Wild Justice/Chris Packham Woodcock Petition

[Dasher]

Just noticed on Facebook Chris Packham promoting Wild Justice's petition to ban the shooting of woodcock until the 1st December

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/619615?fbclid=IwAR137eGxy3IsIPSo7GpVk7bax7oQwPgPlOsGV04yvqK8t-x9Psj9H7sInOY

Looks like I've come to this late as it ends on the 25th Jan.

From what I understand the main cause of decline in woodcock numbers is the loss of habitat, funnily enough I believe the shooting community is the least likely to be the main cause of this and the most likely to create and maintain habitats that are suitable.  

Make of it what you wish .......

[Walker570]

On every shoot I have been on this year the owners have asked not to shoot woodcock as a rule but if you want one to eat then shoot one.  Most days they have just had a hat raised.    I think as nornal Packham is out of touch with reality.

[Keith RW]

Same as above,

All shoots I have been on for the last couple of years have stipulated that they are not to be shot in an attempt to help numbers in their already established habitats

[marlin vs]

Why do ye give  Chris Packham so much publicity, can ye not just ignore the xunt.

[Dasher]

12 hours ago, marlin vs said:

Why do ye give  Chris Packham so much publicity, can ye not just ignore the xunt.

Are you happy to be accused by Wild Justice of being a major contributing factor in the demise of the Woodcock despite the custodial stance that we take on their habitats?

Like it or not the wealthy in land assets suitable for the woodcock and other susceptible wildlife are frequently of the shooting fraternity. This land in many cases exists purely on the basis that it supports shooting either directly over it or the areas adjacent to it, no shooting and these areas would most likely be changed to something more profitable and less environmentally diverse. Areas of adjoining land are regularly managed for shooting say by the addition of game covers, many are mixed covers which benefit a whole array of birds in particularly those that are red listed. Money generated on large estate shoots is often put back into to land in the form of new game covers, tree belts, hedges and to subsidize less profitable land adjacent.

I know that without the shooting industry where I work and live we would lose so much wildlife. Wild Justice seem to believe that without the shooting industry wildlife will thrive, but how is that going to be possible without suitable habitats?

So ignore Chris and Wildjustice if you wish but the general public and those that are anti shooting are lapping it all up and forming inaccurate truths that will become the basis of public opinion, public opinions help to create rules and the way we are going the future of shooting looks bleak.

[Fellside]

15 minutes ago, Dasher said:

Are you happy to be accused by Wild Justice of being a major contributing factor in the demise of the Woodcock despite the custodial stance that we take on their habitats?

Like it or not the wealthy in land assets suitable for the woodcock and other susceptible wildlife are frequently of the shooting fraternity. This land in many cases exists purely on the basis that it supports shooting either directly over it or the areas adjacent to it, no shooting and these areas would most likely be changed to something more profitable and less environmentally diverse. Areas of adjoining land are regularly managed for shooting say by the addition of game covers, many are mixed covers which benefit a whole array of birds in particularly those that are red listed. Money generated on large estate shoots is often put back into to land in the form of new game covers, tree belts, hedges and to subsidize less profitable land adjacent.

I know that without the shooting industry where I work and live we would lose so much wildlife. Wild Justice seem to believe that without the shooting industry wildlife will thrive, but how is that going to be possible without suitable habitats?

So ignore Chris and Wildjustice if you wish but the general public and those that are anti shooting are lapping it all up and forming inaccurate truths that will become the basis of public opinion, public opinions help to create rules and the way we are going the future of shooting looks bleak.

I quite agree with all you say. We all know the profound biodiversity value of game habitat management. The main problem is that the general public don’t. They have been sold a wrong steer - that is to say you’re either a ‘conservationist’….or you shoot. This basic binary message is being exploited by Packham and WJ, the RSPB and the BBC, which are virtually the same organisation currently. 

