Variation Advice Please

Gingwa

Well-Known Member
I have applied for a variation on my firearms. I have asked for a 243.

I have also sent in 2 permission letters to use the new rifle on.

One of the permissions has deer on and one doesn't.

The reason I put on my application is for Deer, Fox and Vermin. The firearms dept is happy for me to have the 243, but I can only shoot fox whilst out stalking.

The 2nd piece of land that I have doesn't have deer on it, so they have told me to add .22CF to the variation to cover this.

Do I just accept the .22CF variation or argue the issue with them. I will be ringing BASC again tomorrow as well.

Many thanks,

Sion
 
The reason I put on my application is for Deer, Fox and Vermin. The firearms dept is happy for me to have the 243, but I can only shoot fox whilst out stalking.

This is a total nonsense and BASC will confirm it. Have a read of the HO Guidance 'Good Reason' section plus get the two 'Conditions' downloads from the firearms section of the BASC website, and it will become clear that they do not have any reason to try and restrict you in this way. If they try and push it, then ask for their reasoning in writing and you might find they will see sense.

Here's what BASC actually advise:

"If the police wish to attach a condition which only allows the shooting of foxes “whilst deer
stalking”– strongly resist it, as this is not following Home Office guidance and it is​
unnecessarily restrictive condition."

The 2nd piece of land that I have doesn't have deer on it, so they have told me to add .22CF to the variation to cover this.

Do I just accept the .22CF variation or argue the issue with them. I will be ringing BASC again tomorrow as well.

If you and/or BASC point out the good reasoning behind having the .243 conditioned for Fox (not just when out stalking) then it should negate their insistance for a .22CF - unless of course you would like one as well. If you think about it, why are they trying to get another uneccessary firearm into circulation when the one calibre will do the two jobs?

Which force is this?

BTW. You should be able to get your .243 condition for 'deer and any other lawful quarry'. It's a condition that has now been advised to all force firearms departments by ACPO FELWG and they should be adopting it's use. Again it's on the BASC download so you could print off a copy and give it to the FEO/FLO and ask them to use it.
 
Last edited:
OH GOD!, Cheshire........... which trolley collector or shelf stacker have you drawn?, Speak to Mike Eveleigh straight of, or if not available ask for Mr booth.
 
Cheshire

Thanks for the advice guys.

This is the jist of it:

I spoke with BASC about it and they said that Cheshire were a bureaucracy unto themselves and they won't budge on the matter.

I have spoke with the FEO, basically he has told me that this is the way they do it know (BASC won't approve).

I have to put in another variation for .223 as well as the .243, because I wouldn't get the 243 for fox.

Mad as a box of frogs!!
 
And what are BASC doing about the situation? Sitting on hands?

If they are constantly doing this the question has to be why isn't a test case being put together?
 
Last edited:
So they want you to have TWO rifles and TWO lots of ammunition instead of ONE rifle and ONE lot of ammunition? Crazy! Maybe if you were also to speak with your MP about this and using that argument and ash him or her to assist it might help.
 
Might it be worth writing to the boss FEO explaining your circumstances and pointing out that his application of the 'and other lawful quarry' condition, as approved by ACPO, would be enormously helpful: removing the need to carry two rifles about at once, for one thing.


FEOs still have to behave reasonably in their application of conditions, and it might be worth gently making that point if they still decline to do what appears to be the right thing; as well as asking him what his objecton to the use for fox of the obviously vermin-suitable .243Win.
 
In that case if they really are that intransigent, it might be the right time to start a traceable paper trail by asking them to explain their reasoning in writing - start with the FLO and ending with the Chief Constable if neccessary. Perhaps they could also be requested to explain why their administration of the Firearms Act is contrary to the Home Office Guidance to police which states right from the off:

1.4 The guidance is intended to assist
consistency of practice between police forces
and encourage an informed understanding
among firearms users of the considerations
involved in the application of the Firearms
Acts.

1.6 The Secretary of State and the Scottish
Ministers attach great importance to the
consistent administration of the Acts, as
does the Association of Chief Officers of
Police. All forces should seek to comply
with the advice and guidance and follow
the procedures set out in this document.
However, chief officers of police are the
ultimate authority responsible for the
administration of the legislation in their force
area, and it may be necessary to depart from
the guidance when each case is assessed on
its merits and the circumstances justify such
a course of action. In such circumstances,
chief officers for the force concerned will
need to be able to justify their decision.

Thereafter it would be up to the OP or BASC (if they want to get involved) to take it further, but as Enfield has suggested a letter/email to the local MP wouldn't go amiss - maybe even a visit to the surgery. I know what I'd do.

Isn't this a perfect example of the 'Postcode Lottery' we have to suffer when it comes to firearms administration? Can anyone explain why BASC are not pursuing this if they are already aware of the situation in Cheshire?
 
