Wood Pigeon Licence issued, exactly the same ridiculous conditions as the Carrion Licence replace Crow with Pigeon. Designed purely to stop people shooting.
Banned
No they would have had dialogue with him before he officially took up his post for a decision of that gravity, very bloody obviously!!Originally Posted by short-carabine
So what had NE been doing in the month or so before Juniper started since being served with the legal notice? Nothing? If you knew the slightest thing about politics you would see the coincidences in timing. He had input in his first day? Yeah, right, how convenient
Really not sure why you are defending the rabid anti!!
Last edited by Spanner.; 03-05-2019 at 05:08 PM.
Banned
Wood Pigeon Licence issued, exactly the same ridiculous conditions as the Carrion Licence replace Crow with Pigeon. Designed purely to stop people shooting.
Registered User
yes you scare them off first.if that dont work then kill them.
Guest
I take this means unless you have a huge garden full of crops which you then sell , then shooting them in your garden is out
3. The purpose(s) for which this licence can be used
This licence can only be used to prevent serious damage* to crops* (including fruit and vegetables)*: see Definitions
“Crops” for the purpose of this licence refer to cultivated plants grown on
a sufficient scale to have economic or financial value.
7. Who can use this
licence
a) This licence can only be used by people growing crops, and by
people acting on their behalf, except those convicted on or after 1
January 2010 of a wildlife crime* (unless, in respect of that offence,
either:
they are a rehabilitated person for the purposes of the
Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 and their conviction is
treated as spent; or
a court has made an order discharging them absolutely.)
Any application by a person to whom this exclusion applies for an
individual licence will be considered on its merits.
*: see Definitions
8. When this licence can
be used
a) Only as a last resort to prevent serious damage*.
b) Before using the licence reasonable endeavours must have been
made to resolve the problem using the lawful methods identified in
Table 1 (unless their use would be impractical, without effect or
disproportionate in the circumstances) and any other lawful methods
that may be appropriate in the circumstances.
c) Reasonable endeavours must continue to be made to resolve the
problem using such appropriate lawful methods alongside use of the
licence.
d) Only undertake lethal control of birds during the peak breeding
season* if lethal control at other times or use of other licensed
methods (e.g. egg destruction) would not provide a satisfactory
solution.
e) Any person using this licence must be able to show, if asked by an
officer of Natural England or the Police:
(i) what type of crop any action under this licence is protecting;
(ii) what lawful methods have been, and are being, taken to
prevent serious damage to such crops by woodpigeon or why
the lawful methods have not been taken;
(iii) what measures have been and are being taken to minimise
losses due to other species and causes; and
(iv) why the threat of serious damage from woodpigeon is
sufficiently serious to merit action under this licence.
Licence users are advised to keep a record or log of crop damage
and of efforts to address problems by legal methods.
“Serious damage” is damage to an economic or financial interest that exceeds mere nuisance, minor damage or normal business risk1
.
There is clear evidence that woodpigeons cause serious damage to a range of vulnerable growing crops. For the purpose of this licence, there is
considered to be potential for “serious damage” in the absence of licensed action where pigeons are feeding on one or more of the following
crops:
Oilseed rape
Cabbages, Brussels sprouts and other brassicas
Beans/Peas
Cereals
Linseed
Newly sown grass/clover
Sugar beet
Salad crops
Any other vegetables
Any fruit
Evidence
As explained in condition 8 of the licence, any person using this licence must be able to show, if asked by an officer of Natural England or the
Police, what type of crop licensed action is protecting and why the threat of damage is sufficiently serious to merit action under the licence,
notwithstanding the use of approp
https://assets.publishing.service.go...e-to-crops.pdf
Last edited by bighit; 03-05-2019 at 10:09 PM.
Registered User
Not at all, if you grow your own veg then your crop has economic value to you because you're not buying it in.
But it does mean that you can't claim that shooting them in your garden provides a "general financial benefit" to farmers you don't know because "pigeons are pigeons & eat stuff"
#notthemexicangardener
There is also a caveat right at the very bottom of the licence that says they can’t be shot for Quote
“ Commercial and / or Recreational purposes”
We have been shooting on about 7 acres of open meadow for about the last 5+ years, bordering on a farm growing wheat / barley / rape. The owner of the meadow also has one of 4 allotments attached to their property which we also have permission to shoot on.
By shooting Wood Pigeons on this meadow / allotments we are helping to protect crops on the allotments from being eaten.
We have been specifically asked to do this as bordering the farm ( the fields are literally the other side of a low tin fence ! ) there are hundreds of pigeons about.
We normally take the pigeons we shoot home to eat, it looks like this licence will stop us doing this now, unless of course the crops could be seen as ‘economic importance’ ??
Norm
Registered User
Guest
I wonder what the "sufficient scale" measurement is then ?
A few rows of carrots and tatties or an acre ?
Also if it's only a small area then netting would be the only option in the eyes of the NE I would think.
