375H&H - Good reason and UK use?

[zambezi]

I have all my rifles conditioned for aolq in d&c including the 300wm. Also have a friend with recent grant (within last 3mths) for .375 which is also conditioned for aolq.......you must have upset someone at Middlemoor!

Do not be so sure. Initially I was promised aolq. Then later denied it. Nothing had changed on my side between those two conversations. I was told they have a new management regime. All calibres so conditioned now will be denied at next renewal. Only time will tell if this statement made to me is as false as the others.

BTW, I used the FOI to reveal that there are currently 21 x .375 rifles in D&C on aolq. I was told they would all be refused at renewal. Brace yourself.

I have no doubt that my persistent requests for D&C to do what they said they would do has upset them.

 

[Lateral]

I think 21 people will need to get together, and take them to court !

 

[CarlW]

I think 21 people will need to get together, and take them to court !

Indeed. Those 21 people may well have spent money on the strength of the grant of that condition. A partial revocation that renders a dual-purpose rifle unusable in this country is surely deeply unfair.

 

[bowji john]

21 + 2

As 9.3 seems to be in their sights too - or have I miss understood

J

 

[Orion]

21 + 2

As 9.3 seems to be in their sights too - or have I miss understood

J

I find those figures hard to believe - are we really the only two D&C residents with 9.3 and AOLQ?

 

[bowji john]

Yeh - I thought that was a bit odd

How's your application going?

J

 

[zambezi]

I find those figures hard to believe - are we really the only two D&C residents with 9.3 and AOLQ?

I too think those figures are flawed. I know a local chap who regulates his .416 at my club. So that should have been captured in that FOI...

Might I suggest that any concerned FAC owner who falls within the D&C catchment may wish to make their own FOI investigation? Here is the link to do that:

Contact us

Devon & Cornwall Police contact details

www.devon-cornwall.police.uk

 

[Orion]

Yeh - I thought that was a bit odd

I suspect that even the relatively limited membership of SD could prove it erroneous.

How's your application going?

It’s in, now to sit back and see what happens!

 

[Flash9919]

Do not be so sure. Initially I was promised aolq. Then later denied it. Nothing had changed on my side between those two conversations. I was told they have a new management regime. All calibres so conditioned now will be denied at next renewal. Only time will tell if this statement made to me is as false as the others.

BTW, I used the FOI to reveal that there are currently 21 x .375 rifles in D&C on aolq. I was told they would all be refused at renewal. Brace yourself.

I have no doubt that my persistent requests for D&C to do what they said they would do has upset them.

View attachment 136435

I think that maybe their search criteria was too limiting. Most of the FEO's in Exeter are not 'calibre experts', I personally know of more than 2 people with 9.3's conditioned for AOLQ in the force area....at a guess they just selected the calibre as 9.3mm and it's only searched on those listed on certificates as solely 9.3mm not 9.3x62,9.3 x 64, 9.3x74r etc, etc. My friends H&H with AOLQ was granted within the last two month's. It's one thing to condition on grant but quite another to rescind at renewal assuming that use etc can be shown and good reason still exists. Personally I'd struggle to find a good reason for a 375h&h for UK use and therefore as much as it would be nice, wouldn't be overly upset if it came back conditioned for overseas use and zeroing practice etc.....but if this does / has recently become force practice i'd be interested to know where they'd want to draw the line...….

As an aside, I believe that DEFRA's own guidance for boar suggests .270 to be the minimum, therefore your 6.5 SE could not be deemed 'sufficient'........personally I think it's marginal on big reds unless shot placement is spot on.

 

[zambezi]

wouldn't be overly upset if it came back conditioned for overseas use and zeroing practice

Just to reinforce that point: In addition to limiting my .375 to overseas use [despite demonstrating a clear reason for boar management in the UK] D&C also elected to deny use of expanding ammunition during UK zeroing. Which means that I can only rough zero with solids.

