what is a 22-250 for

yog1

i was wondering if some of you wise men/women had ever come across the before,
i live in co tyrone and i am passed to own and use a 22-250 for vermin control, i also own land in co donegal witch i farm, i apply'd for a visitors pass for my shotguns, 22lr and 22-250,
but they tell me that i need a deer license for my 22-250, i was then told that a 223 is more commonly used for fox, so i ask'd what should i do, buy a 223 just for fox's in donegal?, to witch the reply was more or less yes,,
i ask'd to speak to the super and was told that he hadn't been shown the application and that he wasn't issuing 22-250 without a deer license, but that they would put it to him?

have any of you been granted a 22-250 for vermin control or do i have to go buy a 223, (witch wont be happening, and they can do without my 40 euro per year per gun for the 22-250)

It wasn't me!

Just highlights a glowing failure in the legislation really. The sooner they make it a 6mm lower limit for deer the sooner the pissing about over .22 centrefires being deer rifles or vermin guns and the arbitrary distinction disappears.

Arcto

I'm not an expert but I was told it is possible to get a 250 licence if you also include a letter stating that you will not be using it for shooting deer. But then its totally up to the super weather or not to grant it or not.

Anybody know if this is correct?

Cass

I have not been in this position so can only talk from a "common sense" point of view.

The 22-250 is deemed to be the minimum deer legal caliber. A .223 is commonly applied for as a varmint rifle and would not be classed as deer legal (irrespective of what the ballistics, etc state). To get a deer caliber rifle you must have a deer license.

To be honest i'm slightly surprised at the decision because you are already licensed on the rifle and merely wish to shoot in the ROI with it. My only advice to you would be to go to the station where you are submitting your request for the visitors permit. Explain to to them face to face that you farm and are licensed on the rifle in your home town. Your intention is to shoot vermin ONLY and as the deer season has ended it would be months before another license could be gotten even if you were so inclined. Also the extra cost involved in buying another rifle to satisfy a Supers requests.

I know you probably have explained all this in your application, but you would be amazed at what a face to face meeting can accomplish. Be ploite and to the point.

At the end of the day the Super has the final word on whether you get the permit. I'm sure there is probably some sort of appeals process, but would you be bothered with all that effort? Either way try the "more with hiney" approach and see what the word is.

Glensman

You've found yourself in a bit of a crappy situation.

I would have said the 22-250 is an out and out fox calibre. To big and expensive for rabbits, and considered to small for a lot of deer.

Just as an aside, you cannot be granted anything over .240 (essentially .243 and up) in the 6 counties without passing the deer stalking course. It's strange that the Donegal Super is refusing 22-250...

ejg

Just get a little 220 swift.
edi

Half-cocked

I got my .22-250 licensed for foxes, the deer license came along a lot later. Seems to depend on your local Super. It might be worth pointing out to him/her that a .22-250 is only deer legal with 60gr bullets. With 55 or less, it isn't legal and therefore not a 'deer calibre', you shouldn't need a deer license for it. The reality is that now larger calibres are available to ROI shooters, the .22-250 falls between 2 stools. Too light for deer, too heavy for foxes. It's a round that was developed for long range varminting over the vast prarie lands of the USA and perfect for coyotes. It only came into use here because we were forced to use it as the largest calibre available for deer for many years. Even then, the authorities screwed up - .22-250 is actualy .224, meaning that they should never have been licensed under the restrictions brought in in the 70's, thankfully the powers that be only read to 2 decimal places at the time, or just took what was on the ammo box as gospel;)

It wasn't me!

Half-cocked wrote: »

.22-250 is actualy .224, meaning that they should never have been licensed under the restrictions brought in in the 70'

Yeah, but so is every other .22 centrefire out there! A .22LR bullet should measure .223"

Tackleberrywho

.22-250 Great for Munties

Glensman

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Yeah, but so is every other .22 centrefire out there! A .22LR bullet should measure .223"

I think the .22magnum is .224?

The brother in law's licence reads that he is licenced for a .22magnum with a bore not exceeding .220 of an inch.
Those licencing boys really know their stuff! :rolleyes:

It wasn't me!

Glensman wrote: »

I think the .22magnum is .224?

The brother in law's licence reads that he is licenced for a .22magnum with a bore not exceeding .220 of an inch.
Those licencing boys really know their stuff! :rolleyes:

Yep, the .22LR is a thou smaller.

Half-cocked

The point being they only worked to 2 decimal places when they pulled everything 'over' .22 calibre. Unless you had something that clearly stated its 'real' size ie .223 (of course there is all that military calibre crap as well). So it begs the question, if I had developed a wildcat round, say .228 calibre, but called it the '.22 half-cocked special' or something similar, would it have been licensable?;):D

Tackleberrywho

Half-cocked wrote: »

The point being they only worked to 2 decimal places when they pulled everything 'over' .22 calibre. Unless you had something that clearly stated its 'real' size ie .223 (of course there is all that military calibre crap as well). So it begs the question, if I had developed a wildcat round, say .228 calibre, but called it the '.22 half-cocked special' or something similar, would it have been licensable?;):D

.223 is .224 :eek::eek::eek::eek:

It wasn't me!

