Permission question

Everett

Out of couriosity mostly,
I recently seen this in a local news paper, im going to blank names etc..

"THE SPORTING RIGHTS
On my land in the townland of_________ are let to ________ Estate company Limited.All prevoius permission is withdrawn.__Name_______"

But this is the first time i have seen this sort of thing and i am wondering is it the norm when this sort of thing happens.
Also are the permisson holders notified when this occurs also.
E

homerhop

A few of the farmers up this way will let lads in shooting crops and coming up to Nov put an ad in the paper saying lands preserved all previous permision revoked. Its their land and not a thing ya can do about it. Comme next harvest and they ask you to shoot over the crops and you refuse next thing they have an ass load of "other folk" in shooting and once they get in around the place it can be a disaster.

pedroeibar1

I'd need to do more research before I was certain, but I THINK that the reason is as follows :

The charge for entering onto somebody's land is trespass.

Under Section 44 (4) (i) of the Wildlife act 1976 anyone shooting over land that is preserved can be prosecuted for poaching provided
(i) prior to the relevant time a notice stating that sporting rights specified in the notice over land so specified have been reserved for the body is published in a newspaper circulating in the area in which the relevant land is situate, .............

IMO it would not be necessary to advise all permission holders individually, but were they known it would be both good practice and a courtesy.
FWIW
P.

Everett

So basically when the seasons come in the Gun clubs take over the land, and if you dont read the paper and take a trip up to your usual spot you will be done for trespassing.

homerhop

They have to poster the land in spots that will be clearly visivble also.

bunny shooter

Everett wrote: »

So basically when the seasons come in the Gun clubs take over the land,..............

homerhop wrote: »

They have to poster the land in spots that will be clearly visivble also.

Which can only happen with the permission of the landowner.

homerhop

if the farmers are advertising in the paper that club x have the shooting rights, club x also have to put up lands preserved signs, advertising in the paper alone is not good enough if they are going to go down the road of prosecuting for trespass. You have to do both, with permission of the farmers.

bunny shooter

So if club x does that can they prosecute without farmers consent?

cavan shooter

Everett wrote: »

Out of couriosity mostly,
I recently seen this in a local news paper, im going to blank names etc..

"THE SPORTING RIGHTS
On my land in the townland of_________ are let to ________ Estate company Limited.All prevoius permission is withdrawn.__Name_______"

But this is the first time i have seen this sort of thing and i am wondering is it the norm when this sort of thing happens.
Also are the permisson holders notified when this occurs also.
E

There is more to that than a local gun club, this is been picked up for the tourist shooting market

cavan shooter

bunny shooter wrote: »

So if club x does that can they prosecute without farmers consent?

From my knowledge, you still need the Farmers permission unless you "own the rights"


This shooting rights lark is causing real hassel, Most farmers will let a club or individual shoot by "permission" but mention shooting rights and lately your sent packing. That was my experience lately when re signing club lands.

pedroeibar1

bunny shooter wrote: »

Which can only happen with the permission of the landowner.

Not quite Bunny ....... not splitting hairs, but it is the owner of the sporting rights that has to give permission, and he/she/it is not necessarily the owner of the lands. The owner of the sporting rights has an automatic right to enter onto the lands to exercise those rights. AFAIK there now is a question mark over whether or not his invitees/assignees have the same rights of entry and if he can bring a dog with him. I wish I could find out about this, it is rumoured to be a district court case in Kerry that never was appealed to the Circuit court.. The holder of the Rights (or a Club Sec if held by a Club) can bring a case for trespass, and if the lands have been advertised as a reserve/game preserve in the local press additionally an action for poaching can be brought.

Section 15 (2) of the Game Preservation Act of 1930 (which was repealed by the 1976 Act) had a similar clause on advertising locally, said and notice of such reservation has been published on two separate occasions in a newspaper circulating in the district in which such lands are situate,... The 1076 Act refers to only one advert. Neither requires the land to be ‘posted’ ...personally. I regard those signs as a magnet for poachers.
If someone is caught, unusually for a prosecution, it shall not be necessary for the prosecutor to prove that a defendant was on the land without lawful authority and, in case a defendant claims that he was on the land with lawful authority, the onus of proving such authority shall be on the defendant.

Rs
P.

homerhop

Pedro we prosecuted quiet a few years ago and the judge asked was the land clearly postered by the club and secondly did we put a lands preserved notice in the paper.

pedroeibar1

homerhop wrote: »

Pedro we prosecuted quiet a few years ago and the judge asked was the land clearly postered by the club and secondly did we put a lands preserved notice in the paper.

Homer,
Neither the 1930 nor the 1976 Acts as far as I have seen (had a quick read today) include a requirement to post notices. Actually, I regard signs as a magnet for poachers. Your solicitor should have quoted the relev. part of the Act at the DJ. Most are clueless and need to be led by the hand. There is a guy sitting in the Circuit Court at the moment who found a passenger 45% and CIE 65% liable for an injury. You need a good hungry solicitor with an interest in the case, not some old fart, and he/she needs encouragement. (Like a haunch, or a brace at Christmas )
Rs
P.

homerhop

We won the case as we had both signs up and notice in the paper, despite pressure to have it dropped, those being prosecuted were drinking buddies of the local boys in blue.
The signs being a magnet for poachers is an interesting theory, would love if ya would explain more on that one. I agree with signs for the sole reason that it shows that there is an active club in the area.
There was a discussion here last year where lads said they just walked onto lands they didnt have permission to shoot on feeling it was not a problem till they were stopped which i feel is another good reason for signs. Poachers are going to poach no matter what signs are up or not.

pedroeibar1

homerhop wrote: »

We won the case as we had both signs up and notice in the paper, despite pressure to have it dropped, those being prosecuted were drinking buddies of the local boys in blue.

That’s a hard call – I'd have given them one warning and then gone for them. The signs being up copper-fastened the notice in the paper – bet the DJ said to the BoysinB afterwards, ‘Couldn’t do anything for ye lads, they had it all covered!’

homerhop wrote: »

The signs being a magnet for poachers is an interesting theory, would love if ya would explain more on that one. I agree with signs for the sole reason that it shows that there is an active club in the area.
There was a discussion here last year where lads said they just walked onto lands they didnt have permission to shoot on feeling it was not a problem till they were stopped which i feel is another good reason for signs. Poachers are going to poach no matter what signs are up or not.

If you have signs up casual guys driving by will see them and come back midweek in the early morning or usually near dusk which really unsettles birds en route to roost . Last year we caught a guy in full camo playing Rambo in a bush with an air rifle – said he was 'only after rabbits', but he was pointing at a cover crop. Another time, a guy with a springer was walking up a cover crop we had on a field margin – ‘Oh, I didn’t know this was part of your land, I’ve always shot here’ –total BS, but in fairness he produced a NARGC card as ID and nearly sh~t himself when we said we were prosecuting. (We didn't, but let him stew.) Most will admit to seeing signs on a different field which is always why they are hunting the one they were caught on! Some people willl chance anything and will shoot boundary fields/ditches which (I maintain) unsettles birds and drives them away from the Shoot area.
We have the signs debate every season and no doubt it will start again when more are around next month. Personally, I find it difficult not to agree with the illegal acts of the gamekeeper in North Dublin who uses a knife on the tyres of cars with dog boxes parked on his land. ('Jays lads, yer fierce lucky its only a couple of tyres, it must have been young fellas out for divillment and not the thieves we had down here robbin cars and trailers last week.')
Rs
P.