Is a blackpowder muzzleloader equal to a rifle or superior ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ballistic

Ballistic

Active Member
Messages
258
A few of the other threads with a key tech committee member have quoted amazing chip shots at 1100 yards plus for muzzleloaders. Plug and play and how easy it is to make a generic off the shelf muzzy as deadly or in 1 case superior to a rifle. 500 yards is easily obtainable and a video of a Gunwerks antelope at over 700 yards was copied and pasted. Speeds of over 3200 fps were also added.
Where is the truth ?

Scopes will likely be coming off as the tech committee is hell bent on selling these lies to the WB. Or is a muzzleloader different now. Or advanced at a much higher level than archery or centerfire rifles as your tech committee member is pushing ?

I will agree that muzzleloaders have advanced - but they still have to be loaded from the muzzle -with blackpowder or substitutes. I have been shooting black powder and have all of the latest tech that is possible. The best barrels that $$ can buy. The latest ignition sources. The best high BC bullets and the best actions and more. I have competed in many matches and have placed at the top often. But when it comes to the statements of 1100 yard chip shots -that I have read on the other threads - I’m calling BS period.
I’m a nobody in todays shooting world but have shot muzzies for over 30 years. I also spend lots of time at a local gun range helping muzzy shooters shoot better and witness the inconsistencies with the best that money can buy.

Can someone please step up with some facts (not social media claims from fakebook or YouTube) to dismiss this nonsense of a muzzleloader being the equal or superior of a rifle. Our board member that’s on the tech committee surely doesn’t have the correct info -JMO.

Fire away please ………
 
I commend your efforts giving real world knowledge on the realities of muzzleloader. I agree with you, however despite what is said, this committee has already made up their minds.

It’s sad that a few selected individuals get to decide what is best. I oppose the committee’s decision as they are not made based on facts but merely to satisfy their own personal agendas.
 
The way things are going in utah is a joke, from the WB to the tech committee. They refuse to look at actual data and base their decisions on what the facts are showing. Your average utah muzzleloader hunter will struggle to make an accurate shot at 300 yards and beyond in a real life hunting scenario. With or without a scope, 200 yards would be a struggle for most. Even with a fancy rifle. The majority of guys out there aren’t using a $4,000 gun, which is what is needed to shoot 500 yards and beyond. Even the paramounts and ultimates in the hands of most guys aren’t going to make good on a 300 yard shot. Have you ever sat back and watched someone try to shoot 300 yards with a center fire rifle during the deer hunt? It’s embarrassing how many people miss the first shot. The tech committee refuses to acknowledge the truth in this stuff.

I just want to know where it’s going to end. These new ideas won’t fix our problems. So then what will happen? Where do we stop? Option 2 didn’t fix anything. Tag cuts hasn’t fixed anything. Reducing technology will surely not fix anything. So then what?
 
I don’t think there is a quick fix for wildlife issues. It took us a long time to get here and will take even longer to get things right again. Taking the scope will not change much. People want to go back to yesterday (figuratively speaking). They remember what they think muzzleloading use to be like. They want that back but taking scopes is not going to get them there. A few people really believe if you take scopes the interest will drop and they can go back to getting tags every year. Taking scopes will not help.

IMO, we need to bring back serious predator control (i.e. 1080). I remember when seeing bears and mountain lions in Utah was very rare. Not so much anymore. I also believe vehicles take a significant toll on animals. Scopes on muzzleloaders…not so much.

The good old days are gone and the quick knee-jerk reactions are simply silly. One influential group imposing their will on the others. The worm will turn and the pendulum will swing the other way. Like I said in the other thread, If you prefer muzzleloaders without a scope…you be you and let me be me. This will not do anything overall to help the quality of the herd or hunt.

New Mexico did this on their muzzleloaders. The demand didn’t drop and it won’t in Utah either. I remember when Utah had a 1x scope requirement and the number of people I saw walking around with a variable scope was a joke. Utah has let that genie out of the bottle and trying to put it back will be impossible. It’s like the orange requirements in Utah. I remember when social media filming started and almost every single video showed people hunting without orange. Shed antler season…nobody listens to the start date. My bet…the same thing happens with muzzleloader scopes.

I have a couple muzzleloaders, one set up for open sights for Colorado, one for all AZ. I can and will adapt but this process has been a joke.

Carry on and good luck this season if you were lucky enough to get a tag.
 
Last edited:
shootem said:
I commend your efforts giving real world knowledge on the realities of muzzleloader. I agree with you, however despite what is said, this committee has already made up their minds.

It’s sad that a few selected individuals get to decide what is best. I oppose the committee’s decision as they are not made based on facts but merely to satisfy their own personal agendas.
Click to expand...
It was one individual that decided to go from 1 power to multi power
 
What They Need To Do Is: Have A Fair Vote!

Let Every Hunter Vote So It's Fair!

Put 3 Equal Takes on The Vote,A Take For Each Weapon Type!

If You Vote For The Take,Every Weapon Type Gets Technology YANKED!

If You Vote Against The Take,Everything Stays As Is!

This Will Help Eliminate Hunters That Only Hunt With One Weapon Type Voting Against Each Other For Ignorance!

Rather Than 10 Committee Members Rounding Up Who They Want To Vote!

This Is No Offense To PUNK!

The Vote Option Should Be Available To Every Hunter That's Ever Bought Or Possessed a Big Game License Of Any Kind in The State!

Let The BAWLING Begin!

EDIT: I'll Gladly Vote On The TAKE Of Some Technology As Long As It's Fair Across The Board!

It's Past Time To Do Something In The Right Direction!
 
Last edited:
Hunter21 said:
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 ?
Click to expand...
I mostly like what slam is doing - mostly.
But on this issue he is completely wrong. He contradicts himself with his posts and doesn’t give the correct info on this thread or to the committee.
Maybe I should play his game for him and copy and paste his contradictions like he has to so many others…………

Like 3200 fps from a blackpowder muzzy.

Over 700 yards on an antelope like it’s routine.

A muzzy has far exceeded tech vs a rifle.

A rifle has always been superior …..
but doesn’t address or admit of the recent improvements that have happened with better tighter chamberings and improved manufacturing of barrels/bullets/stocks/powders/actions/brass and more with rifles

Or the improvements with archery equipment that have happened in the last decade.

I use all of the above systems and have seen the improvements over the last 20/10/5 years. Future and emerging tech - I get it and it needs to be addressed.
But this is about the muzzleloader and optics and should be left where it currently is.
But as others have said. There’s an agenda and the flat out lies have been brought out as truth and will be used as propaganda to sell that agenda.
I can only hope that hunters will see this BS sell of slam and the tech committee as the WB and RAC process unfolds.

JMO
 
I guess this answers the question….

A6A18C9F-2B18-4447-83C2-9E61EB74C445.jpeg
 
elkassassin said:
What They Need To Do Is: Have A Fair Vote!

Let Every Hunter Vote So It's Fair!

Put 3 Equal Takes on The Vote,A Take For Each Weapon Type!

If You Vote For The Take,Every Weapon Type Gets Technology YANKED!

If You Vote Against The Take,Everything Stays As Is!

This Will Help Eliminate Hunters That Only Hunt With One Weapon Type Voting Against Each Other For Ignorance!

Rather Than 10 Committee Members Rounding Up Who They Want To Vote!
Click to expand...
What is happening? You actually made some sense right there.

Most of the people pushing this are rifle hunters that want more bucks to make it through the muzzleloader hunt.

I would like to see the rifle deer hunt cut to 3 days if they take muzzleloader scopes away.

I mean we are trying to kill less deer right?
 
It’s interesting to see how many people who are only capable of hunting with a rifle, in favor of technology restrictions on the other weapon types. Across all social media platforms you can see that trend. If you want to take scopes off muzzleloaders for social reasons only, ignoring data, While using the fake azz argument that it’s for conservation and preservation purposes, then so be it I guess. That’s par for the course of Utahs wildlife management. But guess what. It’s time time for the rifle hunters to do their part now and take a hit as well. 50% of the total deer tags given annually that are set aside for ALW hunts, needs to be a thing of the past. Data also shows they harvest the majority of the animals during each hunting season. Rifle tags needs to be cut by 40% (I’d rather see 60%, but I’m not greedy like some ‘other people), and those tags need to be reallocated into the now open sights muzzleloader and archery pools. Im tired of the entitled “I want my cake and to eat it too” mentality. Muzzleloaders with scopes are too effective? Well WTF do you consider a centerfire rifle? If this truly is about helping the herd, then you’re going to give up your opportunities too as a strict rifle hunter. So you’ll either have to be content with hunting even less now because of your choice to hunt with the most effective weapon or you’ll need to branch out and learn how to pick up another weapon type and hunt with it. You really think a muzzleloader is just a single shot rifle? It’s time to try out your theory first hand and not just take Gunwerks word for it when you watch their very few long range muzzleloader hunts on YouTube.

I can get behind the movement of buck long term preservation. I refuse to get behind buck preservation all year long until the 3rd Saturday in October comes around so the rifle hunters can have more artificial opportunities at bucks that otherwise would have been harvested on previous hunts because of technology restrictions.

Maybe we should just get rid of rifle hunts all together and just do a couple iron sight muzzloader hunts and a couple archery hunts every fall.

None of this fixes the fact that bucks can’t and won’t ever give birth to fawns. But again, the clowns and morons on the WB and the technology committee refuse to look at data and facts when having these discussions. Slammy-Daddy is the biggest offender on ignoring facts and reality. I’m sure that’s one of the reasons he is one of the chosen ones. He does what he’s told and isn’t capable of having his own original ideas, thoughts and opinions.
 
“ Slammy-Daddy is the biggest offender on ignoring facts and reality. I’m sure that’s one of the reasons he is one of the chosen ones. He does what he’s told and isn’t capable of having his own original ideas, thoughts and opinions.”

Your pretty spot on with you assessment of slam on this issue. For the most part he has great posts.
Another one of the arguments for taking scopes off muzzies is that it’s “Not about saving deer” which is another contradiction as the numbers of harvest data can be argued both directions -but the data either way isn’t conclusive and not off by more than 5%.

Muzzleloader hunting needs to be different than the rifle hunt is another pathetic argument for the gaslight agenda. I really don’t understand where that came from but it’s selling.

I personally agree with the removal of electronics in the scope - not so on the archery equipment. Archery is hard enough with the electronics.
In my opinion -the muzzleloader deer and elk hunts are already handicapped with the dates they currently have.
I believe there’s more than the average hunter can see. Divide and conquer will set future agenda to sell more deer tags than ever before. The new agenda for deer will follow the recent “unlimited tags” for the 2nd season rifle hunt. Of course -the elk numbers won’t even be addressed until 2026 on that issue.

I can see a new “trial program” for unlimited archery and open sight muzzy hunts coming” with a 5 year examination proposal.

In short -I can’t understand why there’s so much fuss over removing a scope on a muzzleloader. I can understand that it will be the precursor for what will be coming next on rifle and archery. I hope hunters will stand up and fight for what they have. Historically once you loose something -it’s gone forever.
 
I've Made Sense Forever!

It Just Had To Get Bad Enough Maybe Some Of It Started Sinking In!

Are We Gonna Let All Hunters Vote On an Equal Take Of Technology Across The Board Of All 3 Weapon Types?

Or Are We Gonna Let A Small Group Do The Voting For Us All?





elkantlers said:
What is happening? You actually made some sense right there.

Most of the people pushing this are rifle hunters that want more bucks to make it through the muzzleloader hunt.

I would like to see the rifle deer hunt cut to 3 days if they take muzzleloader scopes away.

I mean we are trying to kill less deer right?
Click to expand...
 
elkantlers said:
What is happening? You actually made some sense right there.

Most of the people pushing this are rifle hunters that want more bucks to make it through the muzzleloader hunt.

I would like to see the rifle deer hunt cut to 3 days if they take muzzleloader scopes away.

I mean we are trying to kill less deer right?
Click to expand...
Hell, I think the rifle hunt can be turned into a 6 hour hunt. 6am-12. Why give them 3 days when in reality most bucks are probably killed in the first weekend anyway.
 
I rarely see legitimate and important threads on this site, and I also rarely agree with the words of most people on here. I feel like most of the people on here base their comments on pure emotion and not facts...BUT there's some damn good and valid points being made on this thread.

I nearly 100% agree with everything elkassassin has said on this thread. I think if one gives, all need to, but I also wonder if any of this weapon BS even matters, I think its way bigger than what type of weapon we use..

I am in the field ALOT, and I mean alot. It is a very very complex problem, and I think it is the result of a bunch of knee jerk reactions from pretty much the WB and wanna be quick fixes from Biologists who pretty much disappoint me in what they do.

First thing we do, is say its lions...so lets kill all of them, which contrary to what some believe, UTAH has waged WAR on lion...if you think I am wrong. Go find a track and prove theres a million of em.

Well, that didn't work, so lets try focusing on killing all of the elk to satisfy Utah hunter's desire to kill something every year...

Damn, now we have no elk, no lions....and ****, still no deer...

It has to be the scopes on muzzy guns...lets ban all of that **** now..

This is just a small example of some of the MANY reasons we have issues...

Its a very complex issue....but it boils right down to, UTAH has alot of people in it ..3.38 million people.. and ALOT of hunters..we have twice as many people that hunt that what the total population of Wyoming is... we cannot all hunt every year for a deer...regardless of weapon or tech...we just cannot sustain it..

None of us will agree on everything, but like elkassassin says, we all deserve a voice..not some stupid committee of a few guys and gals with their own personal agendas...Hell look at the WB..same thing..most of them only care about themselves personally. We need to try to get people and decisions made that benefit all of us.
 
I Agree With You Hoss!

You've Seen Me Post For Decades There's 50+ Reasons Why!

It'll Never Get Fixed From Here On Out!

Just To Clue You In A Little Hoss!

We'll See How Niller Likes Your Post!

I'm Always Wrong!

And You Might Be On The Same Shhitlist As Me!

But That's OK!

Not Too Many Like HELL-F'N-RIGHT!

You Could Ban Every F'N Muzzle Loader In This State & It Would Fix Nothing!

When Somebody Gets 1/2 Serious About Improving Utah's Deer Herd They'll Be Working On A Way To Improve Deer Numbers!

In All The BS Management I've Seen In The Last 50+ Years I've Seen That Happen Very Few Times!

And When It Did Happen It Didn't Take Long To Wipe The Deer Right Back Out Due To Money & Greed!
 
I Seen 3 Fawns Yesterday!

A Doe That Had Just Dropped Twins,She Was Still Licking Them Off!

And Another Fawn Dead On The Highway I'd Bet Wasn't Just A Few Days Old!

Fawns Born This Late Don't Stand a F'N Chance!

That'll Help Deer Numbers along with All The Other Issues That Are Stacked Against Them!
 
you are 100% right. What worries me, is for example:
Ban Muzz scopes again. Fine whatever..
2 years from now when nothing changes with deer, What's next on the knee jerk reaction agenda to fix it...what we gonna blame based on our Emotions and non factual data..

I have a hard time believing muzzy scopes have changed the entire dynamics of deer hunting in Utah, which they have not.

I just figured that we would be seeing at least a few hundred 200+ inch bucks in every canyon now from the roads because banning Trail cams was gonna fix that....

I just would like to see stuff that actually works, and affects positive change...that benefits ALL of us. Until our governing boards and committees can do just that, we will continue to have this problem.

Utah is also very Jealousy driven in the hunting world...if I cant do it, nobody should be able to! Anyhow, that's an entirely different pill to swallow..
 
hoss said:
I rarely see legitimate and important threads on this site, and I also rarely agree with the words of most people on here. I feel like most of the people on here base their comments on pure emotion and not facts...BUT there's some damn good and valid points being made on this thread.

I nearly 100% agree with everything elkassassin has said on this thread. I think if one gives, all need to, but I also wonder if any of this weapon BS even matters, I think its way bigger than what type of weapon we use..

I am in the field ALOT, and I mean alot. It is a very very complex problem, and I think it is the result of a bunch of knee jerk reactions from pretty much the WB and wanna be quick fixes from Biologists who pretty much disappoint me in what they do.

First thing we do, is say its lions...so lets kill all of them, which contrary to what some believe, UTAH has waged WAR on lion...if you think I am wrong. Go find a track and prove theres a million of em.

Well, that didn't work, so lets try focusing on killing all of the elk to satisfy Utah hunter's desire to kill something every year...

Damn, now we have no elk, no lions....and ****, still no deer...

It has to be the scopes on muzzy guns...lets ban all of that **** now..

This is just a small example of some of the MANY reasons we have issues...

Its a very complex issue....but it boils right down to, UTAH has alot of people in it ..3.38 million people.. and ALOT of hunters..we have twice as many people that hunt that what the total population of Wyoming is... we cannot all hunt every year for a deer...regardless of weapon or tech...we just cannot sustain it..

None of us will agree on everything, but like elkassassin says, we all deserve a voice..not some stupid committee of a few guys and gals with their own personal agendas...Hell look at the WB..same thing..most of them only care about themselves personally. We need to try to get people and decisions made that benefit all of us.
Click to expand...
And you don't have an agenda!

