Behind the license revocation

[Plecotus]

3 minutes ago, drum said:

It was Packham and co who triggered this purely to cause as much upset to the game shooting industry as possible.Why do you think they did it at nesting time?

 

 

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. 

[Plecotus]

2 hours ago, Bob57 said:

Thanks for the reply Pete, so really, grouse shooting shouldn't be a problem with you then?

 

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. 

[Bob57]

1 minute ago, Plecotus said:

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

Yeah you might be right, but not for the grouse , and it probably wouldn't be standing for too long before the loggers start chopping it down for timber.

[Malxwal]

3 minutes ago, Plecotus said:

 

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. 

Interests...most things shooting...but not in a positive way by the sounds of it. More raptors are killed by wind turbines and silly birder tags than by rogue keepers.

[drum]

4 minutes ago, Plecotus said:

 

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. 

I had already read it earlier in the week thanks.Didnt feel the urge to read it again.

 

[Plecotus]

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

 

 

[One on top of two]

14 minutes ago, Plecotus said:

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

It was the Scottish who cut most of the bloody lot down There has been a long history of deforestation in Scotland, and clearance of the land began in Neolithic times. Trees were cut for fuel and timber, and to convert the land to agriculture.Over the centuries, the forest shrank as the human population grew, and some parts were deliberately burned to eradicate ‘vermin’ such as the wolf. 

 

[drum]

6 minutes ago, Plecotus said:

 

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. 

Very few prosecutions in fairness.Do you think your friend packham should be prosecuted for his persecution of kestrels?

[Plecotus]

1 minute ago, drum said:

I had already read it earlier in the week thanks.Didnt feel the urge to read it again.

 

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

Enough.  Pub.

[drum]

Are you now saying that packham isnt trying to disrupt the game shooting industry?

Priceless.

[Bob57]

3 minutes ago, Plecotus said:

 

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. 

Yes , but that should be down to the government to make the killing of raptors a VERY punishable offence for the man responsible, including all the keepers on that estate,and landowner, hammer them, then maybe everyone could get on with managing without conflict, but I very much doubt it as there'll allways be people opposed to shooting and countryside sports.

 

[sam39]

We have our issues in commercial game shooting that are doing us no favours. Some shoots are releasing too many pheasants.The big bags have to stop. And don’t get me on about the “high bird specialist” shot gun (a close range weapon) give em all a 16 bore and under an oz of shot, 1/4 and 1/2

I'm involved in running a shoot and I farm, I disagree completely that pigeon and Corvid shooting needs any control, I cant stand Packam ( but that is irrelevant) I do see so many people shooting that  I wish had his bird identification skill. Unfortunately his agenda is to ban field-sports and self promotion, he is irrational. With  his understanding of the countryside you would think he might have a better grasp on how it should be managed. 

Country folk are doing a pretty good job of it. Let’s rein things in a bit give the antis nothing and our grandchildren will be able to carry on.

[Shuggy]

5 hours ago, Plecotus said:

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

 

 

Hmm, nice try, but the first and third paper are written by the RSPB, one of the most vehemently anti-shooting lobby groups in the UK. The second paper is written by the Hutton Institute, who conduct research for the Scottish Government, the most consistently anti-gun administration in the UK. Let’s see some references from genuinely independent academic sources please.

[Chanonry]

8 hours ago, Shuggy said:

Hmm, nice try, but the first and third paper are written by the RSPB, one of the most vehemently anti-shooting lobby groups in the UK. The second paper is written by the Hutton Institute, who conduct research for the Scottish Government, the most consistently anti-gun administration in the UK. Let’s see some references from genuinely independent academic sources please.

That's just lazy thinking at best but more likely you are guilty of what you accuse them of - Bias.

They have different views from you so you dismiss their position out of hand. Maybe they hold their views after having done their research ?

Who says the Scottish Government is the "most" "anti-gun" administration. Thats a subjective view that you are using to casually dismiss relevant research. 

Try reading it then pick holes in it.

Genuinely independent academic source - what a wonderfully naive concept ...

[Popsbengo]

It seems to me that both sides of the argument on this forum demonstrate a distaste for the excesses of big game shoots.

One of the problems is that there's too many people who just treat birds as targets to be shot for money.   Maybe if that was tackled we would have less criticism from the anti shooting lobby?

[Plecotus]

8 hours ago, Shuggy said:

Hmm, nice try, but the first and third paper are written by the RSPB, one of the most vehemently anti-shooting lobby groups in the UK. The second paper is written by the Hutton Institute, who conduct research for the Scottish Government, the most consistently anti-gun administration in the UK. Let’s see some references from genuinely independent academic sources please.

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?

[Plecotus]

14 hours ago, Malxwal said:

Interests...most things shooting...but not in a positive way by the sounds of it. More raptors are killed by wind turbines and silly birder tags than by rogue keepers.

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

[Malxwal]

We all need to stick together on all aspects of shooting. Those who are blinkered enough to think that a ban on game shooting will not in any way lead to a ban on them playing with their black rifles or their ten different guns at the range are in need of a reality check.

Yes, there are issues within driven pheasant and partridge shooting, but they lie in getting the game to the table, the actual numbers shot on a day are irrelevant. The releasing of reared birds is no more harmful to environment in the greater scheme of things than a  poultry farm, where the birds live in much worse conditions, even free range.

[Bob57]

5 minutes ago, Popsbengo said:

It seems to me that both sides of the argument on this forum demonstrate a distaste for the excesses of big game shoots.

