W
ell, I was going to devote all this to Chris
Packham and the general licence fiasco- but the goalposts moved after it became clear
that Natural England were the ones who created
the problem by ignoring their own advice. By the
time you get to read this, either the situation will
have been sorted to the mutual satisfaction of all,
Packham’s front gate will pose a serious health
risk, or you’ll be bored to tears with the whole
sorry saga. The latest I’m aware of is that NE have
been stripped of their responsibility for issuing
general licences, which suggests that common
sense might have prevailed – but this is
environmental politics 2019-style, so who knows?
Apparently, it all started with Packham meeting
some guy shooting flighting pigeons in a wood- possibly in a scenario similar to the delightful Bill
Oddie haranguing wildfowlers making their way
off the marsh near Chichester harbour, I don’t
know. From that chance encounter, Wild Justice
hatched the idea of a petition for a judicial review
of the general licences, a situation NE were aware
of back in March. They were also aware of all the
chaos this might create and, although they didn’t
ask for any advice from relevant organisations,
they did write to the NFU and BASC, reassuring
them that Wild Justice posed no serious threat
and accepting the fact that the licences are
legitimate regulatory tools and that those
contested should remain in place – or words to
that effect. And you know the rest.
What I will say is that there’s nothing new about
it. When I took over as editor of Airgun World,
back in the early 1990s, the Wildlife & Countryside
Act had been in force for a couple of years, along
with the blanket protection for all wild birds and a
large number of mammals. Sixteen bird species
were originally exempt from protection, given pest
status and, under the terms of a general licence,
could be controlled by ‘authorised persons’. But
well before the final rubber stamping, the
magazine I now edited had fought a heroic action- John Fletcher would most probably have been
editor during the battle – to prevent a proposed
ban within the W&CA on air rifles being used for
pest control.
Some of those concerned with the creation of
clauses within the Act were more than keen (you
could even say fanatical) to see air rifles
consigned to history as weapons of mass
destruction. As a consequence, those hunters
whose love of the airgun’s simple effectiveness
against rats, rabbits, pigeons and corvids felt
ostracised and embattled, but Airgun World and
Airgunner played major roles in helping to get the
Act amended, with the significant aid of BASC –
though not all its members were quite as full of
enthusiasm for the cause. Some of them saw an
airgun simply as either a poacher’s tool or an
ineffective toy, or, paradoxically, as both.
The BASC management’s position was based
on the significant use of the airgun as an
introduction to safe and responsible shooting – a
stance they maintain today, logically enough, not
least perhaps because the removal of one creates
Licence to kill
Thanks to biased publicity, the general public now see the general licence in emotional
rather than practical terms. Where’s James Bond when you need him, asks Adam Smith
KEEPER’S COUNTRY
WITH ADAM SMITH
READ MORE
You can find out more
about the general licence
situation on pages 6, 51
and 55.PICTURE:
DOM HOLTAM
The airgun world is no stranger to threats against
the sport