First off it has been posted over and over again THE COMMITTEE IS NOT MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS TO INCREASE OVER ALL HERD NUMBERS NOR INCREASE OPPORTUNITY. IT IS TRYING CURB TECHNOLOGY AND DEFINE HOW MUCH TECHNOLOGY IS TO BE ALLOWED FOR SPECIFIC WEAPONS.
It is called a TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE.
Second the DWR has not declared war on lions, yes the State Legislators declared war on lions starting in May of 2023, but there is plenty of lions to get killed as of today.
It is harder to find lion tracks in the middle of summer but I could find a lion track before night fall.
The DWR has never declared war on elk and never will, if you have a problem finding elk then I say it is a U problem.
So you telling us that Utah has more than 1 millon active hunters, (i doubt it).
And how do you and your little buddy propose we give everyone a voice (rack meetings), that does mean anti hunters too.
So after reading alot of comments on this thread and many other threads, I have came to the conclusion everyone that is involved in making decisions for Utah wildlife is nothing but a bunch of greedy, self interest, no good for nothing idiots and it must be true for most every other western state because the same complaints are made on each individual state thread.
 
Ballistic said:
I mostly like what slam is doing - mostly.
But on this issue he is completely wrong. He contradicts himself with his posts and doesn’t give the correct info on this thread or to the committee.
Maybe I should play his game for him and copy and paste his contradictions like he has to so many others…………

Like 3200 fps from a blackpowder muzzy.

Over 700 yards on an antelope like it’s routine.

A muzzy has far exceeded tech vs a rifle.

A rifle has always been superior …..
but doesn’t address or admit of the recent improvements that have happened with better tighter chamberings and improved manufacturing of barrels/bullets/stocks/powders/actions/brass and more with rifles

Or the improvements with archery equipment that have happened in the last decade.

I use all of the above systems and have seen the improvements over the last 20/10/5 years. Future and emerging tech - I get it and it needs to be addressed.
But this is about the muzzleloader and optics and should be left where it currently is.
But as others have said. There’s an agenda and the flat out lies have been brought out as truth and will be used as propaganda to sell that agenda.
I can only hope that hunters will see this BS sell of slam and the tech committee as the WB and RAC process unfolds.

JMO
Click to expand...
You really need to be careful at what you accuse others of doing.
Slamdunk, did claim select muzzleloaders could shoot 3200 but in his defense he came back and admitted that was with smokeless powder.
He did mention that on YouTube I guy took a Pronghorn at 700 yards but he never said it it was routine or any statement like that.
And he has never said any Muzeloader far exceeded rifles. Infact he has stated many times muzzleloaders ate like a single shot rifle but are in no way as effective of a weapon as a rifle.
The Tech Committee is their to determine how much technology is to be used by a type of weapon. Not to help deer numbers.
 
Ok, so if banning scopes won’t work, what will? Everyone wants to see stuff that actually works to improve herds, but what is it, hoss? Elkass? Anyone?
I see a lot of pissing and moaning, but no real solutions offered.
If anyone can produce the golden ticket, I’ll be the first to pin a star on your shirt and pat you on the head.
So what is it?
Antler point restrictions? Tried once, before herds plummeted.
Five day rifle seasons? If you think muzzy guys cry loud…
Wildlife crossings? Yep.
Fencing? I see more each year.
Habitat improvement? Never ending.
Wage war on cats? Never work, don’t bet on that horse.
Reduce tags by 75%? Fail.
Ban trail cams? I guess we’ll see.
30 sub units? Yeah right…

I’m sure I missed some but the point is, lots of things tried but still no improvement and at this point, I don’t think there’s anything that shouldn’t be on the chopping block, including muzzy scopes.
 
You Haven't Seen Me Mention We Need To Increase Deer Numbers & 50+ Other Issues?

Did You Miss This On Post 19?

When Somebody Gets 1/2 Serious About Improving Utah's Deer Herd They'll Be Working On A Way To Improve Deer Numbers!

In All The BS Management I've Seen In The Last 50+ Years I've Seen That Happen Very Few Times!

And When It Did Happen It Didn't Take Long To Wipe The Deer Right Back Out Due To Money & Greed!



Shadow said:
Ok, so if banning scopes won’t work, what will? Everyone wants to see stuff that actually works to improve herds, but what is it, hoss? Elkass? Anyone?
I see a lot of pissing and moaning, but no real solutions offered.
If anyone can produce the golden ticket, I’ll be the first to pin a star on your shirt and pat you on the head.
So what is it?
Antler point restrictions? Tried once, before herds plummeted.
Five day rifle seasons? If you think muzzy guys cry loud…
Wildlife crossings? Yep.
Fencing? I see more each year.
Habitat improvement? Never ending.
Wage war on cats? Never work, don’t bet on that horse.
Reduce tags by 75%? Fail.
Ban trail cams? I guess we’ll see.
30 sub units? Yeah right…

I’m sure I missed some but the point is, lots of things tried but still no improvement and at this point, I don’t think there’s anything that shouldn’t be on the chopping block, including muzzy scopes.
Click to expand...
 
notdonhunting said:
COMMITTEE IS NOT MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS TO INCREASE OVER ALL HERD NUMBERS NOR INCREASE OPPORTUNITY. IT IS TRYING CURB TECHNOLOGY AND DEFINE HOW MUCH TECHNOLOGY IS TO BE ALLOWED FOR SPECIFIC WEAPONS.
It is called a TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE
Click to expand...
So funny how many just can’t wrap their head around this :ROFLMAO:

Can someone tell me why there were different seasons for different weapons set up in the first place?

Gee it wasn’t because a bunch a guys that like to dress up in leather fringe and carry a possibles pouch around weren’t saying they should get better seasons due to there primitive weapons and traditional hunting methods was it?
 
I need to be careful or what ?
I’m waiting for slam to copy and paste his contradictions or maybe you can do it for him. You could sugar coat/gas light it and leave out the facts.
I’m telling it how I see it.
I’m not posting to gain everyone’s favor -could care less.
If my posts hurt your personal “feelings” I’m really sorry. You should PM slam and cry your “tiny tears” to each other.

Or you should cry foul play and ask a moderator to remove such inappropriate material - “This doesn’t fit our tech committees agenda” so please remove ballistic and his posts.
LOL !
 
notdonhunting said:
You really need to be careful at what you accuse others of doing.
Slamdunk, did claim select muzzleloaders could shoot 3200 but in his defense he came back and admitted that was with smokeless powder.
He did mention that on YouTube I guy took a Pronghorn at 700 yards but he never said it it was routine or any statement like that.
And he has never said any Muzeloader far exceeded rifles. Infact he has stated many times muzzleloaders ate like a single shot rifle but are in no way as effective of a weapon as a rifle.
The Tech Committee is their to determine how much technology is to be used by a type of weapon. Not to help deer numbers.
Click to expand...
Just another one of my ten thousand personal opinions, worth nothing, in total.

Who can say for certain but I doubt very much, if it where not for a terribly reduced of mule deer population in the State of Utah and the expectation, by many hunters, that it’s likely going to continue to reduce in numbers, there would be little concern over weapon technology and little concern what group hunted with new technology and which group didn’t. So to believe this Committee wasn’t formed and isn’t about controlling harvest and responding to hunter dissatisfaction and hunter pressure, as it relates to fewer and fewer deer to hunt and kill, seems like a misguided belief…….. regardless of what anyone in the bureaucracy or the Tech Committee might proclaim to the public.

Just my view of the forest through the trees…..???
 
notdonhunting said:
You really need to be careful at what you accuse others of doing.
Slamdunk, did claim select muzzleloaders could shoot 3200 but in his defense he came back and admitted that was with smokeless powder.
He did mention that on YouTube I guy took a Pronghorn at 700 yards but he never said it it was routine or any statement like that.
And he has never said any Muzeloader far exceeded rifles. Infact he has stated many times muzzleloaders ate like a single shot rifle but are in no way as effective of a weapon as a rifle.
The Tech Committee is their to determine how much technology is to be used by a type of weapon. Not to help deer numbers.
Click to expand...
I need to be careful or what ?
I’m waiting for slam to copy and paste his contradictions or maybe you can do it for him. You could sugar coat/gas light it and leave out the facts.
I’m telling it how I see it.
I’m not posting to gain everyone’s favor -could care less.
If my posts hurt your personal “feelings” I’m really sorry. You should PM slam and cry your “tiny tears” to each other.

Or you should cry foul play and ask a moderator to remove such inappropriate material - “This doesn’t fit our tech committees agenda” so please remove ballistic and his posts.
LOL !
 
If I Remember Right NotDon?

You Can't Legally Use Smokeless Powder In Utah For Muzzle Loader Hunting?

Maybe We Best Start Doing Something Wise Like Doing Things To Increase Deer Numbers!

Possibly Something That Might Work!



notdonhunting said:
You really need to be careful at what you accuse others of doing.
Slamdunk, did claim select muzzleloaders could shoot 3200 but in his defense he came back and admitted that was with smokeless powder.
He did mention that on YouTube I guy took a Pronghorn at 700 yards but he never said it it was routine or any statement like that.
And he has never said any Muzeloader far exceeded rifles. Infact he has stated many times muzzleloaders ate like a single shot rifle but are in no way as effective of a weapon as a rifle.
The Tech Committee is their to determine how much technology is to be used by a type of weapon. Not to help deer numbers.
Click to expand...
 
