I frankly could not care less. OK!
Not BASC Bashing
- Thread starter kes
- Start date
countrryboy
Well-Known Member
Aye totally agree with u sort of contridicted myself in last paragraph, sort of hard to write wot i'm meaning
Wot i meant to say is for all roe have risen 600% a lot of that will be as we have planted so much forestry and created as much habitat for them that simply wasnae there before.
Not saying it is entirely a good thing and will cost forestry owners a fortune in management but it's sort of natural increase and by and large most forestry companies are coping with Roe not to badly.
In my eyes its a sort of natural increase due to more habitat whereas u could argue ur sika (possibly a dubious argument as same forestry) or muntjac is different as habitiat not really increased but just deer numbers are just rising putting more pressure on ecosystems
That response will do me, thanks.
Aye totally agree with u sort of contridicted myself in last paragraph, sort of hard to write wot i'm meaning
Wot i meant to say is for all roe have risen 600% a lot of that will be as we have planted so much forestry and created as much habitat for them that simply wasnae there before.
Not saying it is entirely a good thing and will cost forestry owners a fortune in management but it's sort of natural increase and by and large most forestry companies are coping with Roe not to badly.
In my eyes its a sort of natural increase due to more habitat whereas u could argue ur sika (possibly a dubious argument as same forestry) or muntjac is different as habitiat not really increased but just deer numbers are just rising putting more pressure on ecosystems
Actually Sika are not nearly as damaging to forestry as roe - Roe are terrible for browsing any woody plant and will browse the leader shoots off you trees. Sika tend to graze more than they browse, but the real damage they do is with fraying and bore scoring.
So, reading between the lines, are we to assume that in the past "they" listened to your input and took it in to consideration when creating / altering legislation. But now, or in the near future, you feel that unless "they" are forced to take any input in to consideration they will just ignore you, or even not allow any input?
Will that not have the unfortunate effect of giving a document composed by Home Office civil servants an authority similar to statute?
I hope the ambiguities and non-statutory assertions found in the current HO guide are removed before any such clause is passed.
I'm surprised but changing your position after a month or so and then changing it again might become a little uncomfortable but then again, perhaps its only me that's noticing.
Still, since we both couldnt care less - it doesnt really matter does it ?
At post 39 http://www.thestalkingdirectory.co....firearms-law?p=1103819&viewfull=1#post1103819 it was stated that BASC was already "fully engaged". The BASC, via David's quotation was "don't believe everything you read on the web".
So it is heartening that the BASC have woken up and detected the smell of coffee, after so many shooters had expressed their concerns about being a statutory consultee. It seems to be a case of "follow the BASC, they are right behind you".
"I can assure you all that regardless of what some one here say, BASC will remain in consultation with the decision makers , we have not needed a judicial review for the last 25 years to ensure we have a seat at the table, and that will not change" David - BASC
However, by now seeking to be a statutory consultee, this will mean that the BASC is more fully "fully engaged"?
TH4
Well-Known Member
I find it extremely worrying that an officer of our supposed leading fieldsports group would write on an open forum that he frankly could not care less. I have been a member of BASC for more than 20 years but negative comments such as this are what is making me think twice about renewing.
TH4
Well-Known Member
I said in the post comments such as this, not solely this comment. I have not allways found BASC to be brilliant but also have not allways found them to be awful. I have just found that several comments from staff members lately have been very negative. This may be due to the internal turmoil that is going on at the moment or the result of poor management, but they do not give a good impression to any members of the public that happen to read them. I am a member of several organisations including BASC, SACS and the CA as i have allways believed that they are working for us and need our support but as i put in my original post recent comments are making me rethink my support of BASC.
'' Frankly I could not care less ''
Maybe a little Diplomacy would have been a Better way to go,
Everyone's allowed an off day, let's not club him to death just because he feels a little fed up today.
My off day/s don't have such an impact, as those who hold positions that involve influence.
Maybe he's just p1ssed off and it's finally gotten to him , the continued nipping away at him & BASC & equally as bad or worse childish comments but it's ok for them to throw them about but not him .
I'm not a BASC member I have my reasons , yes I think they need a boot up the backside but the guys trying to explain his stance & BASC's and guess what he could say unicorns **** ice cream & you still pick away a at it
Guess what if you don't like BASC ? Then move on join another organisation & get over it
Paul
I'm not a BASC member I have my reasons , yes I think they need a boot up the backside but the guys trying to explain his stance & BASC's and guess what he could say unicorns **** ice cream & you still pick away a at it
Guess what if you don't like BASC ? Then move on join another organisation & get over it
Paul
David BASC is perfectly entitled to say he doesn't care less about one person's opinion which is what his comment says. It doesn't mean he doesn't care about fieldsports his job or anything else. We all know that there are people on here whose opinions we don't take seriously! Don't pick one comment completely out of context and use it to belabour him. It is the action of someone who has an axe to grind.
David.
David.
Greymaster, I believe that ensuring we have a seat is a better position to be in now circumstances have changed. Its true that we have had a positive interaction with the HO et al over the last 25 years plus, but we have all seen occasions where the HO guidance has not been followed causing certificate holders all sorts of problems. Now the guidance will have to be followed by the licencing teams its important that we are in there ensuring that the guidance is fair etc. I think that members and other shooters would prefer this too
David
David
Whilst I dont agree with hype - its part of Davids job to 'sell' a message. I have to say he could have had an easier 12 -24 months than he has with all the problems at BASC and 'missed opportunities'
However Greymasters post is proof that others see what could remain hidden. I would hate to have to positively sell the John Swift issue or this new one.
All I wanted is an admission that there is some major spinning going on - I think that can be seen.
Also, I dont think its Members that David couldnt care less about - its principally my views and its perhaps rather more personally focused - That's forgivable its just a personal difference of opinion about the value of BASC.
I am not on a crusade to destroy BASC's image, I just think BASC could and needs to do a lot better for shooters over every issue. Given their position, its an absolute obligation.
If it did, then I would probably apply to re-join. A little more humility and focus first though.
Similar threads
