Foreign shooters

ace86

I'm wondering does a lot of guys on here have problems in there local area with fellows bringing French/English shooters around shooting woodcock and snipe. Have these guys trespassed on your lands especially during the week when your working and have you or your club taken any legal action against the shooters or the guile bringing them around or sought any compensation for it?

ah sure !

oh la la ....
better go and ask for an Irish passport

Dalken

I've a big problem with foreigners generally, Hairy Japanese Bast*rds.:)

Depends what you mean, guests of lads with permissions who are just out for a casual shot; no problem, lads making a few Euro from paying guests; a big problem, not with the guests but with those bringing them in.

ace86

Dalken wrote: »

I've a big problem with foreigners generally, Hairy Japanese Bast*rds.:)

Depends what you mean, guests of lads with permissions who are just out for a casual shot; no problem, lads making a few Euro from paying guests; a big problem, not with the guests but with those bringing them in.

I have a problem in general with the guest and the fellow bringing them in. if the guest causes an accident of any sort or injures themselves is the landowner accountable or if they shoot an animal can we hold them hear until its resolved. the fellow bringing them out for money maybe bring a few groups through the same ground on a weekly basis and is basically exploiting all they can get on a migratory specie that comes here for the winter and outside of the shooting season a lot of them put no work into conservation or vermin control.

Dalken

ace86 wrote: »

I have a problem in general with the guest and the fellow bringing them in. if the guest causes an accident of any sort or injures themselves is the landowner accountable or if they shoot an animal can we hold them hear until its resolved. the fellow bringing them out for money maybe bring a few groups through the same ground on a weekly basis and is basically exploiting all they can get on a migratory specie that comes here for the winter and outside of the shooting season a lot of them put no work into conservation or vermin control.

point taken.

patdahat

I stand to be corrected but if the gillie produces NARGC insurance and say's he/she is covered well I believe it's against the constitution of the nargc and if he/she had to make a claim he/she would not be covered, and I believe that many a landowner does not know this, and if you knew the gillie had nargc insurance it would worth your time to tell the landowner this.

deeksofdoom

NARGC is against shooting of migratory species for profit.

If they have the permission of the land owners and they have insurance I don't think there is anything you can do about it.

Countryside alliance insurance has opened the back door for a lot of these cowboy operators.

Grizzly 45

ace86 wrote: »

I have a problem in general with the guest and the fellow bringing them in. if the guest causes an accident of any sort or injures themselves is the landowner accountable or if they shoot an animal can we hold them hear until its resolved

UNLIKE Irish shooters it is mandatory to for hunters on the Continent to have public liability and public indemnity insurance for shooting and hunting activities and has been for at least 40 years. So in the unlikely event of somone shooting your prize bull,you have the least worries if they are foreign.Be more worried about the local messin you about.

the fellow bringing them out for money maybe bring a few groups through the same ground on a weekly basis and is basically exploiting all they can get on a migratory specie that comes here for the winter and outside of the shooting season a lot of them put no work into conservation or vermin control.

why are you allowing them on your land first of all if it bothers you??You have the say on who or whom comes on to shoot??
So lots of birds come here to over winter and then fly back to Europe to be hunted there.The woodcock is a prime example,they are traditionally hunted in Spring on the Continent before their mating and breeding season.

Get the feeling that there is a fair bit of begrudgery here still about them "damn furriners ,comin here an shootin everthin.":D

ah sure !

Grizzly_45 , you are banned from hunting here !

Cass

patdahat wrote: »

I stand to be corrected but if the gillie produces NARGC insurance and say's he/she is covered well I believe it's against the constitution of the nargc and if he/she had to make a claim he/she would not be covered, and I believe that many a landowner does not know this, and if you knew the gillie had nargc insurance it would worth your time to tell the landowner this.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but the NARGC don't offer insurance. They do have a compensation fund. While it might seem like a subtle difference i am lead to believe there are is a huge difference in the two, and whole different set of rules regarding an insurance pay out, and getting covered under a compensation fund. I say "lead to" because i don't have a full working knowledge of the variations in such plans, policies, etc.

deeksofdoom

Cass wrote: »

Correct me if i'm wrong, but the NARGC don't offer insurance. They do have a compensation fund. While it might seem like a subtle difference i am lead to believe there are is a huge difference in the two, and whole different set of rules regarding an insurance pay out, and getting covered under a compensation fund. I say "lead to" because i don't have a full working knowledge of the variations in such plans, policies, etc.

True enough its a compensation fund - as has been discussed here before.

But in order for them to be able to operate in this way the compensation fund has to be underwritten by an insurance company, this is the Law. The NARGC compensation fund is underwitten by Lloyds of London. That way the compensation fund cannot be wipped out, AFAIK.

Sparks

deeksofdoom wrote: »

That way the compensation fund cannot be wipped out, AFAIK.

That wasn't actually the point though - whether or not the fund can be wiped out by a payout doesn't have much to do with the rules for payouts and what's covered and what's not and so forth. That's pretty standard and it ought to go without saying (but sadly you keep hearing of people who get bitten by this) -- for all kinds of insurance polices and guarantees and things of that nature, read the fine print with the mother of all magnifying glasses before you bet more than you can lose on the thing.

ace86

why are you allowing them on your land first of all if it bothers you??You have the say on who or whom comes on to shoot??
So lots of birds come here to over winter and then fly back to Europe to be hunted there.The woodcock is a prime example,they are traditionally hunted in Spring on the Continent before their mating and breeding season.

Get the feeling that there is a fair bit of begrudgery here still about them "damn furriners ,comin here an shootin everthin.":D[/QUOTE]

I Don't allow them on my land but what they do is come to a neighbouring farm and help themselves to everywhere else. I'm working during the day and I can't watch my land or stay at home bcos w*****s like these exist. I had to come home one evening to discover fellows had been through some land of mine an hr previous. If it was your place would be giving them the cead mile failte treatment?

ace86

patdahat wrote: »

I stand to be corrected but if the gillie produces NARGC insurance and say's he/she is covered well I believe it's against the constitution of the nargc and if he/she had to make a claim he/she would not be covered, and I believe that many a landowner does not know this, and if you knew the gillie had nargc insurance it would worth your time to tell the landowner this.

I think alot of these guys don't have insurance full stop and are not in a gunclub either there out for them selves and a few €€€€ and thats that.I have informed landowners of this as well and alot are not happy to see them or allow them on there lands.

deeksofdoom

Sparks wrote: »

That wasn't actually the point though - whether or not the fund can be wiped out by a payout doesn't have much to do with the rules for payouts and what's covered and what's not and so forth. That's pretty standard and it ought to go without saying (but sadly you keep hearing of people who get bitten by this) -- for all kinds of insurance polices and guarantees and things of that nature, read the fine print with the mother of all magnifying glasses before you bet more than you can lose on the thing.

So your saying the NARGC cover isn't sufficient.

Grizzly 45

I Don't allow them on my land but what they do is come to a neighbouring farm and help themselves to everywhere else. I'm working during the day and I can't watch my land or stay at home bcos w*****s like these exist. I had to come home one evening to discover fellows had been through some land of mine an hr previous. If it was your place would be giving them the cead mile failte treatment?

Well first off I'd consider posting my land if you havent done so at all enterances.

Second I'd go and find out who is organising the shoots and tell him to keep his shooting guests under control and to inform them where they can and cannot shoot,and if you do find them on your property again,you will be holding him directly responsible for the tresspass and damage,and heres a solrs letter stating so.
OR
Third, if it was me and my land,I'd be making a contract with whomever wants to shoot on it that they are entering a legal and binding contract for the shooting rights and all damages and policing of vermin and what not,and make a few bob out of them....Buts just me...I'd try to be making a few quid out of them by money for old rope.

Sparks

deeksofdoom wrote: »

So your saying the NARGC cover isn't sufficient.

Deeks, from your neck of the woods, do you assume if someone says more than three words in a row, they're lying about one of them?

Or, more bluntly, no, that's not what I said, I was very specificly not picking sides because we all know the NARGC and CAI are at each others throats over the market for insuring shooters in Ireland, so take the attempt to start an unnecessary row and put it back where it came from please. Maybe one day we'll need to have that row; but today's not that day

ace86

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

I Don't allow them on my land but what they do is come to a neighbouring farm and help themselves to everywhere else. I'm working during the day and I can't watch my land or stay at home bcos w*****s like these exist. I had to come home one evening to discover fellows had been through some land of mine an hr previous. If it was your place would be giving them the cead mile failte treatment?

Well first off I'd consider posting my land if you havent done so at all enterances.

Second I'd go and find out who is organising the shoots and tell him to keep his shooting guests under control and to inform them where they can and cannot shoot,and if you do find them on your property again,you will be holding him directly responsible for the tresspass and damage,and heres a solrs letter stating so.
OR
Third, if it was me and my land,I'd be making a contract with whomever wants to shoot on it that they are entering a legal and binding contract for the shooting rights and all damages and policing of vermin and what not,and make a few bob out of them....Buts just me...I'd try to be making a few quid out of them by money for old rope.[/QUOTE]

I'm not in it for the money never have and never will and wouldn't give any shooting rights to anyone at that racket, and none of them do vermin control full stop. i have the place signed but I haven't tattoed the place at every entrance. I had a sign up in a place I got shooting from a neighbour and I confronted the man that brought them in there and he persuaded me black from blue that the owner said work away and didn't know who owned the land or who the landowner was or get permission from him and he had to pass a sign on the way in there not to mind were he parked his car he could see it too.

you do find them on your property again,you will be holding him directly responsible for the tresspass and damage,and heres a solrs letter stating so.
Yes that is a good idea but if you caught them a 2nd time how would you go about proving it besides your own witness account?

deeksofdoom

Sparks wrote: »

Deeks, from your neck of the woods, do you assume if someone says more than three words in a row, they're lying about one of them?
QUOTE]

Oh der ya go again slating the people from the country again.

meathstevie

deeksofdoom wrote: »

So your saying the NARGC cover isn't sufficient.

Ultimately the fund manager is the one who'll tell you exactly unless you want to read a phonebook worth of small print but as far as my limited knowledge goes I believe that the NARCG fund only covers it's members for recreational shooting and related activities.

deeksofdoom

meathstevie wrote: »

Ultimately the fund manager is the one who'll tell you exactly unless you want to read a phonebook worth of small print but as far as my limited knowledge goes I believe that the NARCG fund only covers it's members for recreational shooting and related activities.

Sure what else is it going to cover, its specifically for shooting related activities, its not going to cover you if you slip in the bath.

juice1304

deeksofdoom wrote: »

Sure what else is it going to cover, its specifically for shooting related activities, its not going to cover you if you slip in the bath.

With other insurance like the countryside alliance you are covered for a wide range of country activities not just shooting.

deeksofdoom

juice1304 wrote: »

With other insurance like the countryside alliance you are covered for a wide range of country activities not just shooting.

I'm not promoting NARGC insurance, there are pros and cons to both policies. You can take out cover on both policies if you want.

Sparks

deeksofdoom wrote: »

Oh der ya go again slating the people from the country again.

*arf*
You know where I'm from, right?

Grizzly 45

I'm not in it for the money never have and never will and wouldn't give any shooting rights to anyone at that racket, and none of them do vermin control full stop. i have the place signed but I haven't tattoed the place at every entrance.

That is what you will have to do first off.

I had a sign up in a place I got shooting from a neighbour and I confronted the man that brought them in there and he persuaded me black from blue that the owner said work away and didn't know who owned the landowner was or get permission from him and he had to pass a sign on the way in there not to mind were he parked his car he could see it too.

Lame excuse on his part,and wont work a second time if he has been informed that;
you are the owner,and you didnt give him permission to hunt,pointed out the land boundaries and where the signs are.

Yes that is a good idea but if you caught them a 2nd time how would you go about proving it besides your own witness account?

Mobile phone with time date stamp and video recording of the incidents???

meathstevie

deeksofdoom wrote: »

Sure what else is it going to cover, its specifically for shooting related activities, its not going to cover you if you slip in the bath.

Fair play smartballs, you figured that out quickly.....Maybe now use the same dictionary and look up commercial and recreational...

ace86

please lads will ye stick to the topic in hand instead of taking snipes at each other over insurance. If ye want to start another thread on it yer more then welcome. thanks:)