BASC response to HSE lead ammunition consultation

[grahamch]

Looking at the last few comments the old farts continue to drag up the past instead of adapting and getting on with life. 

[Scully]

49 minutes ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

I think this thread has truly run it's course and if anyone has outstanding questions for me please feel free to PM me or email me at conor.ogorman@basc.org.uk

Then stop reviving it Conor. 
Given the understandable anger out there in the shooting community, such threads are only going to go one way. 
I’m not blaming you, and it’s not your fault at all; you’re simply following company policy, but the basis for the lead shot ban in game, as far as the ‘potential risk’ to human health is concerned, is dishonest and frankly pathetic, given the multitude of other injurious but nonetheless perfectly legal things the average human can put in their bodies on a daily basis. 
Our shooting organisations may have had a better reception if their statement had been something along the lines of ‘ Listen lads, there is an agenda at play here that we are powerless to resist, regarding lead shot in the environment, effecting flora and fauna, to which has been added the ‘potential risk to human health’. We know it’s rubbish, you know it’s rubbish, and they know it’s rubbish, but the best we can do is push for a voluntary transition away from lead shot.’ 
I can believe in and go with the case for the environment, but the case for human health in lead shot game simply doesn’t exist. It’s an insult to our intelligence. 
The only people buying it are adults, and the safeguards for commercial sales of such are in place to ensure no one is feeding toxic substances to their kids. 
 

[Scully]

1 minute ago, grahamch said:

Looking at the last few comments the old farts continue to drag up the past instead of adapting and getting on with life. 

From one old **** to another, I shoot steel as and when I choose, because I don’t like feeding lead shot quarry to ferrets or raptors, which it most certainly kills. 
I’m not disputing the toxicity of lead, but unless you’re eating a lot of it on a daily basis, it has no ill effects on human health, unless you know different of course. If you do, post it on here and add something to the thread other than the odd insult in the hope of getting it shut down. 
BASC’s agenda regarding this matter, is one of saving driven shooting, and there’s nothing wrong with that in my opinion, but it’s a ‘sport’ for want of a better term, of which ( unless Im mistaken ) you have been particularly scathing in the past, especially regarding big bags and extreme birds. Strange. 
Have a look in town of a weekend, especially as the festive season is underway, there you’ll see many folk shoving toxic substances into their bodies with glee, substances which not only offer a serious ‘potential risk’ to their health, but in many cases, to the health of others also. 🤷‍♂️

Whats that phrase? ‘ Don’t pee down my back and tell me it’s raining!’ 

[Fellside]

3 hours ago, ehb102 said:

@Rewulfhas a good point. I went into discussions with a BASC representative in good faith. I have never been treated so rudely and with such incompetence. A refusal to engage with the issue, to reply to the questions, to even acknowledge the points being raised. "Take this or leave this" was the answer. So to anyone namecalling BASC critics, we have good point and good reason to be unhappy. 

I can understand the level of angst (I really can), but it’s just getting dreadfully ugly I’m afraid. If there is to be virtually no moderation, descending in to the online equivalent of a pub brawl, is not a good look for shooting. Who hit first or got their pint knocked over becomes entirely irrelevant. 

[Konor]

2 hours ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

I think this thread has truly run it's course and if anyone has outstanding questions for me please feel free to PM me or email me at conor.ogorman@basc.org.uk

In running its course it was certainly an insight into your character Conor.

I see you’ve taken my advice though

If you can’t stand the heat get out of the kitchen

maybe next time come back with some answers 

Edited December 21, 2023 by Konor

[Rewulf]

9 minutes ago, Fellside said:

I can understand the level of angst (I really can), but it’s just getting dreadfully ugly I’m afraid. If there is to be virtually no moderation, descending in to the online equivalent of a pub brawl, is not a good look for shooting. Who hit first or got their pint knocked over becomes entirely irrelevant. 

I disagree.

Questions have been asked (again) the questions are valid , but are met by a wall of indifference and non answers, when pressed, the insults start from the usual pro BASC suspects.
Its by far, not a professional way of conducting a public debate on this very important matter.

Lets be honest, BASC set themselves out as the spokesman for this, so they should take the flak, and the credit for the way its handled.
Its members pay for the privilege. but the rest of us have to deal with the consequences anyway.

[Fellside]

15 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

I disagree.

Questions have been asked (again) the questions are valid , but are met by a wall of indifference and non answers, when pressed, the insults start from the usual pro BASC suspects.
Its by far, not a professional way of conducting a public debate on this very important matter.

Lets be honest, BASC set themselves out as the spokesman for this, so they should take the flak, and the credit for the way its handled.
Its members pay for the privilege. but the rest of us have to deal with the consequences anyway.

