Jump to content


Photo

Shoooting boundary


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#1 LeeN

LeeN
  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
  • Joined 16-August 16

Posted 27 December 2016 - 05:26 PM

This has probably been covered many times before but can't seem to find a clear answer on the net, I've got pigeons hammering my permission but they are landing on the far side of the field, the only way to properly shoot them is from the hedge that has a foot path and road on the other side of it, how far from the path/road do I have to be to legally shoot?
I'm in Scotland btw

#2 Stonepark

Stonepark
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 810 posts
  • Joined 20-August 15
  • From:Stirling

Posted 27 December 2016 - 05:35 PM

In Scotland, no specific law exists against shooting adjacent the highway (or on it if the land ownership is split by the road), if you were charged it would be for 'reckless endangerment' and the procarator fiscal would have to prove you were shooting in a reckless and culpable manner (i.e. not caring where you shot).

 

If you have road to your back and only shooting forward, and have signed the footpath 100 yards either side as warning, it is unlikely that any charge could be brought if they were any complaints.


Edited by Stonepark, 27 December 2016 - 05:42 PM.


#3 cooooper1

cooooper1
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 200 posts
  • Joined 24-December 12

Posted 27 December 2016 - 05:37 PM

i had a problem similar to yours couple of years back so what i did was phone BASC for some  info on the problem,this is what i was told 50 feet from the middle of the road shooting away from the road and if it`s a public footpath i could shoot ON the footpath but not behind or in front of the path and as long as i could see 50 metres both ways



#4 Stonepark

Stonepark
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 810 posts
  • Joined 20-August 15
  • From:Stirling

Posted 27 December 2016 - 05:44 PM

i had a problem similar to yours couple of years back so what i did was phone BASC for some  info on the problem,this is what i was told 50 feet from the middle of the road shooting away from the road and if it`s a public footpath i could shoot ON the footpath but not behind or in front of the path and as long as i could see 50 metres both ways

 

That's as per the Highways Act 1981, which is law in England and Wales.



#5 cooooper1

cooooper1
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 200 posts
  • Joined 24-December 12

Posted 27 December 2016 - 05:56 PM

like i said it`s the info i was given by BASC 



#6 rimfire4969

rimfire4969
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6088 posts
  • Joined 21-March 08
  • From:Cornwall

Posted 27 December 2016 - 06:11 PM

like i said it`s the info i was given by BASC


You are correct for England and Wales, but Scotland has its own laws.

#7 LeeN

LeeN
  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
  • Joined 16-August 16

Posted 27 December 2016 - 06:17 PM

Yes the road and footpath would be to my back and all shots would be away from them so no public would be endangered, could there be a complaint by the public for being a nuisance, baring in mind the path is very seldom used for walking, mostly by cyclists, farmer is happy for me to shoot wherever. It as long as it's legal and within the law, just don't want to end up on the wrong side of it

#8 Walker570

Walker570
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1100 posts
  • Joined 22-April 16

Posted 27 December 2016 - 06:52 PM

I would say you are good to go. A small sign either side of your position wouldn't go amiss, covers your back. I was question many years ago by English Nature about a high seat on a cross roads junction in a wood, with a foot path running along one ride. I said for them to check the law as I saw it and they came back and said, no problem. I didn't realise the Scottish situation was different. Learn something on here every day :-)

Edited by Walker570, 27 December 2016 - 06:53 PM.


#9 LeeN

LeeN
  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
  • Joined 16-August 16

Posted 27 December 2016 - 07:26 PM

Thanks for the replies, gives me confidence that tmrw should be a good day 👍🏻

#10 cooooper1

cooooper1
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 200 posts
  • Joined 24-December 12

Posted 27 December 2016 - 07:39 PM

You are correct for England and Wales, but Scotland has its own laws.

oh



#11 mossy835

mossy835
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 10146 posts
  • Joined 26-August 05
  • From:Taunton Somerset

Posted 27 December 2016 - 08:12 PM

i had a problem similar to yours couple of years back so what i did was phone BASC for some  info on the problem,this is what i was told 50 feet from the middle of the road shooting away from the road and if it`s a public footpath i could shoot ON the footpath but not behind or in front of the path and as long as i could see 50 metres both ways

 

 

this what i was told by basc years ago.



#12 Bobba

Bobba
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 821 posts
  • Joined 26-August 09
  • From:Bristol

Posted 29 December 2016 - 09:05 AM

In Scotland, no specific law exists against shooting adjacent the highway (or on it if the land ownership is split by the road), if you were charged it would be for 'reckless endangerment' and the procarator fiscal would have to prove you were shooting in a reckless and culpable manner (i.e. not caring where you shot).
 
If you have road to your back and only shooting forward, and have signed the footpath 100 yards either side as warning, it is unlikely that any charge could be brought if they were any complaints.


Interesting to see the difference between the differing systems explained. Thank you.

My only observation is that With the OP shooting with his back to a road he runs the risk of any incoming birds he hits falling into the road thereby endangering road users where, for example, cars, cyclists, pedestrians are hit by a falling bird or take evasive action to avoid one. A Wiley prosecutor would point to the need for risk assessment where this risk would be clear to see. So, it is not the shooting itself which causes the problem but if, as a result of doing so, you cause an endagerement.

#13 cooooper1

cooooper1
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 200 posts
  • Joined 24-December 12

Posted 29 December 2016 - 03:10 PM

Interesting to see the difference between the differing systems explained. Thank you.

My only observation is that With the OP shooting with his back to a road he runs the risk of any incoming birds he hits falling into the road thereby endangering road users where, for example, cars, cyclists, pedestrians are hit by a falling bird or take evasive action to avoid one. A Wiley prosecutor would point to the need for risk assessment where this risk would be clear to see. So, it is not the shooting itself which causes the problem but if, as a result of doing so, you cause an endagerement.

a shooter with his back to the road and the right distance from the road he or she`s isn`t breaking any law,as for birds falling into the road i`ve shot pigeons,crows and seen them fly on with lung shots for couple hundred yards before dropping i bet most people on here have had the same thing happen to them to, i`d rather set up as far as possible from a road,houses,farms or footpaths but birds dictate there we shoot from time to time and might have to shoot by a road if that`s the case as long as we/me are not breaking the law.

bobba we all want clean kills but in the real world that`s not happening i guest the chances of a bird falling on the road or someones head are very slim but i agree it could well happen a bird falls into a car windscreen car crashes or hits a person so what next tell people they can`t shoot anymore because your NOT breaking the law or tell drives to stop driving cars,there`ll be thousands and thousands of car crashes or people getting run over before we here about a bird causing a accident.


Edited by cooooper1, 29 December 2016 - 03:27 PM.


#14 Bobba

Bobba
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 821 posts
  • Joined 26-August 09
  • From:Bristol

Posted 30 December 2016 - 09:13 AM

a shooter with his back to the road and the right distance from the road he or she`s isn`t breaking any law,as for birds falling into the road i`ve shot pigeons,crows and seen them fly on with lung shots for couple hundred yards before dropping i bet most people on here have had the same thing happen to them to, i`d rather set up as far as possible from a road,houses,farms or footpaths but birds dictate there we shoot from time to time and might have to shoot by a road if that`s the case as long as we/me are not breaking the law.
bobba we all want clean kills but in the real world that`s not happening i guest the chances of a bird falling on the road or someones head are very slim but i agree it could well happen a bird falls into a car windscreen car crashes or hits a person so what next tell people they can`t shoot anymore because your NOT breaking the law or tell drives to stop driving cars,there`ll be thousands and thousands of car crashes or people getting run over before we here about a bird causing a accident.


Interesting observations. Thanks.

It may well be that in the circumstances you describe the OP may not be breaking the law. But that wasn't the point I raised.

Some make reference to but do not understand clearly the law in E&W on shooting within 50 ft of the centre of a highway. It is an offence without lawful authority or reasonable excuse to shoot within 50 ft of the centre of a highway AND IN CONSEQUENCE a user is injured, interrupted or endangered. It follows from this that the action of shooting within 50 ft is not in itself an offence but it becomes an offence if any of the stated consequences result from that action.

