Views on challenging a clearance decision.

[3595wilk]

So, hoping the hive mind on here may be able to suggest some suitable way forward.

I hold a closed ticket for .243 for fox and with a AOLQ stipulation for land in TVP area. I have a permission in GlosPol of similar size (200 acres), that I use RF on for rabbits.

The Gloucestershire permission is a golf course and has asked for me to take foxes due to an emerging damage problem that is being caused by fox (evidenced through green keeper staff and trail cam footage) which needs repairs, and is costing them time and money.

Initially, I contacted GlosPol to ask for it be cleared for CF. They told me to go via TVP and oh, BTW, GlosPol stated they had no record of the land being cleared for ANYTHING…even though they had issued a FAC to the course manager for pest control there……I therefore immediately ceased pest control, informed the land owner and submitted the request for clearance supported by a new permission letter requesting CF clearance and including details of the FAC GlosPol had issued for pest control on the land. Finally they admitted the land was indeed cleared for RF and was done in 2018, and the person who cleared it now deemed it unsuitable for CF use.

Now I have limited experience obviously as I’m still on a closed ticket, but comparing this land to the land I have cleared by TVP for CF…..I can’t see how they have come to that conclusion.

As I’m not the land owner I’m looking to give them some options if they wish to pursue it, and was wondering if anyone had any suggestions on how best to present a case to GlosPol to revisit this.

I’m contacting BASC too on the off chance they could assist or offer some views.

Honestly I suspect GlosPol with their massive backlog, just don’t have the staff to come back out and assess, so this is an attempt to kick it into touch rather than a rational decision.

I could obviously be wrong and the land isn’t suitable……but then I’d have to question my perception/judgement (definitely possible) and why TVP have assessed my other 150+ acre golf course as suitable….. which in my view seems to present less opportunities for safe shots with suitable backstops than the GlosPol one. I also know TVPs assessor is a stalker and an experienced shot, but know nothing about GlosPols assessment staff….

Any thoughts or suggestions of how to proceed? TIA.

 

[palmer_mike]

Ask TVP (in writing, evidencing your experience and need for an open ticket) to open your ticket.

 

[Farmer_J]

Ask for an open licence

 

[Zetter]

Ask for an open ticket but from experience with TVP be prepared for it to be knocked back/ have to push it hard as from personal experience they are really averse to opening tickets unless you have had your ticket for five years. They normally open after five years automatically then. I have also spoken to several people locally who had the same experience and only met one who got opened before five year mainly due to him submitting clearance requests about every three weeks.
I know I asked when I was under five years (about three years in from recollection) to get my FAC air opened as I was getting a lot of opportunities on squirrels where it would have been an advantage but wasnt worth the aggro of getting loads of bit of ground cleared and I got kicked back for that. At the time I also had HMR, .22LR and .17 Hornet on my ticket so I thought that would help as it was only for FAC air but it didnt.

 

[enfieldspares]

1) A .22LR although it will kill a fox is not ideal. In the pas, yes, many police forces would ONLY authorise .22LR for fox but IMHO it is a marginal calibre for fox over thirty yards. I had thought that those days were in the past. Even .22 WRMF isn't that great. Better bit not great.

2) A .22lR is a greater ricochet hazard than is any ultra velocity .22 centrefire. I would however suggest that whether you can sway opinion on the matter may depend on suggesting you use a high seat(s) as unless shooting the thing in a bunker aka sand trap most golf courses are potentilly "ricochet central" is shooting over 1oo yards off you hind legs and a set of sticks.

 

[Pellet Pinger]

From my experience don’t expect them to come out and re evaluate the land, I had the same on one of the golf courses I shoot, I was told by the FEO they wouldn’t clear any golf courses in the county for Centerfire.
Like you there’s plenty of areas for safe shooting, I still put in a request for an officer to come out and I was happy to accompany him to demonstrate the areas, i was told not a chance until the land was up for inspection again.
As others have said best bet is ask for your ticket to be opened up, worked for me.

 

[nic531]

i waited for 18 months for them to clear some land and they seemed to prefer to open my ticket rather than do the survey. Therefore you are probably better asking for an open ticket.
Which force are you licenced under?
do you have experience of shooting over land with other firearms, eg air rifles/shotguns? if so when you request the open ticket, include your experience with these as well. Home Office and NPCC guidance clearly states that experience is neither quarry nor calibre dependant. you have to consider the same things with all firearms when assessing if the shot is safe... it is just the scale that differs. - that is why it is so strange that some forces will give an open ticket for one calibre but not another calibre for the same person????

 

[Bowland blades]

1) A .22LR although it will kill a fox is not ideal. In the pas, yes, many police forces would ONLY authorise .22LR for fox but IMHO it is a marginal calibre for fox over thirty yards. I had thought that those days were in the past. Even .22 WRMF isn't that great. Better bit not great.

2) A .22lR is a greater ricochet hazard than is any ultra velocity .22 centrefire. I would however suggest that whether you can sway opinion on the matter may depend on suggesting you use a high seat(s) as unless shooting the thing in a bunker aka sand trap most golf courses are potentilly "ricochet central" is shooting over 1oo yards off you hind legs and a set of sticks.

1. will bet more forces didnt allow fox with 22 rf than did over the past twenty years , it was like that in Lancs. eventually they dropped it because in the words of an feo " we knew full well it was happening anyhow " like some keeper or poltry farmer would leave it while shooting rabbits .
2. 22 rf has a lower ricochet potential than a 22 CF as the potential has to be measured by kinetic energy if a 22 cf had traveled far enough to be sub 1500 fps ( thinking 22 mag rf) it would then hold the same ricochet potential from that point , it must therefore be " less of a risk under that range " in your thinking . The only safety advantage to rf would be less max range if fired 30 degrees skyward without hitting something of a backstop ( a shot that shoulnt be taken unless it was with special reduced power or shot charge cartridge)
An FEO once said " our problem is listening to shooters to often " Yep i agree " you canna change the laws of physics Jim!" For years people have assumed that ZINNNNNG ! means more than it actually does 22 CF class ( or other calibres) rifles dont make the slightest sound till they hit something you didnt want hitting because the ricochet is likely going to be faster than the speed of sound 2800 -3000 fps is in no way safer than 1050-1500 fps make it 4000 fps and the same applies
A fox is 14 lb, a good Hare near half that, a rabbit 2 lb say? Biggest Bear in Alaska, American Presidents and MOSAD victims are a lot more say 15 stone up and they have all passed away from a single .22 rf shot . Inadquate for a fox on a golf course ? all depends on range and shooter ability but 30 yards ? think double that with an average shooter at least i wouldn't think anything of a 100 yards with a broadside 22 subsonic .

 

[shakey jake]

id just shoot the fox with your 22, bait it if you want or stalk on foot, or wait somewhere.
if you cant hit a fox in the head give up

 

[25 Sharps]

So, hoping the hive mind on here may be able to suggest some suitable way forward.

I hold a closed ticket for .243 for fox and with a AOLQ stipulation for land in TVP area. I have a permission in GlosPol of similar size (200 acres), that I use RF on for rabbits.

The Gloucestershire permission is a golf course and has asked for me to take foxes due to an emerging damage problem that is being caused by fox (evidenced through green keeper staff and trail cam footage) which needs repairs, and is costing them time and money.

Initially, I contacted GlosPol to ask for it be cleared for CF. They told me to go via TVP and oh, BTW, GlosPol stated they had no record of the land being cleared for ANYTHING…even though they had issued a FAC to the course manager for pest control there……I therefore immediately ceased pest control, informed the land owner and submitted the request for clearance supported by a new permission letter requesting CF clearance and including details of the FAC GlosPol had issued for pest control on the land. Finally they admitted the land was indeed cleared for RF and was done in 2018, and the person who cleared it now deemed it unsuitable for CF use.

Now I have limited experience obviously as I’m still on a closed ticket, but comparing this land to the land I have cleared by TVP for CF…..I can’t see how they have come to that conclusion.

As I’m not the land owner I’m looking to give them some options if they wish to pursue it, and was wondering if anyone had any suggestions on how best to present a case to GlosPol to revisit this.

I’m contacting BASC too on the off chance they could assist or offer some views.

Honestly I suspect GlosPol with their massive backlog, just don’t have the staff to come back out and assess, so this is an attempt to kick it into touch rather than a rational decision.

I could obviously be wrong and the land isn’t suitable……but then I’d have to question my perception/judgement (definitely possible) and why TVP have assessed my other 150+ acre golf course as suitable….. which in my view seems to present less opportunities for safe shots with suitable backstops than the GlosPol one. I also know TVPs assessor is a stalker and an experienced shot, but know nothing about GlosPols assessment staff….

Any thoughts or suggestions of how to proceed? TIA.

