6mm and .223/5.56 ILLEGAL for big game in Alaska!

[william schmaltz]

Debate aside, only a few people are getting this right, obviously those with AK experience. This isn't even about regulating the caliber so much as it is regulating the people who typically hunt with such weapons.

Very few sport hunters hunt with a .223, and even fewer with an AR. The majority of those that do in Alaska don't view hunting for sport at all. It's subsistence alone, and they will kill the protein they need by any means necessary, ethics be damned. This is an attempt to bring some semblance of ethics into populations that think nothing of them when looking to put food on the table. It's an attempt to legislate "spray and pray" tactics.

People love to pedal the “.223 has killed more Alaskan animals than anything” line. Maybe (probably) true. I hunt adjacent to a major AK river in an area hundreds of river miles from the nearest road access. It’s nearly all village subsistence users where I’m at. The sequence probably 8/10 times is you hear a boat, they pull off throttle (sometimes not), and within seconds you hear shooting. Almost always it’s about ten shots or more. And you hear this a half dozen times a day. All that to say, based on my annual observations, the comment quoted above is correct.

I don’t know enough about bullets or whatever to comment otherwise. And if I did, I wouldn’t care to spend a few hours a day arguing with strangers on the Internet about how my way is the best. Just do your thing. Comment on the proposal instead of Rokslide strangers if it’s that important.

 

[Yaremkiv]

An automatic knee-jerk "regulation=infringement" response isnt wise either. I would absolutely support banning .223/5.56 as a moose/caribou cartridge, its too small for how it will mostly be used by the average hunter. I have my own opinions on the smaller 6mm cartridges, something along the lines of "its the indian not the arrow". The point is idiots will always ruin the fun for the rest of us.

 

[LCV]

. It’s nearly all village subsistence users where I’m at. The sequence probably 8/10 times is you hear a boat, they pull off throttle (sometimes not), and within seconds you hear shooting. Almost always it’s about ten shots or more. And you hear this a half dozen times a day.

So instead of m16s with shitty milsurp ammo they use an sks/ak/m14 with equally shitty milsurp ammo and voila problem solved.
If this is really the issue they are trying to address the proposal is as likely to make it worse as it is to make it better.

 

[atmat]

Ok, you call up an Alaskan brown bear (or moose for that matter) guide and tell them you want to use a bow. They will say, “ OK great! Send in your deposit”.

Now tell them you want to use a .223 AR with “fragmenting” bullets. IF they actually stay on the phone long enough to say anything at all, they will tell you NFW!

Do you think those outfitters have tried a .223 and can speak to experience? Or are they believing the same fudd-lore nonsense others have bought into?

First, yes, the use of the term “fragmenting” probably isn’t a wise choice by the previous poster.

You could use whatever term you want. Would you be more content with “expanding”? I thought one of the western states specified expanding or fragmenting — but I’d have to double check.

I want to use a 100% weight retention hollow point 223

I’d still rather use a heavy-for-caliber fragmenting bullet that doesn’t have 100% weight retention.

 

[william schmaltz]

So instead of m16s with shitty milsurp ammo they use an sks/ak/m14 with equally shitty milsurp ammo and voila problem solved.
If this is really the issue they are trying to address the proposal is as likely to make it worse as it is to make it better.

I don’t care what they or you do. Just providing an observation and context. The proposal is from the AC in the GMU I referenced, so likely relevant context.

Sounds like you should comment on the proposal.

Have a good day.

 

[SDHNTR]

Do you think those outfitters have tried a .223 and can speak to experience? Or are they believing the same fudd-lore nonsense others have bought into?


You could use whatever term you want. Would you be more content with “expanding”? I thought one of the western states specified expanding or fragmenting — but I’d have to double check.


I’d still rather use a heavy-for-caliber fragmenting bullet that doesn’t have 100% weight retention.

It doesn’t even matter if it’s fuddlore or whatever else. If I’m going brown bear hunting, by law, I need a guide. I want that guy on my side. I’m going to do what he says, and I’m not going to argue with him. I want him there to save my ass. Call it what you want, I’m taking a seasoned professional Alaskan dangerous game guide’s opinion over internet lore, every single time.

Some things don’t need extensive data, they need common sense.

 

[Thegman]

Didn’t say they wouldn’t work. Said they shouldn’t be used. There are always variables and different options. Did you have a reason for choosing that caliber? Do you not own anything bigger?

So, if working isn't the issue, then why exactly shouldn't they be used?

 

[The Guide]

I certainly agree with your last statement. And partially agree with your first. But a bad hole with a .308 is marginally better than a bad hole with a .223, assuming the same bullet. Splitting hairs, neither one is good. But anything that makes these sort of “hunting” tactics harder on those that engage in them is a step in the right direction.

