straightpull6547
Well-Known Member
No it doesnt, its just the deer act was written before .204's were invented.
.204
- Thread starter cowsmart
- Start date
- Status
No it doesnt, its just the deer act was written before .204's were invented.
simonl
Well-Known Member
I'm so glad that the police & Scottich government are happy with what you're doing.
It's not been done before for good reason, based upon decades of analysis of ballistics & biology. You said in your first post that you were *thinking* of getting a 204 for roe. People responded and a reasonable conclusion might have been to reject the idea: Call it a collective feeding frenzy if you're particularly sensitive. I thought it was constructive debate.
You're deluded if you think you're a pioneer of some marvellous combination of calibre/bullet/twist that will become mainstream. If it was for target shooting then there are plenty of people who would help endlessly.... But you're not plinking, and your stubbornness about proceeding is (in my opinion) likely to lead to unnecessary suffering of deer, based on my experience with my 204. (edit: on smaller game)
Last edited:
SussexFallow
Well-Known Member
Last edited:
I take on board what you say but your reasoning doesn't appear to stack up as the Deer Act doesn't mention calibre (for Scotland) just bullet weight, velocity and energy.
Best wishes.
straightpull6547
Well-Known Member
look at home office guidance, its quite explicit, it says .222 and above for roe in Scotland.
I've looked at HOG again and the calibre table for initial good reason refers to .222 as a guide but paragraph 13.34 states The legislative requirements for the shooting of deer in Scotland are based on the performance of the ammunition, not the calibre of the rifle.
Scotland13.34 The legislative requirements for the shooting of deer in Scotland are based on theperformance of the ammunition, not the calibre of the rifle. Ammunition must be “designed 112 Guide on Firearms Licensing Lawto deform in a predictable manner”. Article 3 of the Deer (Firearms etc.) (Scotland) Order1985 makes different provisions for the shooting of Roe deer in Scotland. A calibre is not stipulated but the bullet weight must be not less than 50 grains, the muzzle velocity notless than 2,450 feet per second and the muzzle energy of more than 1,000 foot pounds.In practical terms, this means a calibre of .222 or greater, rather than the .240 or greater for shooting Roe deer required in England and Wales. For deer in Scotland other thanRoe, bullets of not less than 100 grains, and a muzzle velocity of not less than 2,450 feetper second and a muzzle energy of not less than 1,750 foot pounds are all required. The1985 Order also allows the use of a shotgun in certain limited circumstances, but for landmanagement reasons only. Closed seasons are also different in Scotland (see chapter 14).Otherwise the general comments on deer stalking above apply.
Perhaps it may be an idea to consider how much experience the police and Scottish government have with regard to deer management before considering then to be gurus. I suspect not much beyond interpreting the existing regulations. I concede that the 204 may slip through the loophole created by the omission of calibre but lets face it, it is clear from this thread that a lot of stalkers with many years experience regard this as being a rash and foolhardy errand based on unsound thinking and potentially preservation of ego. As has quite rightly been pointed out the 204 was not around when the legislation was draughted so has understandably been omitted. There is no doubt that the 204 is a capable calibre for the purpose it was designed, i.e. fox and small game, but there is a huge difference between a fox with live weight of 18lbs or so and a deer of between 30 and 70lb in weight. Add to that the lack of bullets of suitable construction and you have the makings of an entirely preventable disaster. What will happen when your shot placement is imperfect or the wind blows your bullet to the side and you hit the shoulder blade. You can't pretend it won't happen because it will sooner or later. When this happens and a second finishing shot is needed (perhaps a so called Texas heart shot on a mobile deer) what is your plan then? Can you be sure that your bullet will reach and destroy the vitals? If you can't be sure of that then do you not have the responsibility to choose a rifle that will be humane in this circumstance?
I agree with you entirely. (I use a 308 for all deer). I was just responding to straightpull6547 who said the 204 wasn't legal for Roe in Scotland. Best wishes.
the calibre is used in the USA very effectively on coyotes with a body weight similar to that of roe, and as to the 'lot of stalkers with years of experience'...50% of the folks on here only own air rifles, hence the way they follow like sheep, trying to sound knowledgeable and clever with comments to boost their own confidence...the other 50% go on two or three paid stalks a year and sit in a high seat for 4 hours, great experience in deed....
A Guy Out West
Well-Known Member
I don't know of any state where that would be legal. There might be some, but no place I have ever hunted, .22 caliber is usually the minimum. Some states it's .24, minimum.
your problem is the .204 is a varmint round and just legal with the larger bullets..I have fetched up the .243 a few times which you have ignored..please answer this.... the .243 is a varmint round and is just red legal with the heavier bullets, now a couple of .243 owners I know use 85 or 87 gr on reds as they cannot get 100+ to stabilise which is fine by me as a deer cannot tell the difference between 100 and 87...do you have a problem with anyone shooting reds with a .243?
oh and as to the rest of it....if the shoe fits
oh and as to the rest of it....if the shoe fits
Last edited:
Why you asking me sweet cheeks ? About .243
If your going to quote ...quote the correct person there are other people with Sauer as PART of their username
I've never said it was a pure varmint round .....I've never said anywhere on this thread .204 was wrong .....
Comment I made was you pinched a bit for saving shoulders and got runners with a .22-250
My comment was stop pinching , hit em in the Heart instead of rear lung and see a difference .
But to answer yer question .....my first rifle was .243 & it shot 100grn and I shot red hinds with it . & I wouldn't go below 100grn as it's illegal up here
Some folk think it's unsuitable for a rutting stag or whatever .....their call their choice their opinion .
Now ask whoever you were meaning to about .243
But they may be out with their air rifle .....
Or
Maybe stuck up a high seat on a paid stalk
Paul
If your going to quote ...quote the correct person there are other people with Sauer as PART of their username
I've never said it was a pure varmint round .....I've never said anywhere on this thread .204 was wrong .....
Comment I made was you pinched a bit for saving shoulders and got runners with a .22-250
My comment was stop pinching , hit em in the Heart instead of rear lung and see a difference .
But to answer yer question .....my first rifle was .243 & it shot 100grn and I shot red hinds with it . & I wouldn't go below 100grn as it's illegal up here
Some folk think it's unsuitable for a rutting stag or whatever .....their call their choice their opinion .
Now ask whoever you were meaning to about .243
But they may be out with their air rifle .....
Or
Maybe stuck up a high seat on a paid stalk
Paul
Last edited:
sorry for quoting you..it was the wrong person..post edited
Last edited:
SussexFallow
Well-Known Member
Out of curiosity what distances do you plan to shoot the roe at ? Will you be head or body shooting ? Are you planning to take many ? Will you be eating the venison if chest shot ?
If you think that, why are you seeking advice/experience on this forum?
- Status
Similar threads
