22 centerfire legal deer cal on 1st oct 07 england/wales

[fubar]

22 centerfire legal deer cal from 1st october 07

 

 

Draft Order laid before Parliament under section 6(1) of the Regulatory Reform Act 2001, for approval by a resolution of each House of Parliament.

DRAFT STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS

2007 No. XXX

REGULATORY REFORM, ENGLAND AND WALES

The Regulatory Reform (Deer)(England and Wales) Order 2007

Made - - - - XXX

Coming into force - - 1 October 2007

This Order is made by the Secretary of State in exercise of the powers conferred by sections 1 and 4(3), (6) and (7)( of the Regulatory Reform Act 2001 (“the Actâ€)(a).

For the purposes of section 1(5) of the Act, this Order is made with the agreement of the National Assembly for Wales.

For the purposes of section 3(1) of the Act, the Secretary of State is of the opinion that this Order does not remove any necessary protection or prevent any person from continuing to exercise any right or freedom which he might reasonably expect to continue to exercise.

For the purposes of section 3(2) of the Act, the Secretary of State is of the opinion, in relation to any burden created by this Order, that—

(a) the provisions of this Order, taken as a whole, strike a fair balance between the public interest and the interests of the persons affected by the burden, and

(:( the extent to which this Order removes or reduces one or more burdens, or has other beneficial effects for persons affected by the burdens imposed by the existing law, makes it desirable for the Order to be made.

The Secretary of State has consulted in accordance with section 5(1) (b)of the Act.

The Secretary of State has laid a document before Parliament containing his proposals for this Order in accordance with section 6(1) of the Act.

The period for Parliamentary consideration referred to in section 8(1) of the Act has expired.

In accordance with section 8(4) of the Act, the Secretary of State has had regard to the representations made during that period and in particular to [name any Parliamentary Report that may be issued during Parliamentary scrutiny].

(a) 2001 c. 6;.

( Section 5(1)© was amended by the Justice (Northern Ireland) Act 2002 (c. 26), Schedule 12, paragraph 81.

In accordance with section 4(2) of the Act, the Secretary of State has laid a draft of this Order before Parliament, with a statement as required by section 8(5) of that Act.

The draft has been approved by a resolution of each House of Parliament.

Citation, commencement, extent and interpretation

1.—(1)This Order may be cited as the Regulatory Reform (Deer) (England and Wales) Order 2007 and shall come into force on 1st October 2007.

(2) This Order extends to England and Wales only.

(3) In this Order “the 1991 Act†means the Deer Act 1991(a).

Use of prohibited weapons and other articles

2. In section 4 of the 1991 Act (use of prohibited weapons and other articles) , in subsection (4)(a) after “deer,â€, insert “when the vehicle is moving or when its engine is running,â€.

General exceptions to certain provisions of the Deer Act 1991

3.—(1) Section 6 of the 1991 Act (general exceptions to certain provisions of this Act) is amended as follows.

(2) After subsection (2), insert—

“(2A) A person shall not be guilty of an offence under section 2 or section 3 above by reason of taking or killing a deer that he reasonably believes—

(a) has been deprived in any way (other than by an unlawful taking or killing by that person) of a female deer on which it was dependent; or

( is about to be deprived, by death from disease or a lawful taking or killing, of a female deer on which it is dependent.â€.

(3) For subsections (3) and (4), substitute—

“(3) A person shall not be guilty of an offence under section 4(1) or (2) above by reason of the use of any reasonable means for the purpose of killing any deer if he reasonably believes that the deer has been so seriously injured, otherwise than by his unlawful act, or is so seriously diseased, that to kill it is an act of mercy.

(4) In subsection (3) above, “any reasonable means†means any method of killing a deer that can reasonably be expected to result in rapid loss of consciousness and death and which is appropriate in all the circumstances (including in particular what the deer is doing, its size, its distance from the closest position safely attainable by the person attempting to kill the deer and its position in relation to vegetative cover).â€.

