Packham gets General License revoked!!!!

[Steve Valentine]

So what about the pigeons eating all of my Morello Cherries, leaving me with nothing to make my Morello Cherrie wine with?

What about the same(now very fat) pigeons shitting all of those said Morello Cherries ALL over the remains of my garden, that my 4 year old grand daughter plays in??????…...all birds EXCEPT pigeons are welcome in my garden.

Cheers.

Roy.

When you apply for your individual licence, put in about it depriving you of wine and see if it gets approved. Have you tried other methods to rid the pigeons? Netting the tree perhaps?

And another one, corvids are a problem for a number if reasons and should be controlled!!

Do you want to apply for the 5 or 6 bird species that cause issues on the 6 farms I shoot? Assuming separate licences per species as with cormorants or herons that's 36 licences I have to potentially apply for!


No wonder we're in this mess with such a poor understanding even among shooters!

And you’re another one totally missing Packhams point. He’s doing it to stop every Tom dick and Harry shooting birds that they have no legitimate reason to do so. Shooting corvids pigeons magpies etc in their gardens under the wide umbrella of the general licence and claiming to do so to protect song birds and to stop then shitting all over when the majority of the birds they shoot would stop visiting if they stopped feeding them. Case in point with Roy above.

Shooting is a last resort under the general license. Ask the garden shooters what other measures they’ve done to prevent the birds visiting will draw a blank.

We are all in this together. Let’s fight it the correct way, not bickering among ourselves.

[short-carabine]

It is of course worth remembering that this is a Government decision, so having a wee flippy about Packham is pretty pointless. The Government is wooing voter blocs at the moment (what with the Euro elections imminent) and with all the focus on climate issues and related, this is an opportunity to buy off a few votes by saying "look we care about the environment" etc. The idea that Packham single-handedly made the government do this is frankly laughable. It's a vote grab guys

[Portzy]

Could we not wait until Thursday, and see what that brings in the way of modified proposals, rather than beating each other up?

If, and it may well be a "BIG IF", that the genuine objection is to stop the misuse of the General Licences, (that's to say back garden bird shooting etc), then maybe - just maybe, there will some form of modification or rewording of the licences to categorically spell this out and possibly a need to agree terms then print the licence and always carry it?

[bighit]

Could we not wait until Thursday, and see what that brings in the way of modified proposals, rather than beating each other up?

If, and it may well be a "BIG IF", that the genuine objection is to stop the misuse of the General Licences, (that's to say back garden bird shooting etc), then maybe - just maybe, there will some form of modification or rewording of the licences to categorically spell this out and possibly a need to agree terms then print the licence and always carry it?

Not being funny but rewording it will make no difference to the ones that WANT to shoot birds in their garden . just like the laws that say you can't shoot cats and and most songbirds with them .


A lot of this has been caused by these people that WANT to shoot birds in their garden as well as Packham and co with their agenda to have all shooting banned .

These people are doing no one any favours and they wont change their mind .


I left a comment on facebook about the revoking and one other person said "screw them ,i'm going to carry on regardless" .

That's what your up against i'm afraid.

[bighit]

When you apply for your individual licence, put in about it depriving you of wine and see if it gets approved. Have you tried other methods to rid the pigeons? Netting the tree perhaps?



And you’re another one totally missing Packhams point. He’s doing it to stop every Tom dick and Harry shooting birds that they have no legitimate reason to do so. Shooting corvids pigeons magpies etc in their gardens under the wide umbrella of the general licence and claiming to do so to protect song birds and to stop then shitting all over when the majority of the birds they shoot would stop visiting if they stopped feeding them. Case in point with Roy above.

Shooting is a last resort under the general license. Ask the garden shooters what other measures they’ve done to prevent the birds visiting will draw a blank.

We are all in this together. Let’s fight it the correct way, not bickering among ourselves.

correct Steve .

The minority have spoiled it for the majority .

same with Airguns and the license up here .

Their indiscretions end up affecting everyone yet they will carry on regardless .

[Steve Valentine]

Not being funny but rewording it will make no difference to the ones that WANT to shoot birds in their garden . just like the laws that say you can't shoot cats and and most songbirds with them .


A lot of this has been caused by these people that WANT to shoot birds in their garden as well as Packham and co with their agenda to have all shooting banned .

These people are doing no one any favours and they wont change their mind .


I left a comment on facebook about the revoking and one other person said "screw them ,i'm going to carry on regardless" .

That's what your up against i'm afraid.

I’ve seen quite a few similar comments in Facebook groups. Some of the BBS members need to check a few out to see what we’re really up against. It’s not legitimate shooters carrying out pest control on permissions that Packham want to stop.

[bighit]

One from a group I'm on https://imgur.com/a/jbANyDe

[Portzy]

Not being funny but rewording it will make no difference to the ones that WANT to shoot birds in their garden . just like the laws that say you can't shoot cats and and most songbirds with them .


A lot of this has been caused by these people that WANT to shoot birds in their garden as well as Packham and co with their agenda to have all shooting banned .

These people are doing no one any favours and they wont change their mind .


I left a comment on facebook about the revoking and one other person said "screw them ,i'm going to carry on regardless" .

That's what your up against i'm afraid.

Oh yes, I am well aware of the small minority element and I am with you all the way on how you see it. I just feel like there ought to be some form of middle ground plus unmistakable once and for all line in the sand drawn with all this. Folks openly admitting to back garden "fatal" type shooting should be followed up and dealt with, the same with any law breakers, there is only one simple sentence in the guidance that refers to such behaviour.

