Hypothetical question regarding runners

[ths84]

Now this is purely a hypothetical question which a few friends and I were discussing about running deer after being shot.

The land we have is surrounded on 3 sides by forestry commission and quite a few of the main shooting areas are within 100 yards of these points. Now as yet we have had no runners but Vehicle access at present is restricted to a mile or so away from the main seats due to impassability with water logged fields and slopes.

Now the question is what would you do if you were on your own and one jumped borders?

We are not asking whether you would wonder in rifle over your back as that is obvious but the legality of retrieving the deer, would you need to inform anyone?

 

[Southdowns_stalking]

You would have to get permission from the FC and the owner of the 4th side to retrieve your shot deer..... I would have gone and seen/called the land owners before i had even gone stalking and explained it to them and asked if this did happen would it be ok to cross the boundary and collect the deer.

Why ask now, what would you have done if the first deer you shot had crossed over??

 

[prometheus]

You won't get blanket permission from many because it can encourage flexible boundaries. If it was me you were asking I would request that should it occur you informed me on a case by case basis and a decision on what action to take would be made by me. That action may include permission to go and get it, but that way everyone is crystal about their position and encourages sensible shooting.

 

[ths84]

You would have to get permission from the FC and the owner of the 4th side to retrieve your shot deer..... I would have gone and seen/called the land owners before i had even gone stalking and explained it to them and asked if this did happen would it be ok to cross the boundary and collect the deer.

Why ask now, what would you have done if the first deer you shot had crossed over??

That is actually the conclusion we came to and an email was fired off in the hope of a quick response. In response to your last sentence ill be honest it didn't actually cross my mind as apart from one spine shot (Engine room i pulled slightly) all shots have been head or neck at around 50-80 yards. The 4th side of the land is actually houses and we don't shoot anywhere near there due to noise and town folk not understanding.

 

[widows son]

Now this is purely a hypothetical question which a few friends and I were discussing about running deer after being shot.

The land we have is surrounded on 3 sides by forestry commission and quite a few of the main shooting areas are within 100 yards of these points. Now as yet we have had no runners but Vehicle access at present is restricted to a mile or so away from the main seats due to impassability with water logged fields and slopes.

Now the question is what would you do if you were on your own and one jumped borders?

We are not asking whether you would wonder in rifle over your back as that is obvious but the legality of retrieving the deer, would you need to inform anyone?

Take these thoughts back to yourself what would you do ? Follow your own mind .

I know what i would "do" was to go and collect the beast it is called a death run (now deer belong to no one until there dead) it was dead where you shot it , it just didn't know that ,now saying that it is illegal to go and collect it but it is, what I'd do couple of reasons.

First it is your humanitarian duty to make sure the deer is not suffering.

Secondly why would you go and leave a perfectly good carcass ( IE meat source to lay and rot ) the forestry commission wont come out and lift it .

 

[Southdowns_stalking]

You won't get blanket permission from many because it can encourage flexible boundaries. If it was me you were asking I would request that should it occur you informed me on a case by case basis and a decision on what action to take would be made by me. That action may include permission to go and get it, but that way everyone is crystal about their position and encourages sensible shooting.

I completely understand where you are coming from. I think i also depends on who the neighbours are and if they understand deer management. On all of my stalking grounds i have never had any problems with my above approach, on the few times this has happened i have called, depending on the time of morning or evening or sent a text, just out of courtesy. If i have a control job with close boundaries then i will only take a head/neck shot at close range. If i cant get a safe shot then i will not risk it running onto the neighbours lawn and falling over, it does nothing for the image of deer stalking.

 

[Wingy]

.

I know what i would "do" was to go and collect the beast it is called a death run (now deer belong to no one until there dead) it was dead where you shot it , it just didn't know that ,now saying that it is illegal to go and collect it but it is, what I'd do couple of reasons.

First it is your humanitarian duty to make sure the deer is not suffering.

Secondly why would you go and leave a perfectly good carcass ( IE meat source to lay and rot ) the forestry commission wont come out and lift it .[/QUOTE]

+1 exactly what I would do and for the same reasons
Wingy

 

[David TS]

Deer Act 1991, Section 1 (3) (a).

 

[mark g]

Take these thoughts back to yourself what would you do ? Follow your own mind .

I know what i would "do" was to go and collect the beast it is called a death run (now deer belong to no one until there dead) it was dead where you shot it , it just didn't know that ,now saying that it is illegal to go and collect it but it is, what I'd do couple of reasons.

First it is your humanitarian duty to make sure the deer is not suffering.

Secondly why would you go and leave a perfectly good carcass ( IE meat source to lay and rot ) the forestry commission wont come out and lift it .

Dangerous.

I would go and get permission to get the deer as it does not belong to you anymore

 

[prometheus]

Dangerous.

I would go and get permission to get the deer as it does not belong to you anymore

+ 1 .... it's just not worth the problems you could have if it went wrong and you were without permission

 

[6pointer]

I would never leave a deer to rot if i shot it i will make sure that it enters the food chain there are problems but they can be sorted this thread was done not to long ago. Prometheus. Encouraging flexible boundaries that is poaching and as Fit and Competent people that should never entire you head. But leaving a deer over a boundary to rot or worse to die in pain over a prolonged period of time is a disgrace.

 

[widows son]

Dangerous.

I would go and get permission to get the deer as it does not belong to you anymore

Well Mark you must have an answer to Dangerous ,it didn't belong to me in the first place ,as I said deer belong to know one until there dead ,there's certainly nothing dangerous about it ,there is however taking things into your own hands .

So you would ask for permission,I have many acres that have local councils for neighbours, there carcass would have been rendered back to its maker, before you would make contact with the correct person or get a decision .

I also have absent landlords IE Arabs who own the lands but live in UAE again a rotten carcass , on any of the occasions I'd still check the carcass for humain dispatch ,and remove it as I have done on many an occasion for me it is good countryside husbandry .

Stalkers and shooters alike don't get good enough press to leave an animal laying in a forest or field, for some of the dog walking population, to come across the carcass and between phoning the police and the SPCA not to for get the press .

On some of the land I stalk I've watched the neighbours retreive carcasses ,it doesn't bother me in the least , it may not be legal but in my eyes it is correct .

 

[Hornet]

Well Mark you must have an answer to Dangerous ,it didn't belong to me in the first place ,as I said deer belong to know one until there dead ,there's certainly nothing dangerous about it ,there is however taking things into your own hands .

So you would ask for permission,I have many acres that have local councils for neighbours, there carcass would have been rendered back to its maker, before you would make contact with the correct person or get a decision .

I also have absent landlords IE Arabs who own the lands but live in UAE again a rotten carcass , on any of the occasions I'd still check the carcass for humain dispatch ,and remove it as I have done on many an occasion for me it is good countryside husbandry .

Stalkers and shooters alike don't get good enough press to leave an animal laying in a forest or field, for some of the dog walking population, to come across the carcass and between phoning the police and the SPCA not to for get the press .

On some of the land I stalk I've watched the neighbours retreive carcasses ,it doesn't bother me in the least , it may not be legal but in my eyes it is correct .

Well said mate, my sentiments exactly

 

[User00003]

I can only imagine if you have decent neighbours they would to you for going over the boundary to ensure the beast is dead and not suffering, and to ensure it is extracted and dealt with hygienely. if it was me and someone was seen retrieving a deer from my ground, I would approach and introduce myself, ask what the situation was, and chat about how we should deal with similar circumstances going forwards the best way. If they had been poaching/shooting over the fence, well, at least they know now that I'm on the ground often, so would hopefully refrain from doing so again. I would be happy if they offered me the carcass or £'s since it was now on my ground, but I would always reject the offer.

if I shot a deer that went over the boundary,, I would extract it without wasting time seeking permission to ensure it was dealt with humanely. I would then make every attempt to inform the landowner or permission holders, offering them some cash or the carcass, which of course I would only imagine they would reject as well.

in the ideal world of course, you will be able to have the conversation with your neighbours about how to best deal with such circumstances BEFORE it happens, but that's not always the case needless to say.

