The mallard duck is now a common site in Spalding, yet this may not have been the case if it wasn’t for the likes of Tony Creasey his friend Ken Burton and other wildfowlers rearing ducks for release in the area. In November 1968 Ken Burton wrote the following:
“This year I have pleasure in announcing the record number of ducks released for the club, I am sure it created quite a lot of interest, what with the schools, Spalding people, and of course Spalding Wildfowlers. We have released up to date 259 Mallard, 29 Shelduck, and four Carolina – a total of 292. A grand effort and thanks to all concerned.
I think the other night was one of my greatest rewards for my part in this work. I was feeding the ducks from Chain Bridge when tap on my shoulder and a real cockney voice announces, “Keep up the good work son.” I turned round to see an old gentleman about 70 years young. I said, “Why?”. Maybe it was just blunt Lincolnshire but it was then he said that the willow trees, the ducks and the river was very near as beautiful as his birthplace, Richmond Park.”
Spalding Wildfowlers were also heavily involved in the joint management of a nature reserve at Moulton Marsh downstream of Fosdyke Bridge with a series of pits and a reclaimed rubbish tip. Tony Creasey was one of the driving forces behind this long term project.
There are many wildfowlers that I was lucky enough to meet that are no longer with us. Each club around the Wash had its own characters and personalities in what, at times, could be parochial in their approach, but would co-operate and work together when their areas of interest overlapped. Each clubs membership guided new wildfowlers, but besides the famous Kenzie there are three key guides that stood out in the central coastal area of the Wash: Sid Wright, Ray Issitt and Frank Harrison.
Sid Wright was the son of a river board worker and was introduced to shooting by his father at the age of 7. Initially his father would let him carry a gun, but without cartridges and when he eventually gave his son cartridges he only gave him six. Indeed I have known new wildfowlers to go down the marsh for the first time with Sid only to have him take their cartridges off them as they walked along the sea wall. This actually is not that unreasonable as wildfowling on the marsh is no place for an inexperienced gun to go safely. Indeed only carrying six cartridges is also prudent, as many visits you will not get in range of any quarry and the salt air can quickly cause the brass caps of the cartridges to rust. Also, you do not wish to shoot more than you can carry across mud and marsh and you need to be a reasonable shot before you go down there. You can compare it to playing squash, you need a certain level of ability and fitness before you can begin to play for the first time, the same goes for the sport of wildfowling. In the War and post war period Sid together with other locals regularly shot the marsh for both their own meat and to sell. Sid was possibly one of the last persons to use nets to trap birds on the marshes of The Wash until this method of hunting was banned by legislation in the early 1950’s. Sid then met with Kenzie Thorpe, “ Kenzie asked me to go goose shooting with him. The fowling season had finished so I agreed. We caught a train to Thorney together and shot for two or three weeks decoying over drilled corn and peas. The next season Kenzie invited me to go wildfowling staying with him on an old boat on Terrington Marsh.” Kenzie suggested Sid take up guiding which he did with his first party in 1948.
Like Kenzie Sid fell foul of the law, by shooting two pheasants on the foreshore that he deemed he had a right to shoot as of custom by means of a permissive licence issued by the Crown, that is, it had been allowed in the past and had never been cancelled. The result was a 9 hour long magistrates court case presided over by Mr G. A. Worth (George Worth) magistrate and local farmer. Mr Harbage was the prosecuting solicitor. The case makes interesting reading.
“ Opening Mr Harbage submitted that if the magistrate were satisfied that Wright unlawfully killed game and that he was in possession of the game and gun and equipment when he was searched by a police officer in a public place, then he was guilty.
It was not necessary for the prosecution to prove by direct evidence either the specific land or unlawful means by which the game came into Wright’s possession. It was the prosecution’s case that Wright was somewhere in the vicinity of the new sea bank.
All the land that the magistrates would hear about would fall into one of three categories. It could be farmland owned by individuals or farming companies. Or a little bit of land between the new sea bank and the water mark owned by the Ministry of Defence. To the north of this was a foreshore which, in the submission of the prosecution, was Crown land.
The public by and large had very few rights on the foreshore. They had the rights for navigation and fishing and probably to be there in an emergency. They had no right to walk up and down the foreshore. They did not even have the right to go on the foreshore for bathing.
Members of the public might feel it was their privilege to shoot or walk on the foreshore, but in his submission they had no right. Any pheasants taken there by any member of the public were taken unlawfully.
Two gamekeepers, Mr Albert Edward Griffin of Dawsmere and Mr Reginald Loose of Holbeach St. Matthew, gave evidence of hearing five shots and the direction from which they came.