(4) At the end, insert—

“(6) A person shall not be guilty of an offence under section 4(2)(a) above if he uses for the purpose of taking or killing or injuring any Chinese water deer (Hydropotes inermis), muntjac deer (Muntiacus reevesi) or roe deer (Capreolus capreolus)—

(a) a rifle having a calibre of not less than .220 inches and a muzzle energy of not less than 1,356 joules (1000 foot pounds), and

( a soft-nosed or hollow-nosed bullet weighing not less than 3.24 grammes (50 grains).â€.

(a) 1991 c. 54. 2

Licences

4.—(1) Section 8 of the 1991 Act (exceptions for persons licensed by Natural England or the Countryside Council for Wales)(a) is amended as follows.

(2) In the heading, after “Natural England†( insert “, the National Assembly for Wales,â€.

(3) After subsection (3), insert—

“(3A) A licence may be granted to any person by—

(a) Natural England, in relation to any land in England, or

( the National Assembly for Wales, in relation to any land in Wales,

exempting that person from section 2 above in relation to any species and description of deer.

(3B) A licence may be granted under subsection (3A) above for the purpose of—

(a) preserving public health or public safety, or

( conserving the natural heritage.

(3C) Before granting a licence under subsection (3A) above in relation to any land the licensor must be satisfied that—

(a) in the case of a licence required for the purpose of preserving public health or public safety, there is a serious risk of deer of the species and description to which the application relates putting public health or public safety at risk;

( in the case of a licence required for the purpose of conserving the natural heritage, there is a serious risk of deer of the species and description to which the application relates causing deterioration of the natural heritage;

© to achieve the purpose in question there is no satisfactory alternative to taking and killing the deer of the species and description to which the application relates during the close season prescribed by Schedule 1 to this Act;

(d) the applicant has a right of entry to the land for the purpose of taking or killing deer under the licence; and

(e) if the licence is to relate to red, roe or fallow deer, the taking or killing to be authorised by the licence will not compromise the ability of that species to maintain the population of deer in question on a long-term basis within its natural range in the numbers which exist after the taking or killing has taken place.

(3D) A licence may be granted to any person by—

(a) Natural England in relation to any land in England, or

( the National Assembly for Wales, in relation to any land in Wales,

exempting that person from section 3 above in relation to any species and description of deer.

(3E) A licence may be granted under subsection (3D) above for the purpose of—

(a) preserving public health or public safety,

( conserving the natural heritage, or

© preventing serious damage to property.

(3F) Before granting a licence under subsection (3D) above in relation to any land the licensor must be satisfied that—

(a) As amended by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act (2000 c.37), section 73(4), Schedule 8, paragraph 1(o), which substituted “English Nature†for “Nature Conservancy Council for England†and then further amended by the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 (c. 16), section 105(1), Schedule 11, Part 1, paragraph 128(1), (2), which further substituted “Natural England†for “English Natureâ€.

( As amended by the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006, section 105(1), Schedule 11, Part 1, paragraph 128(1), (3), which substituted “Natural England†for the “Nature Conservancy Council for England†in the heading.

3

(a) in the case of a licence required for the purpose of preserving public health or public safety, there is a serious risk of deer of the species and description to which the application relates putting public health or public safety at risk;

( in the case of a licence required for the purpose of conserving the natural heritage, there is a serious risk of deer of the species and description to which the application relates causing deterioration of the natural heritage;

© in the case of a licence required for the purpose of preventing serious damage to property, property on the land has been seriously damaged in the year preceding the licence application;

(d) to achieve the purpose in question there is no satisfactory alternative to taking and killing the deer of the species and description to which the application relates during the close season prescribed by Schedule 1 to this Act;

(e) the applicant has a right of entry to the land for the purpose of taking or killing deer under the licence; and

(f) if the licence is to relate to red, roe or fallow deer, the taking or killing to be authorised by the licence will not compromise the ability of that species to maintain the population of deer in question on a long-term basis within its natural range in the numbers which exist after the taking or killing has taken place.

(3G) A licence under subsection (3A) or (3D) above must state—

(a) the purpose for which it is granted;

( the land to which it relates;

© the species or descriptions of deer to which it relates;

(d) the method by which the licensee may take or kill deer; and

(e) the period, not exceeding two years, for which it is valid.

