Gun Club land premission

donacarney

Hey going to approach farmers the weekend for the gun club to see about the club getting new land, just wondering what benefits does the farmer/landowner get out of it apart from vermin control?

Cass

Security in that you patrol his lands. Someone that can report "odd" activity. Last year i rang a farmer as i seen lights in his shed. It's 500 yards from the nearest road so it's hard to miss. He told me no one should be there.

He called the Gardaí, and they arrived before he did. They caught three lads trying to steal his tractor, gates, and anything else not nailed down. they had the tractor half loaded onto a small flatbed.

Plus if you have your own insurance there is no risk to him.

donacarney

Cass wrote: »

Security in that you patrol his lands. Someone that can report "odd" activity. Last year i rang a farmer as i seen lights in his shed. It's 500 yards from the nearest road so it's hard to miss. He told me no one should be there.

He called the Gardaí, and they arrived before he did. They caught three lads trying to steal his tractor, gates, and anything else not nailed down. they had the tractor half loaded onto a small flatbed.

Plus if you have your own insurance there is no risk to him.

Yeah true cheers

tikkahunter

Just make sure no other club has the permission, can lead to a lot of arguments if the land owner says you both can shoot it , under Nargc rules even if the land changes hands the original club should retain the shooting rights if shooting is allowed on the land.

Cass

tikkahunter wrote: »

............. under Nargc rules even if the land changes hands the original club should retain the shooting rights if shooting is allowed on the land.

NARGC hasn't got sh*t to do with it.

If the land owner gives permission for a club and indiviudals to shoot the land he can do that (assuming he controls the sporting rights).

If the land changes hands and the sporting rights go with that then the club, nor the NARGC, can do a thing about it.

The annoyance is not directed at you, but rather this mantle the NARGC have been put on. They exist simply because the land owners give the clubs that make up the NARGC the use of their land. They have no control over what happens on it, and who has the right to shoot on it. If the land owners pulled the rights and permissions from all the clubs the NARGC would be no more.

tikkahunter

Cass wrote: »

NARGC hasn't got sh*t to do with it.

If the land owner gives permission for a club and indiviudals to shoot the land he can do that (assuming he controls the sporting rights).

If the land changes hands and the sporting rights go with that then the club, nor the NARGC, can do a thing about it.

The annoyance is not directed at you, but rather this mantle the NARGC have been put on. They exist simply because the land owners give the clubs that make up the NARGC the use of their land. They have no control over what happens on it, and who has the right to shoot on it. If the land owners pulled the rights and permissions from all the clubs the NARGC would be no more.

Seriously Cass if the two clubs are Nargc affiliated then the original is meant to keep the shooting rights even if it changes hands , happens quite a lot with our club, land gets sold neighbouring club go and seek permission the new land owner tells them to work away then the grief starts, members kick up and start quoting that rule at a meeting so something has to be done about it,it is a bollox because the two clubs have lost rights over the land because of this.
If it is not affiliated then noting can be said ,its just tough luck like if a land owner gives local lads the shooting because club members wont get off their hole and shoot vermin.

Cass

Ah, got ya.

For a minute i read it as though the NARGC could someone dictate who had sporting rights to land, and who could or could not shoot on it. What you mean is if both are NARGC and a dispute arises between the clubs over the land?

Well that should never happen. When i was setting up the club years ago i had to go to every local club, show them our lands, show they did not go onto their land, and have them "sign off" on it (among a host of other crap). There were seven surrounding clubs. We issued members with maps to all the lands, as i'm sure other clubs did, and had any of the lands we nominated been part of other club grounds i doubt the clubs would have signed off on it.

Then there is the other issue of the land owner himself. If he decides he wants "Paddy's" club to shoot on his land instead of "Mick's" club then he can pull the permissions and give them to whom he wants.

tikkahunter

Cass wrote: »

Ah, got ya.

For a minute i read it as though the NARGC could someone dictate who had sporting rights to land, and who could or could not shoot on it. What you mean is if both are NARGC and a dispute arises between the clubs over the land?

Well that should never happen. When i was setting up the club years ago i had to go to every local club, show them our lands, show they did not go onto their land, and have them "sign off" on it (among a host of other crap). There were seven surrounding clubs. We issued members with maps to all the lands, as i'm sure other clubs did, and had any of the lands we nominated been part of other club grounds i doubt the clubs would have signed off on it.

Then there is the other issue of the land owner himself. If he decides he wants "Paddy's" club to shoot on his land instead of "Mick's" club then he can pull the permissions and give them to whom he wants.

Yep thats it, see our neighbouring club is made up of a lot of land owners,so when the land changes hands they have the benefit of knowing who bought it well before us if they haven't bought it themselves ,they know it is ****ty thing to do but they try it on and the land owners have got annoyed and told both clubs to get lost and made it a sanctuary.Bit hard to take when you have held the shooting rights for over 30 years, its doesnt help we are a Dublin club and they are a Meath club.:D