New restrictions on shooting woodpigeons and crows

[Guest]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

Copied from another group:

http://www.fwi.co.uk/article.asp?con=17508&sec=18&hier=2

Time to emigrate?

Derry

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/2005/050302d.htm

It ain't just Woodpigeons & Crows

 

[john]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

Derry Argue wrote:
> Copied from another group:
>
> http://www.fwi.co.uk/article.asp?con=17508&sec=18&hier=2
>
> Time to emigrate?
>
> Derry

In effect that bans pigeon shooting, crow shooting, well everything!
At work, we have to provide much the same before we can shoot, for
example all other methods of control must have been examined first eg.
bird proofing.
This "new" rule, simply means that unless your local farmer has gone to
great lengths to move the bird population on and can prove that he has,
then it is illegal to shoot them, I wonder how many people know these
amendments have been made?


John

 

[Dave]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

A lot John no doubt cos it's on the BASC website and I put it on mine
straight away as well.
Regards
Dave

"John" <john.p.young*removethislittlebit*@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:3916rsF5hu31sU1@individual.net...
> Derry Argue wrote:
>> Copied from another group:
>>
>> http://www.fwi.co.uk/article.asp?con=17508&sec=18&hier=2
>>
>> Time to emigrate?
>>
>> Derry
>
> In effect that bans pigeon shooting, crow shooting, well everything!
> At work, we have to provide much the same before we can shoot, for example
> all other methods of control must have been examined first eg. bird
> proofing.
> This "new" rule, simply means that unless your local farmer has gone to
> great lengths to move the bird population on and can prove that he has,
> then it is illegal to shoot them, I wonder how many people know these
> amendments have been made?
>
>
> John

 

[john]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

Dave wrote:
> A lot John no doubt cos it's on the BASC website and I put it on mine
> straight away as well.
> Regards
> Dave

And what will be the end result to all this?

In both theory and practice it is now illegal to simply go decoying or
roost shooting. In fact it is now illegal to shoot any birds at all,
that is unless the land owner has failed by using all other methods.
Presumably these "other" methods would have to be tested for a period of
time, say a season or two just to prove that the method have failed.

The bottom line and the way it looks to me, is that anyone shooting
pigeons on any farms that I shoot over (myself included) will be
breaking the law. However there is a legal obligation for landowners to
control "vermin", this is albeit an old law, but it remains law.


John

 

[Dave]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

Hello John,
The theory is that the farmers have already tested every available method
of deterrent over the years and have proved the only really effective method
is shooting.
That being the case then shooting pigeons will not be affected greatly
according to BASC etc because in the case of most farmers they will have
already tried every method and found them to be inefficient, therefore
giving the pigeon shooter the right to shoot them.
I may be reading it wrong but in my opinion if challenged I would have
thought that the pigeon shooter would have no difficulty in proving that gas
guns, bangers, scarecrows, spinners etc have all been tried in the past on
their areas and not proved to be efficient.
Regards
Dave

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

Dave wrote:
> Hello John,
> The theory is that the farmers have already tested every available method
> of deterrent over the years and have proved the only really effective method
> is shooting.
> That being the case then shooting pigeons will not be affected greatly
> according to BASC etc because in the case of most farmers they will have
> already tried every method and found them to be inefficient, therefore
> giving the pigeon shooter the right to shoot them.
> I may be reading it wrong but in my opinion if challenged I would have
> thought that the pigeon shooter would have no difficulty in proving that gas
> guns, bangers, scarecrows, spinners etc have all been tried in the past on
> their areas and not proved to be efficient.
> Regards
> Dave
>
>
>
>
Provided you have shot at least two, the second one is evidence that
they aren't deterred by load bangs

 

[john]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

Dave wrote:
> Hello John,
> The theory is that the farmers have already tested every available method
> of deterrent over the years and have proved the only really effective method
> is shooting.
> That being the case then shooting pigeons will not be affected greatly
> according to BASC etc because in the case of most farmers they will have
> already tried every method and found them to be inefficient, therefore
> giving the pigeon shooter the right to shoot them.
> I may be reading it wrong but in my opinion if challenged I would have
> thought that the pigeon shooter would have no difficulty in proving that gas
> guns, bangers, scarecrows, spinners etc have all been tried in the past on
> their areas and not proved to be efficient.
> Regards
> Dave
>
>
>
>
I can see the theory and I can understand the theory as it is more or
less the same sort of system over shooting deer out of season.
In simple terms if you can prove you have done everything else and the
only way to protect health or possessions is to shoot the birds then
that is supposed to be sufficient.
Just stop and think for a minuet, wasn't that what the general license
has always said?
The additions make things more complex, for example.

