AYA117 Posted June 7, 2019 Report Share Posted June 7, 2019 16 minutes ago, Lucky Shot 1958 said: I am no legal boffin by any means, but I would assume that the reason that they advise record keeping would be so that you have evidence as your defence should you be questioned by the Police etc,just my opinion. The problem I think, is it would be inadmissible as evidence in your defence as it is not witnessed and is only your say so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted June 7, 2019 Report Share Posted June 7, 2019 5 minutes ago, AYA117 said: The problem I think, is it would be inadmissible as evidence in your defence as it is not witnessed and is only your say so. And only their say so against the shooter! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AYA117 Posted June 7, 2019 Report Share Posted June 7, 2019 2 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said: And only their say so against the shooter! Very true indeed, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arjimlad Posted June 7, 2019 Report Share Posted June 7, 2019 2 hours ago, AYA117 said: The problem I think, is it would be inadmissible as evidence in your defence as it is not witnessed and is only your say so. No, it would be admissible. That would be like being inadmissible to say "I was at home watching telly" if you were accused of being somewhere else. What weight the court might attach to evidence is an other question. So - keeping a note of non-lethal things tried by the farmer or your goodself will always be admissible evidence. I could take a snap of the scarecrows & gas guns for example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motty Posted June 7, 2019 Report Share Posted June 7, 2019 6 hours ago, Old Boggy said: Hi Motty, As I posted the other day, Caroline Cotterell a director of Natural England, confirmed that it is OK to shoot pigeons on stubbles if you are protecting an adjacent or future crop. That's good enough for me and I will continue to do so at harvest and like Marshman, have the backing of my farmer friends. This could also be extrapolated to shooting a flightline. OB I am not interested in what someone may have said. Until it is in writing (in a new general license) then I can't rely on it. If we are to follow the wording on the current license, how can we prove that we are protecting a crop by shooting a stubble? If we are stating that we are protecting other standing crops, how close do they have to be? After all, stubble shooting is probably the main reason why the license was revoked in the first place! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Boggy Posted June 7, 2019 Report Share Posted June 7, 2019 2 hours ago, motty said: I am not interested in what someone may have said. Until it is in writing (in a new general license) then I can't rely on it. If we are to follow the wording on the current license, how can we prove that we are protecting a crop by shooting a stubble? If we are stating that we are protecting other standing crops, how close do they have to be? After all, stubble shooting is probably the main reason why the license was revoked in the first place! As I`ve said previously, having spoken to my farmer friends, I have their full backing and they, if necessary, will provide me with full documentation with photos, loss of yield per acre and financial loss due to historical pigeon damage. On this basis, I feel confident in shooting a stubble if this is on their land and adjacent to a field liable to such damage in the future. I would be more than happy to be challenged on this by whoever and feel confident that I can justify my actions. My farmers would not be too happy if I refrained from protecting their crops knowing that all the pigeons feeding on stubble, would then be attacking the adjacent crop. As you well know, pigeons will stay in an area all the while food is available, so in the event of say a rape stubble, once all seed is gleaned off, they will then be attacking standing wheat or beans on adjacent fields. OB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man Posted June 7, 2019 Report Share Posted June 7, 2019 20 hours ago, Ultrastu said: They would have to prove that you werent there on other days . So did they film you on Thursday when u tried flags .and friday when u tried scare crows .and Saturday when etc etc .. You record your efforts as per gl31. I see your point but why does the potential solution to most situations in the UK require the law abiding person to become outside of the law in order to achieve the solution to his problem? 7 hours ago, AYA117 said: The problem I think, is it would be inadmissible as evidence in your defence as it is not witnessed and is only your say so. Would certainly be admissible.......... but believed??