SACS. What do they support in England?

[Dave-G]

My BASC renewal is almost due and recent threads have caused me concern about legal representation.

 

More and more these days we hear about, or personally experience someone taking a dislike to what we do. This seems to occur nearer built up area's where perhaps someone has moved to the edge of town to get nearer to the country but then try and change things they don't like.

 

I understand someone on this forum is getting legal representation from SACS, so I've had a looksee at their website. I have also seen several endorsements in their diresction. My "thing" is rabbiting with the occasional corvid or close fox, all with rimfire. I just can't find a section in SACS that seems to offer any support for vermin control shooting in England.

 

Can someone point me in the right direction - if there is one please?

[webber]

Dave

 

I think that your answer may be included in the associations name!

 

Their are of opperation is clearly stated on their web site as Scotland and Northern Ireland.

 

webber

[anser2]

I would stick with BASC , they have all the legal cover you would need and more important they are the most important shooting organisation defending our sport. They may not be perfect , but they are the best we have.

[Highlander]

I would stick with BASC , they have all the legal cover you would need and more important they are the most important shooting organisation defending our sport. They may not be perfect , but they are the best we have.

 

 

[Dunkield]

. . . divided we fall' etc etc

[IanClark]

Maybe I can help a little here.

 

The Scottish Association for Country Sports was founded in 1994 by a group of sportsmen who were heavily involved in country sports in Scotland. Many of them were, or had been, part of the BASC Advisory Committee in Scotland, and at that time I was doing voluntary work for BASC as an Education Officer.

 

All of us were genuinely and seriously concerned about what we saw as the inability or unwillingness shown by BASC to accept and reflect the differences between between Scottish law and English law, and regional differences in country sports cultures.

 

We were very conscious of the 'divide and conquer' issue, and tried to avoid this by dealing with these issues within BASC, but this was simply not possible - the BASC hierarchy was completely unwilling to address our concerns.

 

SACS was formed as a direct result of this situation, and as has been stated in this thread, our original remit and purpose was to deal with Scottish issues, as it sets out on our website.

 

However, there is nothing in our constitution which prevents us from helping country sportsmen in other parts of the UK, and as time passed, we found that the services we provide for our membership became so popular that we began to attract members from all areas of the UK. Currently, we have a substantial membership in all four of the UK countries, and all are growing strongly.

 

One of the reasons for this appears to be that sportsmen strongly dislike the way BASC subscriptions rise regularly, and the levels they have reached. Our subscription rate, at £30 for an individual membership, is around half that of BASC, and I hear the comparison made regularly.

 

I do not intend to criticise BASC or the insurance it provides - it has its followers as we do, and no doubt fulfils its purpose as it sees it.

 

What I can say is that our public liability insurance of £5 million covers all country sports, not only shooting, and since most people who shoot also fish, work dogs, fly hawks or do one of the other sports as well, we think this is a sensible service for our members.

 

Perhaps the biggest difference between our insurance and that supplied by BASC is that we include £100,000 legal fees insurance for all of our members as an extra benefit. This covers appeals against the revocation or refusal to renew (or vary) firearms and shotgun certificates (which currently cost up to £10,000 to finance privately). So far we have been successful in EVERY case throughout GB covered by our insurance.

 

This extra insurance also covers charges brought under any of the legislation which affects our sports. Over the years, our insurers have paid for top legal experts to defend our members against various charges - allegations of inappropriate discharge of firearms, coursing hares, unlawful acts against raptors - and we have again been successful in every case so far.

 

NO OTHER ORGANISATION PROVIDES THIS LEGAL INSURANCE COVER FOR ALL OF ITS MEMBERS

 

I hope that helps to answer the points raised - we WILL and DO help any member, anywhere in the UK, whether it be a posh driven pheasant shooter from the Home Counties or an 'ordinary' man who can only afford to shoot the odd pigeon or rabbit.

 

If anyone would like to discuss any of these points, I am happy to do so here, or by email on sacs@netherholm.sol.co.uk

 

Ian Clark

Director, SACS

[dustyfox]

Yes SACS is the one to go for.

 

BASC needs to change just because they got the biggest number of members doesnt mean they the best to go with. Or is it because they got bigger firearms department?

 

SACS looks after its members as well as the shooting and well worth the money you pay.

 

You get more and better service for your money with SACS.

[CharlieT]

Ian, thank you for explaining what SACS is all about and how it came into being.

Seems to me just the sort of philosophy and representation we need for country sports, you will get my vote and subscription.

 

Charlie

[Dave-G]

Maybe I can help a little here.

 

The Scottish Association for Country Sports was founded in 1994 by a group of sportsmen who were heavily involved in country sports in Scotland. Many of them were, or had been, part of the BASC Advisory Committee in Scotland, and at that time I was doing voluntary work for BASC as an Education Officer.

 

All of us were genuinely and seriously concerned about what we saw as the inability or unwillingness shown by BASC to accept and reflect the differences between between Scottish law and English law, and regional differences in country sports cultures.

 

We were very conscious of the 'divide and conquer' issue, and tried to avoid this by dealing with these issues within BASC, but this was simply not possible - the BASC hierarchy was completely unwilling to address our concerns.

 

SACS was formed as a direct result of this situation, and as has been stated in this thread, our original remit and purpose was to deal with Scottish issues, as it sets out on our website.

 

However, there is nothing in our constitution which prevents us from helping country sportsmen in other parts of the UK, and as time passed, we found that the services we provide for our membership became so popular that we began to attract members from all areas of the UK. Currently, we have a substantial membership in all four of the UK countries, and all are growing strongly.

 

One of the reasons for this appears to be that sportsmen strongly dislike the way BASC subscriptions rise regularly, and the levels they have reached. Our subscription rate, at £30 for an individual membership, is around half that of BASC, and I hear the comparison made regularly.

 

I do not intend to criticise BASC or the insurance it provides - it has its followers as we do, and no doubt fulfils its purpose as it sees it.

 

What I can say is that our public liability insurance of £5 million covers all country sports, not only shooting, and since most people who shoot also fish, work dogs, fly hawks or do one of the other sports as well, we think this is a sensible service for our members.

 

Perhaps the biggest difference between our insurance and that supplied by BASC is that we include £100,000 legal fees insurance for all of our members as an extra benefit. This covers appeals against the revocation or refusal to renew (or vary) firearms and shotgun certificates (which currently cost up to £10,000 to finance privately). So far we have been successful in EVERY case throughout GB covered by our insurance.

 

This extra insurance also covers charges brought under any of the legislation which affects our sports. Over the years, our insurers have paid for top legal experts to defend our members against various charges - allegations of inappropriate discharge of firearms, coursing hares, unlawful acts against raptors - and we have again been successful in every case so far.

 

NO OTHER ORGANISATION PROVIDES THIS LEGAL INSURANCE COVER FOR ALL OF ITS MEMBERS

 

I hope that helps to answer the points raised - we WILL and DO help any member, anywhere in the UK, whether it be a posh driven pheasant shooter from the Home Counties or an 'ordinary' man who can only afford to shoot the odd pigeon or rabbit.

 

If anyone would like to discuss any of these points, I am happy to do so here, or by email on sacs@netherholm.sol.co.uk

 

Ian Clark

Director, SACS

 

Thanks Ian, and to those who brought this thread to your attention.

 

This is the sort of information I have been trying to find in written form rather than oral implications. In the nicest possible way, I feel there is a very big difference between the two. I have tried every option I could on the SACS site to find an applicable section that declares SACS activity in England. Whilst I see plenty of references to gaming disciplines I see nothing for the poor old vermin shooter. Any chance of a site update to indicate your support of this and that you do it south of the border?

 

I have no complaint about the BASC, but living near a built up area where so many people abhor our activities I feel it's only a question of time before someone tells lies in order to get shooting stopped in their neighbourhood. Legal assistance with my public liability insurance seems a very sensible precaution for me, particularly when we consider the local police will probably be less supportive than those in very rural areas.

 

We already see the different hymm books various forces sing from. Just today I have been advised my local force will not condition my rimfire for fox, while I have seen "for vermin and ground game/fox" in section 5 on someone elses rimfire conditions issued by a more rural force. Seems silly that I cannot shoot a squeaked in to 50 yards fox, nor despatch one for someone who has trapped it in a cage unless I acquire a centre fire rifle in Leicester, but he can somwhere else... and in Leicester! This is not an attempt at bashing the police or BASC - just that we might need help in court sometimes.

Edited October 14, 2008 by Dave-G

[webber]

Ian

 

What level of activity does SACS conduct in England to protect and promote shooting?

 

I'm thinking along the lines of political lobbying at Westminster, promotional stands for shooting at major political party conferences, young shots events, training and certification, conservation projects. I guess that I could go on for some time.

 

I agree that SACS legal protection is a very useful benefit should you ever need it, and would urge BASC to consider a similar offering.

 

webber

[Bazooka Joe]

I agree that SACS legal protection is a very useful benefit should you ever need it, and would urge BASC to consider a similar offering.

