BASC, nobs, sacs, that is the question.

[willie_gunn]

Cancelled my BDS membership a couple of years ago as I couldn't see what they actually did for me.

Maybe you'd have been better asking "what they actually did for deer"!

 

[willie_gunn]

Expecting the different organisations to amalgamate is unrealistic - a quick read of this thread will show you that. There is relatively little overlap between the organisations, at least when it comes to their primary objectives:

BASC - sporting shooters
BDS - deer welfare
CA - field sports, primarily hunting
GWCT - game shooting and particularly scientific research
NGO - gamekeepers
NRA - target shooters
SACS - all country sports, primarily in Scotland

So BASC, GWCT, NGO and SACS would be the most likely candidates to merge - and I can't see that happening as the NGO and SACS largely grew out of dissatisfaction with BASC!

If the CA and BASC merged - which has been often mooted in the past - the hunting contingent would doubtless go off and form their own organisation (we could call it BFSS!) as they wouldn't want to be subservient to the shooting contingent.

The BDS is a mix of people with an interest in deerand deer welfare - not just stalkers - so they won't want to be seen as joined at the hip to a shooting organisation.

The NRA don't really seem to care about sporting shooting.

NGO and SACS anyone?

The enmity at an organisational level is frequently only matched by that at the individual member level.

 

[PointBlank]

Maybe you'd have been better asking "what they actually did for deer"!

I don't have an overriding concern of deer welfare as they are hardly an endangered species, it's as hypocritical as if you were a member of a pheasant welfare charity because you love driven days!

 

[willie_gunn]

I don't have an overriding concern of deer welfare as they are hardly an endangered species, it's as hypocritical as if you were a member of a pheasant welfare charity because you love driven days!

Then both you and the BDS are better off without each other.

 

[countrryboy]

Possibly not as relevant to a stalking site, but any gameshots/keepers really should be a member of GWCT.

They offer no ins benefits, but are the only organisation (charity) that is actively carrying out scientific research into game management and predator control and the benefits of both. To be fair most of thier findings are common sense, less predators= more prey, but sadly lackiing in a lot of academics nowadays who make the rules.

So when anti's are trying to ban something its there figures u turn to to defend shooting. If it was not for them i'd bet snaring would be banned in Scotland.
On a wider note think they are 1 of the few orgs researching alternative traps to the Fenn MK4 (probably the most popular trap in use for stoats, rats etc) as it could be outlawed in the very near future, with no real alternative yet

 

[McKenzie]

Then both you and the BDS are better off without each other.

Couldn't agree more.

I'm a member of BDS & GWCT because I care about the welfare of deer, game birds & the welfare of the 'countryside' & wildlife at large and want to put something, however small, back.

I'm a member of SGA & BASC because I require insurance cover & because they do fight for our corner when required. I also take the BDS insurance as extends to dealing with RTA's if required.

 

[Taff]

Can someone tell me how the BDS affects deer welfare on most private land within the UK, or even on FC managed and what percentage of deer shooters are members.

 

[willie_gunn]

Can someone tell me how the BDS affects deer welfare on most private land within the UK, or even on FC managed and what percentage of deer shooters are members.

Err....perhaps through their research: Current projects

Their training: Training Home

Their support for Best Practice: DMQ - Setting the standard for wild deer management

Their work in support of studying RTA's: Advice for drivers

Their work on education and deer distribution: Education printable resources

Regarding the proportion of BDS who are shooters, they ran a survery recently about exactly that, but I don't have it immediately to hand. I'll try to dig it out later.

 

[PointBlank]

Then both you and the BDS are better off without each other.

I think you misunderstand me, I make numerous donations to different charities including animal welfare ones, but it doesn't mean I have to pin their colours to my chest.
I just struggled to see what relevance the BDS was to me so I have to agree with you!

 

[Monkey Spanker]

Same here. My opinion is if most of these organisations truly cared about being the strongest voice for shooting they would amalgamate as being in smaller groups trying to poach each other's members isn't going to do anyone any good other than their Chief Executive.
I am with BASC because they have always seemed the most professional offering to represent shooters, that is in addition to me having separate commercial insurance. Cancelled my BDS membership a couple of years ago as I couldn't see what they actually did for me.