Although the 50 ft law seemingly does not exist in Scotland and so the OP is within the law, my observation was ( and remains the case) that the consequences of the action may in certain circumstances place the OP outside the law by endangering others.

Philosophically, as shooters we either consciously or sub- consciously weigh up the risks before placing a shot (or we should do). And dead birds falling on the highway is a risk. It is up to the individual to decide whether it is a risk worth taking.

#15 cooooper1

cooooper1
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 200 posts
  • Joined 24-December 12

Posted 30 December 2016 - 03:19 PM

Interesting observations. Thanks.

It may well be that in the circumstances you describe the OP may not be breaking the law. But that wasn't the point I raised.

Some make reference to but do not understand clearly the law in E&W on shooting within 50 ft of the centre of a highway. It is an offence without lawful authority or reasonable excuse to shoot within 50 ft of the centre of a highway AND IN CONSEQUENCE a user is injured, interrupted or endangered. It follows from this that the action of shooting within 50 ft is not in itself an offence but it becomes an offence if any of the stated consequences result from that action.

Although the 50 ft law seemingly does not exist in Scotland and so the OP is within the law, my observation was ( and remains the case) that the consequences of the action may in certain circumstances place the OP outside the law by endangering others.

Philosophically, as shooters we either consciously or sub- consciously weigh up the risks before placing a shot (or we should do). And dead birds falling on the highway is a risk. It is up to the individual to decide whether it is a risk worth taking.

it`s a hard one this,but i wonder god willing it doesn`t happen IF a bird did cause a fault accident for a road user how would the shooter be under the laws as we`ve said by the law he hasn`t done anything wrong? just wondering



#16 Bobba

Bobba
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 821 posts
  • Joined 26-August 09
  • From:Bristol

Posted 30 December 2016 - 04:15 PM

it`s a hard one this,but i wonder god willing it doesn`t happen IF a bird did cause a fault accident for a road user how would the shooter be under the laws as we`ve said by the law he hasn`t done anything wrong? just wondering


Yes it is a difficult one. Any accident would seemingly be a consequence of a legal act.

But, the age in which we live we are almost automatically required to undertake risk assessments; to exercise due diligence (to take reasonable steps to avoid committing an offence); and, to ensure a duty of care to others.

Should an accident happen or someone is endangered then I suspect the police and proscurator fiscal would apply all of the above and find a law which could be applied for a prosecution in the circumstances. That said, I have no knowledge of Scottish law to even guess at what that offence would be.

#17 cooooper1

cooooper1
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 200 posts
  • Joined 24-December 12

Posted 30 December 2016 - 05:01 PM

most incidents between motor vehicles and animals are birds/dogs/ribbits etc crossing or flying low across the roads and in  99% of the time are injury free



#18 Hopper Bopper

Hopper Bopper
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 288 posts
  • Joined 11-September 11
  • From:Nottingham

Posted 31 December 2016 - 04:08 PM

This is an interesting thread. I have just finished an hour on a little flight line. Ithought I had hit a pigeon but didn't see it go down as I was going for the second bird. driving home the bird I thought I had hit was on the road about 120 yards away from where I hit it. It just shows how far they can travel

#19 cooooper1

cooooper1
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 200 posts
  • Joined 24-December 12

Posted 01 January 2017 - 02:29 PM

This is an interesting thread. I have just finished an hour on a little flight line. Ithought I had hit a pigeon but didn't see it go down as I was going for the second bird. driving home the bird I thought I had hit was on the road about 120 yards away from where I hit it. It just shows how far they can travel

that`s the point i was making on a earlier post i`ve hit high pigeons(when i say high i mean two miles up :whistling: )and seen them flying on for hundreds of yards but most probably already dead in the air with a lung shot it happens,so like i said what happens if that bird flys say 120/130 yards across a field and then drops into the road



#20 motty

motty
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6270 posts
  • Joined 12-July 05
  • From:Kings lynn norfolk

Posted 02 January 2017 - 07:06 AM

If a pigeon flies on for a few hundred yards, it is most certainly not dead in the air.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users