Shooting UK is your complete shooting resource. From gun reviews to shotgun licence and firearms certificate information, to clay pigeon shooting, game shooting, shooting lessons and gundog training.
Shooting Times reader Robert Smith, from Falkirk If ever a wake-up call was given, it must be the one recently issued by Natural England with the publication of the new General Licences for the control of certain birds in England from 1 January 2010 (News, 7 October).
The initial proposals included a ban on the sale of birds, including woodpigeon, shot under the terms of the General Licences system, and this was only retracted after representations by BASC.
However, it is my opinion that this was the thin end of a wedge being inserted to separate the sporting shooting of woodpigeon from true, legitimate crop protection activities. It is widely recognised that an industry surrounding the sporting shooting of woodpigeon has developed in the UK under the guise of crop protection.
The reason given for proposing this piece of legislation in the first place was to avoid encouraging a trade that might result in people killing more birds than is strictly necessary to resolve the problems the licences are issued to deal with (News, 7 October).
How can anyone justify shooting large bags of woodpigeon on set-aside, stubbles, failed crops and in areas where there are no arable crops after reading a statement like that?
While many good arguments can be made to keep woodpigeon control under the present system, a great many arguments can equally be made against many of the shooting methods currently used under the label of crop protection.
I have shot woodpigeon over the past five decades and, in that time, I have witnessed great advances in farming methods and machinery, as well as the development of many excellent bird-scaring devices. We should not be complacent and assume that we can carry on as we have since 1981, bearing in mind that the woodpigeon is, in fact, a protected bird.
In the light of the recent high-profile cases of pigeon shooters being arrested (News, 19 August and 30 September), I feel that it is only a matter of time before some knowledgeable officer or prosecutor questions the legality of what the shooters were doing if not actually shooting over crops. In the Shooting Times debate on 20 March 2008, I stated that woodpigeon should be added to the quarry list and I gave many valid reasons for my stance. The only change I would make to that statement now is that the woodpigeon must be added to the quarry list if we are to continue to enjoy the wonderful sport it provides.
Gareth Cole I was appointed as the first-ever poaching priority officer for England and Wales on 10 September. I will be acting as the principal point of contact in co-ordinating investigations into poaching crimes across English and Welsh police forces as part of the Government funded National Wildlife Crime Unit (NWCU) based in Scotland.
The new position is being funded by the Environment Agency, BASC and the Deer Initiative through the Partnership for Action Against Wildlife (PAW) coalition.
The number of poaching incidents being reported has risen significantly in recent times. For example, the NWCU witnessed a 79 per cent increase in reports of hare poaching in the past year. There has also been a rise in reports of deer poaching.
There is already a network of wildlife crime officers spread throughout the 43 police forces in England and Wales, which is responsible for investigating wildlife and environmental crime. The challenge now is for the NWCU and the national police forces to work in partnership to share knowledge and advice on approaches to tackling poaching and other wildlife crime.
As poaching priority officer, my main objectives are to:
- Offer advice and guidance to enforcement agencies with regard to poaching incidents. This could include assessment of initial evidence and complaints, advice on appropriate legislation and about the points of law required to bring a case to court.
- Assist in identifying and locating appropriate expert witnesses.
- Advise on scenes of crime and forensic examinations.
- Provide a specialist point of contact for all enforcement officers in England and Wales.
- Maintain a network of contacts within law enforcement agencies who will aim to reduce levels of poaching offences at a national and regional level.
- Raise awareness of poaching crimes among the general public.
Deer poaching incidents increase every year at this time, peaking in the weeks before Christmas. This is because a fair proportion of the poached venison is traded illegally via the “back door” of a small number of dubious pubs, butchers and restaurants to satisfy the Christmas market. What really concerns me is the cruelty of the methods used by poachers, the associated criminality and the lack of standards in terms of game meat handling.
In addition, estates lose valuable stalking fees and revenue if they suffer poaching. Poachers target deer indiscriminately and, as an example, will have no respect for the respective females of the species with dependent or suckling young.
Associated serious issues are threats to or intimidation of farmers and keepers, and damage to signs, gates, fences and crops.
We would urge all legitimate purchasers of venison to ask for the source of the meat they are buying. Lawful gamedealers and butchers will be only too proud to boast of the quality of legitimately sourced venison.
Have your say: if you have a view on a current news topic, send it, in no more than 500 words, to selena_masson@ipcmedia.com.
Have your say: if you have a view on a current news topic, send it, in no more than 500 words, to selena_masson@ipcmedia.com.
Douglas McAdam The idea that stalking should be cheaper and more widely available is not a new one. This recently reported proposal (News, 7 October)comes from the MacMillan report Conservation with a Gun published last year and is based on data that goes back five years. It presumes a problem exists when, in fact, Scotland’s red deer numbers are largely in balance. Yes, there remain too many deer in some places, but there are too few in others. What is certain is that we have all become much better at managing impacts where and when they occur, and the mantra that there are too many deer is one that should be buried once and for all.
