Can hunters close down a forest?

loobylou

Went out for a walk yesterday in a local Coillte forest. As I pulled up at the entrance another car arrived. A passenger got out with a printed sign and told me I could'nt use the forest as they were going in there with guns.
Now this forest has 3 other entrances so anyone could be already in there. Indeed, had I arrived there two minutes earlier they would not have seen me.
Is this normal practice? It seems very unsafe to me.

It wasn't me!

Nothing unsafe, as all shots will have a well-chosen backstop to prevent the bullet going anywhere except where it's expected. It serves as much to warn people that if they see guys with guns and carcases, it's perfectly normal, and anyone who's squeamish about such things is warned that today might not be a good day to go walking.

loobylou

Thanks for the quick reply.
So, the forest is'nt officially closed? This is the impression they were giving, although they did choose their wording carefully.

BUACHAILL

This would be normal procedure. The sign that was shown to you would be a Coillte made sign which in fairness does prohibit anyone entering into forest once firearms are in use, problem is most people ignore it and go in anyway. It is impossible to stop people going in beforehand and if there are other gates or entrances its very possible signs were also put on these gates to help make people aware.

In reference to safety of them shooting while people are in woods and huters not being aware its not a big risk generally speaking but certainly not ideal, Hunters would be very aware of the lands they shoot and where is and is not safe to do so !

Having Coillte land myself its a problem which arises every year. Hunters pay a lot of money for the grounds they shoot. They need to be out of wood by 11.00 and dont start until sunrise so at minute gives them about 4 hours of shooting time, considering the money we pay its not a lot of time and the first and foremost in all of this is safety. It makes hunters very uneasy being in a forest knowing you have walkers in it and being quite frank a lot of times ruins the chances of seeing deer as there is normally dogs etc with the walkers. This is hugely frustrating and an issue Coillte should look at but they wont as they are driven by money.

I have come across people who see the signs and just completely ignore them, this boils my blood, its the same people who give out about safety etc but ignore thats its actually for there own good.

How did the hunter handle the situation ? Did you continue in or turn back ?
It is an order of Coillte that forest is now out of use until the hunters have left

J. Ramone

I'm curious as to what time of day they arrived. A condition of most Coillte deer shooting leases is that all shooting must cease by 11am especially in forests with high public usage. This means most shooters would arrive and have their signs in place very early in the morning well before any walkers would arrive.

It sounds to me that they have scant regard for other peoples recreation. As you said their operation of the signage seems very ineffective. It sounds to me like an attitude of "I paid my money and can order people around".

BUACHAILL

J. Ramone wrote: »

I'm curious as to what time of day they arrived. A condition of most Coillte deer shooting leases is that all shooting must cease by 11am especially in forests with high public usage. This means most shooters would arrive and have their signs in place very early in the morning well before any walkers would arrive.

It sounds to me that they have scant regard for other peoples recreation. As you said their operation of the signage seems very ineffective. It sounds to me like an attitude of "I paid my money and can order people around".

Thats a ridiculous statement to make.

If it was within the time allowed, be interesting to hear what time it was ? I know I have different forests some that I would not get to till later in the day but still before 11 !! I am entitled to be there and put up my signs.

they are entitled to approach somebody and make them aware of the situation. if they are going in with firearms people should abide by the rules of the forest laid down by coillte, not the hunters themselves.

Its nothing personal to somebodys recreation it for their own saftey !!

dCorbus

Here's some info from the Coillte site, which may help explain things: http://www.coillte.ie/fileadmin/user_upload/pdfs/Coillte_Eng_17.pdf

And here's the Code of Practice from Coillte regarding hunting on Coillte land: http://www.coillte.ie/fileadmin/user_upload/pdfs/MOF_Code_of_practice_Game_Shooting.pdf

Here's a copy of the signage which should be erected:



So the forest isn't "officially closed" as a forest by its nature cannot be officially closed. However as private lands, as a walker, you may not actually have rights to walk it AFAIK whilst the hunter with permission does have such right.

It would only seem sensible to heed such warning signs and avoid areas of forest where hunters are active.

