National wild venison standard

[User00038]

Everything from counting: Planning | Best Practice Guidance to drone survey: Deer Drone Surveys | BH Wildlife Consultancy. The latter being the most accurate technique.

Ha! You replied while I was editing mine... Sorry.

Depending on spp, a drone survey is not going to be within the reach of a single stalker/ landowner. What I was trying to get to was that none of this is easy for a single landholding - it requires co-operative action, with shared objectives.

And when the best practice days come up in anyone's locality, go to them and join in.

 

[DevonRedDeer]

Assuming we all join at an annual cost of about three million what’s in it for us its obvious what’s in it for the assurance company. Farmers were promised better prices for the red tractor assurance but it never materialised all it did was add to there production costs.

 

[wytonpjs]

We’re rapidly getting to the stage where the carcass of a wild shot deer is going to represent a potential cost.

Arguably, most small-scale deer stalkers running a food business have been there for a long time already, myself included

 

[Cris]

Sticking my neck out here, but do think that might be the aim?
The UK has a deer problem. Government realises that. Deer "management" on private land is all in the hands of part-time amateurs. Force those amateurs out of the picture and you're well on the way to controlling all deer management.....

So private land owners then would have limited choices to make and mostley at their cost.
1. Employ full time stalkers
2. Pay contractors
3. Do nothing
4. Lease the stalking to a handfull of pro stalkers that would not be able to cover all the ground!

Part time stalkers are an asset with many skilled and dedicated folks amongst them.

 

[big ears]

100+ posts in, onto 6 pages now. Obvious that the BASC and BDS reps in here are following this thread yet remain staunchly silent.

Possible reasons.

1. They don’t care about supporting amateur stalkers?

2.They are embarrassed that they have gone behind the backs of their members and proposed this without due consultation?

3. They see the opportunity to take over the majority of stalking and make a huge profit in the name if improving venison sales?

There may be more but I am totally bemused as to why they are so silent. Personally I think they are scared to comment because they are frightened of the response they might get.

Would love to be proved wrong.

BE

 

[Home Loader]

To be honest any standard/assurance scheme which is audited and advertised properly, can only give confidence to the buyers.
Rather than picking holes and looking for floors, how about looking for the positives, anything that has the potential to raise standards, within the industry is a good thing in my view.

The new grant schemes coming out regarding deer management, do require evidence to prove effort as part of the claim process, no evidence no money. This is the only way to pressure land owners at the moment. I went through 3 inspections last year, the RPA do look under every stone! I believe, that the first point of audit is the FC for both the deer and squirrel grants going forward.

As for all those who believe you can still make money out of deer, its a very fine line when you start culling enough to make a difference to the floral and diversity, and when you get to the point you think you can relax, you cannot. Then it becomes a cost job! It is part of proper land management which costs.

 

[StephenToast]

100+ posts in, onto 6 pages now. Obvious that the BASC and BDS reps in here are following this thread yet remain staunchly silent.

Possible reasons.

1. They don’t care about supporting amateur stalkers?

2.They are embarrassed that they have gone behind the backs of their members and proposed this without due consultation?

3. They see the opportunity to take over the majority of stalking and make a huge profit in the name if improving venison sales?

There may be more but I am totally bemused as to why they are so silent. Personally I think they are scared to comment because they are frightened of the response they might get.

Would love to be proved wrong.

BE

4. They aren't interested in wasting their time on the conspiracy theories of a handful of muppets who make up a tiny percentage of the UK's deer stalkers.

 

[Woodenbeam]

4. They aren't interested in wasting their time on the conspiracy theories of a handful of muppets who make up a tiny percentage of the UK's deer stalkers.

& I thought some of my comments could be sarkie

 

[sikamalc]

To be honest any standard/assurance scheme which is audited and advertised properly, can only give confidence to the buyers.
Rather than picking holes and looking for floors, how about looking for the positives, anything that has the potential to raise standards, within the industry is a good thing in my view.

The new grant schemes coming out regarding deer management, do require evidence to prove effort as part of the claim process, no evidence no money. This is the only way to pressure land owners at the moment. I went through 3 inspections last year, the RPA do look under every stone! I believe, that the first point of audit is the FC for both the deer and squirrel grants going forward.