Hey NotDon?

Were You As Riled When They Opened Scopes Up Un- limited on SmokePoles As You Are Now Trying To Shut Em Down?



notdonhunting said:
And you don't have an agenda!

First off it has been posted over and over again THE COMMITTEE IS NOT MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS TO INCREASE OVER ALL HERD NUMBERS NOR INCREASE OPPORTUNITY. IT IS TRYING CURB TECHNOLOGY AND DEFINE HOW MUCH TECHNOLOGY IS TO BE ALLOWED FOR SPECIFIC WEAPONS.
It is called a TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE.
Second the DWR has not declared war on lions, yes the State Legislators declared war on lions starting in May of 2023, but there is plenty of lions to get killed as of today.
It is harder to find lion tracks in the middle of summer but I could find a lion track before night fall.
The DWR has never declared war on elk and never will, if you have a problem finding elk then I say it is a U problem.
So you telling us that Utah has more than 1 millon active hunters, (i doubt it).
And how do you and your little buddy propose we give everyone a voice (rack meetings), that does mean anti hunters too.
So after reading alot of comments on this thread and many other threads, I have came to the conclusion everyone that is involved in making decisions for Utah wildlife is nothing but a bunch of greedy, self interest, no good for nothing idiots and it must be true for most every other western state because the same complaints are made on each individual state thread.
Click to expand...
 
elkassassin said:
You Haven't Seen Me Mention We Need To Increase Deer Numbers & 50+ Other Issues?

Did You Miss This On Post 19?

When Somebody Gets 1/2 Serious About Improving Utah's Deer Herd They'll Be Working On A Way To Improve Deer Numbers!

In All The BS Management I've Seen In The Last 50+ Years I've Seen That Happen Very Few Times!

And When It Did Happen It Didn't Take Long To Wipe The Deer Right Back Out Due To Money & Greed!
Click to expand...
I agree we need to increase deer numbers, nobody will dispute that. Maybe you missed post 26 where I listed a handful of things tried, now if that isn’t atleast 1/2 serious, then what is? All those things tried, yet here we are, down from 200k tags to 70k.
Like I said, at this point, nothing should be considered off limits.
 
Ya!

Seen It!

They Are Admitting This TECH/SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP Has Nothing To Do With Improving Deer Numbers!

Shouldn't Improving Deer Numbers Be More Important Than This Last Move?



Shadow said:
I agree we need to increase deer numbers, nobody will dispute that. Maybe you missed post 26 where I listed a handful of things tried, now if that isn’t atleast 1/2 serious, then what is? All those things tried, yet here we are, down from 200k tags to 70k.
Like I said, at this point, nothing should be considered off limits.
Click to expand...
 
2lumpy said:
Just another one of my ten thousand personal opinions, worth nothing, in total.

Who can say for certain but I doubt very much, if it where not for a terribly reduced of mule deer population in the State of Utah and the expectation, by many hunters, that it’s likely going to continue to reduce in numbers, there would be little concern over weapon technology and little concern what group hunted with new technology and which group didn’t. So to believe this Committee wasn’t formed and isn’t about controlling harvest and responding to hunter dissatisfaction and hunter pressure, as it relates to fewer and fewer deer to hunt and kill, seems like a misguided belief…….. regardless of what anyone in the bureaucracy or the Tech Committee might proclaim to the public.

Just my view of the forest through the trees…..???
Click to expand...
I do believe they would be addressing technology even if we had a healthy deer herds.
We have healthy elk numbers and most pepole that hunt elk agree with controlling technology.
I personally believe if we had healthy deer herds the muzzleloaders would have never been moved from 1 power to magnification power. That happened because hunters of all weapons wanted a more successful chance at mature bucks, they are more in the open and accessible during the September hunt. Anyone that spends much time on the mountain knows that after the spike elk or any bull elk hunts happen it is less likely to find them mature bucks out in the open during day light hours.
There is very few that support controlling technology think it is going to improve the deer numbers but yes most do belive it will save some mature bucks, that goes for all types of weapons.
If it did not improve are chances at killing mature bucks we would not be fighting so hard to keep multi magnification scopes.

elkassassin said:
If I Remember Right NotDon?

You Can't Legally Use Smokeless Powder In Utah For Muzzle Loader Hunting?

Maybe We Best Start Doing Something Wise Like Doing Things To Increase Deer Numbers!

Possibly Something That Might Work!
Click to expand...
Never said you can use smokeless, I simple pointed out that slamdunk had admitted the 3200 feet per second was using smokeless. Please follow along better elkassassin.

elkassassin said:
Hey NotDon?

Were You As Riled When They Opened Scopes Up Un- limited on SmokePoles As You Are Now Trying To Shut Em Down?
Click to expand...
Yes I was elkassassin. Thanks for asking.
 
Ballistic said:
I need to be careful or what ?
I’m waiting for slam to copy and paste his contradictions or maybe you can do it for him. You could sugar coat/gas light it and leave out the facts.
I’m telling it how I see it.
I’m not posting to gain everyone’s favor -could care less.
If my posts hurt your personal “feelings” I’m really sorry. You should PM slam and cry your “tiny tears” to each other.

Or you should cry foul play and ask a moderator to remove such inappropriate material - “This doesn’t fit our tech committees agenda” so please remove ballistic and his posts.
LOL !
Click to expand...
Someone is little defensive.
Don't like getting called out for the BS you spread.
 
Let’s drastically cut ALW tags. Make the archery hunt a traditional bow only. You could probably go back to statewide OTC archery deer tags if everyone had to use a recurve. Your new “general” deer hunt is iron sight muzzleloader only, with a hunt the end of September and another mid October. 5 day seasons only. Rifle guys get 15% of the total general deer tags allocated to them. The hunt is the last 5 days of October. You’d have all kinds of 2 points left over every fall to die from starvation during the winter, it’ll be great!

If you want to use your precious rifle that’s far too effective, you’re gonna have to wait. You wanted restrictions. Let’s do it all around.
 
Bux n Dux said:
If you want to use your precious rifle that’s far too effective, you’re gonna have to wait. You wanted restrictions. Let’s do it all around
Click to expand...
That’d be a good statement for your scoped muzzle loader. Want a scope, drastic cut in seasons and when they happen. Then go nuts.
 
Shadow said:
Ok, so if banning scopes won’t work, what will? Everyone wants to see stuff that actually works to improve herds, but what is it, hoss? Elkass? Anyone?
I see a lot of pissing and moaning, but no real solutions offered.
If anyone can produce the golden ticket, I’ll be the first to pin a star on your shirt and pat you on the head.
So what is it?
Antler point restrictions? Tried once, before herds plummeted.
Five day rifle seasons? If you think muzzy guys cry loud…
Wildlife crossings? Yep.
Fencing? I see more each year.
Habitat improvement? Never ending.
Wage war on cats? Never work, don’t bet on that horse.
Reduce tags by 75%? Fail.
Ban trail cams? I guess we’ll see.
30 sub units? Yeah right…

I’m sure I missed some but the point is, lots of things tried but still no improvement and at this point, I don’t think there’s anything that shouldn’t be on the chopping block, including muzzy scopes.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Hunter21 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Now we’re talking.
 
Can someone point me to the document/statement from one of these game departments that says the regulations of technology are part of a herd management/health plan?
 
It Must Be Way More Important Than A Smart Herd Management Plan!

JPickett said:
Can someone point me to the document/statement from one of these game departments that says the regulations of technology are part of a herd management/health plan?
Click to expand...
 
elkassassin said:
It Must Be Way More Important Than A Smart Herd Management Plan!
Click to expand...
That’s fine. I just ask because that’s what I hear in these bich fest’s. “Want thee hell right herds done to be better ban um alls!!!”

But that’s not actually the context of the issue. I just think keeping on what the actual point is important. But then that’s not really your motivation on what, the 2 million posts you’ve made about scopes on muzzle loaders?
 
Pay Attention JP!

I Said I'll Give!

Make It An Equal Give Across The Board & I'm Fine!

But You Don't Wanna Give Your HIGH TECH Rifle Scope Up!



JPickett said:
That’s fine. I just ask because that’s what I hear in these bich fest’s. “Want thee hell right herds done to be better ban um alls!!!”

But that’s not actually the context of the issue. I just think keeping on what the actual point is important. But then that’s not really your motivation on what, the 2 million posts you’ve made about scopes on muzzle loaders?
Click to expand...
 
JPickett said:
That’d be a good statement for your scoped muzzle loader. Want a scope, drastic cut in seasons and when they happen. Then go nuts.
Click to expand...
Cool story, but muzzleloaders don’t get half the tags and they don’t kill the majority of the deer.

Isn’t that what this is about? Or are we finally acknowledging this isn’t about long term deer preservation? All they are worried about is preserving them until the end of October. Then go nuts.
 
elkassassin said:
Pay Attention JP!

I Said I'll Give!

Make It An Equal Give Across The Board & I'm Fine!

But You Don't Wanna Give Your HIGH TECH Rifle Scope Up!
Click to expand...
As Ive told you before. I’m primarily an archer. Modern weapon season has always been just that. High power rifles with the most modern ( there’s that pesky root word) optics. Was that the same point of muzzle loader seasons?

Why would everyone need to “give up” something when it’s incredibly blatant that the muzzle loader has evolved well past its intended place of having a reserved season. Where’s that 700 yard pronghorn video again?
 
JPickett said:
As Ive told you before. I’m primarily an archer. Modern weapon season has always been just that. High power rifles with the most modern ( there’s that pesky root word) optics. Was that the same point of muzzle loader seasons?

Why would everyone need to “give up” something when it’s incredibly blatant that the muzzle loader has evolved well past its intended place of having a reserved season. Where’s that 700 yard pronghorn video again?
Click to expand...
And archery hasn't?
 
Do You Know What a K-4 Weaver Is?

Back In The Day If You Had One On Your Deer Rifle You Were Stylin!

300-400- Yard Shots With Rifles Were Impressive!

Now We've Got Rifle Hunters Packin Rifles That Shoot 1100 Yards+!

Some Of Them Are Purposely Looking For Deer & Elk at 2,000 Yards Just To See If They Can Hit Them With Their Rifles!

If You Can't See The Evolution In All Weapon Types You'd Best Take A Second Look!

Same With Your Bow/Archery Equipment!






JPickett said:
As Ive told you before. I’m primarily an archer. Modern weapon season has always been just that. High power rifles with the most modern ( there’s that pesky root word) optics. Was that the same point of muzzle loader seasons?

Why would everyone need to “give up” something when it’s incredibly blatant that the muzzle loader has evolved well past its intended place of having a reserved season. Where’s that 700 yard pronghorn video again?
Click to expand...
You Know what a
 
Hey JP?

Did You Read Post # 7?

I Mentioned The Fair Take From All Weapon Types Across The Board So Hunters That Hunt With Just One Or Two Weapon Types Can't Vote Against Other Just For Ignorance!

Do You Get That Part?
 
elkassassin said:
Now We've Got Rifle Hunters Packin Rifles That Shoot 1100 Yards+!
Click to expand...
Hence the “modern” designation. I’ve said it before, more than once to you. You’ll never ban the tech in that season but you can shorten the hell out of it to keep up. Rifles getting too good? Make it a 4 day season.

But that still doesn’t mean a scope on a muzzle loader is the same conversation. It’s a modern weapon at that point in no need of it’s own separate season
 
elkantlers said:
And archery hasn't?
Click to expand...
I’ve always been just fine with no electronics on bows, no lighted knocks, no mechanical broad heads.

As far as mechanics of a bow go pinned sights and cams have been around since the advent of archery only seasons.
 
Well!

Your Bow That Some Shoot Out To A 120 Yards?

You Tellin Me It Hasn't Made Leaps & Bounds?

Let's Throw The Archery StickFlippers In To The Same Season As Well!

Kinda Like a FREE FOR ALL!


JPickett said:
Hence the “modern” designation. I’ve said it before, more than once to you. You’ll never ban the tech in that season but you can shorten the hell out of it to keep up. Rifles getting too good? Make it a 4 day season.

But that still doesn’t mean a scope on a muzzle loader is the same conversation. It’s a modern weapon at that point in no need of it’s own separate season
Click to expand...
 
elkassassin said:
Hey JP?

Did You Read Post # 7?

I Mentioned The Fair Take From All Weapon Types Across The Board So Hunters That Hunt With Just One Or Two Weapon Types Can't Vote Against Other Just For Ignorance!

Do You Get That Part?
Click to expand...
Didn’t realize you were such a leftist. Sure sounding a lot like the equity crowd. Fair take from all :ROFLMAO: LOL!!!

The weapon you happen to like evolved past the point of the special treatment of season setting that got it there snd you cry “un fair, take sumpin from dem too hell right!!!”
 
elkassassin said:
Well!

Your Bow That Some Shoot Out To A 120 Yards?

You Tellin Me It Hasn't Made Leaps & Bounds?

Let's Throw The Archery StickFlippers In To The Same Season As Well!

Kinda Like a FREE FOR ALL!
Click to expand...
I still have to be able to see my target without telescoping aid… you know, like a primitive weapon season…
 
You Know!

I Ran In To a Game Warden In Wyoming Once and His Name Was Joe Pickett!

Is That You?
 
You Have Proved My Point!

You Don't Hunt With A SmokePole!

In Your Eyes You Won't Admit Archery Equipment Has Evolved!

So You'll Vote Against Muzzle Loader Hunters Just For IGNORANCE!

I Hunt A Little With All 3 Weapon Types & Don't Vote Against Other Weapon Type Of Hunters Until They Vote Against Me!

I'm Sure That'll Piss You Off!

JPickett said:
I still have to be able to see my target without telescoping aid… you know, like a primitive weapon season…
Click to expand...
 
I’ve killed several elk and a couple deer with a muzzle loader. Open sights, open breach. They’re whatever, I prefer a bow.


You really have zero reading comprehension. Here let’s try this exercise

Why did muzzle loaders get their own season separate from rifle? - answer-primitive weapon with less advantage over game

Why did muzzle loaders get better dates (I.e. closer or in rut)? -answer- primitive weapon with less advantage over game

Is a muzzle loader with a turret scope that can kill pronghorns at 700 yards a primitive weapon with less advantage over game? Answer- no


Im sure all of this will still be well over your head but trust me, it checks out
 
Using your “logic” here I should be able to hunt archery season with a scoped cross bow that can shoot out to 200 yards. I mean after all, it’s still just a pointy stick I’m sending at the animal
 
Says the dude from Idaho who has no dog in this fight!
JPickett said:
I’ve killed several elk and a couple deer with a muzzle loader. Open sights, open breach. They’re whatever, I prefer a bow.


You really have zero reading comprehension. Here let’s try this exercise

Why did muzzle loaders get their own season separate from rifle? - answer-primitive weapon with less advantage over game

Why did muzzle loaders get better dates (I.e. closer or in rut)? -answer- primitive weapon with less advantage over game

Is a muzzle loader with a turret scope that can kill pronghorns at 700 yards a primitive weapon with less advantage over game? Answer- no


Im sure all of this will still be well over your head but trust me, it checks out
Click to expand...
th
 
You Have ZERO Comprehension at All!

The Bow Is Still Evolving!

Maybe We Better Get a Committee Going For Them As Well!

Then You'll Start BAWLING!

JPickett said:
I’ve killed several elk and a couple deer with a muzzle loader. Open sights, open breach. They’re whatever, I prefer a bow.


You really have zero reading comprehension. Here let’s try this exercise

Why did muzzle loaders get their own season separate from rifle? - answer-primitive weapon with less advantage over game

Why did muzzle loaders get better dates (I.e. closer or in rut)? -answer- primitive weapon with less advantage over game

Is a muzzle loader with a turret scope that can kill pronghorns at 700 yards a primitive weapon with less advantage over game? Answer- no


Im sure all of this will still be well over your head but trust me, it checks out
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
JPickett said:
Were muzzle loaders different in Utah?
Click to expand...
Yes, we can use 209 primers or small rifle primers with closed ignition. Idaho has the dumbest rules on muzzleloaders of all 50 states.

Do you even hunt in Utah? I bet not! I think you just like to stir the pot!
 
shootem said:
Yes, we can use 209 primers or small rifle primers with closed ignition. Idaho has the dumbest rules on muzzleloaders of all 50 states.

Do you even hunt in Utah? I bet not! I think you just like to stir the pot!
Click to expand...
I would be interested to have someone clarify for sure via the hunting regs. in Utah what laws were in place the first year of muzzleloader season in Utah as it pertains to muzzleloader equipment. I've tried a few times myself on the internet with no results.

Were the restrictions very minimal just because 209 primers and in lines and other innovations hadn't been thought of yet so there were little restrictions needed?

People have mentioned the first year scopes were allowed but never a word about the original first season equipment and why Utah started having muzzleloader hunts in the first place.

While I respect your opinion to say "Idaho has the dumbest rules on muzzleloaders of all the 50 states " I don't agree with you. By dumbest you really mean most restrictive and your wrong on that.

An Idaho muzzleloader would be illegal in Montana. I for one hope they keep it the primitive weapon it was intended to be.

I'm sure you'll keep your opinion and I know I'm gonna keep mine. We're just hunters that are gonna have to agree to disagree.

I'm not just taking JPicketts side. Don't know him, never met him. Strictly my opinion.
 
HORNhunter7 said:
I would be interested to have someone clarify for sure via the hunting regs. in Utah what laws were in place the first year of muzzleloader season in Utah as it pertains to muzzleloader equipment. I've tried a few times myself on the internet with no results.