As for broadening participation in stalking, considerable good work by the Scottish Country Sports Tourism Group (SCSTG) is attracting new blood both from the UK and overseas. As a sport and a necessary management practice, stalking is neither elitist nor expensive. Anyone who holds a firearms certificate, has the necessary equipment and, most importantly, has the proper training and permissions, can go stalking, and they do.
It is this “voluntary” sector that the MacMillan report has chosen largely to ignore, focusing instead on estate owners, their families and top-end clients. Made up of skilled men and women of all backgrounds, the voluntary sector covers leased stalking to individuals who effectively supplement the efforts of the estate stalker and comprise a now significant component
of the deer management capability in Scotland. They work with private estates and public and non-governmental organisation landowners such as Forestry Commission Scotland. It is a sector that needs encouragement through better support, promotion and recognition. More private and Government effort and resources should go into facilitating greater accessibility and voluntary attainment of Deer Management Qualifications levels 1 and 2 and continuing professional development. It is important to avoid mandatory regulation and other barriers to entry that the proposed Wildlife and Natural Environment Bill could potentially introduce.
But should the hind cull be opened up to provide a budget stalking experience? Estate stalkers work hard and often in the worst conditions to achieve their targets. The prospect of short winter days accompanying new recreational stalkers would interfere significantly with this. Furthermore, there are issues relating to deer welfare and safety, which make introducing inexperienced sportsmen and women to the hind cull at this time not a viable option.
There certainly is a place for new entrants to deer management and to stalking. Scottish stalking positively welcomes enthusiastic men and women of all backgrounds wanting that experience, but not as the solution to an imaginary problem.
Have your say: if you have a view on a current news topic, send it, in no more than 500 words, to selena_masson@ipcmedia.com.
Have your say: if you have a view on a current news topic, send it, in no more than 500 words, to selena_masson@ipcmedia.com.
Albie Fox - The Sportsman's Association spokesman First, let me reiterate The Sportsman’s Association’s stance on the Olympic clayshooting at Woolwich. We fully support our shooting sportsmen and women and encourage everyone to support them in order that they are able to compete successfully at the Olympics. We are, however, against UK shooters and judges supporting the infrastructure needed to run the games if they take place at Woolwich.
The latest fiasco, the discovery of the need to erect a 62ft-high ballistic screen, has added to the growing list of reasons not to hold the Olympic clayshooting at Woolwich Barracks. The Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) emphatically stated on its website that the Royal Artillery Barracks will provide an appropriate backdrop for shooting events for both Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2012. That is, however, no longer true.
On the 18 September, The Daily Telegraph revealed that this iconic backdrop will now be a ballistic screen that will stretch across the shotgun range to prevent lead pellets falling on nearby homes.
This controversial screen is not guaranteed to achieve its aim, however. If any other organisation submitted plans for a shooting range with the criteria adopted by the ODA, it would be laughed out of court by the authorities. The normal rules that apply are being twisted for the ODA. I am shocked that the Health and Safety Executive is allowing this. Once more, it is one rule for the Government and another for law-abiding shooters.
The Woolwich shooting range has problems that would not occur if the shooting events were to take place at Bisley. The screen is a waste of taxpayers’ money. It would be better if the additional money it is costing was put towards training our shooters for the games. The loss of the “iconic background” should have brought the ODA to its senses and prompted it to agree to move the event to another location, but I am afraid it has not.
Unless a miracle of common sense happens, we will have a much devalued shooting competition at an unsuitable venue, we will lose the advantage of having a home range for our marksmen to practice on, and we will end up with substandard ranges, which will inhibit shooting performances. Furthermore, despite claims to the contrary, there will be no legacy from the £42million needed to build the Woolwich ranges.
So, what can we shooters get out of this fiasco? The answer is nothing, unless we protest and the only way to make a meaningful protest is to refuse to man the shooting events at the Olympic Games, so that the authorities are forced to call in foreign labour. The resulting embarrassment will generate the publicity needed to help us put our case forward. Then, and only then, will the Government listen.
Our shooting organisations are sleepwalking into the oblivion of shooting sports. This international event is our last chance to make clear that ours is a legitimate sport and that we will not be treated like second-class citizens.
Have your say: if you have a view on a current news topic, send it, in no more than 500 words, to selena_masson@ipcmedia.com.
Comment and opinion on country and field sports and countryside events and issues
07th October 09:
30th September 09:
08th September 09:
02nd September 09:
19th August 09:
19th August 09:
18th August 09:
05th August 09:
Save up to 31% on a subscription to Shooting Times & Country Magazine, subscribe today and perfect gift this Christmas.
