National wild venison standard

[big ears]

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.

I cannot make out whether this is naive or collusion. I do hope it’s the former.

Farm assurance schemes have not been an overwhelming success you say and many are tied into deals they had no choice but to join. As a consequence the value of their product has reduced both in actual and real terms.

You have actually hit the nail on the head with your last paragraph.

It is unknown what is being offered, and unknown what the final result of this new scheme will be. Yet we are being asked now to commit to it and many if us feel, like the farmers, we will have little choice as the game dealers will insist on it. Having seen the results on the farmers of these schemes we are, understandably concerned and are asking the like of BASC for some reassurance.

Their silence is either a sign they haven’t got any handle on where this is going OR they know where this is going and know the impact it will have on the average stalker.

It’s up to the individual to decide which if these they believe to be true.

 

[Pete6.5]

When there is a problem the government has 3 levers to pull as I see it. Throw cash at it. Tax it. Or change the laws and force or fine it. At the moment there are different groups of people keeping their fingers crossed for the throw cash at it option (most probable) and then they want a slice of the cake.

 

[John Doe]

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.

Go for it. Arrange a poll on here, see how many people actually vote then analyse that number as a percentage of the number of people in the UK actually involved in deer management. As a follow on, ask those that voted how many (honestly) deer they actually kill each year and take that as a percentage of the annual UK cull. If the percentages stack up to a significant figure then you are probably on to something. Anyone want to have a stab at what those two percentages are likely to be?

 

[User00038]

I cannot make out whether this is naive or collusion. I do hope it’s the former.

Hahaha! Alternative interpretations are available!

However, when you use words like 'collusion', I hope that some do not feel encouraged to take a divisive 'them and us' attitude.

 

[big ears]

Hahaha! Alternative interpretations are available!

However, when you use words like 'collusion', I hope that some do not feel encouraged to take a divisive 'them and us' attitude.

It’s the concern that the organisations are doing exactly that which is at the heart of the disquiet.

There is nothing but a positive spin from the organisations on the media yet silence to its members. This can lead you to think that there is a “chosen few” approach. This behaviour is rife in our society, from the top down and I have little doubt is in part involved in this decision making.

I have no knowledge of you or your allegiance to any of the parties involved in this as you have no knowledge of mine.

Because of past experience with groups such as the Deer Initiative I am reserved about anyone who strongly supports plans such as this and have been proven right on several occasions.

When a deal looks too good to be true, it often is. My experience is that those that try and sell you it positively often have a vested interest and stand to gain from its introduction.

As I said none of that may be relevant to you if it isn’t then I apologise if my collusion comment offends.

The lack of open discourse on this matter, the lack of real data as to outcomes of this scheme, and the way it is being pushed through by the organisations is worrying in my opinion.

As I have said before I have seen what these assurance schemes have done to farmers in the SW. This looks no different. I am 100% sure the outcome will be a huge bureaucracy and cost to the individual producer (stalker) and a reduction in the value of deer carcasses at the game dealers. If the organisations would like to publish a statement saying this will definitely not happen I might go along with them. Until then I believe this to be a wolf in sheep’s clothing like the DI and am suspicious of anyone’s motive who positively pushes this scheme.

Again sorry if that offends you.

BE

 

[NullMac]

Dearie me, that was designed by committee wasn't it?

Isn't this just a bad rehash of existing requirements lumped into one document. eg I am sure a processor would love me if I turned up with a carcass and told him it had a notifiable disease. Who produced this rubbish?

 

[DevonRedDeer]

It must be obvious now to most of you this assurance scheme is only being introduced to make money for the assurance companies involved. I have been in an assurance scheme since 1996 in my farming enterprise and have regretted it almost every day it just costs me money and stress in my experience they are very difficult people to deal with they change the rules every year to make it more difficult to comply,don’t take my word for it go and ask the farmer who’s land you shoot on.Venison is safe to eat now,it is traceable now,it is chemical free now,because of the way they feed it is one of the safest meats on the market. Its in your hands they can’t start it up if you refuse to join.

 

[75]

I’ve been quite vocal on this thread as I have quite strong views so a few final points based on conversations with some of the organisations involved over the last couple of days then I will bow out.

