56 THE COMPLETE WILDFOWLER 
Government does not encourage or restrict shore-shooters 
unless it has serious reasons to do so, the Crown is generally 
considered neutral in this matter. 
SHOOTING GAME ON FORESHORES AND 
CROWN LANDS 
As to killing game on foreshores, it may be questioned very 
much whether this can be legally done where no grants of 
right exist. On tracts where no one can claim a right to 
prevent the public’s enjoying sport, certainly no one can claim 
the game to be met with thereon. Consequently, for all the 
purposes of common law, a certificate to kill game keeps a 
shooter within the law, but, despite this, he cannot state that 
he has any right to kill the game on permitted foreshores. 
Before a person can state he possesses a right to shoot game 
he must either be legally permitted to do so by invitation or 
written permission, or be an owner or occupier of land holding 
rights to the sporting. With regard to foreshores and lands 
under the ruling of River or Crown Commissioners, the letting 
of sporting rights is not entertained. The tenancy of the 
land takes with it, in the ordinary sense, the sporting that may 
be involved. In reality, the sporting over Crown lands is 
vested in the Crown; but, as the importance of such a right 
over foreshores may now be cited as neutral, the view as to any 
sporting rights has been likewise considered by those dealing 
with the affairs in question. It would therefore be just as 
likely to suppose (since the Crown has not exercised any enjoy- 
ment with the game on foreshores and small outlying properties) 
that to reserve any game rights would mean that no one could 
legally shoot game either as Crown tenant or free gunner. 
Such things are quite possible, however, and, if the Crown so 
wished, it appears that all shooting on foreshores and the shoot- 
ing of game on lands under its control could be stopped. The 
tenancy of the land would, of course, under the Ground Game 
