Deer killed by shotgun?

[CharlieT]

Your worthwhile and inspiring input is noted, perhaps you would care to show where I am wrong before you come out with comments like jibberish.

 

You will grow very old looking!

 

Let me remind you what I said....

 

You can shoot deer to your hearts content with a 12g and AAA, or a slug. The likes of BB or SG carts are NOT allowed! If the BDS had its way shotguns would be banned entirely!

 

Other that that specifically, any other shotgun or cartridge can only be used for Humane despatch in defined circumstances!

 

ATB!!

 

What is jibberish is advising people that they can shoot deer with a shotgun "to their hearts content". Such advise is not true as Guest 1957 pointed out to you.

 

Bandying around such advice will give many people the idea that they can blast away at deer with their shotgun loaded with AAA and be within the law which in fact it is not.

[Dekers]

What is jibberish is advising people that they can shoot deer with a shotgun "to their hearts content". Such advise is not true as Guest 1957 pointed out to you.

 

Bandying around such advice will give many people the idea that they can blast away at deer with their shotgun loaded with AAA and be within the law which in fact it is not.

 

 

Stop spouting Jibberish and quote some statute!

 

I will certainly accept there may be some interpretation differences here, but you CAN hunt/stalk deer specifically with a 12g and AAA/Slug! And you can do it on a daily basis if required, did you ever know of anyone who shot a deer with a shotgun that wasn't doing damage to cultivated land or any other property, etc, I'd say that means you can do it to your hearts content If you don't then thats your view!

 

And Humane despatch conditions have changed considerably in the 1997 Amendment

 

ATB!!

 

OK...I will accept one bit of jibberish...I really don't know why I keep saying to 1997 Amendment, it is of course the 2007 Amendment...appologies!! :o

Edited March 14, 2010 by Dekers

[vulpicide]

I'm in a city like Glasgow its called Glasgow . :o

[Blackpowder]

Louise Gray probably knows as much about deer control as a dog knows about its own father.

 

Blackpowder

[CharlieT]

Stop spouting Jibberish and quote some statute!

 

I will certainly accept there may be some interpretation differences here, but you CAN hunt/stalk deer specifically with a 12g and AAA/Slug! And you can do it on a daily basis if required, did you ever know of anyone who shot a deer with a shotgun that wasn't doing damage to cultivated land or any other property, etc, I'd say that means you can do it to your hearts content :o If you don't then thats your view!

 

And Humane despatch conditions have changed considerably in the 1997 Amendment

 

ATB!!

 

 

You know full well what the terms of section 7 are.

 

If you shoot deer under these exemptions and are challenged or prosecuted under the act (for using a prohibited firearm) the onus is on you the shooter to prove that you were complying implicitly with the terms of the act. Now this is not hard for someone genuinely shooting deer under the "Farmers Defense" I do it myself but significant damage must be proved and one must be able to prove one has the authority to shoot them.

The act is most specific on this matter and please do not get confused over section 7.4© as this is taken to be the owner or leaseholder of the sporting/shooting rights and having permission from the farmer to shoot fox, deer and rabbits is not the same as owning the sporting rights and would not stand up in court.

 

This is a useful exemption for farmers and as you say the BDS would like to see it go, so please let's not jeopardise the exemption by encouraging people to twist the rules and shoot deer claiming they qualify under the "The Farmers Defense"

[guest1957]

'A person to whom this section applies shall not be entitled to rely on the defence provided by subsection (1) or subsection (2) above as respects anything done in relation to any deer on any land unless he shows that—

A

he had reasonable grounds for believing that deer of the same species were causing, or had caused, damage to crops, vegetables, fruit, growing timber or any other form of property on the land; .

B

it was likely that further damage would be so caused and any such damage was likely to be serious; and .

C

his action was necessary for the purpose of preventing any such damage.'

 

 

The onus would be on the shooter to prove that such damage was serious, and given the political pressure from groups such as the BDS, I don't think this would be anywhere as easy as relying on the general licence for shooting woodpigeon. For me this doesn't equate to being able to shoot them 'to my heart's content' with a shotgun, but as you rightly say this is an opinion based on interpretation of certain words, and a particular view as to how they might be interpreted in the eyes of the law. It just seems an odd choice of tool given that people who have deer problems can apply for a rifle.

