England Lockdown ... implications for shooting

[grahamch]

On 03/11/2020 at 17:33, scolopax said:

As a wildfowler and Deer stalker I am  happy with this statement. It is the best we could hope for in the circumstances 

Yep but whats a reasonable journey - my fowling is 45 mins up the A1!

[WalkedUp]

Need to find out what is allowable. Will email BASC. I have shooting on my doorstep literally but my main shooting is in Wales. 15 mins away, after the firebreak™️ is that allowable? 🤔

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, WalkedUp said:

Need to find out what is allowable.

I doubt anyone can tell you .......... because I don't believe the law actually states a 'distance' or 'time', and as far as I know, there have been no test cases.  It would be for you to justify to an authorised enquirer (e.g. a policeman) that it was reasonably close.

My guess (and it is only that) is that the vast majority of police would use sense and ask if you could have gone nearer - and if you said 'no because ...... and gave a decent reason, you would be OK - as long as it isn't ridiculously far'.  On the other had, if you said that you were going to join a mate there and although there were possible places more local, it was much better there than anywhere locally ..... you might get told 'no' and warned to be more reasonable.  I would very much doubt if you would be prosecuted unless you were being very unreasonable - because being no test cases works against them as well.

[WalkedUp]

5 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

I doubt anyone can tell you .......... because I don't believe the law actually states a 'distance' or 'time', and as far as I know, there have been no test cases.  It would be for you to justify to an authorised enquirer (e.g. a policeman) that it was reasonably close.

My guess (and it is only that) is that the vast majority of police would use sense and ask if you could have gone nearer - and if you said 'no because ...... and gave a decent reason, you would be OK - as long as it isn't ridiculously far'.  On the other had, if you said that you were going to join a mate there and although there were possible places more local, it was much better there than anywhere locally ..... you might get told 'no' and warned to be more reasonable.  I would very much doubt if you would be prosecuted unless you were being very unreasonable - because being no test cases works against them as well.

I agree, but will feel more comfortable with BASC behind me. They will likely advise me to speak to NWP 101 first before heading out. I’m happy to do so. 

[Mutiny]

24 minutes ago, grahamch said:

Yep but whats a reasonable journey - my fowling is 45 mins up the A1!

1 hour and 10 for me, but I cant go anywhere closer as there isnt anywhere closer, so I’d say that’s reasonable.....

[ShootingEgg]

On 02/11/2020 at 20:56, Stonepark said:

Thats because the virus does not generally affect the age group that attends raves!

I think that all ages can get this virus, then can pass it on so basically what you are saying is that these idiots dont respect or care about anyone but themselves.. They are willingly out there potentially contracting and spreading this to people that won't survive it.. 

[grahamch]

15 minutes ago, Mutiny said:

1 hour and 10 for me, but I cant go anywhere closer as there isnt anywhere closer, so I’d say that’s reasonable.....

Have emailed BASC for guidance

[Dave at kelton]

I cannot understand why there is any debate about staying put and keeping yourselves and others safe.

In January I am feeling poorly and bad cough etc so wife convinces me to go the the doctor. Five minutes in the surgery and I am on my way to hospital. Can’t breathe, barely move, temperature at 43, heart going like the clappers, oxygen levels low, kidney and liver function impaired. A week in hospital on intravenous antibiotics and oxygen and two months before I can get about again. That they tell me was only viral pneumonia! So those that still want to go shooting still think it is worth it rather than have a brief pause?

[captainhastings]

Your not going to catch it stood on a foreshore some where or walking the woods. Stopping driven shooting is probably a good idea though. Regrettable though it is 

[grahamch]

33 minutes ago, Dave at kelton said:

I cannot understand why there is any debate about staying put and keeping yourselves and others safe.

In January I am feeling poorly and bad cough etc so wife convinces me to go the the doctor. Five minutes in the surgery and I am on my way to hospital. Can’t breathe, barely move, temperature at 43, heart going like the clappers, oxygen levels low, kidney and liver function impaired. A week in hospital on intravenous antibiotics and oxygen and two months before I can get about again. That they tell me was only viral pneumonia! So those that still want to go shooting still think it is worth it rather than have a brief pause?

My fowling is done alone and l live alone so will not involve anyone but me in my trip.

Am more than tired of bing told what to do and p***ing my life away by a govt than wont do everything needed to control things like shutting schools etc. 

[Mutiny]

1 hour ago, Dave at kelton said:

I cannot understand why there is any debate about staying put and keeping yourselves and others safe.

I work on building sites all week with hundreds of other people - I cant see how being on the foreshore 5/600 yards minimum away from anyone else is putting anyone at risk more than when I am at work?

[Stonepark]

3 hours ago, ShootingEgg said:

I think that all ages can get this virus, then can pass it on so basically what you are saying is that these idiots dont respect or care about anyone but themselves.. They are willingly out there potentially contracting and spreading this to people that won't survive it.. 

The issue is that everybody in this country is going to get the virus sooner or later, all people can do is prevent the NHS from being overrun at any one point so that they can give adequate care to those who require it.

 

The average age of deaths from the virus is 82, it is taking the place of the flu (for which a large number of people now are annually vaccinated, making flu survivable), asking 90% of the population to give up their lives and dreams, jobs and money to protect 10% of a vulnerable population of which 95% are over 75 was never going to be viable long term solution.

 

[wymberley]

11 hours ago, Stonepark said:

The issue is that everybody in this country is going to get the virus sooner or later, all people can do is prevent the NHS from being overrun at any one point so that they can give adequate care to those who require it.

 

The average age of deaths from the virus is 82, it is taking the place of the flu (for which a large number of people now are annually vaccinated, making flu survivable), asking 90% of the population to give up their lives and dreams, jobs and money to protect 10% of a vulnerable population of which 95% are over 75 was never going to be viable long term solution.

 

Speaking as one of the 9.5% of the population, it's good to know that it's not the Covid 19 that we need to be wary of. Especially now as it might be us lot that get a half decent Christmas present - either just before or after.

[Yellow Bear]

1 hour ago, wymberley said:

Speaking as one of the 9.5% of the population, it's good to know that it's not the Covid 19 that we need to be wary of. Especially now as it might be us lot that get a half decent Christmas present - either just before or after.

Speaking as another one of the 9.5% of the population perhaps we should instead isolate the 12.5% of the population that are the main infection spread vector, the 15 to 30 year olds, then the rest could get on relatively safely.

[old'un]

35 minutes ago, Yellow Bear said:

Speaking as another one of the 9.5% of the population perhaps we should instead isolate the 12.5% of the population that are the main infection spread vector, the 15 to 30 year olds, then the rest could get on relatively safely.

Plus that age group have plenty of time in front of them, whereas most of our years are behind us.

[Teal]

18 hours ago, Dave at kelton said:

I cannot understand why there is any debate about staying put and keeping yourselves and others safe.

In January I am feeling poorly and bad cough etc so wife convinces me to go the the doctor. Five minutes in the surgery and I am on my way to hospital. Can’t breathe, barely move, temperature at 43, heart going like the clappers, oxygen levels low, kidney and liver function impaired. A week in hospital on intravenous antibiotics and oxygen and two months before I can get about again. That they tell me was only viral pneumonia! So those that still want to go shooting still think it is worth it rather than have a brief pause?

I can't be the only one that sees all shooting outside of essential pest control (in England) as a grey area at present. I did see the BASC release - but I think it contains caveat that it is preliminary interpretation. There seems to be some ambiguity around the whole situation. Certainly there was an article in the independent that fishing was the "only outdoor recreational activity to be permitted" -https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/fishing-lockdown-allowed-covid-uk-rules-b1588327.html

I have heard Avon&Somerset have turned back anglers this morning from travelling to fish - going against the article above. Of course the police interpretation may be subsequently revealed to be wrong. However, I would say to shooters who higher burden to be responsible, to be aware that unless doing pest control, until the situation is properly clarified, and don't think it is business as normal with respect to 'fowling or rough shooting. Deer management probably permitted under the same grounds as pest control work.

This isn't about coronavirus risk, but it is a blanket lockdown, and the Govt and police will be very cautious to unpick it, or there will be so many loopholes, and complexity that it won't be followed.

[grahamch]

1 hour ago, Teal said:

I can't be the only one that sees all shooting outside of essential pest control (in England) as a grey area at present. I did see the BASC release - but I think it contains caveat that it is preliminary interpretation. There seems to be some ambiguity around the whole situation. Certainly there was an article in the independent that fishing was the "only outdoor recreational activity to be permitted" -https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/fishing-lockdown-allowed-covid-uk-rules-b1588327.html

I have heard Avon&Somerset have turned back anglers this morning from travelling to fish - going against the article above. Of course the police interpretation may be subsequently revealed to be wrong. However, I would say to shooters who higher burden to be responsible, to be aware that unless doing pest control, until the situation is properly clarified, and don't think it is business as normal with respect to 'fowling or rough shooting. Deer management probably permitted under the same grounds as pest control work.

This isn't about coronavirus risk, but it is a blanket lockdown, and the Govt and police will be very cautious to unpick it, or there will be so many loopholes, and complexity that it won't be followed.

But its not a blanket lockdown at all, school, colleges, universities are all still open. Teaching may be done in social bubbles bit once the kids are off the school site the local ones anyway gather and behave like nothings wrong and thats where the infection is spreading 

[Teal]

13 minutes ago, grahamch said:

But its not a blanket lockdown at all, school, colleges, universities are all still open. Teaching may be done in social bubbles bit once the kids are off the school site the local ones anyway gather and behave like nothings wrong and thats where the infection is spreading 

This is all covered under part 1: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/new-national-restrictions-from-5-november

I don't make the rules. I am just saying that shooters should be very careful until things are properly clarified with full information. Look it'd be great if shooting and fishing are allowed, and I know it's not popular to say that it may be restricted- but I think it is possible - and given the higher burden of responsibility as a certificate holder, I think people should be cautious for the next few days until full guidance comes out, as there are mixed messages.

[AVB]

I don’t see rough shooting as a grey area. As far as I am concerned it is pretty obvious that rough shooting which complies with the regulations Re: number of people from outside your ‘bubble’ is legal. It is simply exercising whilst carrying a gun. There is NO limit on the amount of exercise you can take nor the the distance you can travel to partake in exercise. 
 

If you come across a copper who asks what you are doing it isn’t hard to say “exercising” and If you were in the unlikely situation to come across a copper who disagreed then you either argue your case or say “sorry sir” and turnaround. Nobody is going to lose their ticket over it. 

[mossy835]

i email BASC yesterday, about this, they said as long as its Authorised and agreed vermin control then yes you can continue.

[Smokersmith]

I've decided that a 6 hour round trip for some Grayling was a little hard to defend .. so passed on that.

BUT .. a nip to the marsh for a spot of fowling is well within the guidlelines to me.

[oscarsdad]

14 minutes ago, Smokersmith said:

I've decided that a 6 hour round trip for some Grayling was a little hard to defend .. so passed on that.

BUT .. a nip to the marsh for a spot of fowling is well within the guidlelines to me.

Hmmm I haven’t caught a grayling since March, that sounds a good plan but the Derbyshire rivers are probably still too high and coloured this weekend I think.

[grahamch]

Checked with my FLO and reply is below.

As you have stated rough shooting and wildfowling may take place as long as you comply with the government guidance which includes making short journeys. 

As a department we are not in a position to confirm what would constitute a short journey therefore it must be up to you, the individual, to make that decision.

We all need proper regs stating a distance and not putting the individual at risk from misinterpreting 'guidance'.

Looks like my fowling is shafted. 

[Dave at kelton]

1 hour ago, grahamch said:

Checked with my FLO and reply is below.

As you have stated rough shooting and wildfowling may take place as long as you comply with the government guidance which includes making short journeys. 

As a department we are not in a position to confirm what would constitute a short journey therefore it must be up to you, the individual, to make that decision.

We all need proper regs stating a distance and not putting the individual at risk from misinterpreting 'guidance'.

Looks like my fowling is shafted. 

But stating a distance is of itself impractical. If you live in a rural area, as I and many others do, a short journey might be twenty or more miles. If you live in an urban area that would be way too far depending on what you are travelling to do.

The principal of reasonableness is enshrined in English Law and it is for each of us to consider if our actions would be considered reasonable in the eyes of the officious bystander. Also remember you are innocent unless proven guilty so the burden of proof is on others to prove objectively that you have not travelled a short distance having regard to all of the circumstances.

I am sorry but everyone has to make their own objective assessment and not rely on others to do it for you. Remembering of course that you may have to justify you actions to a police officer.

[udderlyoffroad]

2 hours ago, grahamch said:

We all need proper regs stating a distance and not putting the individual at risk from misinterpreting 'guidance'.

That is exactly the last thing we need.