CarlW
Well-Known Member
Of course. However, that matters not to us. What would be helpful is for some of them to break ranks now they have been confronted by the lies.
Basc voluntary lead ban
- Thread starter Roestalker39
- Start date
Redleg
Well-Known Member
I was that kid in the school play..!
Roestalker39
Well-Known Member
Trying to drum up a bit of sympathy for the voice ??!
I'd rather see the demise of large scale game shooting myself. No one here (on this farm) sells game to the EU, everyone on this small farm shoot takes them home and eats them themselves. Mind you, they also don't expect to be able to blatt hundreds of birds from the sky with a loader beside them, all in the name of 'sport'. I can see who BASC et al clearly favour with their choices and it isn't the air rifle shooter, deer stalker, target shooter, clay shooter, pigeon shooter, vermin shooter, practical shotgun shooter or small walked up game shooter...
Oh, the glorious twelfth will soon be here again.
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
I agree. If the short straw is to be given then it is "big bag" commercial shoots it should be handed to.
For basc members just taken this from a PW post a petition for a special general meeting of basc
Petition to BASC to enact Section 7b
This is a petition to enact Section 7b of the British Association for Shooting and Conservation constitution. Section 7b is regarding Special General Meetings this would give members the opportunity to air their views in regards to their recent decision to see an end to lead in ammunition used...
redleafaccountancy.wufoo.com
Roestalker39
Well-Known Member
Be more effective just to cancel membership
Odders
Well-Known Member
Done. Though it'll take the resignation of ALL BASC committee members who voted this in to make me even consider rejoining when my membership lapses. Same goes for the CA.
In the meantime, I'll look at the alternatives regarding insurance cover.
Just spotted this statement by Gamebore. It is UTTERLY clear that the shooting associations did not consult them and have made this lead moratoriam undertaking in the absence of facts. It is an undeliverable overture. Just shocking. We are not represented by shooting associations. Quite the reverse: we are being sold out by them.
I have to say I’ve remained a BASC member on and off over the last 12 or so years and recently joined GWCT, I’m aware of BASCs multiple cock ups and general lack of bollocks in the face of an ever increasing attack on fieldsports and our way of life . Initially when this thread started it obviously ****ed me off but I gave them the benefit of the doubt as all of the big orgs had agreed and we was told that the manufacturers had been consulted.
That apparently couldn’t be further from the truth.
To me it would appear BASC have now clearly shown their complete disregard for their members by making a decision of this magnitude without any consultation with us or the manufacturers I can’t actually believe it as I’m writing it.
The arrogance is appalling, I don’t like being taken for a mug in life and it has just dawned on me that I probably am being taken for one by an organisation that is more concerned with filling its own pockets and pandering to its biggest supporters in the big bag commercial shoots. As stated and I love all forms of shooting and all disciplines including game shooting the main elephant in the room in the public eye is the big bag shoots.
So to finish sorry to anybody who told me so prior to this and previously in the thread for my comments but to me it’s now clear it’s the beginning of the end with BASCat the helm.
That apparently couldn’t be further from the truth.
To me it would appear BASC have now clearly shown their complete disregard for their members by making a decision of this magnitude without any consultation with us or the manufacturers I can’t actually believe it as I’m writing it.
The arrogance is appalling, I don’t like being taken for a mug in life and it has just dawned on me that I probably am being taken for one by an organisation that is more concerned with filling its own pockets and pandering to its biggest supporters in the big bag commercial shoots. As stated and I love all forms of shooting and all disciplines including game shooting the main elephant in the room in the public eye is the big bag shoots.
So to finish sorry to anybody who told me so prior to this and previously in the thread for my comments but to me it’s now clear it’s the beginning of the end with BASCat the helm.
I don't quite understand where you are all seeing a monstrous lie by the shooting insurers/organisations in their joint statement?
The statement calls for the GTA and ammunition manufacturers to work towards a move away from lead.
