limited. As one source put it: "The gun lobby is influential in the sense that itssupporters are rich and high-profile. But this is not America where there is a large number of supporters."

The Tory party, as so often these days, found itself divided. On the pro-shooting side there was the patrician, huntin'-shootin'-fishin' wing and the libertarians, who opposed controls as an infringement of freedom. Pitched against them was a swathe of urban MPs and mainstream backbenchers anxious to be seen to be tough on law and order."

(Emphasis mine)

...............................................................

Bearing in mind this was from an era prior to the wide spread use and access to e-mail, twitter and even online forum formats like this were not readily available the vast majority of the population, the above being from 1996. 

These days is easy to fire off a well intentioned e-mail to our representatives that could backfire, it's also much easier to store and share with "interested" parties, our own correspondence that could be used against us.... 

Edit to add: The last few words on the highlighted bit on the end of the quote, swap the words "tough on law and order" with "strong on the environment" and you'll get the point I was trying to make there. 

Edited November 29, 2017 by Uilleachan

[Scully]

Very interesting and many thanks.

As a former handgunner I have no faith in either the NPA or the NRA, and I’m quite aware of just how effective the BSSC and BASC were when it came to fighting our corner; the latters advice being to ‘keep a low profile’, but in my experience hiding under the bed doesn’t make the bogeyman go away.

Many other shooters were ( to put it politely ) disappointed with their chosen representation,  hence the formation of The Shooters Rights Association. 

A lone individual who on this forum, goes by the name of ‘ he whom must not be named’ , did sterling work on behalf of those who were thrown to the wolves in the name of self preservation and started a one man campaign to oust the despicable David Mellor, whom had described pistol owners as ‘perverts’. I can’t claim the ‘anything but Mellor’ campaign was solely responsible for his political demise, but he certainly wasn’t a happy bunny.

While I can agree that some folk shouldn’t be allowed near a microphone, in the face of non committal from paid representatives, the only choice is to go it alone.

I have had letters published in national media and defended the rights of those shooters who weren’t responsible for Dunblane on radio, and admit you do need to base your argument on logic and reason, but still can’t and won’t accept that leaving it to others is the answer. 

If nobody takes the time then I won’t tolerate their complaints. 

If you do your homework you can and may find that you can even pick away at scientific arguments, as a totally impartial body is a rare commodity. 

Edited November 30, 2017 by Scully
Spelling

[Uilleachan]

As a vetren campaigner such as yourself I've no doubt you can make a good case. The problem is, especially under the present climate where online communications are under the spotlight, many others won't/can't/or could be misinterpreted.  

   

[Scully]

Then we’ll have to agree to disagree, as I don’t see a problem. 

[grrclark]

On 30/11/2017 at 12:57, Scully said:

Very interesting and many thanks.

As a former handgunner I have no faith in either the NPA or the NRA, and I’m quite aware of just how effective the BSSC and BASC were when it came to fighting our corner; the latters advice being to ‘keep a low profile’, but in my experience hiding under the bed doesn’t make the bogeyman go away.

Many other shooters were ( to put it politely ) disappointed with their chosen representation,  hence the formation of The Shooters Rights Association. 

A lone individual who on this forum, goes by the name of ‘ he whom must not be named’ , did sterling work on behalf of those who were thrown to the wolves in the name of self preservation and started a one man campaign to oust the despicable David Mellor, whom had described pistol owners as ‘perverts’. I can’t claim the ‘anything but Mellor’ campaign was solely responsible for his political demise, but he certainly wasn’t a happy bunny.

While I can agree that some folk shouldn’t be allowed near a microphone, in the face of non committal from paid representatives, the only choice is to go it alone.

I have had letters published in national media and defended the rights of those shooters who weren’t responsible for Dunblane on radio, and admit you do need to base your argument on logic and reason, but still can’t and won’t accept that leaving it to others is the answer. 

If nobody takes the time then I won’t tolerate their complaints. 

If you do your homework you can and may find that you can even pick away at scientific arguments, as a totally impartial body is a rare commodity. 

Well said Scully.  The 'leave it to someone better qualified' approach is a false premise unless there is very real cohesion amongst the community and we know in the shooting community that is absolutely not the case.  Even on this forum amongst the top 30-50 regular posters we would struggle to find any sort of consensus, let alone a nominated spokesperson.  There is not even cohesion between the half dozen representative bodies at times.

What happens is that people are happy to leave the smelly parcel for someone else to handle and nobody does.

The stupid will always make themselves heard as well because that is what the stupid do, whether there is professional representation or not, so best to accept that and make sure that as many well formed, reasoned and clearly articulated points of view are put forward.

[stagboy]

Interesting stuff. No easy answers.

It seems to me that most campaigning causes use a certain amount of professional resource these days.  But when the PR operation itself becomes the story... well, that can be problematic.

For example, the publicity achieved on behalf of the shooting community by a certain sporting celeb certainly put the antis on the back foot. Many on our own side, even,  seemed oblivious to the fact that the celeb was fronting an orchestrated campaign. This reached the point where one poster said the celeb was putting the shooting organisations to shame. When I then gently hinted that the celeb in question was not necessarily acting entirely off his own bat (pun intended) I was accused of being "snide" by Gordon R, who demanded evidence. I didn't bother replying (mindful that antis are constantly searching key words/names), although a few keystrokes would have revealed the name of the PR firm and the chief lobbyist.

None of this detracts from the courage of the celeb, of course. He deserves immense credit for putting his head above the parapet. Nor do I doubt his sincerity.  And the campaign was broadly effective. But, in the end, those who live by the word die by the sword. The media hate to think they are being manipulated (ironic, I know.)

I reckon the reason the BBC proceed to give the celeb a hard time on a related matter at the end may have been because a certain left-wing newspaper, which is effectively the BBC's  house journal, had previously done a lengthy hatchet job, attempting to raise concerns about "shadowy" financial backers (see link, below). This undoubtedly influenced the Beeb, who decided to turn a straightforward interview into an unprovoked attack.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/aug/12/grouse-shootings-rich-influential-backers-join-forces-fire-on-critics

 

 

[Walker570]

Well, I don't know what planet these experts live on but I am seeing red kites appearing everywhere I go these days.  They really do lose the plot when they infer that the only source of lead is from ingested lead shot. Why therefor do we have a constant increase in buzzard numbers, I'd bet I have six or seven pairs within 5 miles of me in Leicestershire and numbers increase every year. So buzzards will not eat a carcase which has lead shot in it then ?  My resident pair will eat all and everything soft and covered in feathers or fur I leave out for them, rabbit, squirrel, rat, pigeon, both waiting on me this morning. They appear very healthy and raise a couple of youngsters every year. Stops them eating any pheasants or partridge. I look forward to a pair of red kites dropping in. They have been seen locally.

Researcher speak with forked tongue, no doubt.