Case for Vermin and 243?

[sandersj89]

Is there a case to be made to allow vermin on a FAC for a 243 rifle?

 

Recent developments with ACPO have resulted in them allowing fox to be shot with a stalking rifle, I suspect some of the reasoning behind this to reduce the number of FAC slots/rifles out there as now a person wont need a dedicated foxing set up when they can use their stalking rifle.

 

But I also believe fox are not classed as vermin in the eyes law, therefore the wording on FAC’s explicitly states fox or vermin or both. For instance my ticket allows for vermin and fox for my HMR, for my 243 it allows deer and fox.

 

But is there a case that the 243 would be a useful tool in the box for vermin as well?

 

Economics make it a hard case to make as at a £1+ a pop it would make for expensive vermin control, yes reloading makes it cheaper but still ahead of most things. Still the occasional shot would still be OK if it was to remove a problem.

 

But there are situations when the extra legs of the 243 and weight of bullet over the HMR make it possible to take a shot I would not with the HMR. For example, breezy days so HMR is blown all over the place and a gun shy problem crow at 150m. Crow never presents itself at shootable ranges as it has learnt the effective range of the shooter.

 

I would not take that shot with the HMR but would take it with a 243 if allowed.

 

Do people have vermin on their centre fires and would it be deemed suitable/ethical?

 

If you were to approach the FEO for vermin on 243 what case would you make?

Thanks

 

Jerry

[6mmBR]

If you have a .243 for deer then ACPO have now reconised that you can use said caliber for deer/fox and vermin.

If you haven't got stalking then the .243 may be harder to justify.

Dave

[sandersj89]

If you have a .243 for deer then ACPO have now reconised that you can use said caliber for deer/fox and vermin.

If you haven't got stalking then the .243 may be harder to justify.

Dave

 

I have a 243 and it states 243 and fox. I have my own stalking on the family farm plus fox and vermin rights on other pieces of land. I have been in discussions with sussex police about adding vermin to the 243 for the reason it has, I believe, a place for vermin control but they say I have to prove why.They are looking for a valid reason.

 

BASC are envolved, interested to see what others think about 243 for vermin control and the approach you would take with the FEO.

[6mmBR]

ACPO have just approved all deer stalking calibers now for vermin.

I just sent my ticket into Southwales police and now all my deer calibers are cleared for deer/fox and vermin.

You should have no problems.

Dave

[6mmBR]

Sorry mate should of added this.

http://www.basc.org.uk/content/change_to_firearms_certif

Have a look here.

Cheers

Dave

[varminter]

This is just " my own " personal view ,

I see no reason whether its a 243 or 308 why you cannot use it for deer / fox and ground game!!

We all know that for most calibers the bullet makers make a varmint bullet for that very reason!!!

And as we all know - no matter whether its a deer / fox or ground game one thing rules / and thats a safe backstop !!

 

I am very disappointed that the FLO in some areas seem to make it up as they go along / hence the need from organizations to guide them - but also from experienced owners!!!!

 

I personally use my rifles for target / varmint ( pest ) fox and deer control and always stipulate that when speaking to my FLO!!

 

Now heres a thing , you have land which enables to shoot pests at the longer ranges , if its safe to do so ,why not!!!

The larger calibers enable you to use heavier bullets on windy days for fox and pests to control them!!!

Using your rifle for triple duty i call it!!!!!

So we " do " have a good reason!!!!!

All the best with your application.......................

RAY.....................................

[Bazooka Joe]

I am very disappointed that the FLO in some areas seem to make it up as they go along / hence the need from organizations to guide them - but also from experienced owners!!!!

 

 

Interesting point Ray, the above is exactly what I've had to put up with for years now........I look forward to hearing different comment by Cert Holders on this one, who have applied for the Vermin condition for there stalking calibers.

 

BJ.

[eldon]

I have just put in a variation and requested the ammendment with West yorks for my 308.

I'll let you know how I get on.

