Sadly, no license is required tp possess air weapons Steve. There's a minimum age for possession, under which they must be supervised by a person over 21. I assume though you mean a license to shoot vermin? Again, none is required or exists, and no control other than the necessary authority to shoot on land being obtained. Farmland is the obvious example, where the permission of the farmer would be needed, but a back garden is 'land' for this purpose and the occupants authorise themselves. (in the same way a farmer would on his own land)
There's nothing wrong with shooting air weapons in a garden environment, provided it's done responsibly and safely, but we all know that's often far from the case!
The vermin list is subject to change from time to time, due to the monitoring of species numbers etc., and fairly recently Starlings and Sparrows have been removed from the list and Canada Geese added to it.
Shooting Game species, pheasants, etc and wildfowl is a different matter - a Game License (license to shoot game) is required and is renewable annually. Obviously, the Open and Closed seasons on these species must be strictly observed and even in the Open Season, it is illegal to kill or pursue game on Sundays, Christmas Day or Good Friday.
You're wrong on a technicality. The wording of the general licence (which in effect gives an exemtpion to the Wildlife and countryside act, which gives protection to all wild birds) says:
Permits authorised persons to kill or take certain birds, or to take, damage or destroy their nests; or to take or destroy their eggs, for the purposes of: (i) preventing the spread of disease; and (ii) preventing serious damage to livestock, foodstuffs for livestock, crops, vegetables, fruit, growing timber, fisheries or inland waters. The species on the licence are: Common name Scientific name
Canada Goose Branta canadensis
Crow Corvus corone
Dove, Collared Streptopelia decaocto
Gull, Great Black-backed Larus marinus
Gull, Lesser Black-backed Larus fuscus
Gull, Herring Larus argentatus
Jackdaw Corvus monedula
Jay Garrulus glandarius
Magpie Pica pica
Pigeon, Feral Columba livia
Rook Corvus frugilegus
Woodpigeon Columba palumbus
Permits authorised persons to kill or take certain birds, including the taking, damaging or destruction of their nests or the taking or destruction of their eggs for the purposes of conserving wild birds. The species on the licence are: (same as above)
Permits authorised persons to kill or take certain birds, including the taking, damaging or destruction of their nests or the taking or destruction of their eggs for the purposes of preserving public health or public safety. The species on the licence are: (same as above).
So, technically, you have to have a reason to kill them. there is no such thing as 'vermin' in law, and no open season on any bird species. So Collared Doves are actually protected, unless you can prove one of the above conditions. In effect this is hard;y ever enforced, despite a test case by the RSPCA which successfully prosecuted someone for shooting starlings in their garden (back when they were on the list) without a valid reason. And despite this exemtion in the licence:
"This licence can only be relied on in circumstances where the authorised person is satisfied that appropriate
non-lethal methods of control such as scaring are either ineffective or impracticable."
and also:
"This licence authorises acts which would otherwise
be an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside
Act 1981. Failure to act within the purposes of this
licence as set out in paragraph 1 or failure to comply
with the terms and conditions set out in paragraphs
3 to 10 may lead to an offence against that Act. The
maximum penalty available for an offence under Part
I of the Act is a fine of £5000 and/or a six month
custodial sentence."
Again, the fact that the dove was seen to be shot in their garden, and they were in possession of it, is more than 'your word against theirs' That's called evidence and eye-witness account. The pellet clearly left the garden. The dove was clearly shot without reason in disregard of the General Licence. Those facts are unavoidable. So that's an offence under firearms laws and wildlife laws. And the police wonder why public confidence in them is not what it should be? If that is your first and only experience of policing, then it doesn't give a good impression, does it? Not only has this happened at least twice, but the police left these children with the means to do it again! I think that's shocking. Just what else aren't they enforcing?
