FAC sshotgun

[Scully]

I'll have to do some digging about this MC,I'm not doubting it's law,but there has to be a reason.To suggest there's no reasoning behind legislation(however flawed that reasoning)is a bit daft isn't it? I mean ,if there's five blokes shooting wildfowl with 3 shot auto's and one bloke with his 8 shot auto.........!?

[casts_by_fly]

In the US, hunters shooting waterfowl and migratory birds are required to use 3-shot mgazines (a few states require 3 shot mags regardless of what you're shooting). The reasoning there was originally to reduce the numbers of ducks/geese shot by market hunters. In the early 1900's up until WWII, market hunters were decimating bird populations. As a conservation measure, the federal government made a 3-shot magazine rule and also outlawed shotguns bigger than a 10 bore.

 

However, you guys still don't have bag limits here so conservation as a regulation isn't the rule.

 

Thanks

Rick

[guest1957]

As a point of interest/clarity it would be interesting to see the legislation that differentiates between corvids/woodpigeons and canada geese with respect to the use of fac shootguns. My reasoning behind this is that it certainly isn't apparent, because:

 

1)The WCA 1981 prevents the use of a shotgun with a magazine capacity greater than two for the shooting of any wild bird.

 

2) The WCA 1981 does not include pigeons or corvids as exempted species, only certain game, wildfowl and waders outside of the close seasons.

 

3) The general licence provides for the taking of certain species of birds that would otherwise be prohibited by the WCA 1981 and as such supersedes the Act for legal purposes.

 

4) The current general licence relied on by most shooters appears here: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images/genl05_tcm6-7669.pdf and appears to make no differentiation between species of bird when allowing for the use of an fac shotgun.

 

I am therefore unsure where the law makes the differentiation between shooting a canada with an fac shotgun and shooting a woodpigeon with an fac shotgun. Can anyone clear this up for me?

 

(This is merely a point of interest, as I don't foresee having a reason to shoot a goose under the general licence)

 

As this is included in the general licence: "Section 16(1) of the Act (WCA 1981) provides that sections 1, 5 and 8 shall not apply to anything done under and in accordance with the terms of a licence granted by the appropriate authority, which is, in England, Natural England." As section 5 prevents the use of a large capacity semi-automatic, I am even more confused as to whether it is valid.

Edited October 16, 2010 by guest1957

[Scully]

I find it pretty confusing.When I applied for my second FAC shotgun one of the reasons I gave initially was that while I found the 'fixed' full choke 20 bore fine for shooting pigeons from a hide,it's tight pattrern rendered bolting rabbits unsaleable.This didn't satisfy my licensing dept' however,so I was advised to apply again ,citing the Wildlife and Countryside Act as 'good reason'! I did so and was subsequently granted the application.

[MC]

So by reading all this nonsense that all the EXSPURTS are posting means you can also shoot canada geese with lead shot as well?

 

After all the OGL gives exemption to all laws.

 

You go ahead and do whatever you feel is right, and when the day comes that you are prosecuted for breaking all the laws I will be the first in line to say I told you so.

 

The LAW clearly states that you cannot shoot wildfowl with a gun which has a magazine capable of holding more than 2 cartridges. Yes I am sure there is a valid reason and it is probably to prevent mass slaughter of these birds. However I do not know but I will e mail BASC to ask them for you all.

[guest1957]

I never claimed to be an expert, however Section 16 of the WCA 1981 essentially states that sections 1, 5 and 8 don't apply when a suitable general licence is in place. Therefore the general licence supersedes what is written in these sections when it is in place. Therefore these sections are not the law for the species named on that licence, but the general licence is. Now the current general licence does not differentiate between pigeons/corvids and canada geese, this is why it is important to have more clarity on the matter.

 

With regard to your point on lead, the licences don't grant any exemption to the Environmental Protection (Restriction on Use of Lead Shot)(England) Regulations 1999 and 2002 therefore you cannot use lead to shoot a canada goose, even under the terms of the general licence.

 

I am not looking for an argument here, I just think some clarity would be useful therefore it would be handy if someone could outline where the differentiation lies.

[Scully]

Nobody is having a pop at you MC;you seem to have taken it personally.If I was an expert I wouldn't be asking questions,I'd be giving answers.

You've got to admit,it's not exactly clear is it! I'll give the NGO a bell and see if they can come up with a definitive answer.We have irate landowners round our neck of the woods who don't care how we get rid of Canadas from winter barley,as long as we get rid of them.But it's our tickets at risk here,not theirs(not that they're interested)so we've got to get this right.

[al4x]

So by reading all this nonsense that all the EXSPURTS are posting means you can also shoot canada geese with lead shot as well?

 

After all the OGL gives exemption to all laws.

 

You go ahead and do whatever you feel is right, and when the day comes that you are prosecuted for breaking all the laws I will be the first in line to say I told you so.

 

The LAW clearly states that you cannot shoot wildfowl with a gun which has a magazine capable of holding more than 2 cartridges. Yes I am sure there is a valid reason and it is probably to prevent mass slaughter of these birds. However I do not know but I will e mail BASC to ask them for you all.

