First new general licence issued

[Scully]

Reading through all this and parts of the 'Carrion' license, I feel quite confident that if the wood pigeon ( and other species ) are covered in the same manner then everything will be fine. If pigeons are covered in the same manner as Carrion then I'd be struggling to discover just what great difference there is ( when it comes to decoying ) really between the newer versions and the former. It's still all down to interpretation of not only the shooter and landowner, but of the enquirer also , and as long as you and the farmer tell the same stories ( if on the rare occasion you are asked ) as to what non-lethal methods you have employed, then all should be well. There could be exceptions however, such as stubbles, roost shooting and the opportunistic shots during game drives. 

The 'scaring' clause is puzzling however, as the entire point of decoying is not to scare the birds away, but to attract them so you can shoot them!  In theory, hanging a couple of rope bangers down the opposite end of the field to your hide may have you covered! 

It would be so much more logical and effective if pigeons and corvids ( with the exception of the rarer types such as Ravens ) were simply officially regarded as pests with no closed season, enabling them to be shot without restrictions. It is obvious that shooting has little if any effect on their population as a species, so until it does, I can't see why this should be a problem. 

I sincerely hope our shooting organisations don't drop the ball; they have been presented with a great opportunity to shape the outcome. 

Sorry, there are so may threads running at the moment I thought I'd posted this in the main one! Mod's please move if they feel it necessary. 

Edited April 27, 2019 by Scully

[ShootingEgg]

1 hour ago, Scully said:

It would be so much more logical and effective if pigeons and corvids ( with the exception of the rarer types such as Ravens ) were simply officially regarded as pests with no closed season, enabling them to be shot without restrictions. It is obvious that shooting has little if any effect on their population as a species, so until it does, I can't see why this should be a problem. 

Exactly my thoughts. It is clear we have no impact on numbers, just looking at some of the reports in sporting photos shows that.. 

[Yellow Bear]

8 minutes ago, ShootingEgg said:

Exactly my thoughts. It is clear we have no impact on numbers, just looking at some of the reports in sporting photos shows that.. 

Figures from Rspb show 40% increase in wood pigeon  since 2005 - this is despite "the millions"  that have been "shot out of hand" as has been claimed.

[Mice!]

15 minutes ago, ShootingEgg said:

Exactly my thoughts. It is clear we have no impact on numbers, just looking at some of the reports in sporting photos shows that.. 

Could almost say then why shoot at all? It has to help shooting pigeons when crops are vulnerable, we know this.

As for crows and corvids, we know they need controlling especially around nesting time but the antis will never agree with this

 

[ShootingEgg]

2 minutes ago, Mice! said:

Could almost say then why shoot at all? It has to help shooting pigeons when crops are vulnerable, we know this.

We are controlling, not trying to wipe out. No control means millions more within a year.. So im not saying 'why shoot at all' i am saying that even though we shoot all year round we are not wiping them out, we are just controlling. If they we pest and open all year in that respect, we could shoot anywhere at anytime with no paper to say it has to be over sown fiels, or standing crops etc. 

[oldypigeonpopper]

hello, if Packham has his way and stops the vast majority of corvid  pest control by law abiding farmers/game keepers and those allowed to shoot on their permissions he will not need to do anymore winter watch on the BBC as there will be less song birds on viewers bird tables for years to come and that is what needs to be made aware to the general public,