The BDS won't really do anything for you, as you are not a deer! However, they can help you with training and advice as to how to become a better deer manager in the interests of deer welfare.
Here's what they do cut and pasted from their website:
We at BDS:

• support academic research into deer welfare and habitat
• provide high quality education and training to ensure that deer can be effectively managed
• campaign on a range of deer welfare issues working closely with other countryside and animal welfare organisations
• advise government and key public bodies on deer-related issues
• lobby for a thriving and sustainable wild deer population
• offer members a tailored public liability insurance package covering a wide range of recreational countryside and wildlife-related activities
• publish ‘Deer’ magazine, the only UK journal devoted solely to deer

I would also argue that they are amalgamated much more than many people realise. They do offer pretty much the same training packages which is in some way a good thing for the candidates as it offers healthy competition which keeps costs at a realistic level rather than one body commanding the entire market. They also join forces quite often. The annual stalkers evening that you have attended over at Great Welnetham is a joint effort hosted by the DI, BASC and the BDS. I believe these are now being held around the country. They will probably never be able to amalgamate completely, but should undoubtedly speak with the same voice against certain issues.
One thing is for certain though. Any organisation that supports shooting, conservation and deer welfare should be given our support! There is so much bickering and in-fighting over petty arguments and spilt milk from almost 30 years ago that we almost do the work of the anti's for them! Not everyone can afford to be a member of everything, and some will only be doing it for the insurance and go for the cheapest provider, but there is no need to slate the other providers along the way as we should all surely share a common cause?
MS

 

[enfieldspares]

One point I will make. A charity, by law, cannot campaign politically for law changes. Despite what the RSPCA may try to achive. So if you are wanting to pay money to a group, organisation, that is actively and effectively lobby for no further changes in our gun laws then joining any organisation that is a charity is a waste of your money. Both BDS and the British NRA being charities. I have always felt that by doing so the British NRA has effectively rendered itself impotent.

 

[willie_gunn]

One point I will make. A charity, by law, cannot campaign politically for law changes. Despite what the RSPCA may try to achive. So if you are wanting to pay money to a group, organisation, that is actively and effectively lobby for no further changes in our gun laws then joining any organisation that is a charity is a waste of your money. Both BDS and the British NRA being charities. I have always felt that by doing so the British NRA has effectively rendered itself impotent.

Are you sure?

Speaking out: guidance on campaigning and political activity by charities - GOV.UK

As I read it:

> A charity may engage in campaigning and political activities so long as those activities are in support of it's charitable purpose.

> Charities can also campaign for changes in the law, or to ensure existing laws are observed, so long as these laws support the charities purpose.

But:

> A charity cannot be set up solely for political purposes, and nor can it fund or support a political party, a candidate or a politician.

So the RSPCA, who state their purpose as being "to end cruelty and promote kindness to animals and to alleviate their suffering", may be justified in campaigning for changes in the law in support of that charitable purpose.

Similarly BDS would be justified in undertaking campaigning and political activities around deer welfare. But they would not be justified in campaigning or political lobbying around general matters of gun ownership.

As for the NRA.....you may well be right!

 

[enfieldspares]

Yes WG I fear I am. The NRA sacrificing some sort of short term benefit for long term detriment to its ability to have campaigned against the various gun bans we have had.....or to claim that it cannot do so. Personally the sooner shooting in the UK is rid of the NRA the better. But, of course, that will now never happened and in any case is too late. That boat sailed in the early 1990s when the NRA was financially "on its uppers" so to speak.

 

[willie_gunn]

Based on their magazine the NRA recently seems to be trying to change their image, though I am guessing that is as much because their core membership is dwindling through death from old age as it is with dissatisfaction. I fear it is too little, too late.

Although I am still a member it is only through inertia. With barely one trip per year to Bisley I can't see any reason to remain so, which I say with some sadness. As I've found since moving further afield, if you don't live within striking distance of Bisley and don't focus on target shooting, what is the point of being a member?

In other circumstances they could have become the major driving force for firearms owners of all disciplines in the UK. Instead they seem to be, like most of the accommodation at Bisley, a relic from the past.

 

[JabaliHunter]

Countryside Alliance is now a charity also. They definitely would not have gone down that road if it in anyway inhibited their campaigning ability.
Being a charity hasn't stopped the RSPCA either.