Final Muzzleloader Scope Committee Recommendation

Status
Not open for further replies.
slamdunk

slamdunk

Moderator
Messages
10,391
It was heavy majority vote last night by the committee to recommend to the WB "Open Sight Only" rule in the state of Utah for General and LE big game hunts going forward.

A COR would still an option for use of a 1x scope.

I am not posting this to encourage debate and questioning for arguments, it is what it is and now up to the WB for final ruling.
 
Last edited:
If, "IF", this in any way helped deer numbers I would be all for it. However, it only helps other groups have more deer on the hill when their hunt starts. We have gone from wildlife management to social experimentation.

The rifle hunters are the only ones who are making out on this whole debacle.
 
Makes no difference to me how the vote goes...I know for a fact this ruling will not make any difference to our deer herds..hunting of any kind ( buck or bulls) is not the problem with our herds so these rules and restrictions is sort of like pizzing in the wind as far as improving our deer herds
 
I will say this......I find it profound that a lot of the same guys saying "removing scopes only saves deer for the rifle hunt" are the same ones saying "there was no change in harvest rates so why remove them".

You can't have both hypothesis.

If the harvest rates didn't change when scopes were implemented then the same amount of bucks will still be harvested by both groups.

And if you're making the claim that there will be more bucks for rifle hunters going forward without scopes, then you are admitting the scopes effectiveness.
 
I don't like it ...for my old tired eyes but like everything else, we have to play within the guardrails and hopefully everyone else does the same.

The world will not end with a decision either way.

Slam,
Thanks for conducting the discussions in a straight forward, gentleman like manner even when some of us got a little hot under the collar.

Zeke
 
Love to see this, hopefully the Wildlife Board will get this across the line. Scoped muzzleloaders increase effectiveness. The fact that success rates have remained relatively unchanged as our deer heard have decreased materially should mean something. The top end is unproportionatly impacted further.

Concurrently, look at the difference in our muzzleloader success rates relative to our rifle success rates. Compare that delta, or difference, to that the difference realized in states such as Colorado and Nevada where the muzzleloader season remains a primitive weapon season. There isn't much of a difference in our success rates between the two seasons, whereas there is significant difference between the seasons in those states where primitive weapon seasons remain true.
 
If the WB passes as per the recommendation, I’ll be back to head shots again. Okay by me.

Like I’ve said previously, I’d prefer all weapon hunts limit current technologies, across the board…… seems like the right thing to do.
 
slamdunk said:
I will say this......I find it profound that a lot of the same guys saying "removing scopes only saves deer for the rifle hunt" are the same ones saying "there was no change in harvest rates so why remove them".

You can't have both hypothesis.

If the harvest rates didn't change when scopes were implemented then the same amount of bucks will still be harvested by both groups.

And if you're making the claim that there will be more bucks for rifle hunters going forward without scopes, then you are admitting the scopes effectiveness.
Click to expand...
Since that little jab was directed at me.

If you would have recommended going back to 1X then your above statement would hold water. Going from unlimited magnification to open sites will definitely change the % success rate for the muzzleloader season thus holding more deer for the later seasons. No two ways about it.

Don't you agree that if we went from compound bows to recurves that less bucks would be harvested?

Also, Why have the "primitive weapon muzzleloader" hunts if these are going to be so close in definition.
 
I think they should let all the scopes stay on muzzys. But, what they should do is put the two rifle seasons before the muzzy season. Let the modern muzzy guys hunt the last week of October. See how that flies with you guys. The fact is that the 1st firearms hunting on a unit , with a modern scope, have a distinct advantage over the following seasons.
 
elkantlers said:
Since that little jab was directed at me.

If you would have recommended going back to 1X then your above statement would hold water. Going from unlimited magnification to open sites will definitely change the % success rate for the muzzleloader season thus holding more deer for the later seasons. No two ways about it.

Don't you agree that if we went from compound bows to recurves that less bucks would be harvested?

Also, Why have the "primitive weapon muzzleloader" hunts if these are going to be so close in definition.
Click to expand...
No, not directed at you personally, there have been a lot of guys saying it.
I'm just stating a fact and a point that was discussed last night because all committee members have heard it.
 
I like having a scope on my muzzleloader, but I'm almost as accurate out to 150 yards with open sights as I am with a scope. I rarely shoot past 150 yards, especially when hunting elk. All of my muzzleloader deer have been at less than 100 yards. In thick trees, a scope can be a disadvantage.

As someone with 22 limited entry elk points, taking away scopes would definitely help my draw odds and would not make my elk hunt that much more difficult.

I bet the board keeps at least a 1x scope on the table. That being said, there are new board members, and two out and two new ones in can drastically change votes. Time will tell.
 
slamdunk said:
It was heavy majority vote last night by the committee to recommend to the WB "Open Sight Only" rule in the state uf Utah for General and LE big game hunts going forward.