Re the Woodcock, the only significant declines in UK nesting pairs are in the South East. Numbers are stable in the north. Equally, once the migrants are here, there is a non-significant 2% probability of shooting a native UK bird. Given that the Eurasian population as a whole has been classified as ‘stable and not under threat’, this is really a non issue, and nothing more than yet another trumped up attack angle for Packham. It is a shame however that some in the shooting community seem to be cow towing to Packham instead of standing by the science. 

[Dasher]

I think half the problem with people is wishing to be seen as activists for a good cause led by celebrities, acting like sheep following the largest pack regardless of the truth. Easy to agree and click 'like' on a social media site than to be seen as against the norm. 

 I don't think it helps when almost all natural history programs anthropomorphize everything these days, people just don't seem to grasp how life and death are interconnected. If people can't grasp certain concepts then their voices shouldn't be heard.......but then I guess we would be accused of bullying and non exclusivity.

[grahamch]

So this ***** is at it again, why oh why cant folk see through his narcsistic self promotion and ignore him?

 

[oowee]

Do i understand correctly two variety of woodcock (same species) those that we mostly see prior to Dec being UK natives and those more prevalent post Dec being migratory, hence the proposal?

[mowdy]

Just out today on a small shoot (120acre) and counted over 40 +?woodcock . 20 on one drive . 

[old'un]

9 minutes ago, mowdy said:

Just out today on a small shoot (120acre) and counted over 40 +?woodcock . 20 on one drive . 

It was the same one.

[8 shot]

3 minutes ago, old'un said:

It was the same one.

Counldn't be they shot it on the first drive 

[old'un]

1 minute ago, 8 shot said:

Counldn't be they shot it on the first drive 

there must have been two then.

[8 shot]

2 minutes ago, old'un said:

there must have been two then.

Nope again Left and Right on the second drive.....

[old'un]

6 minutes ago, 8 shot said:

Nope again Left and Right on the second drive.....

Well I never, so there was 3 of them?

[marsh man]

Going by what I have seen over the last over the last few years the guns who would like to shoot Woodcock seem to be getting less and less , this tend to reflect on the rest of the guns , we don't stop anyone shooting Woodcock and it is entirly up to them if they want to shoot any , the only stipulation is whoever shot it , or them must take them home instead of leaving them hanging up in the game larder .

This seem to work well , some still like shooting the odd one and others , who are mainly the older ones tend to leave them alone , another reason might be that whatever is hanging up in the game larder at the end of the day is counted and everything is included in the days bag , so if the team have bought say 150 bird day then some prefer 150 head of Pheasents and Partridges , if we have got a lot of Woodcock in then they dont want to pay good money and have 20 Woodcock , 10 Pigeons , 3 various and a dozen duck hanging up which is nearly a third of the days bag , this dont really matter if it is a syndicate day as they are happy with varity and the above is fairly easy to achive with some of the drives we have got .

[Krico woodcock]

Over the last 20 years, on average, there has been more  and more migratory woodcock coming here, they are the one game bird that seem to be thriving,  I spend at least 2 days a week,  in the season after them.  Rising  between 15 to 30 daily.  Sometimes up on 40, 50.. that is me on my own,  working one or two springers.. it baffles me,but mostly annoys  me that the antis have this agenda to curtail,  and to end woodcock shooting if they can,  by using misleading and false information. One day Last week I was in a bog, well off the beaten track,  when a elderly farmer came in to see who was firing shots, I had a chat with him,  I was after a few woodcock.  He said that "t'was time to leave them alone",  he read it in the paper that they were "getting very scarce "..  this was a farmer, rural country man.  Not a city dwelling tree hugger.  And he is even swallowing this b.....t ..

[Scully]

Shooting with a bloke today from the West coast of Cumbria. He was a guest of one of the guns in our syndicate, and back home they shoot nothing but Woodcock. 
They have suitable terrain and don’t release pheasants or any other game bird, as he said the constant disturbance through feeding, both by keepers and the foraging game birds themselves, makes for a habitat Woodcock don’t remain in, and that, he claims, is why you don’t see Woodcock in big numbers on game shoots. 
I saw about six today, and three made their way into the bag. Not by me. 