(3H) Natural England and the National Assembly for Wales may charge fees for the consideration of applications for licences under subsections (3A) and (3D) above.â€.

(4) In subsection (4)—

(a) for the words from “subsection (1)†to “Walesâ€, substitute “this section may be revoked at any time by the licensorâ€; and

( for “either of those subsectionsâ€, substitute “this sectionâ€.

(5) In subsection (5), for “subsection (1) or subsection (2)â€, substitute “this sectionâ€.

(6) At the end, add—

“(6) In this section, “the natural heritage†means flora and fauna, geological or physiographical features or natural beauty and amenity of the countryside.â€.

Close seasons

5.—(1) For the tables in Schedule 1 to the 1991 Act (close seasons), substitute—

“CHINESE WATER DEER (Hydropotes inermis)

Buck

15th March to 31st October inclusive

Doe

15th March to 31st October inclusive

FALLOW DEER (Dama dama)

Buck

1st May to 31st July inclusive

Doe

15th March to 31st October inclusive

RED DEER (Cervus elaphus)

Stags

1st May to 31st July inclusive

Hinds

15th March to 31st October inclusive

4

RED /SIKA DEER HYBRIDS

Stags

1st May to 31st July inclusive

Hinds

15th March to 31st October inclusive

ROE DEER (Capreolus capreolus)

Buck

1st November to 31st March inclusive

Doe

15th March to 31st October inclusive

SIKA DEER (Cervus nippon)

Stags

1st May to 31st July inclusive

Hinds

15th March to 31st October inclusiveâ€.

(2) In section 2 of the 1991 Act, omit subsections (4) and (5).

(3) In subsection (2) of section 15 of the 1991 Act(a), for “any of sections 2(4) and 4(3)â€, substitute “section 4(3)â€.

(4) In section 16 after the definition of “deer†insert “ “species†includes any hybrid of different species of deerâ€.

Subordinate provisions

6.—(1) For the purposes of section 4(3) of the Regulatory Reform Act 2001, article 4(3) and the tables set out in article 5(1) of this Order are designated as subordinate provisions.

(2) A subordinate provisions order( made in relation to any of the provisions mentioned in paragraph (1) shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.

(3) The power to make such a subordinate provisions order shall be exercisable in relation to Wales by the National Assembly for Wales.

Signatory text

Name

Address Parliamentary Under Secretary of State

Date Department

EXPLANATORY NOTE

(This note is not part of the Order)

This Order is made under section 1 of the Regulatory Reform Act 2001 (2001 c. 6). It amends the Deer Act 1991 (1991 c. 54) (“the 1991 Actâ€) by removing certain burdens on those affected by it.

Article 2 amends section 4(4) of the 1991 Act as regards the use of mechanically propelled vehicles when shooting at deer.

Article 3 amends section 6 which is concerned with the exceptions to sections 2 to 4 of the 1991 Act. Those sections contain offences relating to the killing or taking of deer.

Article 4 amends section 8 of the 1991 Act, which is concerned with the granting of exemptions by licence by Natural England or the Countryside Council for Wales.

(a) As amended by the Regulatory Reform (Game) Order 2007 (S.I. 2007/xxx), article 6.

( See section 4(4) of the Regulatory Reform Act 2001. 5

Article 5 amends Schedule 1 to the 1991 Act, which sets out the close seasons in respect of different species of deer, and makes consequential amendments.

Article 6 designates article 4(3) and the tables in article 5(1) as subordinate provisions for the purposes of section 4(3) of the 1991 Act.

A Regulatory Impact Assessment has been prepared and placed in the library of each House of Parliament. Copies can be obtained from Defra (Wildlife Species Conservation Division), Temple Quay House (Zone 1/08a), 2 The Square, Temple Quay, Bristol, BS1 6EB.

6

[kip270]

But this bit is not good :(

 

2.27 In relation to the general prohibition on the use of rifles of a calibre of less than .240 inches to

kill deer, Defra considers that .22 inch centre-fire rifles that discharge a bullet of not less than

50gr and generate not less than 1000 ft lbs muzzle energy can despatch small deer humanely

and such use should therefore be permitted. This would avoid the need for gamekeepers and

others, who only have need to control foxes and small deer, from acquiring larger rifles which,

being more powerful, require a greater margin of safety when being used. Defra regards

muntjac, Chinese water deer and roe deer as ‘small deer’.

