Search results

Just because some guys didn’t want or agree with the change doesn’t mean they don’t still prefer to hunt with a muzzleloader.

I agree with your post. But in my opinion the pictures that were sent to him tell alot about this situation.

Except most, including yourself don’t consider the DWR’s current program “real data”.

I understand that. I just think it would have been useful and easy information to gather on a controversial subject.

Yeah, but it’s not going to show any data on the scopes that are coming off. Knowing magnified scope’s coming off was a real possibility 3 years ago they should have started mandatory harvest surveys then. Major failure in my opinoon.

Might not need to apply. Muzzleloader tags can probably be sold over the counter now that it will be so difficult to harvest an animal. 🤔😂

To bad we won’t find out. Thinking scopes were an issue and knowing the possibility of them being taken off they should have started mandatory reporting on the muzzleloader hunt a few years ago. The last three years with scopes and the next three without would have been interesting.

I would, I wouldn’t even mind doing it when the scopes come off. It‘s not the first firearm hunt on every unit. When the rifles start going off on youth elk hunts and limited entry elk hunts the good majority of mature bucks where I’ve been head for private or hiding. For me the season isn’t...

2021 I suppose. When the Utah Wildlife Board asked the DWR to establish a Technology Committee to decide which NEW technologies and weapons should be used for hunting.

I haven’t seen a single person complain about limiting, curbing or just flat out not allowing future technology. The complaint I see is taking away existing technology. I just don’t see the reason to go backwards because you’re afraid of the future. I’m all for the TC focusing on exactly what it...

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 believe I do comprehend you saying “do you realize the rallying by hunters demanding to keep high power scopes on their rifles points at the very reason the change is imminent “ and that is what I commented on as pathetic reason. I probably am missing the point on this whole scope ordeal...

I guess the lesson here is don’t speak up or rally for a cause or the committee will show us whose boss!! That’s a pretty pathetic way to go about it in my opinion.

Because they don’t want a philosophical change. Maybe they enjoy hunting with a scope on their muzzleloader. Remember this has “nothing to do with success or helping the herds”!

I was assuming he was comparing it to being the same as a “centerfire” rifle. I doubt he‘s concerned about a Hawken.

It’s NOT a rifle!!

How about not hunt them 6 months straight and chase them year round? That might help?? In my opinion all this Tech stuff doesn’t matter much if you’re chasing and putting stress on these animals year round.

So it will be one individual that decides to go back to 1 power or no scope instead of multi power? Slam probably won’t be happy to hear his time has been wasted ?

Just curious what did I say that is Untrue?? Or is it just that my opinion is wrong??

I love the idea of staying ahead of the game and being proactive rather than reactive. I’m thankful there’s good folks like yourself out there willing to step up on all hunters behalf and try and make a difference. Thank You for that!!

Easy, outlaw the KR 40 caliber rifles before they become the new craze. This is exactly the reason the committee was put together in my opinion. To stay ahead of new and emerging technologies. I haven’t heard any pushback of people wanting to stay ahead of the technology craze. The pushback I...

I agree it makes it easier to hit your target. I don’t think it necessarily increases the killing or success rate however. I say this because I believe a vast majority of the deer killed are yearlings or young bucks that are killed within a couple hundred yards of the road. These deer are...

Why go back to 2007?

No one is saying don’t put the brakes on emerging technologies! I imagine they will be relatively the same. Just like you said the hunters that want to kill will still kill, they will just do it at closer ranges.

My point was just that if throwing on scope made it that easy, success would have skyrocketed and been very noticeable. Not just a few percentage points one way or another. I realize are success rate data isn’t the best!

Didn’t you just make it about success when you said any rookie kid can throw on a scope and kill deer easily at 300 yards??? I understand if you and others want the muzzleloader hunt to be different from any weapon hunts. Simply leave it at that!! It’s just how you personally want to hunt...

If it’s so easy for anyone to just to throw on a Mid grade scope and be shooting 1” @ 100 yards right out of the gate. Make 35 clicks on the turret and any rookie is killin deer easily at 300 yards then why haven’t success rates blown up?? Why have success rates stayed basically the same with...

I think most guys are fine with drawing a line in the sand, they’re just not wanting to go backwards because a few guys want to go back to how they used to hunt and draw it there. I just don’t feel that’s a real good reason to redraw the line.

I understand the reason for the committee and understand what it‘s about as I stated. I was just curious about your opinion on why success rates haven’t went through the roof with all this technology that makes it so easy for everyone to harvest these animals? Yes, I understand the committee...

Slam, I know decisions aren’t being made on success rates. I also understand your stance and what the committee is trying to accomplish. That being said I see many of your posts with all this high tech equipment and long range shooting making it so easy to kill animals. With all this technology...

Most guys on here aren’t wanting things left unchecked, they’re just wanting the focus on “emerging technologies“! If we’re really worried about the sport as we know it maybe we should focus on not hunting these animals for six months straight!! Regardless of weapons or technology used. Since...

If you don’t have one by noon opening day of the general rifle elk your hunt’s pretty much over anyway ? A week is plenty

I would think unlimited second season would out do the 12K or so 1st season. The problem with second season will be very, very few elk that are not on private or out of reach for 99 percent of hunters. Fish and Game knows this that’s why they can sell unlimited tags with very few elk getting killed.

Magical season for both teams for sure. Looks like the Aztecs have bright future with a great coaching staff. ?

No trouble here……. “GO UTES”!!!!

Yeah, your first post says ”Hell, I’d go give it hell, even though I believe Utah needs to eliminate the L.L.” Now that you’ve had a few days to think about it would you mind answering my question in post 12?

He wants one for shooting a coyote but wants everyone else’s eliminated ? We get it Rob.

Going to have to be. Just like all the other missed opportunities that have passed me by. When you go out and shoot your prize coyote and get your coveted lifetime license are you going to fight them to eliminate it?

Yes, if we are down to 3,000 tags and 3,000 lifetimers that’s where they should go. Sucks for me and you but we wouldn’t be hunting deer. Should have taken advantage of the opportunity to get one when the chance was there I guess.

How many ranches or big parcels of land were acquired by paying back taxes or by homesteading? Should the state ”eliminate” these people’s ownership because times have changed and it does not fit into the times we have? Or should the State honor their obligations? There are plenty of...