Muzzleloader 1X vs All-Scope-Ban?

[Ballistic]

Took me less than 30 seconds to find numerous chats like these.
3200ftps with a 300gr projectile hits harder than a 300 Magnum.

If we cannot acknowledge the obvious trend, we are just in denial.
View attachment 115914
View attachment 115915

Slam
1st off -I’m not trying to attack you on a personal level. If so -I apologize.

You are our spokesperson so to say. Most of what you’re trying to do is admiral. However you don’t have all of the data or facts when it comes to this issue. I sir don’t have all of the data either- but have lots of experience shooting steel comps and have been shooting muzzleloaders for over 30 years.
Your recommendation for a 4X scope is a decent compromise.
When a committee member says they have shot a deer at 1100 yards - I call BS on that person - not you. I might be wrong -maybe that member can make that shot all day long…..

3200 fps with a 300 grain bullet is possible with smokeless powders. It isn’t possible with black powder substitutes where 2400-2600 is in fact possible. Maybe a very long barreled setup could gain a little more but not much over this.

We can all (myself and you included) get caught up in the media hype. I have watched many videos of claims of 1000 plus yard shots on tube. When a shot is timed by sound it should take 1.25-1.5 seconds to hit the target. Many of those vids -it’s easy to pick up hits instantly with the sound of the rifle.
Then you have the true marksmen that can make the hits - but often they don’t get any media credits at all.
Rest assure - for profit gun makers -will make the claims and showcase 12 year olds making 1376 yard shots on bull elk.
I have shot against that group in comp - and they were not in the winners circle.

Would a Gunwerks long range muzzy make the average hunter feel warm and fuzzy and give them confidence to make a long shot ? Probably yes.
In reality it takes lots and lots of practice to unlock the secrets for long range work with any weapon and much more with a muzzy.
I just want to call out the BS claims of a muzzy being a single shot rifle and capable of using it to hunt at 1000 plus yards. And 500 -not many out there can do it.

The proposed limits for scopes is aimed at the majority of hunters. The majority can’t shoot 1/4 as far as the hype has created.
So let’s say 1 experienced hunter out of 1000 can make a 500 yard shot with 90% success rate. Why should the average hunter be penalized for that ?

Again - thanks for your efforts. Please take your recommendations to the board with good data and facts.

 

[slamdunk]

@Ballistic
No offense taken my friend, I haven't taken anything you say personally at all.

As far as providing data on success rates driving the WB to implement changes, we've already shown there has only been a slight uptick in success.
This isn't about success though, it's about keeping a muzzleloader "tamed" and keeping it a shorter range weapon or "medium" if you will.
If we don't, in 10 years or less, we'll be buying a Gunwerks style weapon at Cal-Ranch for less than $500 made by average manufacturers and everyone will have one, just like the inline explosion.

Archery tackle has been regulated by eliminating Garmin style sights even though no data proves they are making hunters more successful.

Same with centerfire optics, nothing computerized.....leave the human skillset equation involved in all three weapons.

 

[MrShane]

Yes, I disagree! Like most posters on this thread, you have taken the human element out of your equation, ie: less technology=lower success rates=more tags. Humans aren't machines you can just adjust or tweek in order to get them to perform better (or worse, in this case). They'll adjust themselves to get the results they want and they'll find other legal ways to make the kill and your equation goes down the toilet.

I don't have the past any-weapon or muzzleloader harvest data and maybe those stats would show something different, but the past archery general season harvest stats show there has only been an average increase of 1% in recorded success rates since the invention of the compound bow in 1966. From 1952 to 1965, 17.1%. From 1966 to 2023, 18.1%. So, do we want archery harvest rates to go even lower? And how do we achieve that by limiting technology that, so far, hasn't contributed to a noticeable increase?

Would muzzys or rifles be that much different? I don't know, but I hope the committee members do their homework and stick to the data and consider the human factor.

Something else you might want to consider! In 2022, only 75% of the general archery tag holders, 86% of the general muzzy tag holders and 91% of the any weapon tag holders actually hunted "in the field". That's a total of 7,703 out of 62,175 general season buck tags not used! Yeah, let's make it even harder to be successful.

Thank you for your opinion.

 

[notdonhunting]

Slam,

I believe the issue that most here have is the committee is only attacking scopes on muzzleloader. You would get much more support if this was with all weapons but it’s not. Restrict rifles to a 9x scope and you will not hear another word from most on here. You want us to suppor
t the muzzleloader scope ban? Give us a logical reason and make it fair across the board, then we’ll talk.

The problem with limiting a rifle to 9x is the same problem to limiting muzzleloaders to 4x. Law enforcement nightmare.

It Ain't JUST The SmokePoles!