 

[firsttimer]

Stalkers and shooters alike don't get good enough press to leave an animal laying in a forest or field, for some of the dog walking population, to come across the carcass and between phoning the police and the SPCA not to for get the press .

On some of the land I stalk I've watched the neighbours retreive carcasses ,it doesn't bother me in the least , it may not be legal but in my eyes it is correct .

So you advocate breaking the law, but are concerned that stalkers are getting bad press- contradiction in terms?

 

[6pointer]

Time will tell the powers that be are looking at this very situation at this very minute. With the onset of the CSGN there will be many occasions were a deer runs over the boundary on to who knows were. There should be a definitive plan of action set out by the government so that the situation is solved with out worry. If widowson did not go an get the carcase and put him self first then he would also be breaking the law ROCK AND A HARD PLACE comes to mind.
Deer going over the boundary has happened to over 70% of active deer managers i would hope that most have been recovered with out prosecution.
Firsttimer what would your coarse of action be if the boundary was breached by a deer shot and you did not know the owner or could not get in touch.??

 

[Tamus]

So you advocate breaking the law, but are concerned that stalkers are getting bad press- contradiction in terms?

No... He's not advocating breaking the law... either in Scotland or south of the border.

Both of the relevant Deer Acts give dispensation to cross boundaries in order to prevent suffering. In Scotland our laws clearly allow recovery of the lawfully killed animal. In England&Wales you are called upon to conjecture that the "other" landowner would not object. Of course, how could he or she object, without causing or potentially causing suffering to a wild animal... which is in itself a crime?

As for recovering a carcase from "neighbouring" land down south, I'm not clear on all the poaching laws but the one that seems to apply to deer down there is the Deer Act 1991. If that's the only one that creates the crime of poaching deer, there's a clear dispensation for "any" act done to prevent suffering.

 

[Tartan_Terrier]

How far into a neighbour's property would you consider going when searching for a wounded animal? What if it managed to cross into someone else's property?

If you couldn't get hold of the relevant landowners, would a call to the local police be sufficient? Could one risk being charged with 'armed tresspass' if found carrying a rifle on someone else's property, even if intent on dispatching a wounded deer?

Just curious, over here registrered 'schweisshundeførere' are permitted to cross property boundaries carrying firearms, and are of course also permitted to use them while in the course of their work.

 

[Uncle Buck]

No... He's not advocating breaking the law... either in Scotland or south of the border.

Both of the relevant Deer Acts give dispensation to cross boundaries in order to prevent suffering. In Scotland our laws clearly allow recovery of the lawfully killed animal. In England&Wales you are called upon to conjecture that the "other" landowner would not object. Of course, how could he or she object, without causing or potentially causing suffering to a wild animal... which is in itself a crime?

As for recovering a carcase from "neighbouring" land down south, I'm not clear on all the poaching laws but the one that seems to apply to deer down there is the Deer Act 1991. If that's the only one that creates the crime of poaching deer, there's a clear dispensation for "any" act done to prevent suffering.

Interesting reading,

Mr. Hingston's advice, as supplied to me, complete and unadulterated.

Please note: The following advice is relevant only in Scotland.

"The answers are to be found partly in the terms of the Deer (Scotland) Act 1996 and at common law.

At common law, deer are wild animals [unless they are being farmed] and thus belong to no-body. That is why the offence of poaching had to be made by statute, which in Scotland is the '96 Act. The offences are created by the sections in Part 111 being sections 17-24. Exceptions to these rules are found in sections 25 and 26.

