Disruption of Chris Packhams work

[Rewulf]

This is what you're up against. 

People who live in cities, thinking they 'know' how things outside of their bubble work. 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/01/britain-countryside-bullies-chris-packham

[Rewulf]

From the comments 

"I find it difficult to see what problem anyone would have with what Packham is saying. Shooting corvids is basically irrelevant to any real purpose at all other than enjoying shooting them. There are plagues of this type of person skulking and hanging around the countryside.

However, for me, where this article is mistaken is that most often the ones I come across lurking around our land and up to no good they are not actually anything to do with the countryside at all - they are urban and, sorry if this offends, but exclusively men. You only have to read some of their online things to grasp what horrifically inhumane activities they band together to 'enjoy'. Shooting with anything from air rifles to even crossbows, they are a subculture in themselves and the associated wastage rate in dogs - frequently horrifically maimed down badger setts or lost, injured having been set on something and also frequently abandoned sick and diseased - well, its basically unspeakably vile.

I'm not saying the article is incorrect other than that it seems to think that the enjoyment of inhumane pointless slaughter is a thing associated with wealth. It isn't. I'd put folding money on it being the case that by far the greater number of wildlife crimes are committed by these types and the sentences they receive are far too light"

[Miserableolgit]

39 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

This is what you're up against. 

People who live in cities, thinking they 'know' how things outside of their bubble work. 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/01/britain-countryside-bullies-chris-packham

Indeed. The brief Wiki summary of Monbiot's background and career to date provides a little insight.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Monbiot

[Fen tiger]

3 minutes ago, Miserableolgit said:

Indeed. The brief Wiki summary of Monbiot's background and career to date provides a little insight.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Monbiot

Talking of backgrounds to help colour in the picture on packham.

 

 

[ShootingEgg]

17 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

 Shooting corvids is basically irrelevant to any real purpose at all other than enjoying shooting them.

Just took this part of your last post. 

Are you saying that when I got to a farm where we see close to 1000 corvids sat on the maize store and feed area, that im just enjoying murdering? The farmer has to feed his livestock, and if the corvids are helping themselves then his costs go up, I have farmers who lost alot last year with the heat, nothing growing, now they have crops and livestock being left unprotected, one I know uses fixed scarecrows, timed inflatable ones, kites and a gas banger, and still when working in the field, pigeons drop in. 

I am there to serve a purpose, after all non lethal means have been exhausted. 

[Rewulf]

37 minutes ago, ShootingEgg said:

Just took this part of your last post

Err, I was quoting from the comments section of the Monbiot piece I posted  from the guardian. 😂

A supposed 'farmer' 😶 who regularly finds murdererous pest hunters on his land, with no permission, illegal weapons, and leaving a multitude of injured and inexplicably diseased dogs behind! 

I've stated before, I need a reason to shoot things, rabbits, pigeons ect, if farmers tell me they're a problem, that's my reason, I need no reason to take corvids or foxes, they are on the shoot on sight list. 

[scutt]

No one has mentioned the cost of time and money the average skulking murderer gives freely to the farmer in the protection of his crops etc. of course there is an element of enjoyment but also a satisfaction of a service carried out.If it wasn't the case then the farmers would have to pay for contractors to cull  the pest and therefore pass the costs to the consumers.

Edited May 1, 2019 by scutt

[ShootingEgg]

45 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Err, I was quoting from the comments section of the Monbiot piece I posted  from the guardian. 😂

A supposed 'farmer' 😶 who regularly finds murdererous pest hunters on his land, with no permission, illegal weapons, and leaving a multitude of injured and inexplicably diseased dogs behind! 

I've stated before, I need a reason to shoot things, rabbits, pigeons ect, if farmers tell me they're a problem, that's my reason, I need no reason to take corvids or foxes, they are on the shoot on sight list. 

Ah my bad, didn't k ow it was a quote, been a long week... 

[udderlyoffroad]

2 hours ago, Rewulf said:

This is what you're up against. 

People who live in cities, thinking they 'know' how things outside of their bubble work. 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/01/britain-countryside-bullies-chris-packham

 

1 hour ago, Miserableolgit said:

Indeed. The brief Wiki summary of Monbiot's background and career to date provides a little insight.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Monbiot

Ahh, I had wondered when ‘Moonbat’ (as he’s known on social media) was going to pipe up.

