Changes To The General Licence

[scarecrow243]

Hi Old un   sorry but those video clips are not brutal enough  they wont change peoples minds

[ShootingEgg]

Have filled out a complaint form but no sign of acceptance on email to say its received 

[old'un]

17 minutes ago, wymberley said:

https://cereals.ahdb.org.uk/media/1191562/11-15_Woodpigeon_factsheet_web.pdf

Well done! Now ask them for the reference to it.

I have and Mark Avery’s reply was “I have data (published data from the GWCT actually), and I've posted it in previous blogs”

 

I have sent an email to GWCT with all the relevant info and have asked them to confirm they have supplied Mark Avery with this data.

[Newbie to this]

3 minutes ago, ShootingEgg said:

Have filled out a complaint form but no sign of acceptance on email to say its received 

Same.

[mick miller]

Ditto.

[wymberley]

23 minutes ago, old'un said:

I have and Mark Avery’s reply was “I have data (published data from the GWCT actually), and I've posted it in previous blogs”

 

 

I have sent an email to GWCT with all the relevant info and have asked them to confirm they have supplied Mark Avery with this data.

I would imagine that as most of the birds shot would be the woodpigeon so this from the GCWT is probably relevant and contradicts Packam et al:

Recent changes in British hunting legislation have protected the stock dove Columba oenas since 1 October 1982, and removed protection from the collared dove Streptopelia decaocto after 1 April 1977; the wood pigeon Columba palumbus has remained legal quarry throughout. Ringing recoveries offer a means of comparing annual survival rates before and after the change in legislation. Care is needed in the construction of the recovery matrices to remove inhomogeneities in the data and ensure that each 'year' runs from the day of legislative change. Annual survival rates were estimated by maximum likelihood using multinomial models conditioned on the recoveries; there was no evidence of age- or time-related variation in reporting rates. The annual survival rate of the stock dove was constant, at 54 ± 3%. For both the collared dove and the wood pigeon, estimates of survival rates in the first year after ringing were not consistent between birds ringed as young and those ringed as adults, but nevertheless averaged less before 1977 than after 1977; annual survival rates of birds that survived the first year after ringing did not differ between time periods, and were 64 ± 2% for the collared dove and 61 ± 2% for the wood pigeon. The proportion of recoveries reported shot or trapped was only 14% for the collared dove, compared with 79% for the wood pigeon, and remained constant before and after 1977 for both species; in the case of the stock dove, the proportion reported shot or trapped before and after 1982 fell from 70% to 34%. The change in quarry status had no effect on annual survivorship or population size of either the stock dove or the collared dove, while the wood pigeon has increased regularly in abundance despite heavy shooting.

[Smokersmith]

Called into my local game dealer today .. they're taking woodies tomorrow, and are awaiting news following that.

I think the battle we've lost is on legal competence. It looks like the NE wording was legally poor, and instead of our shooting organisations having the brightest minds and sorting this out in a controlled way ... the pressure has come from the anti's and resulted in this kneejerk response which has ended up in our nuts.

Sharper leadership/brighter minds required I think!!

[wymberley]

From the NGO:

It starts at 23:59 tomorrow. Haven't copied the whole email, but this is worth noting:

Some people have unfortunately been directing their understandable anger about the situation towards the shooting organisations rather than NE. Let’s be clear on this. The NGO was told by NE in mid March that despite the legal challenge being made against them, the General Licences would remain in place. The next communication on the subject we had from NE was received by the NGO at 1446 yesterday afternoon, announcing the revocation. There had been no previous indication of revocation whatsoever. We issued our response via our website at 1704 yesterday. None of the other countryside organisations had been given any more notice of this than the NGO.

[mick miller]

I think we should all bombard old worm lips, who congratulated Tony Juniper CBE on his appointment to NE stating that...

Quote

“Tony will bring great experience and passion to Natural England from a career dedicated to conservation from his role at WWF to advising the Prince of Wales."

Get your Tweets in chaps: https://twitter.com/michaelgove?lang=en

Tony's first decision in taking on the role appears to be revoking the three general licences after mild pressure from a handful of animal extremists and condemning millions of fledglings, lambs and crops to destruction. A good first step in conservation.

