Jump to content

"Other Lawful Quarry" - is it still a thing?


Thunderbird
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

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Group (FELWG) publish where this sort of thing is discussed by the Police and haven't read anything about this being rescinded.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 by Breastman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 by Redgum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

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 by mick miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...