P.C. Foster and Sgt. Plaskitt gave evidence of conversations with Wright who was stopped as he drove his van away from the sea bank along Barge Road.
Flt. Lt. Robert G. Gray officer commanding the R.A.F. Bombing Range at Holbeach said no-one had authority to shoot pheasants on that range. Permission was given for the Wildfowlers’ Association to shoot wildfowl.
Mr Alfred Frederick Halgarth of The Limes, Fleet said he had always known that pheasant shooting went on on the sea side of the new sea bank, but always thought it was illegal. He had never heard it said that there was any right or privilege to shoot pheasants in that vicinity. Mr Halgarth said he was chairman of the Holbeach Wildfowlers and since reorganisation about four or five years ago, wildfowlers clubs had strictly forbidden their members to shoot pheasant on the outmarshes.
Mr Robert Edward Goodland , a land agent employed by the Ministry of Defence said there were no shooting rights agreements for any Ministry of Defence land at all.
At the conclusion of the prosecution’s case Mr Lewis (defence counsel instructed by Metcalfe, Copeman and Pettefar ), submitted that there was no case to answer. He said that killing of game was only unlawful when it was done on land where it ought not to be done. The crucial issue was not whether Wright shot the pheasants but where.
The only issue in this case was whether, at this stage, the irresistible inference from the evidence of possession and conversation which followed was that this defendant shot those pheasants in a place which constituted the shooting of them poaching. He submitted that throughout the evidence there had been running a misconception that because these were pheasants they could not lawfully be shot because they were game.
In this case they had a no man’s land where it was reasonably possible that the defendant may have shot the birds, and where they knew from the evidence that shooting was done and had been done for many years. There was confusion as to the existence, if at all, of rights to shoot in this area and it was his contention that there was tacit licence to shoot.
Mr Harbage told the magistrates that there could not be a “no man’s land.” If the tide had receded over the years then the Ministry owned rather more land than it thought it did. Even if he was wrong about that, the land must necessarily belong to the Crown.
The magistrate ruled there was a case to answer.
Next to give evidence was Wright who said he shot the pheasants when he was out from the new sea bank by about 600 to 800 yards. When the wildfowlers were first formed he heard someone say, “We won’t shoot no pheasants as now we are getting this marsh tied up and want to keep the right side of the farmers.”
Answering Mr Harbage he said that he knew the members of the Wildfowlers’ Association could not shoot pheasants on the bank. The pheasants were not protected on the foreshore. One of the three pheasants seized he had shot on his father-in-law’s land. Re-examined he said he had always thought you could shoot pheasant on the foreshore. People had for 70 years.
Mr. Eric Henry Simpson of Fleet Road, Holbeach, said he had shot wildfowl and pheasant on the foreshore for 25 years.
Mr. George Arthur Ball, of 7 Council House, Gedney Drove End, said he had always shot everything, including pheasants, on the foreshore.
Evidence was also given by Mr George Richard Wilkinson of Sutton Bridge, and Mr Henry Walker Swan, of Broad Lane, Moulton, who produced correspondence he had had with the Crown Estates Commission. Mr Lewis submitted that the attitude of the Crown had been shown to be “permissive” throughout. True, he could not contend there was any right, but it was quite a different matter for someone to establish a permissive licence to carry out certain conduct.
This land had been shot upon and game shot going back over very many years and was evidence of permissive licence by the Crown. In order to bring that licence to an end the Crown had to give some form of notice.
Mr Worth said that the letters from the Crown Commissioners made it quite clear that in their opinion the only rights that the public had on the foreshore were for navigation and fishing.
At the conclusion of the case, Mr Worth said the court believed there was a very real distinction in practice between wildfowling and shooting game on the Crown lands in that area. So far as shooting game in the area owned by the Ministry of Defence and the Crown the court had come to the conclusion that there was a complete right to the Crown in the shooting of game in that area. While some people might have believed that the Crown had no intention of instituting proceedings for so doing the Crown’s rights remained the same and would remain the same unless there was further legislation. To escape conviction on an illegal act of shooting game there the defendant would have to prove that he had genuinely thought that he had permission and that there were reasonable grounds for thinking so. That, he had failed to do. Therefore the court came to the conclusion that Wright had performed an illegal act.