The easy button is to disallow nonexpanding bullets below. 338 caliber for hunting big game. This would still allow large bore hard cast lead and other specialty bullets used in hunting.

These rules would barely have any affect on sport hunters (both nonresident and resident) and provide more hurdles for subsistence hunters with limited resources and financial support. Life is already hard enough in the bush. Groceries are 10x what you pay in San Diego and now people want to make it harder to get protein.

Jay

 

[Yaremkiv]

The people that this proposal author is referring to is the problem, not their case heads. If they 'think they must have missed with an entire magazine', how's a heavier recoiling rifle going to be helpful? This is control seeking 101. Target the tools and not the behavior. This should fail easily, but I'd actually look forward to a thorough discussion at this level. It may enlighten many people. It's not usually the tool, it's how it's used.

Yes but at this point how do you regulate the people without regulating the tool? Wanton waste is already a problem and highly illegal. Some people are idiots and ruin it for the rest of us but what else could you do besides taking away the means for them to waste meat?

 

[atmat]

It doesn’t even matter if it’s fuddlore or whatever else. If I’m going brown bear hunting, by law, I need a guide. I want that guy on my side. I’m going to do what he says, and I’m not going to argue with him. I want him there to save my ass. Call it what you want, I’m taking a seasoned professional Alaskan dangerous game guide’s opinion over internet lore, every single time.

Some things don’t need extensive data, they need common sense.

Well, you are welcome to accept whatever non-data-driven anecdotes you’d like. It’s your money. Cheers.

 

[Marbles]

Life is already hard enough in the bush. Groceries are 10x what you pay in San Diego and now people want to make it harder to get protein.

Jay

Probably underestimating grocery cost, but somewhere between 10-15x is close. In short, I agree with you over all.

 

[SDHNTR]

The easy button is to disallow nonexpanding bullets below. 338 caliber for hunting big game. This would still allow large bore hard cast lead and other specialty bullets used in hunting.

These rules would barely have any affect on sport hunters (both nonresident and resident) and provide more hurdles for subsistence hunters with limited resources and financial support. Life is already hard enough in the bush. Groceries are 10x what you pay in San Diego and now people want to make it harder to get protein.

Jay

Are we not going to talk about where a lot of that money really goes? And where a lot of that money comes from in the first place?

I don’t think pushing a few more bucks in the direction of proper cartridges instead of a multitude of other evils is a bad thing. Especially if it means better long-term sustainability of the resource.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

Does Alaska currently legally allow FMJ bullets (sport or subsistence)? Bizarre if so.

 

[The Guide]

I hunt adjacent to a major AK river in an area hundreds of river miles from the nearest road access. It’s nearly all village subsistence users where I’m at. The sequence probably 8/10 times is you hear a boat, they pull off throttle (sometimes not), and within seconds you hear shooting. Almost always it’s about ten shots or more. And you hear this a half dozen times a day. All that to say, based on my annual observations, the comment quoted above is correct.

Thank you for your input. This sounds like a cultural issue more than an equipment issue. Not sure that new laws or regulations will change the way they hunt, only the weapons they do it with. Even then, nothing may change.

Jay

 

[omicron1792]

Ok, you call up an Alaskan brown bear (or moose for that matter) guide and tell them you want to use a bow. They will say, “ OK great! Send in your deposit”.

Now tell them you want to use a .223 AR with “fragmenting” bullets. IF they actually stay on the phone long enough to say anything at all, they will tell you NFW!

What does the person on the phones ignorance have to do with the conversation here?

 

[9.3koolaid]

Are we not going to talk about where a lot of that money really goes? And where a lot of that money comes from in the first place?

Please enlighten us

 

[atmat]

I don’t think pushing a few more bucks in the direction of proper cartridges instead of a multitude of other evils is a bad thing. Especially if it means better long-term sustainability of the resource.

But there’s no evidence that it does other than your personal opinion (which is demonstrably false) that .223 is too small.

 

[SDHNTR]

What does the person on the phones ignorance have to do with the conversation here?

You tell a guy who hunts brown bears professionally he’s ignorant on what it takes to kill them because you read it on the internet.

 

[atmat]

You tell a guy who hunts brown bears professionally he’s ignorant on what it takes to kill them.

Yes, if he’s only ever tried one thing — when others are easily demonstrating that another thing works.

 

[Formidilosus]

You tell a guy who hunts brown bears professionally he’s ignorant on what it takes to kill them because you read it on the internet.

Usually you tend to logical thinking, here you have deep dived into fallacies. Why?