Fox Control With A .22

[Alsone 789]

 

 

Yes before the now fashionable aolq my force would not put fox condition against any rimfire, however just over the border in Derbyshire, everyone had a fox condition against .22 lr

 

My friend in Derbyshire has LR conditioned against fox.

 

So does everyone else in Derbyshire...

 

 

Yeah my point was, Derbyshire are a really good force.

[charlie caller 3,654]

 

 

 

Yes before the now fashionable aolq my force would not put fox condition against any rimfire, however just over the border in Derbyshire, everyone had a fox condition against .22 lr

 

My friend in Derbyshire has LR conditioned against fox.

 

So does everyone else in Derbyshire...

 

 

Yeah my point was, Derbyshire are a really good force.

 

Haha, unless you want a .243 for foxes lol.

[Alsone 789]

Haha, unless you want a .243 for foxes lol.

 

 

Didn't know they restricted .243's.

 

My friend has .22LR, .223 and .30-06 all open and all AOLQ.

[charlie caller 3,654]

And I will bet a hefty chunk of change that your friend has deer as his good reason? But try getting a .243 for fox only, some forces will allow it, a shooting pal down south had a .243 for fox only, for ages before having deer added to his ticket, according to Derbyshire .243 is too big for fox, but a .22-250 is fine, well to me if its a safe shot for a .22-250 its a safe shot for a .30-378

[Born Hunter 17,775]

Nott's are the same regards 243. They even verbally acknowledge that the Home Office consider it acceptable, but think they know best.

 

Apparently it's safer to shoot a fox with a 22-250 than it is a 243...... safer to shoot a fox while 'in the pursuit of deer' with a 300 win mag than it is to shoot one when specifically out for fox and apparently it makes more sense to allow someone to keep two CF rifles (increasing the number of publicly held firearms) than it does to grant one for dual purpose.....

 

Chief Officer of Police, the only job where intelligence is considered a hindrance to success....

[Deker 3,478]

And I will bet a hefty chunk of change that your friend has deer as his good reason? But try getting a .243 for fox only, some forces will allow it, a shooting pal down south had a .243 for fox only, for ages before having deer added to his ticket, according to Derbyshire .243 is too big for fox, but a .22-250 is fine, well to me if its a safe shot for a .22-250 its a safe shot for a .30-378

I totally agree in principle with your comments, and I'm down south, I have a pal here who had .243 for many years simply for Fox, he wanted to add deer and the region insisted on a mentor...that was me, crazy situation. We have shot together many years now, in the field and on the range and this particular gent now shoots for Team GB and was our highest placed shooter at the Europeans a few weeks back.

 

Funny old world.

[danw 1,748]

Nott's are the same regards 243. They even verbally acknowledge that the Home Office consider it acceptable, but think they know best.

 

Apparently it's safer to shoot a fox with a 22-250 than it is a 243...... safer to shoot a fox while 'in the pursuit of deer' with a 300 win mag than it is to shoot one when specifically out for fox and apparently it makes more sense to allow someone to keep two CF rifles (increasing the number of publicly held firearms) than it does to grant one for dual purpose.....

 

Chief Officer of Police, the only job where intelligence is considered a hindrance to success....

By adding fox while in the pursuit of deer to larger calibres it means you can't lamp with it I reckon truth be known that's the real reason

[Born Hunter 17,775]

That's exactly the reason mate. But technically, under that condition, you would be breaking the conditions of your FAC if you decided to take your 'deer rifle' out specifically to shoot a fox during the day...... but it'd be okay to shoot that fox if you were waiting for a deer..... Why not just condition "no night shooting".

 

That's not really my gripe though, just a peculiarity. My real gripe is individual forces making their own laws up, and nonsense ones at that like a 243 being unacceptable for foxing but a 22-250 being fine.

[Alsone 789]

The big trouble is that these are only guidelines. So whilst they carry some weight, any force can if they want, simply ignore them.

 

That said, there is a long history of some forces making their own rules up for firearms licensing.

 

To my mind, there needs to be one central law that isn't a guideline but a gospel and any firearms dept that doesn't follow it, should be subject to fines which are compulsory not discretionary in their application. So if a regional dept steps out of line, it's not only admonished but it's hit in the pocket.

Edited November 4, 2014 by Alsone

[celticrusader 78]

Went stalking last year with a well known deer stalker and family friend, as a way of getting into it I told my feo that I want a .243 for foxing but at the same time I want to use it on deer on the odd stalk as the cost of travelling from where I live is ridiculous and my intention is maybe once or twice a year.

He was in fact happy to give me this as the reference I provided was more than happy to stand my corner.

My feo is also a club member and has a lot of first hand experience himself.

My area is s.Wales, v.Glamorgan.

Edited November 4, 2014 by celticrusader

[charlie caller 3,654]

Obviously a man with some sense, probably wont last long in the job then!!!!!!!!!!!!

[celticrusader 78]

I agree with a statement earlier, they need to act on a nationwide rule and not make it up to suit their needs otherwise theyre going to constantly come under scrutiny and f*** things up when they come under investigations with like wise incidents that have recently happened that are in the news at the moment.

Edited November 4, 2014 by celticrusader

[danw 1,748]

So long as they leave Dorset just as is we have a great team down here fast service and a very sensible approach to licensing only once have I had issue with them and the resolution was quickly found and to my benefit

[Alsone 789]

I would actually amend my above statement, there should be nationwide rules which have to be adhered to, so if eg. a calibre is recommended in the table, then it would have to be granted if the shooter could show good reason for that quarry and passed all other security checks. However, there should be a discretion to grant a larger calibre outside of the table if special circumstances could be shown. eg someone on a very large estate who shoots at range.

 

This would allow for special circumstances whilst still ensuring the police stuck to the recommended calibres on all other occasions.

[Deker 3,478]

Does make you wonder how we got here with a thread heading Fox Control with a .22, but in fairness I am as much to blame as anyone for this threads meandering path!