Of course, the evidence was mixed on the subject of whether they thought they could, as the law stood, shoot game on the outmarsh or not. That, in the opinion of the court, did not absolve them from the duty of knowing the law and obeying it. The court was satisfied that game had been shot on the outmarsh, probably quite frequently. No action had, in fact, been taken by the Crown against this, but the court had no evidence at all that any officer of the Crown had any knowledge that this was happening. London was rather a long way from Holbeach outmarsh. Mr Worth went on to say that if this case is properly reported in the Press, there will in future be no excuse for anyone being ignorant of the law, unless of course our interpretation of the law is altered.
“Therefore , we think in this particular case that justice will be served if the defendant is fined the almost nominal sum of £5 (£4 in the first case and £1 in the second) but I wish to emphasise that this case, having received publicity, other cases of like nature are unlikely to be treated leniently.”
Mr Worth added that in the circumstances costs would be remitted and there would be no order as to forfeiture.”
The magistrate, in my opinion, showed wisdom in his response in that he upheld the law, but recognised that Sid suffered an extra punishment in that he was banned from the Marshes operated by Spalding and Holbeach Wildfowling Clubs and also banned from issuing permits to shoot on the marshes they operated. At that time this typically amounted to 100 permits a season so was a significant culling of Sid’s activities. In later times all was forgiven and Sid was restored to guiding and sharing his great knowledge, but Alf Halgarth did tell me he felt that Sid had not forgiven him for his testimony in court. It has to be noted that the leases held by the wildfowling clubs from private landlords were very specific that no game was allowed to be shot, and the future of these could easily be put in jeopardy.
Many years later Alf Halgarth was to fall foul of the magistrate himself, this time a Mrs Worth from the same farming family. Alf had burnt some stubble on his land, but was up before the magistrate because he did not have the statutory supply of water on site as he burnt the stubble. Alf defended himself, claiming that there was water bowser in the neighbouring field. “That may be so Mr Halgarth, but I know for a fact that the neighbouring field does not belong to you and the water bowser you refer to belongs to my husband’s farm.” Alf smiled as he told me the fine cost him £50 which he thought was fair.
Frank Harrison was a famous wildfowling guide and much has been written about him, and although I met him several times I have little intimate knowledge of him other than his reputation as a likeable and knowledgeable wildfowling guide.
Franks obituary read: “ A Normandy veteran and one of the most knowledgeable guides on the shores of the Wash has died. Frank Harrison (84), of Long Sutton was a longstanding member of the Fenland Wildfowlers’ Association and a professional guide on the area’s salt marshes for the past 50 years.
Described as being ‘as famous as you can get in the world of wildfowling’, Mr Harrison’s interest in the countryside stemmed from a visit to his school by Sir Peter Scott, founder of the Worldwide Fund for Nature, who lived in the East Lighthouse at Sutton Bridge.
A former smallholder, Mr Harrison and his late wife Peggy took over Long Sutton’s Crown and Woolpack in 1955.
He also worked for civil engineers French Kier and served in the Royal Navy during World War II, when he was a coxswain on a D-Day landing craft.”
The Crown and Woolpack was a favourite pub for visiting wildfowlers in its day and was notorious for its lock-ins and late morning breakfasts for visiting wildfowlers. Indeed, I have been told that no wildfowler was turned away and it was even known for visiting wildfowlers to sleep on the floor.
Another of the early wildfowlers that I had the benefit of making acquaintance of is Ray Issitt, a founder member of Gedney Drove End Wildfowlers. Ray and his wife Mabel moved to Gedney Marsh as a farm foreman in 1954. In his position shooting rabbits and pigeons to protect crops was his initial interest. But rabbit populations were hit as myxomatosis was introduced as a disease to control them and his attention turned to the ducks and geese of the marsh. He remembered Kenzie bringing down wildfowlers to the marsh literally by the bus load. He became a member of Holbeach Wildfowlers and eventually formed Gedney Drove End Wildfowlers at the Wheatsheaf Pub in Gedney Drove End. Ray died in 2018 aged 91 having enjoyed a long retirement.
Of course there are many other wildfowlers that are worthy of mention, but their tales have been told elsewhere or remain for others to tell. However, I will give brief mention to Laurence Thompson. He was a farmer and a keen wildfowler and one of the last punt gunners of this area. Although I have encountered later ones in Kings Lynn wildfowlers. He was very cautious about drawing attention to this sport as he was aware of the perception of mass slaughter of wildfowl cause by one shot of a gun. He did make a film of his exploits punt gunning which I do recall seeing. Although I never understood how, he also held the post of honorary coastguard, I guess this may have been in order to procure his knowledge of the marsh and its tides, but I was never privileged to the background, I am aware he has helped rescue people, but he was a modest man. Below is from his letterhead that illustrates his passion for the area and his sport.
Comentarios