 

I'm not being argumentative, I just don't want to see people wondering the countryside blasting deer with shotguns. :-) (but equally appreciate that if on a rare occassion if is all that is available and saplings for example are being destroyed rapidly, it can be a fair option)

Edited March 14, 2010 by guest1957

[Dekers]

You know full well what the terms of section 7 are.

 

If you shoot deer under these exemptions and are challenged or prosecuted under the act (for using a prohibited firearm) the onus is on you the shooter to prove that you were complying implicitly with the terms of the act. Now this is not hard for someone genuinely shooting deer under the "Farmers Defense" I do it myself but significant damage must be proved and one must be able to prove one has the authority to shoot them.

The act is most specific on this matter and please do not get confused over section 7.4© as this is taken to be the owner or leaseholder of the sporting/shooting rights and having permission from the farmer to shoot fox, deer and rabbits is not the same as owning the sporting rights and would not stand up in court.

 

This is a useful exemption for farmers and as you say the BDS would like to see it go, so please let's not jeopardise the exemption by encouraging people to twist the rules and shoot deer claiming they qualify under the "The Farmers Defense"

 

 

'A person to whom this section applies shall not be entitled to rely on the defence provided by subsection (1) or subsection (2) above as respects anything done in relation to any deer on any land unless he shows that—

A

he had reasonable grounds for believing that deer of the same species were causing, or had caused, damage to crops, vegetables, fruit, growing timber or any other form of property on the land; .

B

it was likely that further damage would be so caused and any such damage was likely to be serious; and .

C

his action was necessary for the purpose of preventing any such damage.'

 

 

The onus would be on the shooter to prove that such damage was serious, and given the political pressure from groups such as the BDS, I don't think this would be anywhere as easy as relying on the general licence for shooting woodpigeon. For me this doesn't equate to being able to shoot them 'to my heart's content' with a shotgun, but as you rightly say this is an opinion based on interpretation of certain words, and a particular view as to how they might be interpreted in the eyes of the law. It just seems an odd choice of tool given that people who have deer problems can apply for a rifle.

 

I'm not being argumentative, I just don't want to see people wondering the countryside blasting deer with shotguns. :-) (but equally appreciate that if on a rare occasion if is all that is available and saplings for example are being destroyed rapidly, it can be a fair option)

 

 

Guys.

 

I see where you are coming from and I accept what you say.....simple fact is I have never had any issue qualifying to shoot a deer with a shotgun and neither have loads of other people, (not that I have had much cause to specifically use one) so when the issue comes up perhaps I do accept it a bit to generally and may have conveyed the wrong impression to some, if that is the case then my apologies.

 

But finding the right reasons is pretty simple, two Roe eat as much grass as a horse in a day so that is a serious problem/cost at stables etc, and is also damage to crops, grass being a food crop to the owners and horses, so its a problem on two counts at least......easy!!! Christmas tree farms they **** up the new shoots causing the the loss of saleable trees and therefore owners a serious ongoing problem, Garden centres they eat all the plants and roots, Orchards they demolish trees and crops, fencing they are always damaging (lots of debate about this one), woodland damage, Farmers in many situations, Golf Courses, talk to a Green keeper after a Deer has strolled across his pride and joy (especially if he got spooked), that is serious damage to property costing loads!!, and so it goes, on and on....

 

So ....... :o

 

ATB!! B)

[CharlieT]

Guys.

 

I see where you are coming from and I accept what you say.....simple fact is I have never had any issue qualifying to shoot a deer with a shotgun and neither have loads of other people, (not that I have had much cause to specifically use one) so when the issue comes up perhaps I do accept it a bit to generally and may have conveyed the wrong impression to some, if that is the case then my apologies.

 

But finding the right reasons is pretty simple, two Roe eat as much grass as a horse in a day so that is a serious problem/cost at stables etc, and is also damage to crops, grass being a food crop to the owners and horses, so its a problem on two counts at least......easy!!! Christmas tree farms they **** up the new shoots causing the the loss of saleable trees and therefore owners a serious ongoing problem, Garden centres they eat all the plants and roots, Orchards they demolish trees and crops, fencing they are always damaging (lots of debate about this one), woodland damage, Farmers in many situations, Golf Courses, talk to a Green keeper after a Deer has strolled across his pride and joy (especially if he got spooked), that is serious damage to property costing loads!!, and so it goes, on and on....

 

So ....... :o

 

ATB!! B)

 

Deckers

 

Thanks for the debate, it's what forums should be all about.

 

I hope we have enabled others to learn a little bit of deer "law" from it.

 

All the best

 

Charlie

[sitsinhedges]

Not everyone has the inclination to own a centrefire rifle for the very rare occasion of thinning out troublesome deer. I have seen deer shot, and run, from a hit with a .308 and am sure a close range dose of AAA would be effective and humane.

 

IMO, a lot of what comes out of the BDS is pure snobbery and a closed shop mentality to keep it all for themselves.

 

 

We should be free to responsibly make these decisions for ourselves with the minimum of legislation, that's what we have brains for.

[Harry136]

I personally don't know what the problem is with shooting a deer with a slug from a shotgun, if your close enough to make a safe and humane shot.

[Underdog]

It is a shame shotguns are not allowed. Slugs and ball have come on a good way.

Britain is so full of elitists!

[brett1985]

agreed. slug out to 50 yards would happily take a deer.

 

on a side note, I believe this thread resurrection has set the benchmark for 2016. nearly six years old!

[kent]

Shotgun is a very bad idea

For a slug load you already require fac and the condition it might be used so nil gain for those who don't have the ticket

 

I have been called to numerous roe left injured from shotgun use. Most of them were ending thier days with blood poisoning

 

If you have deer to shoot legally you can get an fac

[rjimmer]

Someone told me recently that licenses to shoot deer at night are only issued on condition that AAA in shotguns are used. Not many such licenses are issued.

[Savhmr]

Well, I'm with Charlie on this. I remember from the DSC course notes, that it is NOT lawful to use a shotgun for general stalking. You are constrained to use a centrefire rifle with specified energy and bullet sizes (or North of the border, specified minium velociteis come into play as well I believe).

 

A shotgun can be used as a slaughter instrument for sick or injured deer or subject to being 12g or larger, and loaded with AAA or larger, as an exemption can be used for crop protection by the landowner BUT NOT by a stalker who must comply with the current Deer Act legislation.

 

S4 of the Deer Act specifies the "Weapons & Articles Allowed or Prohibited for Taking Deer" (England and Wales)

 

From S4:

 

• It is illegal to take or injure Red, Fallow, Sika or Roe deer with a rifle of a calibre of less than .24" or having a muzzle energy of less than 1700ft-lbs.
• It is illegal to take Chinese Water Deer and Muntjac Deer with a rifle of a calbre of less than .22" with a muzzle energy of less than 1000ft-lbs

It is also ILLEGAL to take, kill or injure a deer with ANY shotgun unless specifically exempted under certain conditions and even then, subject to certain restrictions.

 

The exemptions that allow the taking of Deer with a shotgun are specifically:

 

• Slaughtering Instrument - A 12g or larger smooth bore of not less than 24 inches in length firing a cartridge of AAA shot at least. This is an exemption for SLAUGHTERING and does NOT permit general stalking with a shotgun
• Humane dispatch
• Deer Damage

The latter exemption allows for the occupier or any person in the service of the occupier who has written permission and includes the killing of deer out of season and with a shotgun of 12g or larger, with a barrel length of 24 inches or more, firing shot of AAA or larger. You first have to prove that deer are doing damage to crops and the owner must have reasonable grounds to believe that deer are the same species as the ones damaging crops AND that further damage was likely to be caused and would be SERIOUS. In this case, "serious" would need to include significant financial loss affecting the livelihood of the landowner. You first have to prove that all other reasonable methods have been tried first such as fencing in order to prevent such damage.

 

Also, the killing MUST take place at the site of the damage and that deer cannot be ambushed or trapped between the site and cover.

 

The above hardly constitutes a "go knock yourself out" approach to using a shotgun and clearly, general stalking which does not fall into those exemptions would require a rifle of the afore stated calibre and muzzle energy. Anything else for general stalking IS illegal, plain and simple.

 

For those that "cannot be bothered" to look it up, it is probably best not to quote bad advice which could lead to illegal acts involving shotguns, but ultimately it is the responsibility of the licence holder to inform themselves of the law, as ignorance of the relevant acts is no excuse and breaches thereof could lead to loss of certificates and prosecution, so be careful folks.

 

In a nutshell: general stalking using a shotgun is NOT legal.

Edited January 2, 2016 by Savhmr

[TIGHTCHOKE]

I personally don't know what the problem is with shooting a deer with a slug from a shotgun, if your close enough to make a safe and humane shot.

 

Nice to see an OLD thread getting an airing again!

[hawkeye]

Is it just me i read the whole page through and never once read that shotguns were used ???

[MAB1954]

Not everyone has the inclination to own a centrefire rifle for the very rare occasion of thinning out troublesome deer. I have seen deer shot, and run, from a hit with a .308 and am sure a close range dose of AAA would be effective and humane.

 

IMO, a lot of what comes out of the BDS is pure snobbery and a closed shop mentality to keep it all for themselves.

 

 

We should be free to responsibly make these decisions for ourselves with the minimum of legislation, that's what we have brains for.

 

+1

 

Nothing wrong with a shotgun if with in effective range for shot size. I have SGC & FAC so would be nice to be free to make responsible decision based on each individual situation but that's not going to happen in UK or Europe. Think the US have it about right but the anti's are gaining ground over there.

 

The BDS is IMO is very much an organisation for the very wealthy and has no interest in the common shooting man.

 

Tin hat on, incoming.

[Underdog]

 

+1

 

Nothing wrong with a shotgun if with in effective range for shot size. I have SGC & FAC so would be nice to be free to make responsible decision based on each individual situation but that's not going to happen in UK or Europe. Think the US have it about right but the anti's are gaining ground over there.

 

The BDS is IMO is very much an organisation for the very wealthy and has no interest in the common shooting man.

 

Tin hat on, incoming.

The elite!

[scotslad]

Someone told me recently that licenses to shoot deer at night are only issued on condition that AAA in shotguns are used. Not many such licenses are issued.

 

I'd say that is complete nonsense, in england very few if any issued so not sure the requirements.

 

But in scotland fairly common now in many areas, a few hoops u have to jump throu to prove crop(tree) damage and normal stalking not working etc, but generally granted, some of the conditions are u must have access to a 'trained' deer dog and min calibre is 270 for all deer (considering u can use a 222 in daylight for roe) and notify polis ur out lamping are a few of the conditions

 

I would imagine conditions in Eng will be very similar so severly doubt would allow shotgun use.

Cn't really see any reason why anyone would want to limit themselves by taking a shotgun out for deer, if using slugs need an FAC so just get a rifle?

 

As was said earlier it is often called the 'farmers defence' so u could end up in the dock and have to defend ur actions.

[rjimmer]

 

I'd say that is complete nonsense, in england very few if any issued so not sure the requirements.

 

......

I would imagine conditions in Eng will be very similar so severly doubt would allow shotgun use.

The chap who told me had just completed his DSC2

[scotslad]

Be easy enough to check up but i'd be amazed if he's right. Think EN will issue them in Eng and be of FC website possibly also on DI site

 

In fact there is no way on earth he is right, like i said in scot even for roe min calibrefor nites is a 270 so a fair step up from a 222.

Even in practical terms u would never use a shotgun as ur losing so much range .

 

 

Ps when u say condition, i've took it to mean u have to use a shotgun and AAA to get a licence granted,

there is the farmers defence as this thread has talked about or a licence to shoot deer out of season for crop damage that is more likely to be used with a shotgun as carried out by farmers?

 

I think ur mate is confused there really is no way u would be allowing a shotgun to be used for lamping deer, just not very effecient anyway, and if u have been granted a licence ur trying to thin deer numbers out big time as quickly as possible

Edited January 3, 2016 by scotslad

[kent]

Someone told me recently that licenses to shoot deer at night are only issued on condition that AAA in shotguns are used. Not many such licenses are issued.

I don't know about England at all but I held a night licence in Scotland a while back the terms were

.270 minimum

Rifle only

 

Second person with binos

 

Since then I think the terms have changed with the change over of governing body

 

I thought though I might be wrong that night licence for deer hasn't ever actually been issued in England for deer

[rjimmer]

I think ur mate is confused

Possibly, I haven't seen him for a few weeks.

[8 shot]

should have gone to SPEC SAVER sure it said RIFLE in the article