Indiana DNR is having a meeting this evening about regulations changes. One of the proposed changes is to allow rifles for deer hunting. The minimum bullet diameter will be .243 and the minimum case length 1.16. I personally have no problems with this. I have always wanted to use one of my 300 Savages. What are some other Hoosier hunters thoughts ?

I don't think they will do it, however I'm for it !

Ohio legalized rifle hunting,but only with straight walled shells.I would rather hunt with slugs.

You've obviously never fired a .45-90 or .45-110 from a High Wall or a Sharps.

I've never fired one ,but I know the reputation of such guns,but very,very few have them,Most people will be using shells more suited for pistols.

What other people do doesn't change what you stated as a preference.

A .357Maximum will give you very good ballistics in a single-shot. The .38-55 and .375 Winchesters are no slouch.

I don't live in Ohio,I live in West Virginia,right across the river from Meigs Co Ohio,and I'm just saying that I personally don't see any advantage of their new law for the vast majority of the hunters.

The ones who have any sense at all, and in OH that might be very few, will figure it out quickly. The rest? Well, that's there problem.

The primitive weapon rules changed here several years ago to include break open single shot rifles of certain calibers instead of actual muzzle loaders. Hunters figured out quickly that Handi rifles in 45-70 and 444 were legal and sales of those rifles soared.

The regs changed again a few years later making 35 caliber cartridges in the same rifles legal. At that point Handi's in 35 Whelen became the hot sellers.

I bet the hunters will quickly adjust and start purchasing rifles that meet the new regs.

I hope it passes! I'm skeptical, but lots of data out there showing rifles are no less safe than sluggers. I'm wondering if this will be statewide or if some of the counties (like Marion) will stay shotgun only. Either way I'm for it. I have a nice/good slug gun, but the slugs are too expensive and kick too much for shooting deer.

When I lived in Indiana it was explained to me that the reasoning for the no-centerfire rule was because of #1. Tradition and #2. ranges hunted.
I think they made the initial change to include pistol cartridges in a rifle to try and increase the numbers of hunters. As was stated earlier, hunters figured out pretty quickly that the H&R's and the like, fit the bill perfectly.
Going to bottle necked cartridges of whatever dimensions should help increase gun sales in the state as well as possibly bringing in a few more hunters into the folds.

All-in-all I think that it would be an item of mixed blessings. The positive would be more hunters taking more deer. The negative would be the pressure those additional hunters would put on the price of leasing the hunting rights on property around the state.

They will be far more accurate than most slug guns, and just as deadly at similar ranges, with much less recoil

Also nothing will prevent you from using slugs if you prefer to handicap yourself

Ever hear Foster slugs bouncing down thru the timber after someone misses a deer? Just about anything else is safer to the hunting public.....

According to the info I have found: Indiana was limited to shotguns and muzzleloaders starting in the early 50's when they had the first recognized deer season. The shotgun and muzzleloader were used because of their short range capabilities. The DNR was trying to grow the herd and was trying to limit the hunters advantage.

They better not change the law. I just had a 358 Hoosier built for this fall!!!

Well from what I have heard it passed. A friend of mine just had one built also.

Lots of folks like you are gonna be a bit peeved I'm guessing. Glad I was too broke to build one.

Now I'm thinking my boys might need a 6X204 Ruger instead of the 357 I have...

In NY wer were always allowed to use rifles for deer in the north and in the Catskill region. Now they've opened up almost the whole state to rifles.

The wife and I just moved from our hometown on the northern border to the south shore of Lake Ontario where it previously was shotguns only. I'm amazed at how nervous some of the guys who hunt deer around here are about it. They're all concerned about how far a rifle bullet will travel. When I ask them how many deer they've shot at in the tree tops a little light seems to come on. Now, wait'll they find out I use a .223.

What was the reason for no rifles in the first place?

It'll be alright. It's still a cool round. And the new rule probably won't be in effect until next fall...

I hope it passes also. I'm tired of trimming down my 35 Rem. brass!

The biggest thing we noticed in the southern tier of NY when they made rifles legal is there was a lot less shooting because they couldn't work the bolt nearly as fast as they could a semi-auto 12, and every open field with a 300+ yd view would have at least one orange blob on it opening weekend. Seems rifles meant you could now shoot your deer at maximum ranges so there was no need to sit in the woods any more. Besides, what fun was it shooting your spike horn at 30 yds with a 7mm mag?

The theory was, rifles were more dangerous because the projectiles travel further. I never bought into it, but you'd be surprised how many people I've met over the years do buy into it. Kind of a lack of critical thinking skills....

What else would you use a slug gun for besides shooting deer? I've got a designated slug gun and I don't notice it kicking any harder than anything else.

I've never understood the thought behind not allowing a centerfire but allowing muzzleloaders and slug guns. Most hunters I know in Indiana hunt out of treestands which means they are shooting towards the ground. In cases like that a centerfire is no more dangerous than a muzzleloader or a slug gun. If they restrict it to "straight wall cartridges, I'd use a 450 Marlin.

I too have a designated slug gun and have been very successful with it over the years. I have gone to the Ruger 77/44 when they made rifles legal, it worked just fine on a 60yd. shot last season. I see no need for other than pistol cartridge chambered rifles in Indiana, most shots are well within their range and capability.

Man, you Yankees are easy to condition.

You might just get to hunt in IN if you are nice... grin

PS. Leave the 223AI at home...

I'd only use a slug gun, for anything, if it's mandated. If you can't tell the recoil difference between a 12ga slug and many more than adequate deer cartridges (260, 30-06, 30-30, etc) you are much less sensitive to recoil than I.

From what I've heard it's passed the vote, but can't/won't be implemented until 2015. So if you have a slugger to sell, sell it soon!

Anyone have a link to info regarding the passage of legislation allowing hunting with high power rifles and when the law takes effect?

Yeah, it sounds like somebody banging on the trees with a stick.....time to get small!

Why you callin' a Yankee? I live in AL but i have some nephews that live in IN.

Here's a link the to the rules that were voted on:
http://www.in.gov/nrc/files/item_7_nrc_sept_2014.pdf

It is my understanding that it was voted for by the Natural Resource Commission.

Will make it easier to take kids hunting. use a 243 with light loads, bingo!!!

Anybody know if a final decision has been made on this ?

Yep! I'm thinking of making a 6X204 Ruger for that purpose. My kids appear to be opposite handed shooters, so the single shot 357 Mag may be getting a new barrel.

That would be great news if it did pass! I was kind of bummed when I moved to Indiana from Pennsylvania to learn of no high power rifles for deer hunting but figured Indiana is kind of flat, wide open terrain thus figure the game commission was being conservative due to "safety" issues.

Having hunted Indiana successfully with my rifled barrel slug gun for 25yrs. I was very pleased when the DNR voted to allow rifles chambered for pistol cartridges to be used for deer hunting. I have retired my slug gun and now hunt with a Ruger 77/44 .44 Magnum which I feel is very adequate for the task. I am not sure how I feel regarding high powered rifles being made legal. I hunt the hills and hollows of Brown County almost exclusively and have not encountered a shooting situation there where I feel that a high powered rifle would be more effective than the .44 Magnum. Perhaps in other areas of the state that offer longer shots a high powered rifle would be more effective. I'll stick to my .44 Magnum while hunting in Brown County.

Brown County as you well know is the exception rather than the rule for the type of terrain that make up this state...

pointer,

as a transplant to Indian, what's the typical type of terrain? what you estimate the range/yardage?

I couldn't get over how flat parts of Indiana coming from western Pennsylvania. Our shots are usually under 100yards, even half that distance isn't uncommon unless your on logging road/power line or purposely overlooking farmers field.

According to a poster on IN gun owners forum...

The centerfire proposal was preliminarily adopted at the NRC meeting yesterday. Public comments will begin soon...

Someone attended the meeting and said it had passed but will be no hard decisions until the public comments are reviewed and will not be until March 2015 until the Rules will be available.

Varies depending on the part of the state. From roughly, Indianapolis to the north is pretty flat as it was glaciated the most and most recently. The exceptions being some of the moraines and along the major waterways. The south western part of the state is rolling hills. A triangle who's apex starts north of Bloomington and goes to the Ohio River in the central part of the state over to the OH/KY border has a bit of topography. Most of this is unglaciated and more similar, but smaller, than the hills I've seen in PA. Shooting situations in the 'triangle' would be similar to what you had in PA. The more open, farmed part of the states could offer some much longer ranges. Just depends on how big the fields you have permission on...

pointer,

Thank you for your feedback!


So high power rifles for deer hunting isn't a done deal yet? It can still get turned down by public hearing/comments?

That is correct. I would be surprised if it didn't pass. Generally getting changes passed like this is harder to get past the Commission than the public.

I really think it will pass and hopefully it does.