National wild venison standard

[GeorgeC]

At least BASC have come out and said it:

Agreed however this statement confuses this:

"Within the BQWV standard, BASC has created a group scheme to help reduce the costs and administrative burden on deer stalkers and managers. The scheme is aimed at those shooting up to 300 deer per year"

Or am I misreading it?

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Hi Conor

Seems like decisions have already been made.

Could you feedback on some questions please:

1. Who will do the annual assessments? and how much will they cost? Will they need to have formal National approval?
2. Which body is managing the audit / assessment system, content and feedback? and is there an appeal process?
3. Is the system built on the British Retail Consortium current system?
4. Are the detailed requirements regarding the audit going to be published? by this I mean questions, procedure requirements, auditor / producer interaction [day / night / stalk], if it a measure of hygiene [eg gralloching] what happens should the producer not be successful this day?
5. Why is non lead use a particular requirement when it is not currently banned? is it process supermarket or FC driven?
6. With this implementation, will the bodies driving this guarantee an improved price for the future? So that producers etc can see some pay back for their investment in the scheme.
7. How much are the true fees, and how long will you subsidise the smaller stalkers?
8. Before undertaking this change and the presumption that there will be an increase in sales of venison, what marketing was undertaken and is it available?

I'm sure there will be plenty of questions coming from others

Thanks

Thanks for the questions. I will pass these and any others to our deer team for consideration.

 

[devon deer stalker]

Thanks for the questions. I will pass these and any others to our deer team for consideration.

Firstly, thanks for finally posting.

If you read the thread, you will see our concerns.
But of course if a consultation had taken place back in May 2020, I'm not even sure this would of happened as we already have an acceptable system in place.

Might I ask why deer stalkers (the main producers) were not consulted back then?

Also I just read this on your link 'but the costs are reduced, with BASC undertaking much of the administrative work on behalf of members'
Interesting, so it's to attract new members to BASC as well?

 

[T.eddie]

I would have thought basc taking some of the cost is a benefit of being a large organisation with a little bit of support for its members

No difference to say the NGO offering courses at reduced prices for its members so not sure that can be used against them, in fact any org that signed up to it should do the same

 

[VSS]

Im going to produce a green deer sticker saying this venison is organic and naturally produced and certified by me, stick this to the 100 or so muntjac carcasses i dispatch each year and see if my sales go up, if they do ill start selling stickers on a roll to all stalkers to increase there sales

Nice idea, except it's not organic. So you would be in trouble for labelling it as such.

 

[VSS]

@Conor O'Gorman, can you please clarify whether a stalker who is also a processor (registered food business etc, but not an AGHE) and a retailer is eligible for this scheme?
I can see that, in the case of a chain consisting of more than one business, it is necessary for the product to pass through an AGHE, but the document is far from clear over what the situation is where the whole process is carried out "in house" without the product moving between different premises. There are several places where it appears to contradict itself.

I'm also puzzled about why this scheme has been launched as a "done deal", without consultation with grass-roots venison producers.

 

[fallow me]

Nice idea, except it's not organic. So you would be in trouble for labelling it as such.

Whoops, my mistake, replace with Wild, the consumer will love Wild and naturally produced,The green deer sticker will show its been culled ethically

 

[VSS]

Whoops, my mistake, replace with Wild, the consumer will love Wild and naturally produced,The green deer sticker will show its been culled ethically

Yep, the consumers love the story. All my packs of venison are labelled as "Ethical - Sustainable - Seasonal", and that certainly ticks the right boxes for a lot of people. Probably more so than "organic".

 

[308tikka]

Sorry agree let’s see ALL the details BUT let’s NOT allow it to be put into action before we ALL get a say on the matter.
Once started it will be like a snowball rolling down a snowy bank.

What we need is the organisations who have signed up to this without consulting their members to explain why.

Simply because they think they know better.

Possibly because the people that go on their courses are not that knowledgeable, havent had mentored training and are a cash cow? Which then skews the perception of the average hobby stalker....

