UK Bowhunting laws
- Thread starter JimN
- Start date
What has so irritated you ? It's like you're in a nippy mood on every post 
None of us are infallable, and I most certainly am not. If I'm wrong, I apologise, but I'll make no excuse for being a member and joining in the conversations too.
Toddy
None of us are infallable, and I most certainly am not. If I'm wrong, I apologise, but I'll make no excuse for being a member and joining in the conversations too.
Toddy
As a hunter, bowhunter and Hunter Education Instructor, I would say that education is the key to effecting change in your laws to permit bowhunting. Here in Virginia, less than 3% of the population are hunters (all methods). However, with excellent efforts in educating all citizens of our commonwealth, a strong effort in earning the 'trust' of our non-hunting population and a strict attention to representing the hunting community in an ethical and positive manner, legislation can be achieved. In Virginia during 2001 the hunting community was able to earn the trust of the voters and secure an amendment to the Virginia Constitution which establishes hunting as a constitutional right of Virginians, though the legislature may enact appropriate regulations and restrictions on these rights. For those that are working to effect change there, I offer my encouragement.
I do understand your concerns as an urbanized and limited space island. The very concerns expressed by Toddy are the same concerns expressed here in the urban communities of Virginia. The size of our deer herd (our wildlife biologists estimate there are more whitetail deer in Virginia now than when the English established Jamestown) and the "deer magnet" habitat that urban settings have become here (yes, you are reading that correctly) has brought front and center the issue of "acceptance capacity" in our state's deer management plan.
In 2002 the Virginia Game and Inland Fisheries Department (VDGIF) established an Urban Archery Season to assist towns and cities with deer management issues. Here is a link to the VDGIF web page showing participating locales and their restrictions. If you go to the bottom of this page and read the background information first it will give information why this season was established. http://www.dgif.virginia.gov/hunting/urban-archery/
I do understand your concerns as an urbanized and limited space island. The very concerns expressed by Toddy are the same concerns expressed here in the urban communities of Virginia. The size of our deer herd (our wildlife biologists estimate there are more whitetail deer in Virginia now than when the English established Jamestown) and the "deer magnet" habitat that urban settings have become here (yes, you are reading that correctly) has brought front and center the issue of "acceptance capacity" in our state's deer management plan.
In 2002 the Virginia Game and Inland Fisheries Department (VDGIF) established an Urban Archery Season to assist towns and cities with deer management issues. Here is a link to the VDGIF web page showing participating locales and their restrictions. If you go to the bottom of this page and read the background information first it will give information why this season was established. http://www.dgif.virginia.gov/hunting/urban-archery/
Last edited:
Thats really interesting Gordon. Some areas close to me have a real deer problem - but the fens are madly flat and there is no satisfactory backstop for a rifle. A bow would be a useful management tool.
Yeah. That's what I was pointing out earlier reference bowhunting being legal next to the flightline whereas firearms aren't.
That said, on other threads we've discussed the difference in approach where you're not allowed to take larger game with buckshot or slugs (some areas here are limited to shotgun only) Within their limited range (about 40 yards/meters for buckshot and nearer 100 for conventional slugs) they're every bit as effective as rifle ammo on deer sized game (more so in my experience) and far less dangerous in respect of over-travel.
Last edited:
I think the general issue here is margin of error. The laws as they currently stand mean that the lowest common denominator in society placing a non expert, engine room, shot in reasonable conditions with a legal calibre rifle should make a humane kill shot.
We are not talking dead eye Sniper or Robin Hood here.
As a Longbowman myself I would love to test my skill vs the skills of my forefathers but I have more respect for my quarry than that.
If bow hunting ever were to be legal then bows would need to be licenced and hunters pass a qualification. That's frankly where we are with rifles for Deer today.
I actually agree with Santaman that if large scale problem deer were to be culled that slug would be more effective than bow. Not sure what the potential range is on Slug but pretty sure there are at least 100 meter target competitions for it here in the UK. Whether at 100 meters there is enough KE delivered to make a humane kill likely is questionable but I wouldn't want to be hit by one. Regardless the BC of slug probably makes it preferable in British Reds hypothetical Fenland eradication program.
The laws on who and what can kill an animal in the UK are rightly prescriptive. They stop the inhumane slaughter of wildlife by Numpties. I long since came to the conclusion that common sense just isn't that common anymore and that there is a fair undercurrent of folk that are not right-minded.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
We are not talking dead eye Sniper or Robin Hood here.