[Fellside]

I was on a lovely shoot up in the wild north today - mainly pheasants. On one drive I had 8 woodcock dash past me, but too low for a shot. Throughout the whole day I saw dozens, and that was just me. Other guns reported similar. On the last drive, a fast high one jinked over. I took the shot and was lucky enough to see it tumble. Tomorrow’s breakfast: honey glazed woodcock on toast. Delicious! 

[scolopax]

23 hours ago, Scully said:

Shooting with a bloke today from the West coast of Cumbria. He was a guest of one of the guns in our syndicate, and back home they shoot nothing but Woodcock. 
They have suitable terrain and don’t release pheasants or any other game bird, as he said the constant disturbance through feeding, both by keepers and the foraging game birds themselves, makes for a habitat Woodcock don’t remain in, and that, he claims, is why you don’t see Woodcock in big numbers on game shoots. 
I saw about six today, and three made their way into the bag. Not by me. 

I have always found, unless there has been a recent fall, that many more woodcock come out of the coverts that have few pheasants in them. Like you I put this down to them disliking the constant movement and scratting of pheasants.

[Fellside]

1 hour ago, scolopax said:

I have always found, unless there has been a recent fall, that many more woodcock come out of the coverts that have few pheasants in them. Like you I put this down to them disliking the constant movement and scratting of pheasants.

I think the pheasant densities have to be quite high before disturbance becomes a factor - but yes I’m sure you’re right. 

[mowdy]

On 31/12/2022 at 20:54, Scully said:

Shooting with a bloke today from the West coast of Cumbria. He was a guest of one of the guns in our syndicate, and back home they shoot nothing but Woodcock. 
They have suitable terrain and don’t release pheasants or any other game bird, as he said the constant disturbance through feeding, both by keepers and the foraging game birds themselves, makes for a habitat Woodcock don’t remain in, and that, he claims, is why you don’t see Woodcock in big numbers on game shoots. 
I saw about six today, and three made their way into the bag. Not by me. 

Funnily enough we don’t have large numbers of pheasants on our shoot . We only put down 200 birds . Yet we regularly have large numbers of woodcock on the land here  in NE cumbria .

[Scully]

11 minutes ago, mowdy said:

Funnily enough we don’t have large numbers of pheasants on our shoot . We only put down 200 birds . Yet we regularly have large numbers of woodcock on the land here  in NE cumbria .

Ditto. We put down 350 pheasants in our syndicate ( E Cumbria ) and see maybe half a dozen throughout the day, whereas BIG shoot puts down who knows how many, and the most I’ve ever seen in a day there is about two, and always on the boundaries. 
Not exactly scientific I know, but he could have a point. 

[8 shot]

1 hour ago, Scully said:

Ditto. We put down 350 pheasants in our syndicate ( E Cumbria ) and see maybe half a dozen throughout the day, whereas BIG shoot puts down who knows how many, and the most I’ve ever seen in a day there is about two, and always on the boundaries. 
Not exactly scientific I know, but he could have a point. 

So.. to take this a little further then, do you think there would be more if we release less pheasants on the whole or what are here would be more widespread. So seem less, but actually more 

[marsh man]

51 minutes ago, mowdy said:

Funnily enough we don’t have large numbers of pheasants on our shoot . We only put down 200 birds . Yet we regularly have large numbers of woodcock on the land here  in NE cumbria .

I would have thought it is more down to habitat and weather conditions rather that how many Pheasents are put down , we have got some Pine woods with Bracken covering the soil and they will hold good numbers of Woodcock in all conditions , when the weather take a turn for the worse then the numbers will increase as they can find plenty to eat in the constant soft soil .

We used to hold two back to back days for a team of guns who shoot nothing but Woodcock , we had more than enough for driven and walked up ,but these last 3 / 4 years our boss stopped it as he didn't like to see that many Woodcock shot .

I know one year when his father was alive he allowed us to shoot 20 on our beaters day , we had some tidy guns and we also had a lot of Woodcock about , after the first drive the keeper had a count up and we had already gone just over so that was it for the rest of the day , no more Woodcock ,