A COR is still an option for use of a 1x scope.

I am not posting this to encourage debate and questioning for arguments, it is what it is and now up to the WB for final ruling.
Click to expand...
Now add ‘#11 percussion, musket cap, and flintlock only’ and you got us on the right track!
And, 9x power max for alw.
 
elkantlers said:
Since that little jab was directed at me.

If you would have recommended going back to 1X then your above statement would hold water. Going from unlimited magnification to open sites will definitely change the % success rate for the muzzleloader season thus holding more deer for the later seasons. No two ways about it.

ANSWER-
I actually voted against open sights only because I stood by my word of trying to sell them on a 4x maximum, but after some discussion, it was tossed out for a few reasons.

Don't you agree that if we went from compound bows to recurves that less bucks would be harvested?

ANSWER-
Yes of course, but we aren't taking away inlines or changing anything about the modern muzzleloader itself, just the add on sight system.
Your comparison question about a bow is changing the mechanical aspect, recurve to compound.

Also, Why have the "primitive weapon muzzleloader" hunts if these are going to be so close in definition.

ANSWER-
They are still very much different mechanically and by definition.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Zeke said:
I don't like it ...for my old tired eyes but like everything else, we have to play within the guardrails and hopefully everyone else does the same.

The world will not end with a decision either way.

Slam,
Thanks for conducting the discussions in a straight forward, gentleman like manner even when some of us got a little hot under the collar.

Zeke
Click to expand...
Thank you Zeke, that means a lot.

Depending on what the criteria for a COR eyesight issue ends up being, you may have the option of a scope that you can at least focus to aid in seeing your target.

I wear 2x readers, can't see up close.
My issue will be seeing my actual sight, not the target.
 
elkantlers said:
The rifle hunters are the only ones who are making out on this whole debacle.
Click to expand...

I’m guessing most rifle hunters don’t care about this. If anything, they worry about the “slippery slope” that could come to their world.

The push to claw this regulation back has come mostly from within the muzzy hunting community, not from rifle hunters looking for an advantage. At least that is what I’ve been told by some insiders that have been working on this issue.
 
The TAKE Should Be Equal Across The Board Of Weaponry!

Vanilla said:
I’m guessing most rifle hunters don’t care about this. If anything, they worry about the “slippery slope” that could come to their world.

The push to claw this regulation back has come mostly from within the muzzy hunting community, not from rifle hunters looking for an advantage. At least that is what I’ve been told by some insiders that have been working on this issue.
Click to expand...
 
Vanilla said:
I’m guessing most rifle hunters don’t care about this. If anything, they worry about the “slippery slope” that could come to their world.

The push to claw this regulation back has come mostly from within the muzzy hunting community, not from rifle hunters looking for an advantage. At least that is what I’ve been told by some insiders that have been working on this issue.
Click to expand...
100%
 
Hey lif!

This Has Been HASHED & THRASHED For Months Now!

Let's get Serious!

Fred Bear Bows!

HAWKENS Or FLINTLOCKS on the SmokPoles!

30-30 Open Sights For Rifles!

Ya!

I'm Sure everybody Will Like This List!:D









lif said:
What is your suggestion for that? I’m not against the idea at all. Just curious what you think would make it equal.
Click to expand...
 
Vanilla said:
I’m guessing most rifle hunters don’t care about this. If anything, they worry about the “slippery slope” that could come to their world.

The push to claw this regulation back has come mostly from within the muzzy hunting community, not from rifle hunters looking for an advantage. At least that is what I’ve been told by some insiders that have been working on this issue.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with that. I have talked to a lot of muzzleloader hunters in my area and not a single one is in favor of going to open sights, not one.
If they could do a poll with just the people who have had muzzleloader permits within the last few years, I believe that it would show the majority of Muzzleloaders don't want this.
 
My prediction is that the WB does not go all the way back to open sights. I believe that they will settle in with going back to the old regulations that was in place before they allowed magnified scopes. This just make everyone’s life easier versus go to open sights when considering a good portion of the older population will be applying for COR.

Pros for going back to the old regulations over going with the open sight recommendations; minimum administrative time creating the new rule (copy and paste, done), 1x scopes provides minimum advantages over open sights and some believe it is a disadvantage so pick your poison… I mean preference, no need for COR’s so less administrative time and hassle by all involved, makes it so some will not have to buy new muzzleloaders or modify their existing muzzleloader if they are only set up for scope rings with no option for mounting open sights, it would be more acceptable to the hunting community (customers) than going to open sight.

Cons for going back to the old regulations over the open sight recommendation; draw odds would likely be better going with the open sight recommendation, aligns the hunt closer to a primitive hunt, easier for field officers to verify the compliance with the new rule, harder to manipulate around the new rule (use of quick release scope rings).

The open sight manufacturers have already adjusted and capitalized on agencies restricting scopes on muzzleloaders and they will continue to advance open sight technologies so more regulations will follow to meet the original objectives of the agencies.This will never end and everyone will never be happy with every change, that is simply impossible. Good luck WB on this one, I’m sure it will be a packed house at the November meeting. They better have a lot of tissues on hand and security. I am fine with whatever they decide but I hope there is some limitations placed on muzzleloaders because I do not believe the intentions of having a muzzleloader hunt was to shoot 300, 500, 700, or 1000+ yards. Just my thoughts. Happy hunting.
 
Somehow we keep forgetting there isn't a "Rifle" hunt in Utah, we have an ALW "Any Legal Weapon" hunt where we have the choice to use whatever is legal by definition whether it be a 50 BMG, a Gunwerks muzzleloader, Flint Lock or a crossbow.

That's what that hunt is for and is why it is after the restricted weapons hunts.
 
How do they justify the extra expense incurred by all the guys that sold their old open sight guns, and bought newer, scope only guns in the last 7 years? I'm sure they don't care, but plenty of people will.
 
slamdunk said:
Somehow we keep forgetting there isn't a "Rifle" hunt in Utah, we have an ALW "Any Legal Weapon" hunt where we have the choice to use whatever is legal by definition whether it be a 50 BMG, a Gunwerks muzzleloader, Flint Lock or a crossbow.

That's what that hunt is for and is why it is after the restricted weapons hunts.
Click to expand...
Except for the crossbow, you need a COR to ‘run’ that weapon.
 
twopointdn said:
I’m sure they are aware of that sight and could easily regulate it out by defining what types of open sites are legal on a muzzleloader.
Click to expand...

Except that the adjustable turret with and open sight on front is pointless as you are limited by your own vision. That limit for most people is 250 yds for deer size game.

A BDC reticle on the front globe sight is sufficient.

I suppose it would help in just putting the crosshair on the adjusted zero each time. So whatever...
 
257Tony said:
How do they justify the extra expense incurred by all the guys that sold their old open sight guns, and bought newer, scope only guns in the last 7 years? I'm sure they don't care, but plenty of people will.
Click to expand...
I didn't see all tge complaints in when dudes bought them to start with.
 
257Tony said:
How do they justify the extra expense incurred by all the guys that sold their old open sight guns, and bought newer, scope only guns in the last 7 years? I'm sure they don't care, but plenty of people will.
Click to expand...

I was all set to do exactly that, until they started talking about banning scopes here in NM a couple years ago. Thank God for the ban. I saved thousands $$$ ?.
 
Its great. Thanks to tge committee fir not doing g tge usual Tard thing and going g anything goes.
 
@slamdunk.

Gracias sir for having the stones to keep guys up to date on this and taking abuse from the usuals.

Let's get this passed, then maybe we can spend another couple years addressing a single item that we all know needs done.

But if we want to stick with muzzy, let's address the actual tech, powder and ignition.

#11 seems like the easiest way to limit what's become single shot rifles
 
257Tony said:
How do they justify the extra expense incurred by all the guys that sold their old open sight guns, and bought newer, scope only guns in the last 7 years? I'm sure they don't care, but plenty of people will.
Click to expand...

Poor choice in a free market economy?

At least they have a precision muzzleloader that will shoot sub-moa at 75 yds once the barrel gets drilled and tapped for open sights ?
 
257Tony said:
You don't see a problem with government allowing people to upgrade, then a few short years later telling people that they can't use their new rifle?
Click to expand...


Nope. Ask the trail cam, FLIR, and bait truck guys.

Your rifle(notice you said rifle) shoots just fine with sights
 
UtyoteKiller said:
False, if you dig deep enough, the crossbow COR is only for ALW tags. I have emails from Director Shirley stating as much.
Click to expand...
There must be wires crossed somewhere.

I physically spoke with two people (husband and wife) up at the Kokanee capturing station at Strawberry 4 days ago who are both using crossbows through COR's on the Archery Only Elk hunt currently taking place.

I also have a friend who used a crossbow through the COR on his Archery Only Wasatch deer for several years due to a shoulder issue.
 
I’m not an archery guy at all but I don’t know of any newer crossbows that don’t have a scope.

IMG_0639.jpeg
 
UtyoteKiller said:
What were these three individuals using for sights on said xbows?
Click to expand...
Honestly I cannot answer that, they weren't carrying them at the moment looking at fish, they both simply stated they had COR's for shoulder issues.
I never cared to ask the other guy because I felt he acquired his COR illegally......but that's a whole other story.
 
