Crossing boundaries

[Thar]

Nix

Best practice now recommends you shoot an injured deer from close range; if it is safe to do so. By somebody using a knife, especially if they don’t really know what they are doing they could be leaving themselves open to prosecution for causing unnecessary suffering to the animal by the SPCA. Dilemmas again.

I get the feeling that you really don’t like the thought of an individual being able to cross a boundary to dispatch an injured deer.

Best rgds

Tahr

 

[bambislayer]

Rather than getting to bogged down on the complexities of law , is it not better to make contact with your neighbours and have an agreement in place so that you can follow a wounded animal if need be.
I've always had this agreement with my
neighbours and they would have the privelage of the same right.

 

[stone]

Rather than getting to bogged down on the complexities of law , is it not better to make contact with your neighbours and have an agreement in place so that you can follow a wounded animal if need be.
I've always had this agreement with my
neighbours and they would have the privelage of the same right.

i agree with you here, but not all neighbouring farmers, landowners ,lease holders etc etc ...are on the same wave length
eck and there must be some who are anti shooting/hunting aswell can't see them letting you anywhere the place ,probally call the police on you the moment they saw you looking over the fence line in the first place
and there does not seem to be any protection in place for those trying to do the right thing in England or wales, unless i hav missed something whilst checking it out

 

[bambislayer]

Very true, I live a sheltered and privelaged life

 

[Nix Niveus]

Nix

Best practice now recommends you shoot an injured deer from close range; if it is safe to do so. By somebody using a knife, especially if they don’t really know what they are doing they could be leaving themselves open to prosecution for causing unnecessary suffering to the animal by the SPCA. Dilemmas again.

I get the feeling that you really don’t like the thought of an individual being able to cross a boundary to dispatch an injured deer.

Best rgds

Tahr

Hello Tahr

I think DCS best practice guidelines would be a strong defence, but as the law stands the Deer Act allows things, the act of which, contravene other acts. Nobody wants to get into a position where they have to defend that. I also think that neighbouring landowners who stalk/have stalkers would be more sympathetic about if there were no formal agreement in place.

It's the non-stalkers who could kick off, and the police will give the law priority over any ethical consideration - that bit would be for a court to decide.

One of the first things I did when I got my stalking was to clarifiy with 3 different neighbours the agreed rules for crossing boundaries. We all agree that we can follow and shoot, and retain deer (or any other quarry) over boundaries if they were first shot on 'their/our own' side.

It is a due dilligence issue as well, and will keep your insurers happy if it came to anything. We all know where people frequent and who might have kids/visitors around and when. e.g. I avoid one part of my bit on a Friday in Nov/Dec because my neighbour releases pheasant for him and friends to have some sport. Keeps him happy, I hope I'm a safe shooter, but I don't blame him for not taking my word for it!

Crossing boundaries doesn't worry me, most people act sensibly and would do it for right reasons, but I dont like the thought of losing my FAC because I thought the Deer Act said I could shoot a deer over a boundary when in fact it doesn't.

Reading some old threads, here and elsewhere, there are a lot of people in Scotland who misunderstand the Act to think they can do just that. Fortunately I think many police officers think you can as well!

I wonder if there any case law or precedent for this?

Nix

 

[Nix Niveus]

I did a quick google and found this.

Section 20 Firearms Act 1968

Title: Firearms

Offence:

Trespassing with firearm

1. A person commits an offence if, while he has a firearm [or imitation firearm] with him, he enters or is in any building or part of a building as a trespasser and without reasonable excuse (the proof whereof lies on him).
2. A person commits an offence if, while he has a firearm [or imitation firearm] [FN2] with him, he enters or is on any land as a trespasser and without reasonable excuse (the proof whereof lies on him).
3. In subsection (2) of this section the expression "land" includes land covered with water.

Statutory Limitations & Maximum Penalty:

1. TEW unless imitation or air weapon - 5 years
2. SO - 3 months

Sentencing Range: depends on weapon used see below
Aggravating & Mitigating Factors

* High
o planned illegal use
* Low
o firearm used for lawful purpose but not amounting to a defence,
o not produced,
o no intention to use.

===

It all boils down to what 'a reasonable excuse' is. Not everyone would agree that putting a wounded animal down would always be a reasonable excuse. Some people would argue that as you have no legal obligation to do so, only an ethcial one, it was a personal choice you made. I think the context would decide a lot.

Either way, it's not something you can view as giving you immunity from prosecution.

'firearm used for lawful purpose but not amounting to a defence,' - that's the bit that relates to the deer Act.

Are there any real lawyers on here instead of a bar room lawyers like me?

 

[Davie]

Laws are there to defend the public not to create criminals were there are none. Thar is correct you can entre ground to dispatch wounded deer or deer that would suffer as dependants. Might i add its a good law as animal welfare should be at the top of all our thoughts while out stalking. Also accessing ground with a firearm should be done with the land owners consent were possible and only used as a way of dealing with trouble some animals. Not as a way of poaching deer under a disguise.