Estate Rifle

mj robson

Well-Known Member
Hi Guys,

I have been speaking to my local FLO and she has informed me that unless you are a landowner/occupier, servant of the landowner/occupier or a sporting lease holder (giving you sole rights to the deer management) that you would be unable to accompany a friend or client onto your land and allow them to use your own rifle under the estate rifle clause.

I have about 15 farms (about 12,000 acres) that I regularly stalk on with clients as part of my job. She has said that I cannot accompany clients on this land and allow them to use my rifle under the estate rifle rule. Permission to shoot is not enough to qualify.

If this is the case I'm sure this must be the most flouted law in firearms legislation!!!

I would be very interested to hear anyones experience on this matter.

Thanks,
Mark.
 
That's how it is under the letter. You are right I am very sure it is flouted but that does not make it right. It shows the importance of a lease or license to be in place on land you stalk with guests/clients. Do others have 'permission' on your ground also other than the owner or occupier themselves ? If not I am sure a simple agreement document would suffice.
 
Its how I have always understood it to be, though many people think they are OK to let someone use their rifle under the estate rifle clause, as others have said a much flouted exemption, and lets face it you are unlikely to be caught unless something goes wrong, which as we know sooner or later has habit of happening.
 
servant of the landowner/occupier If you have full permision to control the deer then your are the servant of the landowner. I asked my FO and he said writen perrmison to say you are the autherised controller should be enough. Not one i would like to test in court.
 
written permission with an extra bit like, 'and may be accompanied by a other persons when controlling deer' is all you need
 
Its a stupid statement with little if any legal value. to define servant is not relevant in the discussion

You either have permission to shoot on the land and if covering quarry, therefore "sporting rights" (a leaseholder or not as the case may be) or you dont.

If you do there is no legal precedent to stop you from allowing anyone to use your rifle whilst under your supervision on land you are authorised to shoot on. (obvious exceptions where only the named leaseholder may shoot the deer on said lease).

It doesn't matter if you are shooting paper or deer. If you have permission for whatever you are shooting and you recognise that YOU are going to be held legally responsible for the shot your friend is taking should it all go pear shaped then plink away.

how would anyone start shooting if not under the supervision of people already doing it on land they currently shoot over!?
they cant all be going to Bisley open days and then applying for an FAC!
 
Last edited:
While I am totally in agreement with your sentiments Brewsher it’s far from a simple matter and I think you may (strong emphasis on may) be mistaken on a couple of the legal points. I certainly wouldn’t like to argue the case either one way or the other and would suggest that mj robson would be best advised to consult the legal or firearms department of his shooting organisation which ever one that might be. It was mentioned in the original posting that if the FEO is correct then a lot of us may be breaking the law or have broken the law at some time in the past.

If I remember the background to the “estate rifle” exemption correctly the wording that was included was actually done in such a way so as not to inconvenience the landed gentry who would invite friends without certificates to take a stag off their estates. I believe that there wouldn’t actually have been an estate rifle exemption if it hadn’t have been raised by one of the lords in the upper house when the legislation was going through parliament. It wasn’t really considered at the time that the likes of us oiks would like to get into stalking at some time.
 
Last edited:
My shooting buddy looks at it this way, if you are shooting game/vermin/deer for the table you are in effect taking payment in leiu of services rendered and hence become the servant of the landowner and thus you may loan a rifle to a third party.
Both my shooting buddy and myself have a condition on out permission slips that reads
"On certain occasions but only on prior arrangement with the landowner, may be accompanied by one or two other shooters or non shooters"

Ian.
 
Last edited:
For the enlightenment of all, here is the actual wording from the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988 (see http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/45/section/16):

16 Borrowed rifles on private premises.

(1)A person of or over the age of seventeen may, without holding a firearm certificate, borrow a rifle from the occupier of private premises and use it on those premises in the presence either of the occupier or of a servant of the occupier if—
(a)the occupier or servant in whose presence it is used holds a firearm certificate in respect of that rifle; and

(b)the borrower’s possession and use of it complies with any conditions as to those matters specified in the certificate.
(2)A person who by virtue of subsection (1) above is entitled without holding a firearm certificate to borrow and use a rifle in another person’s presence may also, without holding such a certificate, purchase or acquire ammunition for use in the rifle and have it in his possession during the period for which the rifle is borrowed if—

(a)the firearm certificate held by that other person authorises the holder to have in his possession at that time ammunition for the rifle of a quantity not less than that purchased or acquired by, and in the possession of, the borrower; and

(b)the borrower’s possession and use of the ammunition complies with any conditions as to those matters specified in the certificate.​

So if you are the occupier, or the servant of the occupier, you can use the estate rifle clause to take out a guest who may then use your rifle (and also acquire ammunition for your rifle), providing (a0) the rifle is on your FAC and (b) the guest only uses your rifle in accordance with any relevant conditions on the FAC.

Now the eagle-eyed amongst you will have noted that neither "occupier" nor "servant" are defined in the Act.

There is no legal definition of servant, but it is typically deemed to be an employee (and whitebeard, I doubt your shooting buddy is an employee). Neither is there a definition of "occupier", though if you check out the Home Office Firearms Law Guidance to the Police (2002) it states the following:

The term “occupier” is not defined in the Firearms Acts, nor has a Court clarified its meaning. However, the Firearms Consultative Committee in their 5th Annual report recommended that the provisions of section 27 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 be adopted. This states that ‘“occupier” inrelation to any land, other than the foreshore, includes any person having any right of hunting, shooting, fishing or taking game or fish’.​


Or, in the words of Deer: Law & Liabilities (p124), "Occupation of land must be broad in nature and enforceable through the courts, it is generally accepted that it would include a person who holds the sporting rights to the deer."

So if you hold the sporting rights to deer (aka stalking rights), and your permission entitles you to bring onto the land a guest (fee-paying or otherwise) you should be able to utilise the estate rifle clause.

Of course, all the above is IMHO opinion only and I will happily stand to be corrected by any learned colleagues on the site.

willie_gunn

P.S. Here is the next question: If you don't personally have the stalking rights, but you are employed as a guide for someone who does, are you entitled to use the estate rifle clause WITHOUT having said rifle on your certificate? If so, under what conditions?
 
Last edited:
Mark

In response to your OP, I think the crucial question is going to be "do you hold the sporting/stalking rights, exclusive or otherwise, to the farms on which you shoot?". If you do, and your permissions also include the right to take out guests, I can't see any reason why you couldn't use the estate rifle clause.

This might be a question to put to SACS/BASC/SCA?

willie_gunn
 
As with much of the HO guidance the Estate Rifle clause is open to a great deal of different interpretation as I found to my chagrin when building the range and opening to the public, luckily I received a great deal of help from various constabularies and leading authorities. However since little of the guidance and in particular the ER clause has been tested it remains firmly on the shoulders of the individual to prove they were not breaking the law should anything go wrong. In the case of permission to shoot over ground,how many land owners are aware that the ultimate responsibility lies with them if anything goes wrong? In my case at the range, my range, my land, my problem! That would scare the living daylights out of many land owners and make them doubly wary of individuals asking for permission. This has yet to be tested in law so who knows on which side the jury (as it would undoubtedly be a high court case) would fall. As far as I am aware, if you hold the sporting rights for deer (The Occupier) you are entitled to allow a guest (the question of payment is another difficult one) to borrow a rifle and ammunition that is entered onto the FAC of the person with the sporting rights (or occupier) providing it is used under the same conditions entered on the FAC (I think 16 part 1 has now changed to 18 years old).

WG
I'm not entirely clear on your question, are you meaning if you are employed as a guide on someone else's land can you let a client use your rifle? I'm 99.9% sure you can as you are a servant of the occupier, I do that on about half of my ground, I pay half the lease but I am not on the lease, I have a separate agreement with the leaseholder (its in writing).

After building the range and opening to the public I spent a lot of time on the phone (actually when it came to my own FAC renewal) as Gloucestershire police weren't enamoured with what I was doing, letting people shoot a centre fire without a FAC. I explained my understanding of the Estate rifle rule and immediately it became clear there was a difference between my understanding and theirs and whilst they wouldn't tell me what they believed I could do they were very sure of what I couldn't and left it for me to work it out, once I'd done that I put it to them and we reached an agreement which they actually put on my FAC to allow me to train people with non-expanding ammunition on targets. This is a bit extreme for most people but at least if an accident (God forbid) happens, it will be exactly that an accident, I won't be breaking the law as the condition is written on my FAC. This is why when people come to the range and ask if their friends can shoot their rifle the answer is no because if something goes wrong, I'm ultimately responsible, they can however shoot mine! Crazy I know but if they are using my rifle it is absolutely legal because it stipulates it on my FAC, if something goes wrong with their mates rifle we fall back on the ER rule and I aint sharing no cell or playing hide the soap for anyone!