Really, the man is an absolute gross ignoramus – 144 times worse than a normal ignoramus.

On the one hand, he appears on Newsnight lecturing us all that we should all eat less meat, and that when we do, it should include more pest species, specifically grey squirrel which he then proceeds to butcher and cook live on air.  Then he rails against organisations taking young people shooting and shooting in general?

He is completely unashamed in his hypocrisy and contradiction, and today’s column is just his usual tripe that would embarrass a sixth-form common room debate.

Again, I suggest engagement with “Wild Justice” only as an organisation, rather than engaging with publicity-seeking egos such as Packham et al.  They will find that infuriating.

Now, obviously there are a lot of individuals in the gallery (the Grauniad’s comments section) lapping it up, but check Twitter (if you’re feeling strong) and there are plenty of individuals who calmly contradict his ludicrous assertions with facts, and often invitations to come and see the work they do.  Needless to say, such offers go ignored.

I suspect we do actually have something of an opportunity here.  Trust in the mainstream media has never been lower, and look at the record number of TV licence cancellations recently.  People are questioning more and more the agenda that broadcasters, in particular, are pursuing.  Calm, fact-driven responses to ludicrous assertions, whilst they may not get as many ‘likes’ or ‘retweets’ as the initial lie, are viewed by the general public and may even change some minds.

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, ShootingEgg said:

Ah my bad, didn't k ow it was a quote, been a long week... 

No worries 

[ShootingEgg]

2 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

No worries 

To be honest with the amount thats been put up regarding this madness im lost as to what topic im even in haha

[Dibble]

51 minutes ago, udderlyoffroad said:

Again, I suggest engagement with “Wild Justice” only as an organisation, rather than engaging with publicity-seeking egos such as Packham et al.  They will find that infuriating.

 

Absolutely, Chris Packham and Monbiot do not fear people saying mean things about them they fear people not saying anything about them!

Do we have any Lawers and Accountants who could look at this:

Packham has chosen to set up Wild Justice as a limited company  with no benefit to it's directors and which minimises the risk to Chris Packham Ltd(06180055) or it's Director Chris Packham, no putting your money where your mouth is here.

All this discussion is however benefiting Chris  Packham the brand (I should insert one of those photos of him enigmatically staring into the distance chin slightly raised, rugged yet caring. Is the raised chin an attempt to disguise the effects of one too many pies, unlikely that Avery gave him some spare ones).

Wild Justice is serving as a Publicity vehicle for Packham .

The recent case with Lorainne Kelly seems to say "Celebrities" are professionally playing the role of themselves on TV.

Is Chris Packham Ltd(06180055) paid by the BBC for the services of Chris Packham playing the role of Chris Packham on Springwatch etc.

If he has chosen to use a Limited Company for  (legal) Tax avoidance it's fair for us to have a look, I only have access through work and it would be fraudulent for me to have a poke around.

If he is paid in a similar way to Loraine Kelly then should he make it clear when he is playing a role and isn't.

 

Mark Avery is very keen, amazingly keen really, for everyone to know his income sources he lists them on his website.

Ruth Tingay.....the grey woman......

 

[Scully]

Am currently trying to find what I can about the legitimacy of the RSPB killing predators for the protection of other species such as ground nesting birds, and came across this quite reasoned article form the Guardian, of all sources: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/28/conservation-killing-predator-control-protect-wild-species

[old'un]

48 minutes ago, Scully said:

Am currently trying to find what I can about the legitimacy of the RSPB killing predators for the protection of other species such as ground nesting birds, and came across this quite reasoned article form the Guardian, of all sources: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/28/conservation-killing-predator-control-protect-wild-species

Looks like I will have to put the air rifle away…https://www.rspb.org.uk/birds-and-wildlife/wildlife-guides/bird-a-z/magpie/legal-magpie-control-methods/

This is the current criteria set by the RSPB before they use lethal methods.

But non-lethal methods, whilst always our preferred way of doing things, are not always practical. Lethal vertebrate control on RSPB reserves is only considered where the following four criteria are met:

• That the seriousness of the problem has been established;

• That non-lethal measures have been assessed and found not to be practicable;

• That killing is an effective way of addressing the problem;

• That killing will not have an adverse impact on the conservation status of the target or other non-target species.

If we can satisfy ourselves of all these things, then we can be sure to make the right decision.