• “We kept you informed via our magazine” is a common comment I’ve heard. This may have been true that they informed us something was coming but this is the first time we’ve seen any detail so can form a view and provide feedback.
• This is aimed only at the large producers and relies on all venison going through a national wild venison approved AGHE.
• Technically it might be possible for a small producer to become a “Processor” and therefore supply direct but that will likely be so costly and onerous that it is probably impractical. I don’t actually think this latter point hasn’t been thought through as no one has yet been able give me an answer on whether it’s possible or not.
• Take up by game dealers has so far been poor (makes you wonder how many of them were consulted during the 2 1/2 year development period!?)
• My view is this splits the industry and serves the few not the many.
• I have worked hard to create a local market for direct supply. I am a Registered Food Business with a 5* Food Hygiene rating and provide full traceability. Regardless, it is impossible for me to ever achieve this new standard as there is no local approved AGHE for me to put my product through. This is my annoyance with the scheme - it is not voluntary it is exclusive. I CANNOT join even if I wanted despite having hygiene standards as good as anyone and being fully compliant with all the regs.

 

[cyberstag]

It must be obvious now to most of you this assurance scheme is only being introduced to make money for the assurance companies involved. I have been in an assurance scheme since 1996 in my farming enterprise and have regretted it almost every day it just costs me money and stress in my experience they are very difficult people to deal with they change the rules every year to make it more difficult to comply,don’t take my word for it go and ask the farmer who’s land you shoot on.Venison is safe to eat now,it is traceable now,it is chemical free now,because of the way they feed it is one of the safest meats on the market. Its in your hands they can’t start it up if you refuse to join.

I have been farming red deer for 43 years in North Devon and for some of those years I was supplying one of the large supermarkets. In order to do so I had to be Farm Assured through SAI Global so an annual inspection was necessary with full record keeping of all inputs, medicines etc. All livestock were to be inspected and things like standard of fencing, water troughs and handling facilities. None of which was a problem to comply with but a bit of a pain. However the whole scheme was just a money making exercise for SAI Global and just a self congratulatory tick box session for the supermarket.
The end came for me when during the last 4 annual inspections the "inspector" never left our kitchen, just doing the tick boxes. Never walked the farm, never looked at the deer. The general public who can be bothered to ask a few questions about how the venison is produced would no doubt have been informed of the "inspection process" but I decided it was just a scam and wanted no further involvement.

So you may think an assurance scheme can deliver benefits but who gets the benefit? I will leave you to work that out!

I could take issue with DevonRedDeer's statement that venison is safe to eat now because if he is talking about wild venison how do you prove it is safe, there is no full meat inspection and there can be no knowledge of what the animals have eaten. As I have said on here before I am not knocking wild venison just the people who make claims about it that cannot be proven; the worst being that it is organic.

 

[devon deer stalker]

@Conor O'Gorman has replied on behalf of the BASC and has kindly requested further information from BASC, thank you Conor I/we look forward to the reply.
I see the @BDS - Charity Account official member posted a thread today but sadly ignored our requests for input.
And although @Alastair Boston works for the FC, and has watched this thread, he has not replied.

It would be helpful if the latter 2 would reply, it might even lesson our concerns over this.

Cheers

Richard

 

[Gudgeon]

@Conor O'Gorman has replied on behalf of the BASC and has kindly requested further information from BASC, thank you Conor I/we look forward to the reply.
I see the @BDS - Charity Account official member posted a thread today but sadly ignored our requests for input.
And although @Alastair Boston works for the FC, and has watched this thread, he has not replied.

It would be helpful if the latter 2 would reply, it might even lesson our concerns over this.

Cheers

Richard

Did you miss the response from Nick Route from the BDS?

 

[devon deer stalker]

Did you miss the response from Nick Route from the BDS?

I discounted it because a member called Muntiacus claimed to be from the BDS called 'Nick', now I have a surname from you, however, there is an official member account on here from the BDS, in my opinion they should answer.

But to be honest I guess this thread has run it's course, we have all formed our own opinions and only time will tell how this all pans out.

 

[terrier1]

Without going over an old thread the BDS/BASC want to push the DSC2……..

And why do you think that is. Could it be that they are going to earn money from the training they are going to give. People don't look at the bigger picture on here.

 

[big ears]

And why do you think that is. Could it be that they are going to earn money from the training they are going to give. People don't look at the bigger picture on here.

Absolutely it’s all about money.

You are right about the bigger picture. These organisations do very little because of altruism. They will get involved if they see money and a benefit to them. Sleeping with the devil is a dangerous place, particularly when they start to limit freedom of speech.

 

[big ears]

I’ve been quite vocal on this thread as I have quite strong views so a few final points based on conversations with some of the organisations involved over the last couple of days then I will bow out.

