NE RAC

[ktg]

WE ARE ALL GUILTY OF TECHNOLOGY OF SOME SORT OR ANOTHER!

WE ARE ALL GUILTY!

I'M NOT AGAINST A TAKE!

BUT TAKE EQUALLY FROM EVERY F'N WEAPON TYPE!

I WOULDA USED THE WORD 'FAIR' BUT ONCE AGAIN PANTIES AROUND HERE GET WOUND TIGHT!

IF YOU'RE GONNA TAKE SMOKEPOLE SCOPES TAKE EM!

WHEN YOU DO,TAKE THE LONG RANGERS RIFLES AS WELL!

WHEN YOU DO, TAKE THE COMPOUNDS AWAY FROM STICKFLIPPERS!

IF YOU'RE NOT GONNA TAKE EQUALLY,DON'T TAKE AT ALL!

IT'LL TAKE A HELL OF ALOT MORE THAN BANNING SMOKEPOLE SCOPES TO IMPROVE THE DEER HERD!

They already took from archers, electronics attached to bow. I had to sell a sight because of it.

 

[lif]

If it's not about harvest rates, or any other biological impact THEN WHY DO IT?????

I get the point you are trying to make, but why? So the old hats can "have it how it used to be" The DWR said this was about keeping it as a unique experience, in my mind it still is a very unique experience, and can be made even more unique if you want to limit yourself any way you choose by hunting the way you want to hunt.

This is totally about some people wanting to control how others hunt. Nothing more.

This is a social issue that is being driven by pure emotion, and not by data. I don't like changing things based off of people's emotions.

I’d like to hunt archery with a crossbow. Is that ok with you?

 

[Ballistic]

You know what.
They should have never ever allowed scopes period. You all know this you know what kind of hunt this supposed to be.

If the success rate went up only up 2.5%.

Then what the hell is the problem then. That means it won’t change much with them off either.
Really that’s your angle. sorry better come up with something better.

We all know dam good and well this is supposed to be a challenging hunt. If you want to use scopes then any weapon hunt is where you can use them.

Ballistic will say why in earth would you use one on an any weapon hunt.
Well simple. Look above look at all the push back. It shouldn’t be an issue.

But holy cow the board is reading every single one of these post. Yes I know they are.
If the comments are anything like the trail camera comments then sorry scopes are gone.

Elk
If the board is reading all of these posts -then the board should “know” that folks on the tech team have been called out for BS as well as anyone that doesn’t agree with the scope removal propaganda.

I’m taking about Kevin Norman (sponsored long range competitor) that represents SFW. What’s his motive ?
Maybe he wants to go out on top with his 1100 yard chip shot on a deer. Time to pull the scopes so no-one can get it done at 1101 yards.
What other reason would he have…..
A good ol country boy That says 1100 yards is easy - but hides who is really is.
Kevin is well known as a shooter - hard to believe that no-one knew that.

But elk
Can you really tell me that you would pick a scoped black powder muzzy over a centerfire rifle on a legal weapon hunt ?

And you and others say I just don’t get it…..

 

[MrShane]

I’d like to hunt archery with a crossbow. Is that ok with you?

I hunt with a crossbow and they suck.
Stick with a regular bow if you can.

 

[Elkrunning-Scared]

Elk
If the board is reading all of these posts -then the board should “know” that folks on the tech team have been called out for BS as well as anyone that doesn’t agree with the scope removal propaganda.

I’m taking about Kevin Norman (sponsored long range competitor) that represents SFW. What’s his motive ?
Maybe he wants to go out on top with his 1100 yard chip shot on a deer. Time to pull the scopes so no-one can get it done at 1101 yards.
What other reason would he have…..
A good ol country boy That says 1100 yards is easy - but hides who is really is.
Kevin is well known as a shooter - hard to believe that no-one knew that.

But elk
Can you really tell me that you would pick a scoped black powder muzzy over a centerfire rifle on a legal weapon hunt ?

And you and others say I just don’t get it…..

You’re right i do get. They should have never allowed scopes and you know it as well.
Say what you want.
Refer to post 196

But elk
Can you really tell me that you would pick a scoped black powder muzzy over a centerfire rifle on a legal weapon hunt ?

Oh boy. I was hoping you would ask
Well guess what!
I had a tag in my pocket and I hunted with all 3 weapons during my early GS rifle elk hunt.
I hunted with my bow for 2 days. Then I hunted with my open sight muzzleloader for 3 days.
Then I switch to my rifle and guess what I shot my bull at 60 yards.

 

[elkantlers]

We discussed all the different components available today and what was available in 2016.
The law enforcement didn't want to tackle individual components like sabots, high BC projectiles, different powders or even ignition sysystems.

Law enforcement? You mean Gabe?
You could tell he was one of the people pushing this whole thing when he was presenting at the RACs last year.

 

[Elkrunning-Scared]

If the board is reading all of these posts -then the board should “know” that folks on the tech team have been called out for BS as well as anyone that doesn’t agree with the scope removal propaganda.

You’re right it’s BS. They even allowed scopes on Muzzy’s and you know it.

 

[lif]

WE ARE ALL GUILTY OF TECHNOLOGY OF SOME SORT OR ANOTHER!

WE ARE ALL GUILTY!

I'M NOT AGAINST A TAKE!

BUT TAKE EQUALLY FROM EVERY F'N WEAPON TYPE!

I WOULDA USED THE WORD 'FAIR' BUT ONCE AGAIN PANTIES AROUND HERE GET WOUND TIGHT!

IF YOU'RE GONNA TAKE SMOKEPOLE SCOPES TAKE EM!

WHEN YOU DO,TAKE THE LONG RANGERS RIFLES AS WELL!

WHEN YOU DO, TAKE THE COMPOUNDS AWAY FROM STICKFLIPPERS!

IF YOU'RE NOT GONNA TAKE EQUALLY,DON'T TAKE AT ALL!

IT'LL TAKE A HELL OF ALOT MORE THAN BANNING SMOKEPOLE SCOPES TO IMPROVE THE DEER HERD!

If I don’t get a recess then no one gets a recess?

 

[slamdunk]

Regulations are good when they are needed, but Regulations just to regulate because some people don't like the way some others are doing something is not OK in my book.


It still is a limited hunt, just not as limited as some want it to be.


Entitled??? Is what is Entitled is pulling scopes from people because "your group" doesn't like it, especially if there is no biological impact because of it.

And come on Slam, you can't be on both sides of this coin, you just said in your last post this wasn't about saving deer, in fact you have said it probably 100 times.

Our problems with the deer herds HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH A SCOPE ON A MUZZLELOADER! If we fix the real problems with our deer herds, then we wouldn't even be talking about this.

It's NOT about saving deer, it's about keeping this particular weapon in check for what this hunt was intended for.

My comment about success and entitlement was for those who grasp technology when bucks decline so you stay successful and fill your tags annually.
Please don't twist it.

 

[slamdunk]

Can Somebody SPLAIN This?

When I Was Younger!

SABOT'S Were FLAT-ASS Outlawed!

Then Years Later It Was Fine & Legal To Use Them?

