The new GL so ambiguous

[Harnser]

I keep reading and reading it and find it more ambiguous every time I read it . Can we shoot stubbles ,can we roost shoot ,can we use decoys , will using rope bangers be sufficient to be classed as none lethal method. Love the advise to change positions with your scare crow and sit your self in its chair . The mind boogles,

harnser

[bluesj]

I think they are written that way on purpose so you can never be sure that you are legal so could be open to prosecution.

As I read it you could have 500 pigeons coming in on to some seed so out go the bangers, flags etc and still they keep coming so you site out in your deck chair with a gun, in come 3 birds you have a cracking left and right taking 2 of them and the 3rd flies off, it could be said that you should have fired a shot to scare off all 3 as it had worked on the 1 you had not shot!

[mick miller]

It is deliberately worded to leave you open to prosecution if you ask me. An antis dream: did you try scarecrows? Banners? Shouting and waving your arms? Shots to scare? Why are you using decoys to entice them in? Have you documented all the attempts to scare first, where are your records? Why are you shooting them in the breeding season? Why are you not removing the roosting trees etc? Why are you hiding behind nets, in camo when you should be wearing hi viz and making yourself visible as a deterrent? 

All in all, if the licences stand, the shooting you have carried out for the last 40 years is dead and gone. 

[lancer425]

46 minutes ago, Harnser said:

I keep reading and reading it and find it more ambiguous every time I read it . Can we shoot stubbles ,can we roost shoot ,can we use decoys , will using rope bangers be sufficient to be classed as none lethal method. Love the advise to change positions with your scare crow and sit your self in its chair . The mind boogles,

harnser

Ambiguity and the whole idea of a General licence run hand in hand. And if you think about it it could be viewed as a roaring success as ambiguous as it is, designed to be like this to paper over the cracks of a disaster born over 40 years ago that never got sorted out then and still has not been.

  Or as i suspect you feel . confused not knowing what is right and wrong what’s allowed and what’s not.

Or how NE see it Complicated open to interpretation in several ways and leave them enough scope to prosecute if the need arises.

And finally the BASC interpretation.  "its not fit for purpose "  Now this one is the one i am taking notice of.   Wait lets see what they throw in next see how that looks. Racking your brains trying to fathom the unfathomable is pointless.

[the enigma]

Do the new licenses specifically state that records have to be kept of attempts to scare birds with non lethal methods?

[bluesj]

13 minutes ago, the enigma said:

Do the new licenses specifically state that records have to be kept of attempts to scare birds with non lethal methods?

yes

[Rossco89]

3 minutes ago, bluesj said:

yes

They don’t state time frames though...so you see the field getting hammered, put out scarecrow and bangers, two days later return and shoot away? Record could be kept in your shooting book if you keep one.

[old'un]

13 minutes ago, Rossco89 said:

They don’t state time frames though...so you see the field getting hammered, put out scarecrow and bangers, two days later return and shoot away? Record could be kept in your shooting book if you keep one.

If only it were that simple.

[marsh man]

3 minutes ago, old'un said:

If only it were that simple.

Nothing is ever that simple when it comes to this latest round of the continuing saga of the G L .

I would have thought by now along with 99% of the shooting fraternity that we would have had a clearer picture of what we can and cant do , but it seems we are nowhere near to a workable conclusion as of yet , a sad state of affairs .

 

[gotgcoalman]

Log entry 06/05/2019

Today I used my weather altering machine to make it rain so as to keep the pigeons away.

It appears to be successful when combined with 1250 shop window mannequins (which I need to move)

 

[bluesj]

4 minutes ago, gotgcoalman said:

Log entry 06/05/2019

Today I used my weather altering machine to make it rain so as to keep the pigeons away.

It appears to be successful when combined with 1250 shop window mannequins (which I need to move)

 

Log entry 07/05/2019

Moved the 1250 mannequins. Unfortunately the crop has been ruined by being trampled but at least the pigeons are leaving this field alone. 

[Harnser]

Does anybody know if worzel gummage is available for a couple of days this week . 

Harnser 

[old'un]

Think the pigeons have got wise to the new GL.

[the enigma]

1 hour ago, Rossco89 said:

They don’t state time frames though...so you see the field getting hammered, put out scarecrow and bangers, two days later return and shoot away? Record could be kept in your shooting book if you keep one.

or an hour later

 

[the enigma]

Recording & reporting - Users are advised to keep a record of problems and the use of nonlethal methods, but do not need to submit records to Natural England.

advised, not must keep a record................... no need to start gold plating things.

