Jump to content

Changes To The General Licence


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Just got this...………………………..

 

Display problems? View this newsletter in your browser.

untitled-header-5.jpg

BASC Head Office, Marford Mill, Rossett, Wrexham, LL12 0HL
Contact 

---

NE revokes general licences -
what you need to do now

You will be aware that Natural England (NE) suspended three general licences, under which 16 pest bird species could be legally controlled in England. This followed a legal challenge from activist group Wild Justice.

NE has told BASC that they hope to have new general licences in place during the week beginning Monday 29 April.

If you control pests under the terms of the general licence, you must make an individual application right away or stop shooting until new system is available.

You can apply for a temporary licence by clicking here

Natural England has published a position statement on the general licences and the next steps. It explains the situation with general licences in detail and offers advice on what people controlling pests could do. It is available to read here.

BASC continues to press Natural England and the government to issue new general licences as a matter of urgency and will publish regular updates on the dedicated BASC webpage.  

**Please note that members' emails can only go out in batches to avoid being blocked as spam. This email is going out to all BASC members in the UK. It will take up to three working days for it to reach everyone. We apologise for the inconvenience.**

---

© 2019 BASC - British Association for Shooting and Conservation
Registered Office: Marford Mill, Rossett, Wrexham, LL12 0HL
Registered Society No: 28488R

ei?u=http%3A%2F%2Fbasc.org.uk%2Fwp-conte

Unsubscribe from this mailing list

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Yes, I got that in overnight.  I found the middle link (the one "It is available to read here") very helpful and would recommend people to have a look at that.

 

Me too. Priority 2 makes particularly interesting reading? Such careful attention to detail over such an important issue!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like BASC are going for some changes, the saga continues…https://forums.pigeonwatch.co.uk/forums/topic/387487-new-general-licence-“not-fit-for-purpose”-basc-tells-ne/

Mods at this time when the info is coming in dribs and drabs would it be a good idea to put a sticky with all the info coming in from Debbie (BASC) as I think some people are missing it, if there were just one place to look for the latest info it might help.

Edited by old'un
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi folks i havent seen any posts that say putting  out gas guns banger ropes kites etc  get gas gun batteries stolen switched off  rope bangers getting cut  stolen etc etc i have had this problem up here  and read on the net about walkers cutting rope bangers and putting them in water this is theft    plus rope bangers are a danger too kids  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, turbo33 said:

 

Me too. Priority 2 makes particularly interesting reading? Such careful attention to detail over such an important issue!

 

53 minutes ago, Ultrastu said:

IMG_20190428_085502.jpg

No collard dove ive noticed 

 

 

11 minutes ago, Ajarrett said:

Collared Doves should come under serious damage to foodstuffs for livestock and public health and safety

 

Just goes to indicate the total ineptitude of NE.

Items as indicated by Turbo33 duplicated and items (collared doves) as indicated by Ultrasu and Alan Jarrett omitted. Beggars belief who is coming up with this. No wonder WJ was able to win their case.

OB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Old Boggy said:

Demonstrates that this is an anti's charter.

See the new Thread I have started about extending SSSIs

 

2 minutes ago, Old Boggy said:

 

Just goes to indicate the total ineptitude of NE.

Items as indicated by Turbo33 duplicated and items (collared doves) as indicated by Ultrasu and Alan Jarrett omitted. Beggars belief who is coming up with this. No wonder WJ was able to win their case.

OB

 

See the new Thread I have started about extending SSSIs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Ajarrett said:

See the new Thread I have started about extending SSSIs

 

 

See the new Thread I have started about extending SSSIs

Just read that Alan.

Thanks for posting.

No doubt that WJ are working full out to find yet more chinks in NE`s armour. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ultrastu said:

IMG_20190428_085502.jpg

No collard dove ive noticed 

 

Being sceptical, I`m wondering whether the omission of collared doves from Priority 3 was an error or something that NE were keeping under the radar in the hope that no-one would notice. However, not being an indigenous species to Britain, I think that they should be included in Priority 3 if not 1. 

Hopefully this omission to this non-indigenous species will be forcibly pointed out to NE in the very near future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Dekers said:

Just got this...………………………..

 

Display problems? View this newsletter in your browser.

untitled-header-5.jpg

BASC Head Office, Marford Mill, Rossett, Wrexham, LL12 0HL
Contact 

---

NE revokes general licences -
what you need to do now

You will be aware that Natural England (NE) suspended three general licences, under which 16 pest bird species could be legally controlled in England. This followed a legal challenge from activist group Wild Justice.

NE has told BASC that they hope to have new general licences in place during the week beginning Monday 29 April.

If you control pests under the terms of the general licence, you must make an individual application right away or stop shooting until new system is available.

You can apply for a temporary licence by clicking here

Natural England has published a position statement on the general licences and the next steps. It explains the situation with general licences in detail and offers advice on what people controlling pests could do. It is available to read here.

BASC continues to press Natural England and the government to issue new general licences as a matter of urgency and will publish regular updates on the dedicated BASC webpage.  

