BASC Conflict of interest

CWMMAN3738

Well-Known Member
Having read many posts in BASC's introduction to SD about freeloading dose the membership not feel that it is wrong for the Vice President of BASC to be a consultant to the countryside Alliance, which is in direct competition with BASC, this seems potentially to be a conflict of interests to me?
Please no BASC bashes this is a question not a bandwagon to get on!
Graham Downing
Counsellor | UK
Graham Downing is a lifelong field sportsman. A keen rough-shooter since his early teens, he is both an active game shooter and a passionate wildfowler and deer stalker. Graham hunts waterfowl throughout Britain and manages muntjac, fallow and roe deer in the East of England, travelling to Scotland to stalk red deer on the hill.
A Vice President of the British Association for Shooting and Conservation, an officer of the British Shooting Sports Council and Shooting Consultant to the Countryside Alliance, he has been involved with the representation of shooting sports in the UK for nearly 30 years. He writes regularly for The Field, Shooting Times and other shooting magazines, is editor of the British Deer Society’s journal, Deer and has written a number of books on shooting and deer stalking.
Graham is married with three children and lives on his own small farm in Suffolk which he manages for wildlife and conservation.


 
I am a member of both and don't see it as a conflict. On occasions I have thought (and it sometimes comes up in the various publications) that perhaps it would be more productive if all the organisations joined. However on other occasions they have concentrated on such different things that I can see why they have remained separate. I don't necessarily think its accurate to see them solely as competitors. I use BASC for shooting services and I support CA in their campaign to repeal the hunting ban.
 
What conflict is there, as said above BASC is mainly about shooting, where as the CA has a far wider remit,
 
Graham is a field sportsman at hart so its a good step to unite our sport and make it stronger,
 
Are you mixing up the CA and LACS :)

But seriously I see mo conflict of interest, on the contrary i see it as possibly mutually beneficial to both organisations.
 
I have been a member of the GWCT, CA and BASC for about 25 years, although I did take a sabbatical from the CA when the hunting debate was in full cry, because I did not agree with the targeting of shooting in some instances to defend hunting, but they have moved on so I am a member again. I don’t hunt and I never will but I support a person’s rights to go hunting if they want to. More recently I have joined the NGO.

Graham has been a BASC member for many decades, he has been a member of BASC staff in the past, and he wrote our Centenary History book. Remember a vice presidency is an Honour awarded and not an ex-officio staff or council post. I can assure you Graham is very pro BASC and very professional in his consultancy role with the CA.

Several ex members of BASC staff now work for the CA and one for the NGO. An ex BFSS press man is now part of the BASC team. That’s not too surprising a there is only a small pool of people in our field sports industry as it were so there is bound to be a bit of mixing

There is no conflict of interest at all, and although the CA have been targeting shooters almost exclusively for membership in the last three years, judging by their marketing campaign; as has been said their remit is very broad. It has been since they changed from the BFSS to the CA. Their remit covers a broad church of issues from hunting to broadband, post offices, fly tipping, the list goes on.

Yes BASC will always focus on shooting and the key features that support shooting such as gundogs, shoot management, conservation and so on, but there is room for more than one organisation, especially those who support and promote other field sports, but increasingly we will be working together more effectively I feel.

Thanks for raising the point, but as I say there really is no conflict

My regards to all

David
 
Now there is a good response from BASC, well said David. If someone is stating there is a conflict, then they should really put the meat on the bones, so to speak
 
Well said David I also am a member of both but asked after having read some of the posts in your inro as explained and the way the CA target shooters for membership but also feel that any unity is a good ting within our community but as I had been asked thought I'd grab my balls, take cover and ask the question:scared:, towhich you provided a very eloquent response, thanks.
I have been a member of the GWCT, CA and BASC for about 25 years, although I did take a sabbatical from the CA when the hunting debate was in full cry, because I did not agree with the targeting of shooting in some instances to defend hunting, but they have moved on so I am a member again. I don’t hunt and I never will but I support a person’s rights to go hunting if they want to. More recently I have joined the NGO.

Graham has been a BASC member for many decades, he has been a member of BASC staff in the past, and he wrote our Centenary History book. Remember a vice presidency is an Honour awarded and not an ex-officio staff or council post. I can assure you Graham is very pro BASC and very professional in his consultancy role with the CA.

Several ex members of BASC staff now work for the CA and one for the NGO. An ex BFSS press man is now part of the BASC team. That’s not too surprising a there is only a small pool of people in our field sports industry as it were so there is bound to be a bit of mixing

There is no conflict of interest at all, and although the CA have been targeting shooters almost exclusively for membership in the last three years, judging by their marketing campaign; as has been said their remit is very broad. It has been since they changed from the BFSS to the CA. Their remit covers a broad church of issues from hunting to broadband, post offices, fly tipping, the list goes on.