Edited April 24, 2019 by mick miller

[Dekers]

3 minutes ago, wymberley said:

From the NGO:

It starts at 23:59 tomorrow. Haven't copied the whole email, but this is worth noting:

Some people have unfortunately been directing their understandable anger about the situation towards the shooting organisations rather than NE. Let’s be clear on this. The NGO was told by NE in mid March that despite the legal challenge being made against them, the General Licences would remain in place. The next communication on the subject we had from NE was received by the NGO at 1446 yesterday afternoon, announcing the revocation. There had been no previous indication of revocation whatsoever. We issued our response via our website at 1704 yesterday. None of the other countryside organisations had been given any more notice of this than the NGO.

It is shocking that a chance/revocation should be made that quickly.

There are many legitimate shooters who will be ignorant of the situation in the very short term, and no doubt break the law unintentionally.

[oowee]

2 hours ago, JohnfromUK said:

If I understand the present situation right, this is where we are;

1. Natural England (NE) issued Licenses which were poorly written and do not comply with the regulations under which they were issued (in respect of non lethal methods being unsuitable).
2. The Licenses have been challenged by a 3rd party 'pressure group/body' called Wild Justice (WJ) in court - it seems either the court found in their favour, or NE agreed to settle 'out of court' - it is not clear to me from reports which is true.
3. NE has capitulated and revoked the licence with virtually no notice.  WJ had expected the ruling to apply from the issue of licenses in January 2020, not immediately (according to one Avery, of their named founders)
4. Some form of replacement licenses are 'in urgent preparation', but no one is saying what these will allow and under what conditions.
5. The timing is unfortunate with ground nesting birds, crops etc at particular risk at this time of year.

Now from this - two things seems possible;

1. Natural England have been thoroughly incompetent in drafting the wording of the licenses - leaving themselves open to challenge and loosing (it must have been a high probability that any wording and small print would be closely examined by the various pressure groups)
2. Natural England have chosen to word the licenses poorly to enable a challenge to succeed and enable them to revoke the licenses without having to take blame directly.  There are those in NE who are not field sports friendly.

It is not an issue with the wording of the licence. It is an issue with the way the licence is administered and issued. The wildlife act of 1981 gives the power to grant licences but requires the licencing authority (in this case NE) to be satisfied that there are no other satisfactory alternatives, that they are selective for a small number of birds. NE has put the onus for satisfactory alternatives on the shooter with no limits on the birds which has resulted in the challenge.

NE may in hindsight be not so good at the way they have delivered the solution but it has worked well for the last nearly 40 years. If they are to address the fundamental point of application the licence may not change radically but the administration and beaurocracy associated may be significantly changed. 

 

Edited April 24, 2019 by oowee

[TIGHTCHOKE]

 

6 minutes ago, wymberley said:

From the NGO:

It starts at 23:59 tomorrow. Haven't copied the whole email, but this is worth noting:

Some people have unfortunately been directing their understandable anger about the situation towards the shooting organisations rather than NE. Let’s be clear on this. The NGO was told by NE in mid March that despite the legal challenge being made against them, the General Licences would remain in place. The next communication on the subject we had from NE was received by the NGO at 1446 yesterday afternoon, announcing the revocation. There had been no previous indication of revocation whatsoever. We issued our response via our website at 1704 yesterday. None of the other countryside organisations had been given any more notice of this than the NGO.

Noted!

[mick miller]

@michaelgove Nice to see that Tony Junipers first decision in taking on the chairpersons role at NE appears to be revoking the three general licences that help protect millions of fledglings, lambs and farmers crops. A good first step in conservation.

[CharlieT]

6 minutes ago, oowee said:

It is not an issue with the wording of the . It is an issue with the way the is administered and issued. The wildlife act of 1981 gives the power to grant requires the authority (in this case NE) to be satisfied that there are no other satisfactory alternatives, that they are selective for a small number of birds. NE has put the onus for satisfactory alternatives on the shooter which has resulted in the challenge.