Just Wondering Who & How They Became Legal?

We Gonna Need A Committee On This?

Because new generation hunters discovered they could shoot farther with this "new technology".
Now look where we are!
Fury high BC smokeless powder projectiles.

 

[slamdunk]

Very sad that individual components were not discussed.
That is really what would have made the experience different.

They were discussed.
If you can come up with a safe way for law enforcement to check a loaded rifle for components, please help us out.
What is in his possible bag, may not be what is inside his breech.

 

[Elkrunning-Scared]

I’m taking about Kevin Norman (sponsored long range competitor) that represents SFW. What’s his motive ?
Maybe he wants to go out on top with his 1100 yard chip shot on a deer. Time to pull the scopes so no-one can get it done at 1101 yards.
What other reason would he have…..
A good ol country boy That says 1100 yards is easy - but hides who is really is.
Kevin is well known as a shooter - hard to believe that no-one knew that.

This doesn’t matter at all. What matters is you guys are trying to keep scopes on guns because the success rate only went up 2.5%.
My point is very simple without scopes it only drops 2.5%.
That is your selling point on keeping scopes dream on.

 

[MrShane]

They were discussed.
If you can come up with a safe way for law enforcement to check a loaded rifle for components, please help us out.
What is in his possible bag, may not be what is inside his breech.

Extremely simple.
The TC claims to be saying this move is to bring back a unique hunting experience (I beg to differ on that motive but that is another topic) and to bring the hunt back to where it was meant to be during the late 70’s/early 80’s.
One super simple and easy check by law enforcement and done:
Open ignition by flint on steel, a musket cap, or #11 percussion cap only.
Let everyone have up to a 1x scope if eyes need it.
See, told you it was super simple.
The TC’s ‘open’ agenda has been met and the hidden agenda is also met.
I hope the board reads this and informs us how this would not tick every box they want ticked off.

 

[Simpleton]

No, you are correct, scopes aren't "emerged technology.
But......without them, the "emerged technology is rendered completely useless, that's the point.

We discussed all the different components available today and what was available in 2016.
The law enforcement didn't want to tackle individual components like sabots, high BC projectiles, different powders or even ignition systems.
Restrictions in the optics was the low hanging fruit and the whole cause for the birth of today's components and what will be coming down the pipe to reach even farther.

So which is it Slam.. The TC didn't believe limiting the actual weapon was the best route, or they did and LE (or at least the one LE Rep there) didn't want to because it would be too hard for them, so the TC went for the "low hanging fruit" (scopes)?

You have said yourself that there are high end sights that are available that do not render new muzzleloader tech useless. It may limit a shooters ability on the very top end, but I personally know shooters that are capable with those types of sights beyond the arbitrary limit of 200 yards set by the holy book of muzzleloaders.

Again, if the TC chose to limit the actual weapon, the scope on top would not matter and many, especially older guys, wouldn't feel disenfranchised by the rule.

If down the road someone creates some new system that works around whatever the current law is at that time, the TC could address that as it comes, as you know, that is what the TC was created for. To address new tech.

They were discussed.
If you can come up with a safe way for law enforcement to check a loaded rifle for components, please help us out.
What is in his possible bag, may not be what is inside his breech.

I understand that checking a loaded ML would be very difficult and not realistic. Eliminating rifle primers and 209s would be easy enough to check. Go to No 11 cap or lesser open/exposed ignition. They are capable of checking if guns are capped/primed now. But the argument that a guy may have different components in his breech is weak at best. Current proposal aside, you could say the same about smokeless powder now. Doesn't stop the current law from stating that smokeless isn't allowed.

 

[hossblur]

Slam. Ever feel like the little girl on exorcist? Your heads got to be spinning.

The same dudes that are bitching up a storm about "losing something", are now demanding they give up ignition or powder,,?

My god I go to dinner and they are pissing and moaning about "life's not fair", then I get home to find out they want more unfairness?

I swear to God some of these dudes would complain about a ****job.



So. Now, we are taking dudes breach plugs, powder, caps, but keeping scopes?

Almost 2 years to get these jokers where I was.

I agree fellas. Idaho rules for muzzies.

Welcome to the team.

 

[MrShane]

Slam. Ever feel like the little girl on exorcist? Your heads got to be spinning.

The same dudes that are bitching up a storm about "losing something", are now demanding they give up ignition or powder,,?

My god I go to dinner and they are pissing and moaning about "life's not fair", then I get home to find out they want more unfairness?

I swear to God some of these dudes would complain about a ****job.



So. Now, we are taking dudes breach plugs, powder, caps, but keeping scopes?

Almost 2 years to get these jokers where I was.

I agree fellas. Idaho rules for muzzies.

Welcome to the team.

I have been saying “Idahos rules” this entire time.
I only mentioned leaving on 1x scopes to answer Slams question.
I would like to see scopes disappear also (Idahos regs to the letter) if you are reading this TC Board.

P.S. I’m hoping Slam can answer for the board that my answer to Slam is not super simple for LEO to enforce?

 

[Simpleton]

Slam. Ever feel like the little girl on exorcist? Your heads got to be spinning.

The same dudes that are bitching up a storm about "losing something", are now demanding they give up ignition or powder,,?

My god I go to dinner and they are pissing and moaning about "life's not fair", then I get home to find out they want more unfairness?

I swear to God some of these dudes would complain about a ****job.



So. Now, we are taking dudes breach plugs, powder, caps, but keeping scopes?

Almost 2 years to get these jokers where I was.

I agree fellas. Idaho rules for muzzies.

Welcome to the team.

News to me that Idaho allows scopes for muskets…?
Can’t speak for anyone else, but I am not demanding that at all. Just pointing out that if their intention was to limit range, there are far more effective solutions than what’s been proposed that wouldn’t make a segment of people feel targeted.

 

[MrShane]

News to me that Idaho allows scopes for muskets…?
Can’t speak for anyone else, but I am not demanding that at all. Just pointing out that if their intention was to limit range, there are far more effective solutions than what’s been proposed that wouldn’t make a segment of people feel targeted.

Idaho does not allow scopes.
I threw in the ‘up to 1x’ for guys with vision problems, but a COR would be required.
I hunt with a crossbow because I only have one hand.
BUT, I am still required to obtain a COR every year to prove I have one hand.
I shouldn’t complain I guess.
Utah now keeps my note on file, at least I can make the request over the phone now.
In the beginning I used to have to take a Dr.s note stating I only had one hand to the DWR office every year to get my COR.
I would show them at the counter I only had one hand but without the Dr note it was if I had two hands.

 

[hossblur]

News to me that Idaho allows scopes for muskets…?
Can’t speak for anyone else, but I am not demanding that at all. Just pointing out that if their intention was to limit range, there are far more effective solutions than what’s been proposed that wouldn’t make a segment of people feel targeted.

I've Been calling for Idaho rules since tech committee was put together. I didn't say Idaho allows scopes. I'm just amazed what dudes will give up to keep scopes, "that don't do anything."


But honestly. Most dudes, just want to *****.

 

[elkassassin]

Agreed!

I Was In Dis-Belief When It Happened!

But How Many People Didn't Jump On It?

Damn Few!

Too be fair? They should of never allowed scopes on them and you know it.

 

[JakeH]

I’d like to hunt archery with a crossbow. Is that ok with you?

Sure, if you get the COR stating you can use one.

Crossbows have never been allowed during the archery hunt, so it's not even remotely a valid argument. We've been hunting with scopes on muzzleloaders for probably 20 years, (whenever they started allowing 1x) and with variable power scopes for 8 years.

I helped my 70 year old dad get a crossbow COR this year and watched him kill an elk with it. Personally I don't think it's the total game changer everyone thinks it would be if allowed during archery.

If the DWR had allowed everyone to use crossbows 10 years ago, and then just changed their mind and wanted to limit everyone to long bows, I would have an issue with that, just like I do with this issue.

 

[JakeH]

It's NOT about saving deer, it's about keeping this particular weapon in check for what this hunt was intended for.

Then check yourself.... Every single one of you that want to go back to what ever the hell you want to go back to CAN DO IT with out anyone telling you too. If you want to hunt with idahos rules you can, if you want to hunt open site you can, if you want to dress up in buckskins and hunt with a patch and round ball NOBODY is stopping you.

For the life of me I don't understand why everyone is so upset about how someone else chooses to legally hunt with whatever they want to hunt with.

News flash guys, your not competing with each other.

If it's not about saving deer, then it's 100% about you guys wanting to limit the other guy because you think it's going to give you some kind of advantage.
Most of you think it's going to increase draw odds, slam you have already admitted this awhile back.
This has nothing to do with scopes, or all of you would be hunting with the regulations you are pushing for without being forced to. But very few of you(I know some of you have) have the balls to limit yourself to your own positions here but you want to force everyone else to do it, or you want to force them to do it how you do it, if you really are one of the few that do limit yourself.

@hossblur this is no different then your cut the tag campaign you promote every year. Your no different than all those guys that push for tag cuts, but won't cut up their tag before the season starts. If you truly wanted to hunt with idaho rules why aren't you doing it already?

 

[elkassassin]

Hey PUNK!

My SmokePoles Ain't Even Close To Being That Far Advanced!

I'm Using JUNK BH209!

Because new generation hunters discovered they could shoot farther with this "new technology".
Now look where we are!
Fury high BC smokeless powder projectiles. View attachment 127140

 

[hossblur]

Sure, if you get the COR stating you can use one.

Crossbows have never been allowed during the archery hunt, so it's not even remotely a valid argument. We've been hunting with scopes on muzzleloaders for probably 20 years, (whenever they started allowing 1x) and with variable power scopes for 8 years.

I helped my 70 year old dad get a crossbow COR this year and watched him kill an elk with it. Personally I don't think it's the total game changer everyone thinks it would be if allowed during archery.

If the DWR had allowed everyone to use crossbows 10 years ago, and then just changed their mind and wanted to limit everyone to long bows, I would have an issue with that, just like I do with this issue.

So once the DWR does something, it's stuck in place forever? No changes or adjustments are allowed? Silly

 

[elkassassin]

Because Hossy Is An OPPOR-F'N-TUNIST & Admits It!

In His Eyes He Doesn't Care One Way Or The Other!

In His Eyes & Mine As Well He's Smart Enough To Know If Taking The SmokePoles Scopes Helps, It'll Only Help The Rifle/LongRangers Out On The Very Next Following Hunt! (Which Is The Rifle/ALW Hunt!)

Since He Prefers The Rifle Hunt And Hunts All 3 Seasons/Weapon Types He'll Still Lick The Cream One Way Or The Other!

HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO EVERYBODY INCLUDING YOU Hossy!

You Know I'm RAZZIN You Once Again!

Carry On With The BS That Fixes ABSO-F'N-LUTELY Nothing!

There's PISSCUTTER'S To Count,I'm Outa Here!

Then check yourself.... Every single one of you that want to go back to what ever the hell you want to go back to CAN DO IT with out anyone telling you too. If you want to hunt with idahos rules you can, if you want to hunt open site you can, if you want to dress up in buckskins and hunt with a patch and round ball NOBODY is stopping you.

For the life of me I don't understand why everyone is so upset about how someone else chooses to legally hunt with whatever they want to hunt with.

News flash guys, your not competing with each other.

If it's not about saving deer, then it's 100% about you guys wanting to limit the other guy because you think it's going to give you some kind of advantage.
Most of you think it's going to increase draw odds, slam you have already admitted this awhile back.
This has nothing to do with scopes, or all of you would be hunting with the regulations you are pushing for without being forced to. But very few of you(I know some of you have) have the balls to limit yourself to your own positions here but you want to force everyone else to do it, or you want to force them to do it how you do it, if you really are one of the few that do limit yourself.

@hossblur this is no different then your cut the tag campaign you promote every year. Your no different than all those guys that push for tag cuts, but won't cut up their tag before the season starts. If you truly wanted to hunt with idaho rules why aren't you doing it already?

 

[hossblur]

Then check yourself.... Every single one of you that want to go back to what ever the hell you want to go back to CAN DO IT with out anyone telling you too. If you want to hunt with idahos rules you can, if you want to hunt open site you can, if you want to dress up in buckskins and hunt with a patch and round ball NOBODY is stopping you.

For the life of me I don't understand why everyone is so upset about how someone else chooses to legally hunt with whatever they want to hunt with.

News flash guys, your not competing with each other.

If it's not about saving deer, then it's 100% about you guys wanting to limit the other guy because you think it's going to give you some kind of advantage.
Most of you think it's going to increase draw odds, slam you have already admitted this awhile back.
This has nothing to do with scopes, or all of you would be hunting with the regulations you are pushing for without being forced to. But very few of you(I know some of you have) have the balls to limit yourself to your own positions here but you want to force everyone else to do it, or you want to force them to do it how you do it, if you really are one of the few that do limit yourself.

@hossblur this is no different then your cut the tag campaign you promote every year. Your no different than all those guys that push for tag cuts, but won't cut up their tag before the season starts. If you truly wanted to hunt with idaho rules why aren't you doing it already?

Dudes really cherry pick. The "it's not about saving deer" line is bullshit. And as a new RAC member, you're going to learn real fast to shut your mouth, and not say anything, because there are dudes who grab on to anything they want to hear and run with it. It's why politicians use political speech.


It may not be SOLELY about saving mule deer, but let's not be children, a few bucks saved, just might make it to next year.

Now, I know, I said "solely", so automatically, here they come.

There should have Never been scopes allowed to start with. Show me how scopes BENEFIT deer. Everyone wants to disprove a negative, but show me how scopes increased either deer herds, or deer age class.

Scopes were pushed by a tiny, vocal minority, with backing from industry who saw a new revenue source.

But same challenge. Who is stopping you from using your state of the art muzzleloader? What your bitching about isn't having something taken away. Your bitching about season date to use it.

We don't have a rifle season. Third week of October, tear it up.

 

[hossblur]

Because Hossy Is An OPPOR-F'N-TUNIST & Admits It!

In His Eyes He Doesn't Care One Way Or The Other!