According to SACS the shooting insurers/organisations consulted with the Gun Trade Association [and they in turn were presumed to engage with their members the Ammunition Manufacturers]. This is apparently true to the extent that the GTA provided a guidance document in conjunction with the shooting Organisations statement...
"It is SACS’ understanding that the trade and cartridge manufacturers were consulted about the proposed transition and that the Gun Trade Association itself had engaged with its relevant trade members. Furthermore, the GTA provided the organisations with a guidance document, which we shared with our members and community at the time of the announcement on Monday. SACS signed the joint statement on this basis."
The Ammunition Manufacturers say they were not consulted by Shooting insurers/organisations but they did not deny being consulted by their Trade Association....Eley, Gamebore, Hull and Lyalvale are all members of the GTA....so it looks like a bit of ducking and diving by them rather than anybody else.
The GTA seems to be the one in the middle which maybe did...or maybe did not...consult with its ammunition manufacturer members. The GTA undoubtedly were consulted by the shooting organisations, and received and have subsequently published information [presumably gleaned from the ammunition manufacturers] to coincide with the shooting insurers/organistions joint statement.
"Monday 24th February 2020
In recognition of the shooting organisations' statement on lead ammunition, the GTA has produced a guide on alternatives. While many are aware of the availability of bismuth and tungsten based ammunition, standard steel cartridges offer an affordable and useful solution to many old guns. This guide is available here."
This is the link to the GTA guidance document to accompany the shooting insurers/organisations statement if you haven't already seen it...
drive.google.com
Alan
The statement calls for the GTA and ammunition manufacturers to work towards a move away from lead.
According to SACS the shooting insurers/organisations consulted with the Gun Trade Association [and they in turn were presumed to engage with their members the Ammunition Manufacturers]. This is apparently true to the extent that the GTA provided a guidance document in conjunction with the shooting Organisations statement...
"It is SACS’ understanding that the trade and cartridge manufacturers were consulted about the proposed transition and that the Gun Trade Association itself had engaged with its relevant trade members. Furthermore, the GTA provided the organisations with a guidance document, which we shared with our members and community at the time of the announcement on Monday. SACS signed the joint statement on this basis."
The Ammunition Manufacturers say they were not consulted by Shooting insurers/organisations but they did not deny being consulted by their Trade Association....Eley, Gamebore, Hull and Lyalvale are all members of the GTA....so it looks like a bit of ducking and diving by them rather than anybody else.
The GTA seems to be the one in the middle which maybe did...or maybe did not...consult with its ammunition manufacturer members. The GTA undoubtedly were consulted by the shooting organisations, and received and have subsequently published information [presumably gleaned from the ammunition manufacturers] to coincide with the shooting insurers/organistions joint statement.
"Monday 24th February 2020
In recognition of the shooting organisations' statement on lead ammunition, the GTA has produced a guide on alternatives. While many are aware of the availability of bismuth and tungsten based ammunition, standard steel cartridges offer an affordable and useful solution to many old guns. This guide is available here."
This is the link to the GTA guidance document to accompany the shooting insurers/organisations statement if you haven't already seen it...
GTA_factsheet_shootingnonlead_ver1.02.pdf
drive.google.com
Alan
Last edited:
It would be sensible to check whether BASC sent out advance warning of their proposed release to those who were involved (named).
Logical also to check whether any of those given the embargoed release checked BASC's comments on ammunition producers or the gun trade (whether implicit or explicit).
I would anticipate the news was given early to most - maybe 7/10 days early. So who checked ?
Or did they all think BASC wouldn't have been up to fabrication.
Misplaced trust is something which, as far as this "initiative" is concerned, affects everyone
Logical also to check whether any of those given the embargoed release checked BASC's comments on ammunition producers or the gun trade (whether implicit or explicit).
I would anticipate the news was given early to most - maybe 7/10 days early. So who checked ?
Or did they all think BASC wouldn't have been up to fabrication.
Misplaced trust is something which, as far as this "initiative" is concerned, affects everyone
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
On Pigeonwatch some BASC members are saying that there's an email from BASC offering Maserati cars at a discounted £55,000? True? Or untrue?
