Stump shooting / roving archery, the legalities?

[MagiKelly]

A quick search shows the access laws allow active pursuits but exclude shooting. Is archery shooting? I don't think so as in the document archery is mentioned twice as an activity in its own right although in the sense that you do not have a right of access over an established archery range.

 

[Rob]

I dont know about things solely specific to north of the border (or whether the following apply) but the only contemporary laws that I know of that specifically mention bows relate to crossbow possession use (age restrictions etc) and the Wildlife & Countryside Act (can't bowhunt).

 

[MagiKelly]

I have submitted a question tot eh authority dealing with the Scottish and access and left a message for my local access officer. I will report back with the answers.

 

[silvergirl]

I've just asked a Local Access officer and the comprehensive answer was 'I don't know'.

As you say hunting, shooting and fishing are excluded within the primary legislation so I guess it depends on the legal definition of shooting.
It seems that within the spirit of the legislation it may be allowable, because it is a non powered activity, in the same way that pea shooters are non-powered perhaps?
Obviously crossbows are a different matter as there is substantial mechanical advantage. The legal definition of a firearm includes air rifles but excludes bows so I don’t know if that has any bearing or not on shooting per see.


The only specific reference in the access code (I can find) is allowing land managers to close land for archery tournaments though. And reference to archery as a formal activity.

Be interesting to hear what your access officer says.

 

[MagiKelly]

The more I think about this the more I am convinced it is legal.

Clearly if my 11 year old daughter was to take her plastic bow to the local woods and play with it firing arrows with suckers on them at targets she was picking out she would be breaking no laws and no one would mind. Legally I cannot see a distinction between this and me using my bow with blunts or judo tips. My intention is the same as my daughters and my tools are legally identical to my daughters.

The only point at which we could start to break the law is if we were recklessly endangering others.

 

[Toddy]

I have a horrible feeling that Roving is proscribed.
For the life of me though I cannot remember the context in which I heard this discussed.

Brian Blessed comes to mind

cheers,
Toddy

 

[Toddy]

Might be worthwhile contacting these fellows.

http://www.southernupland.webs.com/

cheers,
M

 

[Doc]

I'd be interested to hear a definitive answer.

Thae Act is clear that shooting and fishing are excluded, so I am sure much will depend on the definition of 'shooting'.

The foreshore is different - on Crown foreshore the public right to recreation includes shooting with a shotgun, so I would think archery practice on the foreshore would be legal.

Archery with the bow has a good public image of being a benign, healthy inclusive sport, and I suspect many landowners would grant permission. Crossbows have a rather different image of course.

 

[w00dsmoke]

As far as I'm aware a bow as is a catapult an offensive weapon in ANY public space including the boot of tyour car. So having chatted to a cop pal of mine, he agreed and albeit no expert, it would first appear that unless you had the permission of the landowner then it would be classed as carrying an offensive weapon in public.

I've seen the police lift an adult with a crossbow in a public park even though the crossbow only had plastic bolts. In the laws eyes it's an offensive weapon and I suspect they will see it alwasy as such unless you have the express permission to use it on the land you are on, going to or coming from.

WS

 

[Doc]

As far as I'm aware a bow as is a catapult an offensive weapon in ANY public space including the boot of tyour car. So having chatted to a cop pal of mine, he agreed and albeit no expert, it would first appear that unless you had the permission of the landowner then it would be classed as carrying an offensive weapon in public.

I've seen the police lift an adult with a crossbow in a public park even though the crossbow only had plastic bolts. In the laws eyes it's an offensive weapon and I suspect they will see it alwasy as such unless you have the express permission to use it on the land you are on, going to or coming from.

WS

But I think there is a 'good reason' defence (which I accept might only apply if you have landowners permission).. I often carry a shotgun on crown foreshore, or have (unloaded and cased) firearms in the car travelling to and from where I shoot. I have never heard of a sportsmen been arrested in such circumstances.

I'm sure having a crossbow in a public park would attract police interest though, and rightly so.

 

[w00dsmoke]

Yes, that's exactly it "good reason" or not.

As regarding the foreshore, I wouldn't say ther'es a blanket okay to shoot or use bows on crown land. There are exceptions where it would not be permissable and you'd be surprised how large an area these can cover. The obvious places are some SSI's, LNR's and SPA's and areas with byelaws in place aswell as potentially busy places such as harbours. At one time I did a lot of shotgun shooting on the foreshore and places where you may at first think you had legal rights to shoot were sometimes denied by the police or LA. It was very difficult to find out but usually BASC were very helpful in the legal dept in advising you.

 

[MagiKelly]

As far as I'm aware a bow as is a catapult an offensive weapon in ANY public space including the boot of tyour car.