I personally believe DSC2 is enough to show you know what youre on about - which is not to say that anyone with it knows everything or those without know nothing. Just a decent benchmark.

Effectively paying a membership fee to sell deer is absolutely not what is required to reduce numbers and will only - in my opinion - lead to large entities taking on land with contractors/ employees.

Plenty of charities and NGOs have good DMGs, as do MOD and other large landowners. There are multiple good models but requiring landowners (including the recalcitrant ones) to control deer numbers should be considered.

We all know of ‘pro’ stalkers or ‘lead bodies’ who use their land as a overstocked larder to guarantee a client a shot, especially with CWD, while they run around and nab surrounding permissions..... then dont manage it.

Until people get into the mindset deerstalking is not sport, but numbers management, this will continue. Until the overall herd is reduced to a manageable size I would personally suggest the following.

Muntjac: shoot on sight.
Fallow: Shoot on sight in season
CWD: Shoot on sight in season
Sika and sika hybrids: shoot on sight in season
Red and Roe: as native species, manage appropriately.

 

[devon deer stalker]

We all know of ‘pro’ stalkers or ‘lead bodies’ who use their land as a overstocked larder to guarantee a client a shot, especially with CWD, while they run around and nab surrounding permissions..... then dont manage it. Just to clarify, once again, I am not one of those so called 'pro' stalkers! and I've never nabbed another permission, although I have had it done to me!

Until people get into the mindset deerstalking is not sport, but numbers management, this will continue. Until the overall herd is reduced to a manageable size I would personally suggest the following.

Muntjac: shoot on sight. Don't have any
Fallow: Shoot on sight in season Agreed
CWD: Shoot on sight in season Don't have any
Sika and sika hybrids: shoot on sight in season Don't have any
Red and Roe: as native species, manage appropriately. Red, shoot on sight, Roe, managed

 

[John Doe]

I would have thought this was a pretty simple one, if you think there might be some benefit, and you are eligible then consider taking part. If you think it’s a load of rubbish then just pass it on by. Why does everyone have to slag stuff off all the time? Too much negativity in this world.

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Just to confirm that I will pass on 3 more questions from above posts as follows:

• Might I ask why deer stalkers (the main producers) were not consulted back then?
• Also I just read this on your link 'but the costs are reduced, with BASC undertaking much of the administrative work on behalf of members' Interesting, so it's to attract new members to BASC as well?
• Can you please clarify whether a stalker who is also a processor (registered food business etc, but not an AGHE) and a retailer is eligible for this scheme?

 

[NullMac]

The wonderful thing about all of these schemes is that people talk a good game, pass an audit and complete bits of paper on a regular basis.

The trouble is there is no guarantee that best practice meat hygiene standards are consistently applied. From my limited experience of the Scottish scheme the paperwork is good but the hygiene isn't. Very limited experience, but its worthless IMO.

Just another example of Best Practice advocacy not being translated into standards on the ground I am afraid.

 

[User00038]

Much of the content of this thread baffles me. Here's a scheme that is aimed at expanding and increasing the market for wild venison without affecting any of the requirements made of the stalker, except in regard to non-lead bullets, (which, despite all the to-ing an fro-ing on here, can hardly be a surprise). So, I really don't understand why anyone should feel entitled to a consultation.

Obviously, it is worthwhile to ask the questions that relate to the interpretation of the Standard documentation, though most are more relevant to the policy and processes that BASC and other Group scheme operators develop to meet the requirements of the Standard.

There are numerous farm assurance schemes in agriculture. Farmers, as a whole, don't get consulted on the development of the scheme for obvious reasons (just a sample of which have been evident on this thread). But the larger producers effectively have no choice and they join up whereas the smaller producers make their decision on whether it adds value to their business or not.

This is such early days in terms of the BQWV and in terms of what the Venison Working Group has to offer for opening up the supply chain for wild venison that we just need to wait it out. We can't all be consulted on everything.

 

[Taff]

Just another thought, it’s tax payers money, via FC, how long before this is removed.
Imagine the interview with the minister for Defra,
Minister, why are you payin people to shoot bambie ?
ok the money is for the sale of venison but don,t let the truth get in the way of a good story.

 

[Freeforester]

Whoops, my mistake, replace with Wild, the consumer will love Wild and naturally produced,The green deer sticker will show its been culled ethically

My venison labels read ‘organic, by nature’; it was all wild, free-ranging, ethically produced venison. I had customers who had allergies to basically everything 21st century, yet strangely enough they could eat it (repeatedly ) without issue, one of the few meats they could eat, apparently.

The wonderful thing about all of these schemes is that people talk a good game, pass an audit and complete bits of paper on a regular basis.

The trouble is there is no guarantee that best practice meat hygiene standards are consistently applied. From my limited experience of the Scottish scheme the paperwork is good but the hygiene isn't. Very limited experience, but its worthless IMO.

Just another example of Best Practice advocacy not being translated into standards on the ground I am afraid.

This^^
I had cause to reject SQWV produced carcasses, the chain is only as strong as the weakest link I found, that’s why I never joined any of the schemes. When I raised the matter with SQWV they ignored it. I did likewise thereafter.

‘Organic’ - is only as clean as the air, rain and dust, chemicals etc carried along above the ground. Ask a beekeeper re the latter.w

 

[DevonRedDeer]

As I understand it we live in a democracy clearly this assurance scheme is not what the majority want perhaps stalking directory could arrange for its members to vote on it we could then make a plan of action after the vote.

 

[Pete6.5]

Much of the content of this thread baffles me. Here's a scheme that is aimed at expanding and increasing the market for wild venison without affecting any of the requirements made of the stalker, except in regard to non-lead bullets, (which, despite all the to-ing an fro-ing on here, can hardly be a surprise). So, I really don't understand why anyone should feel entitled to a consultation.

Obviously, it is worthwhile to ask the questions that relate to the interpretation of the Standard documentation, though most are more relevant to the policy and processes that BASC and other Group scheme operators develop to meet the requirements of the Standard.

There are numerous farm assurance schemes in agriculture. Farmers, as a whole, don't get consulted on the development of the scheme for obvious reasons (just a sample of which have been evident on this thread). But the larger producers effectively have no choice and they join up whereas the smaller producers make their decision on whether it adds value to their business or not.

This is such early days in terms of the BQWV and in terms of what the Venison Working Group has to offer for opening up the supply chain for wild venison that we just need to wait it out. We can't all be consulted on everything.

The reason that the people doing the deer management/stalking should be entitled to consultation. Is because we are the ones that do most of the hard work and the long hours and the costs get pushed on to us. Plus if you want to know about deer ask the people that spend the most time in their environment.

 

[User00038]

The reason that the people doing the deer management/stalking should be entitled to consultation. Is because we are the ones that do most of the hard work and the long hours and the costs get pushed on to us. Plus if you want to know about deer ask the people that spend the most time in their environment.

I don't see that this is about deer. It's about the meat processing & supply chain that is downstream of the stalker's work. This is not going to happen overnight but it's surely aimed at stability of prices from the AGHEs and enuring that they don't stop taking carcasses at the beginning of winter.

The AGHEs are going to take the bulk of the chain of custody burden, so I see it as a good thing that they are on board with it.

 

[Hayduke]

So, I really don't understand why anyone should feel entitled to a consultation.

Because apparently this scheme is aimed at we too. At least 70% of the UK deer cull is carried out by 'hobby' stalkers, 'amateur' deer managers and cullers.

I'm not 'entitled' to or want anything. I am a BASC and BDS member so hearing from them on this would be good. I really do resent continued moves from government that will add to my costs, admin and bureaucracy, putting more barriers in the way, especially when they keep droning on that deer numbers are 'out of control' - whilst they might be in some localities isn't a UK wide issue.