Woodpigeon: pest or a quarry species?

[enfieldspares]

So to close as I was interrupted and ran out of time.

In respect of the General Licence for pigeons I thank that a Court would hold similar, maybe even referencing similar law about land, about authority and about shooting, which may be the Animals Act as mentioned above with emphasis on the bold words below:

The land on which it is belongs to him or to any person under whose express or implied authority he is acting

So if the shooting to prevent damage is not done other by the actual owner of the land where the damage is done or with permission of that actual owner of the land where the damage is done I think there may be issues. But as said I would welcome any successful attempt to change the law.

For like the alteration to the law to expressly permit the use of an "estate rifle" which until that change was supposedly unlawful it is this. What may have been felt was and is allowed because it is a continuing or common custom is not, it is to be regretted, always correct interpretation of the law.

 

[Liveonce]

Why would you roost shoot a wood that was not on the same land that you have permission to shoot for crop protection?
If you have no permission for crop protection on the adjacent land to the woods that you do have permission to shoot within, I would not roost shoot, grey squirrels, rabbits, and deer if present in the woods then yes, unless pigeons are doing significant financial damage to the woods.

 

[Bowland blades]

I appreciate that is your viewpoint but I have been tagged on PW regarding the same viewpoint that you have posted there also and am a bit concerned that you might put some folk off with getting on with controlling woodpigeons with your viewpoint.

I don't know if you read my post above or not so I will just repeat it here again below. Also, just to qualify that I am not saying my advice trumps yours, there is no case law on this as far as I know, but my advice is based on BASC's website and my own experience of dealing with policy on general licences for circa 20 years.

Some general principles as I understand them, with the England general licences in mind, these being the most confusing ones, but the following applies generally across all countries I think:

General licences allow preventative action to be taken so you do not need to wait until damage has occurred. You can shoot or trap the listed pest birds if you haven’t tried non-lethal methods because the decision is yours on the practicality of that. You can use decoys, shoot on stubbles, roost shoot etc. under general licence because they allow preventative action to be taken and there is no restriction on using decoys, shooting on stubbles, roost shooting etc.

For info on general licences in England, Wales, Scotland and NI click here:

General licences

All the latest news and advice concerning general licences and how they affect you.

basc.org.uk

None the less the contra argument has valid points . It was weak wording that allowed WJ the opening for the challenge of the OGL in the first place . Test cases are what refines law in the UK and nobody really wants to be the one the defendant

 

[Dunwaters]

Why would you roost shoot a wood that was not on the same land that you have permission to shoot for crop protection?
If you have no permission for crop protection on the adjacent land to the woods that you do have permission to shoot within, I would not roost shoot, grey squirrels, rabbits, and deer if present in the woods then yes, unless pigeons are doing significant financial damage to the woods.

Regardless of the ownership of the land, what is the justification for roost shooting?
What is the justification for stubble shooting?
In both cases the birds aren’t causing harm in the location where they are being shot and you can make a decent argument that by disturbing them where they are causing no harm, you are encouraging them to disperse into areas where they will cause damage.
It’s a bit of a minefield, especially if the onus is placed on the shooter or landowner ( which it is ) to show that shooting was necessary and all other methods to mitigate the damage had been tried and failed.
An open season would make things easier, both shooters and NE are currently skating on the very thin ice of non enforcement of the current general licence T’n C’s.

 

[enfieldspares]

Regardless of the ownership of the land, what is the justification for roost shooting? What is the justification for stubble shooting?

Yes I agree an open season would make things so much easier and we could go back to before the GL where the good reason that I and others had was, of course, shooting a few, maybe a half a dozen for eating. Others with freezers, and hungry friends and families shooting more and what was wrong with that either. Without having to pussyfoot around this "serious damage" and etc. requirement. It is indeed a minefield and I hope that both DUNWATER's comments and that of I and others is taken in the constructive manner in which we all intend them.

 

[JTO]

Perhaps the answer is to go back to the situation that we had before being in the EU.

 

[Tim.243]

Regardless of the ownership of the land, what is the justification for roost shooting?
What is the justification for stubble shooting?
In both cases the birds aren’t causing harm in the location where they are being shot and you can make a decent argument that by disturbing them where they are causing no harm, you are encouraging them to disperse into areas where they will cause damage.
It’s a bit of a minefield, especially if the onus is placed on the shooter or landowner ( which it is ) to show that shooting was necessary and all other methods to mitigate the damage had been tried and failed.
An open season would make things easier, both shooters and NE are currently skating on the very thin ice of non enforcement of the current general licence T’n C’s.

A lot of stubble on second wheat (for example) can be direct drilled so the emerging crop say rape (break crop) will be poking out (like it did this year) as a lot of people got it right with it nice and damp. Those who waited then drilled into dry ground and no rain.
In the DD case pigeons would have been on the tram lines so the bleating naysayers see a pigeon shooter on stubble dd with rape with the field close by being stubble of first wheat and want to hang you out on the nearest tree...

When we were desperate for food.
In the first two years of the war, over 4 million acres were ploughed up. The priority was getting as much food out of each acre as possible. One acre growing potatoes could feed up to 40 people, wheat 20 people, whereas areas of permanent grazing for animal fodder could only feed around 2 people.

People having meetings on how to enforce the GL will most lightly be having lunch of imported food lol

 

[Liveonce]

Regardless of the ownership of the land, what is the justification for roost shooting?
What is the justification for stubble shooting?
In both cases the birds aren’t causing harm in the location where they are being shot and you can make a decent argument that by disturbing them where they are causing no harm, you are encouraging them to disperse into areas where they will cause damage.
It’s a bit of a minefield, especially if the onus is placed on the shooter or landowner ( which it is ) to show that shooting was necessary and all other methods to mitigate the damage had been tried and failed.
An open season would make things easier, both shooters and NE are currently skating on the very thin ice of non enforcement of the current general licence T’n C’s.