One thing I have always been very strict on with myself - Get it in writing! A wink and a nod is ok until the proverbial hits the fan.

HME

Welcome to Corinium Rifle Range
 
WG
I'm not entirely clear on your question, are you meaning if you are employed as a guide on someone else's land can you let a client use your rifle? I'm 99.9% sure you can as you are a servant of the occupier, I do that on about half of my ground, I pay half the lease but I am not on the lease, I have a separate agreement with the leaseholder (its in writing).

HME

Apologies, I was not clear with the question! The situation is this:

Person A holds the stalking rights to a piece of ground and on his FAC he has a rifle, serial number 123, which he uses when taking visiting guests out.

Person B is employed by A as a guide as, for example, person A occasionally has two guests in the visiting party or just to give some flexibility in guiding.

The question is this; if a guest is out on the estate being guided by person B, can he use rifle 123, even if person A is not present?

willie_gunn
 
Hi Guys,

There certainly seems to be a slight difference of opinion with this matter.

Let me try and answer the questions.

I am a BASC member for 22 years, I am a BASC registered goose guide. I shoot Pigeons, Geese, Roe and game on a total of around 100 individual farms and 3 estates. My company was started 12 years ago by my father and we have worked with many of the farms for this period. On the 15 farms I stalk I also shoot pigeons and sometimes geese. I pay the farmers on a per day per client basis, the more I shoot on a farm, the more money the farmer gets. I could not run my business by paying annual rents on all these farms, so pay per day allows me to have the large area of land that I need (especially with pigeons and geese). On all of my stalking farms I am the only stalker, however, 2 or 3 do have others pigeon shooting on them also. I do not have any written leases for any of my land, just verbal permission from the landowner.

Here is another point the FLO made to me,

If I take 2 clients of mine to a local estate for some stalking, one to stalk with me and one with the keeper, I could not let the stalker with me use my rifle, they would have to use the gamekeepers rifle and be accompanied by him. Basically stopping me from taking 2 clients to an estate!

Regards,
Mark.
 
WG

In this instance, the answer is 100% no unless the rifle is on person B's certificate. I have the same situation occasionally, the guest may only use the rifle of the person accompanying them which is on person B's FAC and providing it is conditioned accordingly.

I have one of my rifles on a friends FAC, so that he may accompany a client of mine with my rifle, his FAC conditions for it are the same as mine and he is covered under the servant of the occupier wording.

The police are more than willing to do this because it covers you and them, but it does cost £26!

HME
 
Last edited:
Here is another point the FLO made to me,

If I take 2 clients of mine to a local estate for some stalking, one to stalk with me and one with the keeper, I could not let the stalker with me use my rifle, they would have to use the gamekeepers rifle and be accompanied by him. Basically stopping me from taking 2 clients to an estate!

Regards,
Mark.

Mark

I'd really like to hear the FLO's reasons for that statement. If you hold the sporting rights to that land (paid or otherwise) then you should be able to utilise the estate clause, other restrictions such as age, etc. You should, however, definitely try to get some form of written agreement in place with the farmers for the stalking rights, regardless of whether or not any payment is made.

In particular, what is the FLO's argument for saying that the gamekeeper can take out a guest but you can't? Is it that the gamekeeper is an employee or servant but you are not? Or that the gamekeeper is an occupier but you are not?

Definitely one for BASC's firearms department I'd say.

willie_gunn
 
WG

In this instance, the answer is 100% no unless the rifle is on person B's certificate. I have the same situation occasionally, the guest may only use the rifle of the person accompanying them which is on person B's FAC and providing it is conditioned accordingly.

I have one of my rifles on a friends FAC, so that he may accompany a client of mine with my rifle, his FAC conditions for it are the same as mine and he is covered under the servant of the occupier wording.

The police are more than willing to do this because it covers you and them, but it does cost £26!

HME

HME

Absolutely 100% correct.

I have just the same. A number of rifles on my FAC belong to a friend, but they are on my FAC so that I can use them when unaccompanied by said friend.

However, I had to argue to get them added as I was originally advised that the estate clause covered this scenario :eek:

willie_gunn
 
Back
Top