Half-cocked wrote: »

The point being they only worked to 2 decimal places when they pulled everything 'over' .22 calibre. Unless you had something that clearly stated its 'real' size ie .223 (of course there is all that military calibre crap as well). So it begs the question, if I had developed a wildcat round, say .228 calibre, but called it the '.22 half-cocked special' or something similar, would it have been licensable?;):D

And the answer is almost certainly. Nobody ever said the system was smart!

Savage93

yog1 wrote: »

i was wondering if some of you wise men/women had ever come across the before,
i live in co tyrone and i am passed to own and use a 22-250 for vermin control, i also own land in co donegal witch i farm, i apply'd for a visitors pass for my shotguns, 22lr and 22-250,
but they tell me that i need a deer license for my 22-250, i was then told that a 223 is more commonly used for fox, so i ask'd what should i do, buy a 223 just for fox's in donegal?, to witch the reply was more or less yes,,
i ask'd to speak to the super and was told that he hadn't been shown the application and that he wasn't issuing 22-250 without a deer license, but that they would put it to him?

have any of you been granted a 22-250 for vermin control or do i have to go buy a 223, (witch wont be happening, and they can do without my 40 euro per year per gun for the 22-250)

You can license a 22-250 for vermin, deer legal only with 65grain rounds, explain that to Super

steyrman2

Savage93 wrote: »

You can license a 22-250 for vermin, deer legal only with 65grain rounds, explain that to Super

22-250 deer legal with 55 grain not 65 most 22-250 will keyhole anything over 60 grain unless the rate of twist is changed from stanard

Half-cocked

steyrman2 wrote: »

22-250 deer legal with 55 grain not 65 most 22-250 will keyhole anything over 60 grain unless the rate of twist is changed from stanard

Last year (and they may move the goalposts again this year) the NPWS ruled that 60gr was the minimum for deer. I had this confirmed by NPWS on the phone and in writing. IDS also confirmed it. Some folks were told 64gr was the minimum. This was because some clown in NPWS didn't realize they could scroll up the list of permitted bullet weights and 60gr was at the top of the list.

I agree with you steyrman about anything over 60gr being useless, even 60gr causes trouble with some guns. Another bureaucratic mess, ban the very accurate 55gr and allow the less accurate 60gr = more chance of injured animals.

Kat1170

Got my 22.250 for vermin shooting long before I got DHL. Had to go to local station for interview, but face to face chat meant I could explain reasons for getting said gun a lot better than I could in a letter.

Would people who have obvisouly never used a 22.250 please stop calling for it to be withdrawn as a deer hunting caliber. I have NEVER had a deer take as much as a single step when shot with my 22.250, a bigger caliber is fe#k all use if the person using it doesn't know what they are doing. Bigger is not always better.

Tackleberrywho

Kat1170 wrote: »

Got my 22.250 for vermin shooting long before I got DHL. Had to go to local station for interview, but face to face chat meant I could explain reasons for getting said gun a lot better than I could in a letter.

Would people who have obvisouly never used a 22.250 please stop calling for it to be withdrawn as a deer hunting caliber. I have NEVER had a deer take as much as a single step when shot with my 22.250, a bigger caliber is fe#k all use if the person using it doesn't know what they are doing. Bigger is not always better.

Truth be truth, between 1973 and 1999 most deer were shot with less:eek:

The .22-250 is a fine calibre, if we could reload I'd consider one myself

doyle61

was chatting to a lad who shoots with both a 30-06 and a 22-250 and he reackons that the 22-250 is leathel with head shots and never had an injured animal. ild like one to go with my .308 but because of the uncertanty about weather it will stay a deer hunting calliber im leaning towards a .243 instead.........pitty:(

podge.243

doyle61 wrote: »

was chatting to a lad who shoots with both a 30-06 and a 22-250 and he reackons that the 22-250 is leathel with head shots and never had an injured animal. ild like one to go with my .308 but because of the uncertanty about weather it will stay a deer hunting calliber im leaning towards a .243 instead.........pitty:(

i was in the same boat with the 22.250 i had for fox's i had it for over 5 year's but when i went to license it last year the super said i need to get a deer license to keep it, so off i went to apply and the wildlife department said there not issuing any more 22.250 for deer so i sold it and bought a tikka t3 .243 and boy do i love that gun they are a perfect cal for deer and fox'es

It wasn't me!

Kat1170 wrote: »

Got my 22.250 for vermin shooting long before I got DHL. Had to go to local station for interview, but face to face chat meant I could explain reasons for getting said gun a lot better than I could in a letter.

Would people who have obvisouly never used a 22.250 please stop calling for it to be withdrawn as a deer hunting caliber. I have NEVER had a deer take as much as a single step when shot with my 22.250, a bigger caliber is fe#k all use if the person using it doesn't know what they are doing. Bigger is not always better.

True enough, and I know plenty of people in the same boat, but if I said the same thing about using a .22 Hornet, would you agree that it should be a deer calibre?

DR6.5

The 22-250 is a head and neck shooting round for deer, for someoneone starting out stalking it would not be the best choice of calibre.

Even with the 22-250 with neck shooting sika stags in the rut youll find that a lot of the time youll have to knife the stag,

I know a couple of people still using it for deer and really rate it.


dr6.5