Legality of lamping from public road into preserved lands

Rowley Birkin QC

Just had a crew driving down a public road that splits our (preserved) lands lamping left and right and driving the dogs here at the house crazy.

Drove down to clear them but they were gone before I got down to them. :mad:

What's the legal position of this type of activity if they return?

Thanks.

stick shooter

Rowley Birkin QC wrote: »

Just had a crew driving down a public road that splits our (preserved) lands lamping left and right and driving the dogs here at the house crazy.

Drove down to clear them but they were gone before I got down to them. :mad:

What's the legal position of this type of activity if they return?

Thanks.

quiet simply a big no no .

Rowley Birkin QC

stick shooter wrote: »

quiet simply a big no no .

Cheers.

That's exactly what I wanted to hear. F*****n numpties.

cyberblade 918c

stick shooter wrote: »

quiet simply a big no no .

They could say they had no intention of shooting / hunting from the road and where looking to call any potential charlie to a diff location?? or that they were scouting the location to see what the vermin population was like before seeking permission in the surrounding areas. Should imagine it would be hard to prove anything unless they are actually caught as they fire a shot... I could be totally wrong though :rolleyes:

Rowley Birkin QC

cyberblade 918c wrote: »

They could say they had no intention of shooting / hunting from the road and where looking to call any potential charlie to a diff location?? or that they were scouting the location to see what the vermin population was like before seeking permission in the surrounding areas. Should imagine it would be hard to prove anything unless they are actually caught as they fire a shot... I could be totally wrong though :rolleyes:

I would be hoping that confronting them and pointing out the utter illegality of what they are up to would be enough, along with conspicuously writing down the reg of the jeep.

Spunk84

dont think theres anything illegal about throwing a lamp into a field unless there shooting or running dogs..... Are the fields owned by you or GC land?

Rowley Birkin QC

Spunk84 wrote: »

dont think theres anything illegal about throwing a lamp into a field unless there shooting or running dogs..... Are the fields owned by you or GC land?

Owned by us and preserved from all hunting.

Tackleberrywho

Rowley Birkin QC wrote: »

Owned by us and preserved from all hunting.

Your job to "prove" they were hunting, a good QC would argue that they may have been looking for a lost dog.......

Shining a light is not illegal.
Shining a light with the purpose of dazing or dazling protected wild birds or mamals is

Spunk84

Rowley Birkin QC wrote: »

Owned by us and preserved from all hunting.

2 things "may" happen

you go madly down the road to confront them and they stick a firearm threw the window at you:eek:

you go madly down the road to confront them and they stick a firearm threw the window at you:eek:

See where im going here, why not get there regs, make a formal complaint, then if you need be confront them??????????????

poulo6.5

Rowley Birkin QC wrote: »

Just had a crew driving down a public road that splits our (preserved) lands lamping left and right and driving the dogs here at the house crazy.

Drove down to clear them but they were gone before I got down to them. :mad:

What's the legal position of this type of activity if they return?

Thanks.

shining a light into a field in of its self is not against the law,

however shooting from a road or from a vehicle is against the law.

did anyone fire a shot or step out of their car with a rifle. if no then there is nothing you can do except maybe ask them not to do it any more

i am not condoning what happened to you so dont get me wrong.


i lamp foxes my self and i would hate to think that i would disturb anyone while doing it

landkeeper

from the nargc website

Lamping of Foxes - The Legal Position

Section 45 of the Wildlife (Amendment) Act 2000 amends Section 38 of the 1976 Act which applied to the use of lamps, mirrors, dazzling equipment etc., for the purposes of hunting. Section 38 of the '76 Act was substituted by this completely new Section. The amendment states that it will be illegal for any person to hunt any protected wild animal or protected wild bird while using a lamp, light, torch, mirror or other artificial dazzling device. Also prohibited are any devices for illuminating, image intensifying or heat seeking, night sights, or any device which the Minister may declare as coming within this category.

It will be lawful to use such devices while ringing or marking or while hunting for educational or scientific purposes under licence issued by the Minister. The Minister may amend or revoke an order made under this Section. The most important thing for hunting people to know about this Section is that the ban on the use of lamps and the other equipment mentioned, applies only to protected wild birds and protected wild animals. Therefore, contrary to what some people would assert, and have asserted in the past, even people in regulatory positions, it is not illegal to hunt by lamping foxes or rabbits, neither of which are protected and no licence is necessary. This is a question which comes up again and again. However, please note that while it is not illegal to lamp a fox or rabbit from a public road for the purposes of shooting, it most definitely is illegal to shoot from a road. In addition, it should be borne in mind that the use of a mechanically propelled vehicle may not be used for the purposes of hunting any wild animal, whether the vehicle is stationary or moving. Therefore a hunter must not be in any vehicle while lamping. (Section 44 Wildlife (Amendment) Act 2000).

