panoma1 Posted March 16, 2018 Report Share Posted March 16, 2018 (edited) NE have today released the results of the consultation they held on Wildfowling consents, anyone read it? Any comments? Just on an initial scan I offer the following comments....., 92% of all respondents were from Wildfowlers...a good turnout! I've noticed a few issues such as the number of Wildfowling clubs the Association of UK Wildfowling Clubs (AUKWC) represent is actually over 50........not around 40 as the document claims! And more prominence is given to the opinion of the RSPB and WWT (i.e. 2 organisations) than the other 76 organisation responding! On the issue of bag limits! Edited March 16, 2018 by panoma1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muncher Posted March 16, 2018 Report Share Posted March 16, 2018 The part that worries me ,was the supposed high % of replied in favour of bag limits,that is a very dangerous game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted March 16, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2018 Apparantly 46% of respondents opposed visit numbers, 23% didn't know, 31% supported it?? Of the reported 46% who opposed visit numbers, NE claim "A FAIR PROPORTION suggested that bag limits would be a more effective way of ensuring that Wildfowling was always carried out in a sustainable manner" Neither is acceptable! Its was a question couched in such a way as to get an answer they wanted! like offering someone to choose between being hung for stealing a sheep or a lamb! How many, do NE interpret is a FAIR PROPORTION?..........5%, 10%, 15%, 25%, 50%.....90% I can't believe any wildfowler would volunteer to accept bag limits, in my opinion the responses and the results need independent scrutiny! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grahamch Posted March 16, 2018 Report Share Posted March 16, 2018 2 hours ago, panoma1 said: NE have today released the results of the consultation they held on Wildfowling consents, anyone read it? Any comments? Just on an initial scan I offer the following comments....., 92% of all respondents were from Wildfowlers...a good turnout! I've noticed a few issues such as the number of Wildfowling clubs the Association of UK Wildfowling Clubs (AUKWC) represent is actually over 50........not around 40 as the document claims! And more prominence is given to the opinion of the RSPB and WWT (i.e. 2 organisations) than the other 76 organisation responding! On the issue of bag limits! Who or what is tge asociation of uk wildfowling clubs? Never heard of them... Surely responces are better under the basc umberella not a body which appears obscure at best Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted March 16, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2018 17 minutes ago, grahamch said: Who or what is tge asociation of uk wildfowling clubs? Never heard of them... Surely responces are better under the basc umberella not a body which appears obscure at best AUKWC is a loose Association of UK Wildfowling Clubs (many are household names in fowling) formed specifically, at their joint expense, working through Consultants, to address ongoing problems with NE relating to Wildfowling consents, it currently comprises of over 50 Wildfowling Clubs (and individuals).......it has a wealth of Wildfowling knowledge and expertise within its membership and is currently working in parallel with BASC to try to protect traditional Wildfowling from the imposition of unnecessary conditions and the over regulation of Wildfowling via consents which are granted through NE.... If anyone is a member of a Wildfowling club, speak to your committee, if they haven't heard of AUKWC and what they are trying to achieve.....they have their ears shut! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grahamch Posted March 16, 2018 Report Share Posted March 16, 2018 2 minutes ago, panoma1 said: AUKWC is a loose Association of UK Wildfowling Clubs (many are household names in fowling) formed specifically, at their joint expense, working through Consultants, to address ongoing problems with NE relating to Wildfowling consents, it currently comprises of over 50 Wildfowling Clubs (and individuals).......it has a wealth of Wildfowling knowledge and expertise within its membership and is currently working in parallel with BASC to try to protect traditional Wildfowling from the imposition of unnecessary conditions and the over regulation of Wildfowling via consents which are granted through NE.... If anyone is a member of a Wildfowling club, speak to your committee, if they haven't heard of AUKWC and what they are trying to achieve.....they have their ears shut! Ironically am Treasurer of a club and its not been mentioned at all. Any contact details available? Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted March 16, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2018 6 minutes ago, grahamch said: Ironically am Treasurer of a club and its not been mentioned at all. Any contact details available? Cheers PM coming your way! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muncher Posted March 16, 2018 Report Share Posted March 16, 2018 (edited) The Aukwc, was formed as panoma1 says with a bit more to it, but wanted to work along side Basc not against or to replace BASC . Edited March 16, 2018 by muncher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penelope Posted March 16, 2018 Report Share Posted March 16, 2018 2 hours ago, muncher said: The part that worries me ,was the supposed high % of replied in favour of bag limits,that is a very dangerous game. Agreed. I have just finished reading it. In regards to disturbance, on my last coastal trip, two micro lights came down river, they moved hundreds of fowl and waders for miles. Shots from a couple of other fowlers on the marsh disturbed only those birds that were shot at, yet only fowling is considered as a cause of disturbance. No wonder trust between wildfowlers and NE is a concern. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scolopax Posted March 17, 2018 Report Share Posted March 17, 2018 I think many wildfowlers would accept daily bag limits as part of their consent agreement if the alternative was a visit limit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muncher Posted March 17, 2018 Report Share Posted March 17, 2018 We shouldn' settle for anything ,why should we bloody dog walkers er don' have to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted March 17, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2018 (edited) Well if we are going to give ground before we even get near a negotiating table.....we're already ******! How disappointing that this posting hasn't attracted more comment! It appears shooters, including Wildfowlers are happy to let others fight shootings battles?...........Wildfowlers have been on the front line in the defence of all shooting since WAGBI (now BASC) was formed by Wildfowlers many years ago..........and it looks like we still are?........if Wildfowling dies?.....who's shooting sport will be next? Edited March 17, 2018 by panoma1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smiler23 Posted March 17, 2018 Report Share Posted March 17, 2018 1of the Clubs I'm in already have bag limits and visit limits, and another club locally has just reduced there bag limit again. Is this not the norm around the country? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted March 17, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2018 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Smiler23 said: 1of the Clubs I'm in already have bag limits and visit limits, and another club locally has just reduced there bag limit again. Is this not the norm around the country? If these restrictions are imposed by NE as conditions of your Clubs consent? Then, to the best of my knowedge it is not the norm! But I think NE (and the WWT/RSPB) wishes they were!!........these conditions are amongst the restrictions NE is currently looking to impose when awarding future Wildfowling consents Edited March 17, 2018 by panoma1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muncher Posted March 17, 2018 Report Share Posted March 17, 2018 (edited) Visiting limits and bag limits we should fight all the way . They will not adopt the American system where it's done on proper bird counts they will give bag and visit limits and it will only get smaller until it's not worth us going, death by a thousand cuts. Edited March 17, 2018 by muncher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewluke Posted March 17, 2018 Report Share Posted March 17, 2018 i had a shock last year when i was told that nobody from our club was allowed to be involved with discussions about our clubs consents only BASC and landowners ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muncher Posted March 17, 2018 Report Share Posted March 17, 2018 (edited) 20 minutes ago, andrewluke said: i had a shock last year when i was told that nobody from our club was allowed to be involved with discussions about our clubs consents only BASC and landowners ?? I would think that is incorrect and that was one of the reasons AUKWC was formed as we didn't agree to those conditions.I believe all wildfowling club' need to have more dialouge with their neighouring clubs and nationally so we know what' going on and fight each other' corner,that way we are a force to be reckoned with. Edited March 17, 2018 by muncher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smiler23 Posted March 17, 2018 Report Share Posted March 17, 2018 These aren't part of ne consent, just inhouse club rules. One of the clubs we have pintail ban due to ne consent, to monitor numbers. They did a bird count local and were way out on numbers.. But state it was an accurate number.. The lads out regular see much larger population Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muncher Posted March 17, 2018 Report Share Posted March 17, 2018 (edited) This I find hard to take,Pintail a legal quarry but they say you can not shoot them, tell me how that is legal. Edited March 17, 2018 by muncher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smiler23 Posted March 17, 2018 Report Share Posted March 17, 2018 Shocking isn't it, but do gain consent this had to be done... Locally at peak times we have 2-3000 pintail.. Obviously this number goes up and down,but they came back with a result of a couple of hundred ,(can't remember exactally). Once something goes on a protected list in my eyes unlikely to come off it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muncher Posted March 17, 2018 Report Share Posted March 17, 2018 That was blackmail, and should be fought all the way by BASC,it's wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smiler23 Posted March 17, 2018 Report Share Posted March 17, 2018 I'm not on committee or out for clubs but I'm pretty sure basc were being spoken with in regards to this, it seems tad unfair... Another club borders the one I'm in. At low water I can be sat on the river opposite my mate(in the other club) literally 20 yards across from each other, he can shoot pintail ... I can't... It's wrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted March 17, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2018 38 minutes ago, Smiler23 said: Shocking isn't it, but do gain consent this had to be done... Locally at peak times we have 2-3000 pintail.. Obviously this number goes up and down,but they came back with a result of a couple of hundred ,(can't remember exactally). Once something goes on a protected list in my eyes unlikely to come off it Who are "they"? This sort of nonsense is exactly why the AUKWC was formed! A club initiated ban is fair enough, but I suggest, it is not acceptable to wildfowlers, for NE to on one hand use ill-considered, unscientific and unproven data.........and on the other hand, ignore the movements, distribution and natural fluctuations in numbers of wildfowl on one particular site, in order to restrict wildfowling and impose a species ban as a condition of granting consent on that site, when.....under the prevailing conditions at the time the majority of birds prefer (for whatever reason) to be elsewhere!...........it is not the number of birds on one site that is important.........it is the overall number across all sites! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nic Posted March 17, 2018 Report Share Posted March 17, 2018 In regards to visit limits, if you have renewed consent since 2010 its been part of NE's guidance that visits are limited to a number...... but that the visits are policed by yourselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motty Posted March 18, 2018 Report Share Posted March 18, 2018 On 16/03/2018 at 20:34, grahamch said: Who or what is tge asociation of uk wildfowling clubs? Never heard of them... Surely responces are better under the basc umberella not a body which appears obscure at best Just shows what you know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.