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marsh man Posted June 7, 2019 Report Share Posted June 7, 2019 6 hours ago, motty said: I am not interested in what someone may have said. Until it is in writing (in a new general license) then I can't rely on it. If we are to follow the wording on the current license, how can we prove that we are protecting a crop by shooting a stubble? If we are stating that we are protecting other standing crops, how close do they have to be? After all, stubble shooting is probably the main reason why the license was revoked in the first place! According to wiser men than me , they recon you couldn't shoot pigeons on stubble on the old license , if this was the case we were all breaking the law without knowing , although these wise men would have said we should have read the license first before we shot , mind you I have yet to hear of anyone who have been found guilty over it . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dead eye alan Posted June 8, 2019 Report Share Posted June 8, 2019 Lets just look at hard facts 1, in 40 years shooting i have never been challenged by anyone. 2, the police only act on reports that are important. knowing this i am going on as normal and will take what comes if anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShootingEgg Posted June 8, 2019 Report Share Posted June 8, 2019 Defra have released a very vague and random statement. Saying they are looking at the evidence they received. So still an on going saga. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marsh man Posted June 8, 2019 Report Share Posted June 8, 2019 28 minutes ago, dead eye alan said: Lets just look at hard facts 1, in 40 years shooting i have never been challenged by anyone. 2, the police only act on reports that are important. knowing this i am going on as normal and will take what comes if anything. A man of my own heart Alan , for those who are not happy about going , there will always be someone who will be happy to take your place , use it , or lose it . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted June 8, 2019 Report Share Posted June 8, 2019 An update from NGO has arrived in the form of an email. Defra themselves tell us that they are aware of the urgent need for action and having now picked the bones from the 4,000 responses they received are hoping to come up with something appropriate shortly. This was sent out yesterday pm by Defra. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJsDad Posted June 8, 2019 Report Share Posted June 8, 2019 1 hour ago, dead eye alan said: Lets just look at hard facts 1, in 40 years shooting i have never been challenged by anyone. 2, the police only act on reports that are important. knowing this i am going on as normal and will take what comes if anything. Precisely ! My sentiments exactly and my shooting career is slightly longer. I have now been out 4 times on soya with mixed results since GL31 was issued. The farmer had tried, and was still trying, all the normal deterents when I got a phone call to see if I could turn out to shoot them. If I dont go when asked, he wont ask again & he will quickly find someone who will. He has read and has complied with the GL, and he & I are singing from the same hymn sheet in the highly unlikely event someone phoned the Police to report a couple of guys with guns sitting in a hedge. 1 hour ago, marsh man said: there will always be someone who will be happy to take your place , use it , or lose it . Couldnt agree more. Those who are seeing anti`s behind every tree, or as one poster on here suggested that I could find myself the victim of an anti with a drone and high vis camera, all I can say is, you have a very active imagination. For those sitting on their hands and not venturing out while they wait for a revised version of GL31, I would suggest they are in for a very quiet summer ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marsh man Posted June 8, 2019 Report Share Posted June 8, 2019 10 minutes ago, JJsDad said: Precisely ! My sentiments exactly and my shooting career is slightly longer. I have now been out 4 times on soya with mixed results since GL31 was issued. The farmer had tried, and was still trying, all the normal deterents when I got a phone call to see if I could turn out to shoot them. If I dont go when asked, he wont ask again & he will quickly find someone who will. He has read and has complied with the GL, and he & I are singing from the same hymn sheet in the highly unlikely event someone phoned the Police to report a couple of guys with guns sitting in a hedge. Couldnt agree more. Those who are seeing anti`s behind every tree, or as one poster on here suggested that I could find myself the victim of an anti with a drone and high vis camera, all I can say is, you have a very active imagination. For those sitting on their hands and not venturing out while they wait for a revised version of GL31, I would suggest they are in for a very quiet summer ! We will never get everything as we would like it on a G L , but I can easily live with what we have got on the ongoing revised one , my main concern was being able to off load the shot pigeons to the dealer or whoever was taking your pigeons ( which you can ) , and using mechanical aids , this wouldn't have bothered me to much but it's nice to be legally able to if you feel the need to use one . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motty Posted June 8, 2019 Report Share Posted June 8, 2019 34 minutes ago, JJsDad said: Precisely ! My sentiments exactly and my shooting career is slightly longer. I have now been out 4 times on soya with mixed results since GL31 was issued. The farmer had tried, and was still trying, all the normal deterents when I got a phone call to see if I could turn out to shoot them. If I dont go when asked, he wont ask again & he will quickly find someone who will. He has read and has complied with the GL, and he & I are singing from the same hymn sheet in the highly unlikely event someone phoned the Police to report a couple of guys with guns sitting in a hedge. Couldnt agree more. Those who are seeing anti`s behind every tree, or as one poster on here suggested that I could find myself the victim of an anti with a drone and high vis camera, all I can say is, you have a very active imagination. For those sitting on their hands and not venturing out while they wait for a revised version of GL31, I would suggest they are in for a very quiet summer ! Well, I think the attitude of some could be seen as blasé. Yes, I want to shoot the stubbles as I have in the past, but just saying that you're protecting future nearby crops is a bit flimsy. The reason that the license was revoked initially, is mainly down to stubble shooting. It's all well and good people having this attitude, until they get reported and potentially prosecuted. No one has yet answered my earlier question. How close does your standing crop need to be from your stubble field you're shooting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twenty Posted June 8, 2019 Report Share Posted June 8, 2019 16 minutes ago, motty said: Well, I think the attitude of some could be seen as blasé. Yes, I want to shoot the stubbles as I have in the past, but just saying that you're protecting future nearby crops is a bit flimsy. The reason that the license was revoked initially, is mainly down to stubble shooting. It's all well and good people having this attitude, until they get reported and potentially prosecuted. No one has yet answered my earlier question. How close does your standing crop need to be from your stubble field you're shooting? What would you say,.... adjacent fields,... or anything on the same permission,....No doubt the Landowner would say the whole permission. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJsDad Posted June 8, 2019 Report Share Posted June 8, 2019 15 minutes ago, motty said: Well, I think the attitude of some could be seen as blasé. I am not sure if its my comments above that are in your view blase. I was not referring to shooting over stubble. My comments were in regard to shooting over soya where the damge was evident for all to see. The farmer had put out 3 gas guns, 2 kites & a couple of rope bangers to try to deter them. He was also driving a 14 mile round trip twice a day to try to keep them off. These actions seem to meet all the requirements of the licence. 24 minutes ago, motty said: How close does your standing crop need to be from your stubble field you're shooting? No one on this forum can answer this, as its not defined in the licence, as you almost certainly know. Perhaps you should raise the question with Defra, then we would all be the wiser. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motty Posted June 8, 2019 Report Share Posted June 8, 2019 7 minutes ago, JJsDad said: I am not sure if its my comments above that are in your view blase. I was not referring to shooting over stubble. My comments were in regard to shooting over soya where the damge was evident for all to see. The farmer had put out 3 gas guns, 2 kites & a couple of rope bangers to try to deter them. He was also driving a 14 mile round trip twice a day to try to keep them off. These actions seem to meet all the requirements of the licence. No one on this forum can answer this, as its not defined in the licence, as you almost certainly know. Perhaps you should raise the question with Defra, then we would all be the wiser. No point asking Defra. The revised license will hopefully be with us shortly, with wording that is in favour of a decoyer. I am completely of the view that year round management of pigeons, wherever and whenever possible, is the only real way to reduce crop damage. I told Defra as much in my email to them. Anyone relying on what some women said in an interview about stubble shooting is asking for trouble. It means next to nothing. I seem to remember the PM telling us we would be out of the EU by the end of March! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harnser Posted June 8, 2019 Report Share Posted June 8, 2019 1 hour ago, motty said: Well, I think the attitude of some could be seen as blasé. Yes, I want to shoot the stubbles as I have in the past, but just saying that you're protecting future nearby crops is a bit flimsy. The reason that the license was revoked initially, is mainly down to stubble shooting. It's all well and good people having this attitude, until they get reported and potentially prosecuted. No one has yet answered my earlier question. How close does your standing crop need to be from your stubble field you're shooting? Caroline cotterill from NE has stated that pigeons can be shot over stubbles if the farmer is going to grow any crop that will be liable to damage from pigeons in the area during the next growing season . The actual words are in the area . See old bogeys post . This is good enough for me and I will be shooting the stubbles Harnser Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motty Posted June 8, 2019 Report Share Posted June 8, 2019 4 minutes ago, Harnser said: Caroline cotterill from NE has stated that pigeons can be shot over stubbles if the farmer is going to grow any crop that will be liable to damage from pigeons in the area during the next growing season . The actual words are in the area . See old bogeys post . This is good enough for me and I will be shooting the stubbles Harnser Some woman said it, so that must be ok! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motty Posted June 8, 2019 Report Share Posted June 8, 2019 10 minutes ago, Harnser said: Caroline cotterill from NE has stated that pigeons can be shot over stubbles if the farmer is going to grow any crop that will be liable to damage from pigeons in the area during the next growing season . The actual words are in the area . See old bogeys post . This is good enough for me and I will be shooting the stubbles Harnser Another question. You have permission to shoot what just so happens to be the last field to be cut in the area. It is then harvested. It attracts a good number of pigeons, so you shoot. What crops are you then protecting? One more question. When shooting stubbles, will you still be complying with the terms of the GL by scaring the pigeons? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motty Posted June 8, 2019 Report Share Posted June 8, 2019 1 hour ago, Harnser said: Caroline cotterill from NE has stated that pigeons can be shot over stubbles if the farmer is going to grow any crop that will be liable to damage from pigeons in the area during the next growing season . The actual words are in the area . See old bogeys post . This is good enough for me and I will be shooting the stubbles Harnser 1 hour ago, Harnser said: Caroline cotterill from NE has stated that pigeons can be shot over stubbles if the farmer is going to grow any crop that will be liable to damage from pigeons in the area during the next growing season . The actual words are in the area . See old bogeys post . This is good enough for me and I will be shooting the stubbles Harnser Just one more point on this. I shoot on over 20 farms, and many hundreds of fields. Are you suggesting that I have to ask each farmer for a complete map of his rotation each year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harnser Posted June 8, 2019 Report Share Posted June 8, 2019 1 hour ago, motty said: Some woman said it, so that must be ok! That women has put it in writing . See old bogeys post harnset Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harnser Posted June 8, 2019 Report Share Posted June 8, 2019 1 hour ago, motty said: Another question. You have permission to shoot what just so happens to be the last field to be cut in the area. It is then harvested. It attracts a good number of pigeons, so you shoot. What crops are you then protecting? One more question. When shooting stubbles, will you still be complying with the terms of the GL by scaring the pigeons? 1 hour ago, motty said: Another question. You have permission to shoot what just so happens to be the last field to be cut in the area. It is then harvested. It attracts a good number of pigeons, so you shoot. What crops are you then protecting? One more question. When shooting stubbles, will you still be complying with the terms of the GL by scaring the pigeons? You will be protecting a future crop that may be grown in the area. As I read it you don’t have to scare the pigeons of the stubbles to shoot them as you are there to shoot them to protect a future crop . harnser Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted June 8, 2019 Report Share Posted June 8, 2019 On 07/06/2019 at 14:05, motty said: I am not interested in what someone may have said. Until it is in writing (in a new general license) then I can't rely on it. If we are to follow the wording on the current license, how can we prove that we are protecting a crop by shooting a stubble? If we are stating that we are protecting other standing crops, how close do they have to be? After all, stubble shooting is probably the main reason why the license was revoked in the first place! 3 hours ago, motty said: Well, I think the attitude of some could be seen as blasé. Yes, I want to shoot the stubbles as I have in the past, but just saying that you're protecting future nearby crops is a bit flimsy. The reason that the license was revoked initially, is mainly down to stubble shooting. It's all well and good people having this attitude, until they get reported and potentially prosecuted. No one has yet answered my earlier question. How close does your standing crop need to be from your stubble field you're shooting? I wasn't aware of this, but could have easily missed it amongst all the hoo haa. Can you possibly give a reference? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.