@UtyoteKiller
My comment to MrShane was that a crossbow is legal to use by anyone on the ALW hunts, scope or no scope, it doesn't matter.

A COR is only required to use a crossbow during "archery only" season.
 
slamdunk said:
@UtyoteKiller
My comment to MrShane was that a crossbow is legal to use by anyone on the ALW hunts, scope or no scope, it doesn't matter.

A COR is only required to use a crossbow during "archery only" season.
Click to expand...
Care to clarify? My understanding is a COR is required for ANY crossbow use no matter the season. Then obviously the rule I posted about fixed or magnified scopes.
 
slamdunk said:
@UtyoteKiller
My comment to MrShane was that a crossbow is legal to use by anyone on the ALW hunts, scope or no scope, it doesn't matter.

A COR is only required to use a crossbow during "archery only" season.
Click to expand...
I can answer some questions:
I use a crossbow and have a COR for it.
I have killed a four cow Elk, a couple Deer, and also used it for Goose season one year to kill my first archery Goose.
I am trying to kill both sexes of Elk and Deer with all three weapon types.
I call it the ‘Master Hunter’ checklist.
I am missing a bull with archery gear, a cow with a muzzy, and I have never even shot at a buck with a high powered rifle.
If anyone thinks crossbows are an advantage, they are wrong.
They suck to carry, can’t reload in a stand ( at least mine can’t), suck to discharge at end of day, every weed possible finds my cables, bulky to carry/pack around, and heavy.
But, at least I am still out there.
Maybe a newer crossbow would change all that but too expensive.
 
MrShane said:
I can answer some questions:
I use a crossbow and have a COR for it.
I have killed a four cow Elk, a couple Deer, and also used it for Goose season one year to kill my first archery Goose.
I am trying to kill both sexes of Elk and Deer with all three weapon types.
I call it the ‘Master Hunter’ checklist.
I am missing a bull with archery gear, a cow with a muzzy, and I have never even shot at a buck with a high powered rifle.
If anyone thinks crossbows are an advantage, they are wrong.
They suck to carry, can’t reload in a stand ( at least mine can’t), suck to discharge at end of day, every weed possible finds my cables, bulky to carry/pack around, and heavy.
But, at least I am still out there.
Maybe a newer crossbow would change all that but too expensive.
Click to expand...
What are you using for a sight?
 
Unl
UtyoteKiller said:
What are you using for a sight?
Click to expand...
Unless something changed, I always believed a scope was illegal.
I ordered my crossbow from Barnett many years ago.
I told them I was in Utah and scopes were illegal so they gave me like a $30 dollar credit or so and they kept the scope.
I will try to post a pic tomorrow.
 
MrShane said:
I can answer some questions:
I use a crossbow and have a COR for it.
I have killed a four cow Elk, a couple Deer, and also used it for Goose season one year to kill my first archery Goose.
I am trying to kill both sexes of Elk and Deer with all three weapon types.
I call it the ‘Master Hunter’ checklist.
I am missing a bull with archery gear, a cow with a muzzy, and I have never even shot at a buck with a high powered rifle.
If anyone thinks crossbows are an advantage, they are wrong.
They suck to carry, can’t reload in a stand ( at least mine can’t), suck to discharge at end of day, every weed possible finds my cables, bulky to carry/pack around, and heavy.
But, at least I am still out there.
Maybe a newer crossbow would change all that but too expensive.
Click to expand...
Very impressive Sir, that's a tough feet to even fathom!

As to our previous conversation engagement, I hope we were on the same page with question and answer.

I assumed the question was about using a crossbow (no sight mentioned) on the ALW hunts without a COR.

The answer and after verification from my DNR friend, a crossbow is legal to use by anyone, scoped or not on the ALW hunts.
No COR required on that particular season.
 
slamdunk said:
Very impressive Sir, that's a tough feet to even fathom!

As to our previous conversation engagement, I hope we were on the same page with question and answer.

I assumed the question was about using a crossbow (no sight mentioned) on the ALW hunts without a COR.

The answer and after verification from my DNR friend, a crossbow is legal to use by anyone, scoped or not on the ALW hunts.
Click to expand...
Yes, we are on same page.
I have only used my crossbow for archery season because I am really a muzzy guy at heart.
I grew up as a teen in the 80’s and my Mom and Dad were big in the mountain man scene, attending rendezvous in Wyoming and Deer and Elk seasons were in the tipi.
My parents would sign me up for flintlock shoots at rendezvous:
split the ball ( hit a card on each side of double bit axe), shoot out a candle, muzzy trap shooting, etc when I was twelve or so.
 
slamdunk said:
It was heavy majority vote last night by the committee to recommend to the WB "Open Sight Only" rule in the state of Utah for General and LE big game hunts going forward.