[Axe]

Why so Kip?

[kip270]

If you happen to have say a 6.5 calibre rifle, on your renewal they could insist that you have NO need for the larger calibre, and urge you to downgrade to a smaller calibre :(

 

It has nothing to do with the calibre of the rifle it is the person behind it that counts. I can see them getting pushy on this, they don't want us to have rifle's anyhow

[Axe]

Assuming you have the 6.5 from a previous application for shooting Deer, could you not argue that: whilst the smaller .22 Centrefire calibres can now be used on Small Deer, you do infact still require the 6.5 for the Larger Deer species?

[kip270]

You could try, but have a read of my first reply to the original post, so that means if you aplly for a .243 for fox and deer they will say no you only need something in .22calibre and 1000ftlb. Same thing as the .17hmr at the moment regarding Fox, some say Yes others say NO .

[Axe]

It does clearly state small deer Kip, you would certainly get a larger calibre if you wanted to use it on larger species.

[kip270]

Lets hope so Axe, but they are pushing people to get there DSC 1 & 2, so who knows what will happen

[Axe]

I must admit I dont like this self imposed 'you must do a DSC 1' condition.

[auto culto]

oh dear, theres going to be alot less large cal stuff soon. Its just one more step towards making life more difficult for everyone and limiting free choice even more.

[Dunkield]

http://forums.pigeonwatch.co.uk/forums/ind...c=29871&hl=

[Oly]

So is this DEFINATELY going to happen then...or is it still to be fought over?

[karl h]

but for fallow red and sika you have to have bigger so its not all bad like its been said its not about the rifle its the person behind it.

[Dunkield]

I think Kip's point is, if you only have Roe stalking for instance, and you have a 6.5 or whatever, but you also have .22 centrefire, will they then say you have no good reason to posess the larger calibre, so give it up?

[karl h]

with my firearms officer he says as long as i show that I am a member of range and buy regular ammo I can can keep my calibres. A lot of it depends on the local FAO and what his views on it are. But like said they are all ways normally against us what ever we do.

[kip270]

I think Kip's point is, if you only have Roe stalking for instance, and you have a 6.5 or whatever, but you also have .22 centrefire, will they then say you have no good reason to posess the larger calibre, so give it up?

 

Spot on Stu

[Browning]

Apart from my personal feelings that this is a backward move, I wonder just how many small deer will

be shot with the "favourite foxing round" ? Which, according to my experience, and that of most of the lads that I have foxed with

over the many years I've been shooting, are ballistic tips.

 

In general I would hope that anyone currently taking the time and effort to get a deer caliber (.240+) placed on

their ticket, will be expecting to shoot deer at some point, and would make some effort to learn

the laws on deer shooting.

 

This is now going to be (and please don't take this the wrong way, it certainly is not meant as a disparaging

comment) opened up to all .22CF owners, who may not be actively stalking deer, and therefore may not be

clued up on deer law.

 

I would expect that the majority will hear "It's OK to shoot deer with the .22CF now" and off they go......How many

will take the effort to work up a new deer round, using the correct weight (Min 50gn) and format (Soft or Hollow Nose) of bullet?

 

Obviousely the lads on here will But I'll guess there are many more out there that won't have a clue.

[njc110381]

I see it as quite a positive change, for my situation anyway. If you don't need a larger calibre, then why have one? If you need to shoot larger deer, they have no arguement and they can't ask you to give up your guns. Some land is too small for .243, so if roe could be shot with a smaller round it will open up a lot of permissions for people that for now, have to just sit and watch them wandering around (me on my land!). I'm all in to new shooters having to do a safety course before they can take say .308 into the field, it's a pretty potent round, and mistakes could well be costly for all involved. I do feel the DSC1 is a bit detailed for the job, and very costly to the shooter though. Why do I need to know the life cycle/seasons of all deer if all I shoot is roe? Experienced shooters will not learn anything on the course either so I feel it's a waste of time for them, and my FEO agrees. If a long standing FAC holder with deer as a condition on their cert gives me the thumbs up, that's all he wants to see (but others may be different). All in all, I feel it's a move in the right direction.

[markbivvy]

I see it as quite a positive change, for my situation anyway. If you don't need a larger calibre, then why have one? If you need to shoot larger deer, they have no arguement and they can't ask you to give up your guns. Some land is too small for .243, so if roe could be shot with a smaller round it will open up a lot of permissions for people that for now, have to just sit and watch them wandering around (me on my land!). I'm all in to new shooters having to do a safety course before they can take say .308 into the field, it's a pretty potent round, and mistakes could well be costly for all involved. I do feel the DSC1 is a bit detailed for the job, and very costly to the shooter though. Why do I need to know the life cycle/seasons of all deer if all I shoot is roe? Experienced shooters will not learn anything on the course either so I feel it's a waste of time for them, and my FEO agrees. If a long standing FAC holder with deer as a condition on their cert gives me the thumbs up, that's all he wants to see (but others may be different). All in all, I feel it's a move in the right direction. :(

wish i could agree with you Neil.

but to be honest i cant see any good coming our way.

more hoops to jump through, and more money into shooting organisation pockets.if wounded deer start to get seen by tony tree hugger the **** will really hit the fan.

 

call me paranoid but. the timing of this and the firearms data base getting on line, the thread the other week about having to be a member of a club. Ireland having a big firearm review that does no favors for shooters.

makes one wonder.

[Eagleman]

I am by no means any kind of expert in this at all. However, my reading of the proposed changes will see a number of .243 going cheap as people are either gradually restricted to .223 for Muntjac, Roe and Chinese Water deer and fox and those that shoot Fallow, Sika and Red now with .243 move up to .270 and .308 etc and also include a .223 in the guns locker.

 

Interesting times ahead!

[markbivvy]

http://www.countryside-alliance.org.uk/foo...t_consultation/

[reefman]

I think it is a step in the right direction .243 is ok on some of the farms I shoot on but not on my own land where I have problems with Roe damaging trees

However .223 is ok.(I have an open ticket any way)

For me this means all I have to do is get a variation for Roe deer get my friend who is an experienced stalker to come out with me a couple of times and bingo it's sorted.

DEFRA claim there is clear evidence that stalking/Deer control of Roe deer is not being carried out because of the hastle of the correct rifle etc putting off keepers or other low income agricultural workers from forking out the best part of £1000 for a modest moderated set up.When they already posses one for fox control.

My understanding of the change is perhaps less cynical,the changes have been drafted with people like myself a landowner, keepers and farmers in mind.Why do we need two guns for roe and fox,(Pests).

I already have .22 rf for lamping bunnies and rats,.17hmr for day light bunnies and crows and .223 for fox and soon to be Roe deer.

 

You guys who shoot the bigger deer have little to fear,we are only falling in line with Scotish law,I havn't seen them all loose their big rifles.

Also I bet most of the members of the house of Lords go deer stalking so they will not spite themselves.

 

As for wether or not .22 cf is humane,well that has already been decided by the "clever "people in government.

The test will be when we have idiots taking unrealistic and innapropriate shots.

[Browning]

I think it is a step in the right direction .243 is ok on some of the farms I shoot on but not on my own land where I have problems with Roe damaging trees

However .223 is ok.(I have an open ticket any way)

 

We had a similar conversation to this in the pub last night, where one of the lads stated almost word for word what Reefman did above........my argument was.........I'm not really sure why, seeing as you have an open ticket, .243 would not be deemed suitable for your land but .223 would? They both need the same care and attention to detail, they both need the same backstop, a suitably moderated .243 is not much louder than a .223.

 

Or am I missing something?

[desperado]

So is this DEFINATELY going to happen then...or is it still to be fought over?

 

Statutory instruments (which is what this law will be) do not go through parliament in the same way as statutes. The Secretary of State for the Environment or something will just read it out in parliament and it will probably be approved without any debate.

 

So, even though its not law yet it is more or less certain that it will be soon.

 

Desperado