Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

Necked cartidge bill returns HF 716

I think I can bottom line this reasonably close....
The bill is generic & open ended on purpose. Year 1 this committee or other previously mentioned groups say “u can use XYZ rounds”. Later on after this 2020 season’s accepted rounds announced..... later.... “well heck, not fair I can’t use my .300 Winchester magnum..... can we submit a request to add smaller calibers?” It doesn’t need to go through the whole legislative process.... all t’d up to run through committee for change. it’s much simpler & IFC will clearly push these committees & groups to accept changes. It could be year, could be 3. Likely what will happen. IFC set these dominos & legislation up like this on purpose.
EVERYONE I know is confused, by design. IFC is playing a short game of chess here. Maybe checkers. They will push for committee changes to include “other said rifles” in matter of time. MARK MY WORD!!!!!!
 
Last edited:
IowaBowHunter1983 said:
I guess I don't have a full grasp of how this works. So the legislature passed a law. But its not really a law until NRC talks about it? What if a person follows the legislature law but that doesn't match what is in print in the rule book. Can they be prosecuted? Obviously this is not streamlined which is no surprise since we are talking about the government.
Click to expand...

My understanding of the process is this: The law directs the NRC to establish rules regarding the use of firearms for taking deer. The law includes language that would allow the use of necked cartridges. It is up to the NRC to establish the rules within that law. The NRC could still say "no" to necked cartridges but then the legislative rules committee could require the NRC to allow the use of necked cartridges. At this time necked cartridge's are not allowed in Iowa for taking deer. This could change if the topic is included in an NRC agenda, is open for public comment and then passed by the NRC.

The bill/law did not set the rules, it directed the NRC to set the rules. The NRC has not yet acted on the law so no rules have been established making last years rules in effect in regards to straight wall rifles cartridges.

Clear as mud?
 
BTW- lumber prices way up right now??? I ain’t checked in on em in 6-12 months.
 
Anyone been following this. Saw the DNR released a proposed list for next year and immediately the IFC and NRA attacked the DNR for trying to limit cartridges.
 
bigbuckhunter88 said:
Anyone been following this. Saw the DNR released a proposed list for next year and immediately the IFC and NRA attacked the DNR for trying to limit cartridges.
Click to expand...
They told us they were NOT trying to get rifle cartridges legalized and that the DNR would make rules to clarify that
yet as soon as DNR does try to clarify - they blow up and say ANYTHING .350-.500 with enough energy should be legal
Were we misled in their intentions?
Most of the reading I've done on the forums say the vast majority DO NOT want a bunch of long range centerfire rifles being legalized
 
gunrunr said:
They told us they were NOT trying to get rifle cartridges legalized and that the DNR would make rules to clarify that
yet as soon as DNR does try to clarify - they blow up and say ANYTHING .350-.500 with enough energy should be legal
Were we misled in their intentions?
Most of the reading I've done on the forums say the vast majority DO NOT want a bunch of long range centerfire rifles being legalized
Click to expand...
Exactly my thoughts. I remember specifically people for the bill were using the point of the DNR being able to pick the weapons as a talking point. I saw on the newly proposed list that 45-70 would now become not legal. Thats gonna be tough considering there's probably quite a few out there being used. Hopefully the site stays up and running so it's easier to keep informed
 
bigbuckhunter88 said:
https://www.nraila.org/articles/202...to-create-list-of-approved-hunting-cartridges
IFC might not be involved about further inspection, but I have a feeling I know which side they will fall on
Click to expand...
NRA is again so far out of their lane - needs correction!!!!! I wanna see the NRA & IFC back legislation for High Power Bass Fishing season or some whacked out crap they ALSO have no place being & no expertise in!!! They have as much legitimacy messing with fishing regs as they do hunting regs!!!!
 
Let the DNR know your stance on this before Monday.

https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/IACIO/bulletins/2af1155
wildlife@dnr.iowa.gov

Hunters interested in additions or subtractions are asked to send their request along with a brief justification to wildlife@dnr.iowa.gov by Dec. 14, 2020.


The first is from House File 716 that directs the DNR to develop a list of cartridges approved for use in rifles to hunt deer in Iowa. The following list of cartridges is proposed for inclusion:

.350 Legend

.429 DE

.35 Remington

.44 Wildey Mag

.356 TSW

.44 Remington Magnum

.357 Sig

.44 Automag

9x25 Dillion

.445 Super Mag

9x23 Winchester

.45 Super

.357 Magnum

.45 Wildey Mag

.357 Maximum

.450 Bushmaster

.357 SuperMag

.45 Winchester Magnum

.357 Wildey Mag

.451 Detonics

.357/44 Bain & Davis

.454 Casull

.375 Winchester

.45 Silhouette

.38-55 Winchester

.458 Socom

10 mm Auto

.460 Rowland

.40 Super

.475 Wildey Magnum

.401 Powermag

.475 Linebaugh

.400 Cor-Bon

.480 Ruger

.38-40 Winchester

.50 GI

.41 Remington Magnum

.50 Action Express

.41 Wildey Mag

.50 Beowulf

.414 SuperMag

.500 JRH

.44-40 Winchester

.500 Special

.440 Cor-Bon

.500 Wyoming Express


Allowable cartridges for use in handguns that were considered for use in rifles but deemed ballistically dissimilar from allowable pistol or revolver cartridges include (these cartridges are NOT proposed for inclusion to the list of allowable rifles to hunt deer in Iowa):

.35 Whelen

.356 Winchester

.358 Winchester

.444 Marlin

.45 Raptor

.45-70 Govt.

.460 S&W Mag

.500 S&W Mag
 
357 SIG, 429 DE, 35 Rem, 9x25 Dillon, 357/44 Bain & Davis, 458 Socom, 40 Super, 400 CorBon, 38/40 Win, 440 CorBon - all bottle necks.

What kind of data are these people using to choose allowable cartridges ? Case length? FPS? Pressure? Bore diameter? Straight vs bottle case? This list makes no sense.
 
Handcannon said:
357 SIG, 429 DE, 35 Rem, 9x25 Dillon, 357/44 Bain & Davis, 458 Socom, 40 Super, 400 CorBon, 38/40 Win, 440 CorBon - all bottle necks.

What kind of data are these people using to choose allowable cartridges ? Case length? FPS? Pressure? Bore diameter? Straight vs bottle case? This list makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Anything else in the above list that needs to go?
 
Seems strange to exclude cartridges like the 444 Marlin, 45 Raptor, 45/70, 460 S&W, and 500 S&W. All "straight" wall. Yes the 444 is tapered but by no means is a bottle neck. The 35, 356 & 358 are bottle neck.

Does anyone have the criteria they are looking at to choose cartridges?

And why does it matter if cartridges are dissimilar? That's the whole point of a different cartridge. A 12 gauge foster type slug is around .70 . What about muzzleloaders? Traditional 50 cal ball is OK but not everything listed from the 444 to the 500 in a rifle? This just makes NO sense. Seems like someone is just looking at #s on paper with very little knowledge of actual ballistics & performance. I really wish I knew the parameters they are looking at.
 
Here is my guess, and only a guess, on what the criteria for inclusion or exclusion was: The DNR wanted to get legitimate public input on what should and should not be allowed so someone put together a list, published it and stood back. After the dog whistle list hit the ether the IFC wasted no time in responding with their usual pugnacious and intransient attack on the DNR. I do have to say though that I even wondered why the 45.70 was not included in the proposed list.

The IFCs opinion that hunters were confused about what would be allowed this year by the list and press release is just more vitriol. Here is a copy and paste of the title of the press release from the DNR:

DNR seeking comments on proposed laws ahead of the 2021/22 deer hunting season​


If you read that and can't understand that the laws will not take affect this season then maybe you shouldn't be carrying a gun.