As a Longbowman myself I would love to test my skill vs the skills of my forefathers but I have more respect for my quarry than that.
If bow hunting ever were to be legal then bows would need to be licenced and hunters pass a qualification. That's frankly where we are with rifles for Deer today.
I actually agree with Santaman that if large scale problem deer were to be culled that slug would be more effective than bow. Not sure what the potential range is on Slug but pretty sure there are at least 100 meter target competitions for it here in the UK. Whether at 100 meters there is enough KE delivered to make a humane kill likely is questionable but I wouldn't want to be hit by one. Regardless the BC of slug probably makes it preferable in British Reds hypothetical Fenland eradication program.
The laws on who and what can kill an animal in the UK are rightly prescriptive. They stop the inhumane slaughter of wildlife by Numpties. I long since came to the conclusion that common sense just isn't that common anymore and that there is a fair undercurrent of folk that are not right-minded.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited:
To be honest it's not that difficult with a modern hunting bow (which doesn't automatically mean a compound bow) and the typical bowhunting accessories: 1)Bowsights, 2)Mechanical releases, and 3) laser range-finders. The one thing these do NOT change is the effective range for a bow is still much, much shorter.
For me the skill of stalking is getting the rifleman to within 100 meters where a safe humane shot can be taken.
I'm not rubbish with a bow by any stretch but I wouldn't be confident of shot placement at that range and to hit a saucer sized target zone with certainty I would need to be way closer. It takes more skill.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm not rubbish with a bow by any stretch but I wouldn't be confident of shot placement at that range and to hit a saucer sized target zone with certainty I would need to be way closer. It takes more skill.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The effective range for slugs depends on several; factors. The typical shotguns you have now wouldn't be 100 yards (not reliably anyway) But once you swap out the choke for a slug choke (or the entire barrel for a dedicated deer gun) the range goes up to 100 yards/meters easily.
If you take it further and get a rifled choke (or barrel) and swap the standard slug for a sabot, you can reach out to 200 yards/meters with an effective lethal range of about 150. Of course if you increase your effective range too much, you're giving up the purpose you went to the shotgun for in the first place.
Last edited:
Why would you need to license a bow? They are not licensed now and if someone is willing to break the law they could hunt with them now. License the hunter for competence, sure but I see no reason why a bow should be licensed. With rifles right now not everyone who has a rifle is cleared to hunt with it - I don't see why it would be necessary to vary that for bows.
As for slug, I am cleared for slug now. Its certainly an option - and one I would like to see brought in - but it does go a heck of a way. Not accurately much over a hundred yards, but it travels much much further than an arrow. Some for of LG (Buckshot) would be a better alternative for many of the smaller UK deer species perhaps.
As I have said before, I don't want to bowhunt, but I think those who prove themselves capable should be allowed to. If the test is difficult, there will be few bowhunters, but I don't see why those who are capable should be forbidden from participating.
I'll just leave aside comment on the full auto bit previously - best let to lay.
That said I'm not sure exactly how to approach the plethora of comments following that!
I guess I feel obliged to comment given my close involvement with deer and previously noted stance that we live in a world governed by perception - of which there has been a very broad spectrum shown!
Toddy - as always a. you are a Mod and its a thankless job, but ultimately we all agree to abide by the rules; b. you are the embodiment of Hopolophobia we discussed elsewhere; and as there, I do not use that term pejoratively at all. I personally find your input illuminating and helpful. But I can see how your comments may have been read so as to justify some ire on Boatman's part. But cool comment and debate is the way forward. Without getting bogged down in a side issue, I simply do not see the 'logic' of your views on such things being applied in the same way to rope, cars, rolling pins, bricks etc - that's the Hopolophobia element. Again - not argument or criticism, just ultimately banter.
Within posts we've had the implication that rifle shooting on flat areas isn't safe. There are safety considerations, but safe shooting is a function of many elements - not least the actions of the shooter. At a very basic level, you must know in terms of a safe resting place if not the precise spot, where every projectile will come to rest and what it will pass through on its way. Flat ground is problematic for a backstop and risks bouncing a bullet. So a shooter chooses a very fast and relatively light bullet that breaks up readily and makes the ground slope - by using a high seat to alter the angles.
Keeping it to archery - that brings in an element of ballistics - light and fast tends to counter-intuitively perhaps - be safer. An arrow will skitter across ground more readily than a 3000 fps 50 grain bullet. Turning to Santaman - the shotgun slug has a lower effective range than most deer rifles; hence various US regulations mandating use etc. But it fits the profile of heavy and slow - it will bounce very readily. Some circumstances it works, but there are very few in the UK. This risks getting back into a 'gun' debate - it supposed to be about bows etc.
Toddy - hunting/sport/ food. All sporting shooting derives from originally food gathering. Fieldsports as we think of them really only developed in Victorian times and where the 'sportification' of food gathering previously done by servants. Some branches retain a clearer Sporting aspect, but deer stalking has retained a far closer link to food production. In current times, deer are taken and processed subject to Food Industry regulations, with Trained Hunter status required for any person submitting a carcase into the food chain.
Archery - like most fieldsports the participants are reticent/ low profile to a near suicidal degree - ie no voice. Hunting with bows was carried on through the 20th Century and at a reasonable level. It was never shouted about, but was in it's own way quite vibrant. Where did all the Commando training and gear come from in WW2? There are accounts of several officers actively 'hunting' Germans using a bow. But with no coherent voice they had no stake in democracy. Leading Archery suppliers like DG Quick undelined the general malaise we have in the Uk and refused to sell broadheads to UK customers and so on. Add in a few pictures in papers of ducks and Swans with arrows stuck in them and it was easy for the far better organised and much louder ( even then ) 'conversvationists' to push for a ban.
Its an interesting debate, but I suspect a relatively short lived one as the headlamp of the 14.10 Closure Train from Stoke Newington appears to be entering the tunnel.... and that in itself comments on the general debate.
That said I'm not sure exactly how to approach the plethora of comments following that!
I guess I feel obliged to comment given my close involvement with deer and previously noted stance that we live in a world governed by perception - of which there has been a very broad spectrum shown! Toddy - as always a. you are a Mod and its a thankless job, but ultimately we all agree to abide by the rules; b. you are the embodiment of Hopolophobia we discussed elsewhere; and as there, I do not use that term pejoratively at all. I personally find your input illuminating and helpful. But I can see how your comments may have been read so as to justify some ire on Boatman's part. But cool comment and debate is the way forward. Without getting bogged down in a side issue, I simply do not see the 'logic' of your views on such things being applied in the same way to rope, cars, rolling pins, bricks etc - that's the Hopolophobia element. Again - not argument or criticism, just ultimately banter.
Within posts we've had the implication that rifle shooting on flat areas isn't safe. There are safety considerations, but safe shooting is a function of many elements - not least the actions of the shooter. At a very basic level, you must know in terms of a safe resting place if not the precise spot, where every projectile will come to rest and what it will pass through on its way. Flat ground is problematic for a backstop and risks bouncing a bullet. So a shooter chooses a very fast and relatively light bullet that breaks up readily and makes the ground slope - by using a high seat to alter the angles.
Keeping it to archery - that brings in an element of ballistics - light and fast tends to counter-intuitively perhaps - be safer. An arrow will skitter across ground more readily than a 3000 fps 50 grain bullet. Turning to Santaman - the shotgun slug has a lower effective range than most deer rifles; hence various US regulations mandating use etc. But it fits the profile of heavy and slow - it will bounce very readily. Some circumstances it works, but there are very few in the UK. This risks getting back into a 'gun' debate - it supposed to be about bows etc.
Toddy - hunting/sport/ food. All sporting shooting derives from originally food gathering. Fieldsports as we think of them really only developed in Victorian times and where the 'sportification' of food gathering previously done by servants. Some branches retain a clearer Sporting aspect, but deer stalking has retained a far closer link to food production. In current times, deer are taken and processed subject to Food Industry regulations, with Trained Hunter status required for any person submitting a carcase into the food chain.
Archery - like most fieldsports the participants are reticent/ low profile to a near suicidal degree - ie no voice. Hunting with bows was carried on through the 20th Century and at a reasonable level. It was never shouted about, but was in it's own way quite vibrant. Where did all the Commando training and gear come from in WW2? There are accounts of several officers actively 'hunting' Germans using a bow. But with no coherent voice they had no stake in democracy. Leading Archery suppliers like DG Quick undelined the general malaise we have in the Uk and refused to sell broadheads to UK customers and so on. Add in a few pictures in papers of ducks and Swans with arrows stuck in them and it was easy for the far better organised and much louder ( even then ) 'conversvationists' to push for a ban.
Its an interesting debate, but I suspect a relatively short lived one as the headlamp of the 14.10 Closure Train from Stoke Newington appears to be entering the tunnel.... and that in itself comments on the general debate.
Buckshot works well enough on white tails here as long as the range is kept reasonable; but after all, that is the whole point in not using a rifle.
