BASC has welcomed clarification from the Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust (WWT) (http://www.wwt.org.uk/news/all-news/2015/12/wwt-news/wwt-and-lead-ammunition-poisoning/) that any additional regulation on lead shot must be dependent on established government risk management processes. This means that the level of risk is identified and quantified using sound evidence delivered through rigorous and consistent process.
BASC has always insisted that the processes around the assessment of lead ammunition should be coherent, consistent, clear and unbiased. Thereafter, any additional regulations must meet better regulation principles.
In a letter to the Times in December 2014 the President of the Royal Society, Sir Paul Nurse, wrote: “Scientists have a responsibility to work with and correct those who misuse and misrepresent science to support their particular politics or ideologies…we must remain vigilant to ensure that evidence comes before opinion.”
This is why BASC has unswervingly continued to highlight the dangers of White Hat Bias – where a scientist deliberately or unintentionally selects evidence which supports their opinion.
Where BASC has expressed concerns it is where commitments to certain policy outcomes appear to drive conclusions and campaigning. This has been part of the constructive challenge that any scientific and information gathering process should actively welcome.
BASC believes it is important that those benefitting from charitable status abide by their charitable objects. We also believe it is right that organisations which benefit from charitable status are fully transparent on how they spend their funds.
We do not believe however, that it is up to either BASC or the charities themselves to act as judge in the matter of compliance with charitable objects. This is why the Charity Commission exists.