Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Terry2016

We’re back in business !

Recommended Posts

leeway might be the wrong word But arent the licences only valid to March 2020

6 minutes ago, motty said:

 

What do you mean "leeway"?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All GL’s have always been reviewed annually and on each anniversary it is our duty to check for any changes to the license before we undertake any control measures. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Terry2016 said:

All GL’s have always been reviewed annually and on each anniversary it is our duty to check for any changes to the license before we undertake any control measures. 

^^^^^^ This. Surprising how many shooters did not know (may still not know) there is even a licence to be complied with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those that haven't seen it, here's the BASC video they released yesterday

 

The last sentence he says is the important one.  If you do nothing else, read and understand the licences!  Amazing how many people will avoid doing their own research and put themselves in a legally dubious position based on anecdotal half-truths their mates spout.

(sorry I'll get off me soapbox)

Edited by udderlyoffroad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As they say patience is a virtue and in the fullness of time BASC and others have helped the issue of these ne GLs which is a positive step in the right direction, Basc and the other organisations are to be applauded for their steadfast approach to resolving most of the problems created by this whole fiasco.  Business well for the most part as usual.  I am confident BASc  the NGO etc can uphold our position in the consultations now to follow.  We are so lucky to have the likes of BASC  NGO etc fighting our corner , we all need to give credit where credit is due now stop all the bickering and anti BASC negativity and get on with the job in hand . TOGETHER!.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, lancer425 said:

As they say patience is a virtue and in the fullness of time BASC and others have helped the issue of these ne GLs which is a positive step in the right direction, Basc and the other organisations are to be applauded for their steadfast approach to resolving most of the problems created by this whole fiasco.  Business well for the most part as usual.  I am confident BASc  the NGO etc can uphold our position in the consultations now to follow.  We are so lucky to have the likes of BASC  NGO etc fighting our corner , we all need to give credit where credit is due now stop all the bickering and anti BASC negativity and get on with the job in hand . TOGETHER!.

Well said :good:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, old'un said:

Read the comments below Avery's post, there's some absolute crackers in there - bless you whoever posted them!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read the GL36 has anbody read the bit where it says consumption .Says you can eat the birds you shoot but can't be sold for human consumption ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, lancer425 said:

As they say patience is a virtue and in the fullness of time BASC and others have helped the issue of these ne GLs which is a positive step in the right direction, Basc and the other organisations are to be applauded for their steadfast approach to resolving most of the problems created by this whole fiasco.  Business well for the most part as usual.  I am confident BASc  the NGO etc can uphold our position in the consultations now to follow.  We are so lucky to have the likes of BASC  NGO etc fighting our corner , we all need to give credit where credit is due now stop all the bickering and anti BASC negativity and get on with the job in hand . TOGETHER!.

Agree our orgs have to some extent done a good job, but while you are handing out praise, don’t forget all the individual efforts made by people on here and elsewhere. :good:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, blade said:

Just read the GL36 has anbody read the bit where it says consumption .Says you can eat the birds you shoot but can't be sold for human consumption ?

With the exception of woodpigeon, what else would you sell for human consumption? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 243deer said:

Just a quick point on the original post - the Collared Dove is officially on the red list so it was always unlikely to be included in a GL - I quoted the collard dove to my MP as one of the red listed species (out of the 16 that I listed) that I would be helping on our DIY  pheasant shoot when protecting our game cover from wood pigeons and the nests from the corvids.

Conversely at a separate location which includes raising cattle I will be applying for an individual licence to control said collard doves as they bring with them one or two real nasties that can kill or at best make very ill, calves - last year we had a vets bill for £1400 for 2 calves to get them well 

Use the licenses to your advantage - as long as you have good cause there should be no problem

We must comply completely with the licences - any deviation will simply be used as ammunition (please forgive the pun) against GL's

Since when has the collared dove been on the red list? Any ref to that 243? They listed in the most top 10 common birds in uk. Big prob in a lot of places and one of the biggest spreaders of tracy desease. Loads my way and they certainly don't get on with and compete with the turtle doves we have got around here.   NB 

32 minutes ago, blade said:

Just read the GL36 has anbody read the bit where it says consumption .Says you can eat the birds you shoot but can't be sold for human consumption ?

Apart from wood pigeon!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, blade said:

Just read the GL36 has anbody read the bit where it says consumption .Says you can eat the birds you shoot but can't be sold for human consumption ?

Best to put the all of the information rather than a snippet that might mislead

 

Page 13 of GL36

u. Birds killed or taken under this licence may be eaten but, with the exception of the Woodpigeon (Columba palumbus), may not be sold for human consumption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, NatureBoy said:

Since when has the collared dove been on the red list? Any ref to that 243? They listed in the most top 10 common birds in uk. Big prob in a lot of places and one of the biggest spreaders of tracy desease. Loads my way and they certainly don't get on with and compete with the turtle doves we have got around here.   NB 

Apart from wood pigeon!

That is my bad - sorry folks - getting my lists mixed up - I hate getting old and slow - getting my head around stewardship is a bit of a mare.