A slug certainly can ricochet. But in over 50 years of shooting my experience is that a standard slug (which is quite flat in comparison to a rifle bullet (much more aerodynamic) is far less likely to do so.
And while an arrow can do so, rarely have I seen one ricochet off of flat ground; more likely to burrow into it. Hence the need for special grass gripping tips when shooting ground animals such as bunnies.
Hypothetical situation BR. Firearms are stipulated for Deer by calibre and Energy. If bows weren't licensed there would be deer pincushioned by 30lb target bows all over the place.
Really can't expect Nanny State to let you run round with an unlicensed lethal weapon now the have acknowledged it's lethality by allowing you to hunt Deer with it. You could have someone's eye out with that you know?
Buck shot will certainly work for Deer (hence the name) but the meat damage would be horrendous.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Really can't expect Nanny State to let you run round with an unlicensed lethal weapon now the have acknowledged it's lethality by allowing you to hunt Deer with it. You could have someone's eye out with that you know?
Buck shot will certainly work for Deer (hence the name) but the meat damage would be horrendous.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Just don't see it myself. If people are willing to break the law to hunt with bows then they can do that already, I really can't see how allowing responsible, qualified and appropriately trained people to hunt with a bow changes that?
Sorry I may be missing the point here. If Bowhunting were to be legalised in the UK (never going to happen) then you would open up a whole load of licensing concerns in the media.
In honesty the fact bows and crossbows aren't licenced now is a mad mystery of Nanny State. So within a week there would be draft legislation to protect us from all the bad people with lethal weapons.
Katanas are restricted after all.
I'm not advocating any of this. I'm just making the point. At some point you might get to hear my Firearms Manifesto but that's off topic.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In honesty the fact bows and crossbows aren't licenced now is a mad mystery of Nanny State. So within a week there would be draft legislation to protect us from all the bad people with lethal weapons.
Katanas are restricted after all.
I'm not advocating any of this. I'm just making the point. At some point you might get to hear my Firearms Manifesto but that's off topic.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ahhh that we have a Nanny state that does illogical things because of irrational fear we can agree with
Thats is Santaman you have gone too far. The above is not a bow it is an automated arrow flinging machine
Hope the thread stays on topic. Its also handy to hear from folk who neither fling arrows or slugs.
Oakleaf, you are gravely mistaken; I have no fear of guns. I do have a fear of cretinous numpties with guns.
The clothing analogy was simply in explanation that I have no issue with bows per se, it's the same issue with cretinous numpties with bows.....and I hardly see how that justifies setting Edwin off. I honestly believe that hunting for dinner has been so much part of humanity that turning it into a sport purely for those tholed to the feudal system was a travesty.
No, the sporting laws support the 'sport' of those who could afford the kit, not those who simply wish to put food on the table.
I know it's your job to cater to those who can afford it, but most folks who have deer grazing their back gardens can't afford either the training or the legal equipment to turn them into dinner.
I also know areas where the deer are so much of a damned nuisance that they're considered vermin...and it's not just in BR's flat and arable bit of the world either.
Same with salmon fishing beats...sport, not dinner.
I do think that Santaman2000's suggestion might at some point be feasible, I really can't see bowhunting being permitted (legally) any other way. Not here. I think the infrastructure, the education/certification/recording would take a lot of forethought though.
As ever, we'll see. In the meatime though, we get to admire Dwardo, Grooveski and other's beautiful workmanship
cheers,
Toddy
The clothing analogy was simply in explanation that I have no issue with bows per se, it's the same issue with cretinous numpties with bows.....and I hardly see how that justifies setting Edwin off. I honestly believe that hunting for dinner has been so much part of humanity that turning it into a sport purely for those tholed to the feudal system was a travesty.
No, the sporting laws support the 'sport' of those who could afford the kit, not those who simply wish to put food on the table.
I know it's your job to cater to those who can afford it, but most folks who have deer grazing their back gardens
can't afford either the training or the legal equipment to turn them into dinner.I also know areas where the deer are so much of a damned nuisance that they're considered vermin...and it's not just in BR's flat and arable bit of the world either.
Same with salmon fishing beats...sport, not dinner.
I do think that Santaman2000's suggestion might at some point be feasible, I really can't see bowhunting being permitted (legally) any other way. Not here. I think the infrastructure, the education/certification/recording would take a lot of forethought though.
As ever, we'll see. In the meatime though, we get to admire Dwardo, Grooveski and other's beautiful workmanship
cheers,
Toddy
Similar threads
