The petition to get chris packham sacked

[Whisky2014]

Wtf is this shit?

"87,866 Supporters
BBC to sack Chris Packham
As an employee of the BBC, Chris Packham should remain impartial and keep his views and beliefs to himself however, he is the face of many anti hunting campaigns and uses his celeb status as a platform to push his anti hunting agenda, he has made his goal to ban all kinds of hunting, and country sports and pursuits and I feel he is no longer fit to work for the BBC"

How about David Attenborough then? From this person's logic he should also be sacked

A lot of people in this country seem to have a problem with anyone standing up for our wildlife. I’m glad Chris speaks out about it, even though it appears to cost him personally.

Yes - if Wild Justice had lost, Nature England would, iirc have been entitled to recover all their legal costs from Chris Packham and the other two. Everybody knows how legal costs can mount up - CP risked losing everything he owns, standing up for what he believed in. How many people would do that, except for their nearest and dearest?

I am only going by what I have been told since a child that rats are dirty beggars. But are they maligned?

They do need to hire a better PR team. Poor little buggers even got blamed for the Black Death even though there is evidence to question their guilt. In fact that might be the cause of their issues, our collective memories of blaming them for the death of millions.

While it's not pleasant if crows etc attack lambs neither is it pleasant sending them to be slaughtered at a few months old for a ten minute dinner.

Mont. 36k was raised for Wild Justice very quickly on change.org. I am sure people would have raise more money if it had been required.

I dont understand t his netting business.
I thought it was for the good for birds.
The put netting up on hedges where they are going to build, then the birds dont nest there and the building is able to go ahead.
What is wrong with that?

Birds already don't have enough nesting places. Netting makes it even harder for them.

@EleanorReally
They can't get rid of the hedges if there is nesting birds. So the nets stop the birds nesting, which in turn means they can cut them down when they want to

I personally think the demise of the hedge is responsible for a lot of the loss of our wildlife.

neither is it pleasant sending them to be slaughtered at a few months old for a ten minute dinner.

This may come as a surprise to you but for baby lambs to be born there has to be a daddy sheep and a mummy sheep. Which perhaps suggests not all lambs are destined for slaughter at a few months old.

Should us farmers ask the crows just to go for the ones that are destined for Sunday Lunch? Not that it matters, without a tongue most lambs don't live very long at all so wouldn't even have 5-12 months playing outside on grass first before being killed rather than starving to death or being put down at a few days old.

Just depends on your outlook on life I suppose.

The problem is that there will be less habitat for the birds to nest in, harder for them to breed. Not necessarily a problem if there are lots of alternative nest sites nearby. More of a problem if birds have migrated across continents to find their breeding grounds unavailable. I think this was a thing with sand martens in SE England.

The thing is we've pushed wildlife so much with intensive agriculture creating vast mono cultures in our countryside, building houses everywhere. At some point we're going to have to put profit second to other species wellbeing.

Given the dead crow display, I’m not sure he was entirely wrong there was he?

Thing is, Sashkin, he tarred them all with the same brush. If I said all football fans were hooligans, I'd be howled down, and quite right too. Some shooters are unpleasant people. Many are not. And he managed to piss them all off.

What we are doing to our wildlife is fucking criminal, without it, we are fucked. This isn't just ramblers and bird watches getting pissed off about the demise of their hobby. its for all of us to be able to survive.
The annoying thing is, it wouldn't take a lot to reverse it..... at the moment.
Make developers put slightly fewer houses on plots (think governments 1950's allocation), landscape them properly (with hedges not fences), have green roofs / solar panels on all new builds, all new buildings must have swift / bat / whatever is appropriate for the area bricks / boxes.
All developments (no matter how small) need an environmental study to ensure developers know what is on the site and protect it / provide for it accordingly. Instead of at the moment, not doing them on purpose so they don't have to protect it.

The longer we leave it the bigger the challenge will be.

www.newscientist.com/article/2200822-have-people-in-the-uk-really-been-banned-from-shooting-wood-pigeons/ looks like a balanced article.

I'm with Chris Packham and the other leading conservationist involved with wild justice. We need someone to challenge Natural England and it's general inefficiencies at protecting wildlife in this country. They are not saying that no birds should be controlled, but that there should be scientific reasons behind the control, not just allowing anyone to control 'pest' species, many of which are native species whose numbers have increased due to agriculture and other land management.

Sacking? He's perfectly allowed to air his views. Even if I don't agree. Even if I found them adhorrent: lets pretend he or anyone else was : homophobic, racist, in favour of vaginal mutilation etc etc. They are still entitled to air their views.

one fell in a water trough. I remember them all because it's so unusual for us. Yes we had one drown in a water trough in a shed this year. It was a freak accident and really gutting.

37 deaths within Wensleydale due to falling in becks, or getting stuck, then falling in etc. 3 corroborated claims of corvus predation. ( I am a vet, it was scour then opportunistic feeding. I could give locations but don't want to out myself. The corvid 'attacks' are in no way equal to accidental or even night time predation.

That's not evidence that's just you saying figures and claiming to be a vet? 37 'beck deaths' in Wensleydale in what period of time? Who has collated this research? What percentage of farmers in the district took part?

I don't know any farmers who would be specifically reporting corvid attacks or lambs falling in becks to their vets either. It just doesn't happen.

As a vet I would hope you would know what mortality reasons farmers do actually report as part of assurance/health schemes.

Corvid attacks are part of insurance compensation and need expert proof form nearly all insurers including nfu. It was 2017 roughly march - may. All within a certain distance of the practise I worked in. Not research just my own experience when attending to corroborate death. It's under ' downed lambs'

Not all 37 were just 'falling into becks' I'm also talking about accidental deaths. I still have my worksheet s.

Why on earth would anyone put in an insurance claim for a few day old lamb? That's ridiculous! Unless you could prove they were from particularly valuable breeding they aren't worth anything. It would probably cost 50 times more to put in the claim than you round get back in compensation. You can buy a live week old lamb for £10, how much is a dead one worth???

If that's what you are basing your statistics on, and you are genuinely a farm vet regularly visiting farming clients then surely you must have some insight into just how far off the mark you must be? Do you not know anything about how the farming community works?

If you are genuinely a sheep farmer I would think you would know about case specific insurance and common practise. To the extent this situation has a definitive terminology

Do you at least accept that there is likely to be significant under reporting from farmers as to lamb mortality rates for different reasons, and impacted by different times of year and that your (only known by you) statistics presumably don't differentiate between day old lambs attacked by crows and 5 month old market ready lambs that have drowned?

Because we would perhaps claim insurance on the second because at that point in it's life it has some monetary value, but we wouldn't claim on the first.

I may be a sheep farmer but I'm still capable of critical thinking and interpreting data within its context.

I really like him as a presenter but this recent campaign really shows him for what he is, an enthusiast who has no idea what it's like to run a working farm. He's ruining the people who put food on our table and putting many more animals at risk. I'd love some of the people on this thread to step out of their bubble and see what live is really like in the countryside.

I don't think being a sheep farmer would mean you weren't capable of critical thinking etc. I'm sure you can do any of those things, farming is hard work on many levels.

I'm baffled Scrowy No one claims for very young lambs. I insure my tups which cost £0000s

If you are genuinely a sheep farmer Oh FFS