 

 

You're wrong MC and the BASC will confirm it, The law also says you cannot shoot any bird with a gun with a magazine that can hold more than two. The General license gives an exception for certain "pest" species so you can use a gun with a magazine cap of more than two whether shotgun or rifle. Its simply in theory because in certain circumstances they need controlling. If pigeons weren't on the list it would be illegal to shoot them with one as well. As for lead shot well that law is separate and covers all wildfowl with no exceptions and unless I'm mis reading it anywhere the OGL doesn't exempt you from using non toxic shot. Have you a hat or anything you can eat when the BASC confirm you're wrong

[MC]

You're wrong MC and the BASC will confirm it, The law also says you cannot shoot any bird with a gun with a magazine that can hold more than two. The General license gives an exception for certain "pest" species so you can use a gun with a magazine cap of more than two whether shotgun or rifle. Its simply in theory because in certain circumstances they need controlling. If pigeons weren't on the list it would be illegal to shoot them with one as well. As for lead shot well that law is separate and covers all wildfowl with no exceptions and unless I'm mis reading it anywhere the OGL doesn't exempt you from using non toxic shot. Have you a hat or anything you can eat when the BASC confirm you're wrong

 

 

If pigeons weren't on the list it would be illegal to shoot them anyway,

 

So the law that covers lead shot is seperate and covers all wildfowl yet the one that states you cannot use a gun with a mag that can hold more than two doesn't apply.

 

Argue all you like, the law is the law and you cannot get away from it.

[al4x]

aaaaargh there is an exemption from the law that covers Canadas like it or not, the same exemption means you can shoot them out of season (unlike other ******* wildfowl) use rifles (unlike other ******* wildfowl) and various other things that wouldn't be legal with normal wildfowl under usual laws. The BASC will confirm when they get back to you and then you can have a bit of humble pie.

 

Lead shot is different simply because there isn't a provision in the OGL to mean you are exempt from that law, however there is an exemption for using guns with a mag capacity of more than 2 like it or lump it there is nothing illegal about using a FAC semi on Canada Geese or using a rifle with a mag capacity of more than 2 on one if you're shooting in the spirit of the OGL so in theory tried waving your arms at them etc

[guest1957]

Read this:

 

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Act...14-pt1-pb1-l1g9

 

Then this:

 

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Act...2-pt1-pb5-l1g33

 

It cannot be law because the 'law' also states that S5 is not applicable if a general licence has been issued. As they are in the same statute they aren't going to be contradictory.

 

The ban on lead shot is dealt with by a seperate statutory instrument and does not have any exemptions unlike section 5 of the WCA 1981 being inapplicaple when a general licence has been issued under S16 of the WCA 1981.

 

If you are convinced we can't get away from the law, can you please find the relevent statute and show us so we can be clear.

[guest1957]

Incidentally there is no legal requirement to try and scare canada geese as they are non-native. If you read notes N to O here: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images/genl05_tcm6-7669.pdf

[mowdy]

just to state that the use of non-toxic shot to shoot wildfowl applys only to shotgun ammo and not rifle ammo and it never has!

[the running man]

i was led to beleive not to use my sec1 shotgun on wildfowl,weather on the list or not. my licence says,practical/target, and for use against flocking birds in accordance with the natural england terms etc. not into geese so,i dont give a toss.

[al4x]

does it really say in accordance with the Nature England Terms as that as we say is Game set and match MC

[the running man]

does it really say in accordance with the Nature England Terms as that as we say is Game set and match MC

will take a picture or scan it this evening and post it here for you.

[CharlieT]

I really am amazed that some can not read and understand the relevant passage in the OGL where it clearly states....

 

2. For the purposes set out in paragraph 1 above, and subject to the terms and conditions, below, this licence permits:

 

(a) to use a semi-automatic weapon;

 

and then goes on to expand on the type of automatic weapon

 

16. “semi-automatic weapon” means any weapon which is not prohibited by section 5 of the Firearms Act 1968 as amended and which has a magazine capable of holding more than two rounds of ammunition, where the depression of the trigger discharges a single shot and reloads the next, each subsequent shot requiring a further depression of the trigger;

 

As the OGL makes no reference to lead shot one does not have to be very bright to gather that the "lead shot" legislation is not overidden by the OGL and therefore the primary legislation on the use of lead shot must be adhered to. Infact if you are shooting any bird on the OGL over a SSSI you can't use lead let alone wildfowl.

[al4x]

seems MC has gone quiet on this, not one to admit defeat easily

[MC]

I am not admitting defeat at all,

 

Yes I have gone quiet as I have better things to do with my time than argue with complete ******* idiots. As I have said several times the law states that you cannot shoot WILDFOWL with a gun with a magazine capable of holding more than two cartridges.

 

You think you have been clever and have found a loophole, yet you haven't. The fact the Canada geese are listed on the OGL does not reclassify them. They are still WILDFOWL and as such you have to abide by the laws that govern them.

 

You carry on how you want, I really am not bothered or care. The fact that some of you seem to revel in the fact that you can shoot what is probably the greatest sporting bird (To a wildfowler) with a rifle when it is flightless and has no chance of escape is very sad.

 

This will be my last post on this subject. And possibly this forum as it is full of complete ******* idiots.

[al4x]

ooh you are a sore looser, wait for the BASC reply

 

its not a loophole at all, its the ability to control them where they are being a pest which is why they are on the OGL

[silverhawk]

I put in for my section 1 shotgun today,ive done a 6month probation at a club and got a letter from my land owner, ive put for target/psg on approved ranges and vermin control/crop protection.I was refused last year as i was told i cannot have one just for vermin/crop protection and had to be a member of a psg club.I gave psg ago with my 3shot and reaily did enjoy it so decided to go all the way and once my probation is up apply for one again.

Edited October 18, 2010 by silverhawk

[the running man]

ooh you are a sore looser, wait for the BASC reply

 

its not a loophole at all, its the ability to control them where they are being a pest which is why they are on the OGL

this is the 2 conditions on my sec 1 hope it helps.