It is an offence for someone, without legal right or without permission from someone having legal right, to kill or injure a deer [s17(1)] or to remove a deer carcase [s17(2)] on or from any land. However these offences are subject to the exception in s25, where it is not an offence against s17 if the act is to prevent suffering to inter alia an injured deer.

Hence the answer to your question is that it is not an offence to follow a wounded deer from land where you have permission to shoot onto other land and to kill it on the other land if that killing was was for the purpose of preventing suffering to it. I would have thought it is incumbent upon any sportsman, concerned as he should be with the wellfare of his quarry to make sure it was not suffering, to take steps to put it out of its misery.

Because it is a wild animal it does not belong to the owner on whose land it was first shot nor to the owner upon whose land it died. Ownership of the ground conveys no ownership rights to the animal whether dead or alive. At common law it belongs to the person who kills or takes it which explains why the court should order forfeiture otherwise it would have to be handed back to the poacher! The offence of removing the carcase [s17(2)] does not apply because it was killed in terms of s25.

That is the legal position, proper manners and law are however different. It would be a matter of courtesy [and may avoid false allegations of poaching] to tell the relevant landowner what happened and explain why you were shooting on his land.

David Hingston"




In effect a free get out of jail card , as one would just have to provide proof that the said deer was

taken to prevent suffering !........................

could be advantageous ! springs to mind !

Rgds, Buck.

 

[Tamus]

Interesting reading,

Mr. Hingston's advice, as supplied to me, complete and unadulterated.

Please note: The following advice is relevant only in Scotland.

"The answers are to be found partly in the terms of the Deer (Scotland) Act 1996 and at common law.

At common law, deer are wild animals [unless they are being farmed] and thus belong to no-body. That is why the offence of poaching had to be made by statute, which in Scotland is the '96 Act. The offences are created by the sections in Part 111 being sections 17-24. Exceptions to these rules are found in sections 25 and 26.

It is an offence for someone, without legal right or without permission from someone having legal right, to kill or injure a deer [s17(1)] or to remove a deer carcase [s17(2)] on or from any land. However these offences are subject to the exception in s25, where it is not an offence against s17 if the act is to prevent suffering to inter alia an injured deer.

Hence the answer to your question is that it is not an offence to follow a wounded deer from land where you have permission to shoot onto other land and to kill it on the other land if that killing was was for the purpose of preventing suffering to it. I would have thought it is incumbent upon any sportsman, concerned as he should be with the wellfare of his quarry to make sure it was not suffering, to take steps to put it out of its misery.

Because it is a wild animal it does not belong to the owner on whose land it was first shot nor to the owner upon whose land it died. Ownership of the ground conveys no ownership rights to the animal whether dead or alive. At common law it belongs to the person who kills or takes it which explains why the court should order forfeiture otherwise it would have to be handed back to the poacher! The offence of removing the carcase [s17(2)] does not apply because it was killed in terms of s25.

That is the legal position, proper manners and law are however different. It would be a matter of courtesy [and may avoid false allegations of poaching] to tell the relevant landowner what happened and explain why you were shooting on his land.

David Hingston"




In effect a free get out of jail card , as one would just have to provide proof that the said deer was

taken to prevent suffering !........................

could be advantageous ! springs to mind !

Rgds, Buck.

NO! Most definitely not a "get out of jail free card" either "in effect" or in fact.

Nor would the accused have to "prove" anything. Though an explanation that holds water would aid their position. The need of proof lies with the accuser. If a crime has been committed and the accuser, or anyone else, has the proof... a charge and conviction may follow.

The converse of what you imply is that a hostile neighbour need merely make allegation that you took unlawfully from his land, even though you may only have taken perfectly lawfully on you own and you'd be for the high jump. Law doesn't really work like that, there needs to be some corroboration.

In other words; a stitch up takes a fair bit of effort, and the stitcher then risks very serious penalty themselves.