dadioles

If the farmer gives you permission - in writing - to shoot an area of land, and you have acted in good faith in the reasonable belief that he was authorised to give you that permission, you will be in the clear. The details of the rental agreement between the land owner and the tenant farmer are not something that is your concern. I stress.... permission in writing.

Of course.... you know that ALL wild birds are protected don't you. Yes, that even includes wood pigeons and crows... but.... "Under section 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act it is an offence for any person to kill, injure or take any wild bird; to take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while the nest is in use or being built; or to take or destroy an egg of any wild bird." Certain birds may be shot as they are a pest. That permission is granted by the issue of a licence - it is a 'general licence' for which you do not need to register. "This licence permits landowners, occupiers and other authorised persons to carry out a range of otherwise prohibited activities against the species of wild birds listed on the licence." It does not include starlings!

This all took place in my bit of the world and I would love to have spotted the Rhea striding across a rape field. No, my instinct would not be to shoot it but just admire it. The Rhea was not a problem, did no damage, was no more threat than a deer and rather less than some dogs that are not controlled properly by their owners. To talk about risk to traffic or possibility of attacking children is plain daft and classic media scaremongering to make a good story. I am sure the shooter feels very proud of himself. Whether it was a lawful act? Open to debate. I would not prosecute the shooter but think he may have been a bit of a ****. Police will keep a very low profile as whatever action or view they took, they would lose.

PM sent

I do not use Ely because I found them too tight to chamber (CZ and Anschutz). There is no advantage to a tight fitting bullet. Just the nuisance of having to apply extra pressure to the bolt in order to chamber the round. It seems to be the lead that is oversize, not the brass. Removing a chambered bullet when unloading can be awkward with a tight fit. I want a smooth easy bolt action, not something that requires force. SK Subs are my bullet of choice but my local suppliers no longer stock them so it is getting difficult. Every gun is different, you really must try several different makes of ammunition to find what YOUR gun shoots best.

I think barrel length can play a significant part. My 14 inch Anschutz chewed up a sak after only a few hundred rounds. Perhaps people stating whether their sak is chewed up or not could give their barrel length.

Chatting to a forensic firearms examiner in the pub a few months ago and he told me that when a dodgy air rifle comes in for examination they put a variety of pellets through and check the power at the muzzle with a chronograph. If any of the variety of pellets give a result over 12ft lbs it goes into the report and submitted with a view to prosecution or destruction of the rifle. So when you are tuning for a particular pellet, check a few other weights or designs just to be on the safe side.

I concentrated really hard and chanted 'beesley121' 3 times while sitting cross legged on the floor with a huge glass of Sauvignon Blanc and guess what - I still couldn't see his sak. After tuning in as a large medium (work it out) the advice from the spirit world was that the sak was really designed for .22lr and the hot high pressure gasses produced by .17hmr, especially if the barrel is reasonably short, are quite destructive causing the sharper edges of the 'hole' up the middle to corrode away. Invisibility shield on.

Someone else will be able to confirm this or correct me if I am wrong. Once a sub 12ft lb air rifle has been converted to FAC you cannot convert it back again to sub 12ft lb in order to re-gain the price and sell it on as non FAC.

Many thanks to all of you for such excellent and well thought out replies. I regularly see muntjac when out after rabbits and they are seldom more than 100 yards away, often much closer. Foxes are not something I 'go after' other than close urban fox with the .22lr. Again, I frequently see them through the night vision at 80 to 200 yards but I do not feel equipped do deal with them humanely at that distance. Last night I was endlessly barked at by another munjac which I watched for 10 minutes or more just 30 yards away, damned nuisance, spooked the rabbits and annoyed the neighbours. It would have been delicious! In Cambridgeshire the FEO comes out for a visit at renewal so I shall have a chat. My feeling, and it is only based on reading and not first hand knowledge, is to lean towards the .223 and it seems 50-55g with 1:8 twist is sensible (don't you just hate people who regurgitate what they read). The cost difference between .223 and .243 is not enough to be a deal breaker and I do see the point that .243 would be more versatile. I cannot help thinking, however, that for fox and muntjac, in my circumstances, .223 is a big step up from .17hmr and I know how devastating that tiny bullet can be. Muntjac is a tough animal with a tough hide but I am an accurate and disciplined shooter and .223 with a suitable bullet would be adequate. I do not shoot with a dog and would expect to drop the deer on the spot. My rabbits are mostly head shot out to 100 yards, that is a smaller target than neck shooting a muntjac, or am I talking out of my bottom? Should the need arise for larger deer, and I am not too sure if I would ever go that route, I could look for .243 .308 or whatever is most suitable for that sized animal. I am also very grateful to those of you that have offered to let me tag along and get a first hand idea of the different calibres before making a final decision. I may be in touch, it is appreciated. Let's see what the feo has to say, Cambridgeshire have always been pretty fair and good to deal with. Oh, and finally, the reason I only asked about calibre and not scope is because I know a lot about scopes but do not have the experience that some of you have with centrefire.

