| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Matt the Rat
Moderator
197 Posts |
 Posted - 03 Feb 2006 : 12:57:07
|
Did anyone hear 'Yesterday in Parliament' today? BBC Radio 4 (just in case you want to use the listen again service).
Big debate about moles and methods of control. No mention of BPCA, or NPTA though..............
Perhaps Richard and Barrie could let us all know if anyone from our organisations was present in the lobby yesterday, and if not why.
Keep on Killing |
|
|
Bob Newey
Junior Member
31 Posts |
Posted - 04 Feb 2006 : 04:21:54
|
| What's the Listen Again service? Is it possible to access this through the internet as I'd like to hear it if its possible? |
 |
|
|
blatta
Junior Member
United Kingdom
46 Posts |
|
|
nigel
Senior Member
106 Posts |
|
|
Northerner
Senior Member
United Kingdom
109 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2006 : 12:03:26
|
Isn't this just typical of the organisations we throw money at, though? Classic example is BASC, who up their membership fees enormously, and then sit on their thumbs.
Anyone get the Mail on Sunday this week? Fabulously ridiculous and ill-informed piece by Roy Hattersley on the proposed badger cull. This is a man who definitely goes around with his head firmly wedged up his ****.
God help us. |
|
|
|
Matt the Rat
Moderator
197 Posts |
Posted - 08 Feb 2006 : 16:04:15
|
Bounce for BPCA/NPTA to respond.........
Keep on Killing |
|
|
|
NickA
Senior Member
United Kingdom
452 Posts |
Posted - 08 Feb 2006 : 16:21:16
|
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Straight over their heads.
Prevention for protection |
|
|
|
andyb
Senior Member
United Kingdom
195 Posts |
Posted - 08 Feb 2006 : 16:51:34
|
From what I hear the BPCA and The NPTA are fighting thier corner very well at the moment. I think that they need our support not our criticism.
ANDY B |
|
|
|
blatta
Junior Member
United Kingdom
46 Posts |
Posted - 08 Feb 2006 : 17:08:50
|
Firstly, I would like to say that I have never used strychnine, have never seen it used and have only carried out mole trapping at a friends house. So I hope that this will excuse me from any errors in the following:
The BPCA have completed all the relevant forms etc and sent them to the appropriate groups. The BPCA have had to explain why
1. we in the UK need strychnine when no other European country uses it.
2. what grounds does the UK have for needing it (H&S;, damage to stock etc).
3. why other methods available are not sufficient in certain circumstances.
The BPCA have sent out requests for specific examples of cases where moles have caused damage etc. etc. The information has been colated (not many people replied!) and sent off. It is currently a matter of waiting for the response before the BPCA can go to the next stage.
The problem is going to be trying to convince 'Europe' that the UK has reasons, different those of mainland Europe, for keeping it.
Lewis
(my apologies for the lack of detail) |
Edited by - blatta on 08 Feb 2006 17:09:32 |
|
|
|
NickA
Senior Member
United Kingdom
452 Posts |
Posted - 08 Feb 2006 : 17:59:33
|
Andy, not criticising but Parliament is in London, thats where they need to lobby, and to be seen.
Prevention for protection |
|
|
|
blatta
Junior Member
United Kingdom
46 Posts |
Posted - 08 Feb 2006 : 18:19:23
|
A while ago the BPCA requested specific examples from PCO's where moles had caused damage, caused H&S; problems etc.
Specific examples are much better than theory, or 'a friend of a friend' stories.
The response from BPCA members was extremely poor.
It is unlikely that strychnine will be given any sort of reprieve; it will be even less likely unless an extremely good case can be put forward. There may be another chance to put forward examples so if anyone has any information that can be used then please contact Richard Strand at the BPCA. |
|
|
|
Helen
Moderator
United Kingdom
50 Posts |
Posted - 09 Feb 2006 : 11:10:25
|
did i hear the right honourable gentleman correctly when he said that the sonic devices he has been using have worked!
Helen
Luxan(UK)Ltd |
|
|
|
NickA
Senior Member
United Kingdom
452 Posts |
Posted - 09 Feb 2006 : 16:15:04
|
Did he also say it was black cylindrical and inserted into .......
Prevention for protection |
|
|
|
Helen
Moderator
United Kingdom
50 Posts |
Posted - 10 Feb 2006 : 09:44:43
|
Nick i hope your not being suggestive!
Helen
Luxan(UK)Ltd |
|
|
|
Matt the Rat
Moderator
197 Posts |
Posted - 11 Feb 2006 : 11:18:37
|
Thanks Blatta. You've told us what the BPCA have asked everyone else to do, perhaps Richard Strand could now tell us what they have actually done. Your response doesnt answer my question anyway: did either BPCA or NPTA have anyone in the lobby of the palace of Westminster while the debate was taking place or not?