 

I wonder how much BASC will charge for that then?

 

On top of what they charge now.

 

Thanks for that imput Ian, brings a few things mentioned into a better light,

 

BJ.

Edited October 14, 2008 by Bazooka Joe

[kev 1]

I went with the National Gamekeepers Organisation (NGO)

[weejohn]

hello ian join SACS

Edited October 14, 2008 by weejohn

[markbivvy]

Perhaps the biggest difference between our insurance and that supplied by BASC is that we include £100,000 legal fees insurance for all of our members as an extra benefit. This covers appeals against the revocation or refusal to renew (or vary) firearms and shotgun certificates (which currently cost up to £10,000 to finance privately). So far we have been successful in EVERY case throughout GB covered by our insurance

for £30 can any shooter in any part of the country afford not to have this.

thanks Ian, top man.

[Dave-G]

A fairly recent event posted on here had me bricking it about the actions of a neighbouring force that proposed to revoke my ticket.

 

In short, both Leicester, and Devon and Cornwall force's indicated it would be acceptable on a short term basis for my brother to secure his HMR in my cabinet when visiting Leicester. He should retain his bolt - and bullets so I don't exceed my holding allowance. Seems good sense to me because I would not have been able to use his firearm as my bolt won't fit his rifle, and he could only access my cabinet in my presence.

 

When the next county force "checked my security" a second time because I had Chris's rifle, I was informed that I was very lucky that Chris was at my house when they arrived. They had come to seize all of our rifles and revoke our certificate's because I had one of his pressure bearing components that was not listed on my certificate.

 

They instructed Chris to get his bolt and bullets out of his locked glove compartment in case his car gets stolen, and put them into the inner locking compartment of my cabinet. He was to keep some of my keys so that neither could access the cabinet without the other. Ok in principle, but what if the cabinet gets stolen... or I go off on one and cut it open? In my opinion this was bad advice that could allow someone to access all parts of his rifle. More importantly it was advice against which both of our force's had given.

 

We copped a right talking to and it ended up as "a very strong recomendation" that we observe HIS advice. As said, if Chris had not popped in for a cuppa we'd both be fighting for our tickets. With conflicting advice or instructions like above we need legal back up from shoot experienced barristers.

Edited October 15, 2008 by Dave-G

[Mungler]

I don't know. I prefer my male shooting organisation representatives not to wear skirts.

[ferretman]

when it is time for me to renew i think i will be living basc and joinging sacs after readying that from ian,yes i no thay fight for shooting ect but dont cover it like them and that is wot we need.thanks

[Dave-G]

Thanks all, it looks like this is about done now.

 

I've downloaded and sent off my SACS enrolment form with my card details.

 

I'm undecided at this time whether I'll renew my BASC, given some of the fee is going towards public liability inurance I will have with SACS. I do feel that BASC is a good voice for us in England, and is the one best known by English farmers who's land I shoot on: But they seem to have missed the boat in terms of support if the brown stuff hits the fan for any of us. I might instead make a small donation, similar to the SACS fee towards their good work in more general terms.

Edited October 16, 2008 by Dave-G

[weejohn]

good choice Dave-G

[markbivvy]

I don't know. I prefer my male shooting organisation representatives not to wear skirts.

 

if i was to end up in a court on a firearms related offense they could turn up wearing a tutu and red nose for me.

[webber]

Hang on DG, please don't call time just yet. Ian Clark invited questions a day or so ago, and I for one have been patiently awaiting his replies.

I think that I already know the answers, but would like to be sure.

 

BASC do not offer specific legal cover insurance, but they can and do take legal action on members behalf when necessary. The costs are met from BASC reserve funds, which means that members have no need to subscribe to an insurance that the majority would never need. I guess that SACS due to its smaller membership has smaller reserves and therefore needs to insure the risk separately.

 

Ian Clark claims to have won all cases taken to court. I for one would be interested to learn as to the number of cases taken to court over say the last 12 months and the general nature of the cases, obviously without naming anyone.

 

BASC members are fortunate to have access to a highly experienced firearms department, whose advise is valued. Their approach appears to be to advise, and where necessary lias with the members police force, usually with an amicable outcome, without the need for legal action. Therefore building a bridge with a police force and hopefully an allie, rather than taking an aggressive stance and rushing to court. We may win the battle, but would we win the war? I doubt that a Firearms department manager who has been blooded in court is likely to be sympathetic and use any degree of discretion in our favour in the future.

 

One PW member intimates that SACS was better value for your money! well its certainly cheaper, but do you really get more bang for your buck?