A COR would still an option for use of a 1x scope.

I am not posting this to encourage debate and questioning for arguments, it is what it is and now up to the WB for final ruling.
Click to expand...
Thank you!

Hawkeye
 
elkantlers said:
I don't agree with that. I have talked to a lot of muzzleloader hunters in my area and not a single one is in favor of going to open sights, not one.
If they could do a poll with just the people who have had muzzleloader permits within the last few years, I believe that it would show the majority of Muzzleloaders don't want this.
Click to expand...

See MrShane in this very thread.

I’m not trying to make anyone believe me, I’m just telling you what I’ve been told by people in the know. These are not folks guessing, but people actually at the table. So take it for what it’s worth. Again, this is not a rifle (ie: ALW) hunter initiative.
 
slamdunk said:
Very impressive Sir, that's a tough feet to even fathom!

As to our previous conversation engagement, I hope we were on the same page with question and answer.

I assumed the question was about using a crossbow (no sight mentioned) on the ALW hunts without a COR.

The answer and after verification from my DNR friend, a crossbow is legal to use by anyone, scoped or not on the ALW hunts.
No COR required on that particular season.
Click to expand...
Thank you Slam,
It has been a tough challenge but very fun and very rewarding.
I hope to check off the cow with muzzy in Oct and a buck with a high powered rifle if I ever draw my LE Deer tag in the next few years.
It is the bull with archery equipment that worries me the most.
I am running out of time quicker than I thought I would.
Have a great night.
 
Vanilla said:
See MrShane in this very thread.

I’m not trying to make anyone believe me, I’m just telling you what I’ve been told by people in the know. These are not folks guessing, but people actually at the table. So take it for what it’s worth. Again, this is not a rifle (ie: ALW) hunter initiative.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately these types of things divide hunters up, this scope vs. open sights discussion is proving division in the ranks will happen.
The same division will happen in the archery world if the talk was recurve vs. compound and also in the high powered rifle world if it was straight wall cartridge vs. bottleneck cartridge.
Sadly it was muzzy guys that got drawn the short straw and ended up being first.
 
When can we expect to see an agenda item topic discussing the ALW technology? Serious question. Archery guys got theirs. Muzzy guys are lubed up, bent over and ready for the inevitable. So when can we see expect to see the “committee” discussing the most effective weapon type and ways to limit its effectiveness? …for the animals sake of course.

Next year? Or would that impact the guides, RMEF, MDF and $FW to the point where they can’t profit enough off public resources for them to make a decent living?
 
Bux n Dux said:
When can we expect to see an agenda item topic discussing the ALW technology? Serious question. Archery guys got theirs. Muzzy guys are lubed up, bent over and ready for the inevitable. So when can we see expect to see the “committee” discussing the most effective weapon type and ways to limit its effectiveness? …for the animals sake of course.

Next year? Or would that impact the guides, RMEF, MDF and $FW to the point where they can’t profit enough off public resources for them to make a decent living?
Click to expand...
Well since your "serious question" quickly turned to negative sarcasm, I'll just remind you that "rifles" were already hit with no electronics other than illuminated reticles, rendering any automation of ballistics compensation illegal.

The ALW season means just that.......Any Legal Weapon can be used and will always have the highest success rates......obviously.
Wanna use an AR platform, air gun, crossbow.....go for it, as long as it's defined as a legal weapon in the rules.

These aren't about changing success rates, none of them are.
The scope decision is about keeping the muzzleloading rifle a relatively close range weapon as that hunt was originally intended.......please follow along.
 
Last edited:
MrShane said:
Unfortunately these types of things divide hunters up, this scope vs. open sights discussion is proving division in the ranks will happen.
The same division will happen in the archery world if the talk was recurve vs. compound and also in the high powered rifle world if it was straight wall cartridge vs. bottleneck cartridge.
Sadly it was muzzy guys that got drawn the short straw and ended up being first.
Click to expand...


Who really cares? If something isn't done, there won't be anything left worthwhile to hunt. So sick of the "division" of hunters excuse.
If you can't understand that muzzleloader technology needs to be limited to align with what was intended in the first place for introducing a "Muzzleloader season" then you are too far gone as it is to agree to anything.

Muzzleloader seasons were not designed/intended to allow people to kill animals at 200+ yards. If you think they were then you have your head in the sand.

The more efficient our technology becomes the more efficient we are at filling tags. The more tags we fill, the less opportunity to get out and actually hunt we all have.

Inlines and crossbows are the two worst things that ever happened to modern hunting seasons in my opinion.

I wonder how many people on this thread are truly worried about going home empty handed when hunting. lol My bet says a lot of them. They feel that they have to have a sense of success on a hunt. Sad.
 