In His Eyes & Mine As Well He's Smart Enough To Know If Taking The SmokePoles Scopes Helps, It'll Only Help The Rifle/LongRangers Out On The Very Next Following Hunt! (Which Is The Rifle/ALW Hunt!)

Since He Prefers The Rifle Hunt And Hunts All 3 Seasons/Weapon Types He'll Still Lick The Cream One Way Or The Other!

HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO EVERYBODY INCLUDING YOU Hossy!

You Know I'm RAZZIN You Once Again!

Carry On With The BS That Fixes ABSO-F'N-LUTELY Nothing!

There's PISSCUTTER'S To Count,I'm Outa Here!

200% incorrect.

I picked up a bow as well.

I haven't shot a deer with a rifle since before I had kids, my oldest turns 18 next month. In fact, not since dad was alive and that's been 23 years.

I am an opportunist. Thats why I do all weapons. Increased chance at a tag.

I'll take the tag. If that means spears, great. Slingshots, ok. But I want the tag.


If you want to shoot guns, great. I know if several real nice ranges, many are long range. Let's not be children.

But I'll take the tag, cuz I'm a hunter, and before I worry about optics choices on a gun, I NEED A TAG.

Truth is, muzzleloading has become so easy, every tard tardville can pick one up be highly successful.

Archery, and muzzleloaders should be a more difficult, and thus less sought after tag.

And no, don't show me DWR "data".

Same guys quoting "data" spend the entire year no believing deer "counts".

Data is bullshit unless it's complete. Success rates with muzzies are higher, or my camp is damn above average each year

 

[hossblur]

Thanks for reminding me @JakeH


Year 4.

Not a single video.

Lots of big talkers

 

[bucks]

Elkassassin hit it right on............

 

[Vanilla]

The number of muzzy hunters increased when they started allowing magnifying scopes, just like the number of muzzy hunters increased when they started allowing inlines. I am guessing if this new regulation passes, a decent number of muzzy applicants will bounce back to rifle season, so it may not be the boon rifle hunters that some are claiming it’s going to be. I believe it will make being able to rifle hunt a little harder. Especially as tag numbers continue to drop.

I’m often reminded on another forum that the muzzy hunt really was just an extension of the rifle hunt. So those that say it needs to go back to what it was originally intended, the history may not be what we think. It was those with a rifle tag (yes, I know it’s ALW) that could go pay a small fee and pick up the muzzleloader extension and hunt in November after the rifle season closed. The nature of the weapon itself had kept many people out of the game, and the muzzleloader hunt eventually had to be moved to September when technological advances being allowed during the muzzy hunt made it easier to kill deer and made more people want to do it.

As for those saying if it does not help the deer herd, so why do it? 90% of the regulations and processes we put in place have no benefit to the deer herd. If that was our standard, things would look VERY different in this state. If things were managed for biological benefit and not for social demands all the time, boy things would be different! Heck, the entire new elk plan would be voided. We’ve been told for a long time (correctly) that there is no biological harm to the elk herd to have a rifle hunt in the rut. Yet what have people been crying about now for years and finally got some real traction on? Are we saying now that we should put all those tags back in the early rifle and give those extra 4 days back to rifle hunters because the change won’t do anything to help the elk herd? Because if it’s going to become about only what helps or hurts the animals, I’m going to be watching those discussions closely! And I’m not going to lie…I like that way of thinking. But we can’t pick and choose which regulations we like or dislike and label them good or no benefit just because we are for or against them. We need to stay consistent one way or the other.

Eventually a decision just has to be made on this topic and just STICK TO IT! I’m not in favor of the proposed regulation, but we can’t keep flip flopping our regulations back and forth and keep changing how the system works every few years. People need to be able to make plans based upon the system in place and all this back and forth and some of the topics that have been discussed that haven’t passed yet do nothing but screw over hunters. We need to quit screwing over hunters.

 

[gundog2]

The number of muzzy hunters increased when they started allowing magnifying scopes, just like the number of muzzy hunters increased when they started allowing inlines. I am guessing if this new regulation passes, a decent number of muzzy applicants will bounce back to rifle season, so it may not be the boon rifle hunters that some are claiming it’s going to be. I believe it will make being able to rifle hunt a little harder. Especially as tag numbers continue to drop.

By the same reasoning, the proposal may make it easier to get a muzzy tag.

I basically agree that it would be nice if we could stop changing all the rules every year. I waited 25 years to get a 5-day early rifle bull tag this year. I wasn't happy about losing 4 days but it is what it is. I recognize that they are trying to balance high demand with limited resources.

 

[roadrunner]

If the board is reading every one of these then here goes:
Dear Board,
Please, please, please just cut and paste Idaho’s muzzy regs in for Utah already and stop this madness.
The End.

Think everyone would be happier with CO's instead.

 

[slamdunk]

Hey PUNK!

My SmokePoles Ain't Even Close To Being That Far Advanced!

I'm Using JUNK BH209!

I'm still using my old Knight disc, 3 pellets of Firestar powder pushing a 250gr Powerbelt, but it's still deadly at 400 yards with my 4x12 Vortex Tactical.

Them Basin boys are pretty fond of those LRC's, but won't admit why they use them!

 

[muledeer]

Yes if the board is reading these please take away the scopes.
This is the very definition of not having rules, everything becomes chaotic and society would slide rapidly into pandemonium. Isn't this what has happened since they took the rules on scopes off in 2016.

 

[slamdunk]

Then check yourself.... Every single one of you that want to go back to what ever the hell you want to go back to CAN DO IT with out anyone telling you too. If you want to hunt with idahos rules you can, if you want to hunt open site you can, if you want to dress up in buckskins and hunt with a patch and round ball NOBODY is stopping you.

For the life of me I don't understand why everyone is so upset about how someone else chooses to legally hunt with whatever they want to hunt with.

News flash guys, your not competing with each other.

If it's not about saving deer, then it's 100% about you guys wanting to limit the other guy because you think it's going to give you some kind of advantage.
Most of you think it's going to increase draw odds, slam you have already admitted this awhile back.
This has nothing to do with scopes, or all of you would be hunting with the regulations you are pushing for without being forced to. But very few of you(I know some of you have) have the balls to limit yourself to your own positions here but you want to force everyone else to do it, or you want to force them to do it how you do it, if you really are one of the few that do limit yourself.

@hossblur this is no different then your cut the tag campaign you promote every year. Your no different than all those guys that push for tag cuts, but won't cut up their tag before the season starts. If you truly wanted to hunt with idaho rules why aren't you doing it already?

Sorry Jake, this has absolutely nothing to do with 12 individuals sitting on a committee trying to improve our draw odds for muzzleloader tags.

You are correct though, I have stated that a few handfuls of guys might go back to using centerfire rifles, but It was said in jest.
I personally don't care because I draw my WW muzzleloader tag every year no problem.

Limiting ourselves is definitely an obvious option, I know a few that still use Hawkins just for fun.

Some people are still in this for the sport of hunting, not just killing.
There's a difference.

