Humane despatch 2

Ade8mm

Well-Known Member
I have just been reading about the alleged water buffalo in Chesterfield. I couldn't resist and sent reply or two.:rolleyes:

It raises a good question or three (apologies if this has been covered before)

Humane despatch from a legal perspective re: calibre's. I understand .22 is illegal for deer. ?

.22 rf to my certain knowledge will efficiently kill much bigger animals than deer.(I am talking about head shots close-up like a slaughter man would expedite) . Horses and cows for example. OK not necessarily in a distressed state but with correct placement certainly does the job. Same applies to the venerable .410 . Kill a big horse DRT as they say in the States.

A local vet once advised me that her .32 (I think) was an concern as she had had numerous problems with bullets dangerously exiting the casualty. I said I would love to knock up some home loads that would help her out but that it would be illegal. Told her to chuck her pistol away and get a .410 instead.

Am I right that .22 is illegal for deer despatch? If so why is the .410 legal for the same job? It is certainly no more legal than .22 rimfire for shooting deer in other circumstances (rightly)?

Ade
 
Hi Scot

The fact you have answered this with a question clearly identifies at least you are as unsure as me.

No offese intended.
 
The legal standing on dispatching a wounded deer is by any means necessary to prevent further suffering,so yes to dispatch a wounded deer a .22 is legal,I had this arguement with the local firearms dept a few years back and on them doing some checking up on the legalities they agreed.
 
I might be wrong here but I seem to remember from my DSC1 that the laws were different for Scotland & England. Scotland is as above (any means to stop suffering) & England required the use of a deer-legal rifle. I've only stalked in Scotland so I've not had occasion to study the English law since then.
 
Good to know, thanks.

Added:

Curiosity got the better of me & it looks like I was given the correct information during my DSC1 but it has been superseded by the 2007 Deer Act Amendment, bringing the humane dispatch more in line with the Scottish legislation.
 
Last edited:
Not entirely sure where, (possibly wildlife act 1981) - but I am sure that if you have the means to end an animals suffering (whatever the 'means') may be, and you fail to do so, than you have committed on offence. - Yep, must be wildlife act 1981, however I am unsure of which specific (sub)section.
I will try to find it; but to me that would seem to allow the use of .22rf at close range.
 
[h=2]Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996 (WMPA 1996) (C.3)[/h]Under section 1 WMPA 1996 it is an offence for any person, with intent to inflict unnecessary suffering, to mutilate, kick, beat, nail or otherwise impale, stab, burn, stone, crush, drown, drag or asphyxiate any wild mammal.
[h=3]Defence[/h]However, the following will amount, under section 2 WMPA 1996, to a defence to such a charge:

  • The attempted killing of a seriously disabled wild mammal as an act of mercy, so long as that disability was not caused by the accused's unlawful act and the animal had no reasonable chance of recovery;
  • The killing in a swift and humane manner of a wild mammal injured or taken in the course of a lawful hunting or pest control activity;
  • Any act done by the use of a lawful trap or snare, dog or bird;
  • The lawful use of any poisonous or noxious substance.




It would seem therefore, that any method is legal, to end suffering.
 
Guys,

Do the course that is usually run by your local DMG for RTA call out.
You will find that whilst the "LAW" doesn't change it's how you approach it.
Primary, and only, imperative is to have an incident number. With that everyone else falls in.... No incident number, walk away.
Police, and local Council "for collection" all fit in.

Use a shotgun.

Stan
 
Hello Ade.

As others have said it is how you approach it, as each scenario is different, however, I can tell you that I have used .22LR with both subs, and standard velocity ( above subsonic ), for deer, a horse, and a very large bull in one instance - as that was all I had to hand.... Good shot placement, and confidence on scene is everything.... .22RF is legal - but you don`t want to go taking multiple shots at the same animal.... makes you look really bad....

However, by far and away my most effective HAD tool, and my go to weapon, is a Full Choke .410 Hushpower ( Mossberg ). Used with standard and subs, from 10 feet or less, it is very effective. A fraction out is still usually getting the job done....

All the best.

Neil.
 
Hello Ade.

As others have said it is how you approach it, as each scenario is different, however, I can tell you that I have used .22LR with both subs, and standard velocity ( above subsonic ), for deer, a horse, and a very large bull in one instance - as that was all I had to hand.... Good shot placement, and confidence on scene is everything.... .22RF is legal - but you don`t want to go taking multiple shots at the same animal.... makes you look really bad....

However, by far and away my most effective HAD tool, and my go to weapon, is a Full Choke .410 Hushpower ( Mossberg ). Used with standard and subs, from 10 feet or less, it is very effective. A fraction out is still usually getting the job done....

All the best.

Neil.

Cheers Neil

I agree. .410 makes the most sense from all angles (no pun intended by the way).

I posted the question as I was once involved in a humane despatch where a young Roebuck had been nastily tangled in a barbed wire fence, presumably whilst jumping it. (me and the farmer/landowner were out for a spot of rabbiting at the time) - His left hind led was clearly broken and he was in considerable distress. We had the .22 RF with us but the land owner/farmer elected to whizz back to the farm and collect a .410 which only took a matter of minutes on the quad bike. This was for a couple of reasons.

1. The beast was pretty mobile (flapping around a fair bit) . Whilst farmer fetched the .410 I stepped out of view of the buck to avoid further distress. He calmed down a lot when I did that.

2.The shot gun would give a small amount of latitude for shot placement compared with the .22 and frankly given the situation, be a lot safer too.

The beast was efficiently despatched. (with .410)

I posted the query as, lets suppose the .22 had been the only option?

The answers posted have clarified this so many thanks.

(The section of "fence" was a mishmash and a taught strand of wire would have probably avoided the problem, but this is the real world. Not my fence. Don't blame me!)

Ade
 
To clear this matter up for once and all.

It is legal to dispatch a wounded deer or other animal with a 22RF. It is also legal to use a hammer or knife for instance.

The only problem is that if it is a badger then you have to consider the chances of the badger surviving. It is you that will have to answer to the magistrate or judge and convince them it was not going to survive.

If a complaint is made of you for using an appropriate method to dispatch a wounded animal then provided you have a defence for that method you are in the clear.

If in doubt get the Police involved at the point of dispatch even if by a phone call to agree with them that you should carry out the dispatch.

In the case of a Water Buffalo it has a small brain in a big solid head and somebody with experience of culling such animals should have been involved not the Police. They should be held responsible for continued suffering of that animal.

I agree a 410 is appropriate for most UK animals but not exotics or old boar pigs.
 
Dear billh

Quote.. "The only problem is that if it is a badger then you have to consider the chances of the badger surviving. It is you that will have to answer to the magistrate or judge and convince them it was not going to survive."


"If a complaint is made of you for using an appropriate method to dispatch a wounded animal then provided you have a defence for that method you are in the clear."… un-quote


I would venture to suggest that you have done anything but "clear this matter up once and for all"

The point vis. badgers whilst no doubt, if correct (and I have no reason to doubt what you say) is well worth knowing, doesn't clear anything up.

"Provided you have a defence" .You have not ventured to suggest what a form a cast iron defence would take.

Respectfully unclear.

Ade


 
Last edited:
Ade8mm

Thanks for the comment but try to think your own way around the badger problem if you have to be told the solution you may not be the best person to carry out the job. A badger is almost a sacred animal with very strong laws to protect it.
It is for the person about to kill it to think of the possible consequences.

As for your unnecessary comment about my 'for once an for all' comment it referred to the original post.
 
Back
Top