Last edited:
Mallardsx2 said:
Who really cares? If something isn't done, there won't be anything left worthwhile to hunt. So sick of the "division" of hunters excuse.
If you can't understand that muzzleloader technology needs to be limited to align with what was intended in the first place for introducing a "Muzzleloader season" then you are too far gone as it is to agree to anything.

Muzzleloader seasons were not designed/intended to allow people to kill animals at 200+ yards. If you think they were then you have your head in the sand.
Click to expand...

Best quote on the subject yet!!?
 
Mallardsx2 said:
I wonder how many people on this thread are truly worried about going home empty handed when hunting. lol My bet says a lot of them. They feel that they have to have a sense of success on a hunt. Sad.
Click to expand...

Why is it sad that hunters have a desire to kill something rather than go home empty handed? Isn’t that why we hunt? If you never want to kill an animal, you don’t need a hunting license to go out and look at em.

“Success” can be defined a lot of ways while hunting, but I don’t think I’ve ever started a hunting season telling myself “Man, I really hope I eat tag soup this year because I’d really like to go home empty handed!”

I guess that makes me sad in some eyes. I think it just makes me a hunter and not a bird watcher.
 
Mallardsx2 said:
Who really cares? If something isn't done, there won't be anything left worthwhile to hunt. So sick of the "division" of hunters excuse.
If you can't understand that muzzleloader technology needs to be limited to align with what was intended in the first place for introducing a "Muzzleloader season" then you are too far gone as it is to agree to anything.

Muzzleloader seasons were not designed/intended to allow people to kill animals at 200+ yards. If you think they were then you have your head in the sand.

The more efficient our technology becomes the more efficient we are at filling tags. The more tags we fill, the less opportunity to get out and actually hunt we all have.

Inlines and crossbows are the two worst things that ever happened to modern hunting seasons in my opinion.

I wonder how many people on this thread are truly worried about going home empty handed when hunting. lol My bet says a lot of them. They feel that they have to have a sense of success on a hunt. Sad.
Click to expand...
I think you might have me mistaken for someone else?
I am pro no scopes, and only #11 cap, flint, or musket cap ignition on all muzzy seasons.
I would be totally happy if we copied Idaho’s muzzy rules.
And by the way, high powered rifles take out WAY more Deer than crossbows and inlines combined.
 
MrShane said:
I think you might have me mistaken for someone else?
I am pro no scopes, and only #11 cap, flint, or musket cap ignition on all muzzy seasons.
I would be totally happy if we copied Idaho’s muzzy rules.
And by the way, high powered rifles take out WAY more Deer than crossbows and inlines combined.
Click to expand...
With all due respect, these "primitive style" weapons are supposed to be low success weapons and hunts, they are there for hunters to experience more challenge and accept the odds of success being lower yet having more opportunities to draw tags and be on the mountain.

A rifle is for filling a tag as often as possible.

Again, the last GS hunt isn't a "rifle hunt", it's Any Legal Weapon you choose.
 
slamdunk said:
With all due respect, these "primitive style" weapons are supposed to be low success weapons and hunts, they are there for hunters to experience more challenge and accept the odds of success being lower yet having more opportunities to draw tags and be on the mountain.

A rifle is for filling a tag as often as possible.

Again, the last GS hunt isn't a "rifle hunt", it's Any Legal Weapon you choose.
Click to expand...

^^^ 100% accurate.
 
MrShane said:
I think you might have me mistaken for someone else?
I am pro no scopes, and only #11 cap, flint, or musket cap ignition on all muzzy seasons.
I would be totally happy if we copied Idaho’s muzzy rules.
And by the way, high powered rifles take out WAY more Deer than crossbows and inlines combined.
Click to expand...

While I appreciate your views on the muzzleloader season, you are the one saying the topic is divisive.
 
Vanilla said:
Why is it sad that hunters have a desire to kill something rather than go home empty handed? Isn’t that why we hunt? If you never want to kill an animal, you don’t need a hunting license to go out and look at em.

“Success” can be defined a lot of ways while hunting, but I don’t think I’ve ever started a hunting season telling myself “Man, I really hope I eat tag soup this year because I’d really like to go home empty handed!”

I guess that makes me sad in some eyes. I think it just makes me a hunter and not a bird watcher.
Click to expand...

See what I mean? You're the guy who has the mentality that he HAS to fill his tag.

I knew you guys who have to kill something would come out of the woodwork. lol
 
Last edited:
Mallardsx2 said:
See what I mean? You're the guy who has the mentality that he HAS to fill his tag.

I knew you guys who have to kill something would come out of the woodwork. lol
Click to expand...

You don’t even see what you mean. That is the unfortunate aspect of how strongly you’re coming out here.