**Please note that members' emails can only go out in batches to avoid being blocked as spam. This email is going out to all BASC members in the UK. It will take up to three working days for it to reach everyone. We apologise for the inconvenience.**

---

© 2019 BASC - British Association for Shooting and Conservation
Registered Office: Marford Mill, Rossett, Wrexham, LL12 0HL
Registered Society No: 28488R

ei?u=http%3A%2F%2Fbasc.org.uk%2Fwp-conte

Unsubscribe from this mailing list

Dekers.. I was wondering how the new licencing has effected you, as a professional 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had never even heard of Wild Justice until a few days ago, so thought it might be a good idea to find out about them.

Quotes in red are from the Wild Justice website     https://wildjustice.org.uk/about/

My interpretations are in italics.

 

“We decided not to set up a charity because that would limit some activities, eg campaigning against government policies, that we may want to carry out.”

Charitable status would have brought substantial benefits, so animal welfare is perhaps NOT the principal objective of Wild Justice.

 

Wild Justice will take on public bodies ….. We aim to hold their feet to the fire in court.”

It sounds as though Wild Justice intend to concentrate on interpretation of the law, rather than science.   This will allow them to rely on arguments about the exact wording of regulations, and avoid any challenge based on scientific evidence or practical considerations (eg  welfare of domestic animals or non-pest species).  

 

“… if the law is weak, if the law is flawed – we are coming for you.”

You may be acting entirely within the law, but if the directors Wild Justice happen to disagree with the wording of that particular law, they will launch a campaign against you as an individual.

 

“I know many people who despair ….. typically because access to justice can be prohibitively expensive and a daunting arena.”

… and a hill farmer whose lambs are having their eyes pecked by corvids, or a smallholder watching brassica crops being destroyed by pigeons, has very little chance of winning a case brought by Wild Justice.

 

“Legal cases are expensive even though we have found a great team of lawyers who will help us at very low fees.”

… which loads dice even further in favour of the Wild Justice, and against any ordinary individual whom they might chose to attack.    “Very low fees” implies that Wild Justice is being heavily subsidized by a wealthy law firm.   Will those lawyers be claiming very low fees when the taxpayer foots the bill for the recent legal case?   I rather doubt it.

 

“Your donation will enable us to fight for wildlife in the courts and in the media”

Packham is a very rich man (net worth said to be $4 million), a substantial part of his wealth having been provided by UK taxpayers via the BBC, but he wants other people to fund his vanity project.

https://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-celebrities/authors/chris-packham-net-worth/

 

“We don’t currently allow comments on this site”

Criticism (even constructive criticism) of Wild Justice will not be permitted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, islandgun said:

Dekers.. I was wondering how the new licencing has effected you, as a professional 

Hardly at all yet, I only do a little pigeon etc, but the Canada Goose will be an issue if all is not resolved soon!

Can't help thinking I will have yet more paperwork to do in the future though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, McSpredder said:

I had never even heard of Wild Justice until a few days ago, so thought it might be a good idea to find out about them.

Quotes in red are from the Wild Justice website     https://wildjustice.org.uk/about/

My interpretations are in italics.

 

“We decided not to set up a charity because that would limit some activities, eg campaigning against government policies, that we may want to carry out.”

Charitable status would have brought substantial benefits, so animal welfare is perhaps NOT the principal objective of Wild Justice.

 

Wild Justice will take on public bodies ….. We aim to hold their feet to the fire in court.”

It sounds as though Wild Justice intend to concentrate on interpretation of the law, rather than science.   This will allow them to rely on arguments about the exact wording of regulations, and avoid any challenge based on scientific evidence or practical considerations (eg  welfare of domestic animals or non-pest species).  

 

“… if the law is weak, if the law is flawed – we are coming for you.”

You may be acting entirely within the law, but if the directors Wild Justice happen to disagree with the wording of that particular law, they will launch a campaign against you as an individual.

 

“I know many people who despair ….. typically because access to justice can be prohibitively expensive and a daunting arena.”

… and a hill farmer whose lambs are having their eyes pecked by corvids, or a smallholder watching brassica crops being destroyed by pigeons, has very little chance of winning a case brought by Wild Justice.

 

“Legal cases are expensive even though we have found a great team of lawyers who will help us at very low fees.”

… which loads dice even further in favour of the Wild Justice, and against any ordinary individual whom they might chose to attack.    “Very low fees” implies that Wild Justice is being heavily subsidized by a wealthy law firm.   Will those lawyers be claiming very low fees when the taxpayer foots the bill for the recent legal case?   I rather doubt it.

 

“Your donation will enable us to fight for wildlife in the courts and in the media”

Packham is a very rich man (net worth said to be $4 million), a substantial part of his wealth having been provided by UK taxpayers via the BBC, but he wants other people to fund his vanity project.

https://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-celebrities/authors/chris-packham-net-worth/

 

“We don’t currently allow comments on this site”

Criticism (even constructive criticism) of Wild Justice will not be permitted.

Brilliant, absolutely first class and even better than your previous post. Thank you very much.

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...