Last edited:
Extract from Chapter 13 ofthe Home Office Guidance

Fox

13.23
Common rifle cartridges considered
suitable for the shooting of foxes range from
.17 Remington, and .22 Hornet to .22 -250
and .220 Swift, though there is a wide range
of suitable similar calibres commercially
available. In windy areas, where heavier bullets
aid accurate shooting, or if applicants wish to
use one rifle for shooting both deer and foxes
they may choose a rifle in 6mm (.243/.244) or
6.5mm (.264) calibre.

 
Thanks for the advice guys.

This is the jist of it:

I spoke with BASC about it and they said that Cheshire were a bureaucracy unto themselves and they won't budge on the matter.

I have spoke with the FEO, basically he has told me that this is the way they do it know (BASC won't approve).

I have to put in another variation for .223 as well as the .243, because I wouldn't get the 243 for fox.

Mad as a box of frogs!!


Dorset.. No diferent.. And comment from B.A.S.C was the same, unable to help..

Dorset are looking for level 2 and letters from assesors to allow an open ticket..
 
I dont know what your pratting about arguing the toss with them
Simple you have made your application and requirements to the Chief Officer of Police in whos area you reside.
Now ask them to decline in writing giving them 14 days notice as reqd by law showing the reasons for refusal then make an application in the Courts for a ruling.
 
Extract from Chapter 13 ofthe Home Office Guidance

Fox

13.23
Common rifle cartridges considered

suitable for the shooting of foxes range from

.17 Remington, and .22 Hornet to .22 -250

and .220 Swift, though there is a wide range


of suitable similar calibres commercially

available. In windy areas, where heavier bullets

aid accurate shooting, or if applicants wish to
use one rifle for shooting both deer and foxes
they may choose a rifle in 6mm (.243/.244) or











6.5mm (.264) calibre.

That cannot be taken in isolation, (neither can the list of calibre/quarry combinations in the HO Guidance be assumed to be the be all and end all of what you can use), otherwise there is a danger of viewing it in the same way that some forces do.

Even BASC Firearms Dept have seen through that little conundrum as advised in one of their 'Condition' advice .pdf files you can download from their website.


ADDITIONAL EVENTUALITIES AND SECONDARY USES.

Paragraphs 13.14 and 13.22 of the Home Office Guidance 2002 support additional conditions being applied to deal with reasonable eventualities and other types of game, pests or vermin on land. The chart on page 77 is not the only guide for cartridges and their uses; it must be read in conjunction with the rest of the chapter. A plethora of centre fire .22 cartridges are available ranging from .22 Hornet to .223 Remington, however; merely because alternatives are available it is not a reason to refuse larger calibre rifles which may be already possessed for use on larger species such as deer.


Take the Winchester .308 cartridge for example; It carries sufficient energy and velocity to kill a fox outright so there is no requirement for another less powerful rifle as the .308 is already suitable.

It is usually the case that a person has a larger calibre rifle for shooting larger quarry species, (such as deer) and has the need to deal with reasonable eventualities whilst stalking i.e. foxes and other vermin. Likewise centre fire .22 calibres possessed for shooting foxes may be used against small vermin e.g. rabbits and avian species such as corvids (whilst they are on the ground of course!).


A condition allowing one rifle for the day’s activities is sensible. To carry two or more firearms or to have to make a return journey later in the day because a condition prevents a certificate holder from engaging a number of species with a single firearm is unhelpful.

This can pose security problems when having to take two firearms, forcing the certificate holder to leave one in a vehicle or elsewhere whilst using the other for the single purpose allowed by the condition.


If the police wish to attach a condition which only allows the shooting of foxes “whilst deer stalking”– strongly resist it, as this is not following Home Office guidance and it is unnecessarily restrictive condition. Such conditions are unhelpful to the shooter but more importantly unenforceable by the police. It is an unnecessarily restrictive condition and the product of a desire for control rather than safety or practicality. As deer are mobile, such a condition prevents foxes being shot where deer have left your land and gone onto adjoining land for example. This condition will prevent foxes from being lamped and shot at night as it is illegal to shoot deer at night. Foxes of course are largely nocturnal.





 
Last edited:
Orion is correct insomuch as precious little can be taken in isolation, in respect of our Firearms Law. However, "The Guidance" clearly states that "if applicants wish to use one rifle for shooting both deer and foxes they may choose a rifle in 6mm (.243/.244).

Bootneck's Police Authority are prepared to allow the .243 for foxes whilst shooting deer on one piece of land but want him to buy a .22 centrefire to shoot foxes on another piece of land. The mind indeed does boggle!! I think I would be writing to the Chief Constable asking him to explain the logic in his decision, with a copy to Adrian Whiting (Chairman ACPO Felweg Committee) and my MP.

Orion is also right to point out that one should not accept the "foxes whilst deer stalking" condition. That condition was applied to my .300WSM but after some time in argument against it, it was removed.
 
Back
Top