Wyoming G&F proposing Firearms Changes - .223 Legal for deer

I've never found that to be the case. Good shots leave good trails, usually. Bad shots usually don't.
Exit wounds can be very helpful, especially for tree stand hunters whose entry holes tend to be high and not bleed much.
I've never noticed that larger bullets leave more blood.
Frankly, when the shot is right, the trail is easy and short. When the shot is wrong, the trail is tough and long. That's the only thing I've seen.
The problem with personal experience is that it's limited and fairly random. That's why I like to rely on the experience of (trusted) others ALSO. I've personally seen what should have been all but perfect shots result in lost animals and shots that should have been awful result in a dead animal in 30 yards. It just happens.
An animal (any animal) which has deflated lungs will be dead in no more than 150 yards or so. If its not, you didn't deflate the lungs.
I go back to the fundamental argument though. It's not that I would recommend a 22 cal for deer hunting, it's that I think the government generally ought to keep their friggin nose out of peoples choices.
 
I have told this a couple of times before on here. I shot a doe straight broadside through both lungs with a 300 Weatherby using 150 grain factory loads supposedly 3500 FPS. I found two little drops of blood and the deer ran about 300 yards. Only reason I found her is because I saw where she went. I'm not sure what all that means other than that bigger faster bullets aren't going to give you perfect results all the time either.
 
My suggestion would be to de-regulate the cartridge and have a restriction on the bullets
A 223 is ok for deer if the bullet used doesn't break up or fragment (as many do because they were designed as varmint bullets.)

Perhaps the best way Wyoming law could be modified would be to allow center fire 22 cal rifles that fire bullets of 60 grains or heavier and those bullets should pass some sore to test overseen by Game and Fish to be sure they will hold together. It may sound impractical, but I'd bet there are several wardens in this state who would volunteer their time to test bullets in ballistic media to get them on the "approved list"

As a gunsmith, I would do the same if the Game and Fish Dept wanted some sort of test. I'd do it free of charge.

I have a lot of experience with such things. I was the CEO of a bullet company for a while, and doing ballistic testing is something I’d be happy to do for hunters if they would provide the bullets to test. Some will not be adequate I know, but some other would I am sure.

I think a 257 Roberts and a 243 Winchester should be the “ruler” to judge the 22s by. I’d set up a test to measure penetration and cavitations on the standard 243 and 257 and see which .224 bullets would give equal penetration with at least 80% of the cavitation. I believe that would be realistic criteria to judge by.

Just a thought……….
What are your thought gentlemen?
 
Wyosmith, I think that worrying about what hunters use is the old "A solution looking for a problem." From Internet chatter here and at THR, it doesn't appear that losing deer from use of a .223 is of any significance. Too many happy campers, as near as I can tell.

We've had the same thrash about the 7.62x39.

The bullet folks R&D has given us useful bullets for deer and as near as I can tell, hunters look to buy effective ammo.
 
What are you going to use to test them? I was sitting at the range one day and while talking to someone, a groundhog came out in front of the 100 yard line. I had a re-cut Arisaka (6.5x55) with open sights. The guy with me didn't have his gun out yet so he said "Go ahead". That 160 grain RN tore it in half. Only a small piece of skin holding it together. That was a "Deer bullet". That same bullet will go through a couple packs of tightly bound newspapers before it starts to deform. I swung on a moving deer and shot an 8" maple tree (It only wounded it because I saw it grew over later) about 15 feet in front of me. It went all the way through and had a jagged hole coming out. You would think 8" of green maple would expand a 7x57 140 grain bullet to the point where it would not exit. On the other hand, I never had expansion problems in soft parts of deer with it. I don't think you can accurately regulate bullets to game.
 
Wyosmith said:
Just a thought……….
What are your thought gentlemen?
Click to expand...

My first thought is just what Art said, a solution looking for a problem.

I understand your concerns but in the many places wherein 22 caliber weapons are already legal for deer we are not seeing a problem.

On top of that, many personal stories shared in this thread and many others provide ample evidence that simply using the right bullet is not the end all, be all solution.

People get lucky with entirely inappropriate choices and unlucky with cartridges and bullets that should be ridiculous over kill. (I've shot woodchucks with 12ga slugs and every single one has made it back to it's hole, leaving a nasty mess of blood and guts behind, yet in years of trying and hundreds killed, only one has escaped my .204Ruger)

In short, I just don't think the problem is nearly the magnitude that you do. I don't really think there's a problem at all.
 
Well, after last night's public meeting, I won't be surprised if Wyoming allows .223 for deer and antelope. I will also be surprised if they put any bullet weight restrictions into the new law.

Most were for the change, some dissenting. Many of the same arguments posted here were vioced by sportsmen.

Thaks, hunters.
 
I still don't see how the bullet weight restriction would work from an enforcement standpoint. Other than pulling a bullet and weighing it I'm not sure how it could be done.
 
Well, after last night's public meeting, I won't be surprised if Wyoming allows .223 for deer and antelope. I will also be surprised if they put any bullet weight restrictions into the new law.
Click to expand...

Wyoredman,

What was the consensus on 357s in pistol or rifles?
 
Kraigwy,

It seemed to me that the few people who showed up were mostly for all the proposed changes.

I think the G&F are thinking of bringing the Wyoming regulations concerning firearms for hunting more in line with other states. I think their ultimate goal is to make the Out-of-Stater feel more comfortable with the Wyoming regs, thus they may get more applications?

Just my personal thoughts. But I think the regs as proposed, will get reccomended to the Commisssion for ratification.

We will see, next year.

P.S. The removal of the Ft-lbs of energy requirement for the .35 calliber cartridge is intended to remove part of the law that was nearly un-enforceable. The new law for pistol type cartridges will be based on diameter (0.35" min) and OAL (1.5") min.

Here is a link to the actual proposed Regulation: http://wgfd.wyo.gov/web2011/Departments/Hunting/pdfs/REGULATIONS_CH32_DRAFTAUG120002860.pdf
 
Last edited:
I don't see any problem with allowing 223 for deer.

As my father used to say, it's the indian and not the arrow.

I've taken 300+ lb. hogs with my AR carbine without problem but I had to be patient to wait for the perfect opportunity. Most bad shot on a game with a 223 would not have ended any better if the shooter used larger caliber/cartridge.

You can't make up for bad shot with "good" ammo.
 
alright I got in on this way too late for my ADHD to allow me to read the whole thread so I'll just jump in and add my .02 that may compound what has already been spoken.

223 is legal in my state. I grew up in Montana which has no caliber restrictions whatsoever. this is just a personal observation based on my local area growing up and seeing what family and acquaintances were using but a large percentage of deer were being harvested by 22lr when i was growing up. these were usually(but not always) shots to the quintessential kill zone, not shots to the head, spine or neck. I would also like to say that a point blank shot on a deer in south eastern Montana is almost unheard of. you are lucky if you can get within 100 yards of them before they bolt.

living in Idaho now the only game I'm aware of that is legal to be hunted with 22lr are grouse with everything else either being shotgun only(turkey) or centerfire(everything else) so 204 ruger or 223 is the smallest many people go. I always hunted with 243, my best friend usually hunted 30-30 and my older brother usually either packed his 243(until it became a christmas present for my little brother) or his 7mm REM MAG(total overkill IMHO) but while I was on active duty I commissioned my brother to build me an Tahunua001-SPEC AR15 in 5.56/223 and he whined the entire time he built it that it was going to weigh 10 pounds and be unbalanced as heck and only good as a benchrest rifle until I recieved an email one day titled "I hate you sometimes".

interested in what this was all about I opened it and it contained 2 photos. the first was my older brother standing over a 200 pound whitetail buck holding MY AR15 that he had just recently finished building. the second was a google earth screen shot marking out where the shot took place, 250 yards. I guess he decided my specs were not nearly as bad as he originally suspected.

223 is more than just a varmint round and is more than powerful enough for deer, though limited personal experience with pronghorn shows that you may need more energy at long range than what a 223 is capable of delivering. I was never able to get within 600 yards of those skittish beasts and I would barely trust a 223 to take down a skunk at that range.
 
I'm not interested in the 223 for hunting, I sure they are satisfactory for deer/antelope.

Shoot I used one for a sniper rifle and it falt works.

I don't don't have any hunting type rifles in 223 and with a ton of other rifles I dont see me buying or building one. I'll probably just stick to my Model 70 Featherweight in 257. Its worked for years.

However I do like the ideal of using my Marlin 94 in 357 for deer. I think it would be neat to take a horse back riding trip and bringing some a deer shot with that rifle.
 
kraigwy,

My gut feeling is that next year you will be able to saddle your pony, stick that ole' 94 in the scabbard and have at it! Momma will be proud of you when you ride up with that nice young buck hanging over the cantle.:D
 
If you're anti .223 for ethical reasons then you most definitely should be anti-archery, shotgun and muzzle loader.

The right shot at the right ranges the .223 will do the trick.

The selection of ammo the last couple of years are leaning towards deer bullets.

If the hunter is an idiot with a .223 then he is an idiot with any hunting weapon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top