Case in Wicklow People

arrowloopboy

I believe there was a case in the Wicklow People this week in relation to a gentleman trespassing with a rifle in another gentlemans wood in the Aughrim area,any Wicklow men on here seen this or happen to have a link to the article ?

landkeeper

http://www.wicklowpeople.ie/news/silencer-on-deer-hunters-weapon-3141799.html

arrowloopboy

Thanks for that Landkeeper.

garv123

He challenged Cullen who said he had permission from a farmer to shoot.

On January 26, 2011 in a different area Andrew Ryan who had leased the deer shooting rights for that area met Cullen with a rifle and a silencer 200 meters inside the wood.

Mr. Ryan told Cullen he had no permission to be there and asked him to leave.

Cullen told Judge David Kennedy he didn't realise he had no permission to be on the lands shooting.

One of the farmers permission I have has fields right in the middle of a big wood which has a fairly expensive lease on it... The only way into it is through the wood and the farmer even has a key for the wood gates.

Does that mean I cant go through the wood to the fields with a gun because there's a lease on it?

kildare.17hmr

If you have permission from the farmer who owns the wood and fields you are fine

moby30

I'd imagine it has more to do with the individual that is stopped. Wouldn't imagine you'd have any problem if it's your only enterance to your permissions. Don't know the law on this exactly but im sure common sense would prevail if anyone tried to make any deal about it. However we've all come across assholes on our land wether it be leased or not who are just persistent poachers and couldnt care less about anybody or anything once they make their few bob and I've no problem seeing these guys end up before the courts as it reflects badly against the rest of us. Looks like this is one of those cases.

arrowloopboy

garv123 wrote: »

One of the farmers permission I have has fields right in the middle of a big wood which has a fairly expensive lease on it... The only way into it is through the wood and the farmer even has a key for the wood gates.

Does that mean I cant go through the wood to the fields with a gun because there's a lease on it?

To be honest Garv,if i caught you going through one of my woods with a gun you'd find yourself in the same quandry as Mr.Cullen,i understand where your coming from but for every one genuine guy crossing a wood their would be 20 inbread poachers spinning the same brain dead yarn that they didn't know where they were or thought they had permission from some farmer or other.
I presume the farmer has access for stock /machinery etc not sporting rights.
So in a nut shell Garv ,unless we had some sort of a pre arranged arrangement, you'd be in a big spot of bodder.

This is not aimed personally at Garv,its just an example

ssl

I've seen a right of way on a forestry plantation before. If there is one of these to a permission then no one can question someone who is on it

garv123

arrowloopboy wrote: »

To be honest Garv,if i caught you going through one of my woods with a gun you'd find yourself in the same quandry as Mr.Cullen,i understand where your coming from but for every one genuine guy crossing a wood their would be 20 inbread poachers spinning the same brain dead yarn that they didn't know where they were or thought they had permission from some farmer or other.
I presume the farmer has access for stock /machinery etc not sporting rights.
So in a nut shell Garv ,unless we had some sort of a pre arranged arrangement, you'd be in a big spot of bodder.

This is not aimed personally at Garv,its just an example

The farmer has access because he owns the field and they have to grant him access to it. The fella with the lease has 0 rights to the farmers fields.
Again I'd have the farmers backing unlike the fella in the case it seems.

slippy wicket

I'll have to ask Andy Ryan about that when i'm talking to him next.
Heard nothing about that before.
I wonder is that Ballygobban, if so one less poacher is all to the good for me.

Cass

Thread is temp closed.

The case is in adjournment, and discussion of ongoing court cases is prohibited.

See here.

I will get clarification on this, and if given the all clear it'll be re-opened.