Jump to content

New general licence “not fit for purpose”, BASC tells NE


Recommended Posts

From the NGO statement.... my comments/questions in blue

….urgent analysis by the NGO has found the new 11-page licence to be far more restrictive than the 5-page licence it replaces.

The additional restrictions include:

  • The new licence only allows crows to be killed “as a last resort.”
  • It allows someone to kill crows only if they have previously tried non-lethal ways of solving the problems the crows are causing.

This is worded differently to the old GL04:

Quote

 

These conditions include the requirement that the user must be satisfied that legal (including non-lethal) methods of resolving the problem are ineffective or impracticable.

but not much different in spirit?

  • It prevents someone from destroying a crow’s nest when it is not in use.

it permits someone to take or destroy a nest that is in use, which would otherwise be an offence under WCA1981

Quote

 Protection of wild birds, their nests and eggs.E+W

(1)Subject to the provisions of this Part, if any person intentionally—

(a)kills, injures or takes any wild bird;

[F2(aa)takes, damages or destroys the nest of a wild bird included in Schedule ZA1;]

(b)takes, damages or destroys the nest of any wild bird while that nest is in use or being built; or

(c)takes or destroys an egg of any wild bird,

he shall be guilty of an offence.

but no licence is needed to take or destroy a nest not in use?

 

  • It prevents the use of some types of cage traps.

The type of traps permitted are listed in separate document WML-GL33, are these different the old requirements? There seems to be an error in the new licence WML-GL26 because it refers to WML-GU01 instead of WML-GL33?

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/798011/wml-gl33-standard-licence-conditions-trapping-wild-birds.pdf

  • It restricts the control of crows during their breeding season.

the condition is

Quote

d) Only undertake lethal control of birds during the breeding season if lethal control at other times or use of other licensed methods (e.g. egg destruction) would not provide a satisfactory solution.

..so if controlling them outside the breeding season is unsatisfactory, they can be controlled in the breeding season?

 

  • It is invalid in conservation areas such as SSSIs unless a further licence is obtained from NE.

Is this different to the old GL-04 (see notes m, n & o)?

  • And it requests users to “exercise restraint” when shooting or scaring crows in periods of severe weather.

the wording is the same as the old GL-04?

It took the NGO just moments to spot many serious flaws in the new licence, which was rushed out without any consultation, with no chance given to suggest changes.

I'm not sure that many of the points above are actually materially different to the old GL-04? (but there does seem to be a factual error in the new GL which needs checking and if necessary correcting)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HW682 said:

From the NGO statement.... my comments/questions in blue

….urgent analysis by the NGO has found the new 11-page licence to be far more restrictive than the 5-page licence it replaces.

The additional restrictions include:

  • The new licence only allows crows to be killed “as a last resort.”
  • It allows someone to kill crows only if they have previously tried non-lethal ways of solving the problems the crows are causing.
  • And this/these are the points I have been trying to get across via the paragraph I have linked to twice previously. Who, and equally to the point how, is anyone going to check that any individual has or hasn't complied with the terms of the new GL, anymore than they could do under the terms of the old one? Is it me? What has changed? I understand the wording may have changed so that the onus is on the landowner or shooter to comply, rather than on NE, but what is there in place to ensure both of the former have in fact complied? 
  • This is worded differently to the old GL04:but not much different in spirit?
  • It prevents someone from destroying a crow’s nest when it is not in use.

it permits someone to take or destroy a nest that is in use, which would otherwise be an offence under WCA1981

but no licence is needed to take or destroy a nest not in use?

 

  • It prevents the use of some types of cage traps.

The type of traps permitted are listed in separate document WML-GL33, are these different the old requirements? There seems to be an error in the new licence WML-GL26 because it refers to WML-GU01 instead of WML-GL33?

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/798011/wml-gl33-standard-licence-conditions-trapping-wild-birds.pdf

  • It restricts the control of crows during their breeding season.

the condition is

..so if controlling them outside the breeding season is unsatisfactory, they can be controlled in the breeding season?

 

  • It is invalid in conservation areas such as SSSIs unless a further licence is obtained from NE.

Is this different to the old GL-04 (see notes m, n & o)?

  • And it requests users to “exercise restraint” when shooting or scaring crows in periods of severe weather.
  • Again, who or what is going to verify compliance? 

the wording is the same as the old GL-04?

It took the NGO just moments to spot many serious flaws in the new licence, which was rushed out without any consultation, with no chance given to suggest changes.

I'm not sure that many of the points above are actually materially different to the old GL-04? (but there does seem to be a factual error in the new GL which needs checking and if necessary correcting)

 

 

Edited by Scully
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get the feeling the new licence has deliberately obfuscated the requirements in the hope that Mr. Average cannot fathom it and walks away or faces prosecution for a bit of grandstanding.

 

IMO its far too complicated and would be far better understood if someone had the nuts to reclassify corvids and pigeons as a vermin/pest issue - which they undoubtably are at any time once able to fly and feed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, greylag said:

Surley Gove and his department can see what a pig's ear the idiots at NE are making of the general license debacle.Someones head should role,which I very much doubt.

He'll be in no rush, it doesn't affect him!

 

10 hours ago, Dave-G said:

I get the feeling the new licence has deliberately obfuscated the requirements in the hope that Mr. Average cannot fathom it and walks away or faces prosecution for a bit of grandstanding.

 

IMO its far too complicated and would be far better understood if someone had the nuts to reclassify corvids and pigeons as a vermin/pest issue - which they undoubtably are at any time once able to fly and feed.

I agree, if NE can't can't come up with an immediate favourable solution, re-designate them as "pests, to be taken at any time" because contrary to what Packham and Avery would have you believe.....that is what they are!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎28‎/‎04‎/‎2019 at 17:39, HW682 said:

>>  …..  There seems to be an error in the new licence WML-GL26 because it refers to WML-GU01 instead of GL33

>>..

After contacting NE about this, they have corrected GL26 and re-issued it today.

Edited by HW682
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...