There are multiple issues with that:
(1) Obviously the ballistics will be different between the solid and expanding ammunition due to differing BC and weights
(2) I use the .375 for PG and DG. PG shots will be at slightly longer ranges using lighter projectiles that have a better BC and thus more accurate out to those distances. DG is usually at close quarters and the projectiles are typically blunt softpoints and I would be less confident of their ballistic path at greater distances. I.e. testing both ammunition types here is a desirable and safe protocol before leaving these shores
(3) When I initially zero'd my .375 using round nosed solids, the rounds cycled very smoothly. On my last DG hunt, I found the previously untried expanding ammunition did not cycle as fluidly. I had to cycle the action far more positively to achieve the speed of reload a DG context might require. Once again, it would be safer to allow testing in a UK zeroing situation before facing DG.

 

[Dalua]

In addition to limiting my .375 to overseas use [despite demonstrating a clear reason for boar management in the UK] D&C also elected to deny use of expanding ammunition during UK zeroing. Which means that I can only rough zero with solids.

AFAIK there was a test case which suppoted the lawfulness of denying an FAC-holder use in the UK of S5 ammunition for his DG rifles conditioned for use abroad. The means by which this was achieved was by withholding a S5 authority for .375 expanding bullets.

It is not clear, now that standard expanding ammunition is not prohibited under S5, quite how so manifestly unreasonable a condition might be enforced.

 

[Flash9919]

I agree it sucks...however as we know, you can't appeal a condition only a refusal and maybe this should have been a consideration when it was granted...you could have refused the condition, they would have then in all likelihood granted without the condition or refused the grant which you could have appealed. It's unfortunate that the home office guidance is interpreted differently depending on your postcode, and frankly not right......that said, once you get above .30 Cal the guidance suggests that it's a DG calibre and clearly states they don't deem it suitable for *any* UK game, it therefore becomes much easier for forces to condition accordingly.

At a guess, existing .375's, 9.3's etc have been sat on individual's open licenses for years, as I've already said, it becomes much easier to argue your position if they try to condition a previously unconditioned licence at renewal.

I assume that your other calibres are conditioned for AOLQ and you have an open licence?? To be fair to D&C they are one of the better forces when it come to AOLQ....there will no doubt be hundreds of people out there that can't get their .270's and 3006 conditioned for vermin.

My only suggestion would be to write / email the head of licensing for D&C and put forward your case.....that said, you could be fighting an uphill battle just because of the calibre classification in the guidance but you have nothing to loose.

 

[XYZ]

Out of interest people who applied for a 375H&H for over seas use were you required to prove you were actually going and not just saying it to "get a big gun" in the same way bookings for deer stalking are often required for the grant of a "deer calibre" rifle if the applicant has no ground of their own.

I applied for my 375 and also a 300WinMag barrel after I saw a deal too good to refuse on a 375 in a local dealer.
I paid a deposit and then applied for the variation to Avon and Somerset stating that I would like to use it in Africa and the one gun, two barrel combination would be perfect for travelling.
I was contacted by the FLO and he said he would be happy to approve my application but as I had stated it was for use in Africa I was asked to provide evidence of a forthcoming trip.
Evidence that I had been hunting in Africa on several occasions was not sufficient as he couldn't approve it based on history.
Fortunately I was travelling to Africa the following month so I supplied flight details and the letter of invitation from my PH.
My application was approved but I can only use the calibres abroad or on a range approved for that calibre and cannot travel with the firearm unless I am going to a range for the purposes of zeroing or "proceeding to or returning from a port of embarkation".

 

[zambezi]

the guidance suggests that it's a DG calibre and clearly states they don't deem it suitable for *any* UK game

Not true.

other calibres are conditioned for AOLQ and you have an open licence

Yes

write / email the head of licensing for D&C and put forward your case.

Via multiple emails over a 12 month period. Indeed it was the head that initially stated aolq would be fine subject to "good reason" [DG hunt] being demonstrated first. Which I did. Plus envigilated UK competence with that calibre. Which I did. And then reneged on the original undertaking.