CarlW
Well-Known Member
True. I received the Maserati email from BASC earlier today.
Ooh, the only issue with the old mazzah is there's not much room in the boot for the matching purdeys AND a pair of Le Chamaues. Although Wilson could always drive me there with them on his lap, what?
Odders
Well-Known Member
I don't quite understand where you are all seeing a monstrous lie by the shooting insurers/organisations in their joint statement?
The statement calls for the GTA and ammunition manufacturers to work towards a move away from lead.
According to SACS the shooting insurers/organisations consulted with the Gun Trade Association [and they in turn were presumed to engage with their members the Ammunition Manufacturers]. This is apparently true to the extent that the GTA provided a guidance document in conjunction with the shooting Organisations statement...
"It is SACS’ understanding that the trade and cartridge manufacturers were consulted about the proposed transition and that the Gun Trade Association itself had engaged with its relevant trade members. Furthermore, the GTA provided the organisations with a guidance document, which we shared with our members and community at the time of the announcement on Monday. SACS signed the joint statement on this basis."
The Ammunition Manufacturers say they were not consulted by Shooting insurers/organisations but they did not deny being consulted by their Trade Association....Eley, Gamebore, Hull and Lyalvale are all members of the GTA....so it looks like a bit of ducking and diving by them rather than anybody else.
The GTA seems to be the one in the middle which maybe did...or maybe did not...consult with its ammunition manufacturer members. The GTA undoubtedly were consulted by the shooting organisations, and received and have subsequently published information [presumably gleaned from the ammunition manufacturers] to coincide with the shooting insurers/organistions joint statement.
"Monday 24th February 2020
In recognition of the shooting organisations' statement on lead ammunition, the GTA has produced a guide on alternatives. While many are aware of the availability of bismuth and tungsten based ammunition, standard steel cartridges offer an affordable and useful solution to many old guns. This guide is available here."
This is the link to the GTA guidance document to accompany the shooting insurers/organisations statement if you haven't already seen it...
GTA_factsheet_shootingnonlead_ver1.02.pdf
Alan
I'll take the cartridge manufacturers' word over BASCs any day - the latter have p***ed in too mant pots of late to be considered trustworthy inder the current management.
Why would the cartridge industry feel the need to be "economical with the truth"?
My point was that I don't think you have to choose who is telling the truth, the statements are not mutually incompatible.
The cartridge manufacturers say they were not consulted by the shooting organisations. The shooting organisations' joint statement does not claim they consulted the cartridge manufacturers, they just ask them to work towards a move away from lead. SACS subsequently stated that the organisations consulted the GTA.
SACS statement is borne out by the fact that the cartridge manufacturers' [GunTrade] Association were obviously consulted, because they published a supporting document simultaneously with the shooting insurers/organisations statement.
Any complaint about lack of consultation the cartridge manufacturers' have would appear to be with their trade association which patently was involved in the process. SACS stated they understood the GTA had consulted with its cartridge manufacturer members. The GTA guidance document information was sourced from somewhere...most likely its cartridge manufacturing members?
The cartridge manufacturers sound a bit ticked off that they are being put on the spot to come up with the alternative goods in a short time frame...which presumably was part of the intention of the joint statement.
Alan
Last edited:
CarlW
Well-Known Member
Alan,
It is inconceivable that the shooting organisations would have failed to check with the GTA (the members of which thrive on the sale of new, steel-proofed guns), that the cartridge manufacturers were also in the loop. Heck, if I were running BASC (or any of the other betraying organisations), I would have wanted to see the whites of the eyes of the people who actually make the cartridges before turning the shooting world upside down.
Make no mistake, the cartridge manufacturers were deliberately excluded from this process (as they would have dissented), and then the impression given that they had been involved and indeed supported it.
We have been lied to, betrayed, and damaged beyond belief by the very people who swore to defend us.
Kind regards,
Carl