Come out of the internet ‘rabbit hole’ and take a helicopter view of the whole landscape. How does this debacle look to others? 

[Rewulf]

2 minutes ago, Fellside said:

Come out of the internet ‘rabbit hole’ and take a helicopter view of the whole landscape. How does this debacle look to others? 

Depends who the 'others' are , 99% of non shooters wouldnt make head or tail of what we are discussing !
The other 1 % would think 'storm in a teacup' because it doesnt matter to them in the slightest .

If we are to believe that this exchange casts us in a bad light, then its the pro BASC belligerents they would think were the aggressors.

These things need to be aired and discussed, it would be handy if it was conducted without insults, but most of them seem to come from one direction.

[Scully]

16 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Depends who the 'others' are , 99% of non shooters wouldnt make head or tail of what we are discussing !
The other 1 % would think 'storm in a teacup' because it doesnt matter to them in the slightest .

If we are to believe that this exchange casts us in a bad light, then its the pro BASC belligerents they would think were the aggressors.

These things need to be aired and discussed, it would be handy if it was conducted without insults, but most of them seem to come from one direction.

This. Non-shooters couldn’t care less. 

[Fellside]

9 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Depends who the 'others' are , 99% of non shooters wouldnt make head or tail of what we are discussing !
The other 1 % would think 'storm in a teacup' because it doesnt matter to them in the slightest .

If we are to believe that this exchange casts us in a bad light, then its the pro BASC belligerents they would think were the aggressors.

These things need to be aired and discussed, it would be handy if it was conducted without insults, but most of them seem to come from one direction.

Its hard to stop and look around if you’re still in the heat of the argument. Also, everyone in the brawl always says it’s the other chap’s fault. Still not a great look for those witnessing however. I’m not honestly sure what percentages of non shooting onlookers we have and I don’t know of any empirical data re their opinions. I only know that they do look in - probably more than we imagine. 

[Konor]

3 minutes ago, Scully said:

This. Non-shooters couldn’t care less. 

The only non shooters concerned are the vocal minority who are determined to see an end to all field sports. 
If and when lead shot is banned they will move on to another target to hasten the decline of a way of life that they have no stake in.

[Konor]

If some want to accept the party line being pedalled by CO’G from BASC despite the falsehoods being peddled stating that they always have and always will oppose a lead shot ban despite evidence to the contrary highlighted in this thread then so be it.

Bear in mind that there is a great many people who want to eliminate all  shooting of all animals and once a lead shot ban has been delivered will move on to the next campaign to bring about their goal.

Appeasement will not bring about any acceptance of what we do.

Its time to pick a side.

Edited December 21, 2023 by Konor
Grammar

[Rewulf]

23 minutes ago, Fellside said:

Its hard to stop and look around if you’re still in the heat of the argument.

The 'heat' as you refer to it, usually comes from one sides complete inability to answer a simple question !
Me . Ill answer any question I know the answer to, to the best of my knowledge and without prejudice.

And this is the crux of the argument/debate, BASC NEVER asked the question, it has allegedly 150,000 paying members, many of them placed their trust in BASC ,and many of them have a vested interest, often a financial interest in shooting sports.
Yet BASC never saw fit to ask them what they thought, about a 'voluntary phase out of lead shot for live quarry' they just did it.
Did they do it because they thought thats what we wanted, because it very clearly isnt, judging by the responses on various forums.
Did they do it because it protected BASCs business interests/model, because it clearly does.

Conor, on this thread magicked up some figures where it looks like everyone is ecstatic about using none lead cartridges, yet you struggle to find any real world people who are happy, so is this spin, deceit ?

And when the heat becomes too much , he retreats back and asks people to use PM to discuss it further, leaving the public arena so it can be debated in 'private'
What cant be said in public ?

[Fellside]

20 minutes ago, Konor said:

The only non shooters concerned are the vocal minority who are determined to see an end to all field sports. 
If and when lead shot is banned they will move on to another target to hasten the decline of a way of life that they have no stake in.

You’re correct in that it’s a minority - however some of this minority have considerable influence and following. Ask yourself the question: will they be pleased with this infighting debacle (and make the most of it) or pretend not to notice?

The Pigeon Watch moderators appear not to guard reputational interest. A few thousand more views on a hot topic will increase add revenue. That’s just a platform reality these days. However we could all do a better job in having these discussions more privately. Or just agree to disagree more respectfully. Alright…alright…. I may have gone too far there in my last sentence….. 🙂. 
 

 

[Fellside]

3 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

The 'heat' as you refer to it, usually comes from one sides complete inability to answer a simple question !
Me . Ill answer any question I know the answer to, to the best of my knowledge and without prejudice.

