Plecotus

Isn't that the truth, Pete. Folks who enjoy shooting live quarry need to realise that they they are swimming against an enormous tide of public opinion and, when it comes to certain species and reasons given for shooting them, a lot of science which proves those reasons to be spurious. If they don't clean up their act, deal with those in their midst who act illegally, deal with the welfare, waste and other issues associated with intensive, high-density game bird shoots and stop sending death threats and general abuse to public figures who are well respected in the wider community, they should not be surprised to find increasingly onerous limitations placed on what they do. I'm going to leave this thread entirely now. Nothing else I can add. It's been interesting to hear people's views, even if I can't always agree with them. If anyone wants to come and shoot the rats on my smallholding, they would be very welcome!! Perhaps I need to buy myself a .410?

The two papers that you mentioned contain HUNDREDS of references to peer reviewed papers, published in a wide variety of journals, most of which are nothing to do with the RSPB, to evidence what the authors of the papers I cited have concluded. The third paper was published in the British Ornithologists' Union's journal, Ibis. . It's a very well respect, international journal in which every paper is thoroughly peer-reviewed. I believe they are currently No 1 or No. 2 in terms of impact in this discipline, worldwide. The Editorial board list reads like a Who's Who of contemporary avian science with experts in the field from all over the globe (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/page/journal/1474919x/homepage/editorialboard.html) Yes, the research originated from an RSPB team. That's because the RSPB employ some of the world's finest avian scientists. All that said, if the research didn't stack up to robust criticism, it would never have made it into print in such a well resepcted journal. If you think otherwise, my guess is that's because you've never had a paper savaged by a peer review group before. Nothing scientists like to do more that rip professional colleagues' research apart. Please don't talk nonsense about bias. If you think the science is wrong, offer constructive, evidenced criticism. Conduct your own studies, publish your own findings in peer-reviewed journals and them you will have some credibility. All I have read from you on the debate here thus far is your own, personal opinion. I wonder just how biased THAT is?

Most things...but not driven pheasant or grouse shooting. Quite simple really.

Nice try indeed. The two out of three papers you dismiss (I note you make no comment on the third, funny that) contain a great many references supporting their assertions. The vast majority of those refrences are not to papers published by the RSPB or indeed the Hutton Institue. You did read them all throroughly.....didn't you? The RSPB control predators on a number of their reserves where such control has been proven to be of benefit to mostly ground nesting species. You know that two, I guess?

Then why deliberately mislead people my claiming that the timing was chosen by Chris Packham to disrupt the game shooting industry? Enough. Pub.

One last one from me, before I head to the pub. A few people wanted evidence....proper peer-reviewed and/or well referenced science. I dug out a few papers. Enjoy although probably not as much as I will enjoy my Bishop's Tipple. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ibi.12356%4010.1111/(ISSN)1474-919x.RSPB-conservation-science https://www.hutton.ac.uk/sites/default/files/files/RSPB_ReportFINAL_Covers.pdf http://robyorke.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/gamebird-release.pdf

The management of grouse moors IS a problem. Some wild species benefit to an extent but many don't. The illegal killing of raptors still happens too, as successful prosecutions from time to time confirm.

If you read what you will find on the link I posted (which you clearly haven't), then you will see that the timing has nothing to do with Chris Pakham and everything to do with a largely incompetent government organisation. I'm done with you. You have no interest in the facts so what's the point.

If you want to keep it wild, returning much of it to forest would be a good start.

He's a formally trained zoologist who had a passion for widlife from an early age. Michaela Strachan and Kate Humble are both fine people but they would be the first to admit that they are, first and foremost, journalists and presenters, not naturalists. The legal challeng that was mounted was not to stop people shooting corvids when there is a demonstrable good reason for doing so. The LAW requires that anyone who wishes to do so justifies WHY they need to do it. Natural England (NE) realised they had been acting illegally for many years with these general licences and, caught with their trousers firmly around their ankles. Be upset with NE for this sudden withdrawl of the licenses, not Chris Packham. You can read all about it here: https://markavery.info/2019/04/28/what-wild-justice-says-about-the-general-licence-issue/

He has a zoology degree and had started a PhD when the chance to become a camerman came up, which he decided to take. I've worked on Springwatch with him from time to time. He knows way more about natural history than most on here and a very great deal more than some of the other presenters I've encountered.

I think you missed out on an important part of the training that led to your degree....keeping an open mind and not dismissing anything out of hand because you simply don't like it or don't agree with it. "Viscous", indeed.

I hadn't seen it until I followed the link provided on here. I've read through the sections relavent to shooting and found little to argue with. Does that make me half-educated too? I'm a wildlife biologist who has lived and worked in a rual community for 31 years. I would not expect to find endless references to scientific papers in a manifesto. There is plenty of research in resepcted, peer-reviewed journals for those inclined to seek it out.

ODRC shoot at Kingbury, which I believe is just to the north of Birmingham. It's not a site I've been to but I believe they shoot at 300m and 600m there which might be of some help. Also, every time I've shot at Warminster with them, there have been one or two people zeroing at 200m whilst others are completing their HME tests. You'd need to be reasonably quick but it might give another zeroing option.

I'm also an ODRC member. Great bunch of people. Rogiet Moor booked for this weekend. I'm lucky with it being about half an hour from home but I've also shot with them at Sennybridge and Warminster.

If you're charging any kind of fee or using it for anything which could otherwise be considered commercial use, you may well need a licence to operate legally.

I've only ever enjoyed excellent service from this company and I always recommend them.

Cheers, guyys. I already have the required scale in my lab so I don't need to worry about that.

Could anyone who has purchased an autothrow and autotrickler together recently let me know what the door to doo cost is likely to be to the UK, assuming that I'm not one of the lucky ones whose parcel sneaks through customs un-noticed?