Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 24

Thread: 'lesser species' rule

  1. #1

    'lesser species' rule

    just having a variation processed and at the same time I asked for some changes to conditions where it only states that my .243 and 30-06 are for usage on 'deer'. I argued I'd like to be able to use them on vermin/fox/boar, etc. where applicable and correct in choice.

    I received a response back that my conditions would not be changed due to the 'lesser species' rule in Scotland - which means that if my firearm is conditioned for deer, any 'lesser species' such as vermin, fox, boar, etc. can automatically be shot legally, even though the FAC does not state those species nor 'any lawful quarry'.

    I am going to keep that email printed along with my FAC 'just in case'

    do you guys agree with this?

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by PKL View Post
    do you guys agree with this?
    Agree with you keeping the email - yes, without a doubt.

    Agree with the presumption of 'lesser species' nonsense - no, not at all.

    Why can't they just put AOLQ on the ticket instead of going all round the houses to justify themselves and then do it in a 'supplementary' email? Bonkers.

    Anyhow, what is defined as a 'lesser species' than deer - dolphin, aardvark, dodo?

  3. #3
    I have the same email.
    Except I got him to say that his statement would be accepted nationally not just L&B or Scotland.

    think it is a fair idea, saves them from condtioning for specific animals in the positive but then they go and do it for the .243 with Deer AND fox?
    you could argue that on the basis of his description a .243 condition for deer would automatically be conditioned for fox under the lesser species balls!

  4. #4
    AOLQ must the the way forward.

    I think whether the statement would be accepted nationally would depend on the part of the nation you happen to be in, rather than on the opion of the FEO issuing the certificate.

    I guess that having 'deer and fox' on a .243 might be seen simply as the FLD confirming that the 'good reason to possess' is deer and fox, just as the 'good reason to possess' the .30-06 is deer.

    It does sound like a load of cobblers to me, though.

    It is very reasonable of them to issue FACs with the idea that once the rifle is issued you can shoot any lawful quarry with it, but personally I'd be happier if they made it explicit in the conditions.

  5. #5
    I agree with Dalua, I like to know exactly where the "line in the sand" is. I would not be happy with that wording.


  6. #6
    My FEO says that they havent heard of the 'lesser species' rule and they dont do AOLQ, but then i can shoot vermin,ground game,foxes and deer with my 308.

  7. #7
    Their only human no body likes to admit they made a mistake.I hadmy 459 lot listed for vermin control but my 375 for overseas use only.Tried to keep it quite but they noticed it at renewal.
    looked cool though there in ink.

  8. #8
    Some force FLDs treat their 'open' FAC holders as adults though. Just one condition covering all firearms/ammo for AOLQ or similar - it's then up to the user to decide what is suitable/legal to use on what quarry. No need for prescriptive conditions, if the holder is deemed suitable and sensible enough to possess the firearm(s), I'm sure they don't need telling what to do with it. Or maybe people like following instructions?

  9. #9
    I think the lesser species rule is kind of like that just not particularly well worded legally. They didnt think of the AOLQ so obviously dont want to use it.

    In short the Snr FEO said if you want to shoot crows with your .243 that is up to you. expensive but up to you. it is conditioned for fox and deer though, so I can use it extensively for either OR both.

    If you want to shoot foxes with your .270 that is up to you also.

    what they were clear about is that they would not enter "fox only" for .270 as they didnt feel it was appropriate, if I shoot a fox with it that is fine.
    If I use the .270 "solely" for fox shooting then I am not using it for the good reason specified at the time of the variation.

    It is conditioned for deer. that is the "good reason" not a restriction. what else I shoot they couldnt care less. it is unenforceable even if it was a firm restriction
    In that sense it is the same as AOLQ it just doesnt specifify it....but my email does.....

  10. #10
    The issue I think I might have with the presumption of 'lesser species', (and would seek written conformation as back-up as you wisely have), is that there are already more than one named species against, say, your .243.

    If the condition states that the rifle is to be used for those named, then there might be a presumption that those not named are not included - if you get what I mean.

    There would also be the potential problem with shooting in a force area where 'lesser species' is not recognised - which appears to to almost everywhere else!

Similar Threads

  1. Deer species
    By swarovski in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 24-07-2012, 21:17
  2. Which Species ?
    By mudman in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-07-2012, 21:01
  3. species please
    By supersport in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 28-12-2011, 21:52
  4. Conditions for different species
    By david1976 in forum Legal Issues
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 06-10-2011, 20:44
  5. deer species
    By widows son in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 18-03-2011, 08:16

Posting Permissions

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