Humane dispatch - specific question

[75]

I appreciate there is another recent thread on this (which went off on a tangent) but I have a specific question.

A few points I am aware of to hopefully stop us going off on a tangent with this one:

• I accept that a 410 at close range is the preferred option for many reasons, not least the lack of issues around firearms legislation.
• Legislation around killing of livestock for consumption is complex and not something I would get involved in - I.e. nothing killed would be going near the food chain.
• Dispatch would be for humane reasons only.

However, I’ve twice in the last couple of months been asked if I could dispatch livestock from a welfare / safety perspective. Neither circumstances would have allowed anyone close enough to use a shotgun. For clarity - no action was necessary in the end!

I noted on the other thread that some forces require a “humane dispatch” condition and that an open ticket wouldn’t cover it, so I approached my FEO for clarity on the very unlikely event the situation arose again. I received a very prompt, thorough and polite response which concluded (note, I didn’t ask for slaughterman condition, it was a point the FEO mentioned earlier in his email):

In conclusion, I am sorry to say that you cannot have a slaughter man condition unless you are a slaughter man and you cannot have a condition for the humane killing of animals unless it is part of your normal duties.

My normal duties are clearly not “humane dispatch” as it’s a very rare occurrence and I intend to have a chat with him tomorrow for some clarity but my question is does anyone have a specific humane dispatch condition on their FAC, particularly who isn’t a farmer (which I suppose could be argued “normal duties” could apply).

To sum up, this isn’t something I’m going to make a fuss with my FEO over; it’s very, very unlikely to happen again but I do live in the middle of a rural community and I’d just like to know what is common practice elsewhere and be comfortable I know what I can and can’t do in future - should the situation arise.

 

[Buchan]

I think it is very specific. I couldn't, despite being a vet in full time farm practice, get a HD condition on my licence. I now have one, but only because I was effectively refused permission for a humane dispatch pistol.
"on the off chance" isn't "good reason"

One may think that peresented with an injured animal it would be reasonable to dispatch it, but I couldn't possible comment

 

[bottletopbill]

The Met opened up my ticket as I completed the human dispatch course and have volunteered to various organisations. But after asking them about dispatch they said i did not need it on my licence,
So now I am wondering myself?

 

[Triggermortis]

Yes, all my rifles and shotgun are conditioned for HD in one section and a .410g pistol has its own separate HD condition.
I am not a slaughter man or farmer, however because one person has been granted a specific condition you cannot use that fact to argue your case

 

[VSS]

If it's genuinely for welfare reasons, to prevent further suffering of an animal in distress, I don't think it really matters what it says on your ticket. You would be in the right.
It's all the "grey areas" where the situation isn't so clear cut that you need to be worried about, and if necessary steer clear of.

 

[andyk]

Very interesting. Though I didn’t comment I also read the thread to which you refer and the legality of firearms is totally perplexing.

I presume what you are discussing is having a condition to allow you to use an existing firearm (for which good reason is already established) for humane dispatch and not asking for a new firearm (s1 or s5) for which good reason is dispatch?

If I’m correct, then your FEO’s comments would be interesting as to why he (his CC) thinks you are a suitable person to be allowed to stalk deer and shoot them wherever you may find them but not to end the suffering of livestock?

Given the HOG generally suggests that once good reason is established then further conditions to allow extra uses should not be refused (notwithstanding that the extra use might not be regular enough to be good reason on its own) such an approach would be hard to fathom.

Frankly, if they are saying that no-one can do a humane dispatch unless it is part of their job then that is patently absurd!

 

[75]

Thank you @Buchan - that puts it into perspective somewhat!

 

[75]

I presume what you are discussing is having a condition to allow you to use an existing firearm (for which good reason is already established) for humane dispatch and not asking for a new firearm (s1 or s5) for which good reason is dispatch?

Yes, absolutely - existing firearm which is for “deer stalking and AOLQ”. Not using it as a “good reason” to acquire something else.

 

[75]

If it's genuinely for welfare reasons, to prevent further suffering of an animal in distress, I don't think it really matters what it says on your ticket. You would be in the right.

Morally - yes, but legally?? Im less sure after the exchange with my FEO…

 

[VSS]

Morally - yes, but legally?? Im less sure after the exchange with my FEO…

Yes, I think legally too. Why? Because unnecessarily prolonging an animal's suffering is an offence, so if you're on the spot, and you've got the means to end the suffering but choose not to, you would be in the wrong.

 

[Triggermortis]

And it’s not only firearms, I have conditions on my ticket that only allow the acquisition of solid slugs for use in connection with HD

 

[finnbear270]

I was asked by a farmer whose land I fox on, to dispatch a cow that was down & had been for more than a day or so, ( the earth beneath it’s head and neck had been worn through it’s movements), a pair of magpies were lining up to take it’s eyes, I shot them with the HMR I was rabbiting with, a couple of female rspca types had been all over the farmer, I asked my feo of the legal position of me returning home for a .223 to dispatch, his actual words were “Just get on and sort it”.

 

[Laurie]

Yes, I think legally too. Why? Because unnecessarily prolonging an animal's suffering is an offence, so if you're on the spot, and you've got the means to end the suffering but choose not to, you would be in the wrong.

Yes, but what about those cases where the 'dispatcher' has then been in trouble? Wasn't there a case where two officers on duty were threatened by the RSPCA and their own force after they despatched an injured fox (?) with a car jack or wheelnut brace and some bystander reported it as 'cruelty'?

 

[VSS]

Yes, but what about those cases where the 'dispatcher' has then been in trouble? Wasn't there a case where two officers on duty were threatened by the RSPCA and their own force after they despatched an injured fox (?) with a car jack or wheelnut brace and some bystander reported it as 'cruelty'?

I wouldn't let that bother me, quite honestly. I'd just get on and do what I know to be the right thing under the circumstances.

 

[bottletopbill]

I am sure there is something written if in animals in need you cannot be prosecuted.

 

[Heym SR20]

Have a good close read of the Firearms Legislation and also the Home Office Guidance and make your own decision.

 

[bottletopbill]

For deer.BDS state no offence provided reasonable means are used for the purpose and you believe the deer to be so seriously injured that to kill it is an act of mercy.

 

[Stalker62]

One may think that presented with an injured animal it would be reasonable to dispatch it,..

This.

For the love of God, this.

 

[scotch_egg]

Yes, but what about those cases where the 'dispatcher' has then been in trouble? Wasn't there a case where two officers on duty were threatened by the RSPCA and their own force after they despatched an injured fox (?) with a car jack or wheelnut brace and some bystander reported it as 'cruelty'?

Are you thinking of this case

BBC NEWS | England | Staffordshire | Pc 'pursued' over killing of cat

 

[Big Mat]

If it's genuinely for welfare reasons, to prevent further suffering of an animal in distress, I don't think it really matters what it says on your ticket. You would be in the right.
It's all the "grey areas" where the situation isn't so clear cut that you need to be worried about, and if necessary steer clear of.

Lincolnshire assured me that I could be prosecuted if I used one of my rifles to dispatch a goat without the correct humane dispatch condition on my licence. They also point blank refused to even consider putting it on there.

Needless to say, when I asked them to justify these things in writing, I got told the "decison makers" wouldn't.