[eldon]

Well its come back all done so top marks to West yorkshire police.

308 for rabbit and everything else.

 

The bit that caught my eye was the sentence under 22 rf that was new and read,

 

"on ranges suitable for the safe use of that class of firearm and with adequate financial arrangements to meet any injury or damage claim"

 

I have made it bold, not seen that bit before, any comments?

 

I asked for 243/6mm to keep my options open and it has come back with the variation for 243.

If I want to buy a 6 mm say BR will I be allowed with this calibre stipulation wording?

[Redfox]

They are not entitled to put anything to do with financial claims or insurance on your licence, another case of making it up as they go along. Talk to Basc or whichever organisation you are in.

Redfox

[SteveW]

They are not entitled to put anything to do with financial claims or insurance on your licence, another case of making it up as they go along. Talk to Basc or whichever organisation you are in.

Redfox

 

 

Hi Eldon

 

Please keep us informed of the outcome of your inquiry, be very interested to hear !!!

 

Cheers Steve

[eldon]

Yes steve I will.

I have passed the inquiry to SACS for there comment. It should not make any difference to me personally as I have the 5 million cover but.........

 

When it says adequate does it refer to the range or the shooter?

 

Is this not like the police saying you need compulsory insurance?

 

Any comments.

[Redfox]

Thats what I was saying. there is nothing in the firearms legislation that places responsibility for ensuring compensation insurance with the police as the licensing authority, nor is there anything which determines that you actually have to have it, although you would be crazy to shoot without insurance cover of course, but it is not their place or responsibility to check that, or make it a condition. You need it removed from your cert immediately and the best way is to get basc or whoever to get it done for you and take it up with the police authority and the home office.

Redfox

[eldon]

Redfox I think we are both on the same wavelength here.

I will await Sacs response and then decide.

 

Anybody else in west yorks checked there license and got this? maybe its just recently been created I'm sure it wasn't there at last renewal 3 years ago. I will find the photocopies out.

[eldon]

The line I have received from SACS reads,

 

" The Police have no remit to insist on you having insurance cover - that is beyond the things they are allowed to consider. However, the way the law is set out, once a condition is added by the Chief Constable, you are bound by that condition, right or wrong."

 

Redfox seems like you were spot on.

 

Now its a case of where to go from here? Hmmmm

[SteveW]

Now its a case of where to go from here? Hmmmm

 

Hi Eldon

 

I presume that Sacs didn't offer any advice on how to proceed ???

 

Personally I would take Redfox's advice and insist that Sacs take the matter further, please keep us updated

 

Good luck

Steve

[bigdan]

Good luck

Steve

 

 

JUST GOT MY FAC BACK FROM SUSSEX POLICE AFTER renewal and it states"the 6.5x55 mauser rifle ,sound m

oderator ,and ammunition shall be used for, 1, vermin,2,vermin fox,3 fox, and for zeroing etc etc.

why its worded like that i cant tell but i did phone the flo and she said its an open ticket but couldnt explain the wording.

[sandersj89]

Good luck

Steve

JUST GOT MY FAC BACK FROM SUSSEX POLICE AFTER renewal and it states"the 6.5x55 mauser rifle ,sound m

oderator ,and ammunition shall be used for, 1, vermin,2,vermin fox,3 fox, and for zeroing etc etc.

why its worded like that i cant tell but i did phone the flo and she said its an open ticket but couldnt explain the wording.

 

Dan,

 

What other rifles do you have on your ticket and what are they cleared for?

 

I am about to respark the debate with Sussex and they are refusing vermin on my 243 and only say they allow fox and deer. Your listing above is at odds to what they say and again goes to show their inconsistancy!!

[eldon]

Sanders as stated west yorks have granted me vermin for the 308 and i know others on here have bigger tools for the job.

If I was you I would ask the FLO for a visit so you can discuss the issues around there reluctance.

