Packham gets General License revoked!!!!

[Spanner.]

No one is "defending" it, we are simply pointing out the legalities of what it actually says or has said in the past.
and that while you are blinkered to the FACT in front of your eyes, you have been misusing one or more of GL 04/05/06 as cover to kill certain birds, purely because you appear to have a pathological hatred of them.

Methods that could be used over large fields might include the bird scaring bangers (hateful things), mobile things that move & flash in the wind, not sure what they're called but the inflating scarecrow things that pop up on a timer, even an old fashioned static scare crow.
All the licence says is such things must be tried & shown to fail before shooting is used.

As for all the boll*x about the ambiguity of what it means, anyone with half a brain will use that same ambiguity in their favour .

Anyone with half a brain will know that ambiguity works both ways leaving everything down to a judge or jury's personal feelings and leaning towards shooting.

I have been shooting many years and there are no none lethal methods that deter Crows or Pigeons to any effect, so why all the crap about proving you have tried them all and are continuing to do so whlist shooting them. Because the licences were written by people with an anti shooting agenda, Pigeon distress call FFS!!

[bighit]

Anyone with half a brain will know that ambiguity works both ways leaving everything down to a judge or jury's personal choice and leaning towards shooting.

Which is why I have suggested that all of the parties that have an interest in solving the issue should be at the draft stages to confront the issue that the other sides will have .

As I have said numerous times , SAC's say they help the Scottish natural Heritage to draft theirs and so far Wild Justice have not challenged them and they have not challenged the welsh one either .

To not include all the parties with an interest will look one sided