Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19

Thread: Variation problem

  1. #1

    Variation problem

    I put a 1-4-1 variation in to North Wales police in November for my first CF as they won't allow fox with 17HMR, so I decided on a .204 as I'd also like to use it for some long range rabbits and crows plus my mate has a lovely semi-custom T3 he'd sell me. I finally had a visit from the FEO last week who said, provided my permissions had clearance there'd be no problem and I'd get my FAC back in a couple of weeks.

    Yesterday I had a call from him to say they wouldn't allow me a 204 as it wasn't a recognised foxing calibre but I'd be ok for a 223 or 22-250...........do I just accept this or should I query it (I'm a member of BASC)?

    It does state on the home office "Guide on Firearms Licensing Law" page 119 that 204 isn't suitable for fox although it states "Yes for .17 Remington & HMR, .22Hornet and WMR also .22 RF in certain circumstance (see 13.25))".........how can this be?

  2. #2
    I think there must be a mistake in the guidance as they state .204 is good reason for vermin but not fox as you say, can you not just ask for vermin and AOLQ? It seems they are just going by the guidance rather than any sound knowledge of calibres.

    Get them to give paddy a ring and ask if .204 is suitable for fox!

    Either way get on to the BASC and challenge it as you can't lose I'm sure.

  3. #3
    Don't challenge it, just laugh all the way to pick up your 22-250. Awesome round!

    cjs

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Boydy47 View Post
    I think there must be a mistake in the guidance as they state .204 is good reason for vermin but not fox as you say, can you not just ask for vermin and AOLQ? It seems they are just going by the guidance rather than any sound knowledge of calibres.

    Get them to give paddy a ring and ask if .204 is suitable for fox!

    Either way get on to the BASC and challenge it as you can't lose I'm sure.
    'Vermin' is no longer a separate classification on the Home Office definition as it's listed as 'Vermin including Fox' on the latest Condition.

    Using AOLQ as a legal justification for shooting 'Fox' won't work as NWP have already specifically refused it on his application for authorised use for the .204.
    If I'm going to be accused of it then it's just as well I did it.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Sinistral View Post
    'Vermin' is no longer a separate classification on the Home Office definition as it's listed as 'Vermin including Fox' on the latest Condition.
    I think your wrong here as on the December 2015 edition it still shows fox as being part of the medium vermin group, not small vermin.
    Last edited by Thegogg; 13-02-2016 at 16:41.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Thegogg View Post
    I think your wrong here as on the December 2015 edition it still shows fox as being part of the medium vermin group, not small vermin.
    This is the standard Condition wording.

    1. Quarry Shooting (for vermin, fox or deer)

    The *calibre RIFLE/COMBINATION/SMOOTH-BORE GUN/SOUND MODERATOR and ammunition shall be used for shooting vermin including fox, and ground game/ deer (delete as appropriate) and any other lawful quarry, and for zeroing on ranges, on land deemed suitable by the chief officer of police for the area where the land is situated and over which the holder has lawful authority to shoot.

    (The words underlined may be omitted once the certificate holder has demonstrated competence. There is no set time for this and each case should be considered on its individual merits).


    The Quarry/Calibre list (Page 121) has a NO for Fox for the .204, so NWP are following the Guidance.
    If I'm going to be accused of it then it's just as well I did it.

  7. #7
    They should allow 17HMR for fox as its HO guidance and they have been told to follow it or explain in writing why they arnt following HO guidance to teh Fire arms working group committee as the Code pf practice states by the College of policing

    or just ask for the 17HMR or 204 for rabbit/ vermin and get AOLQ (which they are also supposed to issue now on all applications )

    get BASC to ring the FEO and explain in using short words and a crayon and ask for teh copy of the Explanation sent as Required above
    Last edited by FGYT; 13-02-2016 at 18:40.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Sinistral View Post


    The Quarry/Calibre list (Page 121) has a NO for Fox for the .204, so NWP are following the Guidance.

    yes quite right but they where not following the guidance when they refused 17HMR for fox as it has a yes

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by FGYT View Post
    yes quite right but they where not following the guidance when they refused 17HMR for fox as it has a yes
    Read it again.

    Page 121 only has a YES for .17HMR for Fox under certain circumstances (13.25) – otherwise (generally) it’s a NO. The more powerful calibres in the row below get an automatic YES so the inference is plain.

    We don’t know whether NWP have refused .17HMR for Fox as the OP has applied for a .204, but if they did then they are still following the Guidance which (in this case) is discretionary.


    13.25 Although not set out in legislation, 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.

    .22 Rimfires are generally considered as having insufficient muzzle energy to be used against foxes in most circumstances. However, these could be suitable for use at short range by experienced persons, and may be permitted in certain situations such as around farm buildings or paddocks. It is for the operator to ensure that the quarry species are shot at the appropriate range with the appropriate ammunition to achieve a humane kill. Combination shotgun/rifles should have the rifled barrel in a similar calibre. Expanding ammunition should be authorised for shooting foxes.
    If I'm going to be accused of it then it's just as well I did it.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Sinistral View Post
    Read it again.

    Page 121 only has a YES for .17HMR for Fox under certain circumstances (13.25) – otherwise (generally) it’s a NO. The more powerful calibres in the row below get an automatic YES so the inference is plain.

    We don’t know whether NWP have refused .17HMR for Fox as the OP has applied for a .204, but if they did then they are still following the Guidance which (in this case) is discretionary.


    13.25 Although not set out in legislation, 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.

    .22 Rimfires are generally considered as having insufficient muzzle energy to be used against foxes in most circumstances. However, these could be suitable for use at short range by experienced persons, and may be permitted in certain situations such as around farm buildings or paddocks. It is for the operator to ensure that the quarry species are shot at the appropriate range with the appropriate ammunition to achieve a humane kill. Combination shotgun/rifles should have the rifled barrel in a similar calibre. Expanding ammunition should be authorised for shooting foxes.
    I already have a 17HMR which they won't allow for fox hence the variation for the 204 so it's either appeal against their decision or go with a 223 or 22-250.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 184
    Last Post: 28-03-2015, 13:12
  2. one for one variation
    By Bigboab29 in forum Legal Issues
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 29-05-2014, 20:07
  3. Variation Problem. Beware!
    By Bertie Leblanc in forum Legal Issues
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 07-07-2013, 11:38
  4. variation
    By norma 308 in forum Legal Issues
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 15-09-2011, 20:18
  5. Variation problem, Norfolk police
    By goldypurple in forum Legal Issues
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 27-02-2011, 12:33

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •