‘Flagrant Flouting’ Of Shooting Laws

Press, Volume CV, Issue 31052, 6 May 1966, Page 14

‘Flagrant Flouting’ Of Shooting Laws

Random shooting in the regions of Bromley, Bexley, Ferrymead, the Estuary end of the canal reserve, and between the sewage ponds and St. Andrews Hill has brought a protest from the Canterbury chairman of the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society (Mr T. M. C. Hay). “It would seem, particularly near the beginning of the duck-shooting season, that the laws which forbid firearms where the Estuary shores are within the city limits are being flagrantly flouted,” Mr Hay said.

Establishment of a central agency composed of all or any unit of the controlling authorities concerned was advocated by Mr Hay. Such an agency should be readily accessible and have power to act promptly to prevent illegal shooting on public or private land. Mr Hay suggested that some difficulty arose from divided responsibility. An old city by-law made it illegal to carry, let alone discharge, a firearm within the city limits except in special cases by the armed services and the police. The Police

Offences Act and the Arms Act also covered indiscriminate shooting. There were also offences under the Wildlife Act, policed by acclimatisation societies.

Mr Hay said he did not suggest that any of these authorities knowingly shed its responsibilities in preventing irresponsible shooting, but the absence of one specific office allowed poaching to occur just beyond the city’s doorstep.