Defra
offices – London
Attendees:
Mr John Swift - British Association of
Shooting and Conservation (Chair accepted)
Dr Mark Avery - RSPB
Mr John Batley - The Gun Trade Association
Ltd
Mr Stephen Crouch - National Game
Dealers Association
Mr Adrian Gane - Country Land and Business Association
Mr Robert Gray - The
Countryside Alliance
Dr
James Kirkwood - Universities Federation for Animal Welfare
Prof. Len Levy - Institute of Environment
and Health
Dr Deborah Pain - Wildfowl &
Wetlands Trust
Dr Stephen Tapper - Game and Wildlife
Conservation Trust
Secretariat
Mr Tim Andrews - Defra
(Secretary)
Ms Lucy Munro - Defra
Guest Attendees
Dr Christina Baskaran - The Food Standards
Agency (FSA
Mr Terry Donohoe - The Food
Standards Agency (FSA)
Mr Roger Quy - FERA
Mr Ashley Matthews - Defra
1.
Apologies
No apologies
were received.
2. Chairs introduction (Welcome and individual introductions)
John Swift agreed to be the interim Chair and his appointment was endorsed later. The Chair welcomed
the Group and introductions were made. Appreciation was expressed for all those
participating. It was explained how the Group was kept deliberately small but had
also been constructed to include a balance of interest across sectors.
The Chair
explained how participation in the Group will be challenging and will require ongoing
commitment, he also highlighted to the Group that the timeframe for delivering
a progress report to government is one year from this meeting.
The Group
discussed the quality of emerging evidence and how best it might consider this
as part of its work. The Peregrine Fund proceedings of the conference on
Ingestion of Spent Lead Ammunition: Implications for Wildlife and Humans was mentioned: http://www.peregrinefund.org/Lead_conference/default.htm.
John Swift confirmed that all the main shooting organisations were committed to the principle of
the Group. He sought confirmation from the Group that they supported his
appointment as Chair of the Group. The Group unanimously offered their support
for John’s appointment as Chair.
3.
Defra’s objectives in setting up the Group
Gratitude
was expressed on behalf of Defra for all those attending and agreeing to
participate in this Group. The main objective for Defra in setting up the Group
with the FSA was to investigate possible risks from the use of lead ammunition
both for the conservation of wild birds and other species and for animal
welfare.
Defra
officials stated UK Government had not so far formulated conclusions in
relation to the possible impacts of lead ammunition on wildlife conservation
and animal welfare. Defra officials explained it will carefully consider the
conclusions and recommendations of the Group in formulating its policy in this
area.
A question
was posed on communications with devolved administrations and whether NE and
JNCC had been asked to be part of the Group. Defra officials explained that
these organisations would no doubt have a role to play but that this strategic group
was to be kept as small as possible. Defra would endeavour to keep the devolved
administrations informed of progress. It was explained that the Group did not
include government or agency participants so its conclusions and advice could
be free from government intervention.
4. FSA’s
objectives in setting up the Group
FSA
officials explained that there were two key objectives for setting up this Group.
They are to consider:
- The possible risks to humans as a result of consuming wild game and
venison shot with lead ammunition
- The possible risks to the food chain as a result of spent lead ammunition
deposited on farm and agricultural land.
FSA
officials explained that while Defra has an England only remit in terms of nature
conservation policy, FSA’s remit for food safety extends UK wide.
FSA officials
explained the Agency is an independent UK government department and that its remit
covers food safety and healthy eating. In the context of this Group, the FSA’s
particular concerns related to the possible impacts on food safety from lead in
the environment.
The Group
noted the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has now published a scientific
opinion on possible health risks related to the presence of lead in food. (Post
meeting note: this can be viewed at: http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/scdoc/1570.htm)
FSA
officials pointed out that the EFSA report mentions that high consumers of game
meat could have a higher than average exposure to lead.
Risk assessments have so far indicated
that due to the relatively small quantities of game eaten and the relatively
low levels of lead present, it is unlikely that eating game will increase
exposure to lead over the long-term for the majority of the population. FSA
officials indicated they are shortly to commission research in relation to
patterns of consumption that the Group may wish to consider upon its
publication.
The FSA are
aware of a small number of incidents where animals have ingested spent lead ammunition
leading to animal welfare and food safety concerns.
Two recent sources of information that may be of use
in the FSA risk assessment were mentioned, one on lead concentrations in game
from a study led by WWT, and one on game consumption levels from a BASC survey.
5. Terms
of Reference/Group Aims
The Chair
led detailed consideration of the draft terms of reference. The Group agreed
that they are clear.
The Group
agreed the Terms of Reference with minor amendments and also agreed these, once
amended, would be published with the minutes of the meeting.
The Group
discussed what the outputs of its work would likely be and it was confirmed
that the Group have been requested to produce a written report to Defra/FSA at
the end of the first year. The Group agreed to inform Defra/FSA of any key
findings as they become apparent. It was also agreed the Chair will provide a
single point of contact between the Group and Defra/FSA. While Defra/FSA will
determine the timing of publication of the Group’s progress report (so as to
give officials and Ministers time to properly consider it), Defra/FSA gave a
firm commitment that the advice it receives from the Group will be made public.
The Chair
made it clear that any subgroups established to tackle key areas will be able
to consider information from a wide range of sources providing the quality of
information on which any advice to Defra/FSA is based is of a quality that
would withstand independent peer review.
A question
was asked as to the status of the final report and whether it would be made
public. Defra/FSA officials confirmed that although Government would not be
bound by any advice or recommendations contained in the final report, the
report itself would be made publically available.
6.
Working Practices/Operating Principles
The Group
discussed the operating principles under which the Group would carry out its
business and specifically on how decisions would be made within the Group.
