Due to recurring contests over the use of the .223 for deer hunting, this poll might clarify the various stances on the subject.

Question:
What is your opinion on the use of the .223 for hunting white tail deer?

Choices:
I think it is adequate if used within the parameters of its limitations.
I do not believe that the .223 is an adequate cartridge for hunting deer under any conditions.
I don't give a damn either way, if the shooter is satisfied with the results they are getting, that is all that matters.
Even though many deer are killed annualy with the .223, I simply believe there are better choices.

 

I voted for the "I don't give a damn..." option, because I truly don't. As long as you aren't wounding a lot of deer, I don't care what you're shooting them with. 90% of wounded animals are a result of operator error. That includes picking the wrong bullet, making a bad shot, or attempting a shot that is outside the capabilities of the cartridge you're using.

I wish a bunch of Inuit's would get in on this poll.

FYI, I voted for adequate within the parameters of its limitations, I have seen this cartridge work many times. I believe with good bullet choices (partitions, tsx, ttsx), moderate ranges and good shot placement it is just as effective as any other cartridge combo on whitetail deer. DEAD IS DEAD, you can only kill something dead there is no such thing as more dead.

I voted the same as hammer. I load a 63gr Sierra and a 55gr Trophy Bonded for my hunting partner and the 223 is about the only rifle he hunts with. He is currently setting up a 2600 acre tract for a hunting club and has tags to reduce the deer population by about 50. He has shot 35-40 deer in the 140-160 pound range so far and has not lost a single deer, in fact only one went more that 50yds. The shots have ranged from 50yds to 150yds. We agreed that 200yds was probably about the max range he should consider. I am loading some 55gr TSX for him to try next. A good bullet, proper shot placement and a lot of experience are the key. My hunting time is limited so I carry either a 25-06 or a 270Wby so I can take a marginal shot if I have to.

quote:

Originally posted by ColoradoMatt:
I wish a bunch of Inuit's would get in on this poll.

you mean the great spray and pray hunters of the north?

quote:

Originally posted by hammer2506:
FYI, I voted for adequate within the parameters of its limitations, I have seen this cartridge work many times. I believe with good bullet choices (partitions, tsx, ttsx), moderate ranges and good shot placement it is just as effective as any other cartridge combo on whitetail deer. DEAD IS DEAD, you can only kill something dead there is no such thing as more dead.

I am with hammer.
But I think a 6.5x55 or a 6.5-06 is the perfect deer cartridge

quote:

I wish a bunch of Inuit's would get in on this poll.....
you mean the great spray and pray hunters of the north?

Perhaps you guys should consider knowing what you are talking about rather than parroting what you read on some website. I had the privilege of actually hunting with Inuits (not Inuit's) and Athabascans in the 27 years I lived in Alaska, and IME they were superior hunters to the average "white" hunter in the same areas. Yes, many of them use Mini-14s etc. but certainly not all of them. The ones I hunted with were excellent shots with fine hunting skills....but then they were subsistence hunting, not sport hunting. Ignorant racial comments like those above are really uncalled for.

BTW, there are no 'deer' found in areas where the Inuit hunt.



.

I had a chance to work with some Inuit national guard. Their use of terrain for cover is outstanding, and don't think for a second they cant shoot!

quote:

Originally posted by TX Nimrod:

quote:

I wish a bunch of Inuit's would get in on this poll.....
you mean the great spray and pray hunters of the north?

Perhaps you guys should consider knowing what you are talking about rather than parroting what you read on some website. I had the privilege of actually hunting with Inuits (not Inuit's) and Athabascans in the 27 years I lived in Alaska, and IME they were superior hunters to the average "white" hunter in the same areas. Yes, many of them use Mini-14s etc. but certainly not all of them. The ones I hunted with were excellent shots with fine hunting skills....but then they were subsistence hunting, not sport hunting. Ignorant racial comments like those above are really uncalled for.

BTW, there are no 'deer' found in areas where the Inuit hunt.



.

Interesting. I didn't know that caribou are not deer. Or are you saying that the Inuit do not hunt Caribou?

In my experience and observations of the Indigenous of the North AK Native people, when I lived there was that they were more wasteful with game that I'm used to seeing or find acceptable. Indeed they are subsitance hunters and feed a lot of the animals they shoot to their dogs, mostly to avoid the cash economy of purchasing dog food. The stink of rotten meat and fish, hides and bones, dog and human shit during the spring thaw in the native villages is something memorable.

The main thing that the average "hunter" hasn't the option of just moving on to another animal if one wounded gets away, nor do we usually chase them down with snow machines, or wait till they cross the river and shoot them in the head along side the boat.

It's best that I don't say too much, but in summary I found nothing to respect about them or their methods, ethics, choice of cartridges, etc.

You should see all the dead and rotten seals bobbing along the shore line in spring. Those were the ones wounded and got away, and the intrepid native subsistance hunter merely moved on to another.

BTW, many of the young guys up there now use one of the various .17 rimfires for caribou and wolves and seals. After all they have the boats and snow machines to run them down and finish them off.

.17 RF cartridges are cheaper than 223s.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:

quote:

Originally posted by ColoradoMatt:
I wish a bunch of Inuit's would get in on this poll.

you mean the great spray and pray hunters of the north?

you do not have any idea what it means to hunt for food.....food that makes a difference in your life, and the life of your family or village.

think about it

A person respectful of the resource, whether subsistence hunter or sport hunter, avoids tools and methods prone to apathetic waste. IMO, there is something wrong in a society that finds it acceptable, due to heritage, rights. ignorance, or whatever.
KB

How about one time in the history of AccurateReloading, everyone just vote on the poll and if you have something to add concerning the actual subject of the poll that is great.

Last time I checked, the subject of the poll is:

quote:

What is your opinion on the use of the .223 for hunting white tail deer?

Please notice, NOTHING related to Inuits/Eskimos/American Samoans/Starving Pygmies In Africa or Illegal Aliens From Mexico or Saturn, is mentioned!

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
A person respectful of the resource, whether subsistence hunter or sport hunter, avoids tools and methods prone to apathetic waste. IMO, there is something wrong in a society that finds it acceptable, due to heritage, rights. ignorance, or whatever.
KB

I was talking about the use of the 223 for white tail deer hunting.

Someone else brought up the Native subsitance thingy, again, as some form of justification for bad behavior. Justification takes many forms.

However, I get your point and agree, and will try to respect it.

I think this is a good poll and will show something useful of opinion on this matter.

BTW, I voted for the fourth choice. The first choice is good too.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
In my experience and observations of the Indigenous of the North AK Native people, when I lived there was that they were more wasteful with game that I'm used to seeing or find acceptable. Indeed they are subsitance hunters and feed a lot of the animals they shoot to their dogs, mostly to avoid the cash economy of purchasing dog food. The stink of rotten meat and fish, hides and bones, dog and human shit during the spring thaw in the native villages is something memorable.

The main thing that the average "hunter" hasn't the option of just moving on to another animal if one wounded gets away, nor do we usually chase them down with snow machines, or wait till they cross the river and shoot them in the head along side the boat.

It's best that I don't say too much, but in summary I found nothing to respect about them or their methods, ethics, choice of cartridges, etc.

You should see all the dead and rotten seals bobbing along the shore line in spring. Those were the ones wounded and got away, and the intrepid native subsistance hunter merely moved on to another.

BTW, many of the young guys up there now use one of the various .17 rimfires for caribou and wolves and seals. After all they have the boats and snow machines to run them down and finish them off.

.17 RF cartridges are cheaper than 223s.

KB

Since its devolved to this, I'll chime in. During the quite a bit of time I've lived and recreated in and around our nation, I've not observed a measurable difference in wasted game between the different cultures or societies.

Some white folks that live here or visit here make an admirable effort at utilizing the resource to the best of their ability, some don't. The same with our Native friends. The death of the Mulchatna caribou herd has been attributed to over hunting on the part of sport/ trophy hunters taking too many trophy bull caribou. The death of the Nushagak Peninsula caribou herd has been attributed to over hunting by subsistence hunters traveling via snowmobile.

The number of shot and lost seals found on Alaskan beaches, (I've never seen one,) pale in comparison to the numbers of wounded and lost waterfowl found in and around waterfowl hunting areas in the Lower 48. I have always enjoyed working my bird dogs in heavy cattails on public hunting areas hunting up cripples my fellow white sportsmen failed to retrieve.

Its common around rural AK to hear about or see empty freezers in the spring/ early summer due to the families that own them eating everything inside over the course of the winter months. These guys aren't dining exclusively on Quizno's, TGI Friday's and Oscar Meyer, we're talking about moose, salmon, and whats left of the caribou herd. Wildlife in Bush AK is considered food and although there are well documented cases of waste, you can't, and I mean you can not get a laugh out of anyone in a village over wasting a fish or a front quarter.

As to the .22 or even the .17, yes it is used a lot out here. While hunting in a boat, moose are frequently taken at close range and some consider the .223 adequate based on their experience. Last fall both moose I took were less that 100 yards, the bigger of the two less than 50. I used a .375. Actually, many rural Alaskans of a variety of colors are gun nuts like Kabluey and I and have graduated up to larger cartridges. One of my native friends used a 7x61 Sharp &Hart, his sons used 7x57's and 708's. Although they'll do some winter hunting for moose, I know they already have quite a bit stored.

For decades members of my family used .22cal rifles to hunt deer and were wildly successful. Sots were carefully chosen, bullets carefully placed and steaks carefully packaged. I guess if I lived in deer/ bear country I might choose a slightly larger cartridge to hunt with, but in those circumstances it worked fine, and no one who was actually aware of the results could argue to the contrary.

i have a 223. but im taking my .260 rem. or my 7mm-08

quote:

You should see all the dead and rotten seals bobbing along the shore line in spring. Those were the ones wounded and got away, and the intrepid native subsistance hunter merely moved on to another.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:
The number of shot and lost seals found on Alaskan beaches, (I've never seen one,) pale in comparison

Think about it -- for every one seal seen rotten and bobbing on or near the beach, there are too many to count that simply sunk or washed away from the beach, or have already past the bloat and sunk anyway. Seeing several at the same time, during the spring, is a big indicator, IMO.

In October, I rode the ferry from Juneau to Bellingham, then drove across country. I carried a small freezer in the back of my truck, and set up an inverter to run it. When I lived in AK all year, I subsisted in winter off frozen salmon, halibut, blue berries, deer and moose when I could get it. Now I do the same, living in Georgia all winter. I brought back about ten gallons of frozen SE Alaska blueberries, and some highbush cranberry jelly. Those blueberries are special, like nothing found in the store. Very intense color and flavor. I'm discovering new ways to utilize them -- what a treat.

So, I'm familiar with the subsistance lifestyle. I also utilize the local deer and hogs.

It's a real pleasure to pass up buying beef and pork from the local grocery store. I don't even like the taste of the stuff. But I do buy some of the pond raised catfish filets and some chicken.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
How about one time in the history of AccurateReloading, everyone just vote on the poll and if you have something to add concerning the actual subject of the poll that is great.

Last time I checked, the subject of the poll is:

quote:

What is your opinion on the use of the .223 for hunting white tail deer?

Please notice, NOTHING related to Inuits/Eskimos/American Samoans/Starving Pygmies In Africa or Illegal Aliens From Mexico or Saturn, is mentioned!

+1

c'mon folks, stick to the topic!

quote:

Originally posted by drewhenrytnt:

+1

c'mon folks, stick to the topic!

C'mon folks, let's be sporting. Whatever can be said about the 223 and whitetails, has already been beat to death.

This poll pretty much sums up opinion.

We might as well chit-chat about something more interesting than merely arguing about the damned 223.

I for one like the wild blueberry topic.

KB

I voted don't give a damn.

I have used it and within its limitations it worked great. If someone doesn't like it and insists the only caliber for killing deer should be the 458Lott more power to them.

Within its limitations I like and use 22Hornet.

'Squatch

I apologize for bringing up Inuits. I too get annoyed when topics get thrown off topic. Looks like I am responsible this time.

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kabluewy:



I think this is a good poll and will show something useful of opinion on this matter.

BTW, I voted for the fourth choice. The first choice is good too.KB

X 2 roger

Ive killed enough deer with the 222 and 223 and 22-250 to know its as good as anything else when used within its perimaters as the first statement stated..My kids, grand kids, all shot their first few deer with the 222, then later graduated to larger guns as they aged..the never developed a flinch and they all shoot very well indeed...We favored the 60 gr. Hornaday SP or HP, an mostly got pass thrus and what bullets we recovered showed perfect expansion..Other than a few longer shots most all shots were with in 100 yards and most around 50 to 75 yards. Most all behind the shoulder heart and lung shots.

Based on the wording, statements 1, 3 and 4 are perfectly compatible with eachother or separately so, it looks like only; 2% of respondents have any real issue with it. Nuff said.

I wouldn't have a clue, this is something that has never been attempted. If someone did attempt it, I've never seen it mentioned on this forum. I suspect if they tried it, they made the deer mad and got killed or mauled and was unable to report it. Couldn't see a .223 doing anymore than making it mad. You would need someone backing you up, maybe with a bow. Crazyhorse where in the world did you come up with such a creative idea?

Have worked with it some using 60 gr NPTs. With careful impact point selection they work fine. However I prefer the 6.8 in the same platform. Is more forgiving.

Each to their own!

quote:

Originally posted by ColoradoMatt:
I apologize for bringing up Inuits. I too get annoyed when topics get thrown off topic. Looks like I am responsible this time.

Kabluey is just a regular Troll. Put him on ignore.

Many Thanks to all who have participated in this poll, either thru your votes or comments. Personally, I voted for choice number four.

One remaining question I have, how many of you feel or believe that you could be considered an ANTI, concerning another person's choice of using the .223 to hunt white tails?

Could we get a list of rifles that don't have to be used within their parameters. Does adequate mean it killed the deer?

I may be stepping into it, and not quite sure what the full and varying defitions of ANTI are, in this and related context, but I think the 223 should be banned as a viable, and legal, deer cartridge in the whole country. I don't consider that ANTI anything, but realistic and practical. IMO, many people simply need to be told, by law, what's right and what's wrong. They can't seem to figure it out for themselves, so society has to sort it out for them. Stop signs are a simple example that comes to mind - they are not mere suggestions, nor do they violate someone's heratige or fundamental rights.

The problem with the 223 is that too many idiots think more highly of the cartridge's potential than is due. Or simply don't care.

KB

KB, are you able to grasp the concept that hunting conditions are not exactly the same continent wide?

Please answer that.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
KB, are you able to grasp the concept that hunting conditions are not exactly the same continent wide?

Please answer that.

Agreed.

However, idiocy seems to know no geographic boundaries or limitations.

The purpose of stop signs are universal - are they not? To stop idiots from bad behavior, (at least one simple aspect of it) or at least provide penalty for it.

KB

Can you possibly remain just a little civil and act like an adult?

A lot of NVA and Viet Cong went to hang with Buddha. I can personally attest to more than 600 by my Ranger Team alone.

Thousands and thousands of Muslims have gone to meet Allah.

Besides, if you consider the SE 35% of the US has deer the size of cocker spaniels, ie 80-125 pounds renders a lot of the issue moot.

It does, however, require a proper (SP) accurate load, and the common sense to use it appropriately.

But, so does a 375 H&H.

Rich

PS: You might consider it on the minimalist end of the spectrum, but none of you want to jog out about 350yds and let me take a shot at you with one in my bolt gun.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
Can you possibly remain just a little civil and act like an adult?

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
One remaining question I have, how many of you feel or believe that you could be considered an ANTI, concerning another person's choice of using the .223 to hunt white tails?

You asked a blunt question and I gave you my blunt answer. I didn't mean to be uncivil. I'm ANTI using the 223 for deer hunting, and think it's a farce to claim that it's a violation of someone's right of choice to be against the use of it, any more or less their choice to run a stop sign, or not. IMO, the use of the 223 for deer has much potential to feed the zeal of real ANTI hunting/gun freaks.

I'm serious. I really think the 223 is a bad choice as a deer hunting tool, and all the justifications can't make it better. The simple solution is to just ban it for deer hunting, as many States correctly have already.

Of course not all who use it are fools or idiots, it's just that you're amongst bad company.

The frequency of those who make no distinctions of bullet weight or design seems to be much higher with the 223 compared to any other cartridge. Those are the idiots I'm talking about and they can not be persuaded any other way, IMO, than to obey the law.

KB

I personally think there are better choices. (#4)

In my mind, the .223 is an expert's gun for deer. You need to know the anatomy quite well, you need to have the self discipline to pick your shots well and give up when things are not right.

Unfortunately for those who like to shoot deer ethically with the .223, there are too many folks with weird ideas out there, discounting just the guys with an exaggerated sense of their own abilities. The guy who takes an AR 15 with 55 grain FMJ's and a pair of 30 round mags taped together and says that he should post because he has 60 rounds "ready to rock and roll." I also see way too many kids out there using a .223 because they can't handle more. Sorry, a child out on his first season or 3 is not an expert (by definition)... Sorry, when I grew up you came and watched the hunting until you could use a capable gun to the elders of the group's (NOT just dad's) satisfaction that you were safe and skilled enough- and gee, all of us hunt to this day- and the cousins that were allowed to hunt birds with a .410 at age 8? Nope.

Personally I think the military argument is worthless (ISS) because the design parameters were to get a rifle that would cause wounding to decrease the OPFORCE's combat effectiveness by requiring them to use manpower to deal with the wounded- kind of a silly idea, but then lots of McNamara's were.

Now at my point of hunting and shooting, if I was injured in some way that all I could shoot is a .223 would I deer hunt with it? I suppose, but I doubt that I would shoot half the deer I shoot now.

quote:

A lot of NVA and Viet Cong went to hang with Buddha. I can personally attest to more than 600 by my Ranger Team alone.Thousands and thousands of Muslims have gone to meet Allah.Besides, if you consider the SE 35% of the US has deer the size of cocker spaniels, ie 80-125 pounds renders a lot of the issue moot.It does, however, require a proper (SP) accurate load, and the common sense to use it appropriately.But, so does a 375 H&H.RichPS: You might consider it on the minimalist end of the spectrum, but none of you want to jog out about 350yds and let me take a shot at you with one in my bolt gun.

Damn good analysis Sir.

KB, I voted for number 4 also on the poll, BUT, I really believe that legislating what can or cannot be used for hunting deer, based on the ideas/thoughts/beliefs/concepts of one segment of the hunting public, only opens up other avenues for those opposing hunting and guns to take our rights away from us.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
KB, I voted for number 4 also on the poll, BUT, I really believe that legislating what can or cannot be used for hunting deer, based on the ideas/thoughts/beliefs/concepts of one segment of the hunting public, only opens up other avenues for those opposing hunting and guns to take our rights away from us.

I'm in favor of rights too, of course -- actually I'm keen about it. Taken to its logical path, why ban any cartridge "choice" for deer if it was all about "rights" exclusively? Or why have seasons or methods regulated, if it's all about "rights" or a free-for-all attitude.

This ain't just about "based on the ideas/thoughts/beliefs/concepts of one segment of the hunting public". This is the can-o-worms of this topic. The truth, physics, about the real potential of the 223 is measurable and repeatable and ain't a matter of opinion, but fact. We spend a lot of time arguing the variables both human and circumstantial, and the angle of the dangle, but the FACTS of the potential (physics) of the 223 are measurable and are constant.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
Many Thanks to all who have participated in this poll, either thru your votes or comments. Personally, I voted for choice number four.

One remaining question I have, how many of you feel or believe that you could be considered an ANTI, concerning another person's choice of using the .223 to hunt white tails?

I think this is a dilemma.
I totally think that a 223 is an adequate cartridge for Whitetails in the right hands, but for many hunters it is not at all.

The question is if it should be made illegal to use it for deer because some people that use it shouldn't use it.
I think not.

If so, what about shooting a deer past 100 yards?
Should that be made illegal too? As lots of people are not skilled enough with their gun to shoot a deer at 100 yards. Not to talk about 200, 300 yards and longer.
How about shooting at animals running/walking?
And lots of other situations where it demands that the hunter has knowledge, skills and self restrain.

If everything that some hunters are not skilled enough to do or use should be made illegal, we would not have much hunting left.