That said, and as mentioned above, the majority of hunters will be fully aware of the importance of taking a safe shot, so the "danger" is somewhat minimised. However, personally, I'd err on the side of caution and take a route which wouldn't bring me into the hunting grounds.

meathstevie

BUACHAILL wrote: »

This would be normal procedure. The sign that was shown to you would be a Coillte made sign which in fairness does prohibit anyone entering into forest once firearms are in use, problem is most people ignore it and go in anyway. It is impossible to stop people going in beforehand and if there are other gates or entrances its very possible signs were also put on these gates to help make people aware.

In reference to safety of them shooting while people are in woods and huters not being aware its not a big risk generally speaking but certainly not ideal, Hunters would be very aware of the lands they shoot and where is and is not safe to do so !

Having Coillte land myself its a problem which arises every year. Hunters pay a lot of money for the grounds they shoot. They need to be out of wood by 11.00 and dont start until sunrise so at minute gives them about 4 hours of shooting time, considering the money we pay its not a lot of time and the first and foremost in all of this is safety. It makes hunters very uneasy being in a forest knowing you have walkers in it and being quite frank a lot of times ruins the chances of seeing deer as there is normally dogs etc with the walkers. This is hugely frustrating and an issue Coillte should look at but they wont as they are driven by money.

I have come across people who see the signs and just completely ignore them, this boils my blood, its the same people who give out about safety etc but ignore thats its actually for there own good.

How did the hunter handle the situation ? Did you continue in or turn back ?
It is an order of Coillte that forest is now out of use until the hunters have left

I've never understood why lads are willing to pay Coilte a small prince's ransom to do what ultimately is their pest control.

BUACHAILL

Yeah agreed meathstevie but we all like to shoot !! Not everyone has private lands to do so

J. Ramone

BUACHAILL wrote: »

Thats a ridiculous statement to make.

If it was within the time allowed, be interesting to hear what time it was ? I know I have different forests some that I would not get to till later in the day but still before 11 !! I am entitled to be there and put up my signs.

they are entitled to approach somebody and make them aware of the situation. if they are going in with firearms people should abide by the rules of the forest laid down by coillte, not the hunters themselves.

Its nothing personal to somebodys recreation it for their own saftey !!

I don't see how you find my point to be ridiculous. How difficult can it be to plan your morning, put up sufficient signs on the various entrances. Can you picture the possibility of a family with young children walking through a wood while 100 yards away a hunter lines up a beast with his .270. At least if the hunter used a bit of cop on regarding signage such a situation would be avoided.

BUACHAILL

J. Ramone wrote: »

I don't see how you find my point to be ridiculous. How difficult can it be to plan your morning, put up sufficient signs on the various entrances. Can you picture the possibility of a family with young children walking through a wood while 100 yards away a hunter lines up a beast with his .270. At least if the hunter used a bit of cop on regarding signage such a situation would be avoided.

Firstly if you listened to the original poster they were both only arriving at forest. Sounds like the guy involved was putting up the sign as they approached. Whats wrong with him explaining his position ? what exactly did he do wrong ? If he was in there with no signs I would whole heartedly agree with you but he was entering wood at same time which he is fully entitled to do anytime before 11.00. You then go on to just assume that he now has an issue with walkers and its an attitude or chip on his shouders that as he pays for shooting he can say get out !! That in my eyes is ridiculous !

dCorbus

@ loobylou, it seems pretty critical to the advice the lads can give you if you could clarify what time of day you met the hunters.

Now, any deer hunters I know will be at their land, have the signage put up (if it's coillte land), had a cup of tea, got their gear ready, and be all set to go stalking before the sun even rises!

I'd question the activities of anyone else (who's not a hunter) wandering around a forest, before day break. So I can only presume it was much later when you arrived?

So, the chances of the public / walkers arriving at the forest before the signs go up (i.e. before dawn) are pretty slim and anyone entering into the forest pre-dawn for whatever reason must have a good reason to be there and should have made themselves aware of the implications that shooting may commence on sunrise.

BUACHAILL

dCorbus wrote: »

@ loobylou, it seems pretty critical to the advice the lads can give you if you could clarify what time of day you met the hunters.

Now, any deer hunters I know will be at their land, have the signage put up (if it's coillte land), had a cup of tea, got their gear ready, and be all set to go stalking before the sun even rises!

I'd question the activities of anyone else (who's not a hunter) wandering around a forest, before day break. So I can only presume it was much later when you arrived?

So, the chances of the public / walkers arriving at the forest before the signs go up (i.e. before dawn), is pretty slim and anyone entering into the forest pre-dawn for whatever reason must have a good reason to be there and should have made themselves aware of the implications that shooting may commence on sunrise.

This is generally always how it works but I arrive at other woods later on in morning as I have 4 to cover, wont ever go to all 4 on one day as just not possible but that said do arrive to forests at different times.

J. Ramone

BUACHAILL wrote: »

Firstly if you listened to the original poster they were both only arriving at forest. Sounds like the guy involved was putting up the sign as they approached. Whats wrong with him explaining his position ? what exactly did he do wrong ? If he was in there with no signs I would whole heartedly agree with you but he was entering wood at same time which he is fully entitled to do anytime before 11.00. You then go on to just assume that he now has an issue with walkers and its an attitude or chip on his shouders that as he pays for shooting he can say get out !! That in my eyes is ridiculous !

Maybe we are both making too many assumptions. To be clear I think it is foolhardy of anyone to ignore such signs. Yes it is only fair that the hunter should expect the public will take heed for their own safety and the comfort of all.

Read the original post again and you will see that the walker had arrived just before the other car had arrived so in theory they were not prevented from accessing but ordered out. The OP would have been within their rights to say tough luck, I was here first. The only argument against that would be - "I'm the one who is paying for the use of this ground" - or at a stretch "I've a very important job to do". In any event even the most tolerant of individuals would feel somewhat put out. If you read the Coillte guidelines linked above, it would appear this is the type of situation they would like their leaseholders to avoid.

What did he do wrong? Well contrary to the Coillte guidance, he observed other user(s) and continued hunting. Fair enough though if it its a remote location where walkers would need a car to get there and thus indicate their presence and he had checked the other two entrances.

I live beside a Coillte forest which has high public usage including my own and have to say that I've never heard a bad word locally about the shooting leasees.

BUACHAILL

J. Ramone wrote: »

Maybe we are both making too many assumptions. To be clear I think it is foolhardy of anyone to ignore such signs. Yes it is only fair that the hunter should expect the public will take heed for their own safety and the comfort of all.

Read the original post again and you will see that the walker had arrived just before the other car had arrived so in theory they were not prevented from accessing but ordered out. The OP would have been within their rights to say tough luck, I was here first. The only argument against that would be - "I'm the one who is paying for the use of this ground" - or at a stretch "I've a very important job to do". In any event even the most tolerant of individuals would feel somewhat put out. If you read the Coillte guidelines linked above, it would appear this is the type of situation they would like their leaseholders to avoid.

What did he do wrong? Well contrary to the Coillte guidance, he observed other user(s) and continued hunting. Fair enough though if it its a remote location where walkers would need a car to get there and thus indicate their presence and he had checked the other two entrances.

OK well did he continue hunting ? I would like the op to clear a few things here. Firstly what time was it? Who had actually arrived first ?( even though tough luck doesnt cut it by sounds of it neither had entered the forest ) , What happened when he approached you and said you shouldnt enter ? How did he put it across was he smart, aggressive etc? What did the op do once he had said it to them , did they proceed into to the forrest or not ? What did the hunter do if that was the case ?

Lets not assume anything can you please clarify ???

garv123

interisting to read this.
my parents were one of them people ye all hate who build their houses in brilliant fields for shooting deer:rolleyes: (wood behind us and wood infront of us)
deer used travel threw the garden to get from one wood to the other and in the rest of the big field behind and beside us.
but there always used be signs up in the wood at all hours of the day. cant remember what they looked like but they were for shooting. we used always cycle in the wood but didnt when the signs were up. and they were sometimes there in the evening. so this guy had no right to be in there did he?

BUACHAILL

garv123 wrote: »

interisting to read this.
my parents were one of them people ye all hate who build their houses in brilliant fields for shooting deer:rolleyes: (wood behind us and wood infront of us)
deer used travel threw the garden to get from one wood to the other and in the rest of the big field behind and beside us.
but there always used be signs up in the wood at all hours of the day. cant remember what they looked like but they were for shooting. we used always cycle in the wood but didnt when the signs were up. and they were sometimes there in the evening. so this guy had no right to be in there did he?

It just depends who it was doing the shooting, who owns the forest there are exceptions other than times listed on Coillte's Site.

loobylou

To clarify, it was 09.30 Sun morning. Its not the wood I usually walk in, that was not accessable due to snow conditions.
The guys pulled up at the same time as me, but ahead of me if you know what I mean.
The forest is not isolated, ie one would not need a car to get there.
The guy I spoke to was not in any way rude, he just said I was'nt allowed into the forest.

BUACHAILL

loobylou wrote: »

To clarify, it was 09.30 Sun morning. Its not the wood I usually walk in, that was not accessable due to snow conditions.
The guys pulled up at the same time as me, but ahead of me if you know what I mean.
The forest is not isolated, ie one would not need a car to get there.
The guy I spoke to was not in any way rude, he just said I was'nt allowed into the forest.

Thanks for the clarity.
What happened at the end of it all ? did you leave ? Did he continue on etc ?

Thanks again

Anto...

ah lads tbh i think yere going into way to much detail about this whole thing!

BUACHAILL

Anto... wrote: »

ah lads tbh i think yere going into way to much detail about this whole thing!

I don't ! I think it's important to be fair, it's all about safety and at the end of the day you cannot be safe enough, however if the hunter has done something wrong it's something that should be reported to coillte. However if the folks ignored these signs etc it should also be noted!!

So again can the op please explain what the outcome was ??

J. Ramone

Maybe I was a bit judgemental about the shooter but I did recall this post
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055208362&highlight=goats+coillte mind you the poster does seem to have an agenda other than safety so I would take the details with a pinch of salt.
Public interaction on Coillte lettings has the potential to become very bad PR for shooting if common sense isn't applied.

nessie911

J. Ramone wrote: »

Maybe we are both making too many assumptions. To be clear I think it is foolhardy of anyone to ignore such signs. Yes it is only fair that the hunter should expect the public will take heed for their own safety and the comfort of all.

Read the original post again and you will see that the walker had arrived just before the other car had arrived so in theory they were not prevented from accessing but ordered out. The OP would have been within their rights to say tough luck, I was here first. The only argument against that would be - "I'm the one who is paying for the use of this ground" - or at a stretch "I've a very important job to do". In any event even the most tolerant of individuals would feel somewhat put out. If you read the Coillte guidelines linked above, it would appear this is the type of situation they would like their leaseholders to avoid.

What did he do wrong? Well contrary to the Coillte guidance, he observed other user(s) and continued hunting. Fair enough though if it its a remote location where walkers would need a car to get there and thus indicate their presence and he had checked the other two entrances.

I live beside a Coillte forest which has high public usage including my own and have to say that I've never heard a bad word locally about the shooting leasees.

Why should the walker have more rites than the hunter, may be coillte should charge people for walking through there forests, or ever walk way in the country which goes through private land should charge too. Because hunter seems to always have to pay, and ask permission to go any where. In the long run they are doing a job, they are keeping down the numbers of animals. where as the walker is only walking for recreation.

J. Ramone

nessie911 wrote: »

Why should the walker have more rites than the hunter, may be coillte should charge people for walking through there forests, or ever walk way in the country which goes through private land should charge too. Because hunter seems to always have to pay, and ask permission to go any where. In the long run they are doing a job, they are keeping down the numbers of animals. where as the walker is only walking for recreation.

Maybe because Coillte (for now) is under public ownership and should have some regard to the public who indirectly own it. In many areas Coillte forests are the only large tracts of semi wild landscape open to the public for recreation.

BUACHAILL

A few of that public you speak of who indirectly own it also shoot it so what is their position??? Coillte have no loyalties to the hunters who pay top money for it's land yet you expect them to bend over for the casual person who fancys a stroll on it's land ?!

Your view point is disturbed and certainly not rational !! We have woods for a few hours every morning and it's begrudged by people.

How about walkers pay for their use of the woods after all it's only a recreation in most uneducated minds that hunters are actually needed?? It's laughable at best to hear your views!!