Both are preventative and acceptable under the GL for fields that regularly suffer significant damage by pigeons and effect the farmers yield and livelihood, they are not just a recreational deer shooter putting a beast in the freezer and working elsewhere for their livelihood.

And if an open season removes such ambiguity then I am all for that.

To me it matters not what your reason for shooting, be that pigeons, game or deer rather that we all stand together united.

 

[Dunwaters]

Perhaps the answer is to go back to the situation that we had before being in the EU.

That ship has well and truly sailed, you freely entered into a binding international agreement, I don’t see any UK government either reneging on or withdrawing from the directive.
The support is just not there.
The upside of a statutory season is that it would remove the potential ambiguities of shooting pigeon under the general license, I don’t see a downside.

 

[25 Sharps]

Regardless of the ownership of the land, what is the justification for roost shooting?
What is the justification for stubble shooting?
In both cases the birds aren’t causing harm in the location where they are being shot and you can make a decent argument that by disturbing them where they are causing no harm, you are encouraging them to disperse into areas where they will cause damage.
It’s a bit of a minefield, especially if the onus is placed on the shooter or landowner ( which it is ) to show that shooting was necessary and all other methods to mitigate the damage had been tried and failed.
An open season would make things easier, both shooters and NE are currently skating on the very thin ice of non enforcement of the current general licence T’n C’s.

You’re wrong, all other methods do not have to ‘had been tried and failed’ you simply have to be satisfied that they would not be effective.

So a 100 acre field next to houses meaning a bird scarer can’t be used and visual deterrents aren’t going to work, you are good to go.

Equally you can roost shoot or stubble shoot if you are protecting the crops in the neighbouring fields.

You seem to have a lot of opinion on use of a licence you have zero actual experience with!

 

[JTO]

That ship has well and truly sailed, you freely entered into a binding international agreement, I don’t see any UK government either reneging on or withdrawing from the directive.
The support is just not there.
The upside of a statutory season is that it would remove the potential ambiguities of shooting pigeon under the general license, I don’t see a downside.

Never say "never".

 

[3red dogs]

It’s not about being sentimental.
Pigeons on rape , barley etc is ok .
On wild bird food( what they are meant to be eating) it’s a no.
Roosting may be ok if you can prove damage to associated crops, following attempts to scare them.
Drilling is a no -no .
Not thing is growing, so you are protecting nothing.
If you are hungry, don’t shoot a pigeon . That is illegal .

Please don’t shoot the messenger.
I have shot thousands of pigeons .
Shame that I can’t now.

Please prove me wrong . I’m on your side

 

[Nickb]

I have shot thousands of pigeons .
Shame that I can’t now.

Yes you can just crack on like everybody else.

 

[Tim.243]

It’s not about being sentimental.
Pigeons on rape , barley etc is ok .
On wild bird food( what they are meant to be eating) it’s a no.
Roosting may be ok if you can prove damage to associated crops, following attempts to scare them.
Drilling is a no -no .
Not thing is growing, so you are protecting nothing.
If you are hungry, don’t shoot a pigeon . That is illegal .

Please don’t shoot the messenger.
I have shot thousands of pigeons .
Shame that I can’t now.

Please prove me wrong . I’m on your side

How would you go about a bit of ground that has been spun and turned over as a lot sits in the cracks and some gets eaten so it is planted or a direct drill what do you do..?

 

[JTO]

Drilling is a no -no .
Not thing is growing, so you are protecting nothing.

Nothing will grow if the seed is being eaten by pigeons!

 

[Tim.243]

Nothing will grow if the seed is being eaten by pigeons!

Quite, I think his theory's are like the name given to very late drilled Wheat or Barley

Cuckoo barley - Rob Yorke

For Andy Roberts, the sound of skylarks singing is a sure sign that spring is on its way. A farmer fresh back onto the land, he outlines his thoughts on timeliness to provide barley, potatoes and birds. When my brother and I plan to sow spring barley and plant potatoes, we have learnt over the...

robyorke.co.uk

 

[JTO]

Quite, I think his theory's are like the name given to very late drilled Wheat or Barley

Cuckoo barley - Rob Yorke

For Andy Roberts, the sound of skylarks singing is a sure sign that spring is on its way. A farmer fresh back onto the land, he outlines his thoughts on timeliness to provide barley, potatoes and birds. When my brother and I plan to sow spring barley and plant potatoes, we have learnt over the...

robyorke.co.uk

Why has he changed his user name?

 

[25 Sharps]

It’s not about being sentimental.
Pigeons on rape , barley etc is ok .
On wild bird food( what they are meant to be eating) it’s a no.
Roosting may be ok if you can prove damage to associated crops, following attempts to scare them.
Drilling is a no -no .
Not thing is growing, so you are protecting nothing.
If you are hungry, don’t shoot a pigeon . That is illegal .

Please don’t shoot the messenger.
I have shot thousands of pigeons .
Shame that I can’t now.

Please prove me wrong . I’m on your side

You do not have to prove damage and you do not have to make attempts to scare them. Protection can also be preemptive of damage.

 

[starr shot]

Clues in the name mate. STALKING DIRECTORY.

I stalk everything.Rats,foxes, pigeons,pheasant.In fact there’s not much I haven’t stalked in my time.

 

[big ears]

I stalk everything.Rats,foxes, pigeons,pheasant.In fact there’s not much I haven’t stalked in my time.

I’m sure you are very good at it too.