David BASC Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 (edited) We have been saying for ages that a licnencing system akin to shotguns is more practical - licence the perosn not each gun. David Edited October 3, 2013 by David BASC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 (edited) fox is not classed as vermin though it has to have its own stipulation. I understand what you are saying, my FAC used to list FOX as well as small ground game and vermin on all my rimfires, it now says AOLQ. Vermin is Vermin, and that includes fox, even the BASC agree with that. vermin (from the Free dictionary, Online) http://www.thefreedi...nary.com/vermin) 1. Various small animals or insects, such as rats or cockroaches, that are destructive, annoying, or injurious to health. 2. Animals that prey on game, such as foxes or weasels. Edited October 3, 2013 by Dekers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 We have been saying for ages that a licnencing system akin to shotguns is more practical - licence the perosn not each gun. David That could take a while to sort out. Meanwhile, when the next load of FAC blanks is printed simply adding one little word would sort out the problem which is driving everyone mad and then bin the existing copies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeds chimp Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 Got vermin on mine t also deer with regards to the ammo but no deer legal rifle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 I have spoken with the firearms team here at BASC, if your licence reads Any Lawful Quarry then that is exactly what you are allowed to shoot. Shooting foxes with rifles and shotguns is not illegal; BASC is certain that a ‘vermin’ condition granted for small-bore rifles includes foxes but always recommends the following best practice. • Ensure that you have clearly identified the fox with a suitable backstop behind it • That the placement of the bullet is in the heart/lung area of the animal • That the fox is engaged at as short a distance as possible • For .22LR; where possible use high velocity hollow point ammunition rather than sub sonic David Ah but David what if it says Vermin and any other lawful quarry. I know I'm being pedantic but there is a difference between a condition which reads Any lawful quarry and one which reads Vermin and any other lawful quarry. Also if a member was to shoot a species larger than the named species on their license, for example someone has a .222 conditioned for fox and AOLQ and shoots a small deer, would BASC, having advised members that it is Ok to do so, fight the members corner through the courts if their licensing department prosecuted or revoked their fac. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 (edited) OK so lets for sake of argument say vermin means rats and mice, and thus AOLQ means everything else.... Of course BASC would not say its OK to shoot deer with an illegal calibre, as doing so is not legal and would fall outside of the AOLQ condition wouldn’t it? The AOLQ condition does not override the legislation on deer legal calibres - so no we would not support anyone who broke the law. David Edited October 3, 2013 by David BASC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 OK so lets for sake of argument say vermin means rats and mice, and thus AOLQ means everything else.... Of course BASC would not say its OK to shoot deer with an illegal calibre, as doing so is not legal and would fall outside of the AOLQ condition wouldn’t it? The AOLQ condition does not override the legislation on deer legal calibres - so no we would not support anyone who broke the law. David David, I was not suggesting anyone would expect AOLQ to override the law. FYI it is quite legal to shoot small deer with a .222. Bearing this in mind I look forward to your reply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delburt0 Posted October 3, 2013 Author Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 i have been intouch with south yorks david and they cannot see a problem with aolq , even though she did not understand what i meant till i explained she said any other quarry and i agreed, she said said should be fine. still very hazy about foxes been vermin or not some say they are classed alone on certain sited others say they are vermin, but cannot find a decision from any authority. cannot find any information from defra or the home office to confirm that foxes are vermin or are in a class of there own even though the home office do have a calibre graph where foxes are not permitted with anything less than a .17 remmington (not hmr) and 22 hornet... i think there should be blanket rules over the country not forces, not only for calibres but a list of quarry for that calibre. i find this aolq quite useless and confusing and untill there are test cases i think it will be down to shooter and the police force in question own discretion.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sprackles Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 I have posted this once already but I think it's a pretty reasonable statement. Instead of All OTHER legal quarry, I got this.