Glad you have some Turtle doves NB - a couple of years since I have seen one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Delwint said:

I disagree, there are no crops on stubbles. So why would you kill the pigeons? Similarly with roosting, they are not causing damage to crops. 

13A60E1D-6588-48E9-A9BC-5C85988F382C.jpeg

See here for Natural England's comments on stubbles  https://www.shootinguk.co.uk/news/new-general-licences-106201 

1)    Despite repeated attempts at scaring, a farm suffered serious damage to a pea crop throughout the growing season. Can the farmer arrange for the [wood] pigeons to be shot over the pea stubble to reduce numbers and prevent damage next growing season?

 

A: Yes, assuming that a crop such as pea that will be vulnerable to serious damage by woodpigeons is going to be sown by the farmer in the area.

The general licence we published on 3 May is clear that lethal control of wood pigeons can be used where there is no alternative satisfactory solution. The farmer must take reasonable steps to prevent crop damage by other (non-lethal) methods, unless their use would be impractical, without effect or disproportionate in their circumstances. In this example, the farmer has repeatedly tried to scare pigeons away and serious damage is still occurring.

The farmer can authorise others to carry out shooting for them; anyone they authorise must comply with the conditions in the licence.


Read more at https://www.shootinguk.co.uk/news/new-general-licences-106201#cyokMj4uVgFDTaf6.99

 

 

 (I am sure that the same logic is applicable to roost shooting in arable farming areas)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new general licence to prevent serious damage its satisfactory to shoot over stubbles, roost shoot and flight line shoot. 

You would be taking preventive measures. 

There is no need to quote the older general licence GL31 

GL36 as of 14th June 2019 is sufficient In this case.

T

Edited by Terry2016

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Updates on the BASC site, but to answer the specific point about protected sites, its probably worth reading exactly what DEFRA have said - here it is:

Protected sites

European protected sites are subject to specific EU law requirements given their particular importance to conservation. These include a process for ensuring that any impacts on the site are properly considered before any plan or project can be undertaken, known as a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA). There are a number of ways in which people can continue to carry out control on European protected sites – which include Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) and Special Protection Areas (SPAs) – as well as Ramsar sites. For instance, they can apply to Natural England for an individual licence if they are not already covered by an existing individual licence or the specific circumstances provided for by Natural England’s three recent general licences (carrion crow, Canada goose and woodpigeon). Users who already have an individual licence issued since 25 April 2019 can continue to operate under that should they wish.

At this stage the three new general licences will not apply to European protected sites, or to land within 300 metres of those sites. Defra will continue to work closely with conservationists, farmers, landowners, pest controllers, gamekeepers and all interested stakeholders in order to develop solutions that may be available for activity on protected sites.

As in the previous system, users will need to ensure they have consent from Natural England for any activity on Sites of Special Scientific Interest.

I hope that all makes sense.  And there is a great link to a mapping tool that will help you check if land you soot over could be impacted: https://magic.defra.gov.uk/MagicMap.aspx

David

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Mighty Prawn said:

Read the comments below Avery's post, there's some absolute crackers in there - bless you whoever posted them!!

As I've just discovered it's possible to comment on Avery's post. Just keep it sensible and we could make him squirm a bit perhaps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, wymberley said:

As I've just discovered it's possible to comment on Avery's post. Just keep it sensible and we could make him squirm a bit perhaps.

His replies show more and more that he is just anti shooting, saying that magpies don't effect small birds is just ridiculous.. He hasn't a clue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, wymberley said:

As I've just discovered it's possible to comment on Avery's post. Just keep it sensible and we could make him squirm a bit perhaps.

Oops! Tad premature there - it was but now isn't - must have hit home. All I politely said was that if you're having to rely on hearsay, even if it is from Suffolk then any credibility that you might have had left with country folk has just vapourised and if that is the linchpin of your case then you're doomed to failure -  and at someone else's expense.

Edit: Sent a follow up remarking that it looked as though my point may have struck home and on this occasion I've been notified that both are awaiting moderation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14 June 2019 at 18:13, wymberley said:

Oops! Tad premature there - it was but now isn't - must have hit home. All I politely said was that if you're having to rely on hearsay, even if it is from Suffolk then any credibility that you might have had left with country folk has just vapourised and if that is the linchpin of your case then you're doomed to failure -  and at someone else's expense.

Edit: Sent a follow up remarking that it looked as though my point may have struck home and on this occasion I've been notified that both are awaiting moderation.

I have posted a few post over the last 4  or 5 weeks on Avery’s blog and it does take some time for it to show, it looks like yours is up and running now, well I presume its yours? pwfs?..https://markavery.info/2019/06/14/general-licence-confusion/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, old'un said:

I have posted a few post over the last 4  or 5 weeks on Avery’s blog and it does take some time for it to show, it looks like yours is up and running now, well I presume its yours? pwfs?....https://markavery.info/2019/06/14/general-licence-confusion/

Yep, guilty. He's replied now so I've gone again. But will leave it at that for the time being.

Share this post


Link to post
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.

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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...