Keep on Killing |
|
|
|
andyb
Senior Member
United Kingdom
195 Posts |
Posted - 11 Feb 2006 : 21:56:37
|
You must understand it isn't the "Pesticide" Strychnine that is being assessed it is the "Chemical" Different ball game all together. The problem with it as a pesticide is that very few people use it, the amount of effort and time it takes to get a licence to use the stuff out ways the actual results. How many people "actually" use Strychnine and how many are just using it as a way to have a snipe at the leading bodies in the Pest Control Industry. The BPCA are trying to make a case for retaining it for use. What efforts are being made by the individuals to save it? How many times have any of you applied for tickets in the last 12 months? Sour Grapes me thinks in some parts!!!
ANDY B |
Edited by - andyb on 11 Feb 2006 22:08:26 |
|
|
|
NickA
Senior Member
United Kingdom
452 Posts |
Posted - 11 Feb 2006 : 22:23:34
|
Sour Grapes don't think so, we are members of our organisations and we expect them to protect OUR interests.
But hasn't the cut off date for complaints passed.
Wasn't Strychnine registered under The Plant Protection Products Directive.
But are our organisations being effective in lobbying Parliament?
Methinks some people avoid the question or have changed sides!
Prevention for protection |
|
|
|
andyb
Senior Member
United Kingdom
195 Posts |
Posted - 11 Feb 2006 : 22:59:35
|
I use it when I need to. I lobbied my MP, I had a go. The general opinion that I got back was that the BPCA was fighting tooth and nail, but the RSPCA had the ministers ears with regards to, I quote "this nasty form of pest control" A whisper from behind a hand is that there may be licenses granted after the 1st of Sept for exceptional circumstances, is this just a way to fob us of until the deed is done, remember the Hunting enquiry outcomes? that also gave a little light at the end of the tunnel at the time, then bang "Banned"
ANDY B |
|
|
|
blatta
Junior Member
United Kingdom
46 Posts |
Posted - 11 Feb 2006 : 23:34:45
|
Matt, I do not know if anyone from the BPCA, NPTA or other interested parties were lobbying. I can try and find out for you though if you would like?
The BPCA have tried to put forward a case to keep strychnine. Members of associations cannot just expect to hand over some cash and then sit back and wait for everything to be done for them. The BPCA asked for information from its members to help build an effective case to put forward. It appears that very few of its members were willing / able to provide data.
Nick, do you know what your association (I think you are a member of the NPTA) has done? I am sure you will have asked them.  Do you know how they have approached this? Have the NPTA been asking their members for info. too?
Lewis |
|
|
|
nigel
Senior Member
106 Posts |
Posted - 12 Feb 2006 : 08:08:15
|
You would think the way the industry is trying to defend the use of strychnine, that this is something new that has been sprung on us, when in fact it has its roots going way back to 1991;
http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/consleg/pdf/1991/en_1991L0414_do_001.pdf
Since then new directives have been introduced as in 1998;
http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/biocides/pdf/dir_98_8_biocides.pdf
So the industry should have been aware of what was coming instead it waited till the eleventh hour to say something.
All that is being asked is that all products now used to protect plants and control pests are evaluated, the same as all rodenticides and insecticides have to be. If the manufacturers or suppliers can put together the same evaluations and prove that this product is safe to use, poses no threat to wildlife or the environment then it would get clearance for use. Sadly they did not, why? Possibly because of cost in doing so or maybe they can not prove it is the safest option available for controlling moles.
All debates that I have heard of seem to revolve around nothing more than cost or economic reasoning, not safety or does this product comply with legislative requirements such as COSHH.
If the industry really wanted to save this product it should of looked in to providing the scientific evidence that was required to keep this product on the market and submitted it when it was required, they had a long enough warning to do so.
We will just have to wait and see what happens in September. |
|
|
|
NickA
Senior Member
United Kingdom
452 Posts |
Posted - 12 Feb 2006 : 10:02:51
|
NPTA has basically done the same as BPCA asked members for help.Lewis handing over Cash is what the Associations want, after all one says it represents the UK pest Control Industry.
As Nigel says this has been coming for years, but the Industry appears to bury its head in the sand.Look at the money and resources that were and are thrown at Methyl Bromide Fumigators very small percentage of industry.
We need to have a lobbyist in Parliament not hundreds of miles away, they need to be meeting and greeting.Same for the media, we are missing our opportunity to make our views known.
I've done the earhole bending of my local MP, though he is an anti airguns and hunting man.
But it needs to be orchestrated, not petitions but hundreds of thousands of letters.
Yes OUR Associations need our help, but unless they lead, were do we go.
Prevention for protection |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Strychnine
