New Zealand lamping tragedy (lampers beware)

zulu_dawn

New Zealand lamping tragedy
http://www.bds.org.uk/deer_journal.html
[Winter 2010/11 Deer journal – Page 7]


A New Zealand deer stalker who shot and killed a young schoolteacher after mistaking her for a deer faces a term of imprisonment for manslaughter when he is sentenced in February. Andrew Neville David Mears, 25, admitted the manslaughter of 25-year-old Rosemary Ives in Taupo District Court.
Mears and two companions were lamping for deer near the campsite where Ives was holidaying on October 22. She was cleaning her teeth before going to bed when Mears mistook a light on her head for the eyes of a deer.
He had breached a Department of Conservation permit condition forbidding him to shoot during the hours of darkness, he had taken no heed of basic firearms safety rules and had illegally shot from a moving vehicle.
Applauding the decision to upgrade the charge from the less serious offence of recklessly using a firearm, New Zealand Deerstalkers’ Association national president Alec McIver said he believed manslaughter was the only plausible charge: “Hunters of all ages need
to observe high standards of ethics and safety while hunting and above all, the terms of their permits which authorise them to hunt,” he commented.

landkeeper

deserves what he gets!!!feckin idoit but that is little consolation to the family of the dead woman
there was a young lad shot in the head a few years ago in yorkshire in similar circumstances
too many idiots with guns out at night time something was done about it there are roads round here where sometimes it's like something from a ufo film and there are no deer :eek:

dermot218

god what a stupid mistake .which cost a young lady her life .u ddnt have to look as far as newzealand for idots fireing frm vans and jeeps .just beacuse u see a set of eyes glowing doesnt mean its ok to shoot

dermot218

if thats the sliabh na calliigh i know there hasnt been deer there in around 15years there was roumors saying a few were let out hence all the activity

garv123

thats just crazy. surely there was a light on in the house. and the vehicle was moving when he fired?

he deserved manslaughter imo.

Arcto

She was camping so that little head torch must have been the only light for miles.

I nearly shot a calf one day with a shotgun, I thought it was a fox. By nearly I mean that I decided not to take the shot (it was through a ditch) because I couldn't ID what I was shooting at. When I got closer it was a calf lying down.

Since then I make 110% sure of wtf I am shooting at and If I am not 110% sure I don't fire.

That probably would have cost me my licence.

Spunk84

One mistake cost him a life and his freedom. Same here I've lamped calves and lambs before and you would swear they where a fox but if I don't see the fox in the scope I won't chance it. Never take the chance if unsure.

FISMA

God bless this woman, her family, and may she rest in peace.

It appears this was an accident. I do feel sorry for the shooter as well. That is some weight to have on your conscience.

To the young shooters, when you are out, if you are over anxious to shoot, it is best to go back to the range and fire off a few thousand more rounds. Lampers should be out to cull and not shoot.

Take your time. Watch out for buck fever. After you rush a shot or two, you'll realize that you often have more time than you think.

With all this said, I find it very difficult to believe I could mistake a human. When we have been out foxing, I have seen everything: donkeys, deer, dogs, sheep, badgers, but never mistook anything for a fox.

I cannot see how this could happen. Don't animals have an extra membrane or something in their eyes that captures light reflected internally - hence the better night vision? Isn't this what we take advantage of when lamping? Any biologists out there?

Again lads, pass up a thousand shots if you do not know your target and what's beyond. This is especially true for us big bores. Any of ye lads with the 30 calibers: 303, 30-06, ... remember your firearm has a six mile kill radius.

Slan

garv123

we have let so many foxes go been 90% sure its a fox. not worth it.

i often have gave a lamp around and think i see a eye, flick off the lamp and the eye is still there. some room light left on miles away. if he turned off the lamp the light would still be there and he'd have realised it wasnt an eye

Tackleberrywho

Lamping should only be done

1. In close partnership with the farmer
2. For use on Nocternal Vermin only
3. should have verified earlier in the day that no animals (or Humas) are on the land when lamping occurs
4. At night 150% attention to detail is required (eyes, can be lights or reflectors. If you can't see quarry clearly in scope DO NOT FIRE

Victor

FISMA wrote: »

It appears this was an accident.

"Accident" implies it is something that couldn't be prevented and that nobody is culpable.

1. He had breached a Department of Conservation permit condition forbidding him to shoot during the hours of darkness,
2. He had taken no heed of basic firearms safety rules and
3. Had illegally shot from a moving vehicle.