Horizontally Challenged
Evidence? Or speculation?No they would have had dialogue with him before he officially took up his post for a decision of that gravity, very bloody obviously!!
Really not sure why you are defending the rabid anti!!
BTW I'm not "defending him"...simply pointing out that just blaming Juniper fails to take into account the CE, the parent Department for NE and the Minister. Are you seriously suggesting that none of these had any involvement/influence?
Of course, if Juniper is hand in glove with Packham and co, why didn't he do what they were suggesting, which was retain the existing GL until Jan 2020 and use the time til then to consult with all interested parties on a replacement for it?
Last edited by short-carabine; 04-05-2019 at 07:26 AM.
Guest
ENGLAND GENERAL LICENCES FAQs & UPDATE
Includes links to the three current new GLs (carrion crows, Canada geese and woodpigeons), explanation of the General Licences and their legal status, comments on roost shooting, decoying, flight lines, legal risk, opinion on new GL wording and format, alternative and better licence formats and record keeping.
SACS quotes:
"Michael Gove and Defra are apparently not best pleased with NE. Given that Natural England sits under Defra, it’s likely Defra is squeezing very tightly NE's remaining bollock, given that the other one was dropped last week."
"The bigger picture is that General Licences are a significant part of our environment, economy and national food security. They are not a play-toy for self-proclaimed eco-evangelists who would put their ideological objections to shooting ahead of protecting endangered wild birds."
"We need our Government to take immediate and firm action to limit the damage already done by NE and ‘Wild Justice’: what justice for our waders, other ground nesters and farmers? This is a total shambles that should never be allowed to happen again."
https://www.sacs.org.uk/news/england...aqs-and-update
Last edited by bighit; 04-05-2019 at 08:46 AM.
Guest
An update from SACs with FAQS https://www.sacs.org.uk/media/upload...and-update.pdf
I have copied and pasted some FAQs here . Read the full thing as there is more .
CAN I STILL ROOST SHOOT?
This hasn’t changed from before. All birds are protected in law. The General Licences (at least until NE
revoked them) allowed taking and killing for limited purposes including preventing serious damage. Any
GL user, roost shooter or otherwise, needs to be absolutely certain that what they are doing is permitted
under a relevant GL i.e. either preventing serious damage or, if they do not roost shoot or effect other
control, serious damage may occur as a consequence.
It is up to you to justify your actions. If the roosting crows or pigeons are known to hammer your crops
and, due to other limitations, roost shooting is the most expedient way of preventing damage, then that
may be a valid argument.
It is also important that the farmer, if it is not you, actually wants you to prevent serious damage and in
this way. It would be imprudent to roost shoot if the farmer cannot support your actions when
questioned by police.
The big difference between the old GL and the new one is a need to continue with non-lethal methods
even when undertaking lethal methods, which makes no sense at all, either in practice or in law.
Looking at it from this angle, you can see why it would be sensible to keep a basic logbook of what you
are doing and why.
AM I STILL OK TO DECOY PIGEONS AND CROWS?
Exactly the same as for roost shooting (see above). You must be able to justify your actions under a
relevant GL. [B]And the farmer, if not yourself, must be able to support what you are doing. If the farmer is
not suffering or likely to suffer serious damage, or does not really care about pigeons, then you may be
committing an offence. The police would always speak to the farmer.
Again, good practice to keep a little log book, detailing your thinking, the farmer’s requests and what
you’re doing. It doesn’t have to be complicated, just sufficient to demonstrate you have been mindful of
the law.
Last edited by bighit; 04-05-2019 at 09:13 AM.
Registered User
I would love to see thousands of farmers individually mail their MP's and cc: Gove:
"Due to the nature of the current GL changes, we will have to seriously re-consider our crop planting for the next season as the current implementation introduces serious risk to arable crops making them uncompetitive and not profitable".
Or something to that effect. Hopefully that would light a fire under someone's bum.
Registered User
Looks like the telegraph was right after all
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...bird-shooting/
If I am reading it right - this confirms it
https://www.gov.uk/government/public...-england-chair
Last edited by aris; 04-05-2019 at 12:46 PM.
Banned
Maybe to make it look like they aren't hand in glove but blatantly are and the early revocation absolutely suits them both maybe the suggestion to review next year was just a smoke screen both knowing what was actually going to happen. Gove appoints arch anti Juniper to NE FFS & Juniper and Packham are pals, you don't need to be Einstein.
https://www.shootinguk.co.uk/news/mi...packham-105910
Last edited by Spanner.; 04-05-2019 at 01:01 PM.
Horizontally Challenged
Yes, I’m sure it was all carefully planned out and nothing to do with departmental inefficiency, Gove playing for votes and getting to be PM. Look at the timing of the suggestion that NE might lose the responsibility for issuing the GL...right on the day before the local elections. Now that’s a vote grab...and of course, it hasn’t happened.
Posting Permissions