Were the restrictions very minimal just because 209 primers and in lines and other innovations hadn't been thought of yet so there were little restrictions needed?

People have mentioned the first year scopes were allowed but never a word about the original first season equipment and why Utah started having muzzleloader hunts in the first place.

While I respect your opinion to say "Idaho has the dumbest rules on muzzleloaders of all the 50 states " I don't agree with you. By dumbest you really mean most restrictive and your wrong on that.

An Idaho muzzleloader would be illegal in Montana. I for one hope they keep it the primitive weapon it was intended to be.

I'm sure you'll keep your opinion and I know I'm gonna keep mine. We're just hunters that are gonna have to agree to disagree.

I'm not just taking JPicketts side. Don't know him, never met him. Strictly my opinion.
Click to expand...
Well for starters, you could hunt the rut. Beyond that, there wasn’t much for things you couldn’t do aside from no magnified scopes and no smokeless powder.

For the 1000th time. Utahs muzzleloader hunt as we know it today was never intended to be a primitive weapon hunt. It was intended to give hunters more opportunities to get in the field hunting deer.
 
Funny this starts with "facts" not emotion then the OP spends the rest of the thread on a rant.


Here's a fact.

Muzzleloaders are loaded from the barrel with BLACK POWDER, then a patch and ball or a slug are jammed down the barrel. The ignition via side hammer is cap, or flint. Open iron, or peep sights.

Now, just because the marketers were successful in bending the definition so far that we now have brass cased delivery systems, doesn't change what the inline rifle you shoot is. It's a rifle your sliding a bullet down the barrel of. It's much more capable than any straight wall cartridge, and in fact will rival numerous others.

@Slam should have tge commitee simply rename the hunt.

No more muzzy hunt. PRIMITIVE RIFLE SEASON.

If you want a stainless steel, 12x40, plastic tipped, saboted, high octane powdered, shotgun ignition, then the HAMS season is your ticket.


You can tell your over the target by the flak.

The amount of crying from the tech committee identifying an obvious issue, shows, just how big an issue it is.


And dudes lying and spinning show it as well. This is a tech issue, not a herd issue,.
 
Bux n Dux said:
Well for starters, you could hunt the rut. Beyond that, there wasn’t much for things you couldn’t do aside from no magnified scopes and no smokeless powder.

For the 1000th time. Utahs muzzleloader hunt as we know it today was never intended to be a primitive weapon hunt. It was intended to give hunters more opportunities to get in the field hunting deer.
Click to expand...
then why not just another rifle season? had to some mysterious reason it was open sighted muzzle loaders :unsure:
 
www.guinnessworldrecords.com

Farthest archery target hit (male)

The Guinness World Records Official site with ultimate record-breaking facts & achievements. Do you want to set a world record? Are you Officially Amazing?
www.guinnessworldrecords.com www.guinnessworldrecords.com

330 meters =360 yards and done by a Paralympic Shooter. OMG ! Don’t let the tech committee see this.
But archery equipment that we have (and I have the latest) hasn’t evolved ?

The same for rifles - haven’t evolved?

Were “primitive” archery shots on big game less than 1/2 of the distances they are today on average ?

1985 it’s a key date for muzzleloaders. Tony Knight markets the inline muzzleloader. And shortly after 209 ignition hits the scene.

2015 -30 years later in Utah's hunters (57%) vote in favor of optics greater than 1x.

2023 - your current tech committee - has voted 9-1 to propose to WB on limiting or eliminating scopes on muzzleloaders.

So over 38 years of inline muzzleloader hunting in utah and now the tech committee (special interest group) wants the hunt to be “different”
Not the hunters of utah- just the tech committee and the WB.

Can someone please describe “PRIMITIVE” for archery and also muzzleloader please ? I can’t find its definition in utahs big game guidebooks- just a-lot of opinions.

I have only seen the word “primitive” for a restricted weapon hunt for the past 2 years on utah DWR website for HAMS units.

I’m not trying to attack any of the 3 weapon types as I’m a dedicated hunter and hunt all 3 and use the latest most updated equipment the law will allow.

I used the 330 meter archery article just as the tech committee boy of ours used the 700 yard antelope propaganda. How many archers are going to shoot at that distance ? The same for muzz loader hunters at 700 yards. We need to get real with facts.

I am hopeful that utahs hunters will speak up and vote against the nonsense of restricting or eliminating optics on muzzleloaders.
If this passes - plan on big changes going forward on archery equipment next and then rifles.
Emerging tech - I’m onboard - taking scopes off muzzleloaders -solid no.
 
[QUOTE="Ballistic, post: 2200181, member:

So over 38 years of inline muzzleloader hunting in utah and now the tech committee (special interest group) wants the hunt to be “different”
Not the hunters of utah- just the tech committee and the WB.

[/QUOTE]

Do you think you are the voice of the hunters. Because I am a muzzleloader hunter and I do believe scopes should not be allowed on muzzleloaders
 
Me too, I am a DH I vote to ban ALL scopes on muzzleloaders.

And it should be noted that the WB has already imposed some new limitations on rifles and archery with no electronic assistanced scopes on rifles and no rangefinding sights on bows. These changes impacted me just like a scope ban on muzzleloaders would impact me. I currently have a 4-12X Leupold scope mounted on my muzzleloader, but I will happily remove it and go back to open sights or a 1X scope to comply with the applicable rules.

I personally would support some significant restrictions on technology for all three weapon types, particularly if it will help lower success rates and allow more sportsment to get out into the field. A scope ban for muzzleloaders is a good place to start.

Hawkeye
 
Bux n Dux said:
Well for starters, you could hunt the rut. Beyond that, there wasn’t much for things you couldn’t do aside from no magnified scopes and no smokeless powder.

For the 1000th time. Utahs muzzleloader hunt as we know it today was never intended to be a primitive weapon hunt. It was intended to give hunters more opportunities to get in the field hunting deer.
Click to expand...

I appreciate the info you offered about no scopes and smokeless powder but somewhere buried in the UDOW archives has to be a copy of the first ever muzzleloader season and it's rules pertaining to muzzleloaders. To me it would be interesting to read it and to see straight from the "horses mouth" what it said.

You've said for a 1000 times now that the "muzzleloader hunt as we know it today was never intended to be a primitive weapon hunt." I'm not questioning your integrity on that statement but if it's true you should be able to provide something from the UDOW to back that statement up pretty easily. Either that or you are or were employed by the UDOW and were involved in
the original muzzleloader season many years ago and were present when that statement was made by the UDOW.
 
notdonhunting said:
Ballistic said:
[QUOTE="Ballistic, post: 2200181, member:

So over 38 years of inline muzzleloader hunting in utah and now the tech committee (special interest group) wants the hunt to be “different”
Not the hunters of utah- just the tech committee and the WB.
Click to expand...

Do you think you are the voice of the hunters. Because I am a muzzleloader hunter and I do believe scopes should not be allowed on muzzleloaders
Click to expand...

Never said I was the voice for muzzleloader hunters. 38 years of inlines purchased and 8 years of magnified scopes allowed.
Let the hunters decide……..
If you want the scopes off you should hunt a restricted weapons hunt or hunt without a scope. Idaho is the perfect place for you.
Don’t impose your agenda on those that hopefully speak up to keep the scopes.
 
Hawkeye said:
Me too, I am a DH I vote to ban ALL scopes on muzzleloaders.

And it should be noted that the WB has already imposed some new limitations on rifles and archery with no electronic assistanced scopes on rifles and no rangefinding sights on bows. These changes impacted me just like a scope ban on muzzleloaders would impact me. I currently have a 4-12X Leupold scope mounted on my muzzleloader, but I will happily remove it and go back to open sights or a 1X scope to comply with the applicable rules.

I personally would support some significant restrictions on technology for all three weapon types, particularly if it will help lower success rates and allow more sportsment to get out into the field. A scope ban for muzzleloaders is a good place to start.

Hawkeye
Click to expand...
Those same changes were also implemented on muzzleloaders. But the muzzleloader is receiving extra restrictions over and above the archery and rifle weapons.
Is this coming from a previous vote or poll from hunters ?
No it’s coming from a biased tech committee with likely some pressure from some special interest groups.

Someone prove me wrong and show me a poll or study that came from hunters wanting scopes removed from muzzleloaders before the tech committee started it’s parade of BS propaganda.

Btw I mostly support what the tech committee is doing for emerging tech and the electronics ban. The scope removal recommendation shows the cancerous flaws on lack of data from this committee when it pertains to actual muzzleloader data vs rifle and archery tech.

I also accept your vote to remove scopes. Let the hunters decide this issue as the tech and WB set agendas to divide and conquer.
JMO
 
It's always fun when dudes try and pretend something.

We saw it with bait. "Bait doesn't help"

"Trailcams don't help"

"Scopes on muzzys don't matter"

Well, the obvious always applies.

If it doesn't help, do anything, or create an advantage, then what's the big deal?

