Thunderbird Posted January 12, 2016 Report Share Posted January 12, 2016 A friend has heard in writing from an FEO that this 'other lawful quarry' phrase is no longer issued on licenses and that any that still have it are just older ones pending renewal. Is this right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stevo Posted January 12, 2016 Report Share Posted January 12, 2016 Not in lincs as far as i know . News to me if so . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walshie Posted January 12, 2016 Report Share Posted January 12, 2016 I've recently got mine back and it doesn't specify species. It just says the so-and-so guns shall be used for any lawful quarry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderbird Posted January 12, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 12, 2016 That's interesting Walshie. I have no idea how much leeway (if any) different forces have in establishing rules like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walshie Posted January 12, 2016 Report Share Posted January 12, 2016 In theory at least, there shouldn't be any leeway. They should all be following the HO guidelines. As we all know though, that's in an ideal world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snow white Posted January 12, 2016 Report Share Posted January 12, 2016 Got mine back in November still got all lawful quarry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunkield Posted January 12, 2016 Report Share Posted January 12, 2016 I understand in these parts it has been removed on renewal, mine isn't due for years so I can't confirm that first hand. When you see some of the discussion regarding peoples interpretation of what it means on forums it is hardly surprising though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BangBangNik Posted January 12, 2016 Report Share Posted January 12, 2016 Every variation I have put in with Lancashire, I ask for "all other legal quarry" and they have always ignored it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7daysinaweek Posted January 12, 2016 Report Share Posted January 12, 2016 not under Merseyside, recently got my fac renewal back and still states as did my previous "and any other legal quarry" additional to the specific condition for my different calibres and species. atb 7diaw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WRX_Soldier Posted January 12, 2016 Report Share Posted January 12, 2016 Got my fac Christmas eve. Has ground game, vermin and aolq on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrispti Posted January 12, 2016 Report Share Posted January 12, 2016 Recently got mine and for all calibers listed it states for vermin and all other legal quarry, and I specifically asked for muntjac and cwd on the .223. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesj Posted January 12, 2016 Report Share Posted January 12, 2016 judging by another thread it seems its just Gloucestershire doing this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redgum Posted January 12, 2016 Report Share Posted January 12, 2016 A friend has heard in writing from an FEO that this 'other lawful quarry' phrase is no longer issued on licenses and that any that still have it are just older ones pending renewal. Is this right? Gloucestershire police I should think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougy Posted January 12, 2016 Report Share Posted January 12, 2016 I'll let you know, I should have mine back in the next few day's. That's if they can figure out why I asked for .224 bullets and not 22.250 lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scraggoak Posted January 12, 2016 Report Share Posted January 12, 2016 Sussex Police still use ALQ, cheers Geoff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craftycarper Posted January 12, 2016 Report Share Posted January 12, 2016 ALQ came back on my recent renewal with the Met... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka Joe Posted January 12, 2016 Report Share Posted January 12, 2016 Durham have also adopted ALQ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderbird Posted January 13, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2016 Yes, it is Glos. So, is the law open to interpretation to the degree that they can enforce this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breastman Posted January 13, 2016 Report Share Posted January 13, 2016 (edited) I'm sad enough to read the minutes from the meetings the Firearms and Explosives Licensing Working Group (FELWG) publish where this sort of thing is discussed by the Police and haven't read anything about this being rescinded. If anything some forces are only just coming onboard with the AOLQ condition after years of being told thats what they should've been doing from the start! Edited January 13, 2016 by Breastman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redgum Posted January 13, 2016 Report Share Posted January 13, 2016 (edited) Yes, it is Glos. So, is the law open to interpretation to the degree that they can enforce this? As mentioned on another post,Gloucestershire seem to have told several different versions of why they will not give AOLQ. I was told by a member of the firearms team is was due to the fact that they would rather give more specific conditions in relation to calibre and humane dispatch of quarry. They generally won't condition hmr for fox and the other problem is that there isn't a legal calibre for boar of which we have the biggest population in the UK so AOLQ on a hmr or .22lr would make it legal for boar. Also Gloucester FA like to see a qualification for deer or at least mentoring, right or wrong its what they insist, so if you requested a .223 (or 243 but they also don't like giving that just for fox without a struggle) and want to shoot deer with it then it would have to be conditioned for such, AOLQ would take away that decision from them. Until we have a new chief I can't see this changing and I agree with the thinking behind it, I've never had a problem getting the right calibre for species granted, you just have to show em you have good reason and experience. So the answer to your question about the degree in which they can enforce their interpretation, well you have to ask yourself who makes the final decision on granting you a license or the conditions you wish to be on it, is it the law, no its the police but you will always have the right to appeal against their decision if you feel they are not following your legal rights. Edited January 13, 2016 by Redgum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mick miller Posted February 1, 2016 Report Share Posted February 1, 2016 (edited) I just received my variation back from Herts and apart from the reduced quantity of ammunition (a new directive I gather), my previous conditions for fox and unaccompanied deer stalking have been removed and replaced with AOLQ where appropriate. When I questioned this I was told that you should know what calibre is suitable for which species, and so specific conditions are no longer added. The death of DSC1 then? Just get some land, get a 243 and you're deer legal! Edited February 1, 2016 by mick miller Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walshie Posted February 1, 2016 Report Share Posted February 1, 2016 It's about time they made it simpler than it used to be. Don't get much simpler than this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malkiserow Posted February 1, 2016 Report Share Posted February 1, 2016 I've been told that AOLQ is more appropriate for centre-fire rifles where licence holders can make that judgement. However, licence holders are not at liberty to decide on what constitutes legal quarry for rimfire rifles so they have specified uses/species such as fox etc. They insist in the "no badger" sentence like we don't know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redgum Posted February 1, 2016 Report Share Posted February 1, 2016 (edited) This is how my force words it. Edited February 1, 2016 by Redgum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted February 1, 2016 Report Share Posted February 1, 2016 This is how my force words it. Glos. seem still to be micromanaging then, which is somewhat dissapointing. About time these people all started singing from the same hymn sheet and following HO guidelines. 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.