RSPB does something

800px-7.5_CartridgesThe RSPB included a note in its April e-newsletter asking its members to sign Rob Sheldon’s e-petition on banning toxic lead ammunition. this was wittily called ‘Last chance to take the lead’.

If this heralds a month of frantic activity on this subject from the RSPB, whose agreed policy is that there should be a ban on the use of toxic lead ammunition, then I would be both surprised and pleased. Let’s see.

The e-petition closes on 4 May and has reached a respectable 15,000+ signatures in 5 months.

Well done Rob! You deserved more support from RSPB and WWT. We’ll come back to this.

Website Pin Facebook Twitter Myspace Friendfeed Technorati Digg Google StumbleUpon Premium Responsive


13 Replies to “RSPB does something”

  1. The RSPB needs a shot up the backside if they are to encourage any kind of support. Their lack of action over the toxic lead and grouse shooting petitions leaves a great deal to be desired. I have cancelled my membership – my monies are better spent on more worthwhile causes – they certainly do not represent me and are certainly NOT acting on my behalf.

    1. Yes, that’s interesting my good old Mum has just done likewise after countless years of membership. I wonder just how widespread this membership reaction is?

  2. As mentioned on Raptor Persecution Scotland; is it time for Scotland to split from the RSPB, ditch the Royal Charter, reform as the SSPB, and get some teeth?

    1. Mark, would you be interested in doing a blog entry on this subject? With an increasing divergence in wildlife law now separating Scotland from the rest of the UK, are RSPB policies now becoming an increasingly poor fit for Scotland?

  3. More signatories for Andrew Richardson’s petition (keeping lead ammunition) than those wanting it banned, by some considerable margin, roughly 35%, and it hasn’t been running as long. We already have restriction on where we can use lead shot cartridges and where we can’t. Despite what you may read in subjective Blogs etc, my experience is that their is strong compliance with those restrictions.

    Ain’t going to happen, sorry.

    1. To be honest – I don’t understand why there’s a petition to keep lead ammunition ……. Voting for an alternative isn’t asking to stop the killing of everything in sight – just to stop the indiscriminate killing of anything that happens to come into contact with it by accident …… or isn’t that good enough for the shooting lobby.

      1. Again we see the true motives behind this, and the Grouse Hunting petition. Shooters don’t “shoot everything in sight” and it’s idiotic, myopic comments like this that make me even more determined to see this and the Driven Grouse petition for what it is. They’re nothing to do with ‘public health concerns’, or ‘concerns for flood victims because of unsympathetic land usage (note: it’s the agricultural sector you should really be focusing on if that were ever a concern of yours). It’s nothing but ‘anti shooting’ via the back door. Those who use lead shot are legally entitled to and act within the law. Those who shoot driven grouse are legally entitled to and do so within the law.

        I think it’s something like 30% of houses built before 1970 still have lead water pipes in them. I’m looking forward to seeing the petition started by those public health concerns to lobby the government to legislate for its immediate removal. Oh but hang on . . . . how do we target the shooting community with that?

        I can accept there’s a small section of the community who don’t agree with shooting (though generally I’ve found this is borne of ignorance rather than knowledge), but at least have the backbone to stand by your convictions and don’t try and paint it as something else.

        1. Being legally entitled doesn’t always make it morally right …… and personal insults do not make for your cause.
          By ‘killing everything in sight’ I meant whatever type of shooting is followed …. no more – no less ……….
          I couldn’t give a toss who shoots or for what reason – but I do care passionately about the by-catch of shooting whatever it is and wherever it’s executed – and that includes wildlife affected by the fallout from the use of lead to the trapping and snaring on managed moorland …….
          When an alternative is available – why not use it?

  4. I live in Wales and I didn’t get a note about Rob Sheldon’s Lead petition in my RSPB April e-newsletter. I don’t think I overlooked it.
    Maybe Bob the squirrel pushed it out with his plea to contact Welsh Assembly candidates, maybe it was only on RSPBplus.
    I do feel most strongly that in the same way as the RSPB got us all writing to our MPs, MEPs etc about the Nature Directives it should publicise initiatives such as Rob Sheldon’s Lead petition and of course your Ban Driven Grouse Shooting petition.

    1. Yes, it looks like the RSPB are being rather selective about encouraging their members to sign Rob Sheldon’s petition. I live in Scotland and cannot see anything about it in the April e-News that I received. This is a real shame. However, the pesky squirrel was included!!

  5. @Natures Silence ! unfortunately – on so many issues, but particularly Robs petition which I thought might have been “Safe” for the RSPB to heavily support and of course the on-going lack of publicity or action to support Mark’s Ban on Driven Grouse Shoots petition – and at least initially we are only trying to get the subject debated in parliament.

    still don’t know why they haven’t asked their membership for an opinion, after all it is about protecting wildlife the environment and nature isn’t it aka @Natures_Voice?

Comments are closed.