Jump to content


Photo
* * - - - 1 votes

Fox Control With A .22


  • Please log in to reply
119 replies to this topic

#46 Deker

Deker

    Extreme Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,501 posts
  • Location:Berkshire

Posted 02 November 2014 - 04:33 pm

So this is what annoys me. I can shoot a fox with pigeon shot at 30 yards but can't shoot a fox at 100 yards with my 22wmr? I know they have to draw the line somewhere but 17hmr and 22wmr are surely powerful enough to kill a fox at 100 yards.
 
At 150 yards my 22wmr retains more energy than my 22r subsonic at the muzzle.


The latest Home Office guide lists both HMR and WMR as suitable for fox, it is of course a guide, but if you have an issue with your region not granting fox for your WMR perhaps you should ask them why as the Home Office says its ok!

 

:thumbs:


  • ratbuster and charlie caller like this

#47 Matthew Phillips

Matthew Phillips

    Born Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 137 posts
  • Location:Gloucestershire

Posted 02 November 2014 - 08:01 pm

 

The latest Home Office guide lists both HMR and WMR as suitable for fox, it is of course a guide, but if you have an issue with your region not granting fox for your WMR perhaps you should ask them why as the Home Office says its ok!

 

:thumbs:

 

Deker, do you have a link to the latest one? Would be good to quote perfectly and send to my FEO. I was always under the impression it stated something along the lines of "less than 50yards for an experienced shot"

 

Basically it'll save me having to apply for a 223 and then having to fork out for another rifle, mounts, glass, bipod and pricey ammo...

 

Edit: google was my friend and found it immediately - https://www.gov.uk/g..._-_Oct_2014.pdf


Edited by Matthew Phillips, 02 November 2014 - 08:02 pm.


#48 Matthew Phillips

Matthew Phillips

    Born Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 137 posts
  • Location:Gloucestershire

Posted 02 November 2014 - 08:05 pm

And page 106 now explicitly states fox as vermin:

 

The term “vermin” is not defined in law, but it may include species that cause damage to crops, game, livestock or property such as fox, rabbit, mink, stoat, weasel, brown rat, and grey squirrel 

 

So do we now no longer need to have fox against the caliber???

 



#49 celticrusader

celticrusader

    Mega Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 674 posts
  • Location:vale of glamorgan, south wales

Posted 02 November 2014 - 11:12 pm

So basically the law is still working off the term..maybe!
Great! Ha ha

#50 Alsone

Alsone

    Extreme Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,266 posts
  • Location:Middle of nowhere

Posted 02 November 2014 - 11:36 pm

 

 

The latest Home Office guide lists both HMR and WMR as suitable for fox, it is of course a guide, but if you have an issue with your region not granting fox for your WMR perhaps you should ask them why as the Home Office says its ok!

 

:thumbs:

 

Deker, do you have a link to the latest one? Would be good to quote perfectly and send to my FEO. I was always under the impression it stated something along the lines of "less than 50yards for an experienced shot"

 

Basically it'll save me having to apply for a 223 and then having to fork out for another rifle, mounts, glass, bipod and pricey ammo...

 

Edit: google was my friend and found it immediately - https://www.gov.uk/g..._-_Oct_2014.pdf

 

 

Actually Deker, what you've said there isn't entirely accurate.

 

What is says is .22 Rimfires are generally regarded as having insufficient muzzle energy against foxes in MOST circumstances. However, they could be suitable for use at short range by experienced persons.

 

So it doesn't say .22 RF is suitable. It actually says generally its not suitable.

 

However, experienced persons can use it at short range.

 

See section 13.25.

 

Mathew, wIth regards to what you said about WMR, the concern is probably bullet drop as well as energy and the fact that RF doesn't have a lot of energy to impart should you miss a vital area.

 

Contrast that to CF, and most CF's are devasting even if not directly hitting a vital spot because of the huge energies delivered and the huge area of tissue damage.

 

eg. shoot a fox behind the lungs by mistake with a RF and it may run off with a small hole in the abdomen. Do the same with a CF and the sheer area of delivered energy will probably still impart heart / lung damage resulting in a fatal shot or deliver devastating  shock (most likely instantly fatal) from abdomen damage if further back still. That's why RF isn't generally recommended for fox sized targets except at close range - it lacks the energy to impart huge amounts of damage if a shot lands outside of the vital chest / head area. Hence the "experienced" part of the exception.


  • Born Hunter and charlie caller like this

#51 Matthew Phillips

Matthew Phillips

    Born Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 137 posts
  • Location:Gloucestershire

Posted 03 November 2014 - 10:05 am

However, experienced persons can use it at short range.

Hence the "experienced" part of the exception.

 

Thanks for the explanation Alsone... however one answer always leads to a further question. Who or what defines 'experienced'?

 

Using my 22wmr I can hit a tennis ball at 100 yards in no wind. At other ranges i dial in using range finder. At 200 yards which is the absolute limit of this caliber i can hit a CD (and the ones i miss i tell my mates go through the middle hole :tongue2:  ) When the wind is blowing it's another story. Even with a wind meter and calculating drift I find my horizontal accuracy is a struggle but more reliable.

 

The land i shoot on would be safer to hit a fox with a 22 rimfire due to the buildings and close range. How do i convince my FEO I'm experienced.... does this mean accurate?



#52 Deker

Deker

    Extreme Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,501 posts
  • Location:Berkshire

Posted 03 November 2014 - 10:22 am

 

 

The latest Home Office guide lists both HMR and WMR as suitable for fox, it is of course a guide, but if you have an issue with your region not granting fox for your WMR perhaps you should ask them why as the Home Office says its ok!
 
:thumbs:

Deker, do you have a link to the latest one? Would be good to quote perfectly and send to my FEO. I was always under the impression it stated something along the lines of "less than 50yards for an experienced shot"
 
Basically it'll save me having to apply for a 223 and then having to fork out for another rifle, mounts, glass, bipod and pricey ammo...
 
Edit: google was my friend and found it immediately - https://www.gov.uk/g..._-_Oct_2014.pdf

 

 
Actually Deker, what you've said there isn't entirely accurate.
 
What is says is .22 Rimfires are generally regarded as having insufficient muzzle energy against foxes in MOST circumstances. However, they could be suitable for use at short range by experienced persons.
 
So it doesn't say .22 RF is suitable. It actually says generally its not suitable.
 
However, experienced persons can use it at short range.
 
See section 13.25.
 
Mathew, wIth regards to what you said about WMR, the concern is probably bullet drop as well as energy and the fact that RF doesn't have a lot of energy to impart should you miss a vital area.
 
Contrast that to CF, and most CF's are devasting even if not directly hitting a vital spot because of the huge energies delivered and the huge area of tissue damage.
 
eg. shoot a fox behind the lungs by mistake with a RF and it may run off with a small hole in the abdomen. Do the same with a CF and the sheer area of delivered energy will probably still impart heart / lung damage resulting in a fatal shot or deliver devastating  shock (most likely instantly fatal) from abdomen damage if further back still. That's why RF isn't generally recommended for fox sized targets except at close range - it lacks the energy to impart huge amounts of damage if a shot lands outside of the vital chest / head area. Hence the "experienced" part of the exception.

 


Come on Alsone...keep up, did you miss the part of mine and Matthew Phillips post that was talking about HMR and WMR.

Kindly refer to the easy to read table on Page 106 of the new Home Office guide which clearly list HMR and WMR as Fox suitable and also .22lr under certain circumstances. And the notes at the bottom of the table only list close with .22lr.

I consider the Home Office have fallen into the same black hole as the police often do in referring to .22lr as .22 Rimfires in 13.25, they mean .22LR. In suggesting .22 rimfires are only suitable close (précis), they make no mention of HMR close and WMR is more powerful than HMR, just another area of poor wording.


Edited by Deker, 03 November 2014 - 03:35 pm.


#53 Deker

Deker

    Extreme Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,501 posts
  • Location:Berkshire

Posted 03 November 2014 - 10:31 am

 

The latest Home Office guide lists both HMR and WMR as suitable for fox, it is of course a guide, but if you have an issue with your region not granting fox for your WMR perhaps you should ask them why as the Home Office says its ok!
 
:thumbs:

Deker, do you have a link to the latest one? Would be good to quote perfectly and send to my FEO. I was always under the impression it stated something along the lines of "less than 50yards for an experienced shot"
 
Basically it'll save me having to apply for a 223 and then having to fork out for another rifle, mounts, glass, bipod and pricey ammo...
 
Edit: google was my friend and found it immediately - https://www.gov.uk/g..._-_Oct_2014.pdf

 


As you have probably seen the table on page 106 clearly lists fox against HMR/WMR, and the notes at the bottom of the table only list close with .22lr.

I consider the Home Office have fallen into the same black hole as the police often do in referring to .22lr as .22 Rimfires in 13.25, they mean .22LR. In suggesting .22 rimfires are only suitable close (précis), they make no mention of HMR close and WMR is more powerful than HMR, just another area of poor wording.

 

Always remember, whilst the guide does list certain legal quotes/references, it is a GUIDE.  I and MANY other people had a specific Fox listing on my FAC next to my .22lr many many years ago.  :thumbs:


Edited by Deker, 03 November 2014 - 10:41 am.


#54 Matthew Phillips

Matthew Phillips

    Born Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 137 posts
  • Location:Gloucestershire

Posted 03 November 2014 - 10:34 am

Kindly refer to the easy to read table on Page 106 of the new Home Office guide which clearly list HMR and WMR as Fox suitable and also .22lr under certain circumstances.

 

So is 22lr the 'certain circumstances' bit and 22wmr as normally acceptable? 



#55 charlie caller

charlie caller

    Triple Two Fan

  • Donator
  • 5,236 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 03 November 2014 - 10:46 am

And we are off again :toast: I remember reading an article by BASC, in it  they state that if you have vermin as a condition on your cert, "it is highly unlikely that any prosecution would arise from a person shooting a fox with a .22 rf as foxes are widely accepted as vermin" also if you get the aolq condition then again fox would not be a problem as they are legal quarry, it is up to you mate but although you point out getting a .223 etc is additional expense, it is also a very good fox calibre, but I would have a chat with your feo as suggested first.



#56 Deker

Deker

    Extreme Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,501 posts
  • Location:Berkshire

Posted 03 November 2014 - 10:49 am

 

Kindly refer to the easy to read table on Page 106 of the new Home Office guide which clearly list HMR and WMR as Fox suitable and also .22lr under certain circumstances.

 
So is 22lr the 'certain circumstances' bit and 22wmr as normally acceptable?

 


Clearly so in my opinion, the Home Office have .22 rimfire and .22lr confused, in 13.25.

It is clear enough in the table/notes, which has specific mention of .22lr, WMR and HMR!

 

No doubt something many will want to debate for many pages yet to come. :laugh: :laugh:

 

:thumbs:

 

As I said, it is a Guide anyway, I had FOX specifically listed on my first FAC against .22lr, and have had ever since, until it changed to AOLQ.
 



#57 charlie caller

charlie caller

    Triple Two Fan

  • Donator
  • 5,236 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 03 November 2014 - 10:58 am

Yes before the now fashionable aolq  ;) my force would not put fox condition against any rimfire, however just over the border in Derbyshire, everyone had a fox condition against .22 lr :hmm:



#58 Alsone

Alsone

    Extreme Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,266 posts
  • Location:Middle of nowhere

Posted 03 November 2014 - 11:05 am

 

 

 

The latest Home Office guide lists both HMR and WMR as suitable for fox, it is of course a guide, but if you have an issue with your region not granting fox for your WMR perhaps you should ask them why as the Home Office says its ok!
 
:thumbs:

Deker, do you have a link to the latest one? Would be good to quote perfectly and send to my FEO. I was always under the impression it stated something along the lines of "less than 50yards for an experienced shot"
 
Basically it'll save me having to apply for a 223 and then having to fork out for another rifle, mounts, glass, bipod and pricey ammo...
 
Edit: google was my friend and found it immediately - https://www.gov.uk/g..._-_Oct_2014.pdf

 

 
Actually Deker, what you've said there isn't entirely accurate.
 
What is says is .22 Rimfires are generally regarded as having insufficient muzzle energy against foxes in MOST circumstances. However, they could be suitable for use at short range by experienced persons.
 
So it doesn't say .22 RF is suitable. It actually says generally its not suitable.
 
However, experienced persons can use it at short range.
 
See section 13.25.
 
Mathew, wIth regards to what you said about WMR, the concern is probably bullet drop as well as energy and the fact that RF doesn't have a lot of energy to impart should you miss a vital area.
 
Contrast that to CF, and most CF's are devasting even if not directly hitting a vital spot because of the huge energies delivered and the huge area of tissue damage.
 
eg. shoot a fox behind the lungs by mistake with a RF and it may run off with a small hole in the abdomen. Do the same with a CF and the sheer area of delivered energy will probably still impart heart / lung damage resulting in a fatal shot or deliver devastating  shock (most likely instantly fatal) from abdomen damage if further back still. That's why RF isn't generally recommended for fox sized targets except at close range - it lacks the energy to impart huge amounts of damage if a shot lands outside of the vital chest / head area. Hence the "experienced" part of the exception.

 


Come on Alsone...keep up, did you miss the part of mine and Mattehew Phillips post that was talking about HMR and WMR.

Kindly refer to the easy to read table on Page 106 of the new Home Office guide which clearly list HMR and WMR as Fox suitable and also .22lr under certain circumstances. And the notes at the bottom of the table only list close with .22lr.

I consider the Home Office have fallen into the same black hole as the police often do in referring to .22lr as .22 Rimfires in 13.25, they mean .22LR. In suggesting .22 rimfires are only suitable close (précis), they make no mention of HMR close and WMR is more powerful than HMR, just another area of poor wording.

 

 

Yeah they appear to have got confused between RF and LR.

 

13.25 specifically says .22 rimfire. The table does list WMR / HMR as acceptable. It is a case of loose wording.

 

Which they would take as guidance, the wording or the table is questionable. It depends on which your FEO interprets as the correct guidance.

 

I would be inclined to think that WMR and HMR are acceptable as it appears to be text more likely relating to LR. However, it's going to come down to the dept. and their interpretation. Plus the whole thing is only guidance which leaves it open to any Firearms Dept. not to follow it any event.



#59 Alsone

Alsone

    Extreme Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,266 posts
  • Location:Middle of nowhere

Posted 03 November 2014 - 11:06 am

Yes before the now fashionable aolq  ;) my force would not put fox condition against any rimfire, however just over the border in Derbyshire, everyone had a fox condition against .22 lr :hmm:

 

My friend in Derbyshire has LR conditioned against fox.



#60 SportingShooter

SportingShooter

    The Miscellaneous Mod

  • Moderator
  • 5,895 posts
  • Location:South West Wales

Posted 03 November 2014 - 07:13 pm

 

Yes before the now fashionable aolq  ;) my force would not put fox condition against any rimfire, however just over the border in Derbyshire, everyone had a fox condition against .22 lr :hmm:

 

My friend in Derbyshire has LR conditioned against fox.

 

So does everyone else in Derbyshire... :hmm:




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users