Page 8 of 49 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 729

Thread: Packham gets General License revoked!!!!

  1. #106
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    sunderland "north east"
    Posts
    6,429
    As we all already no this "general licence" has been miss used by some "a very small" amount shooting in gardens BUT we are all tarred with the same brush these licences have been temporary with drawn Lets all hope they just get back close as the old as possible soon as possible maybes with some species took off??we no which ones that do need to be kept Farmers need us to control them and cartridge suppliers make money from us as do the other chain of businesses we use and need to carry out what we do I really cant see NE being allowed to put a out right ban on everything and as for suggesting that we all need to apply for a pest control licence "That could not happen" imagine how many forms paper work that would need I do hope im right its very frustration we are being punished for something that SEE YOU EN TEA you no his name has put into a letter sit tight and hope for the best lads I just hope we don't start loosing permissions if we don't get out shooting as we have been asked to do as our hands are tied The only peace of mind I can get at the minute is im and your not alone

  2. #107
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    South Shields, Tyne and Wear
    Posts
    811
    It is within our DNA that groups of human beings with control over others will commonly act collectively; as an opportunistic mercenary self serving organism, as we have done for eons. So why did NE seemingly move so quickly in this particular direction in response to Packman's challenge?

    I certainly don't think the movers and shakers within Natural England are spineless, out of touch or thick as others have said. Please don't give these individuals the cushioning excuse of mere stupidity. They knew what they were doing, they'll have discussed it at length in secret, they've considered the strategic opportunities before them and weighed up the collateral damage and the impact of the current backlash. They then probably formulated "verbal only" internal briefings to raise deflector shields among front facing staff whilst wringing the changes.

    Individuals in NE will be maneuvering to maximize; money, power, influence and personal career progression whilst tactically minimising personal risk (the slopey shoulder brigade). Why? because professional life is about politics and the subject matter is secondary after a while.

    The reason is just not clear to us yet why they acted how they did but what is clear is that they have an insidious agenda that we need to uncover order to fight it.

    Consider this; an individual at NE, a single person not a faceless group, has made a decision that may have the effect of bankrupting some farms this year. To say nothing of the effect on the myriad small businesses in the gun trade selling shooting accessories, decoys etc. What is he personally getting out of this not so accidental terrorism?

    What might happen? I can just see a glint in the eyes of NE as they smell the money and the glory and use this as a reason to introduce a revenue generating licensing system. Say, where individual farmers must pay for the privilege of protecting their own crops, which in turn will precipitate the further commercialisation of pigeon shooting for the rest of us.

    Who in the shooting organisations will be publicly holding this individual to book?

  3. #108
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    New Milton, Hampshire
    Posts
    14,389
    Quote Originally Posted by short-carabine View Post
    Having read up on this today, particularly the actual case that was being brought, I accept I was wrong As I understand it, the GLs have been temporarily revoked while NE gets its house in order. The case to be brought was that NE was issuing licences that were not IAW UK law...so NE are temporarily suspending until they can make sure they are...or change them if they are not. NE appears to be chronically underfunded and may have been "winging it" a bit https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8646941.html . It was interesting to see that they had (although I don't know the precise details" issued specific licences for Robins, a wren's nest that "constituted a threat to public safety", peregrines, owls etc. NE wouldn't be suspending the GLs if they were cast iron and UK law compliant, so it looks like there is at least doubt if they are.
    Yep. It seems that NE are the ones who are charged with demonstrating non-lethal methods are not working before issuing a license, not the person/organisation under the GL. Quite how that circle is squared I don't know. My mind jumps to applying for licenses that require inspection before they are granted, which would be expensive and no doubt require resources that NE don't have. Or perhaps the law can be changed?

    Below is a quote from the solicitors who brought the case. I'm not sure on what basis the requirement is for solely NE to be satisfied is, but that would seem to be the crux of it.

    This condition states that before issuing these licences Natural England – and not any other body or person – has to be satisfied that there are no alternative solutions to killing wild birds. Natural England has not done that. It has instead told licence users that they must themselves decide whether alternative solutions are ineffective or impracticable.
    https://www.leighday.co.uk/News/2019...allenges-Natur

  4. #109
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Exeter
    Posts
    35,662
    Quote Originally Posted by 223AI View Post
    Corvids in a garden are a problem, they prey on the local nesting birds, it’s no different!
    Yes it is very different because that is nature doing what nature does.

    The General licence should not apply to a private garden, they should not be able to be used as a cover-all excuse to shoot birds at a purely domestic residence just because they happen to be on it.

    Mason post #15 & Steve Valentine post #16 were both absolutely spot on

    Like it or not there are a lot of tw*ts with air guns out there who are more than happy to shoot anything that flies & like it or not that is what opens the door to Pakham et al to put in this challenge.

    If you think you have a genuine case to shoot bird X in your private garden because it causes Z damage then apply for a licence on those grounds & see if gets granted, if you keep chickens it might be, if you have a large Veg patch it might be, pretty sure your Cherry tree is on it's own mind

    I'd expect a revised General Licence in very short order, simply revised so as only to apply to Farms & commercial properties not to a domestic address.

  5. #110
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    High Wycombe
    Posts
    18,116
    Quote Originally Posted by RobF View Post
    Yep. It seems that NE are the ones who are charged with demonstrating non-lethal methods are not working before issuing a license, not the person/organisation under the GL. Quite how that circle is squared I don't know. My mind jumps to applying for licenses that require inspection before they are granted, which would be expensive and no doubt require resources that NE don't have. Or perhaps the law can be changed?

    Below is a quote from the solicitors who brought the case. I'm not sure on what basis the requirement is for solely NE to be satisfied is, but that would seem to be the crux of it.



    https://www.leighday.co.uk/News/2019...allenges-Natur
    Thanks for that Rob. This seems to indicate that NE did not have the resource/SQEP to fulfil a legal requirement, and (intentionally or unintentionally) passed the buck. My guess is that with ongoing cuts in funding and personnel they simply did not have the capacity to meet the requirement.

  6. #111
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    High Wycombe
    Posts
    18,116
    Quote Originally Posted by sanibel686 View Post
    It is within our DNA that groups of human beings with control over others will commonly act collectively; as an opportunistic mercenary self serving organism, as we have done for eons. So why did NE seemingly move so quickly in this particular direction in response to Packman's challenge?

    I certainly don't think the movers and shakers within Natural England are spineless, out of touch or thick as others have said. Please don't give these individuals the cushioning excuse of mere stupidity. They knew what they were doing, they'll have discussed it at length in secret, they've considered the strategic opportunities before them and weighed up the collateral damage and the impact of the current backlash. They then probably formulated "verbal only" internal briefings to raise deflector shields among front facing staff whilst wringing the changes.

    Individuals in NE will be maneuvering to maximize; money, power, influence and personal career progression whilst tactically minimising personal risk (the slopey shoulder brigade). Why? because professional life is about politics and the subject matter is secondary after a while.

    The reason is just not clear to us yet why they acted how they did but what is clear is that they have an insidious agenda that we need to uncover order to fight it.

    Consider this; an individual at NE, a single person not a faceless group, has made a decision that may have the effect of bankrupting some farms this year. To say nothing of the effect on the myriad small businesses in the gun trade selling shooting accessories, decoys etc. What is he personally getting out of this not so accidental terrorism?

    What might happen? I can just see a glint in the eyes of NE as they smell the money and the glory and use this as a reason to introduce a revenue generating licensing system. Say, where individual farmers must pay for the privilege of protecting their own crops, which in turn will precipitate the further commercialisation of pigeon shooting for the rest of us.

    Who in the shooting organisations will be publicly holding this individual to book?
    ...Or it may be that NE did not have the resource to do what was required of them, following cuts to budget and personnel. I believe they are due to have a further £8m chopped this year. One could draw parallels with police forces (Manchester in particular, I believe) dropping investigation of "low profile crime" as they no longer have the resource to deal with it.

  7. #112
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Eastbourne, East Sussex
    Posts
    3,326
    What happens if a couple of coke cans fly into the garden are they protected
    The subject is very debatable with arguments on both sides bit like dare I say Brexit!!!