And this is the crux of the argument/debate, BASC NEVER asked the question, it has allegedly 150,000 paying members, many of them placed their trust in BASC ,and many of them have a vested interest, often a financial interest in shooting sports.
Yet BASC never saw fit to ask them what they thought, about a 'voluntary phase out of lead shot for live quarry' they just did it.
Did they do it because they thought thats what we wanted, because it very clearly isnt, judging by the responses on various forums.
Did they do it because it protected BASCs business interests/model, because it clearly does.

Conor, on this thread magicked up some figures where it looks like everyone is ecstatic about using none lead cartridges, yet you struggle to find any real world people who are happy, so is this spin, deceit ?

And when the heat becomes too much , he retreats back and asks people to use PM to discuss it further, leaving the public arena so it can be debated in 'private'
What cant be said in public ?

OK Rewulf, I appreciate the points you make. 

Happy hunting and have a great Christmas. 

[Rewulf]

17 minutes ago, Fellside said:

OK Rewulf, I appreciate the points you make. 

Happy hunting and have a great Christmas. 

Thank you , and a merry Xmas to you too.

[Newbie to this]

It's hard to agree to disagree, when one side claims to speak for you, but failed to ask you.

[holloway]

4 hours ago, Gordon R said:

It probably has run its' course, but what would be the point of an email or message. You don't give a straight answer on here, so why would you do so with message or email?

The thread could run for another 10 pages and we would still be no wiser. We are asked to read your previous posts as if they shed some light. 

Read Graham M's post - sums it up nicely.

what was the question again ?

2 hours ago, Rewulf said:

I disagree.

Questions have been asked (again) the questions are valid , but are met by a wall of indifference and non answers, when pressed, the insults start from the usual pro BASC suspects.
Its by far, not a professional way of conducting a public debate on this very important matter.

Lets be honest, BASC set themselves out as the spokesman for this, so they should take the flak, and the credit for the way its handled.
Its members pay for the privilege. but the rest of us have to deal with the consequences anyway.

What consequences will we have to deal with ?

[harkom]

46 minutes ago, Fellside said:

However we could all do a better job in having these discussions more privately.

This above is what bsac has relied on amongst the membership - apathy, reluctance to question the executive's agenda on the assumption that "they must be right" : and add in  the executive culling any elected appointments who disagreed with their programme. Grumbling behind closed doors - if it happened at all - should have been frank open discussion and perhaps best of all a member vote on lead usage.  The membership now find themselves where they are --- yep, up bsac creek without a paddle.

[Fellside]

17 minutes ago, harkom said:

This above is what bsac has relied on amongst the membership - apathy, reluctance to question the executive's agenda on the assumption that "they must be right" : and add in  the executive culling any elected appointments who disagreed with their programme. Grumbling behind closed doors - if it happened at all - should have been frank open discussion and perhaps best of all a member vote on lead usage.  The membership now find themselves where they are --- yep, up bsac creek without a paddle.

I think you may have quoted me out of context harkom. I was never in favour of silencing any debate, but moreover having a better standard of debate, which shows us in a better light. My suggestion was to engage in the more heated stuff privately. I agree with you that a ‘frank and open discussion’ re members views is always beneficial. 

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, holloway said:

what was the question again ?

 

1 hour ago, holloway said:

What consequences will we have to deal with ?

I would suggest reading the thread, and many others like it if you are unsure.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

WOW! Us old farts are really getting to you lot.

 

Perhaps one day you might understand how let down we feel.

[Konor]

If the association that represents you doesn’t consult their membership before making major decisions that will affect their sport fundamentally then it cannot be considered the voice of its membership never mind the voice of shooting.

Some people are not happy to sit back and accept those decisions being made on their behalf without questioning the motive behind those decisions.

 If by protecting the interests of commercial shooting and the export market for the countless thousands of birds being shot we are forced down the route of using non lead shot and accepting its shortcomings so that the practicality of using a 2 3/4 inch 12 bore with a range of ammo from 7/8oz to 1 1/2 oz capable of taking everything from snipe to goose is to be replaced by steel 4s with a 35 max range and a good chance of pillow casing birds shot then excuse me for being a bit put out. 
Every shooter will lose out some more than others ,us old farts know what we are at risk of losing and are acting accordingly.

[welsh1]

10 hours ago, grahamch said:

Looking at the last few comments the old farts continue to drag up the past instead of adapting and getting on with life. 

Please refrain from derogatory comments about other members.

 

[holloway]

13 hours ago, Rewulf said:

 

I would suggest reading the thread, and many others like it if you are unsure.

life's too short to go through all that lot again ! just a short appraisal will be fine 😀