This has always been the case and this distinction needs to be emphasised here. The shot should be taken from inside the field and then at a distance of not less than 60 feet (measured in meters now) from the road and shooting away from the direction of the road. Legally, lamping and shooting are two distinctly different acts.'

Rowley Birkin QC

Spunk84 wrote: »

2 things "may" happen

you go madly down the road to confront them and they stick a firearm threw the window at you:eek:

you go madly down the road to confront them and they stick a firearm threw the window at you:eek:

See where im going here, why not get there regs, make a formal complaint, then if you need be confront them??????????????

Who said anything about "madly"? I would be very surprised to find myself with a firearm pointed at me through a window to be honest, no need for the crazy hypothetical situation. I have previously asked people to leave our land and they have done so without question, it would want to be a very silly hunter to turn a gun on someone requesting that they desist from shooting into their land. The person who taught me how to shoot said never point a gun at something you don't intend to shoot, good lesson to put in your back pocket.

The very reason I posted the thread was to get the legal position so I knew I stood if I ever got a chance to speak to them.

I have my answer and am finished with this thread, feel free to close if needs be mods.

Thanks.

fodda

Would it not be right to assume that shining a lamp on to land from anywhere is only legal when you own the land or have permission to do this on the land.

If you just pulled up and searched someone else's land with a lamp without permission then surely this would be illegal in some way? Otherwise any would be burglers/rustlers could go around at night inspecting any premises they feel like knocking over with immunity?

Spunk84

fodda wrote: »

Would it not be right to assume that shining a lamp on to land from anywhere is only legal when you own the land or have permission to do this on the land.

If you just pulled up and searched someone else's land with a lamp without permission then surely this would be illegal in some way? Otherwise any would be burglers/rustlers could go around at night inspecting any premises they feel like knocking over with immunity?

not really then that would mean if you pull over on the side of the road and your headlights had lit up a field it would be classed as lamping As your physically not on it what can one do?

Grizzly 45

Rowley Birkin QC wrote: »

I would be very surprised to find myself with a firearm pointed at me through a window to be honest, no need for the crazy hypothetical situation. I have previously asked people to leave our land and they have done so without question.

NEVER underestimate the possibility of limitless stupidity or dangerousness of a situation involving people doing somthing possibly illegal with firearms.:eek:

Spunk84

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

NEVER underestimate the possibility of limitless stupidity or dangerousness of a situation involving people doing somthing possibly illegal with firearms.:eek:

+ only takes you to make a mistake and the other person to use it:D

Gonzor

Was told different myself.

Hunting doesnt start when you pull the trigger.

Hunting starts when you shine the light.

If your caught shining a light from any kind of engine powered vehicle with the intention to shoot anything you find- thats hunting.

Or at least thats what I was told. But it seems to make sense all the same....

Spunk84

Gonzor wrote: »

Was told different myself.

Hunting doesnt start when you pull the trigger.

Hunting starts when you shine the light.

If your caught shining a light from any kind of engine powered vehicle with the intention to shoot anything you find- thats hunting.

Or at least thats what I was told. But it seems to make sense all the same....

but if you dont have a firearm beside you and it is in the boot then its perfactly legal to drive around and lamp fields? The omus is on you to prove that a person is hunting not an person searching for muntjac:D

Gonzor

Spunk84 wrote: »

but if you dont have a firearm beside you and it is in the boot then its perfactly legal to drive around and lamp fields? The omus is on you to prove that a person is hunting not an person searching for muntjac:D

Like I said, the firearm is just what does the killing. You dont start hunting as soon as you pull the trigger. If anything, thats the end of the hunt.

So I guess in theory, if your caught shining a light into one or two fields from a car then its safe to say you are hunting/stalking... and if there is a gun in the boot, well that just adds to the evidence already being built up against you that your out hunting. Seemingly the law says you cant hunt from any engine powered vehicle.

Like I said, it was my clubs chairman told me all this. And he said he was told by someone with the NARGC. Go figure

kakashka

Gonzor wrote: »

Like I said, the firearm is just what does the killing. You dont start hunting as soon as you pull the trigger. If anything, thats the end of the hunt.