Forget laser rangefinders with capabilities of 1000m or whatever, this is not a gulf war bombing mission. I think they are brilliant devices and I would not be without one but you have to find one that measures up close. 10 yards is about as close as they will measure and that is good, 5 yards is better. So the question to ask is "what is the closest range that it will measure". Manufacturers are very good at giving maximum distances but you may have to dig a bit to find the near distance, the one that matters. If you can find one with a backlight that too would be excellent for use at night or in low light conditions. I have Nikon Laser 550 (down to 11 yards) and Bushnell Yardage pro sport 450 (down to 5 yards), the Nikon is better quality and 'nicer' but they both do the same job.

I have .22lr and .17hmr, many years experience and an open ticket. My licence is up for renewal and this seems like a good opportunity to apply for a centrefire. The centrefire will be for longer range fox (maybe 200 yards) and muntjac. The main motivation is muntjac as they are a big problem in this area. I do not have any ambition to shoot larger deer. I do not intend to 'home load'. I like the idea of reasonably flat shooting. Price of ammunition needs to be taken into account as I enjoy shooting paper. Accuracy is very important to me. What would be an ideal calibre?

Thanks for the extra info. Gosh, for an hmr to be that far out at 50 yards is pretty bad. A "shot pattern" 6 inches or more in diameter at 50 yards!! That is not subtle. As others have suggested..... Back to basics, try one thing at a time. But it seems you have tried most things. I would start by removing the rifle from the stock, checking the woodwork and metalwork for damage or "looseness". Clean thoroughly, oil where required then fitting it back together checking for proper fit and screw torque. Slowly and methodically work through all the steps already mentioned and writing down exactly what has been tried and firing 4 or 5 shots at each stage to see what happens. There has to be a logical explanation but heaven only knows what it is. You can eliminate a lot of the variables by locking the action in a vice (you don't need the stock) and bore sighting (remove the bolt and look down the bore) onto the target. It is easier to do than it sounds and even a Black and Decker Workmate or something similar can be used to hold the gun. Just re-check by bore sighting that nothing has moved between shots. A good opportunity to try a couple of different brands of ammunition. It is a pity you are not just around the corner from me, getting to the bottom of this one would be fun.

Most farmland in England is already passed for rimfire. It is a bit of extra hassle having to confirm this with the police but don't take anyone's word for it, YOU do the checking. Some police forces, or individuals within police forces, are more helpful than others. It may just be a quick phone call or it may involve sending them a copy of your signed permission as proof. There is always the odd 'jobsworth' unfortunately.

This is quite a misunderstood topic and it keeps being stated (wrongly) that police will not allow .22lr to be used for shooting fox. The .22lr is perfectly suited to fox control in the right circumstances. Indeed, it is the weapon of choice. Generally speaking, however, the police will not accept 'fox control' as 'good reason' for having a .22lr as there are more suitable (centrefire) calibres for that purpose. 'Good reason' for having a .22lr could be 'rabbit control' as it is ideally suited to that purpose. It can then also be used against fox in the right circumstances. If possible have the 'any lawful quarry' statement on your licence as that removes any legal ambiguity.

I have been using SK Subs for a couple of years now and found them to be the most accurate in my two CZ 452's. They are not cheap but I want accuracy and consistency. The Barn Shop a few miles outside Royston in Hertfordshire was my stockist but now taken over by Stutley's who will not supply them (not particularly helpful about it either). Fenland Rural Sports stock them but it is a bit of a hike, I will pay them a visit though. It is really frustrating when you go to a lot of trouble purchasing a box each of several makes of ammunition, spend hours shooting paper to select the best one for your gun and then find that it is no longer readily available. Arguably it is even worse when manufacturers change the 'recipe' as seems to be the case with Winchester. I shoot a lot..... My certificate only allows 600 to hold and 500 to buy. It would not be so bad if I could purchase 5000. My renewal is just going through and I have asked for an increase to 1000 on the grounds that I want batch consistency. It will be interesting to see what they say, may give them a ring and see what is possible (Cambridgeshire).

I have found that .17hmr ammunition is far more consistent than .22lr but having experimented with just about everything I could get hold of I just use Hornady 17g V-max which have proved to be accurate and reliable (and readily obtainable!). One thing I do not do is swap different makes or types of bullet. That can only lead to inaccuracy due to different trajectories and my brain would not keep up. Find a good one and stick to it. In terms of killing power. They are all devastating when used appropriately at sensible distances. Did I misread the post by Thunderbird? 704 yards...?

Maybe people who post here should read the original post before they keep suggesting what has already been tried! "...we have cleaned barrel well, changed scopes, tried different ammo, checked things are tight, shot with and without moderator..." What you did not tell us is the distance you were trying to zero. What you are effectively saying is that you are shooting a group about the size of a 6 inch circle. As it is an hmr I guess you are zeroing at about 100 yards. If those two assumptions are correct it does, at least, put things into perspective. Please confirm.

Err.... Why? Money to burn? Is there a problem that you are trying to resolve or is it that spring is here and you already have a new 3 piece suite?

My car is bigger than your car and I can shoot the balls off a gnat at 200 yards..... It is all a bit pathetic really. Just listen to yourselves. At the end of the day you are shooting live animals and they deserve some respect. Sadly a lot of shooters lack that respect and just see taking pot shots at living things as a bit of fun and who cares if they are wounded or suffer, they are 'only' rabbits or whatever. That is an attitude seen in many parts of the world in relation to parts of the human population - oh well. It is not very responsible to boast about shooting animals at long distances even though it is technically possible by a skilled shooter in ideal conditions. Maybe there should be a permanent article posted giving 'sensible' ranges for 'typical' shooters using common calibres. As one poster suggested.... How accurate are the distances claimed? Measured with a laser? Paced out? Just guessed? Before shooting live quarry.... is it well within a distance at which you know you can shoot accurately even allowing for a margin of error? Will the bullet have enough energy to do sufficient damage to ensure a quick kill even if the placement is not as accurate as expected? To quote Dekers... "you need the right tool for the job". and add to that, appropriate skill, common sense and humanity. There is nothing wrong with paper punching.

Turn the volume up on your computer and it is loud, turn it down and it is quiet! Sound recording equipment is not linear. Most have microphones and sound inputs with auto level controls and even if switched to manual the circuitry suppresses very high sound levels of short duration. The same applies to using mobile phones or any other simple device to measure sound levels in decibels. Pointless and of novelty value only. You are deluding yourselves.

I shall go and join Kent. It is one thing to be able to head shoot a rabbit at 60 yards with sub 12ft lbs and it is another to watch them run away in agony because the energy in that pellet was not up to the job or the placement did not hit that half inch sweet spot. Been there, not proud of it, bought .22lr. Sub 12ftlb .177 Rapid now used on paper or more like 30 to 40 yards max on quarry.

That is unlikely to give you the information you need. Too many variables. If you want to know what it sounds like, find someone else to fire the gun so you can hear it from the point of view of a bystander.

The .17hmr is an awful lot noisier than .22lr with subs but it sounds as though you have more of an itch than a need and I got the impression that it was "instead of" and not "as well as". I have an hmr for devastatingly effective flat shooting at, typically 100 yards or so. I also have a couple of .22lr, one with day scope and one with night vision. It comes down to the right tool for the job. At night I use the .22lr for quietness and it is easier to get close (50 yards). During the day it is either hmr or .22lr and I enjoy both. The hmr certainly is not discrete though, and that is often important. If you have a .22lr, don't give it up for an hmr, you will miss it. Get an hmr as a second rifle and enjoy both.

Some of the responses are quite disturbing. Complacency rules. The stupidity of those that have managed to persuade themselves that .17 hmr is safer than .22 lr on the grounds that it is less likely to ricochet and can therefore be used in places where the .22 lr would be too dangerous puts into question their suitability to hold a firearms certificate. I just hope that you do not learn the hard way. Flack helmet on and taking cover.....