What should I do ?

prometheus

Well-Known Member
I arranged to meet Woodmaster this morning for him to do a level 2 stalk on my ground.

when he arrived a little late instead of parking outside the front of the bothy he drove round to the larder at the rear. When I went to see why he informed me that he had already taken a buck this morning, however the problem was he had taken it with his front bumper ! :eek: It seems that a small 6 point buck had jumped out onto the lane a few hundred meters from the bothy and as he was doing his level 2 he decided to take it.
unfortunately it has done probably about 1k of damage to the front of his recently repaired truck :doh:

so my dilemma is........ Should I charge him a trophy fee based on the one remaining antler or should I go for the full 6 points ? :D

i might add he did have a successful witnessed stalk on a Muntjac later in the morning too.

all advise appreciated

​P
 
Charge him for the buck, charge him extra for the antlers, charge him for not taking a shot, charge him for parking in the wrong place, charge him for the L2 stalk, charge him for the Muntjac and charge him for your time ;)
 
Charge him for the buck, charge him extra for the antlers, charge him for not taking a shot, charge him for parking in the wrong place, charge him for the L2 stalk, charge him for the Muntjac and charge him for your time ;)

You forgot to charge him for the damaged venison :rofl:
 
Me personaly wouldn't have posted it on here as he too is a member as some will say charge some will say not, leading to another debate leading to no final answear.
Sure you could between you both agreed to a mutual agreement away from here.
 
If you are claiming this is one of your bucks
​surely Woodmaster may hav a good case of charging you for damages...:D:D

but more in importantly I don't think i would of posted this info on here or anywhere TBH
has Woodmaster not only just hit and killed a deer with a motor vehicle , then picked it up and removed the carcass from the scene
wot are the legal implications surrounding this??
then with you knowing and receiving said carcass still did a sucessfull L2 witnessed stalk afterwards...!!! :stir:

 
this is a little harsh you should give him a chance hows about if he eats the entire stomach content of the roe with his arms tied behind his back you will let him off the charges fairs fair
 
Glad to see this "humorous" thread has been taken in the manner it was intended. Unless I'm mistaken (I doubt it) Simon is a decent bloke and has made NO charge. Glad I'wasnt out with you Erik I'd be bankrupt:D. Now for those who aspire to be laywers the buck landed on the verge which "may" belong to the estate as its a small lane, so the carcass would become their property. I gave it to Simon who gave it back to me so no problem there. If it was the property of poor highway workers who now have no dinner, if they come and fix my f**king truck I'll cook the bloody thing for them, and hope it makes them ill.
TBH after getting home from what turned out to be a most enjoyable stalk I have to laugh at the irony. The deer are fighting back. Plus I didn't want to spend £1000 on a 6 point buck. He must be the most expensive 6 pointer taken by anyone on here this season so far.
 
Last edited:
Charge him for the buck, charge him extra for the antlers, charge him for not taking a shot, charge him for parking in the wrong place, charge him for the L2 stalk, charge him for the Muntjac and charge him for your time ;)

Erik, can I direct all my stalking bookings through you and can you take care of post stalk invoicing for me... There will obviously be compensation for your time, but I'm sure you will be able to add that to the invoice too :D
 
Intresting PM this morning. It came from a member who I know well and have stalked with on a number of occasions. It was sent with the best intentions I'm sure and the person will know I take NO offence from it. However it did make me think. How many people would have done as I did. That is to humanely dispatch the animal post collision and remove it from the road. Or would have left it to die from it's injuries and go to waste. Worse still to cause some offence to a passing walker with children or for a further incident to occur should a fox or badger run in front of a vehicle from the feeding site?
So below is the original PM and my response. I'd be interested to hear your views. I'm not concerned with the smart arse who will quote the law as I make clear in my response. What I want to know is does people's fear of the law prevent them from doing the right thing?

John,

Glad to hear your ploughing through your L2. Bit of info for you that I thought would be better sent as a pm instead of posting on the thread.

If you hit the buck on a public road it is an offence for you to remove the carcass, it's covered by the deer act and highways act. Anyone passing afterwards would be entitled to remove the carcass but not you. I know it sounds stupid, but the legislation was designed to stop people deliberately killing deer with vehicles and claiming RTA's. If you were requested to attend an RTA to dispatch an animal then you could remove it.

If the collision took place on a private road then it doesn't apply, other than than the landowner would have to give permission before moving the carcass, otherwise it's theft. Wild animals cannot be owned, the right to kill or take can be owned on the land the animal is on at the time, but the animal only becomes "owned" once it has been "reduced into possession", i.e killed. Once dead then it belongs to the landowner or person who has the shooting rights.

To be honest you've done what most of us would have done.

All the best. ???

And my reply.
Hi Long time no hear!
Thanks for the info. I already knew all this. It was also covered in the level 1 course. However since I know a fair bit on law and highways etc and recently having to deal with a situation as a local Councillor I will say this. In many cases a highway or more specifically the surface is owned by the council or highways department, however in most cases the ground over which the highway runs is owned by an individual. Often without their knowledge. This is especially so in the case of country lanes where the land between hedges is owned by an adjacent land owner and the highway/byway is only a right of passage over said land. It is only the surface which is owned and maintained at public expense In most cases the land owner can not develop or place any obstruction which would impede the right of way but does none the less own the ground beneath the surface along with the verge. So in the instance relating to me I would firstly question if the land was owned by the highways or council. 2nd If someone were to suggest I intentionally ran this animal down I would argue why as a trained hunter who has spent many £100's on learning the correct manner in which to kill and deal with a carcass would go out and use a £20K vehicle to run a deer down which I could have gone and bought for £50, causing £1000 worth of damage to said vehicle. It was fortunate for the deer that I possessed not only the skill but also the tools to ensure it met it's death as humanely as possible under the circumstances. I removed the carcass and offered it to the adjacent land owner from who's land it had come. They chose to give it to me. I also removed it so as it would cause no offence to any passing member of the public who may well have been disturbed by seeing the deer with it's throat cut and suffering other injuries caused by the collision. So although the law is there it is to be applied according to circumstances and any sensible judge would back my actions, knowing they were carried out in good faith and with the deer and general public in mind. I have certainly made no financial gain from the situation.
So in short I hope any proficient hunter would do the same and not be put off by the perception that the laws prevents them from doing so. Law is law but the application of the law is down to a judge and jury and trial by one's peers. It is for guidance and there to prevent clear breaches of it.

Other than that hope things are going well with you.

​So what would you do?
 
Intresting PM this morning. It came from a member who I know well and have stalked with on a number of occasions. It was sent with the best intentions I'm sure and the person will know I take NO offence from it. However it did make me think. How many people would have done as I did. That is to humanely dispatch the animal post collision and remove it from the road. Or would have left it to die from it's injuries and go to waste. Worse still to cause some offence to a passing walker with children or for a further incident to occur should a fox or badger run in front of a vehicle from the feeding site?
So below is the original PM and my response. I'd be interested to hear your views. I'm not concerned with the smart arse who will quote the law as I make clear in my response. What I want to know is does people's fear of the law prevent them from doing the right thing?

John,

Glad to hear your ploughing through your L2. Bit of info for you that I thought would be better sent as a pm instead of posting on the thread.

If you hit the buck on a public road it is an offence for you to remove the carcass, it's covered by the deer act and highways act. Anyone passing afterwards would be entitled to remove the carcass but not you. I know it sounds stupid, but the legislation was designed to stop people deliberately killing deer with vehicles and claiming RTA's. If you were requested to attend an RTA to dispatch an animal then you could remove it.

If the collision took place on a private road then it doesn't apply, other than than the landowner would have to give permission before moving the carcass, otherwise it's theft. Wild animals cannot be owned, the right to kill or take can be owned on the land the animal is on at the time, but the animal only becomes "owned" once it has been "reduced into possession", i.e killed. Once dead then it belongs to the landowner or person who has the shooting rights.

To be honest you've done what most of us would have done.

All the best. ???

And my reply.
Hi Long time no hear!
Thanks for the info. I already knew all this. It was also covered in the level 1 course. However since I know a fair bit on law and highways etc and recently having to deal with a situation as a local Councillor I will say this. In many cases a highway or more specifically the surface is owned by the council or highways department, however in most cases the ground over which the highway runs is owned by an individual. Often without their knowledge. This is especially so in the case of country lanes where the land between hedges is owned by an adjacent land owner and the highway/byway is only a right of passage over said land. It is only the surface which is owned and maintained at public expense In most cases the land owner can not develop or place any obstruction which would impede the right of way but does none the less own the ground beneath the surface along with the verge. So in the instance relating to me I would firstly question if the land was owned by the highways or council. 2nd If someone were to suggest I intentionally ran this animal down I would argue why as a trained hunter who has spent many £100's on learning the correct manner in which to kill and deal with a carcass would go out and use a £20K vehicle to run a deer down which I could have gone and bought for £50, causing £1000 worth of damage to said vehicle. It was fortunate for the deer that I possessed not only the skill but also the tools to ensure it met it's death as humanely as possible under the circumstances. I removed the carcass and offered it to the adjacent land owner from who's land it had come. They chose to give it to me. I also removed it so as it would cause no offence to any passing member of the public who may well have been disturbed by seeing the deer with it's throat cut and suffering other injuries caused by the collision. So although the law is there it is to be applied according to circumstances and any sensible judge would back my actions, knowing they were carried out in good faith and with the deer and general public in mind. I have certainly made no financial gain from the situation.
So in short I hope any proficient hunter would do the same and not be put off by the perception that the laws prevents them from doing so. Law is law but the application of the law is down to a judge and jury and trial by one's peers. It is for guidance and there to prevent clear breaches of it.