I doubt I am the only person to be affected by a recent shift in decision making. I certainly won't be the last. But if we as a community do not share our experiences, we will never know what is coming down the line. Also, whilst JR costs might be beyond any one of us, a class action/crowd-fund solution might well be possible for a sample test case. But getting a quorum to rally behind a single action will probably take a cluster of us getting inappropriate refusals to galvanise will and resources.

 

[Flash9919]

Not true.

View attachment 136447




Yes



Via multiple emails over a 12 month period. Indeed it was the head that initially stated aolq would be fine subject to "good reason" [DG hunt] being demonstrated first. Which I did. Plus envigilated UK competence with that calibre. Which I did. And then reneged on the original undertaking.



I doubt I am the only person to be affected by a recent shift in decision making. I certainly won't be the last. But if we as a community do not share our experiences, we will never know what is coming down the line. Also, whilst JR costs might be beyond any one of us, a class action/crowd-fund solution might well be possible for a sample test case. But getting a quorum to rally behind a single action will probably take a cluster of us getting inappropriate refusals to galvanise will and resources.

I don't disagree with any of the points you make, and if I was in the same position i'd be equally as ****ed!.....Maybe you could come to some sort of compromise by which they will allow zeroing and practice with expanding ammunition only in the UK which will at least allow load development etc?

With reference to the above, I know that dead is dead and safe is safe be it 22lr or 500J......but I'm guessing the initial good reason was as a DG calibre for DGorPG trip abroad? D&C have granted on that basis and have conditioned accordingly......and clearly have no intention of opening it up any further....the expanding ammo bit is daft.

Good luck with your ongoing battle......

You could always apply for a spare barrel in .375 for uk deer and boar!

 

[Orion]

that said, once you get above .30 Cal the guidance suggests that it's a DG calibre and clearly states they don't deem it suitable for *any* UK game, it therefore becomes much easier for forces to condition accordingly.

I wonder how many FLO/FLD also read the chart at the end of chapter 13 in isolation, or not solely for establishing the initial 'good reason' for possession of a firearm, and apply it slavishly without referring to the additional paragraphs as instructed?

In addition to those quoted by zambezi above, the others are particularly relevant when applied to larger calibres being used on lesser quarry:

13.17 The table at the end of this chapter provides guidance on whether, for the purposes of establishing “good reason”, a particular calibre is suitable for shooting certain quarry. It should be noted that the list of calibres is not exhaustive but will serve as a useful guide.

13.18 ‘Yes’ indicates that the calibre is suitable for the purpose, and pursuit of such quarry would normally be a “good reason” to possess such a rifle. ‘No’ indicates that the calibre and muzzle energy is unsuitable, unlawful or inhumane, and pursuit of such a quarry would not therefore be a “good reason” to possess such a rifle. This, however, should not exclude the use of a larger or more powerful firearm, for which “good reason” has been established, to shoot smaller quarry (see 13.9).

 

[Flash9919]

I wonder how many FLO/FLD also read the chart at the end of chapter 13 in isolation, or not solely for establishing the initial 'good reason' for possession of a firearm, and apply it slavishly without referring to the additional paragraphs as instructed?

In addition to those quoted by zambezi above, the others are particularly relevant when applied to larger calibres being used on lesser quarry:

13.17 The table at the end of this chapter provides guidance on whether, for the purposes of establishing “good reason”, a particular calibre is suitable for shooting certain quarry. It should be noted that the list of calibres is not exhaustive but will serve as a useful guide.

13.18 ‘Yes’ indicates that the calibre is suitable for the purpose, and pursuit of such quarry would normally be a “good reason” to possess such a rifle. ‘No’ indicates that the calibre and muzzle energy is unsuitable, unlawful or inhumane, and pursuit of such a quarry would not therefore be a “good reason” to possess such a rifle. This, however, should not exclude the use of a larger or more powerful firearm, for which “good reason” has been established, to shoot smaller quarry (see 13.9).

It wasn't read in isolation.....I'm aware of all the salient points made above. However, if the OP's good reason was solely for DG abroad that's what he got granted, if the original application was for DG, UK Deer & Boar, it's possible the outcome would have been different.

 

[Orion]

It wasn't read in isolation.....I'm aware of all the salient points made above. However, if the OP's good reason was solely for DG abroad that's what he got granted, if the original application was for DG, UK Deer & Boar, it's possible the outcome would have been different.

I'll stand to be corrected on this and Zambezi will be able to give chapter and verse, but I understand that his original .375 application was for DG abroad and U.K. AOLQ. At the time the FLD manager verbally requested the additional criteria that he’s detailed in the post #10 above to be satisfied prior to U.K. use being permitted. He played ball, they then reneged on the deal and to add insult to injury have slapped him with the bizarre ammo condition and a paltry allowance to boot.

From a practical perspective it shouldn't matter if your 'primary good reason Africa' DG rifle has a pre-existing 'overseas only' condition attached to it and you then seek to use it in the UK - HOG 13.9, 13.18 and 13.37 are clear on this.

 

[sikamalc]

I have had a 375HH for the past 25 or so years and it open to all legal quarry.

This ridiculous attitude by certain constabularies towards larger calibres is uncalled for in my opinion. There is NO maximum calibre for taking deer in the UK. And yet we see these FEO'S complaining about someone purchasing a 308 when they already have a 223 or 222 on their ticket. They are all capable of causing damage if in the wrong hands.
If you are going abroad to hunt big game or taking on an area of ground for Wild Boar there should be no problem obtaining the permission to own a 375HH.

 

[zambezi]

However, if the OP's good reason was solely for DG abroad that's what he got granted, if the original application was for DG, UK Deer & Boar, it's possible the outcome would have been different

Per the updates I have posted, the sequence was as follows:

(1) Applied for .375 variation Autumn 2018 [I definitely explained that overseas DG was my primary requirement as I did not hunt boar at that time]
(2) .375 variation granted but with zero ammunition allowed!
(3) Intrinsic risk and unworkability of (2) explained and finally granted 40 rounds [non-expanding] for zeroing-only in October 2018
(4) Performed UK zeroing with solids and realised that .375 was not a hugely recoiling "beast" and entirely manageable [.375 has just 29% more ME than a 30.06]
(5) I then researched boar hunting in UK/Europe and realised the .375 would be ideal [it is the imperial equivalent of the European 9.3 standard used on boar there]
(6) Advised D&C head [Mounsey] of my desire to condition .375 for aolq. Her reply in 2018? Yes if (i) I completed an envigilated UK testing of calibre competence and (ii) Completed successful DG hunt
(7) All criteria in (6) satisfied by April 2019, variation submitted, Boar hunt booked for Forest of Dean in June 2019
(8) aolq declined. Wording used states "you have sufficient rifles for Red deer and boar" [citing 6.5x55mm and 30.06]

So there are a couple of points to be made: I probably did not mention boar at time of original variation. My focus was getting the calibre for a long-planned DG trip. I did not think I would particularly enjoy shooting the calibre but it is the legal minimum for DG in SA. Once I knew it to be an easily managed round [see (4) above] , I realised that the .375 was also a good fit for that pursuit. I cannot see how later application for a variation in use somehow invalidates the basis for that later request. That additional use was not in view at incept.

A secondary issue is the notion of "sufficient" firearms. That should be very worrying to any in the shooting world. Once again, the HOG advises that firearms licences are to be granted where there is demonstrated need.

In the Forest of Dean where I shoot, the manager there has had to track two shoulder shot boar onto adjacent lands. They were shot with 30.06. They recovered only one of two boar. The shot placement was good. The reality is that shoulder shooting a 250kg animal requires a larger calibre to ensure a humane stop. Once again, the HOG deals with the issue of humane shots and, per Orion's post above, allows for use of larger calibres. All of this data has been dismissed.