Just to expand on what Doc said. A locking pocket knife and a sheath knife are both also in the same situation yet I am legally allowed to have both with me when exercising my rights to wild camp under the access laws, regardless of having separate permission from the landowner.

I have to say the more I dig into this the more less reason i see for it being able to be denied.

 

[Moff8]

I hope they look on it as taking my bow for a walk in the woods would be like a golfer firing off a few balls in the local park - ok as long as it is done safely.

I am more inclined to think that anyone found with a bow capable of taking game out in the woods would probably be classed as bow hunting. I hope I am wrong.

I have never seen a blunt - could I use it in a game like paintball? could it be used to simulate deer hunting without actually injuring the deer?

 

[MagiKelly]

I have never seen a blunt - could I use it in a game like paintball?

Only with a very weak bow and bull face protection but you can get a paintball bow but hey are pretty expensive.

could it be used to simulate deer hunting without actually injuring the deer?

Not with real deer it couldn't. You would be breaking any number of laws. Roving archery / stump shooting is sort of meant to be a simulated hunting thing you are just picking inanimate targets.

 

[Rob]

You can get paintball attachments for bows - they operate by the sstring hitting the plunger and sending the ball down range. I played with one back in the summer - they were fun but I doubt that I would ever buy one.

If you want to simulate hunting, get yourself down to a field archery club

As for bow weight problems, it is more the ammo that you have with you that would be the problem. Excuses for carrying broadheads are pretty few and far between. Some cultures hunt with bows of under 18lb draw weight, but these are more likely to be poison arrow users.

 

[caliban]

My understanding is that "blunts" are used to stop arrows and points being damaged by becoming lodged in trees etc. They are not really a safety feature as I used to assume. A rubber tipped arrow from an adult bow hitting someone could kill them if it hit them in the eye or temple. I expect it could rupture a spleen and break ribs too. Regardless of legality, I'd be careful about doing something that might not be very safe. Worst case scenario, you hit a kid in the face (sorry to be gross) That being said, blunts with range reducing flu-flus in an area with a clear line of vision, well scouted out for other people, would probably be safe enough. I'd go to a quiet beach and shoot along the shoreline.

 

[MagiKelly]

Okay got a response

John Kelly - thanks for this enquiry.

First I should note that neither I nor anyone else can give you an 'official' view on your query , as it is only in the Scottish Courts that you can get a definitive judgement on matters of interpreting law as you request. I can give you some pointers, which may be some help, but is no more than that really. So the below is just an informal discussion ..

Archery as you describe is obviously an activity with a 'recreational purpose', so might appear to be within access rights. However, in my reading of the Act, it is section 9 (c) of the Act which is the crux here. Section 9(c) excludes from access rights the activities of "hunting, shooting or fishing". There is no further definition of 'shooting', but I would expect the term might reasonably be taken to encompass the shooting of arrows as well as of bullets. So this 9(c) provision would put archery outside the exercise of statutory access rights. - probably not the answer you were hoping for I'm afraid.

We did have some discussions soon after the Act came into force with Field Archery interests in East Lothian. However, the issue there was that they rent an area of fields and woodland which they use for Field Archery, and were looking for guidance as to how they could warn any members of the public who - using their access rights - might come into that area while shooting was underway. Therefore, those previous discussions with archery interests arose on the basis that archery was not carried out under access rights, but rather that the archery was an existing land use, on land which they rented. (We helped them draft some signs and warning methods that could be used around the site boundaries, to make access-takers aware of that activity when it was in progress).

As I say, probably not the answer you were hoping for, but I hope that may be of some assistance?

regards,

So not really any closer to an answer unless anyone knows of any legal precedent that establishes archery either as shooting or not.

 

[Toddy]

hmmmm
What did the field sports folks say ? or how about the archery clubs ? surely they must have someone who has sussed out the parameters of the legal issues
Police ? maybe those who actually have to police foreshores where there's a fair amount of folk using the lands? Fife or Aberdeenshire maybe ?

atb,
M

 

[bothyman]

Did anyone get any further with this finding out what the legal side is.

I use blunts and judo points but I'm never sure how far to stray from home...


MickT

 

[mrcharly]

There are two types of blunts. The steel ones are like a field head with the point cut off, so you get a flat end to the arrow.

I used to use them for hunting in Australia. They do a great deal of damage when they hit an animal, far, far more than a field or target head.

the other sort of blunt is more like the rubber stopper you get on a walking stick. It's large and usually quite heavy. I doubt it would penetrate the skin, but as said, could cause serious injury if it struck an eye. I'd be worried about strikes on the temple or throat.

Never shoot a living animal/human unless you mean to kill it. It's a pretty good principle.