Now can somebody please clarify what exactly happened on Sunday morning or do I have to ??

clivej

You think that's bad I have part of the munster way route through my shoot.
Walkers, bikers, and the like a plenty, I just have to take extra care.

loobylou

nessie911 wrote: »

Why should the walker have more rites than the hunter, may be coillte should charge people for walking through there forests, or ever walk way in the country which goes through private land should charge too. Because hunter seems to always have to pay, and ask permission to go any where. In the long run they are doing a job, they are keeping down the numbers of animals. where as the walker is only walking for recreation.

I don't want or expect any more rights than anyone else. I only wanted to walk in a publically owned forest. I am quite willing to share my use of the forest with others, horseriders, mountainbikers, etc.
I do not expect exclusive use of the forest for my own activity to the detriment of everyone else. At the very least, if hunters are to be using a forest at a given time, prior notice of this should be given by way of signage or website so that I and others can have an alternative.
It was the arbitrary nature of the arrangement that annoyed me. Had I arrived 30 secs before him would I have been allowed use the forest? If I did would I be breaking any law?
As it happened I walked perhaps 50 metres along the track (for the dogs sake:o) and turned back and went elsewhere. The hunters drove away.

Traumadoc

If timber cutting was going on you would be asked not to enter. Deer culling is part of forest management.

(BTW mountain biking and horse riding are banned in most coillte forrests- as a keen mountain biker I know)

sikastag

Its amazing the ammount of times Ive been told I shouldnt be in such a forest even when the coillte specified signs have been put at every entrance. Its even more amazing the ammount of times Ive been told this by people whose dog is running willy nilly around the forest! That being said, a brief explanation about what its all about and most people are satisfied. We do not access these forests outside the times laid out by coillte because were not supposed to. It would be both dangerous and negligent to do so, similarily it would also be dangerous and negligent of someone towards their 'own' safety to access the forest when signs have been put in place. We have to put up signs for safety of others. Casual walkers should have their dog on a lead for the safety of the fauna. And everybody should follow the guidlines/rules for overall safety of everybody within that environment.

BUACHAILL

Right a few things I need to clarify!!

The guys were at the gate, before you and had said sorry no access as we are going in with firearms ? Yet you still proceeded into the forest ? The guys then drove off ?? Sounds to me like these lads did nothing wrong and handled the situation very well and even though they pay for the shooting still turned away as you insisted on going in anyway ?? Where in all of this do u not realise it's for your own safety and they actually had a right to suggest such measures?

Doesn't sound to me at all that these lads had a chip on their shoulders as some suggested just because they pay for the use !! In relation to the system and the signs they use that's a coillte issue, set out by coillte not the hunters we only follow orders.

Finally why you after entering woods anyway and hunters driving off you decide 50 yards in to turn back for your dogs sake is simply laughable. What about your own sake forget your bloody dog. Yes we love our animals but how you put their safety over your own just totally confuses me !! And at the end of the day hunters hadn't even gone in so what was the threat ??

I think it would be better served for coillte to put a condition on all woods that people cannot walk them until after 11 or 12 ?? This I feel would be the simplest way around it all but I think walkers would be outraged at the idea and in all probability ignore the request regardless.

kildare.17hmr

That sounds like a very easy solution, signs go up on every coilte forrest that will be shot saying from the "1st sept walking is not permitted between sunrise and 11am" or whatever. probably not that easy to do but surly it cant be that bloody hard for them. i can see how much of a headach this must be for lads payin big money for leases

homerhop

It wouldnt matter if you put up flashing neon signs for people not to enter, you will always get those few who will not be told what to do. I was at a local flapper a few years ago where a woman insisted on walking across the line of guns with her dog, even though there were signs up for no entry shooting in progress. It was a case of how dare anyone tell her she couldnt.

J. Ramone

BUACHAILL wrote: »

Now can somebody please clarify what exactly happened on Sunday morning or do I have to ??

Was it you then?

Putting a sign up in advance is hardly bending over backwards, it's just common sense. It doesn't make sense to me to put up a sign at 9.30 at the entrance to a wood when walkers etc possibly are already in the wood without any warning that they are likely to encounter deer shooting. What's irrational or disturbed about that viewpoint?