[sandersj89]

Sanders as stated west yorks have granted me vermin for the 308 and i know others on here have bigger tools for the job.

If I was you I would ask the FLO for a visit so you can discuss the issues around there reluctance.

 

My FLO wont deal with this, he has passed it up to the head manager, a real jobs worth.

 

I have BASC on the case as well for their advice and they have been very good to date. Just sent them a long email with ideas to run past them before I pen my next letter to Sussex Police later today.

 

I also have the option of moving my address for my ticket to Devon, will be splitting my time between Sussex and Devon for the next 6 months, they seem to have a much better approach so may just shift the problem their way and get it back with vermin on.

 

I am also pushing an open ticket for my HMR, had it 18months but put 1,000's of rounds through it. BASC said to go for it, we shall see.

[eldon]

I suppose its all about perceived risk from the police perspective.

History and time is what will normally win them over. Time is an easy item for them to quantify so maybe they feel you are going too fast for them.

Present your case and facts in the best manner and you never know.

 

Good luck.

[bigdan]

Dan,

 

What other rifles do you have on your ticket and what are they cleared for?

 

I am about to respark the debate with Sussex and they are refusing vermin on my 243 and only say they allow fox and deer. Your listing above is at odds to what they say and again goes to show their inconsistancy!!

 

GDAY SANDERS, ive a .22 brno with mod which is on the ticket for vermin. a .17hmr which is on there for vermin AND FOX ,and then the 6.5x55 which ive mentioned. until recently i thought you couldnt have .17hmr for fox, but theyve obviously had a change of heart. are you east or west sussex?

[sandersj89]

I am West Sussex though live right on the boundary between the 2. My FEO is based in Uckfield and I have HMR for vermin and fox like you plus 243 for deer and fox.

 

I intend to load down the 243 for long range vermin in open areas such as some of my permissions up on the downs where it is hard to get near rabbit or crows due to there being little or no cover.

 

Will keep this thread updated with how it goes, awaiting a reply from BASC at the moment.

 

Cheers

[sandersj89]

BASC have drafted a letter for me, made aq couple of small changes but it is in the post today:

 

Thank you for your letter regarding vermin conditions for larger calibre rifles asking for my reasoning for asking for vermin on my ticket for my 243. I have discussed this at length with BASC and their advice is reflected in the response below.

 

As you no doubt are aware; the size of quarry species is irrelevant when the rifle being used is of a type powerful enough to dispatch the largest quarry species found in the UK safely and humanely. It is of course when licensing staff go into the realms of trying to assess whether something is overpowered, often described as “overkill”, where problems arise, as it is impossible to make such an assessment. Surely the main concern for licensing purpose is that a firearm is not underpowered.

 

If a rifle is capable of humanely taking a deer or fox, then by that fact alone, the rifle is capable of taking smaller species such as rabbits. The only remaining concern is for the certificate holder as to whether or not to expend that larger calibre ammunition in terms of cost per round.

 

In essence, a shooter must ensure that they have a safe backstop for all shots and to take a steady shot at the heart lung area of an animal that is a) stationary and identified as legal to shoot and legally in season. The smaller the animal, the frailer it is and thus a more humane shot is achieved. There is no difference in pubic safety for taking a shot at a rabbit over a deer or fox as a suitable backstop is always required.

 

All I wish to do is control a variety of legal species (game and pest) when out with my rifle, thus saving time and energy, otherwise I would have to make two specific visits to land with two different rifles, which I cannot practicably carry and use at the same time.

 

Please will you reconsider my request for conditions to be applied to allow me flexibility when using my rifle, it is simply flexibility I require when out using the firearm that I have experience of and have been deemed fit to posses and use safely.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Jerry

[snap_shot]

And for the simple fact also it that a rifle is a rifle, either rimfire or centrefire, one is as dangerous as the other, and if you were granted for one then you should have no problem being granted for the other, that is if your land is passed for such a cal. as .243

i hope al goes well keep in there.