    Soon we won't be able to shoot anything as in the end even paper targets will be a protected species!!!!
    John Darling JD (1946-2004) was my inspiration to be the best i can and enjoy the sport i love. R.I.P
    A dedicated HW80 Fanatic and owner since 1986 to present.

  8. #113
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Bruton
    Posts
    6,591
    Quote Originally Posted by Muskett View Post
    I don't post photos but think everyone should. Every chicken slaughtered. Every Lamb. Every fish caught. Then people will realises that taking the bounty given us is normal.

    Hunting is normal.

    Not hunting, and expecting your supermarket shelves full of great food stuffs is abnormal.

    ......

    Lastly, taking a rat, rabbit, magpie, deer, wild boar, or even a pigeon are all the same. No difference. If you are the one to do it do it with thought and respect. The vast majority of Hunters give and have that.
    With you on all of that, including the bit in the middle that i’ve taken out to help readability.

    Everyone should read “meditations on hunting” by Ortega y Gasset. He was a bit of a weird Spanish philosopher dude with some slightly odd views on other things. But he nailed hunting. “One does not hunt in order to kill. One kills in order to have hunted”.

    Almost all hunting traditions stress respect for quarry.

  9. #114
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Near Ipswich, Suffolk
    Posts
    1,483
    I don't shoot pigeons or corvids, but am against the steps that NE has taken (even if it was to save their own asses)

    Living and working in rural areas, I've seen what a flock of pigeons can do to a field - I've watched as a field of rape dissolved into a cloud of pigeons, and watched that field show large bare patches later in the year, at a cost to the farmer that I can only guess at - that field has never been sown with oilseed rape since (can't be shot due to houses and roads - no 'clear' area) - this type of event, if this ban remains in place, will be repeated all over the country, ruining arable farmers.

    Yes, a lot can be laid at the door of the irresponsible, and yes, they should be prosecuted for their ignorance/blatant disregard for the law (same goes for those who don't follow the laws regarding safe storage of airguns) - but if a load of court cases come up against them, we'll be looking at licencing for airguns, as the press will have a field day, reporting all the court cases and pressing for tighter restrictions on air guns.

    Face it - we're on a loser here!

  10. #115
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Higham
    Posts
    8,323
    Quote Originally Posted by RobF View Post
    Yep. It seems that NE are the ones who are charged with demonstrating non-lethal methods are not working before issuing a license, not the person/organisation under the GL. Quite how that circle is squared I don't know. My mind jumps to applying for licenses that require inspection before they are granted, which would be expensive and no doubt require resources that NE don't have. Or perhaps the law can be changed?

    Below is a quote from the solicitors who brought the case. I'm not sure on what basis the requirement is for solely NE to be satisfied is, but that would seem to be the crux of it.



    https://www.leighday.co.uk/News/2019...allenges-Natur
    Basic fact not being mentioned or accepted by NE and some on here are that none lethal methods simply do not work. Impossible for Crows / Magpies predating livestock and nests and Corvids and Pigeons on Crops take no notice of Kites and Gas Guns after a day or so. The people making the rules don't understand what they are talking about.

  11. #116
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Devizes
    Posts
    5,031
    Quote Originally Posted by angrybear View Post
    Yes it is very different because that is nature doing what nature does.

    The General licence should not apply to a private garden, they should not be able to be used as a cover-all excuse to shoot birds at a purely domestic residence just because they happen to be on it.

    Mason post #15 & Steve Valentine post #16 were both absolutely spot on

    Like it or not there are a lot of tw*ts with air guns out there who are more than happy to shoot anything that flies & like it or not that is what opens the door to Pakham et al to put in this challenge.

    If you think you have a genuine case to shoot bird X in your private garden because it causes Z damage then apply for a licence on those grounds & see if gets granted, if you keep chickens it might be, if you have a large Veg patch it might be, pretty sure your Cherry tree is on it's own mind

    I'd expect a revised General Licence in very short order, simply revised so as only to apply to Farms & commercial properties not to a domestic address.
    Nature doing what nature does, no difference to deer feeding on crops or trees or pigeons destroying crops or foxes killing chickens then!? Nature doing what nature does...

    So what about the market gardener, or small holder? And I’m not talking crop protective I’m talking killing corvids to protect wildlife.

    Killing a bird in a private garden to protect a blackbird nest is no different to killing a bird in a field to protect a blackbird’s nest!

    Most of the oiks that shoot birds in their garden for no real reason don’t know about the general licences, will this stop them? The £3-400 fines the hare courses we catch regularly on the farms around here don’t stop them, how will making it easier to prosecute a few people really make a difference?
    Thanks for looking

  12. #117
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Devizes
    Posts
    5,031
    Quote Originally Posted by Spanner. View Post
    Basic fact not being mentioned or accepted by NE and some on here are that none lethal methods simply do not work. Impossible for Crows / Magpies predating livestock and nests and Corvids and Pigeons on Crops take no notice of Kites and Gas Guns after a day or so. The people making the rules don't understand what they are talking about.
    A bit like half the folk on this thread then
    Thanks for looking

  13. #118
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    New Milton, Hampshire
    Posts
    14,389
    Quote Originally Posted by Spanner. View Post
    Basic fact not being mentioned or accepted by NE and some on here are that none lethal methods simply do not work. Impossible for Crows / Magpies predating livestock and nests and Corvids and Pigeons on Crops take no notice of Kites and Gas Guns after a day or so. The people making the rules don't understand what they are talking about.
    No that isn't what is happening. It helps to understand the problem, not react to something which isn't the problem.

    What has been said is that NE (and no-one else) has to show that non lethal methods don't work before that license is granted, or else the license isn't lawful and contrary to the law. They are not saying that non-lethal methods have to work, but NE have to know they don't beforehand. NE can't rely on the person/organisation just saying they don't, because the person/organisation under the license is an irrelevance.

  14. #119
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    East Sussex, Nr Rye
    Posts
    17,112
    Angrybear, on shooting in gardens I disagree.
    If its safe to shoot in a garden why not? The Magpie pest is the same just happens to be in the garden not in the field over the fence.

    When Starlings and House Sparrows were a pest they got shot by the local lads arounds the farms and villages. (Farm cats got an easy meal though they didn't like Starling.) It was normal. In my life there used to be zillions of them. Now there are few Starlings or House Sparrows and quite rightly have been put under protection. Their decline wasn't from shooting, nor shooting in gardens. In other places in the world they can be still a pest species. Its management.
    Fruit Farmers had a bounty on Chaffinches. we don't have many Fruit Farms now, now many Chaffinches.
    We have stopped eating small songbirds, quite a few things that we used to. How well provided for we are.

    Anyone shooting the wrong species, protected species, is an idiot, possibly a criminal idiot. In their garden or anywhere else. Thats an education issue. Part of being a responsible Hunter is restraint, only shoot what is in season and necessary. Its not shooting targets! Those lessons you can learn in your garden as well as anywhere else. Grey Squirrels are going to "get the lead pill', they are not pets.

    Some species have adapted to gardens well. I used to shoot on the edge of Cambridge and you could watch the wood pigeons flying from the city out and back onto the arable land. Hundreds upon hundreds of them. Shitting on every car as they went.

    Nothing wrong in shooting in one's garden, targets or pest species. Its the KFC Conservationists that want to make it seem there is a difference.

    When NE gets a flood of license applications and then followed by compensation claims they will have to sort their own mess out. Its seems the bureaucrats couldn't right up the laws to fit the use, nor resources to fit what they put down. An own goal by all accounts. Nanny just got her nickers all twisted up.
    Last edited by Muskett; 24-04-2019 at 07:40 PM.

  15. #120
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Higham
    Posts
    8,323
    Quote Originally Posted by RobF View Post
    No that isn't what is happening. It helps to understand the problem, not react to something which isn't the problem.

    What has been said is that NE (and no-one else) has to show that non lethal methods don't work before that license is granted, or else the license isn't lawful and contrary to the law. They are not saying that non-lethal methods have to work, but NE have to know they don't beforehand. NE can't rely on the person/organisation just saying they don't, because the person/organisation under the license is an irrelevance.
    No NE are currently asking people to demonstrate they have tried none lethal methods before applying for a licence which will take 30 days as it stands IF granted, it is a ridiculous farce. Ring them and ask.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •