Smallest caliber for shooting deer

Lullymore24

4200fps wrote: »

Sure a photocopy or photo of the deer licence will prove nothing at all.
He simply used a serial number of a deer caliber and put down the caliber etc 243,308 or what ever and sent it off and he got his licence that way. No way he put down .223. I can get a serial number for any caliber I wish by making one phone call even if I never buy the gun

False Declaration = Criminal Offence

Cass

So they lie?

In that case they are no better than poachers, and deserve what they get.

4200fps

Lullymore24 wrote: »

False Declaration = Criminal Offence

True but its fact. It goes on. Actually for example I wish to buy a rifle caliber .243 and I send of the particulars and get my deer licence but in the mean while I change my mind and go for a 6.5x55 instead with the dealer. No crime done there and does go on. Deer licence has arrived and i'm shooting them legally.
Caliber of what you use is not printed on deer licences. Not on mine anyways

richiedel123

4200fps wrote: »

Sure a photocopy or photo of the deer licence will prove nothing at all.
He simply used a serial number of a deer caliber and put down the caliber etc 243,308 or what ever and sent it off and he got his licence that way. No way he put down .223. I can get a serial number for any caliber I wish by making one phone call even if I never buy the gun

The application went in saying it was a 223 with the proper serial number and everything.I seen the application and all before it went in. He put down 55 grain bullets on the application and they rang back saying we don't have them on file we have different ones would you use these and he said yes thats grand and got his licence.
I in no way condone it. I said not to apply he is only wasting his time but he proved me wrong. I personally think it'sddefinitely not good enough for deer. I think the lowest limit should be 243 anyway. 22 250 is a light enough round too. If ya cant get a head or neck shot chances are ur deer is gonna run once hit and prob not found.

rowa

No one has mentioned the 5.6x57 rws yet , i know a guy with one and he swears by it , the bullets are .22 in calibre but are heavier in weight and construction ~ 70grains, only fly in the ointment is the cost, €80 a box !

http://www.chuckhawks.com/5-6x57.htm

4200fps

richiedel123 wrote: »

The application went in saying it was a 223 with the proper serial number and everything.I seen the application and all before it went in. He put down 55 grain bullets on the application and they rang back saying we don't have them on file we have different ones would you use these and he said yes thats grand and got his licence.
I in no way condone it. I said not to apply he is only wasting his time but he proved me wrong. I personally think it'sddefinitely not good enough for deer. I think the lowest limit should be 243 anyway. 22 250 is a light enough round too. If ya cant get a head or neck shot chances are ur deer is gonna run once hit and prob not found.

I'll not disagree but its a one off mistake, Jez I got some hassle with the .220swift when I mentioned 55grain. They said no will not be accepted only 60 grain. I've heard few reports of guys few years back who killed several deer with a 223 and much a weaker round like the .22 Hornet too but i'm not going down that road in conversation. Its all down to shot placement no matter what caliber it is as long as it has reasonable energy and I think the law of using a caliber that produces energy of 1700ft/lbs or greater is a good law in this matter

Cass

richiedel123 wrote: »

He put down 55 grain bullets on the application and they rang back saying we don't have them on file we have different ones would you use these and he said yes thats grand and got his licence.

That's unbelievable. NO .223 round/bullet is sufficient. So instead of telling him to go off and get a proper rifle for the job they offer him another round that's still not LEGAL?

mark.17hmr

Well lads this seems to have rightly kicked off a debate.. I agree if a rifle is not up to standards set out by the NPWS it shouldnt be used.. I just thought that there being availablity of the min 60grn round and being of the .22 calibre the .223 was overlooked but didnt know about the 1700ft/lbs.. as you can guess i dont shoot deer.. went with the uncle once and loved it hopefully get out this year before the season closes...

richiedel123

Ezridax wrote: »

richiedel123 wrote: »

He put down 55 grain bullets on the application and they rang back saying we don't have them on file we have different ones would you use these and he said yes thats grand and got his licence.

That's unbelievable. NO .223 round/bullet is sufficient. So instead of telling him to go off and get a proper rifle for the job they offer him another round that's still not LEGAL?

I think they said use a 69 grain bullet it's ok with that one. I think it's s##t that he got his licence. They must not care about what u use to kill the deer anymore. It looks like they just want them down in numbers if they are granting licences for 223. It couldn't be a mistake surely because they rang back saying to use a different bullet and it will be ok

tomcat220t

richiedel123 wrote: »

I think they said use a 69 grain bullet it's ok with that one. I think it's s##t that he got his licence. They must not care about what u use to kill the deer anymore. It looks like they just want them down in numbers if they are granting licences for 223. It couldn't be a mistake surely because they rang back saying to use a different bullet and it will be ok

Hi richiedel123,even with the .223 ....what 69gr hunting rounds are there ?
Regards ,Tomcat .

richiedel123

tomcat220t wrote: »

richiedel123 wrote: »

I think they said use a 69 grain bullet it's ok with that one. I think it's s##t that he got his licence. They must not care about what u use to kill the deer anymore. It looks like they just want them down in numbers if they are granting licences for 223. It couldn't be a mistake surely because they rang back saying to use a different bullet and it will be ok

Hi richiedel123,even with the .223 ....what 69gr hunting rounds are there ?
Regards ,Tomcat .

I don't have a clue lad don't have a 223 so couldn't tell ya bullets just relaying the details is all

4200fps

tomcat220t wrote: »

Hi richiedel123,even with the .223 ....what 69gr hunting rounds are there ?
Regards ,Tomcat .

Federal and Fiocchi have 69gr for .223 rem

Cass

richiedel123 wrote: »

I think they said use a 69 grain bullet it's ok with that one. I think it's s##t that he got his licence. They must not care about what u use to kill the deer anymore. It looks like they just want them down in numbers if they are granting licences for 223. It couldn't be a mistake surely because they rang back saying to use a different bullet and it will be ok

The thing about all this is the license is basically invalid. The rifle is not legal so even if they gave it to him, if he is stopped with a .223, and ranger worth his salt will know a .223 is not sufficient, and he is going to find himself in a whole lot of crap.

As i said above. I met a lad once with a semi auto who had an unrestricted license. He said it's not his problem that the Gardaí made the mistake. Great attitude.

Same thing here. Irrespective of who is at fault the rifle is illegal, and hence the license on it invalid.

tomcat220t

4200fps wrote: »

Federal and Fiocchi have 69gr for .223 rem

Hi 4200fps,are the above 69gr .223 rounds HUNTING ammo or target ?

richiedel123

[/QUOTE]
The thing about all this is the license is basically invalid. The rifle is not legal so even if they gave it to him, if he is stopped with a .223, and ranger worth his salt will know a .223 is not sufficient, and he is going to find himself in a whole lot of crap.

As i said above. I met a lad once with a semi auto who had an unrestricted license. He said it's not his problem that the Gardaí made the mistake. Great attitude.

Same thing here. Irrespective of who is at fault the rifle is illegal, and hence the license on it invalid.[/Quote]
That is the truth. I said it to him it cant be right and to be careful. In fairness the people in npws should be more careful and shouldn't give out licences like that

4200fps

The ranger would lift it on the spot without a doubt I recon. I wonder if he said to the ranger he home loaded the rounds with Semtex and they are putting out over 1700ftlbs Anyways as long as he's killing them humanely and causing no harm but he should go up a level

cookimonster

Just a side note, was given a medium sized carcus last season to process, friend of a friend job. Two separate wounds, lot of prime meat wasted. Found remains of one of the rounds under the skin, entered one shoulder blade exited the opposite blade and lodged under hide. Me being me measured the base of the round and even allowing for distortion it fell short of the supposed .243 caliber that it was ment to have been shot with.
When I questioned the shooter he told me it had been a long shoot (200m), hit it in the hind quarter when it moved and then dropped it with the secound. When I asked about the caliber saying it looked smaller then .243, he went red, asked did I shot my self and then admitted it was a .223.
Needless to say I told my friend to tell his friend not to bring his 'butchered kills' around to me for processing.
Worse still I can across other licensed shooters who knew about this and did'nt think this was an issue. So here we have a typical senario a guy with a gun, shooting beyond his and his guns capability

4200fps

Impact of 1000ft/lbs of energy from any caliber will knock any deer with good shot placement and you will see guys cry when they have a runner from using a big caliber reasons for was bad shot placement. Some of the best .243 ammunition produces 1000ft/lbs at 300 yards. I wouldn't hesitate to cull deer shooting of the bi-pod at 250 yards with a .243. Some deer are harder knocked than others. During the rutt you will find most stags reluctant to go down, In general Sika are the hardest knocked in our country. Reds be the easiest but not during or coming up to the rutt as they be the hardest. They be like Arnold Schwarzenegger's

Sparks

Deer licence has arrived and i'm shooting them legally

Nope. You're shooting with a licence issued based off information you knew was incorrect but didn't correct. Renders the licence void, strictly speaking, like getting an unrestricted licence issued by a super for a restricted firearm.

4200fps wrote: »

True but its fact. It goes on.

It's still a crime.
This is the kind of thing that politicians love to seize on for campaigns as well, usually leading to the kind of crackdowns we saw in '06 and '09.
And I'd bet euros to danishes that the very people who are doing this and causing the ruckus would be among the very loudest voices complaining about the changes as being daft...

4200fps

It's still a crime.
This is the kind of thing that politicians love to seize on for campaigns as well, usually leading to the kind of crackdowns we saw in '06 and '09.
And I'd bet euros to danishes that the very people who are doing this and causing the ruckus would be among the very loudest voices complaining about the changes as being daft...[/QUOTE]

I see where your coming from but if you got a deer licence for a 243 for example and later on during the season you bought a 6.5x55 for example you are not breaking the law as its a legal caliber for shooting deer

Sparks

4200fps wrote: »

I see where your coming from but if you got a deer licence for a 243 for example and later on during the season you bought a 6.5x55 for example you are not breaking the law as its a legal caliber for shooting deer

I wouldn't be betting the house on that.

You got the deer licence giving details of your firearm; you then changed the firearm. There's a fairly solid argument that your licence is no longer valid.

Sure, you changed to something that's still legal, and sure, you'd get the deer licence reissued without problems so it'd just be paperwork; but you said it yourself - lads are bypassing the paperwork to shoot with illegal rifles, so how would the PTB know that that's what you're doing?

Besides which, the paperwork's there for a decent enough reason in this case (to stop eejits blasting away at deer with everything from #8 shot to .22lrs to arrows), so not doing it because you know yourself that you're okay does rather take any weight away from any complaints you might have about people who were using unsuitable firearms for hunting. At some point, people have to step up and do things the right way, if only to set the tone for everyone else...

4200fps

Sparks wrote: »

I wouldn't be betting the house on that.

You got the deer licence giving details of your firearm; you then changed the firearm. There's a fairly solid argument that your licence is no longer valid.

Sure, you changed to something that's still legal, and sure, you'd get the deer licence reissued without problems so it'd just be paperwork; but you said it yourself - lads are bypassing the paperwork to shoot with illegal rifles, so how would the PTB know that that's what you're doing?

Besides which, the paperwork's there for a decent enough reason in this case (to stop eejits blasting away at deer with everything from #8 shot to .22lrs to arrows), so not doing it because you know yourself that you're okay does rather take any weight away from any complaints you might have about people who were using unsuitable firearms for hunting. At some point, people have to step up and do things the right way, if only to set the tone for everyone else...

The deer licence doesn't state your caliber on it. They are not going to refuse any deer caliber. Theres 100's of deer hunter who change their deer calibers to a different deer caliber during season and do not re apply for a deer licence as they don't have to. It doesn't state on application form that its procedure to either. Whats the point, none what so ever in my opinion. I wouldn't be wasting my time or theirs. The Gardai will issue the transfer no problem as you are a deer licence holder and when you renew the following season NPWS won't pass any heed on the new caliber as its legal for deer hunting. That's my view on it. I change my rifle during season for example. I bump into a Ranger one evening and he asks for my licence, I show him, he inspects rifle and see's its a deer caliber. Bobs your Uncle he won't see anything wrong either will a Garda as I'm licensed to that firearm. That's how it goes and thats fact!

Sparks

4200fps wrote: »

The deer licence doesn't state your caliber on it.

But you have to give the caliber to get it.
My drivers licence doesn't tell you where I did my test, but I still had to do the test to get the licence; and if I'd faked the letter saying I'd passed, the licence would be void.

Put it this way; Joe Q Poacher starts off with a .308, but has to sell it 'cos he can't afford it anymore, but closes out the season taking head shots at deer with a CZ .22lr. Anyone think his licence would be valid if he's caught?

4200fps

Sparks wrote: »

But you have to give the caliber to get it.
My drivers licence doesn't tell you where I did my test, but I still had to do the test to get the licence; and if I'd faked the letter saying I'd passed, the licence would be void.

Put it this way; Joe Q Poacher starts off with a .308, but has to sell it 'cos he can't afford it anymore, but closes out the season taking head shots at deer with a CZ .22lr. Anyone think his licence would be valid if he's caught?

I know but they want a that information to insure its a caliber that's legal for deer before they issue the licence to you. What I said goes on nation wide and if they change for an under powered caliber and get caught thats their loss

4200fps

Sparks we need the bit of banter on this lol;) holding no grudges or not cause any mini war either. I see exactly where your coming from but I'm just explaining what I see go on that I would do which I never seen or heard of it being illegal thats all. If its illegal there's very poor guidelines on the application. I may be wrong but I may be right. NPWS is the only crowd that can answer this really but I wouldn't bother thats just me anway

It wasn't me!

My understanding is that the licence from NPWS entitles the bearer to hunt and kill deer. In order to apply for that licence, you have to prove you have access to a rifle which conforms to the laws set out for such a purpose. There's nothing in any of the written law to suggest that the application is to hunt deer with the rifle mentioned. For instance, if I have six suitable rifles, I would put down one on the form, as it satisfies the NPWS's requirement that I have access to a suitable firearm, and they then license me, whereupon I can use any of my suitable rifles for the task as circumstances require or the mood takes me. That's the law as I understand it. Any suggestion that only the rifle detailed on the form is allowed to be used is a definite inference, and I'm not sure there are grounds to support it.

patsat

It wasn't me! wrote: »

My understanding is that the licence from NPWS entitles the bearer to hunt and kill deer. In order to apply for that licence, you have to prove you have access to a rifle which conforms to the laws set out for such a purpose. There's nothing in any of the written law to suggest that the application is to hunt deer with the rifle mentioned. For instance, if I have six suitable rifles, I would put down one on the form, as it satisfies the NPWS's requirement that I have access to a suitable firearm, and they then license me, whereupon I can use any of my suitable rifles for the task as circumstances require or the mood takes me. That's the law as I understand it. Any suggestion that only the rifle detailed on the form is allowed to be used is a definite inference, and I'm not sure there are grounds to support it.

I'd be thinking along the same lines as that.

If it was the case that you could only use the rifle you put down on the license then wouldn't that mean I can't shoot deer on land I haven't sent in written permission for, even if I had sufficient permission from the land owner!

Cass

It wasn't me! wrote: »

There's nothing in any of the written law to suggest that the application is to hunt deer with the rifle mentioned.

There are other instances of no written/specific law on a matter, however it does not make it legal or right.

Any suggestion that only the rifle detailed on the form is allowed to be used is a definite inference, and I'm not sure there are grounds to support it.

They request the make, serial number, calibre, and bullet weight. You fill this in wit the calibre/rifle you intend to use. It does not ask for firearm(s), and there is also a warning on the form in the for of;

Any person who, for the purposes of obtaining a license under the Wildlife Act 1976 to 2010 makes any statement or gives information in which they know to be false shall be guilty of an offence. Penalties include fines, and forefeiture of firearms.

So providing the details of (example) my .308, and then using a .220/.243/6.5/.270, etc. is a false declaration. IOW i got the license based on the information of my .308 which they deemed sufficient, and then used another rifle, that while still legal, was not "vetted" or "authorised" by the NPWS to use.

patsat wrote: »

.............. then wouldn't that mean I can't shoot deer on land I haven't sent in written permission for, even if I had sufficient permission from the land owner!

While the chances of this being an issue, it's possible. As with the rifle i seek the license on the lands that i tell the NPWS i intend to shoot. They grant the letter based on the land, other applciations (and amount of them) o the same of bordering lands, etc. So if i shoot on numerous other lands that i have not told them about or included in my applciation would they have granted the license in the first place?

This is all academic. There is the way some think it is, how others think it is, how it should work, and how it actually works. Perhaps an e-mail or call to the NPWS to get their stance on the matter.

However with inadequate funding for rangers, etc to enforce these rules in whatever manner they were intended means irrespective of which is correct the way it is, is most likely the way it will stay.

4200fps

Answer this. If you handed in your permissions and you got granted a deer licence for them lands and during the season you get another permission and just say someone else already got declined there as the ranger feared there wasn't enough deer for culling etc and you go ahead and shoot them I think your going to get into big trouble if your nabbed by the local ranger. I was refused on 1 permission last year by a ranger for a similar reason. He said there was not enough deer to accommodate the amount of shooters licensed for that land. I rang him and that's what he said so if I arrived down there and shot deer on lands I was declined I know right well i be screwed big style if caught. Would I be right or wrong? He says no and I say yes? I'd say no

It wasn't me!

I disagree Ezri. Like I say, the licence entitles the bearer to hunt and kill deer. You can't have an offence by inference. A false declaration would mean that you do not have access to the firearm in question, for example, rather than that you don't use that specific rifle *only*. Using a suitable rifle other than that with which you applied is not an offence, since there's no clause on the licence which specifies that the rifle applied with is the only one to be used. It's the same as if I apply for a rifle for target shooting, and use it for target shooting, and then go hunting with it. I'm not committing an offence, since I'm authorised to use the rifle for any legal purpose (provided the licence has no conditions to the contrary). If anything, your post supports my point. It's obvious that there are a lot of people with multiple deer-legal rifles around. If the form weren't simply trying to ascertain that you had a suitable means to kill deer, there would logically be space for the multiple rifles you might intend to use.