NE may in hindsight be not so good at the way they have delivered the solution but it has worked well for the last nearly 40 years. If they are to address the fundamental point of application the licence may not change radically but the administration and beaurocracy associated may be significantly changed. 

 

And so it should have considering the number of organisations it consulted during the initial review of licenses by DEFRA in light of the WCA........... https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20070101201546/http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/bird-licence/consultation.pdf

[dad]

I think that by the time this gets sorted you all will be so gratefull to be able to go out with your gun on a saturday and shoot a few pigeons you will pay NE what ever they ask for its all about money they have already said they are under funded and under staffed.it looks to me like a kick in the teeth for the working man pigeon shooting is usually free or at least affordable.

[oowee]

2 minutes ago, CharlieT said:

And so it should have considering the number of organisations it consulted during the initial review of licenses by DEFRA in light of the WCA........... https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20070101201546/http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/bird-licence/consultation.pdf

It looks like we have had it easy so far. It's hard to imagine a streamlined process that meets the requirements of the Wildlife Act. Some farmers here get licences for starlings, expensive and one I have worked with was limited to 50. 

[Scully]

https://www.nationalgamekeepers.org.uk/articles/further-information-on-the-revocation-of-general-licences-in-england

Second and most up to date email I’ve had today. 

[oowee]

18 minutes ago, Scully said:

https://www.nationalgamekeepers.org.uk/articles/further-information-on-the-revocation-of-general-licences-in-england

Second and most up to date email I’ve had today. 

Helpful e mail  Dribs and drabs of info is better than what we are getting from BASC. 

If NE are close to a 'light touch' replacement why would they not delay revocation for a few days?

[motty]

18 hours ago, Ultrastu said:

If natural england are worried that the terms of the gl.arent clear enough and open to missuse .maybe they should just remove the legal protection for pigeons crows etc  (afforded to other species) and put them with rabbits .rats etc .which can be controlled year round and require no licence general or otherwise .

The birds would obviously  still need to be dispatched humanely as in the same manner as mammals. 

This would end any confusion around crop protection or health issues etc.

And while they are at it .add herring guls to the list too please .

 

For once, I totally agree with you!

[the enigma]

2 hours ago, mick miller said:

If we were all vegan, we wouldn't need lambs though...

And that is what a lot of these numpties believe.

 

Any word if NIEA are following suit?

[oowee]

Copied from SD

Interesting and detailed response from Richard Benyon MP:
 

• This issue came about as the result of a legal challenge and as such there is no flexibility other than to suspend the GL. It (the GL) stems from the days of MAFF when there was apparently a requirement to do a regular assessment of the need for a GL. Defra handed the duty over to NE six years ago and it appears that some crucial paperwork did not find its way there, and it has created a loop hole that has been exploited by anti-shooting campaigners.
• NE intend to continue with the GL as soon as possible but crucially most species WILL be able to be legally controlled within a few days.
• On Thursday there will be a simple form to fill in available on the NE website from the moment the GL falls, to apply for and quickly receive legal authority to control a number of the 16 species covered by the GL. NE will prioritise pigeons (damage to crops) and next will be corvids. There will be three categories under which people can apply. These will be a) damage to livestock (including game), b) public health and safety and, c) conservation.
• This is a temporary fix. A new GL will be issued in time but will require the usual processes including consultation.

Edited April 24, 2019 by oowee

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Thank you.

I presume there will be;

A. a massive workload.

B. A price to pay (fee).

Edited April 24, 2019 by TIGHTCHOKE

[Davetyler]

I have never had a general license for shooting. Doni need to apply for one from thursday or the 29th? 

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Just now, Davetyler said:

I have never had a general license for shooting. Doni need to apply for one from thursday or the 29th? 

If you've been shooting pigeons you were doing so under the "General Licence"

[mick miller]

2 minutes ago, Davetyler said:

I have never had a general license for shooting. Doni need to apply for one from thursday or the 29th? 

Maybe there actually is a need for a DSC1 type course for pigeon and vermin shooters? I dismissed the idea earlier, assuming most, if not all shooters would understand even loosely the licence with which they are allowed to shoot. I have to admit, I might have been wrong.

 

 

Edited April 24, 2019 by mick miller