As for all those who believe you can still make money out of deer, its a very fine line when you start culling enough to make a difference to the floral and diversity, and when you get to the point you think you can relax, you cannot. Then it becomes a cost job! It is part of proper land management which costs.

About right in my opinion. Nothing is set in stone, and I doubt the whole stalking world is about to collapse. As for major players not joining this thread, they are not duty bound to are they? Besides BDS being a CHARITY is not in a position to be part. It has to be impartial, but is there to give professional advice when asked.

 

[big ears]

About right in my opinion. Nothing is set in stone, and I doubt the whole stalking world is about to collapse. As for major players not joining this thread, they are not duty bound to are they? Besides BDS being a CHARITY is not in a position to be part. It has to be impartial, but is there to give professional advice when asked.

That’s fine Malcolm. If it is as you say then why are they not offering impartial advice on here to us who are very concerned about this AND have asked for their input right from the start of this thread?
Seems strange.

 

[devon deer stalker]

Charity or not, they, or any charity, are accountable for their actions.

 

[VSS]

As i see it ,it only applies to stalkers who supply to AGHEs, I supply direct to the public so can't see anything will change for stalkers who are presently registered with there local council and sell direct

Not so.
It applies to all stages of the food chain. Anyone who wants to sell venison to the nationally recognised standard, and use the logo on their products, would need to sign up.
So that includes stalkers who process and retail venison, even if only small quantities.

 

[User00038]

Not so.
It applies to all stages of the food chain. Anyone who wants to sell venison to the nationally recognised standard, and use the logo on their products, would need to sign up.
So that includes stalkers who process and retail venison, even if only small quantities.

The standard doesn't apply to stalkers who process the carcass themselves and sell direct. It does apply to those who send the carcass to an AGHE to process, pack and return the meat to the stalker to sell direct.

 

[VSS]

The standard doesn't apply to stalkers who process the carcass themselves and sell direct. It does apply to those who send the carcass to an AGHE to process, pack and return the meat to the stalker to sell direct.

Ah, I see that now in the flow diagram. It seems to contradict what's written earlier in the document.
But even so, it's not entirely clear, because a producer (stalker) can also be a processor, I presume?

Anyway, if your interpretation is correct, then this proposal even further disadvantages small-scale producers.

 

[sikamalc]

That’s fine Malcolm. If it is as you say then why are they not offering impartial advice on here to us who are very concerned about this AND have asked for their input right from the start of this thread?
Seems strange.

Why would they offer advice? What makes YOU or anyone think that a charity have ANY influence over any government proposals, or indeed anyone else who proposes something?
The only strange thing is you thinking they have anything to do with what is being proposed. Furthermore if they have it will be discussed I am sure, now the paper has been submitted. As I said nothing is set in stone.

The fact that I am one of the site owners and try to keep some order on here, which at times is like herding cats, does not carry any weight with any organisations. Although I have dealt with many over the years.

 

[sikamalc]

Charity or not, they, or any charity, are accountable for their actions.

Well you have never run a charity, that's obvious. All charities have to abide by charitable law, and are answerable to the charities commission. They are not allowed to become embroiled with politics and government policies. They are however allowed to be approached and asked for their advice and help.
The BDS is a not for profit organisation, BASC is a different matter and is NOT a charity.

 

[big ears]

Why would they offer advice? What makes YOU or anyone think that a charity have ANY influence over any government proposals, or indeed anyone else who proposes something?
The only strange thing is you thinking they have anything to do with what is being proposed. Furthermore if they have it will be discussed I am sure, now the paper has been submitted. As I said nothing is set in stone.

The fact that I am one of the site owners and try to keep some order on here, which at times is like herding cats, does not carry any weight with any organisations. Although I have dealt with many over the years.

Sorry Malcolm they have signed up to this and their name is clearly mentioned on it, you cannot say they are not involved with it.

As too are BASC, do you feel the same way about them? Are they allowed not to post as well for the same reasons?

This is a Stalking site which I accept can get unruly but numerous members have asked for a direct discourse with the BDS and BASC representatives on this site who are involved in this thread as they are endorsing comments.

Why is it wrong to ask them for a direct comment? And why is it wrong to ask the reason why, when they endorse some comments, to ask why they are NOT making any comments?

I thought this was an open forum to discuss all things Deer stalking related? Maybe I’m wrong?

BE

 

[User00038]

Ah, I see that now in the flow diagram. It seems to contradict what's written earlier in the document.
But even so, it's not entirely clear, because a producer (stalker) can also be a processor, I presume?

Anyway, if your interpretation is correct, then this proposal even further disadvantages small-scale producers.

Page 3 also refers "A supply chain can be made up of one, or all of the above but must pass through an AGHE to be certified as BQWV – see Annex 1."
I don't see the disadvantage really - small scale producers, who process themselves and sell direct have a personal relationship with the buyer, who would usually be the consumer. To my mind, that personal relationship is a key advantage.

An aspect not yet mentioned and as far as I can gather, is that producers of less than 300 carcasses do not need to be direct members audited by the certifying body. They would apply to be part of a Group membership, operated by another organization. Consequently the onus for setting out the policy and processes for meeting the standard would be carried out by the leading organization and passed down to the producer to comply with. The workload, inspection and auditing burden on the producer would be much less than for a direct member.

 

[sikamalc]

Sorry Malcolm they have signed up to this and their name is clearly mentioned on it, you cannot say they are not involved with it.

As too are BASC, do you feel the same way about them? Are they allowed not to post as well for the same reasons?

This is a Stalking site which I accept can get unruly but numerous members have asked for a direct discourse with the BDS and BASC representatives on this site who are involved in this thread as they are endorsing comments.

Why is it wrong to ask them for a direct comment? And why is it wrong to ask the reason why, when they endorse some comments, to ask why they are NOT making any comments?

I thought this was an open forum to discuss all things Deer stalking related? Maybe I’m wrong?

BE

I admit I have not had time to go through all of the paper, I do have a life outside of stalking and this site.

As I mentioned in my previous post, if they have it will be discussed. Nothing is set in stone as yet.
This is a public forum that anyone can read, therefore they may well comment later, whilst also approaching their members with their points. It is up to each organisation to comment or make a post.
Perhaps if you are a member of BASC or BDS you and any of their members should approach them direct ?

In my personal opinion, as with any food product, the UK expects and does produce some of the highest standards of food hygiene. And rightly so. Venison and dealing in game is no different to any other food source and should have the highest standards applied to it. You and I know that this in the past has been sadly lacking, and even now with Level 1 and 2 in place along with other food standards there are still carcasses being put through the food chain that fail by a long way. No doubt any new legislation will effect some people. It always does not matter what industry you are employed in.

I guess time will tell? But along with the FAC fiasco with most constabularies, and people still complaining they do not need Level 1 or 2 it is obvious that further legislation will come along. Some I agree with, this I will hold my council on for the moment.
As a side note my chiller and larder have passed with a grade 5, and was checked early this year, I do produce direct on a very limited basis, and sell on some carcasses to a friend who is a registered game dealer and also has a large farm shop. But the vast majority of my clients take their deer home for self consumption.

 

[75]

4. They aren't interested in wasting their time on the conspiracy theories of a handful of muppets who make up a tiny percentage of the UK's deer stalkers.

Whilst this is a bit tongue in cheek (probably only a bit!) there is some truth in it. Not so much the "handful of muppets" but more the way SD discussion always degenerates.

Someone from the FC made contact with me directly and I spoke to him earlier today. It wouldn't be appropriate to share the contents of a personal call but suffice to say that I feel a lot better after he took the time to speak to me. I've not got the answers I was looking for yet (highlighted earlier in the thread) and am still very much of the view that the current regs aren't enforced so what difference will a new standard make but I've hopefully now opened a dialogue with the FC contact who pulled the whole thing together. I'll feedback on this thread as and when I can.

Assuming it doesn't get locked by then as a result of a load of off topic bitching...