• “We kept you informed via our magazine” is a common comment I’ve heard. This may have been true that they informed us something was coming but this is the first time we’ve seen any detail so can form a view and provide feedback.
• This is aimed only at the large producers and relies on all venison going through a national wild venison approved AGHE.
• Technically it might be possible for a small producer to become a “Processor” and therefore supply direct but that will likely be so costly and onerous that it is probably impractical. I don’t actually think this latter point hasn’t been thought through as no one has yet been able give me an answer on whether it’s possible or not.
• Take up by game dealers has so far been poor (makes you wonder how many of them were consulted during the 2 1/2 year development period!?)
• My view is this splits the industry and serves the few not the many.
• I have worked hard to create a local market for direct supply. I am a Registered Food Business with a 5* Food Hygiene rating and provide full traceability. Regardless, it is impossible for me to ever achieve this new standard as there is no local approved AGHE for me to put my product through. This is my annoyance with the scheme - it is not voluntary it is exclusive. I CANNOT join even if I wanted despite having hygiene standards as good as anyone and being fully compliant with all the regs.

Your last point is the clincher. It seems what they want is to create a large consortium to take over a significant proportion of the deer management in this country at the potential exclusion of anyone not already in their circle.

If you do a search then you will find that the DI ceased trading in March 2020. At that time it transferred all its holdings to the BDS. The BDS still hold the rights to the DI web address. The DI was supported by all the organisations supporting this scheme. I’ll leave you to draw your own conclusions but it doesn’t take a lot of imagination to join the dots.

 

[devon deer stalker]

Sadly it's a case of shutting the door after the horse has bolted, but because suppliers i.e. us ground level deer stalkers/managers were kept out of the loop on this scheme from it's inception, I feel it's only correct we have a 'voice of shooting' and put over our points of view, so I'm writing an email to trudy.harrison.mp@parliament.uk to enlighten her a little.
I suggest others who also feel the same should do it as well.

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Q&As as follows:

1. Who will do the annual assessments? and how much will they cost? Will they need to have formal National approval?

The standard assesses all stages of the supply chain process from primary producer through to the processor. Assessments are carried out by trained inspectors working to a standard that has been developed by a cross sector working group and developed in line with Scottish Quality Wild Venison, a standard that has a proven track record in supporting food safety audits. All Inspectors will be monitored and be approved by SAI global who are the auditors working on behalf of Grown in Britain and the British Wild Venison Working group. The costs in the first year are Processors = £885-£965, Producer (<300 deer) = £115 + tags @£15 for 50, Producer (300 or more deer) = £440 + tags

2. Which body is managing the audit / assessment system, content and feedback? and is there an appeal process?

SAI global, see the website for the standard and appeals procedure.

3. Is the system built on the British Retail Consortium current system?

For Approved Game Handling Establishments yes – there is no BRC audit for producers.

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?

The audit of producers will concentrate on paperwork, facilities and procedures and will not require a carcass to be present, the standard that will be audited against is available on the website www.britishqualitywildvenison.co.uk and from SAI Global.

5. Why is non lead use a particular requirement when it is not currently banned? is it process supermarket or FC driven?

This requirement is to satisfy food safety and the expectation from the market that the sector produces wild venison products of the highest standards, to support the development of a wider diverse market for British wild venison especially with the larger retailers.

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. It is hoped that a premium may be paid in the future for BQWV carcasses, but there is currently no guarantee of this. By supporting the development of standards and traceability throughout the supply chain we hope to develop greater market places for British Wild Venison, which in turn will remove the fluctuations in market price and demand being seen for producers over the past 10 years. There is a need to develop a wider more diverse market space for British Wild Venison in the future, that we hope will provide a more consistent price for producers of British Quality Wild Venison, there are no price guarantees, but developing a more robust market place will provide a more stable market

7. How much are the true fees, and how long will you subsidise the smaller stalkers?

The FC have provided a generous subsidy and it is hoped that this will provide enough incentive for people to join, incentives are currently agreed for two years, at which point an assessment will be made for the requirements for future support for the sector.

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?

The working group were informed by expert opinion through the whole supply chain, , the wild venison working group will continue to be working throughout the supply chain to support and enhance this market where possible.

 

[baguio]

And why do you think that is. Could it be that they are going to earn money from the training they are going to give. People don't look at the bigger picture on here.

Or do providers run courses because people want to attend them and learn/prove their skills? If there were no takers the courses would be cancelled and people would get their money back. Training is considered a good thing by most. No organisation/company offers anything so that they can lose money do they? They wouldn't last long if they did!

 

[cookingfat]

The FC minister launched today.
I have applied but only if I get the grant money

 

[wytonpjs]

Interestingly, I applied on the day of the launch whist at the conference and, besides an acknowledgment on the day, have herd NOTHING since