 

[slamdunk]

Yes if the board is reading these please take away the scopes.
This is the very definition of not having rules, everything becomes chaotic and society would slide rapidly into pandemonium. Isn't this what has happened since they took the rules on scopes off in 2016.

100%

 

[MrShane]

I'm still using my old Knight disc, 3 pellets of Firestar powder pushing a 250gr Powerbelt, but it's still deadly at 400 yards with my 4x12 Vortex Tactical.

Them Basin boys are pretty fond of those LRC's, but won't admit why they use them!

I now understand why you don’t like the ‘open ignition, flint/#11/musket cap only’ idea.
Fair enough.
But there is no way you can argue it is an EXTREMELY easy method for LE’s to check for compliance?
And 100% captures the intent of the TC Board to have ‘a unique’ hunting season.

 

[slamdunk]

So which is it Slam.. The TC didn't believe limiting the actual weapon was the best route, or they did and LE (or at least the one LE Rep there) didn't want to because it would be too hard for them, so the TC went for the "low hanging fruit" (scopes)?

You have said yourself that there are high end sights that are available that do not render new muzzleloader tech useless. It may limit a shooters ability on the very top end, but I personally know shooters that are capable with those types of sights beyond the arbitrary limit of 200 yards set by the holy book of muzzleloaders.

Again, if the TC chose to limit the actual weapon, the scope on top would not matter and many, especially older guys, wouldn't feel disenfranchised by the rule.

If down the road someone creates some new system that works around whatever the current law is at that time, the TC could address that as it comes, as you know, that is what the TC was created for. To address new tech.



I understand that checking a loaded ML would be very difficult and not realistic. Eliminating rifle primers and 209s would be easy enough to check. Go to No 11 cap or lesser open/exposed ignition. They are capable of checking if guns are capped/primed now. But the argument that a guy may have different components in his breech is weak at best. Current proposal aside, you could say the same about smokeless powder now. Doesn't stop the current law from stating that smokeless isn't allowed.

Can we even fathom banning inlines and the absolute uproar that would cause in comparison to scope restrictions?
I shouldn't really need to hit on this much, but the conversation at the TC table lasted about 30 seconds when this "no-brainer" suggestion was brought up.

 

[slamdunk]

I now understand why you don’t like the ‘open ignition, flint/#11/musket cap only’ idea.
Fair enough.
But there is no way you can argue it is an EXTREMELY easy method for LE’s to check for compliance?
And 100% captures the intent of the TC Board to have ‘a unique’ hunting season.

I cannot argue this personally as a TC member.
It's a majority vote, and just as I have mentioned numerous times, even my 1x-4x was declined by my constituents.

 

[elkassassin]

We Use Them Just Like You Use Your NIGHTFORCE Scopes On Your Long Range Rifles!

Because We/You Can & We Will Because It's Been Legal!

Anybody That Hasn't Seen A BIG Change In Modern Day Rifles,Scopes,Spotters, RangeFinders & Cartridges Are Not Looking At The Big Picture!

Same Goes For Archery Equipment!

We Are All Guilty Of TECHNOLOGY Of Some Sort!

Take It All If You're Gonna Take!

I'm still using my old Knight disc, 3 pellets of Firestar powder pushing a 250gr Powerbelt, but it's still deadly at 400 yards with my 4x12 Vortex Tactical.

Them Basin boys are pretty fond of those LRC's, but won't admit why they use them!

 

[falcon63]

"It's NOT about saving deer, it's about keeping this particular weapon in check for what this hunt was intended for."

More accurately would be to say what some people think this hunt was intended for. Not even most people......but some. But ok, let's ban scopes. Let's also move the hunt back to November like it used to be. If we're going back to traditions, let's go all the way back.

 

[Elkrunning-Scared]

For the life of me I don't understand why everyone is so upset about how someone else chooses to legally hunt with whatever they want to hunt with.

For the life of me. I don’t understand why the division allowed scopes. We all know what this hunt was intended to be.

We don’t know actual numbers on what the Success is.
But what you and others have been saying it’s only a 2.5% increase. Like I said in my other post it will only be a 2.5% decrease.
look at the numbers I mean seriously. This hunt was modified for no reason back in 2015. Like you and others have stated it didn’t change harvest that much and there is no biological reason to change it.

Well I can play the same card. There shouldn’t be any problem going back to the way it was because in your mind and others it didn’t help.

I'm still using my old Knight disc, 3 pellets of Firestar powder pushing a 250gr Powerbelt, but it's still deadly at 400 yards with my 4x12 Vortex Tactical.

Them Basin boys are pretty fond of those LRC's, but won't admit why they use them!

You are 100% correct they do love them.

 

[Elkrunning-Scared]

Yes if the board is reading these please take away the scopes.
This is the very definition of not having rules, everything becomes chaotic and society would slide rapidly into pandemonium. Isn't this what has happened since they took the rules on scopes off in 2016.

Yes you are 100% correct.

 

[slamdunk]

We Use Them Just Like You Use Your NIGHTFORCE Scopes On Your Long Range Rifles!

Because We/You Can & We Will Because It's Been Legal!

Anybody That Hasn't Seen A BIG Change In Modern Day Rifles,Scopes,Spotters, RangeFinders & Cartridges Are Not Looking At The Big Picture!

Same Goes For Archery Equipment!

We Are All Guilty Of TECHNOLOGY Of Some Sort!

Take It All If You're Gonna Take!

Exactly why some tech is here to stay as in inlines themselves and why I am in favor of a low power restriction or at least a 1x so poor vision can be corrected through the ability to focus the glass.

As for my Nightforce, it doesn't do anything that a Leopold or Vortex doesn't do, it's just better built.
There's nothing fancy electronically inside, just an illuminated reticle.

The TC already addressed electronics in scopes and the WB approved it into law this year, same with Garmin style sights for archery.

How are we going to limit a bolt action centerfire rifles
That technology has been there for over a hundred years and more.
Today's popular calibers are still just as popular like the very common 300 Win Mag and has been widely used for long range hunting and target shooting.

Every scope has turrets for windage and elevation, most are just exposed now.

As mentioned, rangefinders have created the "stretch" for every weapon.

But again.......this muzzleloader recommendation wasn't ever about equalizing all three, it is about taming it and keeping it what is was intended to be.

Two facts.....
Inlines should never have been allowed.
Variable power scopes should never have been allowed.
There was never a need to scope a Hawkins, but here we are.

 

[falcon63]

Two facts.....
Inlines should never have been allowed.
Variable power scopes should never have been allowed.
There was never a need to scope a Hawkins, but here we are.

This is strictly opinion.......not facts.

 

[elkassassin]

3rd Fact:

Most Rifles Now Are Shooting Further Distances Due To HIGH TECH Scopes Mounted Atop Them!

HIGH TECH Cartridges!

HIGH TECH RangeFinders!

ETC!

ETC!

The Advancements In Weaponry Has Happened On Every Weapon Type!

LET'S TAKE RIFLES & THE RIFLE HUNT BACK To WHAT IT ONCE WAS!

That Goes For Archery Equipment As Well!

Exactly why some tech is here to stay as in inlines themselves and why I am in favor of a low power restriction or at least a 1x so poor vision can be corrected through the ability to focus the glass.

