UK Forestry Certification and non lead ammunition

[Chris Richardson]

 

[Chris Richardson]

As you can see no steel or tin shot is permitted on one of my bits of ground ( a 350 acre wood ) so lord knows how I’ll go on shooting dreys after the lead ban suppose I’ll have to let the squirrels just damage the trees at least I’ll not be using nasty lead that’s better for the environment

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Not unhealthy at all Connor just calling out hypocrisy as I see it

It is indeed a rather unhealthy obsession, perhaps also revealing some personal insecurities given that you always jockey on others' posts to make it about BASC. Perhaps start your own thread to call out the so-called hypocrisy as you see it?

 

[Heym SR20]

For those other than some of idiots on here who want to do nothing more than throw insults more details of the cascade of standards are in the link below

Getting Certified - UKWAS

The full details of UKWAS legal remit and interface with the international standards are on pages 8 to 12 of the following

https://ukwas.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/UKWAS-5.0-2024.pdf

The standards are updated every five years with considerable involvement from all stakeholders involved.


Given that those with limited IQ are unable to read and understand long word they won’t be able to understand any of the above.

 

[Shabz]

The UKFS was updated last year too. It has a much stronger requirement than previous versions, that deer numbers in woodlands should be low enough to allow natural regeneration. Certainly in Scotland, land owners now have to pay more attention to deer numbers and include a deer management plan with their applications for felling approval. They didn’t have to do this previously.

Should mean lots more available stalking really. My experience is that it’s usually an ambivalent land owner that doesn’t shoot any deer. They’ll have to do something going forward.

 

[David Barker]

The UKFS was updated last year too. It has a much stronger requirement than previous versions, that deer numbers in woodlands should be low enough to allow natural regeneration. Certainly in Scotland, land owners now have to pay more attention to deer numbers and include a deer management plan with their applications for felling approval. They didn’t have to do this previously.

Should mean lots more available stalking really. My experience is that it’s usually an ambivalent land owner that doesn’t shoot any deer. They’ll have to do something going forward.

Only some Landowners are tasked with this the legislation only really covers land mass. The central belt is exempt from any of these requirements as are the local authority,s. In my opinion it should be about the deer manager not the land mass. Then it would cover much more of an area.

 

[slider]

Only some Landowners are tasked with this the legislation only really covers land mass. The central belt is exempt from any of these requirements as are the local authority,s. In my opinion it should be about the deer manager not the land mass. Then it would cover much more of an area.

Anyone that enters into UKFS ( a voluntary forestry assurance scheme) is bound by the rules of the Scheme, no matter what the location.
However, it maybe that local authorities and small landowners opt not to join the scheme.

 

[KimE]

A few bullets won’t kill a tree but steel will kill a saw blade. Sawmillers don’t want to see any contamination in wood at all. However, from a practical point of view, stone and steel are far worse than copper and lead.

Modern mills use Xray to sort out forain objekts, xray doesn`t care if its lead, copper, iron, stones it just sort them out. Saw mills do also have a metal detector to sort out metal.

 

[co’den]

Modern mills use Xray to sort out forain objekts, xray doesn`t care if its lead, copper, iron, stones it just sort them out. Saw mills do also have a metal detector to sort out metal.

What’s your point?