As far as I am aware SACS has around 5 employees working for its members. BASC has a little over 100 people working for its members, admittedly, the membership fee is around double. I'm sorry, but its a no brainer for me, but I do accept that not everyone can afford the difference, and I would much rather see people shoot with insurance than none at all!

 

webber

[V8landy]

BASC do not offer specific legal cover insurance, but they can and do take legal action on members behalf when necessary.

 

Their approach appears to be to advise, and where necessary lias with the members police force, usually with an amicable outcome, without the need for legal action. Therefore building a bridge with a police force and hopefully an allie, rather than taking an aggressive stance and rushing to court.

 

 

I have emailed both groups and had mixed replies from both.

 

Given that like ALL insurance, we only (normal people that is!!!) want to make a claim if we REALY have to. I think you can get bogged down (like car insurance) with having to have every bell and whistle on your policy, when in fact you do not need them or they are covered in other methods.

 

SACS gets round some aspects by not selling YOU a policy but having one GROUP policy for members to make use of, BASC sells YOU a policy.

 

BASC is right in its above statement that negotiation is the first stage not court action.

 

We hear about stories of members not being helped by BASC but SASC will "help" them, but there is always two sides to a story have we been given both?

 

I have not got my SGC, and still unsure even with writing this which one to go for (BASC or SASC), !!!!!!!!!!!!

 

One day I am BASC then next SASC,

Edited October 16, 2008 by V8landy

[Dave-G]

You make a good point Webber, and it would be good if they made it clear rather than intimate it might be there.

 

I cant reiterate enough though how vulnerable some of us townies (if you like) feel when someone calls the police because our activities don't seem agreeable to them. The police have to investigate: Well they agree they have to if it's likely that the person being investigated is cooperative at least. We all know how some officers don't have a clue what they're doing with firearm callouts - look at that "Badger shot in Cornwall" thread... "it looks like a bullet" - and thats from a wildlife officer.

 

Who's advice should I have complied with in the instance I have refered to in this thread, an officer that shoots and was adamant I was acting unlawfully - or my own non shooting FEO's? I personally think he was talking out of his depth and just trying to look good in front of his buddy who was sympathetic, but who knows? The cheif superintendant wanted all the dots on the "i"s and the tops on the "T". DavidBASC had also got the BASC firearms team to advise me on the safekeeping of Chris's guns - which more or less mirrored what we had done. After the scary incident their advice differed though, possibly as a result of "pressure bearing component" laws changing.

 

We tread in a minefield of different practices between force area's. I was kacking it but didn't complain to my local force in case they revised their position and took it out on my brother and I, or a big row occurred between the three forces with us as the prize? Either way we look at it, if BASC had this funding available for members court defences they ought and surely would use it to attract or retain membership.

 

EDIT: It could be that I'm being over pedantic, but maybe I'm quite unique in that I shoot with my brother in Devon and Cornwall force area's a few times a year, and my brother often shoots in Leicester force area... but they got different rules of what we can and cannot do. Further, living on the eastern border of Leicester, most of my/our permissions are in Northampton force's area.

Edited October 16, 2008 by Dave-G

[winchester]

I have posted threads about sacs before on here I am the liveing proof when the chips are down, your banged up in a 6x4 cell accused of something YOU didnt do, guns taken, cert revoked. A load of advice over the phone dont mean squat, you NEED A GOOD BREEF AND FAST

BASC SAID THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO BEFORE A COMITTIE to fight my revoke SACS just appointed the breef and bobs your uncle.

I know if it was not FOR SACS & Ian ,and the team i couldnt afford to fight it,

No disrespect to BASC but there like an old lion with no teeth or claws just make a lot of noise,

SACS BITES AND SCRATCHES TO BOOT sorry about the spelling.

£30 to have the £100,000 piece of mind is a no brainer for me

Edited October 17, 2008 by winchester

[markbivvy]

I have posted threads about sacs before on here I am the liveing proof when the chips are down, your banged up in a 6x4 cell accused of something YOU didnt do, guns taken, cert revoked. A load of advice over the phone dont mean squat, you NEED A GOOD BREEF AND FAST

BASC SAID THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO BEFORE A COMITTIE to fight my revoke SACS just appointed the breef and bobs your uncle.

I know if it was not FOR SACS & Ian ,and the team i couldnt afford to fight it,

No disrespect to BASC but there like an old lion with no teeth or claws just make a lot of noise,

SACS BITES AND SCRATCHES TO BOOT sorry about the spelling.

£30 to have the £100,000 piece of mind is a no brainer for me

 

are you a basc member please, and if so how long have you been a member.