Capreolus club

[sy247]

I do agree it is a difficult situation for the police if someone applies for a CF rifle who has not had any previous shooting experience. In my situation I had already had a lot of experience with firearms gained whilst target shooting. I had also done a DSC1 which demonstrated commitment and a level of shooting competence.

The UK is unique amongst most European countries who generally seem to want hunters pass exams before they are allowed to hunt. I worked in Switzerland last year. There it is easy to obtain firearms (semi auto CF and pistols included) but difficult to get a hunting license. I didn't think I would stand any chance of passing an exam in German. You also have to do a certain amount of conservation work each year.

 

[VSS]

. You also have to do a certain amount of conservation work each year.

Much as I dislike additional rules and regs, this is one thing that really would be worth introducing in the UK. It would be a very positive PR exercise, and win-win for all involved.

 

[stubear]

Paid stalking is generally 100% accompanied- paying a mate a few quid/ buying him a pint to let you shoot alone on his permission is not.
The outfitter guides you, confirms the target and makes the final decision on the shot.
If you are in a high seat you might get to sit alone, but the seat will have been positioned to minimise risk, you will have been briefed
on arcs of fire and, what actions you may take so that means it will not be a decision you make fully on your own, it has been supervised.
Therefore paid stalking is - perhaps- more correctly, supervised stalking

So surely thats a mentoring condition? You can only shoot when "supervised". Which the old FELWG and Andy Marsh said FLO's should not be imposing any more...?

I'm sorry, I simply dont see the point in FLO's imposing endless conditions on licence holders. So now you have a "booked stalks only" condition and a mate invites you out on his ground then what? You cant go because you dont have the right condition, and you have to call them up to get the condition changed blah blah blah... And how has that improved public safety? It hasnt. Not one jot. All its done is created work for the FLO and aggro for the FAC holder.

The HO guidance says that FLO's should not be imposing conditions which means people cannot reasonably use their rifles - Thats a de facto refusal and should be challenged.

I cant see a single hunting application in the UK which isnt covered with the normal "Deer/AOLQ/Open/Closed" set of conditions TBH. And if you're the member of a target shooting club then add on target use.

If someone wants an FAC for deer stalking using paid outings and is inexperienced it should be "Deer/AOLQ and closed". Once they get experience and/or have good reason they can have an open ticket. Simples. Having their own permission or not is irrelevant.

 

[Uncle f]

Re capreouls club. They are more interested in what you have permission wise than what you can get from them. They did have the Epping forest permission for a bit then Cocked that up. Massively aimed at rich persons shooting a few times a year than regular recreation type stalkers


steve

 

[Erik Hamburger]

I have had a telephone discussion with a representative of the Capreolus Club, which swiftly moved on to how their members could get access to my permissions. I decided not to proceed.

 

[sy247]

Couldn't agree more. Each to their own but if it was on my certificate I wouldn't be having it.

So surely thats a mentoring condition? You can only shoot when "supervised". Which the old FELWG and Andy Marsh said FLO's should not be imposing any more...?

I'm sorry, I simply dont see the point in FLO's imposing endless conditions on licence holders. So now you have a "booked stalks only" condition and a mate invites you out on his ground then what? You cant go because you dont have the right condition, and you have to call them up to get the condition changed blah blah blah... And how has that improved public safety? It hasnt. Not one jot. All its done is created work for the FLO and aggro for the FAC holder.

The HO guidance says that FLO's should not be imposing conditions which means people cannot reasonably use their rifles - Thats a de facto refusal and should be challenged.

I cant see a single hunting application in the UK which isnt covered with the normal "Deer/AOLQ/Open/Closed" set of conditions TBH. And if you're the member of a target shooting club then add on target use.

If someone wants an FAC for deer stalking using paid outings and is inexperienced it should be "Deer/AOLQ and closed". Once they get experience and/or have good reason they can have an open ticket. Simples. Having their own permission or not is irrelevant.

 

[HTB]

Re capreouls club. They are more interested in what you have permission wise than what you can get from them. They did have the Epping forest permission for a bit then Cocked that up. Massively aimed at rich persons shooting a few times a year than regular recreation type stalkers

I have heard this a bit. The Epping forest permission would have interested me a lot but sounds like it's not worth the membership fee. As someone said £80 is a lot of guided stalks.

 

[jimbo1984]

I have heard this a bit. The Epping forest permission would have interested me a lot but sounds like it's not worth the membership fee. As someone said £80 is a lot of guided stalks.

800 isn't many guided stalks at all

 

[swatty]

I might pretty drunk right now but there’s nothing g exclusive about the Freemasons if you want to join make an approach you will be welcomed as for the caproulis club @ £800 join it from what I’ve seen on you tube and the likes of you have no stalking it’s a foot in the door at reasonably good money

 

[Kalahari]

I have no connection with the Capreolus club but as I understand it they lost the Epping forest lease because the "cuddlies" got to the City of London who own the rights. So maybe not the clubs fault.

David.