Landowner shooting on tenanted land
- Thread starter Mungo
- Start date
Are pests covered within standard tenancy agreements?
You need to see the tenancy agreement. In law (Scotland) the TENANT has a right to control vermin, this includes maurading deer that are damaging crops. Any cause in the tenancy agreement design to prevent this is generally considered null and void.
However, your question appears to be the other way round. If the landlord owns the shooting rights (it is unusual but not unheard off for these to be owned separately) then I very much doubt the tenant could prevent the landlord or someone appointed by the landlord shooting vermin.
However, your question appears to be the other way round. If the landlord owns the shooting rights (it is unusual but not unheard off for these to be owned separately) then I very much doubt the tenant could prevent the landlord or someone appointed by the landlord shooting vermin.
Last edited:
It depends..... but Tenants right to vermin are covered by the Ground Game act and right to control Deer by the Deer Act (Scotland).
My problem is that I have been tasked with clearing an overpopulation of rabbits and roe on an area that has been kept in hand by the landowner. The landowner also wants me to shoot on the adjacent land, which is tenanted out, but is acting as a reservoir for the in hand land. The tenant is flat out refusing to even have the conversation.
monarman
Well-Known Member
It's down to the landlord to sort, all farm tenancies will or should have something that states wether the landlord has a right to shoot or to allocate a person to shoot, some tenancy agreements go further and state what a tenant can and can't control (ie foxes.. especially if the landlord likes the hunt).
All you can do yourself is hit the deer and rabbits hard on the area that isn't tenanted and hopefully open up room for immigration from next door.... until the landlord has cleared things up with the tenant.
You will often find that if the tenant has been there a long time the landlord generally leaves them alone as its too much hassle to cause any issues.... but if the landlord is serious he can get his factor (assuming there is one) to do the dirty work and issue letters to put the tenant right.
Good luck
All you can do yourself is hit the deer and rabbits hard on the area that isn't tenanted and hopefully open up room for immigration from next door.... until the landlord has cleared things up with the tenant.
You will often find that if the tenant has been there a long time the landlord generally leaves them alone as its too much hassle to cause any issues.... but if the landlord is serious he can get his factor (assuming there is one) to do the dirty work and issue letters to put the tenant right.
Good luck
Depends entirely on who owns or holds the shooting rights. If they're held by the landowner then no, the tenant can't prevent the landowner (or someone who has been granted the right by the landowner) from shooting there, notwithstanding that the tenant also has certain rights to control ground game and deer.
However, the shooting rights could be owned by a third party, irrespective of land ownership. This is very common in areas of the country where formerly large estates have been broken up and sold piecemeal, with the sporting rights retained by the original estate owning family.
In this case, the sporting rights could subsequently have been sold (or leased) to the current tenant, and the tenant would be perfectly within his rights to refuse the current landowner (or someone appointed by the current landowner) access to the land for sporting purposes.
You will need to check both the tenancy agreement and the title deeds to be sure. Shooting rights will be registered with the Land Registry as "profit a prendre" relating to that piece of land, iirc.
Landowners often assume that they hold sporting rights when in fact they don't.
However, the shooting rights could be owned by a third party, irrespective of land ownership. This is very common in areas of the country where formerly large estates have been broken up and sold piecemeal, with the sporting rights retained by the original estate owning family.
In this case, the sporting rights could subsequently have been sold (or leased) to the current tenant, and the tenant would be perfectly within his rights to refuse the current landowner (or someone appointed by the current landowner) access to the land for sporting purposes.
You will need to check both the tenancy agreement and the title deeds to be sure. Shooting rights will be registered with the Land Registry as "profit a prendre" relating to that piece of land, iirc.
Landowners often assume that they hold sporting rights when in fact they don't.
In Scotland the tenant has a legal right to control vermin, along with deer that are damaging crops. Any cause in the tenancy agreement that is designed to prevent this is deemed null and void.
But that's not the issue here, and you are correct that it should be up to the landlord to resolve the impass.
1954 land act I believe
Not in Scotland, we're the OP is based, but it is covered by Scottish legislation
A continuation: what about access?
Specifically in this situation: parcel of land still held by the landowner. Completely surrounded by land leased to a tenant. One access track to the enclave. Tenancy agreement allows access to the enclave on the track.
Tenant stating that they intend to deny access to the enclave for shooting.
Specifically in this situation: parcel of land still held by the landowner. Completely surrounded by land leased to a tenant. One access track to the enclave. Tenancy agreement allows access to the enclave on the track.
Tenant stating that they intend to deny access to the enclave for shooting.
There's something a bit not-quite-right in the landlord/tenant relationship, methinks.
Sounds like a situation you don't want to be caught in the middle of.
By the sounds of it the tenant will cause you alot of trouble even though legally you would be fine.
I'd test the water without firearms go onto the enclave ferreting see how that goes down before going gunho
Rabbits no as far as I understand the Ground Game Act applies.
I think the tenant is not endearing themselves to the landlord and should their crops or grazing get hammered by deer or rabbits have no grounds for compensation.
A thought has the tenant got someone chucking them a few quid to shoot the deer and rabbits and you're going to put paid to their little earner?
A thought has the tenant got someone chucking them a few quid to shoot the deer and rabbits and you're going to put paid to their little earner?
Similar threads