The more rules you break, the more likely something will go wrong. Its stops being possible and becomes probable.

johngalway

garv123 wrote: »

we have let so many foxes go been 90% sure its a fox. not worth it.

i often have gave a lamp around and think i see a eye, flick off the lamp and the eye is still there. some room light left on miles away. if he turned off the lamp the light would still be there and he'd have realised it wasnt an eye

Same as with letting foxes go. Another trick is that foxes tend to blink/look away the odd time.

Victor wrote: »

"Accident" implies it is something that couldn't be prevented and that nobody is culpable.

1. He had breached a Department of Conservation permit condition forbidding him to shoot during the hours of darkness,
2. He had taken no heed of basic firearms safety rules and
3. Had illegally shot from a moving vehicle.

The more rules you break, the more likely something will go wrong. Its stops being possible and becomes probable.

I agree. It's negligence, not accidental.

Grizzly 45

Four words would help prevent this happening.
Mandatory Night Vision Usage!!

Sparks

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Four words would help prevent this happening.
Mandatory Night Vision Usage!!

Not that I think it's a bad idea (because I think it's a good one), but can you imagine what would have been said here if the PTB in Ireland had decreed last week that it would now be mandatory to have night vision scopes before a section 42 was issued? There would have been cries over prices of equipment, the difficulty of obtaining that equipment, criticisms of the available Gen1 equipment, and so on...

Tackleberrywho

Sparks wrote: »

Not that I think it's a bad idea (because I think it's a good one), but can you imagine what would have been said here if the PTB in Ireland had decreed last week that it would now be mandatory to have night vision scopes before a section 42 was issued? There would have been cries over prices of equipment, the difficulty of obtaining that equipment, criticisms of the available Gen1 equipment, and so on...

If you were serious about your stalking, and could have NV legally, you would buy it. After all, most stalkers spend over a grand on a scope, some over 2 on Zeiss.

Another few pound on a Safer alternative should IMHO be allowed

Sparks

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Another few pound on a Safer alternative should IMHO be allowed

Tack, NV scopes are allowed, they're just not treated as commodities. Same as with sound moderators.

johngalway

Sparks wrote: »

Tack, NV scopes are allowed, they're just not treated as commodities. Same as with sound moderators.

I wouldn't say they're the same as mods, people can get mods

I don't know, and have never heard of, anyone legally having and legally using a NV scope on a rifle in ROI?

Outside of Govt employees.

Sparks

I don't know of any myself either John (I mean, they're a bit redundant for target shooting), but they're definitely not banned - there's a tickbox right there on the application form for them, right longside the sound moderator tickbox.

BELOWaverageIQ

Sparks wrote: »

I don't know of any myself either John (I mean, they're a bit redundant for target shooting), but they're definitely not banned - there's a tickbox right there on the application form for them, right longside the sound moderator tickbox.

That's news to me, I understood that NV rifle scopes were illegal in Eire.
Are you 100% sure sparks?

Sparks

BELOWaverageIQ wrote: »

That's news to me, I understood that NV rifle scopes were illegal in Eire.
Are you 100% sure sparks?

Yes. They're covered in the Firearms Act, section one, under the definition of a firearm:

“firearm” means—
...
(g) ... any component part ... without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, the following articles shall be deemed to be such component parts:
(i) telescope sights with a light beam, or telescope sights with an electronic light amplification device or an infra-red device, designed to be fitted to a firearm

That's the same place they list sound moderators. Basicly, you can have one, but you need it on your licence, same as with a mod.

Tackleberrywho

I know of one man who ticked the box for NV and never was told he did or did not get it
(he ws applying for scope out of ignorance)

I'd be very interested to know what de-markings if any would be on a licence to say NV could be used.

I have used NV with the DF and I know it would be good enough for deer, not sure about foxes as even expensive NV is fuzzy.

However with a IR Filter for a lamp NV would be more than effective.
It is what conservationists use after all!

This would be what would be suitable for the job. And for a serious fox shooter with Mod and NV it would not disturb any other game.

Yet be the most appropriate method of shooting in complete darkness


http://www.atncorp.com/nightvision-riflescope-atnmars6x-3p

johngalway

Sparks wrote: »

I don't know of any myself either John (I mean, they're a bit redundant for target shooting), but they're definitely not banned - there's a tickbox right there on the application form for them, right longside the sound moderator tickbox.

I know the box is there, just don't know anyone who's successfully used it. If I had the money I'd apply just for the larf, could give them reason too.

Spunk84

Would be class to have one of those Thermal imaging scopes, would be the end of lamping as we know it!

Grizzly 45

A good thermal scope would cost nowadays as much as a good GEN3 NV.Be proably the better piece of equipment too.True ,you are looking at about 3.5k for anything decent ,by that I mean made in the Western World.Yes alot of the Russian stuff is totally POS, like ten years ago but it is getting better..Getting the equipment isnt that hard anymore either the UK sells it without restriction,as will the US..IF it is non milspec or surplus to US military requirements.So there are a few and will be more Vietnam era starlight scopes coming on the market soon.Not bad ,if you dont mind a half meter of 8in Wavin pipe size scope on your rifle!:pac:
I was thinking more even of just using a good hand held unit[not a Lidil POS] to have a look at those "bright eyes" you caught in the beam.Or use the NV to scout the area first then beam it.

However getting gun mounted units..If we get this rubbish about "silencers" and that H&S isnt good enough reason.What do you think Supers excuses not to issue would be for NV???

Sparks

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

What do you think Supers excuses not to issue would be for NV?

Wouldn't apply if it was legally mandatory for a section 42 though. And as to the rest, Grizz, that's exactly what I was saying we would have seen being said had such a measure been proposed before this latest tragedy.

Tackleberrywho

Sparks wrote: »

Wouldn't apply if it was legally mandatory for a section 42 though. And as to the rest, Grizz, that's exactly what I was saying we would have seen being said had such a measure been proposed before this latest tragedy.

I have a section 42.
I have deer in barley but I have been monitoring the land during daylight hours and they are not in it.

NV would be ideal for me. No disturbance of game, no dusturbance of peace as land has a few houses relatively near (people these days never close curtains:rolleyes: )

NV would be ideal for what I want to do, but As fas as I was aware the general public were not allowed to own "even though there is a tick box"

Like all things I would like to be given a definitive answer on acceptable reason to own NV scopes.

To my mind it is safer for general public for shooters to have the best equipment available for the task.

Sparks

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

NV would be ideal for me. No disturbance of game, no dusturbance of peace as land has a few houses relatively near (people these days never close curtains:rolleyes: )

Then apply for it.

As fas as I was aware the general public were not allowed to own "even though there is a tick box"

We've mentioned it a few times in the past y'know. In fact...

Like all things I would like to be given a definitive answer on acceptable reason to own NV scopes.

You asked...
...and were answered in detail.
...and you took part in this thread where the legal status was discussed...

johngalway

Sparks wrote: »

Then apply for it.

+1

Tackleberrywho

johngalway wrote: »

+1

I just might. Need to talk to my Local Ranger to see if he will he sign me off for NV use.

I never thought to put NV use on the application at the time.

As the farmer applies for the section 42 I did not send off the form.

It would be a good test case as 150 acres of barley is a very valid reason as the deer seem to be nocturnal

(droppings everywhere, footprints everywhere, and tracks everywhere; but no deer @ 6am 9am 1pm and 3pm today and same yesterday + 6pm 8pm and 10pm)

I'd have to bite the bullet and get NV, now where is my credit union book??

.243

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

A good thermal scope would cost nowadays as much as a good GEN3 NV.Be proably the better piece of equipment too.True ,you are looking at about 3.5k for anything decent ,by that I mean made in the Western World.Yes alot of the Russian stuff is totally POS, like ten years ago but it is getting better..Getting the equipment isnt that hard anymore either the UK sells it without restriction,as will the US..IF it is non milspec or surplus to US military requirements.So there are a few and will be more Vietnam era starlight scopes coming on the market soon.Not bad ,if you dont mind a half meter of 8in Wavin pipe size scope on your rifle!:pac:
I was thinking more even of just using a good hand held unit[not a Lidil POS] to have a look at those "bright eyes" you caught in the beam.Or use the NV to scout the area first then beam it.

However getting gun mounted units..If we get this rubbish about "silencers" and that H&S isnt good enough reason.What do you think Supers excuses not to issue would be for NV???

these seen to be getting good reviews in the uk
http://www.pulsar-nv.com/product.aspx?prid=13

Victor

Is it useful to use separate night vision equipment, possibly on a spotter + shooter basis. there was stuff avaialble for €100 in Lidl - not sure of the quality.