So I guess in theory, if your caught shining a light into one or two fields from a car then its safe to say you are hunting/stalking... and if there is a gun in the boot, well that just adds to the evidence already being built up against you that your out hunting. Seemingly the law says you cant hunt from any engine powered vehicle.

Like I said, it was my clubs chairman told me all this. And he said he was told by someone with the NARGC. Go figure

Hard enough to get a conviction when Lamp,Warm Carcase and Gun present..report to Garda and give reg number,they may or may not contact but it's just about all you can do

Gonzor

kakashka wrote: »

Hard enough to get a conviction when Lamp,Warm Carcase and Gun present..report to Garda and give reg number,they may or may not contact but it's just about all you can do

Yes, Im sure you're right kakashka. But the difference is that in your sceanrio they werent caught in the act.

(ANd they will always claim that they "found" the deer/fox/rabbit which if your out hunting at night wouldnt be that unlikely that you went to a field, shortly after poachers. And it would be a sh1tty state of affairs to be punished just because you had the bad luck to be carrying a rifle whilst discovering a deer that had being shot an hour before.)

Whereas in the scenario I presented they are caught in the act.

landkeeper

a couple of lads i know were stopped one night not to long ago driving and lamping out the window ,across land they had no permission on , the gun was in the back seat unloaded in the slip
they got the 3rd degree for the guards and have been told they will be prosecuted, i haven't spoken to them for a month or so so know no more. what was mentioned was that ags and npws are sick and tired of all the lamping going on and are under pressure to prosecute some cases to send out an example to try to stop the deer poaching and the 'accidents' to farm stock from idiots

kakashka

Gonzor wrote: »

Yes, Im sure you're right kakashka. But the difference is that in your sceanrio they werent caught in the act.

(ANd they will always claim that they "found" the deer/fox/rabbit which if your out hunting at night wouldnt be that unlikely that you went to a field, shortly after poachers. And it would be a sh1tty state of affairs to be punished just because you had the bad luck to be carrying a rifle whilst discovering a deer that had being shot an hour before.)

Whereas in the scenario I presented they are caught in the act.

Confused Gonzer-lamp with gun in boot V lamp,Animal and gun present..if i'm the offender i'd like your scenario please.anyway.Caught in the act is still very difficult to prove in court

Vegeta

Gonzor wrote: »

Was told different myself.

Hunting doesnt start when you pull the trigger.

Hunting starts when you shine the light.

If your caught shining a light from any kind of engine powered vehicle with the intention to shoot anything you find- thats hunting.

Or at least thats what I was told. But it seems to make sense all the same....

Spunk84 wrote: »

but if you dont have a firearm beside you and it is in the boot then its perfactly legal to drive around and lamp fields? The omus is on you to prove that a person is hunting not an person searching for muntjac:D

You can not hunt any wildlife from a vehicle.
The legislation includes "search for" as a definition of hunting.

So strictly speaking searching for an quarry from a vehicle is illegal. So if there is a firearm anywhere in the vehicle, boot or otherwise, you could bring a lot of trouble on yourself.

If you're out lamping then step out of the vehicle before turning on a lamp to avoid all this hassle.

Gonzor

kakashka wrote: »

Confused Gonzer-lamp with gun in boot V lamp,Animal and gun present..if i'm the offender i'd like your scenario please.anyway.Caught in the act is still very difficult to prove in court

Your wording is a tad bit confusing.
Your saying someone was caught with a firearm, lamp, and animal in the boot of the car?

That still doesnt prove anything.

I cant speak for the rest of you, but if I was out and about with my .243 looking for prince charlie some night and I happend to come across a deer that was shot dead and was still warm... I can tell you one thing, Id be having a lot of nice meaty dinners for the next couple of weeks

kakashka

Vegeta wrote: »

You can not hunt any wildlife from a vehicle.
The legislation includes "search for" as a definition of hunting.

So strictly speaking searching for an quarry from a vehicle is illegal.

Not what were talking about here i know but just for the record licences have been issued for hunting with lamping from mec prop vehicle's

landkeeper

kakashka wrote: »

Not what were talking about here i know but just for the record licences have been issued for hunting with lamping from mec prop vehicle's

but only to npws rangers and not from a public road from what i could determine not your average joe soap from a boreen

kakashka

Gonzor wrote: »

Your wording is a tad bit confusing.
Your saying someone was caught with a firearm, lamp, and animal in the boot of the car?

