Jump to content

Changes To The General Licence


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

14 minutes ago, Scully said:

I know what you’re saying, but shooting also only works while the shooter is there.

Applies to those that 'got away', but the ones shot don't.  Also - overall  numbers would expand rapidly if there was no control ........ and moving them on isn't control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Applies to those that 'got away', but the ones shot don't.  Also - overall  numbers would expand rapidly if there was no control ........ and moving them on isn't control.

Is ‘control’ within the remit of the GL? I’m not picking an argument, I just want to be certain . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Scully said:

I hope you’re right, but I refer you to the answer I gave to Johnfromuk.

I hope so too mate and understand your concern like the rest of us. Will have to wait and see what the new GL looks like for Woodies

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 minute ago, Scully said:

Is ‘control’ within the remit of the GL? I’m not picking an argument, I just want to be certain . 

I don't honestly know.  It would seem logical that the 'measures of last resort' should include a 'control' of population.  The numbers of birds - especially pigeons, mean that for them all to feed adequately, they raid crops.  If there were a lot more pigeons, there are a lot more beaks to feed - and that would put even more pressure on them - and so make scaring them off harder.

I remember tales of very hard winters when food was short for pigeons - and you could barely scare them away at all - they were so hungry for the little that wasn't snow covered.

The purpose of the GL is to prevent crop damage (in this instance anyway).  Realistically - as flock sizes increase this becomes much more difficult ....... so in a sense 'control' of population has to end up in there to some extent for simply practical reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Help PLEASE

Has anyone bothered to apply online for a GL for pigeon/crow/ magpie.. general management on a farm shooting, or leaving it until the just comply one no application comes around.

That's a lot of information that is being gathered if it was ever passed on to antis 

Just wondered if I should wait once its out there no getting it back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

 

I don't honestly know.  It would seem logical that the 'measures of last resort' should include a 'control' of population.  The numbers of birds - especially pigeons, mean that for them all to feed adequately, they raid crops.  If there were a lot more pigeons, there are a lot more beaks to feed - and that would put even more pressure on them - and so make scaring them off harder.

I remember tales of very hard winters when food was short for pigeons - and you could barely scare them away at all - they were so hungry for the little that wasn't snow covered.

The purpose of the GL is to prevent crop damage (in this instance anyway).  Realistically - as flock sizes increase this becomes much more difficult ....... so in a sense 'control' of population has to end up in there to some extent for simply practical reasons.

Even with shooting at the alleged current rate I can see a major problem with WPs in 5 years even based on RSPB figures and breeding rates,  if the NFU figure is correct and the shooting reduces the mind boggles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Konnie said:

Help PLEASE

Has anyone bothered to apply online for a GL for pigeon/crow/ magpie.. general management on a farm shooting, or leaving it until the just comply one no application comes around.

That's a lot of information that is being gathered if it was ever passed on to antis 

Just wondered if I should wait once its out there no getting it back.

I have applied just to control magpies, Jays, Crows and jackdoors in the garden, to prevent damage to "Flora and Fauna". I quoted all the song birds we have regularly and then emailed in the application. As of yet I have had nothing back; not even a message saying the application was received.

Having sent in the application I can't even continue to shoot them as there is no risk of "serious damage to crops or livestock" so I am not covered by the clause that says if you apply then you can shoot until the licence is issued as protection of Flora and Fauna isn't covered.

If you require lethal control to be carried out before the determination of your licence application then you may not commit an offence provided that you do the following.

You must be able to show that your action is necessary for the purpose of:

  • preserving public health or public safety or air safety;
  • preventing the spread of disease; or
  • preventing serious damage to livestock, their foodstuffs, crops, vegetables, fruit, growing timber, fisheries or inland waters. You must also be able to show that there was no other satisfactory solution available for preventing such serious damage.

With regards to the data, I don't think it is any more risky than them having our contact details for licencing: if the data is vulnerable to a leak from NE then I think it is probably vulnerable to a leak from the police. When I go in to the doctors for a jab ect in my notes it comes up on their screen that I am a shotgun certificate holder: so I think the data is probably rather more widely available than you might think!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how the RSPB are getting on with their predator control, and if they have applied under different terms? 

29 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

 

I don't honestly know.  It would seem logical that the 'measures of last resort' should include a 'control' of population.  The numbers of birds - especially pigeons, mean that for them all to feed adequately, they raid crops.  If there were a lot more pigeons, there are a lot more beaks to feed - and that would put even more pressure on them - and so make scaring them off harder.

I remember tales of very hard winters when food was short for pigeons - and you could barely scare them away at all - they were so hungry for the little that wasn't snow covered.

The purpose of the GL is to prevent crop damage (in this instance anyway).  Realistically - as flock sizes increase this becomes much more difficult ....... so in a sense 'control' of population has to end up in there to some extent for simply practical reasons.

Yes, what you say sounds logical, and I agree, control has to play its part. let’s hope common sense prevails. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JohnfromUK said:

 

I don't honestly know.  It would seem logical that the 'measures of last resort' should include a 'control' of population.  The numbers of birds - especially pigeons, mean that for them all to feed adequately, they raid crops.  If there were a lot more pigeons, there are a lot more beaks to feed - and that would put even more pressure on them - and so make scaring them off harder.

I remember tales of very hard winters when food was short for pigeons - and you could barely scare them away at all - they were so hungry for the little that wasn't snow covered.

The purpose of the GL is to prevent crop damage (in this instance anyway).  Realistically - as flock sizes increase this becomes much more difficult ....... so in a sense 'control' of population has to end up in there to some extent for simply practical reasons.

I wonder if land owners are gonna start to bill NE .for lost of earnings due to crop and live stock damage .

And also all these scaring measures that incure costs.What about when pigeon shooters start to charge farmers for crop protection .? 

Wonder if Ne want to swallow those bills .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Timerider said:

Anybody been in to the gunshops lately? I haven`t had a chance this last week, but i`d be interested to know if this whole farce has had an impact on them yet. I imagine the sales of guns, cartridges, decoys, clothing etc. etc. has been down.

Yes I was wondering this as well, I have not fired a shot since all this started.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Scully said:

wonder how the RSPB are getting on with their predator control, and if they have applied under different terms? 

well they were all excited last year over 4 lapwings fledged, i think it was lapwings , thanks to habitat and predator control, no crops or livestock what so ever, so does this mean they can't control Crows??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NE as i see it are taking on a new role restricting individual license applications to just three shooters, if lethal control is needed why should the number of shooters make any difference. I feel this is outside of their remit and can see no reason why they should want to do this other than Back door gun control. They have not dreamed this up in just a few  days or weeks this as been planned. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We got  500,000 plus turn up to support the hunt,  in 1998 there was a devide then from a few thousand shooters who didn't feel it would have affected them. 

I wonder what the number would be if there was march round to Packams??? 

Or even the city again ???

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...