Here is another thought, the IWILL or Iowa's Natural Resources and Outdoor Recreation Trust Fund will probably not be funded again in the up coming legislative session. I've seen a couple of articles this fall about it and it doesn't look like a sales tax increase will pass. With that in mind think of the wind fall in Pitman Robertson funds (an 11% excise tax on recreation equipment including guns and ammunition) Iowa will realize if more calibers are allowed and Iowans purchase new caliber guns and ammunition to hunt with. Kinda funny how the group that rales against the DNR will, in a round about way, help fund it.

Full disclosure: the doe I killed with my .450 Bushy will taste mighty good. With any luck I'll put another doe in the freezer this weekend.
 
Fishbonker said:

DNR seeking comments on proposed laws ahead of the 2021/22 deer hunting season​


If you read that and can't understand that the laws will not take affect this season then maybe you shouldn't be carrying a gun.
Click to expand...
Yep, understood nothing is in effect. Just that the criteria made no sense. If you want straight wall only - then why are 13 of 54 bottlenecks? It's like looking to purchase a black truck & 1/3 of them the salesman shows you are white.
 
Fishbonker said:
Here is my guess, and only a guess, on what the criteria for inclusion or exclusion was: The DNR wanted to get legitimate public input on what should and should not be allowed so someone put together a list, published it and stood back. After the dog whistle list hit the ether the IFC wasted no time in responding with their usual pugnacious and intransient attack on the DNR. I do have to say though that I even wondered why the 45.70 was not included in the proposed list.

The IFCs opinion that hunters were confused about what would be allowed this year by the list and press release is just more vitriol. Here is a copy and paste of the title of the press release from the DNR:

DNR seeking comments on proposed laws ahead of the 2021/22 deer hunting season​


If you read that and can't understand that the laws will not take affect this season then maybe you shouldn't be carrying a gun.

Here is another thought, the IWILL or Iowa's Natural Resources and Outdoor Recreation Trust Fund will probably not be funded again in the up coming legislative session. I've seen a couple of articles this fall about it and it doesn't look like a sales tax increase will pass. With that in mind think of the wind fall in Pitman Robertson funds (an 11% excise tax on recreation equipment including guns and ammunition) Iowa will realize if more calibers are allowed and Iowans purchase new caliber guns and ammunition to hunt with. Kinda funny how the group that rales against the DNR will, in a round about way, help fund it.

Full disclosure: the doe I killed with my .450 Bushy will taste mighty good. With any luck I'll put another doe in the freezer this weekend.
Click to expand...
2 things that didn't make sense to me was the overall list they produced. Theres too many 45-70s that were bought when made legal to take away and others that shouldn't even be considered. The other was the date of the email for input. Why did they think it was a good time to send that email 3 days before the first gun season. I can read and comprehend but all it takes is one guy who doesn't and he starts spewing nonsense. Could've waited 3 week until the gun seasons were over and then release it.
 
bigbuckhunter88 said:
2 things that didn't make sense to me was the overall list they produced. Theres too many 45-70s that were bought when made legal to take away and others that shouldn't even be considered. The other was the date of the email for input. Why did they think it was a good time to send that email 3 days before the first gun season. I can read and comprehend but all it takes is one guy who doesn't and he starts spewing nonsense. Could've waited 3 week until the gun seasons were over and then release it.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the DNR overestimated the reading comprehension of some folks but I do know for a fact that they were getting tremendous pressure from the legislators who sponsored this bill and the groups that supported this bill to get the process going. They could have waited until this spring and still had time to get the process complete by next deer season (2021-2022) but I think the pressure to publish may have resulted in the list that was presented, but I still wonder if the list was made to encourage constructive public comment. Again, the DNR may have over estimated the publics ability to be civil in their responses.
 
Good to know. Part of me was also curious if there was pressure being put to create the list so that said Bill pushers could begin to chisel away or add to it this legislative season. Any word Bonk? Thank you for doing the Lords work
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom