Access, shooting and damage

Re: Access, shooting and damage

Postby MacadamB53 » Thu Jan 25, 2018 9:49 am

Hi asp383,

He has a right of way to cross the access road to the reservoir on foot only to access the rest of the land without having to go all the way round the reservoir or via roads, but not with firearms, to do so, he would be committing armed trespass.

it would be useful to know whether the easement is worded to limit the purposes for which the right of way can be used - the OP needs to know this before following the advice that followed:

You are within your rights to put up signs at either end of the RoW stating no firearms are to be carried on your land, if they fail to comply, then you may phone the police and make a report of armed trespass, doing this every time the carry firearms onto your property, will pretty soon make them fed up with armed police responding and quite possibly the force helicopter etc and the disturbance caused would pretty much wreck any chances of shooting, hopefully they will get the message and take the shooting parties the other route.

kind regards, Mac
kind regards, Mac
Posts: 6182
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 12:13 am

Ads are not endorsed by or the staff thereof and visitors should perform their own due diligence on the product or service offered.

Re: Access, shooting and damage

Postby asp383 » Sat Feb 17, 2018 3:14 pm

Hi Mac,

apologies for a slow reply, I don't get on this PC too frequently and haven't bookmarked the site on my laptop.

With regards to my friend's case, being a licenced firearms holder and having certain other privileges relating to where he is allowed to shoot as part of his pest control business, he insists on having a paper trail for everything. The access road in question is privately owned by the water authority that owns the reservoir, however, there is public access to the water sports and visitor centre. He wrote to the water authority explaining his situation and requesting permission to cross the access road with firearms purely to get between his permission. They afforded him permission to cross the road due to it having public access, but not with firearms.

I will admit to having limited knowledge of lad and property laws, as well as RoW, other than what I've dealt with as part of a 4x4 group and my own private RoW to access my woods. However, I'm more knowledgeable with firearms law.

I'm now able to see the link the OP posted with wordings from their deeds and showing a map of the area, which I hadn't seen prior to my previous reply.

It would seem that because there is the term "for all purposes", the OP's hands are more tied than I was aware of, however, there are still other questions I would be asking.

How many days of the year is the shoot run for?

Is the shoot a commercial venture run by the farmer, or is it a shooting syndicate that have bought the shooting rights for his land?

Have you bought a copy of the farmer's deeds?

Are there any agricultural restrictions or other covenants on the farmer's land?

Does the farmer use the same route across the OP's land every time, or does he just drive any route he wishes between gates?

Do the shooters and the dogs stick to the same route as the tractor, or spread out across the OP's land and allow the dogs to run off the lead?

Are the guns in slips when the shooters are walking across the OP's land?

I'm sure someone more knowledgeable would be able to help with regards the above, but here are my thoughts.

If there are agricultural restrictions and covenants, these could possibly exclude other business use, which a shoot isn't classed as agricultural.

If the shoot happens more than 28 days of the year, depending on the agricultural restrictions and covenants require planning permission for change of use?

Would the phrase "subject to right of way for the vendors and their successors" only include the original seller and anyone buys the property (as successors of the title), not say a syndicate that has bought the shooting/sporting rights to the land, as they're not successors to the title?

Could the OP buy a handful of sheep and erect an electric fence either side of the tractor mars the width of the gates and request that dogs are kept on a lead within the marked area? Is this reasonable action even if they didn't buy any livestock?

In the meantime, I would still try to keep an eye on the shooters, if they are letting their dogs run all over the OP's field and it appears birds or ground game are being driven into the farmers land, then that will be classed as poaching. If the shooters are leaving the easement carrying guns, then that is armed trespass. If they are openly carrying firearms not in slips, even if they are on the easement, then the OP would be within their right to make a report of suspected poaching with firearms ... the Op can still insist that all firearms are kept in slip whilst crossing their land and I would have thought they could .insist on dogs being kept on a lead, regardless of any wording on the deeds in regards to the easement.

I wonder if it would be worth the OP investing in some nature cams to keep an eye on the wildlife, none of the regulations required for CCTV.

I always keep my firearms in their bags an unloaded until I am on my land or land I have permission to shoot on and stick to my easements, so I cannot be accused of armed trespass or suspected poaching.
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2014 9:30 pm

Re: Access, shooting and damage

Postby arborlad » Sat Feb 17, 2018 4:05 pm

Pheasant8 wrote: The farmer is only able to access this field via my track if he exits the same way!

Not had any satisfactory response to this, however, it seems illogical to me that you are insisting on a group of people doing something twice - that you don't even want them doing once!!
arborlad confuses people
Posts: 7540
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire


Return to Rights of Way

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest