Variation

[Thedeerman]

I sent a variation off a few weeks ago to add .243 and a shot pistol to my FAC. I got a phone call today from the old bill saying that they couldnt issue me with the .243 as the land I shoot on was not cleared fot that calibre.

 

Fair enough i thought, just send the FLO out to have a look round again like they did when I put in for my hornet??. They said they can do this, but I still wouldnt get the variation because the permission slips I sent in with my original application for that land didnt have deer stated on them and I had given this as a reason for having it along with fox . They said they have to go and check that there are deer there too?!

 

So today I've had to go around to all of the farmers and get them to sign a new form with deer added to it and my variation goes to the bottom of the pile.

 

Is it me, or is this being a bit fussy?

 

On the other hand, i applied for one of these and got it no questions asked???

 

[cockercas]

hassle them, i do. i get quick turn around now. .

1. when land check was done for your hornet they should of looked and said umm this will pass for calibres upto .22cf/.243/.308 ect.

2. ask for an open cert, then you have freedom

3. what's the shot pistol for?

Edited April 20, 2012 by cockercas

[Thedeerman]

hassle them, i do. i get quick turn around now. .

1. when land check was done for your hornet they should of looked and said umm this will pass for calibres upto .22cf/.243/.308 ect.

2. ask for an open cert, then you have freedom

3. what's the shot pistol for?

 

1. Tell me about it, This is why these things take so long. I spoke to the FLO just after I got off the phone to the clerk. He said he would only check it for the largest calibre applied for?? What a waste of time.

 

2. Already tried that one. They said minimum of three years. I'm going to go knocking on doors for permissions and send them in small additional pieces of unchecked land for the next few months and see if this helps the cause.

 

3. Bragging rights.

[bedwards1966]

It sounds like they're being rather unreasonable, they should have just passed the land without fuss when they received your variation.

It shouldn't be too bad though when they pass it and you get them the permission forms with deer on them - I can't see why they'd need to check for deer though, that seems a bit strange.

Hopefully if they've put you at the bottom of the pile it's not a large pile, I'd keep ringing them up and pestering them about it as often as you can - as I see it they're choosing to make extra work for themselves and you shouldn't have to wait again for them to deal with it. It shouldn't take long once they've got the permission slips, keep pestering them.

[Redgum]

Think its quite obvious why they need to check if you have deer on your permission, isnt it good reason to possess. My FA dept don't let you have 243 just for fox and its an obvious temptation to say you have deer on the land when you do not. I had some ground checked out when I first had a 243 and the FEO had a good look out of his van window It sort of convinded him when the old Colonel came out and tore him off a strip, leaving him in no doupt who'd been at the strawberries.

The ground I had checked was already ok for 223 (for a previous shooter) but thats what had been asked for at the time.

[Thedeerman]

Leicestershire allow 243 for fox, but they said that if deer wasnt listed on my ticket then I cant shoot them legally so I shouldnt just list fox as the reason for possession.

 

I thought that the ''all other legal quarry'' would cover this, but apparently not. They said that the legal quarry bit is to ''cover everything that is smaller than the animals listed''?? So if you see a small munty next to a big fox, you can have venison, other way round and its charlie for supper.

 

Anyway, Have the forms signed now and I've hopefully got another cuple of hundred acres permission out of doing the rounds seeing the farmers today

[Mr_Logic]

Leicestershire are wrong, any other legal quarry would cover you fine to shoot deer. They are correct in that the wording was introduced to achieve, as they say, the shooting of 'lesser' quarry. I.e. I have a cannon to shoot red deer, but I want to annihilate a rabbit.

 

However, the FAC is a literal document, so if it says any other legal quarry, that's what it means, full-stop.

 

However, since they seem more reasonable than many, we should let them be!!

[JonathanL]

Leicestershire are wrong, any other legal quarry would cover you fine to shoot deer. They are correct in that the wording was introduced to achieve, as they say, the shooting of 'lesser' quarry. I.e. I have a cannon to shoot red deer, but I want to annihilate a rabbit.

 

However, the FAC is a literal document, so if it says any other legal quarry, that's what it means, full-stop.

 

However, since they seem more reasonable than many, we should let them be!!

 

Precisely! As someone else has pointed out somewhere, the proper use of language and grammar is for the most part absent these days. If something says 'all other legal quarry' then that is what it means and nothing less.

 

J.