Ask for an open certificate if that’s knocked back then ask for a .22 magnum, perfectly capable for close range fox control and still a rimfire

 

[25 Sharps]

1. will bet more forces didnt allow fox with 22 rf than did over the past twenty years , it was like that in Lancs. eventually they dropped it because in the words of an feo " we knew full well it was happening anyhow " like some keeper or poltry farmer would leave it while shooting rabbits .
2. 22 rf has a lower ricochet potential than a 22 CF as the potential has to be measured by kinetic energy if a 22 cf had traveled far enough to be sub 1500 fps ( thinking 22 mag rf) it would then hold the same ricochet potential from that point , it must therefore be " less of a risk under that range " in your thinking . The only safety advantage to rf would be less max range if fired 30 degrees skyward without hitting something of a backstop ( a shot that shoulnt be taken unless it was with special reduced power or shot charge cartridge)
An FEO once said " our problem is listening to shooters to often " Yep i agree " you canna change the laws of physics Jim!" For years people have assumed that ZINNNNNG ! means more than it actually does 22 CF class ( or other calibres) rifles dont make the slightest sound till they hit something you didnt want hitting because the ricochet is likely going to be faster than the speed of sound 2800 -3000 fps is in no way safer than 1050-1500 fps make it 4000 fps and the same applies
A fox is 14 lb, a good Hare near half that, a rabbit 2 lb say? Biggest Bear in Alaska, American Presidents and MOSAD victims are a lot more say 15 stone up and they have all passed away from a single .22 rf shot . Inadquate for a fox on a golf course ? all depends on range and shooter ability but 30 yards ? think double that with an average shooter at least i wouldn't think anything of a 100 yards with a broadside 22 subsonic .

Ignore this post.

.22 ricochet more easily than .22 cf at supersonic speeds because the bullet holds together more often and ricochets from CF aren’t silent because they are travelling faster than the speed of sound, no more than they’re silent after they leave the muzzle….

 

[cjm1066]

Get a friend with an open ticket onto the permission, let them shoot a few and you do via the estate rifle clause.

Onceyou evidence the calibre is being used safely you are mostly home.

 

[25 Sharps]

Get a friend with an open ticket onto the permission, let them shoot a few and you do via the estate rifle clause.

Onceyou evidence the calibre is being used safely you are mostly home.

You can only use their rifle if it becomes their permission also and they have written permission to loan a rifle

 

[griff]

I would write to your FEO and ask him if the ground that has been declined has had an inspection and who by? I would also point out to the FEO that the 22 rimfire is is not only more prone to ricochet than a C/F with an appropriate bullet, it is not humane. Did they take into consideration the use of highseats? If it has been denied under noise pollution then tell then you will use an appropriate humane caliber ie: 17hmr 17hornet etc.
Ask for the response in writing no phone calls, if you are unable to get a response ask for the information under an FOI. You could also ask them why,when the ground was cleared for C/F in 2018 it is now deemed unsuitable, ask them for a detailed response quoting which calibers they deemed unsuitable and why,could they also give you the date that an FEO visited the the land after it was cleared and did they revoke the conditions of the person who had, had clearance?

 

[cjm1066]

You can only use their rifle if it becomes their permission also and they have written permission to loan a rifle

Look how many syndicates have multiple rifles on the same permission.

What part of the estate rifle clause requires writt permission.

 

[25 Sharps]

Look how many syndicates have multiple rifles on the same permission.

What part of the estate rifle clause requires writt permission.

No issue with shared permissions, just pointing out that it must be the permission holder who loans the rifle, a guest does not qualify.

It was clarified recently in the latest amendments to the firearm act.

“[F111AAuthorised lending and possession of firearms for hunting etc
(1)A person (“the borrower”) may, without holding a certificate under this Act, borrow a rifle or shot gun from another person on private premises (“the lender”) and have the rifle or shot gun in his or her possession on those premises if—
(a)the four conditions set out in subsections (2) to (5) are met, and
(b)in the case of a rifle, the borrower is aged 17 or over.
(2)The first condition is that the borrowing and possession of the rifle or shot gun are for either or both of the following purposes—
(a)hunting animals or shooting game or vermin;
(b)shooting at artificial targets.
(3)The second condition is that the lender—
(a)is aged 18 or over,
(b)holds a certificate under this Act in respect of the rifle or shot gun, and
(c)is either—
(i)a person who has a right to allow others to enter the premises for the purposes of hunting animals or shooting game or vermin, or
(ii)a person who is authorised in writing by a person mentioned in sub-paragraph (i) to lend the rifle or shot gun on the premises (whether generally or to persons specified in the authorisation who include the borrower).”

Firearms Act 1968

An Act to consolidate the Firearms Acts 1937 and 1965, the Air Guns and Shot Guns, etc. , Act 1962, Part V of the Criminal Justice Act 1967 and certain enactments amending the Firearms Act 1937.

www.legislation.gov.uk

​

 

[Clydemotor]

Hi
Explain that you will always be shooting from an elevated position , be it off sticks or vehicle bonnet /roof . Also you could bait bunker areas and shoot into the sandy bunkers to create a suitable backstop .
I shoot a large number of golf courses and have always found the FEO to be helpful once they understand what you are doing to comply with safety .

 

[3595wilk]

I would write to your FEO and ask him if the ground that has been declined has had an inspection and who by? I would also point out to the FEO that the 22 rimfire is is not only more prone to ricochet than a C/F with an appropriate bullet, it is not humane. Did they take into consideration the use of highseats? If it has been denied under noise pollution then tell then you will use an appropriate humane caliber ie: 17hmr 17hornet etc.
Ask for the response in writing no phone calls, if you are unable to get a response ask for the information under an FOI. You could also ask them why,when the ground was cleared for C/F in 2018 it is now deemed unsuitable, ask them for a detailed response quoting which calibers they deemed unsuitable and why,could they also give you the date that an FEO visited the the land after it was cleared and did they revoke the conditions of the person who had, had clearance?

This is the way I was thinking of going TBH.

I'll speak with the authorised person for the land as he may not wish to pursue it and if so, guess we will just accept the decision.

I'm not a bloody minded person but do think they simply haven't considered it properly and feel like challenging it, but not my land or call really.


I just can't see any rationale for no CF use, but as said, I'm just starting out, so maybe I'm missing something.

It's rural, 2 dwellings on the periphery, nowhere near where a shot would be taken. A main road runs to the south of the land, but wouldn't be shooting towards that at all.... and most shots are downhill into land that rises sharply in some cases, by about 25-30 yards.

Got a couple of guys who are on open tickets who have said they'd take a look and offer an opinion and put it in writing if needed.

I'll see where we go from there.

Thanks for the views/comments much appreciated

 

[cjm1066]

No issue with shared permissions, just pointing out that it must be the permission holder who loans the rifle, a guest does not qualify.

It was clarified recently in the latest amendments to the firearm act.

“[F111AAuthorised lending and possession of firearms for hunting etc​

(1)A person (“the borrower”) may, without holding a certificate under this Act, borrow a rifle or shot gun from another person on private premises (“the lender”) and have the rifle or shot gun in his or her possession on those premises if—​

(a)the four conditions set out in subsections (2) to (5) are met, and​

(b)in the case of a rifle, the borrower is aged 17 or over.​

(2)The first condition is that the borrowing and possession of the rifle or shot gun are for either or both of the following purposes—​

(a)hunting animals or shooting game or vermin;​

(b)shooting at artificial targets.​

(3)The second condition is that the lender—​

(a)is aged 18 or over,​

(b)holds a certificate under this Act in respect of the rifle or shot gun, and​

(c)is either—​

(i)a person who has a right to allow others to enter the premises for the purposes of hunting animals or shooting game or vermin, or​

(ii)a person who is authorised in writing by a person mentioned in sub-paragraph (i) to lend the rifle or shot gun on the premises (whether generally or to persons specified in the authorisation who include the borrower).”​

​

Firearms Act 1968

An Act to consolidate the Firearms Acts 1937 and 1965, the Air Guns and Shot Guns, etc. , Act 1962, Part V of the Criminal Justice Act 1967 and certain enactments amending the Firearms Act 1937.

www.legislation.gov.uk

​

Thanks for the update, every day you learn something.

 

[Bowland blades]

I would write to your FEO and ask him if the ground that has been declined has had an inspection and who by? I would also point out to the FEO that the 22 rimfire is is not only more prone to ricochet than a C/F with an appropriate bullet, it is not humane. Did they take into consideration the use of highseats? If it has been denied under noise pollution then tell then you will use an appropriate humane caliber ie: 17hmr 17hornet etc.
Ask for the response in writing no phone calls, if you are unable to get a response ask for the information under an FOI. You could also ask them why,when the ground was cleared for C/F in 2018 it is now deemed unsuitable, ask them for a detailed response quoting which calibers they deemed unsuitable and why,could they also give you the date that an FEO visited the the land after it was cleared and did they revoke the conditions of the person who had, had clearance?

If he knows his stuff , he might downgrade your own terms as Energy is the main factor in dangerous ricochet ( once we pass the shot being unsafe as regards backstop and backdrop ) 22 rf can be heard most cf cannot because the ricochet is generally silent !