BASC is miffed by Wild Justice’s legal action against the lawfulness of Natural Resources Wales’s general licences. In a badly written statement which doesn’t say much, but says most of it twice, BASC calls Wild Justice a bunch of names.
Apparently Wild Justice is attacking the countryside whereas we (Chris Packham, Ruth Tingay and I) are challenging the legality of a government agency’s decision on the licensing of lethal control of birds.
Whereas last year Wild Justice did not seek withdrawal of the general licences (but they were withdrawn anyway) this year we do seek the removal of the current general licences and their replacement with lawful alternatives (either general licences or specific licences). If government and its agencies cannot produce lawful licensing regimes for lethal control of millions of birds then they are not fit for purpose.
BASC may regard itself as having led the charge for reinstatement of the legally flawed general licences – if so, then they were a false friend to governments and their agencies as a legal challenge was inevitable. Our legal advice is that the general licences in England and Wales are unlawful and we are perfectly prepared to go to court to argue this.
Why make those challenges now? Isn’t this the most inconvenient time of year? Well, the timing is entirely down to the timing of the issuing of the licences. Wild Justice can only challenge a decision by a statutory body when it has been made but we have been in correspondence with DEFRA and NRW over our views on the unlawfulness of their licences so our challenge won’t come as a surprise to them.
We may have to settle these issues in court – we are ready and prepared to do that.
BASC is very keen to be involved as an interested party in this dispute, it seems. I wonder whether that is what NRW and/or DEFRA wants…?
And I wonder whether it is what the farming industry wants. It is the ridiculous nature of the so-called conservation licences that attracted our attention to this subject in the first place, and they are our priority to get fixed. I’d think about that if I were a farmer.
Much of this blog is a restatement of an earlier blog this morning. Some things merit repeating, as some take a while to get the message.
[registration_form]
I hadn’t realised that the legal challenge by Wild Justice of the General Licences issued by NRW would somehow close down the countryside could somebody from BASC explain please! Or is this the usual Bulls*** from them.
Sorry to state the bleeding obvious, but BASC are a membership organisation so they need to say what their members expect them to say (they always have done), so we shouldn’t be surprised by this tripe.
And if what they say also chimes with others who also don’t know what they are talking about, like some Government ministers, or do know what they are talking about, but choose to ignore it, like some Government ministers, then that’s also probably the best political tactic too.
Keep up the pressure Wild Justice. If the law is on your side, then justice should be done …….
It is not difficult.
Either the current general licences and their replacements are lawful or they are not. The rigour of our Government and their agencies is being tested in a way that is appropriate in a democracy. BASC and their friends will have to get use to it.
Crowdfunding – don’t you just love it and Wild Justice!
One thing you need to take into account in general is that by a very large majority most farmers have no interest in shooting and so have no interest in bad laws against birds.
Of course it suits those representing shooters to make out they represent all farmers whereas in fact relatively few have a shooting interest.
Indeed Dennis both BASC and the Countryside Areliars would have us all believe that if not all the vast majority of country folk including all farmers are 100% behind their campaigns because most ( they would have us believe)are members, nothing of course could be further from the truth. Relatively few have a shooting interest and even fewer are interested in the barbarism that is hunting with dogs.
Of course elsewhere in the world hunting as a man with a good sporting rifle using his skill at woodcraft to get close to an animal to shoot and then eat. Very different from what Tim “Nasty” Bonner represents.
Hoping that the Welsh environment minister* who I assume is ultimately responsible will be reasonable and not take the side of a large shooting lobby group just because the aforementioned minster represents the constituency in which this shooting lobby group is based.
*Can’t remember if they call themselves ministers here in Wales, and I am too lazy to check.