Harvest or Hunt?

broadfork · Dec 5, 2015

I've been thinking a lot about the recent decisions by the fish and game to change the rules and allow scopes on muzzleloaders. Anyone that knows me, knows I choose to hunt with a bow. I made that choice, because I enjoy being able to hunt longer. I also enjoy the challenge of the hunt, knowing I am limiting my effective range to kill. I'm not sure I understand why we need to make the hunt easier for everyone. It seems to me that some people enjoy the hunt, and others are only concerned with the kill.
Nothing wrong with whatever way a guy wants to go. However I don't understand why we are trying to take the "primitive" weapons and make them as efficient as a rifle. Lets face it, if a guy wants his best opportunity at success while hunting, he will choose a rifle. That's why it takes so many more points to draw a LE rifle tag than muzz, or bow. Some guys are ok rolling the dice with a less successful weapon just so they can be out hunting.
I think we all should be trying to become better hunters, and use good woodsmanship rather than just trying to make the hunt as easy as possible. Just a few thoughts I had.

What say you?

Vanilla · Dec 5, 2015

I think the other 4 threads on the General Hunting forum discussing this issue were insufficient, so I'm glad we have a 5th.

Hopefully by tomorrow we can get a 6th one started!

broadfork · Dec 5, 2015

Now I remember why I never post anything on this site anymore.
Thanks for reminding me Vanilla

Vanilla · Dec 5, 2015

Sorry, just a little overkill to have FIVE different threads in the last day or so started on the exact same subject. I guess everyone should be beaten into submission to oppose this change?

As for your question, I hunt to harvest. If harvesting wasn't important, I don't need to get a tag or carry a gun of bow at all. Sometimes it doesn't work out. But I go out with the goal to harvest on every tag.

WapitiBob · Dec 5, 2015

Yep, I can hunt the San Juan every year with a camera.

YukonDall · Dec 5, 2015

WHAT STATE WE TALKING ABOUT?????................YD.

treedagain · Dec 6, 2015

Utah....i hunt to harvest. If i wanted to camp out i would do that when the weather was better. It would be like a vegaterian just growing a garden to watch it grow. I like to hunt..harvest and eat what i shoot.

When i hear someone say"its not about harvesting an animal its the time spent outdoors" i think why even pack a gun. Just pack a camera and call yourself a photogragher. Nothing wrong with that. But why spend the money on the tag...buy more film.

piper · Dec 6, 2015

Good questions, I think it's a little of everything, I like the outdoors, like being in nature, the land, being around wildlife,the thrill of the hunt and the satisfaction of harvesting an a animal, all of it.

I have to be honest here though and admit that I don't care much anymore about mule deer hunting, and i think it's mostly a combination of things, too many people, too much technology, too little unknown adventure.

I know why I got hooked in the first place, and I hate that it's mostly gone, but it sure seems that way.

BeDawg · Dec 6, 2015

You are right. The direction I would personally want the DWR to take in this day and age of technology is limits in favor of the animal.

1911 · Dec 6, 2015

I know guys, many here, who have killed a hella more animals with primitive weapons than I have with a centerfire rifle so it's a mute point. My experience tells me the more passionate someone is about their primitive hunting, the more likely they are to kill something, whether it is interest, challenge, or something else. For the most part, I could care less whether or not I kill. I haven't killed a big game animal in well over 5 years now minus a moose. One of my good buddies is a "primitive" weapon nut who does so for the same aforementioned reasons. He has killed ever single year in the last 5. They are all a bunch of booners waiting to die of old age either.

broadfork · Dec 6, 2015

I don't think some guys are getting my point. So I'll state it more clearly. I hunt to kill every time I go out, however I feel that we need to make it more of a hunt instead of just see, point, kill. Just my opinion.

deadibob · Dec 6, 2015

What say you? I say if you use any commercial equipment including broadheads and aren't hunting with a self-made bow and arrows, you are just another hypocrite.

piper · Dec 6, 2015

LOL, I knew that was coming.

ridgetops · Dec 6, 2015

>What say you? I say if
>you use any commercial equipment
>including broadheads and aren't hunting
>with a self-made bow and
>arrows, you are just another
>hypocrite.

I agree.
Broadfork, since you do archery.
I hope your shooting a recurve with wood arrows.
Otherwise, I don't see your logic.
There's always next year

Vanilla · Dec 7, 2015

If you are out using technical hunting clothing, a compound bow, scent blocking aids, wind checking devices, face paint, gore-tex boots, a range finder, trail cams, paper topographical maps, a GPS, broad heads, carbon arrows, a wrist release, a 4x4 vehicle to get you to the mountain, or a myriad of other advances in technology...I've got news for you---They all made harvesting an animal easier.

I am honestly still trying to figure out where this designation of "primitive" weapons comes from in these discussions. Unless you are hunting with a rock and a spear, you aren't using primitive weapons. These were used for thousands of years to hunt before even the earliest versions of firearms/muzzleloaders were invented. Simply throwing a 3x9 scope on top of a muzzleloader isn't what took this from "primitive" to advanced technology.

It's one thing to simply disagree with allowing a magnification scope out of personal feelings or preference. Reasonable people can disagree on things like this and that is okay. What I object to is this notion that there is something moral or ethical about this, and those that elect to put a magnification scope on their muzzleloader just need to be better hunters or woodsmen instead of using the advances in technology that every one of us benefit from.

NVBighorn · Dec 7, 2015

I hunt to kill.

"Harvest" is a lame ass way of trying to sanitize what we do.

[font color="blue"]I don't make the soup,I just stir it.[/font]

BrowningRage · Dec 7, 2015

There's just too many factors at play here. Hunting videos, hunting T.V. shows, and all the displays at expos and the like. It all leads individuals to believe that a hunt is nothing more than showing up, glassing a hill, and shooting a 400" bull. You add to that the decades that it takes to draw a tag, and the expectation that it will be an easy hunt, and everyone thinks there's a 200" muley just waitin to be shot.

On top of that, you have so many people here in Utah that never hunt but are putting in for LE Hunts every year. Dads, Moms, wives, etc... People who never hunt, but put in for 18 years and when they draw now suddenly want it to be an easy trophy hunt.

I am sure of one thing: Higher harvest rates will lead to fewer tags or lower quality deer/elk, etc.

"Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!" 2 Ne. 28: 24

wstrntines · Dec 7, 2015

We live in a day and age where muzzleloaders are capable of shooting furthter as well as archery equipment. Im not against the magnified scopes I think there will be more recovered animals versus wounded. I'd rather see sucess over an animal wounded. And I beleive there are people who would take 200+ yard shots even with 1 power scopes and open sights.

elkfromabove · Dec 7, 2015

>If you are out using technical
>hunting clothing, a compound bow,
>scent blocking aids, wind checking
>devices, face paint, gore-tex boots,
>a range finder, trail cams,
>paper topographical maps, a GPS,
>broad heads, carbon arrows, a
>wrist release, a 4x4 vehicle
>to get you to the
>mountain, or a myriad of
>other advances in technology...I've got
>news for you---They all made
>harvesting an animal easier.
>
>I am honestly still trying to
>figure out where this designation
>of "primitive" weapons comes from
>in these discussions. Unless you
>are hunting with a rock
>and a spear, you aren't
>using primitive weapons. These were
>used for thousands of years
>to hunt before even the
>earliest versions of firearms/muzzleloaders were
>invented. Simply throwing a 3x9
>scope on top of a
>muzzleloader isn't what took this
>from "primitive" to advanced technology.
>
>
>
>It's one thing to simply disagree
>with allowing a magnification scope
>out of personal feelings or
>preference. Reasonable people can disagree
>on things like this and
>that is okay. WHAT I
>OBJECT TO IS THIS NOTION
>THAT THERE IS SOMETHING MORAL
>OR ETHICAL ABOUT THIS, and
>those that elect to put
>a magnification scope on their
>muzzleloader just need to be
>better hunters or woodsmen instead
>of using the advances in
>technology that every one of
>us benefit from.

Amen! Opps, I mean Right On!

And I would add the hunting/shooting of a spike, doe, cow, raghorn bull or 2 point buck to the list. It isn't just the technology or method that's under the ethical microscope, it's also the live target.

12point · Dec 7, 2015

For my friends and I as tec increased we quit shooting smaller animals. When we were shooting recurves and the compound came out we shot anything that had an antler, now we limit ourselves to 3 year olds or better. I've seen this trend in our state(Iowa) as well. Most people(I think because of tec) are letting the younger deer go and as a result we seeing alot more older age class bucks percentage wise then we use to. When I tore my rotator cuff and went from bow to crossbow I upped my standard from 130 for anything to 140 for 8 point 150 for ten point. No deer don't let me measure them before I shoot

, it's just an estimate and sometimes mistakes will be made, I also know that this is my standard and I would not ever require anybody else to hold to it. So we up the challenge by going after higher quality animals. We eat tag soup alot more than we used to and not because we couldn't have shot an animal. I know that most of Iowa is private property but most of it at least in my county can be hunted by anybody. The farmers hate these deer, like one told me "shoot ten and pick the best one". Maybe I'm just a bad rifle hunter but I've hunted rifle season in Colorado for deer and elk and have yet to fire a shot but have hunted several muzzeloader seasons for both and have filled every tag.

Zeke · Dec 7, 2015

I hunt for the adventure and the kill is a huge part of it. Yes, it's important.

The advantages of recovered animals outweighs the advantage of more bucks/bulls/rams taken, as pertains to magnification IMHO.

I voted against the increase scope power but I really don't think that increasing scope power will make the huge difference that some are touting. Sportsmen will still be sportsmen and slobs will still be slobs regardless of magnification!

No one answered my question yet: How high should I hold for my 1000 yard muzzleloader shot now that I can use a bigger scope? haha

Zeke

Vanilla · Dec 7, 2015

>There's just too many factors at
>play here. Hunting videos, hunting
>T.V. shows, and all the
>displays at expos and the
>like. It all leads individuals
>to believe that a hunt
>is nothing more than showing
>up, glassing a hill, and
>shooting a 400" bull. You
>add to that the decades
>that it takes to draw
>a tag, and the expectation
>that it will be an
>easy hunt, and everyone thinks
>there's a 200" muley just
>waitin to be shot.

I literally don't know a single person that thinks this. I associate with A LOT of hunters. Honestly, I don't even know that I have ever heard a single person even in online forums that says this stuff. I see the attitude criticized from time to time, but I have never heard of a person that actually believes this.

Downrange · Dec 7, 2015

I took the survey and voted yes. I think vanilla hit it right on the head. As high as you want zeke, i just don't know if you will hit it or not. Ha Ha

elkfromabove · Dec 7, 2015

>>There's just too many factors at
>>play here. Hunting videos, hunting
>>T.V. shows, and all the
>>displays at expos and the
>>like. It all leads individuals
>>to believe that a hunt
>>is nothing more than showing
>>up, glassing a hill, and
>>shooting a 400" bull. You
>>add to that the decades
>>that it takes to draw
>>a tag, and the expectation
>>that it will be an
>>easy hunt, and everyone thinks
>>there's a 200" muley just
>>waitin to be shot.
>
>I literally don't know a single
>person that thinks this. I
>associate with A LOT of
>hunters. Honestly, I don't even
>know that I have ever
>heard a single person even
>in online forums that says
>this stuff. I see the
>attitude criticized from time to
>time, but I have never
>heard of a person that
>actually believes this.

I also don't know anyone who thinks it's that way, but I sure know a bunch that thinks it SHOULD be that way and they do everything they can politically to make it that way!

elkassassin · Dec 7, 2015

>I hunt to kill.
>
>"Harvest" is a lame ass way
>of trying to sanitize what
>we do.
>
>[font color="blue"]I don't make the soup,I
>just stir it.[/font]

WOW!

He's gettin Serious about this sshhitt!

Go Ahead!

Make Me take it down!

huntinfanatic · Dec 8, 2015

I always find it entertaining when the rifle crowd gets all riled up when someone mentions the word primitive or mentions actually challenging yourself and trying to get close to the game we hunt. The comebacks and insults are classic and you can count on the same ones being thrown at anyone who questions them. My all time favorite that ALWAYS comes out in some form is the, "Unless you jump on the things back and strangle it with your bare hands your not a man and a hypocrite". Haha, great rebuttal! I agree with you 100% broadfork! The responses to your post prove that what society perceives as hunting is quickly changing.

tylercreek2 · Dec 8, 2015

why does society have to perceive anything? cant we just hunt?

Vanilla · Dec 8, 2015

>why does society have to perceive
> anything? cant we just
>hunt?

Probably the single most profound statement on Monster Muleys in a long, long time. Simple. Succinct. Absolutely true.

huntinfanatic · Dec 8, 2015

Why does society have to perceive anything? Hmm...I not quite sure how to answer your question. You basically asked why do humans use their brain. It just comes naturally to most.