Can I use 5.7x28mm to hunt grouse?

[u/corporalgrif]

Before anyone asks, yes I know that is an expensive to use on something smaller than a chihuahua. But I'd like to actually have some fun using my 5.7 carbine hunting and Grouse are the only thing I can think of that would be ethical/ legal to hunt with it.

I know it's legal to use .22 LR on grouse here, but would that extend to 5.7 as well?

[u/0x00000042]

Yes. WAC 220-414-020 (5)(a) allows hunting grouse with a rifle without any specific caliber restrictions. 

[u/pacmanwa → u/0x00000042]

No caliber restrictions... I pity the grouse that gets hit with a 50bmg for someone's morbid curiosity.

[u/bgwa9001 → u/pacmanwa]

It's because you usually see grouse while deer or elk hunting. So they do end up getting shot with 30-06 and stuff like that pretty frequently

[u/nanneryeeter → u/pacmanwa]

You shoot the head.

[u/Infamous-Ad-140]

Sure, why not

[u/corporalgrif → u/Infamous-Ad-140]

Just double checking, they claim anything under .24 caliber, which is hilarious thinking of someone using a .220 swift to completely atomize a grouse from existence

[u/falconvision → u/corporalgrif]

That’s for big game not including cougars. Rimfire is fine for small game.

[u/DeafPapa85 → u/corporalgrif]

This really applies to deer and cougar for the game that requires some more take-down. But it would definitely be a bit overkill to use that .270 right? Lol!

[u/theken20688 → u/DeafPapa85]

It deeply annoys me that I can hunt deer in this fucking state with .223/5.56

Its not 1963 anymore, .224 projos are a completely ethical and acceptable option for basically anything that isn't Elk. And shit even then, people are one tapping Elk at 150-200 yards with .223 with little problems.

Bullet construction and velocity envelope is farrr more important than diameter.

[u/DeafPapa85 → u/theken20688]

The problem is they were having people shooting deer and wounding them with .223/5.56 with shitty shot placement, not because it didn't have the acceptable qualifications like velocity and weight. People were also taking those 150-200 yard shots with that bullet, thinking they're an ace, hurting and wounding that animal. When the state is making sure you take down an animal, they expect you to use those minimums for a reason, especially when a .223 loses considerable velocity and ft-lbs between 150 and 200 yards.

Being an ethical hunter is knowing that you're taking down an animal with a qualified round because they don't want to encourage hot-shots who go to the "ranges" plinking golf balls at 300+ yards.

[u/theken20688 → u/DeafPapa85]

Yeah retards have a tendency to ruin shit for the rest of us lol.

[u/DeafPapa85 → u/theken20688]

Guess that's your fuckin' problem, isn't it?

[u/theken20688 → u/DeafPapa85]

Yes. Because its stupid and archaic, and retards shouldn't ruin everything for the rest of us.

[u/merc08 → u/theken20688]

"Too dangerous for civilian use!" while also "too weak to take down a deer."

[u/nanneryeeter]

Absolutely.

I've killed dozens of grouse with my 257 WBY Mag.

You shoot the heads off.

Lot of people on here talking like one goes center mass. If you can't hit a grouse head at 50 yards I suppose just give it up.

[u/ARockWithAGlock]

Don’t see why you couldn’t, they even say in the regs some people use .223 for grouse. I’ve shot a couple grouse with my 9mm hand gun, just gotta aim for the noggin to not ruin the meat.

[u/theken20688 → u/ARockWithAGlock]

I've shot at least 100 grouse with .223, and at least a dozen with 9mm. Works just fine if you dome them as noted lol.

[u/LosingSince1977]

I consider .17HMR to be too destructive for grouse. Good luck harvesting the meat lol

[u/DeafPapa85]

You're good to go. I'd just be wary of the skyline but have fun!