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delburt0 Posted October 3, 2013 Author Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 (edited) I have posted this once already but I think it's a pretty reasonable statement. Instead of All OTHER legal quarry, I got this.... this is just a standard fac have you got any firearms on this ticket as mine stated at the side of the 22/250 it stated it was used for VERMIN also FOX CONTROL separately.. Edited October 3, 2013 by delburt0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 Hi Charlie Sorry if it seems I misunderstood you. Yes if you had 222cf for AOLQ then yes the small deer can be shot with that, as I said AOLQ means you can shoot any quarry with that calibre thats legal to do so David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul2012 Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 Personally i'd make a quick call to the firearms dept. And ask them their interpretation of any wording after all they are the ones who govern what we cant do also this means i can stay legal without the headaches some members seem to suffer from about this. Then again I'm still waiting for my fac grant so maybe my opinion doesn't count. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 AOLQ - does what it says on the tin! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vipa Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 I have posted this once already but I think it's a pretty reasonable statement. Instead of All OTHER legal quarry, I got this.... Mine states "The firearm(s) and ammunition shall be used for shooting any lawful quarry suitable for that calibre and for zeroing on ranges or land over which the holder has authority to shoot" I have .22lr, 6.5x55, .308 & .300WM on my ticket. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delburt0 Posted October 3, 2013 Author Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 (edited) Mine states "The firearm(s) and ammunition shall be used for shooting any lawful quarry suitable for that calibre and for zeroing on ranges or land over which the holder has authority to shoot" I have .22lr, 6.5x55, .308 & .300WM on my ticket. it is that (suitable for that calibre) that seems to be causing confusion, this thread started because my fao said no to me using a .17 hmr for close fox, where some members are allowed to do this so the question i asked david this morning was is fox lawfull quarry. Edited October 3, 2013 by delburt0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 Fox is certainly lawful quarry David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delburt0 Posted October 3, 2013 Author Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 That will do for me thanks David and to basc,,, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njc110381 Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 It is lawful to shoot a fox with any rifle or shotgun. So yes, your HMR is suitable if you have AOLQ. As long as there are no welfare issues (you could be charged under one of the wildlife acts if you cause unnecessary suffering) and no species specific acts (like the deer acts etc) then crack on. I've shot all sorts with all sorts. From foxes with a HMR and .22lr to small vermin with my .338. Given the choice I will always pick up the most suitable gun but if something out of the ordinary needs dealing with then it's good to be able to. Gloucestershire have recently removed the AOLQ condition due to concerns of public safety during the badger cull in the area. The force solicitor seems to have overlooked the fact that many folk are out at night shooting foxes in the same areas with fox conditioned firearms, so what they aim to achieve by this I'm not sure?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sprackles Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 I have posted this once already but I think it's a pretty reasonable statement. Instead of All OTHER legal quarry, I got this.... this is just a standard fac have you got any firearms on this ticket as mine stated at the side of the 22/250 it stated it was used for VERMIN also FOX CONTROL separately.. I have .22 and .17hmr....as to it being standard, it would seem otherwise from the posts in the fox thread. Possibly standard now but previously issued FACs are causing some confusion...eg..yours where you have been told no to foxes with HMR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delburt0 Posted October 3, 2013 Author Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 (edited) I have .22 and .17hmr....as to it being standard, it would seem otherwise from the posts in the fox thread. Possibly standard now but previously issued FACs are causing some confusion...eg..yours where you have been told no to foxes with HMR your right i it is a very shady debate. atb delburt0.. Edited October 3, 2013 by delburt0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka Joe Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 Sorry if it seems I misunderstood you. Yes if you had 222cf for AOLQ then yes the small deer can be shot with that, as I said AOLQ means you can shoot any quarry with that calibre thats legal to do so David, so the 222 wouldn't have to have the Deer Condition then.? (Deer & AOLQ)......just AOLQ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 Hi Charlie Sorry if it seems I misunderstood you. Yes if you had 222cf for AOLQ then yes the small deer can be shot with that, as I said AOLQ means you can shoot any quarry with that calibre thats legal to do so David Thank you David. It would now seem prudent that those posters who are being told that they must have a DSC or mentor before their licensing manager will condition them to shoot deer with their .243 should now simply ask for fox and AOLQ. Job done ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin lad Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 David, so the 222 wouldn't have to have the Deer Condition then.? (Deer & AOLQ)......just AOLQ. my fac says muntjac and chinese water deer and i have .222 but then some of the wording on my fac could be miss leading it says The holder of this certificate may possess,purchase or acquire expanding ammunition ,or the missiles of such ammunition ,in .22rf, .222 .17hmr ammunition authorised by this certificate and use such ammunition in connection with the lawful shooting of muntjac and chinese water deer or any other lawful quarry witch some may think it's ok to shoot small deer with lr and hmr which it is not colin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 That's been the point, so many shooters had a 22 CF or higher for fox, but then had to apply for a variation if deer came onto the land; time and money wasted for shooter and police. Hence BASC and others have been campaigning to get AOLQ as 'standard'. The Firearms Act puts in all sorts of checks and balances about the suitability of a person to possess section 1, which is right and proper, but the Act has no mention about additional conditions that could / should be applied on a species basis. We have to be of good character, have land to shoot over and good reason etc to get granted. Once we have been deemed suitable to possess sec 1 by default we have satisfied all the criteria of the Act - so there is no legal justification for slapping on additional restrictive conditions just because the person wants to shoot a deer. Conditions such as training or experience can be added, sensibly I suggest, if the only alternative would be to refuse the grant. But in some cases the police have used the fact that conditions cant be appealed to slap on mentoring or DSC1 conditions in some cases regardless of the level of knowledge and experience of the shooter, even if they have passed all the criteria to possess Sec 1 - this has to be wrong! So ACPO have written again to all firearms teams senior officers pointing out the AOLQ should be applied and mentoring dropped - unless of course the applicant has no experience. So if your certificate is conditioned AOLQ, and you are using a suitable calibre of course, you don't need to apply to have deer added. David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadioles Posted October 3, 2013 Report Share Posted October 3, 2013 I think a lot of you are missing the point and the Home Office DO NOT say that rimfire is not suitable for fox. When you apply for a firearms licence you have to give "good reason" for requiring particular calibres of rifle. For example, in the case of rimfire, "good reason" will be to shoot vermin. It is for that purpose that you have been granted the licence, but having been granted it, there are other things that you can legally shoot, such as foxes. Shooting foxes, however, would not generally be accepted as "good reason" to purchase a .22lr. It is the same with "land" or "permissions". You only need one "permission" to justify the licence. Thereafter you can shoot anywhere that is legal (you have permission) and appropriate. If you read the Home Office Guidance notes properly, they explain this quite clearly. Quote - ".22 rimfire is generally too low powered to be used against fox except at short range, but may be reasonably permitted against such quarry in certain circumstances. However, sole use against a fox would not normally be sufficient 'good reason' to acquire such a rifle..... " So as you can see, the Home Office are quite happy for the use of rimfire against fox in the right circumstances. I have no doubt that a professional pest controller who requires a .22lr specifically to control urban fox would be able to demonstrate that to be "good reason". A farmer with 10,000 acres would not. The farmer, however, could purchase the .22lr for vermin control and with the aolq condition also use it for close range fox. Indeed, even without the aolq condition he could still shoot fox as it is reasonable to include fox within the definition of vermin, even though without a test case in court that area is still slightly grey. Some police forces have chosen (note "chosen", it is not law) to treat fox as its own category. In this instance, where the chief constable has "discretion", it is a bit tricky. In my view if there is no mention of fox anywhere on your licence, just "vermin", I think it is reasonable to assume (I would defend this position in court) that vermin includes fox. If, however, your licence conditions some guns specifically for fox, it could be argued in court that your police force has made it clear to you that some can legally be used for fox while some cannot. That is why, to avoid any possible grey areas, it is best to have aolq for each gun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.