I shoot deer and game and am fully in favour of the Coillte estate being available for shooting and other activities for the benefit of the public. If I had the spare cash for a Coillte lease, I would be happy with the guidelines currently in place.

tfox

garv123 wrote: »

interisting to read this.
my parents were one of them people ye all hate who build their houses in brilliant fields for shooting deer:rolleyes: (wood behind us and wood infront of us)
deer used travel threw the garden to get from one wood to the other and in the rest of the big field behind and beside us.
but there always used be signs up in the wood at all hours of the day. cant remember what they looked like but they were for shooting. we used always cycle in the wood but didnt when the signs were up. and they were sometimes there in the evening. so this guy had no right to be in there did he?

Evening shooting is allowed on Coilte lets from 2 hours before sunset provided that it is done from high seats approved by the forrester. A lot of lets that are used frequently by walkers are specified as been only shot during the weekdays where there is less chance of walkers being about.

Sounds like the guys who were going shooting did everything by the book and handled it wel IMHO

BUACHAILL

I was simply going to give an account of what happened as per we were told by the op , read my previous post.


J.Ramone do you actually shoot on Coillte ground ? I have forests 20 miles apart in some cases depending which ones I shoot on any given morning. I generally decide which forest to hit first depending on weather, temp etc as I know some forest will shoot better at certain times. So when I shoot the first one I make up my mind as to the second one if I am having no joy ! I generally know which one will shoot better as soon as I get into the first one. I am shooting these forests a long time.

So if I was to do what you suggest I would need to hit everywood I have and put a sign on every entrance to them woods ? for the argument thats 17 gates needing signs with a distance of around 50 miles between them all !! lets be honest here its not going to happen so I question your logic. The guys on Sunday are not obliged to do what your suggesting although I do agree in Theory it would help ( provided people abide by signs ) which doesnt happen in most instances anyway. In practice its just not realistic or workable so you have no right to suggest these guys need more common sense they after all have done nothing wrong !!

BUACHAILL

tfox wrote: »

Evening shooting is allowed on Coilte lets from 2 hours before sunset provided that it is done from high seats approved by the forrester. A lot of lets that are used frequently by walkers are specified as been only shot during the weekdays where there is less chance of walkers being about.

Sounds like the guys who were going shooting did everything by the book and handled it wel IMHO

yes thats 100 percent , also Coillte have gamekeepers who can enter and shoot any of their forests at anytime of that day if they recognise a need to do so. There are lots of reasons for this.

J. Ramone

BUACHAILL wrote: »

I was simply going to give an account of what happened as per we were told by the op , read my previous post.


J.Ramone do you actually shoot on Coillte ground ? I have forests 20 miles apart in some cases depending which ones I shoot on any given morning. I generally decide which forest to hit first depending on weather, temp etc as I know some forest will shoot better at certain times. So when I shoot the first one I make up my mind as to the second one if I am having no joy ! I generally know which one will shoot better as soon as I get into the first one. I am shooting these forests a long time.

So if I was to do what you suggest I would need to hit everywood I have and put a sign on every entrance to them woods ? for the argument thats 17 gates needing signs with a distance of around 50 miles between them all !! lets be honest here its not going to happen so I question your logic. The guys on Sunday are not obliged to do what your suggesting although I do agree in Theory it would help ( provided people abide by signs ) which doesnt happen in most instances anyway. In practice its just not realistic or workable so you have no right to suggest these guys need more common sense they after all have done nothing wrong !!

As I Said, I don't. I appreciate what you are saying and agree that your approach would be reasonable in relation to remote forests where you are unlikely to have any unsuspecting public if there is no car present. The details of the original post were misleading and it did look like the hunter was pushing his weight around. In high access woodlands/forests beside villages or towns, such as the one beside where I live, should be posted before anyone unwittingly enters without warning.

BUACHAILL

J. Ramone wrote: »

As I Said, I don't. I appreciate what you are saying and agree that your approach would be reasonable in relation to remote forests where you are unlikely to have any unsuspecting public if there is no car present. The details of the original post were misleading and it did look like the hunter was pushing his weight around. In high access woodlands/forests beside villages or towns, such as the one beside where I live, should be posted before anyone unwittingly enters without warning.

