Make your views known to Defra

[Mightymariner]

I think all methods are worth doing. The volume of replies, individual and groups, is what counts, Imo.

[JDog]

17 hours ago, lakeside1000 said:

I think the BASC will be speaking on most of our behalf, Gove's intention is to gather as much as possible in a very short time, so it may be counter productive if individuals block the internet with many hundreds of individual emails, far better to have the bodies we pay fees to , represent us which is what we pay our dues for, the BASC has been at the forefront of these complaints and negotiations so far and I believe they represent our best chance of a fast and correct conclusion. If you are not a member of one of the representative groups already in negotiation then by all means get your message in a s a p, we can only hope that  new GL's appear very soon and end this farce. 

I think that you are wrong on this Lakeside. The more emails the more impact.

[Scully]

18 hours ago, lakeside1000 said:

Non of us are accepting 'it', we are being represented by the most powerful shooting and conservation groups in the country who we pay fees to for just this purpose, I don't keep a dog and bark myself, read the letter put forward to the NE prior to this handover by the BASC, which will go forward as evidence and proof of feelings amongst members, this letter is full of specific facts and figure and spells out exactly all our thoughts, unless you have actual specific proof which would help in Mr Gove and his associates coming to the right conclusion and issuing new GL's , If you can furnish photographic or written evidence of pest damage and the need to control then by all means email them now, 

It asks for ‘views’ and not just specifically evidence. I have a few views I would like to express, as well as evidence through experience, gathered over many years of shooting. 

[NatureBoy]

Avery has said on his blog that because Gove copied them in on the letter he sent to Juniper about DEFRA taking on the GL that now makes WJ a stake holder in the new GLs.  HE is the one to watch!!! His blog worth a read for insight on them and info. Other orgs have said WJ a lobbying group and will have no say. . . . . As i have read it now  DEFRA are in control no officer from NE can challenge how you are using the new GL,  And little chance of the police knowing  if we are doing right or wrong!. . . . Has anyone found and read WJs legal challenge and witness statement??

On a light note. Another pair of turtle doves have turned up my way. Male displaying so probably stay.  Us weekend/casual shooters and  wildlife vandals must be doing something right. Still haven't heard the elusive wood pigeon alarm call!?  Think the much needed showers have helped all wildlife and farmers. Scarecrow comp in local village. At first i thought they must have hell of a pigeon problem.   NB

[old man]

If DEFRA are going to do a proper job they should also take into account the WJ position and hopefully move the situation legally beyond challenge?

We will see? 

[Wilksy II]

It does ask for replies come from groups due to the time constraints so I think a well worded email from PW as collective would carry more weight

Edited May 6, 2019 by Wilksy II

[mick miller]

This is a great suggestion by Wilksy, do we have any legal types here that are able to draft a response on our behalf. Stating the membership (in numbers) of the site? 

[Good shot?]

I would second that as there are some good chaps on here with some good sensible solutions and recommendations to give.

[lancer425]

18 hours ago, old man said:

If DEFRA are going to do a proper job they should also take into account the WJ position and hopefully move the situation legally beyond challenge?

We will see? 

In reality i think they have to look at quite a radical change to prevent further challenges. A theme that is running through all the new NE Gl submissions to date is individual licences, i think this will come in as outlined by NE from the outset.

[mick miller]

A well worded, reasoned letter countersigned by us all? Is that possible? I think this carries more weight than individuals muddying the waters

[Wilksy II]

2 hours ago, mick miller said:

This is a great suggestion by Wilksy, do we have any legal types here that are able to draft a response on our behalf. Stating the membership (in numbers) of the site? 

 

 

13 minutes ago, mick miller said:

A well worded, reasoned letter countersigned by us all? Is that possible? I think this carries more weight than individuals muddying the waters

Exactly that Mick!

Both good ideas if it’s possible, not sure of membership numbers but I would imagine it’s a fair few and would show solidarity from the forum.

[JJsDad]

Working on the principle that the more people who respond to DEFRAs fact gathering excercise,  the more (perhaps) they will listen.

I came across the following information from another shooter, which I emailed to them today.

To: DEFRA

Ladies / Gentleman

While your search for evidence concerning the ongoing mess caused as a result of the recent revoking of General Licence(s) 04 / 05 & 06 by Natural England is applauded. I would like to draw your attention to considerable study and data recording on the subject of Wood-Pigeon`s in particular, that ran for a considerable time and gathered more facts and information than you could hope to achieve in the limited time scale you have set.

 Historical Facts:

During and after the 2nd world war; MAFF commissioned research into the Wood-Pigeon and its effect on arable crops and continued to do so up until approx 18 yrs ago, making it one of the longest running research projects on a "Pest Species" the UK has ever funded.

The ultimate conclusion after many years of research into Pigeon population levels and financial costs to British agriculture and food production, was that shooting, ultimately had no effect on National Wood-pigeon Levels, but had a huge effect on localised crop damage and was seen as the ultimate and only effective means of crop protection, hence it's subsequent listing on the General Licence, up until the April this year.

The major factor in National Wood-Pigeon populations was identified as cold or severe winters which reduced populations back down on a relatively consistent basis.

There are a few things that have changed in the subsequent decades.

•      Fact: Winters are getting warmer
•      Fact: The demand for British arable crops has soared which has resulted a change in agricultural practices with virtually all year round production of many crops.
•     Fact: This in turn has resulted in more food being available for Wood-pigeons and other pest specie birds.

Conclusions:

In conclusion; the requirement for the control of Wood-Pigeon`s in particular has become more imperative.

  DEFRA's present "Consultation" on Wood-Pigeon is pretty irrelevant as there is vast amounts of scientific evidence already available on this issue that should be available to you.

Regards

Signature

 

Edited May 6, 2019 by JJsDad

[panoma1]

14 minutes ago, JJsDad said:

Working on the principle that the more people who respond to DEFRAs fact gathering excercise,  the more (perhaps) they will listen.

I came across the following information from another shooter, which I emailed to them today.

To: DEFRA

Ladies / Gentleman

While your search for evidence concerning the ongoing mess caused as a result of the recent revoking of General Licence(s) 04 / 05 & 06 by Natural England is applauded. I would like to draw your attention to considerable data on the subject of Wood-Pigeon`s in particular, that ran for a considerable time and gathered more facts and information than you could hope to achieve in the limited time scale you have set.

 Historical Facts:

During and after the 2nd world war; MAFF commissioned research into the Wood-Pigeon and its effect on arable crops and continued to do so up until approx 18 yrs ago, making it one of the longest running research projects on a "Pest Species" the UK has ever funded.

The Ultimate conclusion after many years of research into Pigeon population levels and financial costs to British agriculture and food production, was that shooting, ultimately had no effect on National Wood-pigeon Levels, but had a huge effect on localised crop damage and was seen as the ultimate and only effective means of crop protection, hence it's subsequent listing on the General Licence, up until the April this year.

The major factor in National Wood-Pigeon populations was identified as cold or severe winters which reduced populations back down on a relatively consistent basis.

There are a few things that have changed in the subsequent decades.

•      Fact: Winters are getting warmer
•      Fact: The demand for British arable crops has soared which has resulted a change in agricultural practices with virtually all year round production of many crops.
•     Fact: This in turn has resulted in more food being available for Wood-pigeons and other pest specie birds.

Conclusions:

In conclusion; the requirement for the control of Wood-Pigeon`s in particular has become more imperative.

  DEFRA's present "Consultation" on Wood-Pigeon is pretty irrelevant as there is vast amounts of scientific evidence already available on this issue that should be available to you.

Regards

Signature

 

A further fact is they now breed year around! Probably due to recent advantageous climate variations.

Any link to where anyone interested would find the post war data referred to? 

[JJsDad]

34 minutes ago, panoma1 said:

Any link to where anyone interested would find the post war data referred to? 

Unfortunately, no. I dont have a link. The info in my email was passed to me by a shooting colleague who had cut & pasted it from "Countryside Rally 2019 - London" which appears to be a Facebook group. I have hacked around the original to retain the bare facts but disguise it from the email which was also sent to DEFRA. Albeit the study ceased around 18 years ago, I would be surprised if MAFF / DEFRA have destroyed all the evidence gathered. If they bothered to look, there must be some remaining hard copies or micro-fiche of such a long running study, albeit the people then involved may since have retired or moved on to other things.

I just thought it typical of our civil service that they are now seeking evidence over a few days when sitting in their archives is years worth of study & facts on the subject.

Further to my initial comments, the following link is worth a look: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0261219489900483

Edited May 6, 2019 by JJsDad
Link added

[Scully]

1 hour ago, JJsDad said:

Working on the principle that the more people who respond to DEFRAs fact gathering excercise,  the more (perhaps) they will listen.

I came across the following information from another shooter, which I emailed to them today.

To: DEFRA

Ladies / Gentleman

While your search for evidence concerning the ongoing mess caused as a result of the recent revoking of General Licence(s) 04 / 05 & 06 by Natural England is applauded. I would like to draw your attention to considerable data on the subject of Wood-Pigeon`s in particular, that ran for a considerable time and gathered more facts and information than you could hope to achieve in the limited time scale you have set.

 Historical Facts:

During and after the 2nd world war; MAFF commissioned research into the Wood-Pigeon and its effect on arable crops and continued to do so up until approx 18 yrs ago, making it one of the longest running research projects on a "Pest Species" the UK has ever funded.

The Ultimate conclusion after many years of research into Pigeon population levels and financial costs to British agriculture and food production, was that shooting, ultimately had no effect on National Wood-pigeon Levels, but had a huge effect on localised crop damage and was seen as the ultimate and only effective means of crop protection, hence it's subsequent listing on the General Licence, up until the April this year.

The major factor in National Wood-Pigeon populations was identified as cold or severe winters which reduced populations back down on a relatively consistent basis.

There are a few things that have changed in the subsequent decades.

•      Fact: Winters are getting warmer
•      Fact: The demand for British arable crops has soared which has resulted a change in agricultural practices with virtually all year round production of many crops.
•     Fact: This in turn has resulted in more food being available for Wood-pigeons and other pest specie birds.

Conclusions:

In conclusion; the requirement for the control of Wood-Pigeon`s in particular has become more imperative.

  DEFRA's present "Consultation" on Wood-Pigeon is pretty irrelevant as there is vast amounts of scientific evidence already available on this issue that should be available to you.

Regards

Signature

 

That's a handy and still relevant piece of info'. Thanks for posting. 

[Good shot?]

8 hours ago, lancer425 said:

In reality i think they have to look at quite a radical change to prevent further challenges. A theme that is running through all the new NE Gl submissions to date is individual licences, i think this will come in as outlined by NE from the outset.

That would be Individual Licences with all the same strings attached. I sincerely hope not.

[lancer425]

1 minute ago, Good shot? said:

That would be Individual Licences with all the same strings attached. I sincerely hope not.

I hope i am wrong and not so much for us the shooters but the country as a whole, they have just not thought about this past their own agendas.

[Good shot?]

Very true Lancer425.

There must be a way to put Corvids, woodpigeon etc in with Rabbits and Rats. Thats the simplest solution and least ambiguous remedy if it can ultimateley be applied.

As long as we don't enjoy shooting them in order to placate CP.

 

[lancer425]

22 minutes ago, Good shot? said:

Very true Lancer425.

There must be a way to put Corvids, woodpigeon etc in with Rabbits and Rats. Thats the simplest solution and least ambiguous remedy if it can ultimateley be applied.

As long as we don't enjoy shooting them in order to placate CP.

 

I am not sure where this will all end with these GLs. And we are every last one of us on here wild guessing scaremongering or wishful thinking in equal order. this is being brought about by impatience which is a perfectly natural thing to do in circumstances like this, but its not helping solve anything.

In the next day or two the best we can hope for is perhaps an update from BASC could  perhaps include advice on Responding  to defra, but other than that i expect it will be a With regards the GLs a quiet week and waiting for the Consultation to end and then next week or so a response from the government its at this point we will have a better idea of what we are dealing with.

Myself i am Anxious i have to admit , but i am optimistic and want to have faith in Britain reason and common sense. I hope none of these three let us down.

[mick miller]

19 hours ago, panoma1 said:

A further fact is they now breed year around! Probably due to recent advantageous climate variations.

Any link to where anyone interested would find the post war data referred to? 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=2ahUKEwiUt8nik4niAhXrRhUIHe_4CG4QFjAAegQIBBAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Frandd.defra.gov.uk%2FDocument.aspx%3FDocument%3DVC0112_2889_FRP.doc&usg=AOvVaw3sCm4qqBgKv5XB1Y-4e1YE

I'm not sure about the model, a ratio of 60:40 summer, winter shooting (as was present up to the GL revocation) predicts a population decline. The reality is that the population has increased.