That still doesnt prove anything.

I cant speak for the rest of you, but if I was out and about with my .243 looking for prince charlie some night and I happend to come across a deer that was shot dead and was still warm... I can tell you one thing, Id be having a lot of nice meaty dinners for the next couple of weeks

Ey no prob,just re read your own post,i didnt mention boot at all,i find englisgsi difficult sometimes to:D

Vegeta

kakashka wrote: »

Not what were talking about here i know but just for the record licences have been issued for hunting with lamping from mec prop vehicle's

Oh I was just making a more general point to anyone reading. This comes up often and the strict letter of the law says don't use a lamp from a vehicle (if hunting).

What's legal and what's provable is a whole other can of worms I won't open myself

kakashka

landkeeper wrote: »

but only to npws rangers and not from a public road from what i could determine not your average joe soap from a boreen

Yeah yeah i know not what were talking about here landkeeper and no not just issued to NPWS either...on another note,i doubt a farmer out with lamp,gun,wheels on own property will ever be approached by An Garda or NPWS..i'm sure joe soap is above average

Gonzor

Vegeta wrote: »

What's legal and what's provable is a whole other can of worms I won't open myself

Well those boys landkeeper was talking about are the perfect example and will be an interesting case to follow.... hope he keeps us posted.

kakashka

Vegeta wrote: »

Oh I was just making a more general point to anyone reading. This comes up often and the strict letter of the law says don't use a lamp from a vehicle (if hunting).

Sure..and just how legal those permits are is probably debatable to but anyway

What's legal and what's provable is a whole other can of worms I won't open myself

Can say that again

Gonzor

kakashka wrote: »

Vegeta wrote: »

What's legal and what's provable is a whole other can of worms I won't open myself

Can say that again

To be honest I think the big issue is having to 2 people to stand up and say "yes we saw him in the act of hunting".... and thats all you need- or so my father says and he was a guard.

One person is no good because its just your word against theres, and catching someone loading a carcass into the back of a van is no good either it doesnt prove they killed it.

kakashka

Gonzor wrote: »

To be honest I think the big issue is having to 2 people to stand up and say "yes we saw him in the act of hunting".... and thats all you need- or so my father says and he was a guard.

One person is no good because its just your word against theres, and catching someone loading a carcass into the back of a van is no good either it doesnt prove they killed it.

i've heard of some very sound cases fail Gonzor,,having a carcas in the back can be enough but the will to prosecute is just not there

Gonzor

kakashka wrote: »

i've heard of some very sound cases fail Gonzor,,having a carcas in the back can be enough but the will to prosecute is just not there

Dont get me wrong kakashka, Im not saying certain cases dont fail.... Im sure some do.

What Im saying is this:

If you want the case to go anywhere then you will need 2 witnesses to say that they saw the person hunting.

Doesnt even matter if he took a shot or not, once he was "hunting" thats all that matters.

BoatMad

I notice mention was made of 60 yards from a public road, I know that used to be in a pre 1925 act, but I wonder is it still the case?, what law is being quoted here to justify this. ( of course i could just be wrong)

4200fps

BoatMad wrote: »

I notice mention was made of 60 yards from a public road, I know that used to be in a pre 1925 act, but I wonder is it still the case?, what law is being quoted here to justify this. ( of course i could just be wrong)

60 yards is still the law.They calculate it in meters now but its 60 yards. I wonder would a Guard or some hangman get one to stop dead on your tracks and put a range finder on the hunter to see if he was under 60 yards lol? I never had to ask any farmer could i shoot/lamp his land in my neck of woods.I know who's land not to lamp and everyone around here's the same.All lay back as long as theres no messing.I meet every Tom Dick and Harry lamping when I'm out.No heed passed.Never ever hear anything bad. God from reading some of the threads where ever some of ye guys are from you must be very limited to where you shoot.I'f id to ask if i could lamp their land thats 100 houses easy a night to visit for permission.I'd cover half a parish in a night never once had hastle.If i see land preserved I dont search till i see no more sign's.Maybe we're lucky everybody is easy going around my neck of woods.

Cass

4200fps wrote: »

60 yards is still the law.They calculate it in meters now but its 60 yards. .

Its not 60 yards or metres.

Its the Summary Jurisdiction (Ireland) Act 1851 and it says within 60 feet of a public road.

Thats 18 metres, 20 yards, or 60 FEET. So all this talk of 60 yards, 150 yards, and the best one i've heard recently of 500 yards from any road is wrong.