While I do agree with that line of thinking to say its upto the hunters to do this is incorrect. You suggested hunters should have more common sense and I simply gave you the perspective from a hunter and why your comments were imo unjust and in practice just not realistic. Nobody denys that doing like you suggest would help.

Hunters pay Coillte to shoot these woods, its upto Coillte to make sure that all high traffic woods are kept as safe as possible if for nothing else to cover their own ass. Signs should be errected by coillte and be on show at all times restricting access for walkers to the forest up till 11 as already suggested.

nessie911

loobylou wrote: »

At the very least, if hunters are to be using a forest at a given time, prior notice of this should be given by way of signage or website so that I and others can have an alternative.
It was the arbitrary nature of the arrangement that annoyed me. Had I arrived 30 secs before him would I have been allowed use the forest? If I did would I be breaking any law? The hunters drove away.

Did you seen them entering the forest. May be they were putting up the signs and were going to return later on but before 11, so they are given people the chance to get out of the forest.

So like in a way they could be given notice to people, as they are displaying the signs in advance of entering the forrest.

J. Ramone

BUACHAILL wrote: »

While I do agree with that line of thinking to say its upto the hunters to do this is incorrect. You suggested hunters should have more common sense and I simply gave you the perspective from a hunter and why your comments were imo unjust and in practice just not realistic. Nobody denys that doing like you suggest would help.

Hunters pay Coillte to shoot these woods, its upto Coillte to make sure that all high traffic woods are kept as safe as possible if for nothing else to cover their own ass. Signs should be errected by coillte and be on show at all times restricting access for walkers to the forest up till 11 as already suggested.

That's where we'll agree to disagree then. Surely it's up to the hunter to organise their stalk without scaring the daylights out of the public.

It would be no harm for Coillte to post general warning signs in conjunction with the hunters sign anyway. If the public were more aware of the times involved, I think they would feel less put out. Unpleasant surprises put shooters in a very bad light imo.

BUACHAILL

Firstly we are getting off topic, guys who asked op to not enter were perfectly entitled to do so and clearly the op without common regard for themselves or the shooters ignored the request, its the same person on seeing if they were entitled to do so even though without knowledge either way purely ignored them at the time anyway.

its not upto hunters to do anything of the sort, they're only request is upon entry to forest signs must be put up to notify the public they are in there and these guys did that, nothing can be done about others gone in beforehand and shots only ever get taken in the safest of manner so others inside are still relatively safe even if its not ideal. Your forgetting that hunters have as much rights if not more rights to be there as they are paying for the service and are authorised to be there, walkers do not pay so why shouldnt the hunters have the forest to do their culling for the few hours ?? people in general go in regardless so its there stupidity in the first place that causes all this crap.

clivej

BUACHAILL wrote: »

Firstly we are getting off topic, guys who asked op to not enter were perfectly entitled to do so and clearly the op without common regard for themselves or the shooters ignored the request, its the same person on seeing if they were entitled to do so even though without knowledge either way purely ignored them at the time anyway.

its not upto hunters to do anything of the sort, they're only request is upon entry to forest signs must be put up to notify the public they are in there and these guys did that, nothing can be done about others gone in beforehand and shots only ever get taken in the safest of manner so others inside are still relatively safe even if its not ideal. Your forgetting that hunters have as much rights if not more rights to be there as they are paying for the service and are authorised to be there, walkers do not pay so why shouldnt the hunters have the forest to do their culling for the few hours ?? people in general go in regardless so its there stupidity in the first place that causes all this crap.

And this is why we all have the insurance in place before we go hunting isn't it.

BUACHAILL

clivej wrote: »

And this is why we all have the insurance in place before we go hunting isn't it.