As for my Nightforce, it doesn't do anything that a Leopold or Vortex doesn't do, it's just better built.
There's nothing fancy electronically inside, just an illuminated reticle.

The TC already addressed electronics in scopes and the WB approved it into law this year, same with Garmin style sights for archery.

How are we going to limit a bolt action centerfire rifles
That technology has been there for over a hundred years and more.
Today's popular calibers are still just as popular like the very common 300 Win Mag and has been widely used for long range hunting and target shooting.

Every scope has turrets for windage and elevation, most are just exposed now.

As mentioned, rangefinders have created the "stretch" for every weapon.

But again.......this muzzleloader recommendation wasn't ever about equalizing all three, it is about taming it and keeping it what is was intended to be.

Two facts.....
Inlines should never have been allowed.
Variable power scopes should never have been allowed.
There was never a need to scope a Hawkins, but here we are.

 

[slamdunk]

3rd Fact:

Most Rifles Now Are Shooting Further Distances Due To HIGH TECH Scopes Mounted Atop Them!

HIGH TECH Cartridges!

HIGH TECH RangeFinders!

ETC!

ETC!

The Advancements In Weaponry Has Happened On Every Weapon Type!

LET'S TAKE RIFLES & THE RIFLE HUNT BACK To WHAT IT ONCE WAS!

That Goes For Archery Equipment As Well!

Help me understand "high tech cartridges".

Nothing has changed in cartridges really except gap fillers.
Popular magnums of today were being used in the 1940's.

 

[slamdunk]

This is strictly opinion.......not facts.

True, I stand corrected.

However, the inline was the embryo to the birth of it all.

 

[elkassassin]

The BC Of Bullets!

There Are Alot Of New Cartridges/Bullets That Are Way More Efficient Today Than of Yesteryear!

Some Cartridges Are The Same With The Exception Of What They Are Being Loaded Up With!

Better Powders!

Better Bullets/Projectiles!

GAWD Forbid I Call Them SLUGS!

Ballistic Coefficients are measures of objects' abilities to overcome air resistance mid-flight. Typically, the higher the number, the lower the drag of the projectile and the better the bullet will cut through the air.

Yes!

There Has Been Big Improvements With This Alone in SmokePole Bullets & LongRange Bullets As Well!

I Hope I SPLAINED It A Little Better In This Post!

Help me understand "high tech cartridges".

Nothing has changed in cartridges really except gap fillers.
Popular magnums of today were being used in the 1940's.

 

[Bigwiffy]

3rd Fact:

Most Rifles Now Are Shooting Further Distances Due To HIGH TECH Scopes Mounted Atop Them!

HIGH TECH Cartridges!

HIGH TECH RangeFinders!

ETC!

ETC!

The Advancements In Weaponry Has Happened On Every Weapon Type!

LET'S TAKE RIFLES & THE RIFLE HUNT BACK To WHAT IT ONCE WAS!

That Goes For Archery Equipment As Well!

I think we should only take Bobcat's scope, I like to hear him whiiiiiiiiine.....meow that it is impacting him.

 

[elkassassin]

Hey BIG Wiff!

Take It!

I've Got A SmokePole For Any Change Made!

I'll Even Retire My Kenetreks & Wear Them New Slippers You Sent Me!

I think we should only take Bobcat's scope, I like to hear him whiiiiiiiiine.....meow that it is impacting him.

 

[elkassassin]

Hey Big Wiff!

I Sent You A PM!

 

[MrShane]

Can we even fathom banning inlines and the absolute uproar that would cause in comparison to scope restrictions?
I shouldn't really need to hit on this much, but the conversation at the TC table lasted about 30 seconds when this "no-brainer" suggestion was brought up.

I never said to ban inlines, they have been around for hundreds of years.
It is the closed ignition that is modern tech.
SO sad only 30 seconds was spent on something 100% more important than scopes.
The no-brainer part was to dismiss it after 30 seconds.

 

[slamdunk]

The BC Of Bullets!

There Are Alot Of New Cartridges/Bullets That Are Way More Efficient Today Than of Yesteryear!

Some Cartridges Are The Same With The Exception Of What They Are Being Loaded Up With!

Better Powders!

Better Bullets/Projectiles!

GAWD Forbid I Call Them SLUGS!

Ballistic Coefficients are measures of objects' abilities to overcome air resistance mid-flight. Typically, the higher the number, the lower the drag of the projectile and the better the bullet will cut through the air.

Yes!

There Has Been Big Improvements With This Alone in SmokePole Bullets & LongRange Bullets As Well!

I Hope I SPLAINED It A Little Better In This Post!

Very true, ballistics are better today than yesteryear.

 

[slamdunk]

I never said to ban inlines, they have been around for hundreds of years.
It is the closed ignition that is modern tech.
SO sad only 30 seconds was spent on something 100% more important than scopes.
The no-brainer part was to dismiss it after 30 seconds.

Both my comments were a bit of exaggeration.
Of course more than 30 seconds were spent, but it was a quick assessment that inlines were not going anywhere on GS/LE hunts.

 

[hossblur]

We Use Them Just Like You Use Your NIGHTFORCE Scopes On Your Long Range Rifles!

Because We/You Can & We Will Because It's Been Legal!

Anybody That Hasn't Seen A BIG Change In Modern Day Rifles,Scopes,Spotters, RangeFinders & Cartridges Are Not Looking At The Big Picture!

Same Goes For Archery Equipment!

We Are All Guilty Of TECHNOLOGY Of Some Sort!

Take It All If You're Gonna Take!

Why?

Were you that kid in a hools that cried to the teacher if everything wasn't perfectly equal?

 

[hossblur]

This is strictly opinion.......not facts.

How?

When this hunt got proposed there weren't inlines

 

[slamdunk]

How?

When this hunt got proposed there weren't inlines

I believe the enclosed ignition technology was there but not "birthed" yet.
But when it hit the market, it exploded over night.

 

[hossblur]

I believe the enclosed ignition technology was there but not "birthed" yet.
But when it hit the market, it exploded over night.

I doubt highly a single one of the guys in the groups that pushed muzzy season, had one

 

[hossblur]

Im getting old. But you read enough of long termers stuff you kinda get a feel for their general positions. So it's odd when you think one thing, then it's flipped on a dime. Seems odd when someone flips 180

 

[Ballistic]

How?

When this hunt got proposed there weren't inlines

Hossy
You even acknowledged the history of muzzleloaders on another thread and posted as such.
Did you forget about your post on inlines dating back to pre 1853 ?
You know the inventor of the inline……..

Waiting for you to come clean Hossycrit.

 

[hossblur]

Hossy
You even acknowledged the history of muzzleloaders on another thread and posted as such.
Did you forget about your post on inlines dating back to pre 1853 ?
You know the inventor of the inline……..

Waiting for you to come clean Hossycrit.

I'll let you ask @2lumpy if there were inlines in the hands of the guys that pushed for this hunt.

 

[hossblur]

Hossy
You even acknowledged the history of muzzleloaders on another thread and posted as such.
Did you forget about your post on inlines dating back to pre 1853 ?
You know the inventor of the inline……..

