Shooting organisations submit evidence to defend High Court challenge

[Conor O'Gorman]

Shooting organisations have submitted evidence on the impact of gamebird release on designated sites as the judicial review against Defra continues.

The interested parties - BASC, Countryside Alliance, National Gamekeepers Organisation and the Game Farmers’ Association - have provided a 60-page written statement highlighting the available science and describing the direct and indirect impacts of releasing gamebirds on designated sites.

The written submission, alongside Defra’s, fundamentally disputes the legal basis for Wild Justice's challenge.

A spokesperson for the organisations said: “As interested parties, we are leading from the front with a pragmatic and scientific approach. Our submission lays out the known science which shows the benefits and possible impacts of gamebird release, but most importantly it shows that this judicial review is a waste of time and is a drain on taxpayers' money.

“Defra are committed to reviewing the gamebird release process and this challenge only serves to disrupt shooting and cause unwarranted concern for those that work within the community."

It is still the court’s intention to have this case heard by middle of October; any court action will not impact on the season ahead.

See:
https://basc.org.uk/shooting-organisations-submit-evidence-to-defend-high-court-challenge/

[JDog]

Please post the submission on the forum.

[grrclark]

Conor, it is interesting that the submission doesn't reference the GWCT.  Is the combined submission from BASC and other bodies in line with the GWCT findings from their research into this area and their guidelines for sustainable gamebird release or is there a divergence?

You may not know of course and a question of curiosity more than anything else.

[wymberley]

22 minutes ago, grrclark said:

Conor, it is interesting that the submission doesn't reference the GWCT.  Is the combined submission from BASC and other bodies in line with the GWCT findings from their research into this area and their guidelines for sustainable gamebird release or is there a divergence?

You may not know of course and a question of curiosity more than anything else.

A good question never- the- less.

[Conor O'Gorman]

7 hours ago, grrclark said:

Conor, it is interesting that the submission doesn't reference the GWCT.  Is the combined submission from BASC and other bodies in line with the GWCT findings from their research into this area and their guidelines for sustainable gamebird release or is there a divergence?

You may not know of course and a question of curiosity more than anything else.

GWCT are not an interested party, they have helped with the sourcing of the information and we have worked with them. However they are not part of the court proceedings so have not submitted the evidence.

8 hours ago, JDog said:

Please post the submission on the forum.

We are not publishing the evidence at this stage, our solicitors have advised against this, the evidence needs to be discussed in the courts.

[grrclark]

8 minutes ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

GWCT are not an interested party, they have helped with the sourcing of the information and we have worked with them. However they are not part of the court proceedings so have not submitted the evidence.

Thanks for answering Conor, I’m pleased to hear that you did still work with GWCT as the last thing the shooting and conservation lobby need is divergence on research based evidence.