Lancs Firearms Office got quite slow?

[poontang]

I have not only met as much of what was suggested as is practically possible I also meet all of the requirements in the HO Guidelines for being authorised to posess and use a .243 for deer and fox so there really is no justifyable reason to refuse my application for a .243 for deer and fox at this present time!

 

Well you seem to have land with deer, but you haven't done the DSC1 (have you booked a course?) or got any written invites, as per his recommendations. I still reckon that's what's holding you back. Like it or not HO guidelines are just that. Guidelines. He probably sees it that you have no experience in shooting deer and is waiting for you to show that you have followed all of his advice before taking the application further?

[kent]

I hear what you are saying Kent but I think questions need raising in view of the fact that a neighbours son who put in for a SGC for Clay shooting told me that when Simon did his home visit he openly said that "He had no problems with Clay or Target shooters but was not so keen on people that shot live animals"!

 

If that is true (And I have no reason whatsoever to disbelieve the person who told me this) which buttons should we press to avoid that one I wonder?

 

Can't say i found any of that sort of attitude comming across in any meet with him and its quite obvious thats what i do, anyhow think yourself lucky i have a know nothing FEO now who likes to misquote HO guidelines

Whats all this passed up to .270 stuff? deer land should be cleared up to 30 cal as a matter of course as the 308 is the second most popular deer cal in the UK, to do otherwise is just wasting future time on second lookabouts very glad i don't have to get land cleared by these people

[Frenchieboy]

Well you seem to have land with deer, but you haven't done the DSC1 (have you booked a course?) or got any written invites, as per his recommendations. I still reckon that's what's holding you back. Like it or not HO guidelines are just that. Guidelines. He probably sees it that you have no experience in shooting deer and is waiting for you to show that you have followed all of his advice before taking the application further?

As stated earlier I am studying for my DSC1 even though I have not booked in for the tests yet and he is happy with that!

With regards to written invites, as I said a little earlier I do not have "invites" in writing but I do have checkable invites for Culling from a Deer Management Expert who is well known to him!

The problems are not really being built around those points anyway, he is now basing any arguments around this "Primary Quarry! thing and the fact that I might end up shooting more foxes than deer where (In his opinion) the .243 is a Deer Stalking Rifle!

I hope this clarifies things.

[apache]

As stated earlier I am studying for my DSC1 even though I have not booked in for the tests yet and he is happy with that!

With regards to written invites, as I said a little earlier I do not have "invites" in writing but I do have checkable invites for Culling from a Deer Management Expert who is well known to him!

The problems are not really being built around those points anyway, he is now basing any arguments around this "Primary Quarry! thing and the fact that I might end up shooting more foxes than deer where (In his opinion) the .243 is a Deer Stalking Rifle!

I hope this clarifies things.

Ring him up and ask him to list it for deer and add fox too!

[Frenchieboy]

Ring him up and ask him to list it for deer and add fox too!

I tried discussing this with him but he says that if I have it with deer as the "Primary Quarry" and shoot more foxes than deer it would breech the conditions of Deer being the Primary Quarry!

It really is this Deer as the Primary Quarry thing that I can't get my head round nor can I find any reference to it in the HO Guidelines. All I want is the .243 so that I can shoot any deer that I want (Or need) to as well as foxes!

[al4x]

I tried discussing this with him but he says that if I have it with deer as the "Primary Quarry" and shoot more foxes than deer it would breech the conditions of Deer being the Primary Quarry!

It really is this Deer as the Primary Quarry thing that I can't get my head round nor can I find any reference to it in the HO Guidelines. All I want is the .243 so that I can shoot any deer that I want (Or need) to as well as foxes!

 

 

personally Frenchie if he will give you that condition then i'd accept it, then you are covered for deer and fox and numbers wise who gives a hoot. Your records would just reflect more deer shot but it is never going to come under scruitiny.

 

As for posting your FEO's name about on forums don't do it, a simple google search will highlight it and it won't take long for him to work out who you are and really it wouldn't do your cause any good at all.

[Frenchieboy]

personally Frenchie if he will give you that condition then i'd accept it, then you are covered for deer and fox and numbers wise who gives a hoot. Your records would just reflect more deer shot but it is never going to come under scruitiny.

 

As for posting your FEO's name about on forums don't do it, a simple google search will highlight it and it won't take long for him to work out who you are and really it wouldn't do your cause any good at all.

If he would give me that cpondition I would be happy but what he is saying is that my application might be refused because I would not be shooting enopugh deer to make them a "Primary Quarry"!

Good point about the name!

Edited December 6, 2010 by Frenchieboy

[al4x]

in that case let him get it refused then appeal it along with a letter to the chief constable saying how ridiculous it is that the FEO doesn't have a problem with you shooting deer but refuses to approve a legal calibre, and how that is absolute nonsense. Either you are safe and suitable to shoot deer or you aren't and the fact the calibre isn't the issue but its use is ridiculous.

[poontang]

in that case let him get it refused then appeal it along with a letter to the chief constable saying how ridiculous it is that the FEO doesn't have a problem with you shooting deer but refuses to approve a legal calibre, and how that is absolute nonsense. Either you are safe and suitable to shoot deer or you aren't and the fact the calibre isn't the issue but its use is ridiculous.

 

I think he does have a problem with the op shooting deer.

 

He obviously feels he's safe to hold a FAC as he still has the .17HMR, but I reckon it's his suitability to shoot deer that's in question. He has no experience of shooting deer so the FEO advised him to do the DSC1 (though not a requirement in law surely a good thing for someone with no experience?)and get written invites to stalk. Neither of which have been done. I would guess it's these things that have got the FEO stalling.

 

Also, can the op show that deer will be his primary quarry?

Edited December 6, 2010 by poontang

[al4x]

the way I'm reading it is a .243 is fine for him as a deer calibre and he would be ok with deer and occasional fox but not having it mostly as a fox gun. DSC is a load of ******** anyway but I may be mis reading it. Fundamentally he has a fair amount of centrefire experience, most other forces will either grant with DSC or mentoring or indeed none of the above. Mine just says when accompanied and no real questions asked

Edited December 6, 2010 by al4x

[hawkeye]

I was under the impression that if you had and could show good reason to hold an FAC rifle then you could not be refused as long as you tick all the right box's on the application form,the fact you don't have DSC1 should have nothing to do with it.. :good: It looks like the feo is making his own rules up as he goes along... :hmm:

[poontang]

the way I'm reading it is a .243 is fine for him as a deer calibre and he would be ok with deer and occasional fox but not having it mostly as a fox gun.

 

Exactly.

 

But can he show the FEO that deer will be his main quarry?

 

It just looks to me that the FEO is wanting to see hard proof of that before granting the calibre.

[al4x]

why should it need to be?

 

a .243 is a legal requirement if he wants to shoot anything other than CWD and Muntjac so to shoot any of the ones he has permission to shoot he needs a legal calibre.

[poontang]

why should it need to be?

 

a .243 is a legal requirement if he wants to shoot anything other than CWD and Muntjac so to shoot any of the ones he has permission to shoot he needs a legal calibre.

 

Yes, it's a legal requirement but it also comes with a certain amount of responsibility. I've never shot a deer in my life but would my FEO grant me a .243 just because I had a few deer on my land? I would hope not. I'm sure I would have to show him that I had gained some experience before being let loose, and quite rightly too in my opinion.

[al4x]

they would in certain areas grant you one just for fox, and if you are safe to use one on fox why should you be unsafe on deer?

Frenchie has been using a centrefire for a while so has experience a .243 isn't that major a step up from a .222 ok dealing with a shot deer he hasn't but that really shouldn't be a police issue same as you don't have to show you can deal with a shot rabbit.

In your case if you had deer and permission to shoot them then you have most of the ingredients required, quite why you reckon a few days in a classroom is more beneficial than a few years using a smaller centrefire is a little strange with regard to being a safe shot.

[poontang]

quite why you reckon a few days in a classroom is more beneficial than a few years using a smaller centrefire is a little strange with regard to being a safe shot.

 

What if I'd used a smaller centrefire for only 7/8 months?

[shaun4860]

I had a .22RF then put in a variation for a .17HMR and a .243(for deer)

 

both were passed without a home visit but thats Northumbria.....

 

shaun

[Frenchieboy]

I think he does have a problem with the op shooting deer.

 

He obviously feels he's safe to hold a FAC as he still has the .17HMR, but I reckon it's his suitability to shoot deer that's in question. He has no experience of shooting deer so the FEO advised him to do the DSC1 (though not a requirement in law surely a good thing for someone with no experience?)and get written invites to stalk. Neither of which have been done. I would guess it's these things that have got the FEO stalling.

 

Also, can the op show that deer will be his primary quarry?