Waiting for you to come clean Hossycrit.

There weren't inlines in the market


Better?

 

[hossblur]

 

[hossblur]

@JakeH

2 years ago you were supporting a return to primitive muzzies and calling out dudes saying otherwise.

What changed? A Paramount? Did your beliefs change as your effective distance increased?

Are all the Basin guys shooting Reed muzzies?

Just seems real odd to 180 a position

 

[Ballistic]

There weren't inlines in the market


Better?

You sure about that Hossy ?

Are you saying no one was making whitworth reproduction inlines since 1853 ?

 

[hossblur]

You sure about that Hossy ?

Are you saying no one was making whitworth reproduction inlines since 1853 ?

Ask Lumpy how many of his crew where rocking inlines when the muzzy season was created.

 

[hossblur]

I sure as hell guarantee NO ONE was hunting with a sub MOA at 500 yd muzzy.

Yes I said no one, I'm sure Ballistic know of a dude. ( I know of a mammal that lays eggs too, but for general conversation we need not look to the extreme oddity)

 

[Elkrunning-Scared]

Hahaha Hoss. Post #260 and #264 Jake what do have to say about that.
Let me guess Jake there’s no biological explanation.

 

[Elkrunning-Scared]

View attachment 127236

I sure as hell guarantee NO ONE was hunting with a sub MOA at 500 yd muzzy.

Yes I said no one, I'm sure Ballistic know of a dude. ( I know of a mammal that lays eggs too, but for general conversation we need not look to the extreme oddity)

Ballistic has been hunting with a muzzy for over 30 years.
he knows exactly what has been happening. He ain’t bull s**** me or anyone else on here or the wild life board.
But he sure has a few RAC members convinced.

 

[Ballistic]

Ballistic has been hunting with a muzzy for over 30 years.
he knows exactly what has been happening. He ain’t bull s**** me or anyone else on here or the wild life board.
But he sure has a few RAC members convinced.

The truth (facts) is a hard pill to swallow.
Continue with your “knows”

 

[Elkrunning-Scared]

The truth (facts) is a hard pill to swallow.
Continue with your “knows”

You said it. If anyone knows what this hunt really is about it’s you.
You have just forgotten. I sure the hell haven’t.

 

[slamdunk]

Im getting old. But you read enough of long termers stuff you kinda get a feel for their general positions. So it's odd when you think one thing, then it's flipped on a dime. Seems odd when someone flips 180

View attachment 127230

He told us his stance changed because "the data didn't support the need".

I wonder where the "data" was back in 21?

Maybe he'll splain it......

 

[JakeH]

@JakeH

2 years ago you were supporting a return to primitive muzzies and calling out dudes saying otherwise.

What changed? A Paramount? Did your beliefs change as your effective distance increased?

Are all the Basin guys shooting Reed muzzies?

Just seems real odd to 180 a position

When I looked at the harvest statistics and they didn't support my arguments I was making. Like all of you, I assumed success had increased substantially.

I've already said at the beginning of this I was for the removal of scopes, until I personally started digging up harvest statistics to prove my point and realized I wasn't accurate.

You think you got me, but I have already said this in this post I'm sure, never hid from it.

 

[JakeH]

He told us his stance changed because "the data didn't support the need".

I wonder where the "data" was back in 21?

Maybe he'll splain it......

Yep, sure did. Thanks for confirming that I had already stated my position had changed.

 

[JakeH]

View attachment 127234

Actually everything I said in that post was factual, and still rings true.

 

[slamdunk]

When I looked at the harvest statistics and they didn't support my arguments I was making. Like all of you, I assumed success had increased substantially.

I've already said at the beginning of this I was for the removal of scopes, until I personally started digging up harvest statistics to prove my point and realized I wasn't accurate.

You think you got me, but I have already said this in this post I'm sure, never hid from it.

I do remember you stating that, yes.

I'm curious as to what made you "think" things were bigger than you originally thought without data.
I mean you do clearly state muzzleloaders shoot in excess of 400 yards.
Even your buddy LRC accused me in a PM of being the problem because my old knight is capable of 400......yet he builds customs that make mine look like a Daisy Red Ryder in comparison.

I'm really spinning my head on this one....

 

[JakeH]

I do remember you stating that, yes.

I'm curious as to what made you "think" things were bigger than you originally thought.
I mean you do clearly state muzzleloaders shoot in excess of 400 yards.
Even your buddy LRC accused me in a PM of being the problem because my old knight is capable of 400......yet he builds customs that make mine look like a Daisy Red Ryder in comparison.

I'm really spinning my head on this one....

What made me "think" that? I was debating from a position of Ignorance.

I just assumed it had more of an effect. When I seen it wasn't having the effect I thought and after learning a hell of a lot more about them with a lot of trial and error at the range My position changed. Personally I feel 400 yards is probably about as far as anyone should be shooting one of these guns, and that's only in the right conditions. In a hunting scenario 300-400 yards is a tough shot in my opinion.

Like I said, I've never really been a muzzleloader hunter, I drew a LE muzzleloader tag last year so I had to learn them a lot more and I can tell you I have a lot more respect for them then I used to have. Hunting with a muzzleloader even with a scope on it is nowhere near the same as hunting with a rifle.

 

[lif]

Why don’t we all be honest about why some folks want to keep scopes on muzzys and some want them off.

It’s mainly the season and weapon advantage over other seasons and weapons. You pro scope guys, answer this: would you be ok keeping your scope and changing your season to mid October? Switch season dates with the early rifle seasons. Allow an early rifle hunt end of September. Then muzzy mid October. Then late rifle.

The reality is folks that want the scopes off are bothered that the early muzzy season gets first crack at the mature deer with a weapon capable of reaching 400+ yards. It is more effective than most rifle hunters were 20 years ago.

And I am for limiting all the weapons from the crazy technology that has happened over the last 10-20 years.

As far as the impact the scopes muzzle loaders have on the deer herds goes, I’ll be interested to see the mandatory stats next year. But I believe, without a doubt, that the ability to shoot out past 400 yards instead of being limited to 150 yards has lead to a huge increase in older deer being harvested during muzzy season. This is common sense. And obvious. And is only reinforced by everyone who is screaming to keep them.

 

[slamdunk]

What made me "think" that? I was debating from a position of Ignorance.

I just assumed it had more of an effect. When I seen it wasn't having the effect I thought and after learning a hell of a lot more about them with a lot of trial and error at the range My position changed. Personally I feel 400 yards is probably about as far as anyone should be shooting one of these guns, and that's only in the right conditions. In a hunting scenario 300-400 yards is a tough shot in my opinion.

Like I said, I've never really been a muzzleloader hunter, I drew a LE muzzleloader tag last year so I had to learn them a lot more and I can tell you I have a lot more respect for them then I used to have. Hunting with a muzzleloader even with a scope on it is nowhere near the same as hunting with a rifle.

Fair enough, thank you.

In fairness, logic, and integrity, I can honestly say that my particular muzzleloader even at 30 years old makes my killing of older age class bucks much more doable than my old Hawkin.
I don't need to show data to admit it, it's just fact.

 

[ktg]

I remember hunting in the Book Cliffs and Diamond Mtn when you could just go buy a tag. The old Hawken with percussion cap and a round ball in November. That was a LOT funner than the hunt now. I hunted the September hunt with my White Super 91 and a 1x scope once. It's just not the same so I essential abandoned muzzleloader hunts.

 

[Deerlove]

Think everyone would be happier with CO's instead.

If you think people are whining about losing our Scopes wait till they research Idaho's and Colorado's restrictions.

 

[Deerlove]

3rd Fact:

Most Rifles Now Are Shooting Further Distances Due To HIGH TECH Scopes Mounted Atop Them!

HIGH TECH Cartridges!

HIGH TECH RangeFinders!

ETC!

ETC!

The Advancements In Weaponry Has Happened On Every Weapon Type!

LET'S TAKE RIFLES & THE RIFLE HUNT BACK To WHAT IT ONCE WAS!

That Goes For Archery Equipment As Well!

You can Bess on the Dutton.

 

[elkassassin]

Hey Hossy?

What's Your Thoughts On Scope Removal On Your Rifle Hunts?

 

[slamdunk]

You can Bess on the Dutton.

I guarantee you all that in 3 years from now, my plan for the fall deer hunt will be to hunt Dutton, and it's a no brainer as to why.

 

[elkassassin]

You Can Do What On The Dutton?

You can Bess on the Dutton.

 

[Deerlove]

You Can Do What On The Dutton?
[ old school rifle no optics?

 

[elkassassin]

So What's The Total Plan For All Weapons On Dutton?

 

[Hunter21]

Can we even fathom banning inlines and the absolute uproar that would cause in comparison to scope restrictions?
I shouldn't really need to hit on this much, but the conversation at the TC table lasted about 30 seconds when this "no-brainer" suggestion was brought up.

So please STOP with the argument that the intent is to go back to what the muzzleloader hunt was intended to be. If you want to go back to 2016 that’s fine but don’t try selling it as going back to the 70’s and 80’s.

 

[Vanilla]

But ok, let's ban scopes. Let's also move the hunt back to November like it used to be. If we're going back to traditions, let's go all the way back.

Man, we got A LOT more to go over just scopes of you want it to go “all the way back.” And I’m just talking hunting in Utah in my lifetime, not even back to civil war times.

Patch and ball, smooth bore here we come!

 

[elkassassin]

Along With Un-Scoped Lever Action Rifles & Long Bows!

Man, we got A LOT more to go over just scopes of you want it to go “all the way back.” And I’m just talking hunting in Utah in my lifetime, not even back to civil war times.

Patch and ball, smooth bore here we come!

 

[slamdunk]

So please STOP with the argument that the intent is to go back to what the muzzleloader hunt was intended to be. If you want to go back to 2016 that’s fine but don’t try selling it as going back to the 70’s and 80’s.

I did all I can do.

 

[roadrunner]

When I looked at the harvest statistics and they didn't support my arguments I was making. Like all of you, I assumed success had increased substantially.

I've already said at the beginning of this I was for the removal of scopes, until I personally started digging up harvest statistics to prove my point and realized I wasn't accurate.

You think you got me, but I have already said this in this post I'm sure, never hid from it.

These are the real numbers. I spent this afternoon compiling the data from the DWR webpage from their annual reports section, inputting it into a spreadsheet so you can really see what's going on. There are a lot of discrepancies and a wide range of variances. The "covid" years played a significant role in how the overall success is with scopes against no scopes.

Also, there was a significant change when the state went from regions (Central, Northeastern, etc.) to unit numbers the way they are now. You can see this from the reports from 2007 to 2011.

2019 - 2021 had a significant decrease in success, deer harvested, and hunters in the field. The success was higher from 2007 - 2011 and nearly the same from 2012-2015 and 2016 -2021.

Some units fluctuate significantly with decreases in success rates as much as -15%, so there is a different dynamic happening.

Overall, there has been a much higher success rate with the use of scopes, once you take out the covid years that skew the results...

 

[Deerlove]

Hey Hossy?

What's Your Thoughts On Scope Removal On Your Rifle Hunts?

I think it's good let's give it a shot see if the herd bounces back a little bit.

 

[slamdunk]

These are the real numbers. I spent this afternoon compiling the data from the DWR webpage from their annual reports section, inputting it into a spreadsheet so you can really see what's going on. There are a lot of discrepancies and a wide range of variances. The "covid" years played a significant role in how the overall success is with scopes against no scopes.

Also, there was a significant change when the state went from regions (Central, Northeastern, etc.) to unit numbers the way they are now. You can see this from the reports from 2007 to 2011.

2019 - 2021 had a significant decrease in success, deer harvested, and hunters in the field. The success was higher from 2007 - 2011 and nearly the same from 2012-2015 and 2016 -2021.

Some units fluctuate significantly with decreases in success rates as much as -15%, so there is a different dynamic happening.

Overall, there has been a much higher success rate with the use of scopes, once you take out the covid years that skew the results...

View attachment 127259

Can't wait to see the mandatory reporting results.
Either way they swing, it'll at least be more believable.

 

[MrShane]

If you think people are whining about losing our Scopes wait till they research Idaho's and Colorado's restrictions.

We need to join them to keep the western states more closely aligned with each other.
Throw NM in to the mix also.

 

[slamdunk]

We need to join them to keep the western states more closely aligned with each other.
Throw NM in to the mix also.

New Mexico went scopeless this year

 

[MrShane]

New Mexico went scopeless this year

I know, that’s why I said throw them in with the Idaho and Colorado mix.
I love it!
I just don’t understand why Utah would not cut tech back on the components when these other states clearly felt they needed to.

 

[JakeH]

These are the real numbers. I spent this afternoon compiling the data from the DWR webpage from their annual reports section, inputting it into a spreadsheet so you can really see what's going on. There are a lot of discrepancies and a wide range of variances. The "covid" years played a significant role in how the overall success is with scopes against no scopes.

Also, there was a significant change when the state went from regions (Central, Northeastern, etc.) to unit numbers the way they are now. You can see this from the reports from 2007 to 2011.

2019 - 2021 had a significant decrease in success, deer harvested, and hunters in the field. The success was higher from 2007 - 2011 and nearly the same from 2012-2015 and 2016 -2021.

Some units fluctuate significantly with decreases in success rates as much as -15%, so there is a different dynamic happening.

Overall, there has been a much higher success rate with the use of scopes, once you take out the covid years that skew the results...

View attachment 127259

Did you watch the DWRs proposal? They went over the numbers pretty good, not as far back as you did, but there are other variables you are not accounting for.

Also not sure why the covid years would have any affect on the numbers, probably had more to do with herd dynamics due to drought then anything to do with covid.

 

[slamdunk]

I know, that’s why I said throw them in with the Idaho and Colorado mix.
I love it!
I just don’t understand why Utah would not cut tech back on the components when these other states clearly felt they needed to.

I believe AZ is the only western state left to not have mz restrictions......I'll wager we see it coming in the near future.