It has never, to the best of my knowledge been updated, amended, etc.

4gun

Ezridax wrote: »

Its not 60 yards or metres.

Its the Summary Jurisdiction (Ireland) Act 1851 and it says within 60 feet of a public road.

Thats 18 metres, 20 yards, or 60 FEET. So all this talk of 60 yards, 150 yards, and the best one i've heard recently of 500 yards from any road is wrong.

It has never, to the best of my knowledge been updated, amended, etc.

we all exaggerate, don'tyouknow... yards become metres, inches become feet

Cass

And like i said you can exaggerate all ya want, until someone calls bulls**t on it. I mean 500 yards from ANY road. There is a section on one of my permissions that if that rule were true i couldn't shoot it.:rolleyes:

Victor

Gonzor wrote: »

If you want the case to go anywhere then you will need 2 witnesses to say that they saw the person hunting.

Strictly speaking no. To secure a conviction, all the prosecution needs is a more believable witness.

4200fps

Ezridax wrote: »

Its not 60 yards or metres.

Its the Summary Jurisdiction (Ireland) Act 1851 and it says within 60 feet of a public road.

Thats 18 metres, 20 yards, or 60 FEET. So all this talk of 60 yards, 150 yards, and the best one i've heard recently of 500 yards from any road is wrong.

It has never, to the best of my knowledge been updated, amended, etc.

This is the law.Third paragraph second sentence
http://www.nargc.ie/predator-control/lamping-of-foxes----the-legal-position.aspx

Cass

No its not. Thats the NARGC, collection of game clubs. They quote the law as its stands and post it on their website in an easy to understand format as sometimes the law as read in the Acts/SIs reads like stereo instructions.

They (NARGC) say not less than 60 feet because that is the law. The bit about 60 yards is, excuse me, made up. Thats a rule they most likely ask their members to adhere to, but if brough up in court, and leaving aside the offensive weapons charges, you would be prosecuted under the 1851 Summary jurisdiction Act.

Now as always i am happy to be corrected, but only when proof via links to the relevant law, SI, Act, etc can be provided. The 1851 Act has eluded many people for years and only recently came to light through a file sent to another member of Boards. The law is so old that nothing that i personally have searched for could be found.

So if you can find a law, SI, Act, etc that shows me that this 1851 Act has been amended or repealed to make the 60 feet law now read 60 yards you will get a heartfelt apology from myself. Until then you can take it to the bank that as it stands the law says 60 FEET.

4200fps

Ezridax wrote: »

No its not. Thats the NARGC, collection of game clubs. They quote the law as its stands and post it on their website in an easy to understand format as sometimes the law as read in the Acts/SIs reads like stereo instructions.

They (NARGC) say not less than 60 feet because that is the law. The bit about 60 yards is, excuse me, made up. Thats a rule they most likely ask their members to adhere to, but if brough up in court, and leaving aside the offensive weapons charges, you would be prosecuted under the 1851 Summary jurisdiction Act.

Now as always i am happy to be corrected, but only when proof via links to the relevant law, SI, Act, etc can be provided. The 1851 Act has eluded many people for years and only recently came to light through a file sent to another member of Boards. The law is so old that nothing that i personally have searched for could be found.

So if you can find a law, SI, Act, etc that shows me that this 1851 Act has been amended or repealed to make the 60 feet law now read 60 yards you will get a heartfelt apology from myself. Until then you can take it to the bank that as it stands the law says 60 FEET.

I wont disagree with you.never heard of anybody getting done for shooting from road yet around here.wouldnt be nice to get nabbed either.Max fine is £500 punt back when the law came out i think.I think I also seen 20 yards or meters mentioned somewhere.Im not sure jus guessing.I'm surprised the NARGC have it up wrong anythings possible

Cass

4200fps wrote: »

I'm surprised the NARGC have it up wrong anythings possible

There is the thing. They have not got it up wrong. They announced the 60 feet part. Its the other part about 60 yards that, as far as i can see, has no standing.

As said i would have no problem being proven wrong, but its taken this long to find the actual law about the 60 feet law so i don't envy anyone looking for the 60 yard one if it exists. I know i will not be searching anymore for it. Head wrecking.

meathstevie

Cut a long story short; don't shine a lamp in a field where you know you shouldn't be, don't shine a lamp from a vehicle while out lamping, when you've spotted a rabbit or a fox you want to have a shot at walk a few paces into the field it's in and don't use roads, houses, farm buildings and roads for a backstop and all should be grand.