Yes BASC will always focus on shooting and the key features that support shooting such as gundogs, shoot management, conservation and so on, but there is room for more than one organisation, especially those who support and promote other field sports, but increasingly we will be working together more effectively I feel.

Thanks for raising the point, but as I say there really is no conflict

My regards to all

David
 
So why cant all the so called shooting organisations join forces to make one large so called voice of shooting etc etc etc...if there's no conflict of interest.

Just a question.
 
So why cant all the so called shooting organisations join forces to make one large so called voice of shooting etc etc etc...if there's no conflict of interest.

Just a question.

Jager, the standard response is that they all have slightly different remits or agendae, but work with the overarching/umbrella org in Europe - FACE
 
Jager, the standard response is that they all have slightly different remits or agendae, but work with the overarching/umbrella org in Europe - FACE

Yep I get that but we are only part of Europe when it suits...wonder how much Buerocratic bull*hit firearms owners have to put up with in Europe.
 
The President of BASC has leased a good portion of his land and buildings at the Hirsel to the Co-Op group - one of the most rabidly anti-shooting & anti-fieldsports businesses in the country.

Conflict of interest? I'd say so...
 
The President of BASC has leased a good portion of his land and buildings at the Hirsel to the Co-Op group - one of the most rabidly anti-shooting & anti-fieldsports businesses in the country.

Conflict of interest? I'd say so...

​But they are still a nice bunch of chaps!

I should add...it's not a conflict of interest because they say it's not.
 
Last edited:
Having read many posts in BASC's introduction to SD about freeloading dose the membership not feel that it is wrong for the Vice President of BASC to be a consultant to the countryside Alliance, which is in direct competition with BASC, this seems potentially to be a conflict of interests to me?
Please no BASC bashes this is a question not a bandwagon to get on!
Graham Downing
Counsellor | UK
Graham Downing is a lifelong field sportsman. A keen rough-shooter since his early teens, he is both an active game shooter and a passionate wildfowler and deer stalker. Graham hunts waterfowl throughout Britain and manages muntjac, fallow and roe deer in the East of England, travelling to Scotland to stalk red deer on the hill.
A Vice President of the British Association for Shooting and Conservation, an officer of the British Shooting Sports Council and Shooting Consultant to the Countryside Alliance, he has been involved with the representation of shooting sports in the UK for nearly 30 years. He writes regularly for The Field, Shooting Times and other shooting magazines, is editor of the British Deer Society’s journal, Deer and has written a number of books on shooting and deer stalking.
Graham is married with three children and lives on his own small farm in Suffolk which he manages for wildlife and conservation.


I don't really consider BASC and the CA to be in direct competition with each other, as a member of both and also the BDS each of these organisations carry out slightly different roles albeit with some overlap in what they do. What I would wish all of them to do is liaise with each other to present a strong united front on issues in which their members have a common interest. atb Tim
 
The varying organisations all have their own individuality but hopefully all pull together towards a common goal. From time to time some seem hellbent on objecting to the direction or activity of others and worse still ocassionally spout about it in public. This is counterproductive and divisive and no doubt gives great glee to our opponents.
Having one man representing two organisations in no way seems a conflict of interest to me, in fact quite the opposite.
Rather than one big umbrella organisation, which in an ideal world would be the way forward, but in the real world would be a serious source of argument, I would propose a "Forum" where all the main organisations meet on a regular basis and be honest and open as to their future objectives. This might save dirty linen being aired in public and also streamline efforts and achieve better use of resources than two groups persuing the same agenda.
There will never be a total agreement between the varying bodies but if they all supported the Forum then a more unified and stronger representation when threats to our sport arise would be possible.
 
Having read many posts in BASC's introduction to SD about freeloading dose the membership not feel that it is wrong for the Vice President of BASC to be a consultant to the countryside Alliance, which is in direct competition with BASC, this seems potentially to be a conflict of interests to me?

Unless you're suggesting that, as an individual, you can only belong to one country sports organisation why would there be a conflict of interest?

I happen to belong to BASC, BDS, CA, GWCT, SACS and the S&TA. Does that mean I somehow have a conflict of interest? No, what it means is that I will defend our sports and pastimes through whatever political, financial and practical means I can.

The reality is that the more people who belong to multiple organisations the better. The last thing we need in fieldsports is the internecine warfare born of "single-issue" bigots who would sacrifice another sport just to protect their own.

willie_gunn
 
I don't see anything wrong with being in both and having an influence on both .The conflicts of interest i worry about are the ones that can have a major influence on legislation.
 
Back
Top