 

Poontang, I think that you are missing a few points that I made earlier -

My FEO advised that he would like to see me to do a DSC1! I have clearly stated in an earlier post that I have already started studying hard for the DSC1 which (as has already been said) has been descussed and my FEO has questioned me about this and is happy with tha answers I gave.

As for invited stalks, I have also cleared this up a previous post - I have invited with a very experienced stalker to go out culling with him (All be it not in writing but the invites are checkable) - My FEO knows this chap personally!

You also say "Can the OP show that Deer will be his primary quarry"? - This is what much of this is about, I have never said that I wanted deer as my primary quarry, in fact I keep pointing out that I do not especially want deer as a primary quarry! I want to be allowed to shoot a few deer (Legally) whenever the need arises and to be able to shoot foxes with that same rifle (A .243) which is acceptable for both deer and fox therefore minimising the amount of rifles I have to hold in my cabinet!

You also say (in a different post) that I do not have any previous experience of shooting deer - True, you are quite right and this is why I have an experiences friend with a DSC1 who is willing to "Mentor" me while I gain experience! (I believe that I clearly said this in a previous post) I will not be going out to shoot any deer without having someone with ample experience with me (until that person writes and signs a letter to the firearms office stating that I am safe and experienced with shooting deer exactly the same as happened with me being mentored with both previous C/F calibers earlier). I do not have a problem with this and (To be fair) nor should you (or anyone else) as this is accepted as a responsible way to do things when any person embarks on the hunting and shooting of any live quarry.

Just out of interest I do not recall seeing anywhere what rifles you shoot/posess or what quarry you go out for Poontang - Have you ever been "mentored" or did you just get your FAC and decide to learn as you went along?

You question my experience with Centrefires Poontang - I believe that I have covered this earlier - I have been mentored with both .222 and 22-250 and have kept a fairly comprehensive log of my C/F shooting experience (On the advice of my FEO), a copy of which has been handed to my FEO.

 

Poontang - In another recent post you say "What if I'd used a smaller centrefire for only 7/8 months?" Please can you explain what it is you are asking here because surely it is not always how long you have been using something for that gives to the experience it is how much you have used it and how well you understand it that matters i.e. I am sure that there are plenty of shooters on here that have has a .243 for deer stalking for maybe 3 years but have only fired maybe 20 shots a year, does that make them more experienced that someone who has had one for just 1 year but has used it for maybe 100 shots/deer?

 

 

 

Al4x has summed it up very well and quite accurately when he said:-

(Quote) the way I'm reading it is a .243 is fine for him as a deer calibre and he would be ok with deer and occasional fox but not having it mostly as a fox gun. DSC is a load of ******** anyway but I may be mis reading it. Fundamentally he has a fair amount of centrefire experience, most other forces will either grant with DSC or mentoring or indeed none of the above. (End Quote)

 

Without wanting to sound argumentative or rude I hope that this clears things up and I am not going to keep having questions/comments directed at me that have been clearly and comprehensively answered already!

Edited December 7, 2010 by Frenchieboy

[poontang]

FB

 

I'm just playing devil's advocate here.

 

From what I can see on 1st November you posted that the firearms dept. had given you the ok to put in for a .243 for deer and fox. On 13th November you mentioned in a post that your FEO was being an ****hole about it.

 

Somewhere in those two weeks something has happened to make him change his mind?

 

Surely there are only two reasons he can refuse you the .243. One being you don't have good reason and the other is you're not a fit person. Now you still have your FAC so that clears up the not a fit person bit. As I've said before he obviously feels you don't have good reason. In your previous post you've just said deer will not be your primary quarry, but you're asking for a deer calibre to mainly shoot fox when you've already got a perfectly good fox rifle (.222). I can understand your point about having just one rifle, but rightly or wrongly your FEO doesn't see it like that. It seems to me your best option is to keep the .222 for fox, get everything in writing like he asked, sort out a few stalks, do your DSC1 and then apply again. The other option is to appeal the decision with all the costs that involves.

As you well know different counties seem to interpret the guidelines differently to others, unfortunately there's not a lot you can do about that, unless you go down the appeal route. As you said earlier in the thread you've joined SACS to fight your corner. Now might be the time to give them a ring?

[Frenchieboy]

Poontang, with reference to your latest post there are a couple of things that I would like to point out!