I know of one farm where the pigeons feed on waste ground. Legally to
shoot the birds I would have to display that they pose a problem or risk
to property or health, not a hard thing to do. With these new additions
the land owner will now have to display that all other methods were
tried before shooting was used and this is where the problem is.
Another one would be where when pigeons roost in non-commercial woodland
with no adjacent crop land. Basically both shooter and landowner are now
held responsible and my knowledge of landowners is that they would
rather let a few pigeons go to roost than risk the hassle of the law!


John

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

John <john.p.young*removethislittlebit*@ntlworld.com> wrote
in news:3934jhF5m35mkU1@individual.net:

> Basically both shooter and landowner are now
> held responsible and my knowledge of landowners is that
> they would rather let a few pigeons go to roost than risk
> the hassle of the law!

In my opinion, it is yet another attempt by Tony and his mates
to ban field sports by the back door.

The nonsense I have to go through to feed some tripe to my dogs,
then I turn on the radio and hear how imports of feathers are
still permitted from the Far East, adjacent to areas where the
bird flu is endemic, with nothing more than a cursory inspection
by UK officials at the port of entry! Apparently, we rely on
certification by Chinese vets that the correct
disinfectation procedures have been complied with. Prof
Pennington, the microbiologist, clearly thought it was crazy.

I have long suspected that DEFRA is the place they dumped the
bewildered when they emptied the lunatic asylums.

Derry

 

[Pete]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 09:54:54 +0000 (UTC), chrisu
<chrisnospam@btconnect.nospam.com> wrote:
>snippety snip<

>if you look at the defra website they've issued a statement 'clarifying'
>the changes. Makes it look not quite as bad on first viewing.
>

Is that a euphemism for "Engages reverse gear"?


><fx> puts away french property brochure <fx>

But don't put away the Tory Party Election Manifesto.

From Pete

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Being eaten by a crocodile is just like falling asleep in a blender"
Bart Simpson

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

Some of you might be interested in this. Source: Countryside Alliance.

--
Kim Sawyer
Sutherland
Scotland


' We are delighted that DEFRA has been forced into a u-turn by the
Alliance and other major rural organisations and has admitted its error
over the Open General Licence for shooting pigeons and corvids. It had
changed the licence procedure without properly consulting key shooting
organisations, making it confusing and unclear, and requiring shooters
to demonstrate that non-lethal methods of pest-control, such as
'scaring', were unsuccessful before resorting to a gun. DEFRA's
climbdown means that, as previously, shooters now have to satisfy only
themselves, rather than demonstrate, that non-lethal methods were
ineffective.
This is a major victory for the Alliance and others, as this would have
been a significant restriction on all those who shoot for pest control
or for the pot, and would have had a serious negative impact on
shooting. Landowners, shooters and gamekeepers alike have all expressed
great confusion over the last ten days, and it will come as a huge
relief to all that they can go out and protect their crops and livestock
without this nonsensical restriction.
Following Labour's hollow promise not to restrict shooting sports, less
than a month after the hunting ban came into force, DEFRA slipped a
short clause into the conditions of the Open General Licence that would
have had serious ramifications for all shooters. We must remain vigilant
and fight to ensure that legitimate shooting sports are not subjected to
death by 1000 cuts.'

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

Kim Sawyer <ksawyer@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in
news:313030303532343642314DB216@zetnet.co.uk:

> Some of you might be interested in this. Source:
> Countryside Alliance.
>

Glad to see you are still alive, Kim. Those of us on the low
ground were beginning to wonder if the stags were perhaps
gnawing your bones for a bit of additional calcium!<g>

As for the "thousand cuts", a bit nearer the truth than you
might think. It is now nearly impossible to get beef tripe for
the dogs. They want us to feed from the little tins in the Co-
op. I have some much paperwork in this regard, I am snowed under
-- but still seem to manage somehow. It is definitely gundog
eradication by the back door.

Derry

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

"Derry Argue" <derry(delete)@adviegundogs.co.uk> wrote in message
>
> Time to emigrate?

No, that was twenty two years ago when I left. Hard to find anywhere that
wants you these days. New Zealand still wants you if you are young and
bright with a good trade or training and or lots of money and what's more
the shooting community here is very welcoming of keen shooters and we have
very good facilities / opportunities for almost all types of shooting - we
don't have driven game and our woodpigeons are huge and very beautiful birds
that are very strictly protected. We also have very sensible and effective
firearms legislation though its a constant struggle to prevent their
erosion.

D.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

The message <Xns9616DB32F7E3derryadviegundogscou@130.133.1.4>
from Derry Argue <derry(delete)@adviegundogs.co.uk> contains these words:


> Glad to see you are still alive, Kim. Those of us on the low
> ground were beginning to wonder if the stags were perhaps
> gnawing your bones for a bit of additional calcium!<g>

It has been a very busy season. And I had quite a bit of work for the
dog this year. The Skibo shoot was a great success and there are plans
to expand this year. Unfortunately, I missed the first shoot of the
season, being on holiday in Spain at the time. I understand it took
place on a bitterly cold blustery day with driving showers of sleety
rain. So my text message, letting them all know that I was sitting on
the beach and eating grilled prawns, went down a treat. Isn't modern
technology wonderful?

> As for the "thousand cuts", a bit nearer the truth than you
> might think. It is now nearly impossible to get beef tripe for
> the dogs. They want us to feed from the little tins in the Co-
> op. I have some much paperwork in this regard, I am snowed under
> -- but still seem to manage somehow. It is definitely gundog
> eradication by the back door.

It's getting ridiculous, isn't it? Sometimes I feel like just giving up.
The rules, restrictions and paperwork associated with just doing ones'
job is getting beyond the pale now. But I guess we owe it to those
coming behind us to point out and refuse to accept absurdity when we
find it. The subject of this thread is a perfect example of what can be
done.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

Kim Sawyer <ksawyer@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in
news:313030303532343642353C0648@zetnet.co.uk:

> The rules, restrictions and paperwork
> associated with just doing ones' job is getting beyond the
> pale now. But I guess we owe it to those coming behind us
> to point out and refuse to accept absurdity when we find
> it. The subject of this thread is a perfect example of what
> can be done.
>

As you probably know, I have been fighting these bastards for
decades!(And, let it be whispered, enjoying every minute of
it!<vbg>).

The thing is never to let up. We won't win but we can at least
remind them that we exist!

The hygiene measures I'm expected to implement in a kennel is
quite crazy. Yet I was in Inverness the other day and passed a
yard with pallet load upon pallet load of raw hides loosely
covered with plastic sheeting in a yard with a very badly
pot-holed tarmaced surface. There is no way that could be washed
down and I'm quite sure they never bother.

I shall be writing a polite letter asking why I am expected to
jump through hoops when this is allowed. Feathers are imported
from the Far East with virtually no inspection at the ports of
entry, and I can buy sausages from the butcher which are made
with a skin of uncooked sheep's intestine!

If civil servants do silly things, they must be made to account
for their wages. Civil? Seldom. Servile? Never! And WE employ
them!

Derry

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

"Cliff Ray" <cliffray@surFNETHYME.co.uk> wrote in message
news:spOdnXCN3YlOF7bfRVnyjw@pipex.net...
> Dave wrote:
> > Hello John,
> > The theory is that the farmers have already tested every available
method
> > of deterrent over the years and have proved the only really effective
method
> > is shooting.
> > That being the case then shooting pigeons will not be affected greatly
> > according to BASC etc because in the case of most farmers they will have
> > already tried every method and found them to be inefficient, therefore
> > giving the pigeon shooter the right to shoot them.
> > I may be reading it wrong but in my opinion if challenged I would have
> > thought that the pigeon shooter would have no difficulty in proving that
gas
> > guns, bangers, scarecrows, spinners etc have all been tried in the past
on
> > their areas and not proved to be efficient.
> > Regards
> > Dave
> >
> >
> >
> >
> Provided you have shot at least two, the second one is evidence that
> they aren't deterred by load bangs

Don't even have to shoot one to get started. You fire off the gun into the
air at the beginning of the pigeon shoot to scare them all off. Those that
return obviously ignored the initial warning shot and are thus fair game.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 23:36:31 +0100, "MichaelM"
<directlyover@centreofearth.com> wrote:

>Don't even have to shoot one to get started. You fire off the gun into the
>air at the beginning of the pigeon shoot to scare them all off. Those that
>return obviously ignored the initial warning shot and are thus fair game.
>