It sure is but still rather not have to use it !

loobylou

Hi,
Just to clear some things up. I have no axe to grind here, I'm not a member of any anti hunting lobby or anything like that.
I simply want to know the legal situation.
I have seen these signs before at forest entrances and have simply gone elsewhere. The situation here to my mind is different.
From my reading of posts here the signs are a "request" not to enter, dressed up as an instruction. If this is the case and the public are being asked to stay away whilst some people pursue their sport, I don't think its unreasonable that they give that same public some prior notice.
For example, there is another forest I sometimes use, Ballinastoe in Co. Wicklow.
This also has a bikers trail laid out where there are occassional sporting events.
The organisers put up clear signs at the forest entrance at least a week prior, giving times,dates,regretting any inconvenience,etc.
Why can't hunters do something similar? Then everyone could give the area a wide berth and we'd all be happy. At the very least maybe they should notify Coillte when they will be shooting and a notice could be put up on their website.

kildare.17hmr

your ideas are good in theory but as was already explained they are not good in prtactice. the events you mentioned like the mountain biking are organised events for a group of people and probably work off a calander and schedual weeks in advance, the lads who go hunting may only decide to go to a particular spot at 9am if they are not having luck in a different spot. so it is unreasonable to expect them put up signs on every shooting ground they may or may not shoot!

BUACHAILL

Ok firstly coillte work on a permissable access basis. This means that while public are allowed entrance to the forest they can also close off access at anytime they see fit if there is a concern for safety to the public. These signs are given to is by coillte and although a recreation to us we are still culling on behalf of them. Legally the stance on this is unclear to me but I will try find out. That said this permissable access is a bye law so take of it what you will.

I also do not see how your situation is any different the hunters were at the gate and showed you sign, you chose to ignore it. In relation to your argument that you receive notice to occasional sporting events in forests hunting is not an occasional sporting event, we have licence for 6 months of the year and if so wish can shoot everyday of the 6 months just no comparison. It is also a request by contract that we give coillte 48 hrs notice to them any wood which is being shot and the days involved, we have out hours of hunting set out by them so that is not requested.

I have put myself in your position in all this discussion and I have a few things that for me having been put in your position I would have been uncomfortable with. You arrive at a forest you don't normally walk, you do not give any notice as it's not requested yet you pay nothing for your recreation , you are met by hunters who advise you of their intentions with live firearms and clearly show you the sign and you with total disregard for your own safety continue in anyway.

I do think your idea of a notice on the website stating forests in use etc is a good idea and I know for a fact it's something that coillte are looking at but regardless you will still have people like yourself who even though they are asked to stay away don't bother so this will continue to keep being an issue. For all your questions of legalitys and stand points can I ask what difference this would make god forbidding some freak accident occured and you were hit by a bullet ? Wouldn't really matter at that stage would it ?? It's there for a reason your safety, not to just cause people disruption so why not just go with it nobody wants an accident.

buckshotbrolan

I would like to know what the going rate is to shoot onCoillte land for a season? Thanks.

BUACHAILL

buckshotbrolan wrote: »

I would like to know what the going rate is to shoot onCoillte land for a season? Thanks.

can I ask what it's has to do with this thread ?? I will answer it anyway.

No such thing as a going rate, it goes to tender so it's what people are prepared to pay. I do know of certain woods going for in excess of 20k per year and I know there is more expensive than that.


However you won't get anyone on telling you what they paid as they don't want to be outbid when tenders come back around!!

buckshotbrolan

BUACHAILL wrote: »

can I ask what it's has to do with this thread ?? I will answer it anyway.

No such thing as a going rate, it goes to tender so it's what people are prepared to pay. I do know of certain woods going for in excess of 20k per year and I know there is more expensive than that.


However you won't get anyone on telling you what they paid as they don't want to be outbid when tenders come back around!!

Wow, if people are paying that kinda money then you would think Coillte would make the woods exclusive for hunters.
Boggels the mind that people would pay that kinda money, glad I shoot my deer for free!!
Thanks for replying.

BUACHAILL

buckshotbrolan wrote: »

Wow, if people are paying that kinda money then you would think Coillte would make the woods exclusive for hunters.
Boggels the mind that people would pay that kinda money, glad I shoot my deer for free!!
Thanks for replying.

I'm sure you can probably appreciate now why hunters get very frustrated when people ignore safety requests and ruin a mornings shooting!!

loobylou

The current situation is plain dumb. I'm trying to tease out something better.
On the plus side, my wife now understands soccers offside rule.
Once you get one foot into the forest, before the sign goes up, then you're onside:D