[bighit]

Oh yes, I am well aware of the small minority element and I am with you all the way on how you see it. I just feel like there ought to be some form of middle ground plus unmistakable once and for all line in the sand drawn with all this. Folks openly admitting to back garden "fatal" type shooting should be followed up and dealt with, the same with any law breakers, there is only one simple sentence in the guidance that refers to such behaviour.

it probably does say it but given that its laid out in the way that you would need a philadelphia lawyer to decipher it could make it look like its ok to blatt them in your garden.

Like the stickies on here giving the forum rules and on other forums , who reads them ? very few I would think. The same could be said for the general license .

Some shooters will watch the likes of verminhunterstv or huntersvermin on youtube and think thats it ok just to go and buy an airgun then go "hunting " in their garden but never read the general license or any of the shooting guidelines as we have seen when so people have not secured their airguns and children have found them then shot and killed other children with them .


Until these people research what they can and can't do and abide by these guidelines then its lost battle for the law abiding ones.

people can and will try to educate newbies but some of these newbies will not listen and do as they please.

[223AI]

When you apply for your individual licence, put in about it depriving you of wine and see if it gets approved. Have you tried other methods to rid the pigeons? Netting the tree perhaps?



And you’re another one totally missing Packhams point. He’s doing it to stop every Tom dick and Harry shooting birds that they have no legitimate reason to do so. Shooting corvids pigeons magpies etc in their gardens under the wide umbrella of the general licence and claiming to do so to protect song birds and to stop then shitting all over when the majority of the birds they shoot would stop visiting if they stopped feeding them. Case in point with Roy above.

Shooting is a last resort under the general license. Ask the garden shooters what other measures they’ve done to prevent the birds visiting will draw a blank.

We are all in this together. Let’s fight it the correct way, not bickering among ourselves.

Shooting as a last resort is a recent addition to the general I would prefer that they went back to simply a licence to control lethally on sight as they were 10 years ago. Much simpler and we’d have none of this nonsense

[Mason]

I find anyone who frequents a shooting website yet supports this ridiculous front door attack on the shooting community very strange, unless of course you don't shoot to protect crops and livestock or indeed shoot at all. Were you in London last week?

In your post you hint that you are having problems with pest attacks on your crops and livestock and show concern that the revocation of certain bird species from the General License may impact on your current methods of control. Other than a paperwork trail, there seems at the moment to be little difference between the proposal and the current general license. Both require non lethal forms of control to be tried first and only allow lethal methods as a last resort, when the former has failed or are impractical. There is no right under common law that allows anyone to shoot domestic or wildlife, the exception being dogs that attack livestock which can be shot on sight. As you are aware lethal control is only allowed under the conditions of the General License for the control of pest species. Far from being an attack on the shooting community, it is merely a refinement to the license that if anything affords the shooter greater protection. How? By obtaining the new individual license, you have already demonstrated beforehand the need to the licensing authority, that there is a real need for lethal control of the named species. So if you are reported by a concerned member of the public your license will exonerate you from further inquiries or possible prosecution. The General license does not do this.

You may find my point of view very strange but it comes from an individual who spent a significant portion of his life in the agricultural industry. Perhaps you can list the problems you have been having and the remedies that you have tried so far; if I can help or point you in the right direction I will, as I am sure others on this forum will share their knowledge too.

[RobF]

It is of course worth remembering that this is a Government decision, so having a wee flippy about Packham is pretty pointless. The Government is wooing voter blocs at the moment (what with the Euro elections imminent) and with all the focus on climate issues and related, this is an opportunity to buy off a few votes by saying "look we care about the environment" etc. The idea that Packham single-handedly made the government do this is frankly laughable. It's a vote grab guys

The pin to burst your bubble is that if it was all about votes there would have been no need for it to be taken to court, they could have just revoked them when he phoned them up and told them what a wonderful vote winning idea he'd come up with. :rollseyes

[223AI]

I’ve seen quite a few similar comments in Facebook groups. Some of the BBS members need to check a few out to see what we’re really up against. It’s not legitimate shooters carrying out pest control on permissions that Packham want to stop.

Are you that naive??

That is exactly what he wants to stop, FFS just look at his views on game shooting, a perfectly legitimate legal activity carried out generally by licence holders!

[223AI]

In your post you hint that you are having problems with pest attacks on your crops and livestock and show concern that the revocation of certain bird species from the General License may impact on your current methods of control. Other than a paperwork trail, there seems at the moment to be little difference between the proposal and the current general license. Both require non lethal forms of control to be tried first and only allow lethal methods as a last resort, when the former has failed or are impractical. There is no right under common law that allows anyone to shoot domestic or wildlife, the exception being dogs that attack livestock which can be shot on sight. As you are aware lethal control is only allowed under the conditions of the General License for the control of pest species. Far from being an attack on the shooting community, it is merely a refinement to the license that if anything affords the shooter greater protection. How? By obtaining the new individual license, you have already demonstrated beforehand the need to the licensing authority, that there is a real need for lethal control of the named species. So if you are reported by a concerned member of the public your license will exonerate you from further inquiries or possible prosecution. The General license does not do this.

You may find my point of view very strange but it comes from an individual who spent a significant portion of his life in the agricultural industry. Perhaps you can list the problems you have been having and the remedies that you have tried so far; if I can help or point you in the right direction I will, as I am sure others on this forum will share their knowledge too.

Do you shoot any living quarry Mason?

Out of interest what was your role in the agricultural industry, was it relevant?

The application for individual licences is only a temporary measure, the general licence system works and is almost fit for purpose (would be far better if the need to demonstrate that lethal control was ineffective was removed, as it used to be), you are forgetting the cost to the taxpayer of administering all of the additional licences.

[RobF]

Are you that naive??

That is exactly what he wants to stop, FFS just look at his views on game shooting, a perfectly legitimate legal activity carried out generally by licence holders!

Doesn't matter if your pro or anti game shooting, what it isn't is legitimate pest control, which was the point.