This is another document on the subject; shooting providing an at least 25% reduction in damage to crops.

Edited May 7, 2019 by mick miller

[mick miller]

Dear Sir/ Madam,

I reply to your request for the following:

1) Views on the alternatives to killing or taking a specific bird species for:

• Conserving flora and fauna
• Preserving public health or safety
• Preventing serious damage or disease (serious damage relates to serious damage to livestock, foodstuffs for livestock, crops, vegetables, fruit, growing timber fisheries or inland waters) In particular, what are these alternatives and to which bird species do they relate? In your experience or evidence, how effective and practicable are they?

and,

2) Your experience or evidence of any benefits that were delivered by the three revoked general licences?

I would advise that you could do little better than review two pieces of research already carried out regarding the efficacy of shooting to control pest species such as Columba palumbus, more commonly known as the wood pigeon, a species whose number has grown by an estimated 134% between 1970 and 2011 and a species that costs UK farmers an estimated £4million in lost revenues each year.

The first document, completed in 2014 by the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board, shows clear evidence that the shooting of wood pigeon by concealed ‘gunmen’ (their term not mine) provided the most cost efficient and practicable means by which to control this pest species and conversely, rather than discouraging shooting during the breeding season as suggested by the revised licence for this particular species, shooting throughout the summer is to be encouraged in order to reduce or at the very least maintain current numbers.

“An NFU/BASC nationwide survey showed that farmers regard shooting as the most effective means of crop protection. Of those growers undertaking shooting, 75% rated its effectiveness as moderate to high; reported by the survey as markedly ahead of the other main protective measures bangers and scarecrows…"

It is worth contrasting opinion on the culling of ‘wild birds’ by Wild Justice, with little evidence to support the claim that the shooting of ‘pest species’ such as the rook, jackdaw, crow, pigeon, magpie et al has on actual numbers, with this research which is thorough and has reviewed the alternative methods to controlling wood pigeon numbers. None matched the shooting of wood pigeons throughout the year as a better, more efficient and cost effective means of controlling numbers.

To further bolster the evidence that shooting through the summer months in order to actually reduce pest species numbers is to be encouraged I would welcome you to review the second document attached as evidence. This is a document created by DEFRA itself and relies partly on data collected during the study conducted at Carlton (one of the longest studies in the UK, covering a period of 43 years). It states that:

"Reversing the seasonal shooting pressure to 40:60, winter:summer, a process which is happening (see Discussion) results in a gradual population decline with the population halving over 60 years.”

Logically, if we are to prevent further serious damage to crops in the UK and costs to UK farming in general, then shooting of pest species is to be encouraged and supported, at least in the short term, until numbers show evidence of decline. That is assuming, of course, that prevention of damage to crops and farming is regarded as a priority for a body that represents food and rural affairs?

Sadly, living as I do surrounded by arable crops, I lack the ‘hands-on’ experience to comment on the corvid family, except to say that the evidence for predation on wild birds, ground nesting species, cattle and livestock is widely available and substantive. Culling is the means by which the body entrusted with protecting wild birds in the UK, the RSPB, protects endangered wild birds and damage to ecosystems where wild birds nest (ref: 1), I would have thought that if the judicous use of ‘bangers’ were an intelligent and ‘friendly’ option to nesting wild birds then that is what they (the RSPB) would have deployed.

The reality is that these forms of deterrent (bangers, tapes, netting, scarecrows) are blanket in their approach; bangers put off all species, not just the ones whose absence is desirable. Shooting however, provides a means to target specific species, at a specific time in a specific area. It is widely accepted as effective and the evidence supports this.

Both documents are attached for your review.

Best regards,

Mick Miller.

Ref.1 - https://community.rspb.org.uk/ourwo...ce-of-the-impact-of-predators-on-wild-birds-5

 

FV 426_Report_Final_2014.pdf VC0112_2889_FRP.pdf

Edited May 7, 2019 by mick miller

[TR1]

Excellent and informative 

[turbo33]

Cracking Mick, well done on an excellent letter.

[Cadman]

On ‎05‎/‎05‎/‎2019 at 12:09, JDog said:

I think that you are wrong on this Lakeside. The more emails the more impact.

Agreed Jdog

BASC have requested individuals to help out here:

https://basc.org.uk/gl/

[mick miller]

The five minute survey is well worth filling in.