We hunt to pursue game to kill. If you were just doing it for the hike, then I don’t need a hunting license or a season, I can go for a hike any time. (And often do!) If I was only doing it for time with family, then you don’t need a hunting license or a season to do it, just go camping with your family, you can do that any time! (And I often do!) If you’re doing it just to get close to nature, then you don’t need a hunting season or a license, just go get close to nature. (And I often do that too!)

I put a hunting permit in my hand because I have a goal to kill something. If any hunter says the opposite, they are a liar. That does not mean they have to kill something every time they go out. They can pass on animals. (And I often do that one as well! In fact, the last hunting permit I possessed was a deer tag last year and let a buck walk away at less than 160 yards in my scope. I ate tag soup. Weird, huh?)

What separates a hunter from a granola is we pursue game to kill them. That’s what hunters do, we hunt. It’s a blood sport. Killing is part of a hunt. Not the ONLY part, but it’s part of it. If anyone says otherwise, they’re lying to themselves, and that is what is sad. Real sad.
 
Zeke said:
I don't like it ...for my old tired eyes but like everything else, we have to play within the guardrails and hopefully everyone else does the same.

The world will not end with a decision either way.

Slam,
Thanks for conducting the discussions in a straight forward, gentleman like manner even when some of us got a little hot under the collar.

Zeke
Click to expand...
My old tired eyes like it. If they don't put some regulations on some of these hunts why not eliminate designation hunts and go to Any Weapon A, Any Weapon B, and Any Weapon C. Stupid right? So is a bow that shoots 100 yards with a built in range finder, a scoped muzzleloader that will shoot with accuracy as far as a high powdered rifle.
 
cannonball said:
My old tired eyes like it. If they don't put some regulations on some of these hunts why not eliminate designation hunts and go to Any Weapon A, Any Weapon B, and Any Weapon C. Stupid right? So is a bow that shoots 100 yards with a built in range finder, a scoped muzzleloader that will shoot with accuracy as far as a high powdered rifle.
Click to expand...
Well, I don't really care one way or the other because I'll still hunt, period.

*** I know its popular to say that muzzleloaders can shoot as far and as accurately as a rifle but within the limitations of the CURRENT regulations, that's just not true. The precision rifles that muzzle-load with smokeless powder, maybe / somewhat / almost but not really.... but that's not legal anyway.

Do guys put a scope on them and THINK they can shoot as far as a rifle? Probably so and that's why I really have no qualms about the new PROPOSED regulation chance for muzzleloaders.

We shall see where this one lands and we'll all deal with it in our own way.

Zeke
 
Try this on for size. You are out there with your trusty old Green River Hawken which pretty accurate to 150 yards. There is a monster down the hill 500 yards. Of course the shot is impossible but there is a passage hill to put the sneak on the buck. You make it 300 yards closer and a hunter, seeing what was going on where you started from sees the deer. He pulls out his special sabot bullet gun with the variable scope with built in range finder and shoots the giant deer from your starting point of 500 yards.

Now is that fair to pair a hunter with the old Green River Hawken with an inline high tech ML with a variable scope. Now you say it is not fair after I purchased all this high tech ML stuff to outlaw it. The old buckskinner purchased his gun knowing the rules of limitations, and has been hunting with it for more years than most of you have been alive. Now you change the rules. It that fair to include these modern morphydite guns? I say Not!
 
Last edited:
cannonball said:
Try this on for size. You are out there with your trusty old Green River Hawken which pretty accurate to 150 yards. There is a monster down the hill 500 yards. Of course the shot is impossible but there is a passage hill to put the sneak on the buck. You make it 300 yards closer and a hunter, seeing what was going on where you started from sees the deer. He pulls out his special sabot bullet gun with the variable scope with built in range finder and shoots the giant deer from your starting point of 500 yards.

Now is that fair to pair a hunter with the old Green River Hawken with an inline high tech ML with a variable scope. Now you say it is not fair after I purchased all this high tech ML stuff to outlaw it. The old buckskinner purchased his gun knowing the rules of limitations, and has been hunting with it for more years than most of you have been alive. Now you change the rules. It that fair to include these modern morphydite guns? I say Not!
Click to expand...
If that was directed at me, here's what I'd say:

Totally a d!ck move if that happened, which I'd guess at some point in public land hunting it has. Now if we got the yardages more REALISTIC like 175 with the old gun and 300 with the new fangled one, you'd almost be on to something. Same can be said of the guy who wants to use his 45-70 and the d!ck is using an '06 with a 3-9 scope. Welcome to public hunting! A d!ck move is a d!ck move regardless of the gun.

Fair? I'm still laughing Mr. Cannonball.

Please don't lay the discussion on me about having to upgrade or downgrade because of some financial reason. I just don't care and have never said such a thing!

Like I said, I have no qualms about the new proposal. I'll continue to hunt and I'm sure you'll do the same.

Zeke
 
And yes I did partake. I purchased two of them with scopes. Do I like them. No I do not - - - Outlaw the darn things. To be fair it took my Grandsons who are the hunters to "Make Me See The LIght". You see I gave them the in-lines and they don't want to hunt with them. They are now sporting the old open sight traditional 12 lb. Hawken muzzleloader, except one who will be hunting with a 8 lb'er. Anyway, they say, "What Is The Challenge? If you say you got it with a muzzleloader, it really means, at least, in my dictionary memory bank - - - History from the frontier days. Now it is just another hunt for the Yuppies. That is my take on it anyway.
I broke this up in segments for Lumpy. His writings are like the old sears and roebuck catalog. :)
 
I'm for it. I'd also support 1x scopes for those with vision needs, but don't need that to support this recommendation.

I think it should be about a different hunting experience. Archery, muzzy, rifle... they should be easily distinguished. For many modern muzzy guys, the experience has been almost indistinguishable from a rifle hunt in recent years...
 
cannonball said:
Try this on for size. You are out there with your trusty old Green River Hawken which pretty accurate to 150 yards. There is a monster down the hill 500 yards. Of course the shot is impossible but there is a passage hill to put the sneak on the buck. You make it 300 yards closer and a hunter, seeing what was going on where you started from sees the deer. He pulls out his special sabot bullet gun with the variable scope with built in range finder and shoots the giant deer from your starting point of 500 yards.

Now is that fair to pair a hunter with the old Green River Hawken with an inline high tech ML with a variable scope. Now you say it is not fair after I purchased all this high tech ML stuff to outlaw it. The old buckskinner purchased his gun knowing the rules of limitations, and has been hunting with it for more years than most of you have been alive. Now you change the rules. It that fair to include these modern morphydite guns? I say Not!
Click to expand...
Never had it happen on the muzzleloader hunt but at happened to us on a Limited Entry Bull Elk hunt on the Fish Lake four or five years ago. While stocking a bull a hunter killed it from 1,100 yards with a rifle.

I said at the time….. “Oh well.” I would say it again. Fair…. isn’t a regulation/law.
 
slamdunk said:
With all due respect, these "primitive style" weapons are supposed to be low success weapons and hunts, they are there for hunters to experience more challenge and accept the odds of success being lower yet having more opportunities to draw tags and be on the mountain.

A rifle is for filling a tag as often as possible.

Again, the last GS hunt isn't a "rifle hunt", it's Any Legal Weapon you choose.
Click to expand...
No disrespect taken, it is all good.
I was just simply stating that high powered bottleneck cartridges have been more detrimental to our Deer herds than all other weapons combined.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Simpleton
Mule Deer Proposal
2 3
Replies
212
Views
4k
elkassassin
elkassassin

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

07D09DF7-5555-4513-80B7-97FF8B8BD9BE.jpeg
Wyoming 2009 006.JPG
F77A27B1-8996-4DE6-9ABF-A33B53A7BA23.jpeg
Mega Muley for buckhorn
732CBD73-3706-42EE-B729-8DE10612F57F.jpeg
9F07BB9E-9445-4CF5-B656-E226D54BC2B6.jpeg
5.jpg
469A1C86-F2D1-439A-AE25-68D2C1777E16.jpeg
IMG_20191218_0001.jpg
CB5AF686-8F67-46A5-940F-946044641FEB.jpeg
20210817_143910.jpg
DSCN0051.JPG
Bearpaw Outfitters

Experience world class hunting for mule deer, elk, cougar, bear, turkey, moose, sheep and more.

Wild West Outfitters

Hunt the big bulls, bucks, bear and cats in southern Utah. Your hunt of a lifetime awaits.

J & J Outfitters

Offering quality fair-chase hunts for trophy mule deer, elk, shiras moose and mountain lions.

Shane Scott Outfitting

Quality trophy hunting in Utah. Offering FREE Utah drawing consultation. Great local guides.

Utah Big Game Outfitters

Specializing in bighorn sheep, mule deer, elk, mountain goat, lions, bears & antelope.

Apex Outfitters

We offer experienced guides who hunt Elk, Mule Deer, Antelope, Sheep, Bison, Goats, Cougar, and Bear.

Urge 2 Hunt

We offer high quality hunts on large private ranches around the state, with landowner vouchers.

Allout Guiding & Outfitting

Offering high quality mule deer, elk, bear, cougar and bison hunts in the Book Cliffs and Henry Mtns.

Lickity Split Outfitters

General season and LE fully guided hunts for mule deer, elk, moose, antelope, lion, turkey, bear and coyotes.

Back
Top Bottom