All was well before (My FEO even suggested that I should apply for a larger caliber than a .243 when I discussed the situation with him during a land check) and when I first sent the application in but things started looking a "bit sour" when I rang to ask if there was any progress (My local firearms office are usually known for their speed and efficiency and I am usually the first to praise them up for that) only to be told that my FEO wanted to have an enquiry as "there had been a few issues with another shooter in the area". This was however (On the admittance of my FEO) before he had even seen my application! This is where the alarm bells first started ringing. What might have happened with another shooter should not effect my application and I could not see how this could possibly effect or involve me and how could an FEO decide that en enquiry is necessary before he even knows what an application is for? I have been told several other different "excuses/reasons" since then which makes it look like they are searching for a reason to block the application.

With regards to deer not being my "Primary Quarry" I totally agree and have never said otherwise, but regardless of whether deer or fox are the "primary quarry" the fact still remains that I want to be able to shoot deer and I need to have a deer legal rifle to do that! When all is said and done who can say how many deer or how many foxes I am likely to shoot, no-one can accurately predict that!

As far as an appeal is concerned using the SACS to "fight my corner", I have already discussed this with the SACS and they are fully aware of all of the circumstances (From my point of view) and they are saying quite catagorically that there is no reason whatsoever why my application should be refused - it is in fact them that have said that it should not matter one iota how many deer I chose to shoot, the main points are that the deer are there on my permissions, the land is safe for the caliber that I have asked for and I am entitled to shoot them (With written authorisation) so all the boxes have been ticked and therefore I should be allowed the correct rifle to do that with.

If my application does get refused (Which I beleive it will) then I will appeal the decision with the help of the SACS, but I will wait till I get written confirmation either way before I take that course of action!

 

Just a quick edit: I do not have either a 22-250 or a .222 in my posession any more, they were sold in order to make room in my cabinet for a "suitable dual purpose rifle".

Edited December 7, 2010 by Frenchieboy

[poontang]

I have been told several other different "excuses/reasons" since then which makes it look like they are searching for a reason to block the application.

 

Ok well if they do block your application they obviously feel they have good reason to do so.

What you need to do is find out what exactly that reason is.

If, as you say, your FEO was quite happy originally then something has set alarm bells ringing in the last couple of weeks.

If you fulfill all the criteria for owning the calibre you've applied for is it you personally he's got a problem with? Did you do or say something in those couple of weeks that might have got his back up? I only ask as in the same way you need to show good reason to own he needs to show good reason to refuse. He won't refuse on a whim, knowing it could go to appeal, so he must feel there's something substantial for him to be able to refuse you?

[streaky]

hi guys,

just found out that my application is expected to take between 15 - 17 weeks!!!!

this is in evesham, worcs!

 

I'm not an impatient man but that seems a little much

[Frenchieboy]

hi guys,

just found out that my application is expected to take between 15 - 17 weeks!!!!

this is in evesham, worcs!

 

I'm not an impatient man but that seems a little much

 

It does seem strange and hard to understand and stomache how one office can be "ultra efficient" yet another office (Or even FEOs in the same office) can seems to drag their feet for ever.

You have my sympathy!

[toka_shigazu]

stick in there Frenchie!!

 

poontang....i can see where you are coming from but even if he did say something to get his back up he should still behave in a professional manner and judge the case on its merits.... 'he got my back up' does not seem a fit reason to refuse the application.

there is one thing that hasnt been mentioned that may have had an impact in that time as well and that could be a change in policy within the force licensing dept...it might be worth Frenchie emailing them to politely ask if between those dates there was any change. at least that way it may clear that up...it may even mean that the office manager looks into the enquiry and asks why someone should be asking about it.....i am sure the manager would not like to think one of his FEO's may be bringing the office into disrepute???

 

only a suggestion as it does seem you have everything on your side....my FEO [also Lancs] did state that they like you to be doing your DSC1, you dont need it to be given your FAC as long as they know you have it under way so i can quite understand your frustration there...

 

ATB

[Frenchieboy]

Cheers for that Toka -Shigazu mate! Now that the FEO has promised that his report would have been on the issuing officers desk for (last) Friday I have decided to try to show a bit of patience and wait till this Wednesday or Thursday before I phone the Issuing Officer to ask if there has been any decision or developments made. Once I have done that I can decide on what action to take according to the answer I get. As has been said already the SACS are ready to step into action if need be!

At the moment this is the last thing that I want to be worrying about now that my 4X4 has "died" and I am not sure if I will be able to get it going again or not. The last thing I need is to be without a motor at this time of the year.

Please give my regards and best wishes to the wife mate, I hope to meet up with the two of you again in the near future - Maybe at another Hunt Meeting!

Edited December 8, 2010 by Frenchieboy