One of the problems is that there's too many people who just treat birds as targets to be shot for money.   Maybe if that was tackled we would have less criticism from the anti shooting lobby?

Big bags of game doesn't bother me, it's how those birds are treated in there upbringing and demise, and dealt with at the end of the day that matters, why should it be any different than a slaughter house killing 3 or 300 animals in a day, similar thing, except one involves people with an expensive shotgun and plenty of money or someone who's saved all year for his one big day!!

And when you drive along a road beside a big shoot that releases lots of pheasant and partridge, and see the road kill, how can that not benefit the kites, buzzards, crows, magpies, badgers etc that eat meat, and on the shoot all the food fed and maize strips,cover crops etc, that help all the small birds through winter and nurture a healthy rodent population, which in turn leads to more owls, it's all just on a different scale but the same benefit for all wildlife as long as the keeper respects the law!!

 I bet no anti would drive along a badger/fox splattered road saying to his family "look at all the dead foxes and badgers,there's obviously too many around here".

[sam39]

Yes I agree we need to stick together on this and Yes a well run shoot brings huge benefits to the country side and other species. Much of our green and pleasant land is there because of shooting and hunting. 

I just think the big days are bad PR. Who on earth needs to shoot that many pheasants in one day........yes I have been on a few big days myself in the past........ not any more. I shoot a fair bit and pick up, it would be a good start to see more guns taking a brace home at the end of the day. Better still putting 50 in your freezer at the end of the season to see you through. I know for a fact not many do

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Malxwal]

20 minutes ago, sam39 said:

Yes I agree we need to stick together on this and Yes a well run shoot brings huge benefits to the country side and other species. Much of our green and pleasant land is there because of shooting and hunting. 

I just think the big days are bad PR. Who on earth needs to shoot that many pheasants in one day........yes I have been on a few big days myself in the past........ not any more. I shoot a fair bit and pick up, it would be a good start to see more guns taking a brace home at the end of the day. Better still putting 50 in your freezer at the end of the season to see you trough. I know for a fact not many do

 

 

 

 

 

 

Personally, a 150 bird day about twice a year is my stretch.  I beat a lot more, and at that shoot the surplus is breasted out and the meat used in pies to feed the guns and beaters. But if other folk can afford to pay to shoot 500 or 1000 birds in a day, I have no problem, as long as the meat goes into the food chain. I really cannot see the pleasure in such a day myself, as I cannot imagine the birds would be presented as fair or challenging ?

Lets not get into the politics of envy, if it were not for the great capitalist world we live in, we would all mostly be getting hung as poachers for the taking of any of the Kings game. Always seems to be the middle classes who come away with the left wing holier than thou attitudes regarding the rich and what they get up to with their millions, when in fact they're not doing too bad out of the system.

[Bob57]

3 hours ago, sam39 said:

Yes I agree we need to stick together on this and Yes a well run shoot brings huge benefits to the country side and other species. Much of our green and pleasant land is there because of shooting and hunting. 

I just think the big days are bad PR. Who on earth needs to shoot that many pheasants in one day........yes I have been on a few big days myself in the past........ not any more. I shoot a fair bit and pick up, it would be a good start to see more guns taking a brace home at the end of the day. Better still putting 50 in your freezer at the end of the season to see you trough. I know for a fact not many do

 

 

 

 

 

 

So you agree we all need to stick together👍 ,you're a shooting man, but you don't like big bags being shot, because "who on earth needs to shoot that many pheasants in one day",even though you've been there and done that😯. 

How do you know for a fact that not many people take home a brace or fill there freezer with pheasant and partridge? Do you visit every shoot in the country?

And you want give the antis nothing!!!

[sam39]

1 hour ago, Bob57 said:

So you agree we all need to stick together👍 ,you're a shooting man, but you don't like big bags being shot, because "who on earth needs to shoot that many pheasants in one day",even though you've been there and done that😯. 

How do you know for a fact that not many people take home a brace or fill there freezer with pheasant and partridge? Do you visit every shoot in the country?

And you want give the antis nothing!!!

Yes, hands up, I have been there and done that but have you not found as you get older you get wiser you learn a few things in life.

I have kept a game book since I was 14 (first entry 1 pigeon with my 20 bore) I could tell you exactly where I have visited, the bag and what fun we had but I wont bore you with that, I've been about a bit there are several of them.   

not giving the antis anything, as a group we can sharpen up a bit   

[Moorlander]

8 hours ago, sam39 said:

Yes I agree we need to stick together on this and Yes a well run shoot brings huge benefits to the country side and other species. Much of our green and pleasant land is there because of shooting and hunting. 

I just think the big days are bad PR. Who on earth needs to shoot that many pheasants in one day........yes I have been on a few big days myself in the past........ not any more. I shoot a fair bit and pick up, it would be a good start to see more guns taking a brace home at the end of the day. Better still putting 50 in your freezer at the end of the season to see you through. I know for a fact not many do

 

 

 

 

 

 

Running a commercial shoot is very expensive and most dont break even , more of a prestige / hobby thing for many owners , those who need to make money have to have big bag days or they wouldnt even cover the beaters fee and lunch let alone the rest or the overheads. 

[Elwood]

54 minutes ago, Moorlander said:

Running a commercial shoot is very expensive and most dont break even , more of a prestige / hobby thing for many owners , those who need to make money have to have big bag days or they wouldnt even cover the beaters fee and lunch let alone the rest or the overheads. 

Incorrect I'm afraid.