[Dibble]

For obvious reasons my house is quite secure, not invunerable, given time and a petrol saw you can get into most places but secure. I fitted an alarm with a visible box as a deterrent,  I knew it wasn't going to make burglars change their life styles they would just rob my neighbours.

A couple of my neighbours have now also fitted alarms as deterrents,  if more do our local vermin will have to brave the alarms, find a new occupation or starve (or give up heroin).

I think the RSPB may find their alarms are less of a deterrent in the future and the pests return.

 

 

[old'un]

This makes interesting reading and they have killed a few crows to protect another bird…https://community.rspb.org.uk/ourwork/b/biodiversity/posts/testing-conservation-delivery-for-curlew

[Scully]

1 hour ago, old'un said:

Looks like I will have to put the air rifle away…https://www.rspb.org.uk/birds-and-wildlife/wildlife-guides/bird-a-z/magpie/legal-magpie-control-methods/

 

 

 

This is the current criteria set by the RSPB before they use lethal methods.

 

 

But non-lethal methods, whilst always our preferred way of doing things, are not always practical. Lethal vertebrate control on RSPB reserves is only considered where the following four criteria are met:

 

• That the seriousness of the problem has been established;

   

• That non-lethal measures have been assessed and found not to be practicable;

   

• That killing is an effective way of addressing the problem;

   

• That killing will not have an adverse impact on the conservation status of the target or other non-target species.

   

If we can satisfy ourselves of all these things, then we can be sure to make the right decision.

 

Thanks oldun; I doubt the advice on the link you provided is still legal now. Can't get any response form RSPB regarding the revoked GL. 

[old'un]

I have been reading a number of studies on the decline of the Curlew and Lapwing, the conclusion of most is put this down to a number of factors, changes in farming practises, dry cold spring weather (lack of insects) but the overwhelming evidence in these studies point to predation from corvids and foxes (no mention of badgers), this was one of the biggest reasons for their decline. predation tied in with poor breeding conditions has not allowed the birds to recover, thus the decline in numbers, the study sites were divided into PC (pest controlled) and NPC (none pest controlled) the conclusion was the PC sites showed a significant increase in the study birds breeding success opposed to the NPC sites.

 

I wonder how they will now control corvids and will they be subject to the terms and conditions in the new GL, will they have to prove serious damage and use All non-lethal methods first.

[Scully]

Just now, old'un said:

 

I wonder how they will now control corvids and will they be subject to the terms and conditions in the new GL, will they have to prove serious damage and use All non-lethal methods first.

One can only assume yes, they must. It's the law. 

[Yellow Bear]

3 hours ago, Dibble said:

Wild Justice is serving as a Publicity vehicle for Packham

Aux contrare I would suggest that Packham is a publicity vehicle for Avery's "Wild Justice". Not that I have one iota of sympathy for him.

[Dibble]

7 minutes ago, Yellow Bear said:

Aux contrare I would suggest that Packham is a publicity vehicle for Avery's "Wild Justice". Not that I have one iota of sympathy for him.

Whichever way you look at it 3 people are getting richer off this and a lot of people, indeed all taxpayers are out of pocket.

[scouser]

Just had Selina Scott on local BBC news complaining about packham and the G.L.  She’s losing lambs and ground nesting birds . Makes a change for them to report on something positive for corvid control .

[old'un]

1 hour ago, scouser said:

Just had Selina Scott on local BBC news complaining about packham and the G.L.  She’s losing lambs and ground nesting birds . Makes a change for them to report on something positive for corvid control .

Pity there’s not more current and relevant stars/celebs endorsing shooting, but I cannot see anyone putting their heads above the parapet in fear of their like ranking taking a nose dive.

[Dibble]

3 hours ago, old'un said:

Pity there’s not more current and relevant stars/celebs endorsing shooting, but I cannot see anyone putting their heads above the parapet in fear of their like ranking taking a nose dive.

I believe Gordon Ramsey has been seen clay shooting recently

[ShootingEgg]

3 hours ago, old'un said:

Pity there’s not more current and relevant stars/celebs endorsing shooting, but I cannot see anyone putting their heads above the parapet in fear of their like ranking taking a nose dive.

There are plenty of them, but will they put themselves in a position that would put them on our side, they may think of their revenue rather than voicing their views unfortunately