It was agreed
that minority views on the issues would be important and needed to be taken
into account and noted, but that the Group would make decisions on a ‘majority consensus
basis’. Decisions made would therefore be based upon the majority view but
would record where a significant minority view was also presented.
It was drawn
to the Group’s attention that a significant number of people within the
shooting community were unconvinced about the case for a total ban of lead
ammunition and the formation of the Group.
The Group agreed
to operate in a way that was as open, inclusive and transparent as possible.
The Chair
requested that the secretariat produce draft formal minutes within 15 working
days following a meeting. The draft minutes will be circulated for comment by
the Group within this period prior to being signed off by the Chair for formal
publication. The aim is to have the minutes published within one month of a meeting
being held. The secretariat agreed to this request.
It was
agreed that these meetings should be conducted in accordance with the Chatham
House Rule but that the names of attendees of the Group would, contrary to the
Rule, be made public.
7. The
use of subgroups
The Chair
presented a possible model of subgroups for consideration. It was agreed that members
of the main strategic group could also be involved in one or more subgroups. The
Group was asked to consider the proposed model though the Chair stressed this
was very much a “straw man” for discussion.
The model
was based on appointing two subgroups for gathering primary evidence and
producing authoritative advice on other considerations. These subgroups could
provide the essential material which could be considered by subgroups covering
shooting stakeholders and external inputs. Consideration might also be given to
an independent subgroup to quality check advice from the main group.
It was suggested
that a model based upon risk assessment would be appropriate. Another
suggestion for the possible model of subgroups was to base the structure on the
three strands: conservation, welfare and food safety. The Chair took comments
away for consideration.
The Group
therefore discussed several subgroup models and how they might interact but
concluded that irrespective of the model used the primary evidence had to be gathered
and a proper risk assessment carried out.
The Group
identified that a subgroup dealing with deer control would likely be necessary.
The Chair invited group members to make suggestions for consideration at the
next meeting as to who might be best placed to lead such a subgroup.
It was noted
RSPB would have an interest in this proposed subgroup as on their land they undertake
a programme of deer management every year and may therefore have expertise to
offer any subgroup dealing with this issue.
It was also
suggested that a select committee type of system might be used where nominated
experts could present evidence to the strategic group.
It was agreed
that collation of “primary evidence” would be necessary as a first step.
It was
agreed that primary evidence would need to cover:
- Wildlife
health and welfare – how much of a risk might lead ammunition pose?
- Human
health - how much of a risk might lead ammunition pose?
- What
broad mitigation options might there be?
A summary of
the evidence base would need to be taken to the strategic group.
The Chair
stressed that while the key evidence might be brought together by scientists
any risk assessment based upon it must involve appropriate people from shooting
disciplines and other stakeholders.
It was put
to the group that risk assessments must be conducted by individuals expert in
the field being assessed. It was added that this must include competent people
from stakeholder groups.
In relation
to the other possible subgroups identified, the Group agreed to consider these
further. Thought was given to potential subgroups covering the needs and
implications for the shooting disciplines.
The Chair
stressed his wish for the Group in due course to consider options for the
independent moderation of the Group’s year-end progress report.
This being
an inaugural meeting the Group reached no firm conclusions regarding how to
proceed with co-ordinating these groups but it was agreed that the first step was
to give consideration to gathering the key evidence on wildlife and human
health. A primary evidence subgroup would be charged with the delivery of this
key step. It was proposed that stakeholders from the shooting sector would
offer a valuable input in the work of this subgroup. The Chair invited members
to think about names for consideration at the next meeting.
It was
proposed, that the evidence would be required in these distinct categories:
- UK based evidence
- International evidence
- Problems proved in the UK
The development
and marketing of alternatives to lead ammunition including associated risks and
performance were also key considerations to be taken into account in due course
by the Group. It was agreed that consideration should be given to this aspect with
a view to further discussion at the next meeting.
8.
Communications
It was agreed
that the Group would release material and statements solely through the Chair. Members
agreed to refer press inquiries going beyond routine inquiry to the Chair.
It was
agreed that the terms of reference for the Group should be published with the
formal minutes. Action secretariat
A proposed
website structure was put forward which had been developed by the BASC web
team. An example layout was presented by the Chair and comments were invited.
The Group agreed this facility would aid transparency, encourage external
comment and would be useful for disseminating the progress of the Group.
9. FERA
Desk Study
A FERA
official presented a summary of the recent desk study undertaken by the Agency
to review the evidence concerning the contamination of wildlife and the
environment arising from the use of lead ammunition.
The Group
agreed this presentation will be made publicly available and published on the
website once it is up and running.
The Group
welcomed this summary and agreed to consider its findings in detail alongside
other available research.
10. Any
other business
Appreciation
was expressed for the Peregrine Fund who had made available a report for this
meeting.
The publication of a paper entitled “The potential
hazard to human health from exposure to fragments of lead bullets and shot in
the tissues of game animals”, was mentioned and noted by the Group.
Action
All: The Chair requested that all attendees consider who needs to be
involved in subgroups.
Action DP:
Debbie Pain agreed to contact John Harradine in order to give consideration to
gathering key evidence sources on wildlife and human health so that it might be
included on the website.
Action
All: It was agreed that the Group should meet again fairly soon. The two
dates proposed are 27 May pm or 28 May am for a meeting at the same venue.
Group members should indicate to the secretariat their preferred date.
Action
All: Consider models and options for sub-group structure and composition. Consider
options for the independent moderation of the Group’s year-end progress
report.
Action
Sec: The secretariat was tasked with producing a Gantt chart/project plan
in order to assist with setting clear milestones for this Group.
|