[bluesj]

12 minutes ago, the enigma said:

Recording & reporting - Users are advised to keep a record of problems and the use of nonlethal methods, but do not need to submit records to Natural England.

advised, not must keep a record................... no need to start gold plating things.

e) Any person using this licence must be able to show, if asked by an officer of Natural England or the Police:  

(i) what type of crop any action under this licence is protecting;  

(ii) what lawful methods have been, and are being, taken to prevent serious damage to such crops by woodpigeon or why the lawful methods have not been taken;  

(iii) what measures have been and are being taken to minimise losses due to other species and causes; and

(iv) why the threat of serious damage from woodpigeon is sufficiently serious to merit action under this licence.

This bit is not going to be easy with out some sort of records being kept

[the enigma]

I may be wrong, but I would be confident that a verbal explanation of the 4 points would be sufficient to demonstrate that you understand the terms of the license.

I do agree with the OP that it is extremely ambiguous, "if" and "unless" are used quite a bit. Other parts are un-quantifiable, such how long should you persist with other methods before using lethal means. 

 

[Scully]

As soon as those crops are sown you need to be putting out your scarecrows and do anything else you can think of which is relevant to the terms of the GL, then, by the time those crops are grown and have managed to attract pests, you can honestly say that you have tried ALL the practical methods the GL includes, and now, as the birds are quite clearly still coming in, you have at last resorted to lethal methods. Keep a log of all you do from day one, and as long as you and the landowner are singing from the same sheet, you are covered. 

[old'un]

34 minutes ago, Scully said:

As soon as those crops are sown you need to be putting out your scarecrows and do anything else you can think of which is relevant to the terms of the GL, then, by the time those crops are grown and have managed to attract pests, you can honestly say that you have tried ALL the practical methods the GL includes, and now, as the birds are quite clearly still coming in, you have at last resorted to lethal methods. Keep a log of all you do from day one, and as long as you and the landowner are singing from the same sheet, you are covered. 

(unless their use would be impractical, without effect or disproportionate in the circumstances)

[bostonmick]

A couple of scarecrows a few flags and a  couple of bits of burnt rope along the edge of the field. A couple of photos and an entry dated in your log. Then go and shoot to your hearts content. The problem of proof is equally as hard on both sides. 

Edited May 6, 2019 by bostonmick

[Scully]

17 minutes ago, old'un said:

(unless their use would be impractical, without effect or disproportionate in the circumstances)

Yes. In which case you need to explain why you think so, and artistic license is your friend in such circumstances. 

9 minutes ago, bostonmick said:

A couple of scarecrows a few flags and a  couple of bits of burnt rope along the edge of the field. A couple of photos and an entry dated in your log. Then go and shoot to your hearts content. The problem of proof is equally as hard on both sides. 

This. 

[old'un]

7 minutes ago, Scully said:

Yes. In which case you need to explain why you think so, and artistic license is your friend in such circumstances. 

This. 

Yes, because it already a pain humping all the gear across a field without have to carry a scarecrow, flags and some burnt rope, do you think they would except that?

[Scully]

Probably. 

[norfolk dumpling]

Having read the GL and your comments I find it hard to believe anyone could be prosecuted and who will monitor crops over a period of time to check measures being applied? In my county are talking about thousands and thousand of hectares, a vast variety of crops and circumstances and, I suspect, no likelyhood of this being a police priority. If I get a call to arms surely it is a simple and uncontested argument that the crops are being damaged and pigeon numbers need to be reduced. Hopefully sensible work will now commence to assess pigeon numbers, the impact on crops and revenues and get the GL amended to ensure a flexible, workable set of rules.

Roost shooting could be interesting - 30-40 guys in woods spread over thousands of acres. You would need half of Norfolk's limited police force to check just one estate!

Having said above our associations - NFU, BASC, CLA etc etc - need to lobby Government to get this reversed and soon as we may have the spectre of a Corbyn government who we know would support the mentally retarded character behind this fiasco. Our beardy far left guy wanted all guns banned unless used for professional purposes - what does that mean for the vast majority of gun owners??

[Konnie]

As you say ND, who would take the case to court, not the cps without a high expectancy of success.

As if like you say …. When asked what made you think pigeons needed shooting..... Answer.. farmer as in his professional capacity as a FARMER, said the pigeons were eating said crop.....

how do they fight against that, if the boxes have been ticked regards scaring