Other than that hope things are going well with you.

​So what would you do?

Good for you woodmaster you did what was right given the circumstances, I would have done exactly the same, there comes a time when commonsense has to prevail for the sake of all concerned, just a shame for the buck and your truck

Bob
 
Woodmaster did exactly the correct thing ethically and legally following the RTA.

The buck was knocked from the road onto the edge of the wood injured but not dead. He dispatched it then brought int to me the exclusive owner of all deer rights on the estate through which the lane passed.

It could not be an offence to remove the deer if was being taken to the owner, it was before 5 in the morning and I the owner was waiting for him only a few hundred yards away so I think he was fully covered.

i can't imagine anybody on here doing anything different to John, and at least dispatched the animal and pulled it as far away from the road and verge as possible and if known have contacted the landowner.

 
Woodmaster / Prometheus
I would have done exactly as you did . I have no idea why indivduals need to quote the law song and verse , when you did the reasonable thing .
I bet it was quite a shock when the collision occurred and your thoughts were ending the bucks suffering . Well done

Chill
 
Blimey
from a simple post having a bit of a laff
a lot has developed

first off
as this all seems probably directed at my comments and the fact John was on his way to Simon to do a L2 witnessed stalk
at no point hav I acted like a lawyer or quoted the law, as suggested
I did ask a simple question about the legal implications surrounding this

i am surprised that Simon did not take such oppertunity to question you about that either..... More out of interest than anything else
i know I would of as your AW... Considering you also used said buck for a witnessed gralloch

as for the your mate's PM ... Not far from the truth in my eyes
If memory serves me correct
what you did if in a normal situ is an illegal act because you killed and removed a carcass with out consent from the land owner or occupier...the RTA was almost unavoidable
aswell as costly
but in your defence
if you believed that the owner or occupier would of given you permission to act in the way you did then no offence had taken place
i believe Simon would of given his consent if you had asked before hand anyway

wot I am surprised at was ... you did not cover your ass better and rung Simon letting him know what was going on , as he was awake and waiting on you...

considering the Meriden poacher issue of late
some sharp eyed busy body may of clocked wot had happened and instead of finding out the truth first may of reported you to the police
i don't fancy your defence if they had turned up to find firearms in the house and the said buck hanging in the shed or freezer .... You claiming your innocent ... Shouting I'm a trained hunter at top of your voice ..... Lol
better to try and prevent a ***** storm before it happens just incase... You never know
bigger question will be ... Will the truck be fixed before the 6th
​seems like there will be a few there
 
Hi Stone.
I think you now know the legal implications surrounding this event. I suspect you already did. I accept you realize that I took the carcass directly to the land owner, rather than leaving it on road verge just to go back with Simon and collect later. I didn't call Simon and let him know as tbh I just went straight into auto pilot, parked up, grabbed my bag and went to deer. I could see it was badly injured and was not likely to be going anywhere. So swiftly put it out of it's pain. This all happen within minutes. Then since I was only hundreds of yards from the bothy I just drove there. There would have been little point in calling to say I'll be there in 2 minutes.
I quite understand what you say about passers buy, and realize that this could have resulted in a visit from the cops. However since I didn't discharge a firearm during this incident I fail to see how my ownership of firearms would be relevant. Neither would me having venison in the freezer, as I have plenty in there anyway. I'm licensed to have a firearm and there is no law against having venison in the freezer/shed. I'm not sure I'd be offering any 'defence' to the police, that would be left to my barrister should they decide to charge me with something. So how would you suggest I cover my arse should this ever happen again?
Now for the bigger question. No it won't be fixed. Priced the parts today and they are main agent only, and a fortune. So gaffer tape will stay there for a while.
​Look forward to meeting up on the 6th.
 
Glad to see common sense prevailing; no-one is inferring that a ve-hicle was being used as "an engine to take game on the Queen's Highway" unless the Law was being obdurately obtuse (if that's not a tautology/oxymoron)
 
Back
Top