I shoot a bow. So what if someone shoots 330yrds? With a pin sight, your pin covers an entire elk at that distance, and without electric sighting, no one hits anything.

My 12 yr old is hunting this year. CVA Optima, with fiber optic sights shooting pyrodex and 245gr sabots, will consistently hit plates at 200 yards.

With side hammer, #11 pistol powder and 495gr Thompson slugs, I can barely reach 200 yards, let alone hit something.

The point. EVERYONE who shoots a muzzy KNOWS that the new guns are extremely accurate, and with optics they easily reach out.


So, if we are gonna cry about scopes cuz guys can't see, or "they don't help", fine.

Let's go after the REAL tech, the powder, ignition, projectile.

You wanna shoot Thompson slugs with actual black powder and #11 caps, KEEP YOUR SCOPE.

But don't piss down my leg and claim it's rain. The modern online's shooting bh, sabots, 209, with 3x9 scopes are a hell of a lot more rifle, then they are primitive rifle, or even blackpowder rifle.

And that distance, has made a hunt where you see a lot of deer, but can't get them, become a single shot rifle hunt.
 
Ballistic said:
Those same changes were also implemented on muzzleloaders. But the muzzleloader is receiving extra restrictions over and above the archery and rifle weapons.
Is this coming from a previous vote or poll from hunters ?
No it’s coming from a biased tech committee with likely some pressure from some special interest groups.

Someone prove me wrong and show me a poll or study that came from hunters wanting scopes removed from muzzleloaders before the tech committee started it’s parade of BS propaganda.

Btw I mostly support what the tech committee is doing for emerging tech and the electronics ban. The scope removal recommendation shows the cancerous flaws on lack of data from this committee when it pertains to actual muzzleloader data vs rifle and archery tech.

I also accept your vote to remove scopes. Let the hunters decide this issue as the tech and WB set agendas to divide and conquer.
JMO
Click to expand...
Utah thread, "Muzeloader Voting Poll"
 
HORNhunter7 said:
I appreciate the info you offered about no scopes and smokeless powder but somewhere buried in the UDOW archives has to be a copy of the first ever muzzleloader season and it's rules pertaining to muzzleloaders. To me it would be interesting to read it and to see straight from the "horses mouth" what it said.

You've said for a 1000 times now that the "muzzleloader hunt as we know it today was never intended to be a primitive weapon hunt." I'm not questioning your integrity on that statement but if it's true you should be able to provide something from the UDOW to back that statement up pretty easily. Either that or you are or were employed by the UDOW and were involved in
the original muzzleloader season many years ago and were present when that statement was made by the UDOW.
Click to expand...
I spoke for a muzzleloader hunting season, at all 5 public hearings, back in the 1970’s I was a designated representative of the Utah Muzzleloaders, and traveled with it’s President, Al Rucksaker, to each public hearing including the final Board of Big Game (which it was called at the time.) meeting, where the Board voted to hold a Utah State wide, 9 day Muzzleloader Season beginning the first Saturday of November each year. DWR big game biologists, Norm Hancock and Grant Jensen also attended all the public hearings and the Board hearing and opposed the requests made by the Utah Muzzleloaders Assocation’s request. Also in attendance were the Presidents of the Utah Wildlife Federation, Utah Bowman’s Association and the Salt Lake Sportsmen’s Club, all were in support of the Utah Muzzleloaders request.

The DWR recorded the minutes of those meetings, whether they still have audio recordings or written minutes of them, I do not know, nor do I care. Personally I now believe we should have never permitted a muzzleloader hunt, because it has evolved into a hunt that was never envisioned, nor wanted by those of us who pushed for it.

I previously posted the intent of the muzzleloaders what pushed for and got the hunt approved. It’s here somewhere in the Monster Muley archives, if you care enough to search it out and read it. I seriously doubt anyone really cares…….. this is all just campfire bickering and nothing more.

My phone number is 435-979-5521. I’ll talk about it with anyone but I’m dyslexic and one finger typing volumes of history is more than I going to do.
 
scopenstalk said:
This is exactly why I created the poll. So there wouldn’t be this “well a minority this” a “special interest group” that. In either direction. It’s just our fellow members, but the numbers show what the people tuned into this issue want
Click to expand...
I commend you for the poll. This was done during the BS propaganda sale that was presented by the tech committee.
Although Slam did say he would go with MM votes to eliminate scopes- so has some merit.
So Slam can now say it wasn’t his idea - even a better sale…..Genius plan I must say.

This is a very small group of data that in my opinion -doesn’t support what the 1000,s of muzzy hunters will support.

How many total votes did you have on the poll ? 220

Are members of MM trophy hunters/meat hunters -hard to say ? The very title of monster Muleys and all of the trophy racked pics -you tell me ?
A would say a majority of tag holders are meat hunters - and may/may not agree to the agenda of scope removal.
The meat hunter isn’t going to appreciate regulation changes when the combo they bought didn’t come with a front sight.
And they hunted the muzzy hunt to stay out of the pumpkin patches the rifle hunt offered.

Your poll didn’t start the discussion of removing scopes from muzzleloaders.
That was the tech committee with a few biased members that don’t have actual data - just an agenda of lies as posted.

Again - good on you for the poll. It tells me that the trophy hunters of monster Muleys want changes.
50% want it back to 2016 1x or open sights
13% want 4X or lower
36.8% want to stay as is -no further advancements.

And the tech committee can say that this wasn’t their idea - came from the poll on MM.
They used you.
 
Scopes on muzzleloaders is a social issue more than a biological issue. Having scopes on muzzleloaders will absolutely result in more deer and elk getting killed on muzzleloader hunts and puts more pressure on the older bucks/bulls. However, scope or no scopes on muzzleloaders won't have any significant impact on the deer herd 10 years from now. They can adjust seasons and tag numbers so it isn't a biological issue for deer/elk management.

Personally I think NM made a good decision to remove scopes from muzzleloader hunts. Utah should have never allowed more than 1X scopes on Muzzleloader hunts in my opinion. Muzzleloader seasons were not designed so you could put a Nightforce on your muzzleloader and dial for 500 yards. Muzzleloader hunts were created as a primitive weapon hunt and then technology improved. I'm more of a threat to deer with my muzzleloader/scope than I am with an open sight 30-30. I set up my muzzleloader for hunting NM a few years ago and could easily kill a deer with it at ranges farther than most hunters should consider shooting their centerfire rifle at a deer.

If you want to use a scope on your muzzleloader, you could still use it during the "rifle hunt". There are many people like me that don't think there should be special season for long range muzzleloaders.

For those of you that still want to keep your scopes, I get it. If I'm able to draw a tag in Utah next year and I'm able to use a scope on a muzzleloader, I will certainly use it. This year I'm using open sights in NM on my deer hunt and I think NM made the correct choice.

I don't think Utah should rush to remove scopes from muzzleloader hunts. In my opinion, they should keep the debate open until January or February before making a final decision. If a majority of hunters want to keep scopes on muzzleloaders, then I think they shouldn't change the rules.
 
Ballistic said:
I commend you for the poll. This was done during the BS propaganda sale that was presented by the tech committee.
Although Slam did say he would go with MM votes to eliminate scopes- so has some merit.
So Slam can now say it wasn’t his idea - even a better sale…..Genius plan I must say.

This is a very small group of data that in my opinion -doesn’t support what the 1000,s of muzzy hunters will support.

How many total votes did you have on the poll ? 220

Are members of MM trophy hunters/meat hunters -hard to say ? The very title of monster Muleys and all of the trophy racked pics -you tell me ?
A would say a majority of tag holders are meat hunters - and may/may not agree to the agenda of scope removal.
The meat hunter isn’t going to appreciate regulation changes when the combo they bought didn’t come with a front sight.
And they hunted the muzzy hunt to stay out of the pumpkin patches the rifle hunt offered.

Your poll didn’t start the discussion of removing scopes from muzzleloaders.
That was the tech committee with a few biased members that don’t have actual data - just an agenda of lies as posted.

Again - good on you for the poll. It tells me that the trophy hunters of monster Muleys want changes.
50% want it back to 2016 1x or open sights
13% want 4X or lower
36.8% want to stay as is -no further advancements.

And the tech committee can say that this wasn’t their idea - came from the poll on MM.
They used you.
Click to expand...
used me? I would suggest you take a big step back from this subject for just a day and read your own posts and think about them. And then come back to the discussion.
 
BrianID said:
Scopes on muzzleloaders is a social issue more than a biological issue. Having scopes on muzzleloaders will absolutely result in more deer and elk getting killed on muzzleloader hunts and puts more pressure on the older bucks/bulls. However, scope or no scopes on muzzleloaders won't have any significant impact on the deer herd 10 years from now. They can adjust seasons and tag numbers so it isn't a biological issue for deer/elk management.

Personally I think NM made a good decision to remove scopes from muzzleloader hunts. Utah should have never allowed more than 1X scopes on Muzzleloader hunts in my opinion. Muzzleloader seasons were not designed so you could put a Nightforce on your muzzleloader and dial for 500 yards. Muzzleloader hunts were created as a primitive weapon hunt and then technology improved. I'm more of a threat to deer with my muzzleloader/scope than I am with an open sight 30-30. I set up my muzzleloader for hunting NM a few years ago and could easily kill a deer with it at ranges farther than most hunters should consider shooting their centerfire rifle at a deer.

If you want to use a scope on your muzzleloader, you could still use it during the "rifle hunt". There are many people like me that don't think there should be special season for long range muzzleloaders.

For those of you that still want to keep your scopes, I get it. If I'm able to draw a tag in Utah next year and I'm able to use a scope on a muzzleloader, I will certainly use it. This year I'm using open sights in NM on my deer hunt and I think NM made the correct choice.

I don't think Utah should rush to remove scopes from muzzleloader hunts. In my opinion, they should keep the debate open until January or February before making a final decision. If a majority of hunters want to keep scopes on muzzleloaders, then I think they shouldn't change the rules.
Click to expand...
I like what your saying but this is what most don’t know about your comment as pasted.
Quote
“If you want to use a scope on your muzzleloader, you could still use it during the "rifle hunt". There are many people like me that don't think there should be special season for long range muzzleloaders.”

Right now an any legal weapon hunt - it will allow all 3 types of legal weapons.

If the scope is restricted going forward on a muzzleloader - it won’t be allowed on an any legal weapon hunt. Scope removed it will be. Scope on and it’s considered an illegal weapon - stupid rules really -considering a muzzy will never equal a high powdered modern rifle - except to the tech committee of course.

That’s why we need to be careful on what we ask for. There will be a price to pay on the other side.
 
elkassassin said:
Do You Know What a K-4 Weaver Is?

Back In The Day If You Had One On Your Deer Rifle You Were Stylin!

300-400- Yard Shots With Rifles Were Impressive!

Now We've Got Rifle Hunters Packin Rifles That Shoot 1100 Yards+!

Some Of Them Are Purposely Looking For Deer & Elk at 2,000 Yards Just To See If They Can Hit Them With Their Rifles!

If You Can't See The Evolution In All Weapon Types You'd Best Take A Second Look!

Same With Your Bow/Archery Equipment!







You Know what a
Click to expand...
Elkassassin,
I believe that what you said was true.......but most of those "shooters" should not be shooting further than about 300 yards, no matter what optics or rifle they have.
 
Hey hawky?

Removing That SIG Hurt a Little Did It?

Hawkeye said:
Me too, I am a DH I vote to ban ALL scopes on muzzleloaders.

And it should be noted that the WB has already imposed some new limitations on rifles and archery with no electronic assistanced scopes on rifles and no rangefinding sights on bows. These changes impacted me just like a scope ban on muzzleloaders would impact me. I currently have a 4-12X Leupold scope mounted on my muzzleloader, but I will happily remove it and go back to open sights or a 1X scope to comply with the applicable rules.

I personally would support some significant restrictions on technology for all three weapon types, particularly if it will help lower success rates and allow more sportsment to get out into the field. A scope ban for muzzleloaders is a good place to start.

Hawkeye
Click to expand...
 
HORNhunter7 said:
I appreciate the info you offered about no scopes and smokeless powder but somewhere buried in the UDOW archives has to be a copy of the first ever muzzleloader season and it's rules pertaining to muzzleloaders. To me it would be interesting to read it and to see straight from the "horses mouth" what it said.

You've said for a 1000 times now that the "muzzleloader hunt as we know it today was never intended to be a primitive weapon hunt." I'm not questioning your integrity on that statement but if it's true you should be able to provide something from the UDOW to back that statement up pretty easily. Either that or you are or were employed by the UDOW and were involved in
the original muzzleloader season many years ago and were present when that statement was made by the UDOW.
Click to expand...
The lack of a “primitive weapon” definition in utah, should give a pretty strong indication that it wasn’t ever intended to be one. I think this year is the first time they ever started thinking about defining a primitive weapon definition in the state.

Kinda like “UDOW”, “primitive weapon” seasons in utah doesn’t exist… but we do have a muzzleloader season, and the Utah DWR has had that season in effect for quite awhile.
 
I Still Say Every Hunter That Hunts With All 3 Weapon Types Should Be Able To Vote on The TECH Changes!

Yes We Need To Limit TECH!

Yes We Need To Limit TECH on All 3 Weapon Types!

Yes We All Need To GIVE A Little!

Just To Make It Fair!

Maybe The KING Can Jump In & Tell Me The World Ain't Fair Again?(No Sshitt Sherlock!)

Then After This BS Is Done Maybe Somebody Should Step Up And Start Figuring Out Ways We Can Increase The Deer Numbers In This State!

And Just For The KING:

Issuing More Tags & Issuing More Antlerless Tags Won't Be On That F'N List!
 
Let’s try this for 5 years and see what happens.

-Rifle hunt gets 20% of the total allotted tags for general deer in utah. 40% goes to muzzleloader, 40% goes to archery.
-archers must use a traditional style only bows. No cams, release aids or pulleys. Same for COR qualified crossbows. You can’t use a crossbow with a cam System.
-muzzleloaders must be full bore projectiles. Loose powder only. No scopes. period. No peep sights, traditional, fixed iron sights only.
-rifles can only have a 9x scope maximum. You can also not possess a range finder while in the field hunting during that hunt.
-archery hunt goes for 2 weeks. Muzzleloader hunt goes for 5 days. Rifle goes for 3.

By the end of year 2, you’d have significantly more bucks, and older bucks, on the landscape than what we have now. You’d still have the issue that there’s no does on the landscape to build the herd with, which is a critical issue we refuse to address, but at least even your worst deer hunters should be seeing 2 points to shoot at from their SxS.

With that hunt structure, you could go back to OTC general archery tags. You could reduce point creep across many hunts and units. You’d increase opportunities. Every hunt type would give something up as far as technology goes. But at the same time, still provide people with more opportunities to get in the field. This would only apply to general deer and elk hunts of course. LE and OIL wouldn’t have these restrictions apply.

OR… we could do the most logical thing we could do, that would impact all hunt types evenly, and BAN RANGE FINDERS. That has potential to fix all of these issues immediately, without making things messy. But for some reason that’s no even a discussion at this point.
 
WTH Do Rifle Hunters Need 9X For?:D
Bux n Dux said:
Let’s try this for 5 years and see what happens.

-Rifle hunt gets 20% of the total allotted tags for general deer in utah. 40% goes to muzzleloader, 40% goes to archery.
-archers must use a traditional style only bows. No cams, release aids or pulleys. Same for COR qualified crossbows. You can’t use a crossbow with a cam System.
-muzzleloaders must be full bore projectiles. Loose powder only. No scopes. period. No peep sights, traditional, fixed iron sights only.
-rifles can only have a 9x scope maximum. You can also not possess a range finder while in the field hunting during that hunt.
-archery hunt goes for 2 weeks. Muzzleloader hunt goes for 5 days. Rifle goes for 3.

By the end of year 2, you’d have significantly more bucks, and older bucks, on the landscape than what we have now. You’d still have the issue that there’s no does on the landscape to build the herd with, which is a critical issue we refuse to address, but at least even your worst deer hunters should be seeing 2 points to shoot at from their SxS.

With that hunt structure, you could go back to OTC general archery tags. You could reduce point creep across many hunts and units. You’d increase opportunities. Every hunt type would give something up as far as technology goes. But at the same time, still provide people with more opportunities to get in the field. This would only apply to general deer and elk hunts of course. LE and OIL wouldn’t have these restrictions apply.

OR… we could do the most logical thing we could do, that would impact all hunt types evenly, and BAN RANGE FINDERS. That has potential to fix all of these issues immediately, without making things messy. But for some reason that’s no even a discussion at this point.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Founder
Taker or No? How wide and what does he score?
Replies
57
Views
2k
mevertsen
mevertsen
WesternSky
Transfer a 5B Late to a Youth Hunter??
Replies
12
Views
902
WesternSky
WesternSky
Sparks Shooter
If you had a Silver State Deer Tag
Replies
19
Views
1k
3TOE
3TOE

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

FB_IMG_1639847058966.jpg
IMG_3560_Fotor.jpg
0B289C1E-A049-458D-AC77-484856534372.jpeg
7B5DEB73-963F-4183-A2E0-E6A711B8BCC0.jpeg
Another Pic of the 2008 Buck
Photo Oct 25, 7 14 27 PM.jpg
20191106_130658.jpg
IMG_0671 (2).jpg
IMG_1117.png
6CA262FF-BEEA-44D9-986D-FEF952A65AC5.jpeg
38053C10-AC66-468E-B4F4-C004D7007C10.jpeg
Big Archery Bull
Back
Top Bottom