Look What StickFlippers Can Do With Their Equipment!

Look What Long Rangers Can Do With Theirs!

We Are ALL Guilty Of Some Kind of GADGETRY That We Damn Sure Didn't Have 40-50 Years Ago!

The DWR created a new rule that muzzleloaders was allowed any power of magnification, I believe it was around 2016.
I would be all for limiting all types of weapons (rifle, muzzleloader and archery) to what technology was allowed to be used by each specific weapon (rifle, muzzleloader and archery) during the 2015 season.

 

[diablo]

Took me less than 30 seconds to find numerous chats like these.
3200ftps with a 300gr projectile hits harder than a 300 Magnum.

If we cannot acknowledge the obvious trend, we are just in denial.
View attachment 115914
View attachment 115915

There are lots of blow hards on the internet claiming all kinds of ridiculous things. Shooting a 300 gr bullet accurately at 3200 fps in a hunting muzzleloader is damn hard to achieve even with smokeless powders. No impossible, but not easy or pleasant. Very few guys out there are doing that as @Ballistic says.

For the record - I’m in favor of some limits on muzzy tech like low powered scopes only.

 

[Utah400Elk]

Those muzzleloaders are using smokeless powders and are not legal in most western states for muzzleloader hunts. They require an FFL to purchase and by federal definition are not “muzzleloaders”. They are single shot rifles. It has been a while since I checked Utah law but I think it requires smokeless powder? Those loads and ballistics are only possible with smokeless powders.

 

[elkfromabove]

Took me less than 30 seconds to find numerous chats like these.
3200ftps with a 300gr projectile hits harder than a 300 Magnum.

If we cannot acknowledge the obvious trend, we are just in denial.
View attachment 115914
View attachment 115915

 

[slamdunk]

So the 3200fps was most likely smokeless, but even these below are extremely impressive numbers for a weapon that used to be impressive at 200 yards at best.
Scouring through various muzzleloader chat sites is eye opening to the trends.
Evolution.....

 

[Packout]

If the Tech Committee wants to reign in the distance of MLs they should also look at the projectile being the size of the barrel (ie no sabots). I have no problem with regs that put hunters within the animal's ability to sense danger.
If we look at the evolution on ML tech in the past 6-8 years, it is scary to think what the next 6-8 could bring.
And if we are all honest, there is a reason people pushback on taking away some of the tech- tech simply makes it easier for us to kill the animal.

 

[elkassassin]

Now It's The Remingtons Fault!

My Remington Isn't Quite That Good!

And Neither Am I!

 

[elkassassin]

And You Can Say The Same Thing For All 3 Weapon Types!

If the Tech Committee wants to reign in the distance of MLs they should also look at the projectile being the size of the barrel (ie no sabots). I have no problem with regs that put hunters within the animal's ability to sense danger.
If we look at the evolution on ML tech in the past 6-8 years, it is scary to think what the next 6-8 could bring.
And if we are all honest, there is a reason people pushback on taking away some of the tech- tech simply makes it easier for us to kill the animal.

 

[elkhuntn247]

If the Tech Committee wants to reign in the distance of MLs they should also look at the projectile being the size of the barrel (ie no sabots). I have no problem with regs that put hunters within the animal's ability to sense danger.
If we look at the evolution on ML tech in the past 6-8 years, it is scary to think what the next 6-8 could bring.
And if we are all honest, there is a reason people pushback on taking away some of the tech- tech simply makes it easier for us to kill the animal.

Reign in muzzleloaders by taking away sabots? I promise anybody that actually has a hot rod muzzleloader isn’t shooting a sabot.

 

[elkassassin]

3X9 scopes is and has always been the most common scopes until some lost their mind and had to start shooting extreme ranges. A 3X9 can do anything that is ethical. Heck, most rifles are topped with a 3X9 still. Always going to be those that go for the extreme and then other's figure they will follow and try it also.

I agree that rifle scopes need addressing as much as muzzleloader scopes. I muzzleloader hunt in this state for both elk and deer. Scopes (1X and red dots) have been on muzzleloaders for way longer then the stated 7 years.

I hated it when the board stated we don't care what magnification they put on a muzzleloader and approved it to be unlimited. Wish they would have stated a common 4x that is easy to find and purchase as the max at the time and we would not be where we are now. Always killed deer and elk with my 1X and red dots for years, but went to the 3x9 when that was the game and approved by the board. I will take them off in a heart beat if that is decided and will be just fine. However, It does come with quit a cost after purchasing and putting them on 5 muzzleloader that me and my son's use. Not to mention going out and buying what ever scope is determined appropriate when all is decided. I'll do what ever is determined and continue to hunt with the muzzleloader hunt because I choose to hunt that season, not because the magnification of a scope. Always was successful with the red dots and will continue to be successful with the red dot/1X, peep sight or open sights. Just hope they decide and don't change it again in 7 years at a cost to the hunter.

Hey Rman!

I Might Need The Surgery So I Can See The Front Sight On My HAWKENS!

I Thought I Was Perty Cool The Day I Filed That Front Sight Down To A Hair about 45 Years Ago!

Heck it will cost me plenty to have eye surgery if it go's to open sights, but I can tell my self that I probably needed the surgery for other situations

 

[GunCarver]

Reign in muzzleloaders by taking away sabots? I promise anybody that actually has a hot rod muzzleloader isn’t shooting a sabot.

Amen to that! The sabot is the weak link. If they want to reign in muzzleloaders, they should require the use of sabots ?.

 

[elkassassin]

Some Of Ya Ain't Old Enough To Know!

But When I Was Younger Sabots Were Flat-Ass Illegal To Hunt With!

And On Occasion Wardens Would Make You Fire Your Gun In To Wood So They Could Check It Out!

 

[Packout]

Reign in muzzleloaders by taking away sabots? I promise anybody that actually has a hot rod muzzleloader isn’t shooting a sabot.

Amen to that! The sabot is the weak link. If they want to reign in muzzleloaders, they should require the use of sabots ?.

That is actually a good point. Especially in the last 4-5 years.
I rescind my request. haha I shoot too many roundballs and forget about the PB ELRs and Fury bore-sized bullets sitting on the shelf for the LR ML my kids like to shoot.
Lets just make it round-balls then.

 

[elkassassin]

I Still Remember The First Year I Hunted With The Original/1st Remington Inline/ML 700!

I Normally Don't F-Around During Season!

But On The Way Back To Camp To Get A Samich!

I Came upon 2 Guys That Had A Target Set Up On a Quake Tree!

They Were Shooting With Some Kinda Tinker Toy Load & Guns!

I Looked At The Target & The Tree!

Didn't See Much Damage Going On!

I Asked Them If It Would Be OK If I Tried A Shot With My Gun!

They Both Said Sure,Go Ahead!

I Launched One 600 Grain Bullet!

Tore The Whole Ass End Out Of The Tree & Their Jaws Dropped!

The One Kid Says,That Ain't MuzzleLoader,WTH Is It?

I Said:Oh It's a Muzzleloader Alright!

They Were I Shock & Awe & Had Never Even Seen an In-Line Before!

They Both Looked At My Gun & Decided They Needed Up-Grades!

 

[elkassassin]

Now If You Want A Bunch Of WOUNDED Stuff Running Around And Ya Want Hunters Moving On Shooting At More Animals Because They WOUNDED & Could Not Find Then Ya, Let's Go to Round Balls!

Especially On Elk!

That is actually a good point. Especially in the last 4-5 years.
I rescind my request. haha I shoot too many roundballs and forget about the PB ELRs and Fury bore-sized bullets sitting on the shelf for the LR ML my kids like to shoot.
Lets just make it round-balls then.

 

[elkassassin]

Back In The Pre-Inline Days Of Hunting!

Alot Of ROUND Balls Were Found By Other Hunters That Were Just Through The Hide From a HAWKENS!

Like A F'N Bee Sting For Alot Of Elk & Yes A Bunch of Them Limped Off & Died As Well!

So You've Got That Argument As Well!

 

[shootem]

Let’s do away with all modern technology and go back to hunting with spears, stones and clubs.

 

[slamdunk]

Some Of Ya Ain't Old Enough To Know!

But When I Was Younger Sabots Were Flat-Ass Illegal To Hunt With!

And On Occasion Wardens Would Make You Fire Your Gun In To Wood So They Could Check It Out!

Yep, and because we eventually allowed them, we surpassed them.

Exactly the point of this entire controversy ?

 

[slamdunk]

I Still Remember The First Year I Hunted With The Original/1st Remington Inline/ML 700!

I Normally Don't F-Around During Season!

But On The Way Back To Camp To Get A Samich!

I Came upon 2 Guys That Had A Target Set Up On a Quake Tree!

They Were Shooting With Some Kinda Tinker Toy Load & Guns!

I Looked At The Target & The Tree!

Didn't See Much Damage Going On!

I Asked Them If It Would Be OK If I Tried A Shot With My Gun!

They Both Said Sure,Go Ahead!

I Launched One 600 Grain Bullet!

Tore The Whole Ass End Out Of The Tree & Their Jaws Dropped!

The One Kid Says,That Ain't MuzzleLoader,WTH Is It?

I Said:Oh It's a Muzzleloader Alright!

They Were I Shock & Awe & Had Never Even Seen an In-Line Before!

They Both Looked At My Gun & Decided They Needed Up-Grades!

And so it began........

 

[elkassassin]

And so it began........

And then it EVOLUTED!

Just Like The Other 2 Types Of Weapons!

 

[GunCarver]

And so it began........

So this is Elkassassin's fault!!!!! ?

 

[elkassassin]

Pay Attention!

Everything Is My Fault!

So this is Elkassassin's fault!!!!! ?

 

[Gator]

With all the idea's being thrown around the best one is the one that don't leave wounded and lost animals. We can only do what's right in eye of the guy doing the shooting.
If you think you can make the shot great, if you have doubts get closer or pass .

 

[elkassassin]

Hey GATOR!

Most DRATS Don't Pass On SQUAT!

And I QUOTE:

He's Under 1100!

It's SmokePole Season!

Should Be Doable!

2 Steps & He's In To The Trees!

Must Not Of Hit Him!

He Didn't Fall 5 Seconds Later When The Bullet Got There!

F'It!

Let's Go Find Another One To Shoot At!

You Know This Shhitt Happens Way More Than It Should!

With all the idea's being thrown around the best one is the one that don't leave wounded and lost animals. We can only do what's right in eye of the guy doing the shooting.
If you think you can make the shot great, if you have doubts get closer or pass .

 

[Gator]

Yes it does.

 

[elkassassin]

If I Was To Use The Smokepole I'm Using At The Present Time!

I'd Bet You Couldn't Hold Over Enough To Shoot 1100!

The Object/Animal Would Be Out Of My Scopes View!

Now if I Had That NIGHTFORCE That hawky Thinks I Have on My Gun That Might Be A Different Story!

But 1100 With a SmokePole?

JUDAS!

 

[middlefork]

One of history's longest sniper kills happened during the Civil War

Fort Sumter, South Carolina was famous for having suffered the first shots of the Civil War in April 1861. Over three years later, the two sides were still fighting over it. Confederate troops held the badly damaged fort while Union soldiers fired …

www.wearethemighty.com

History is a *****

 

[slamdunk]

So this is Elkassassin's fault!!!!! ?

He's the trend setter!

 

[slamdunk]

Now It's The Remingtons Fault!

My Remington Isn't Quite That Good!

And Neither Am I!

Your ML700 is a far cry from the RUM (Remington Ultimate Muzzleloader).
It evolved from your old standard ML700 because of the UML ignition system and ability to fire a much heavier payload.
Evolution....

 

[slamdunk]

500 yds with a factory stock CVA and with "velocities comparable to a 300 Win Mag".

 

[Gator]

I know 2 guys who used the Paramount ML and killed 2 nice bucks that was WELL it was past my range. But it was one shot for each Buck.

 

[GunCarver]

500 yds with a factory stock CVA and with "velocities comparable to a 300 Win Mag".

View attachment 115943
View attachment 115944

Slam,

Is the committee recommending a ban on 40's and 45's, or is the discussion narrowed to only optics at this point?

 

[Gator]

You can slow them down with the bumper of your truck even before they get into the ditches. The Truck has to be fast not one of those heavy diesel trucks. LOL

 

[elkhuntn247]

Slam,

Is the committee recommending a ban on 40's and 45's, or is the discussion narrowed to only optics at this point?

what would this achieve?

 

[slamdunk]

Slam,

Is the committee recommending a ban on 40's and 45's, or is the discussion narrowed to only optics at this point?

We haven't discussed calibers at this point, I'm sure the current rules will remain in place.

 

[257Tony]

I drew a late season muzzy deer tag last year, one of the general unit tags that uses your LE points. I borrowed a "Best of the West" muzzy easily capable of 600 yards deer accuracy. Killed a real nice Buck at 200 yards, a shot I could have made with my open sighted TC Omega.

I also own a couple of rifles capable of 1000 yard Deer accuracy, but my longest shot on a Buck is half that, and the majority of the Bucks I've killed with those rifles have been 300 yards or less.

My point is, not everyone that has the tech, is using it to do anything out of the ordinary. Yes, there are idiots lobbing lead at distances they have no business attempting, but that's ALWAYS been the case.

Put me in the camp of, if we take capability away from the muzzy guys, and the archery guys, the rifle guys need the same treatment.

 

[elkassassin]

But Tony?

There's Something You Didn't Mention!

I drew a late season muzzy deer tag last year, one of the general unit tags that uses your LE points. I borrowed a "Best of the West" muzzy easily capable of 600 yards deer accuracy. Killed a real nice Buck at 200 yards, a shot I could have made with my open sighted TC Omega.

I also own a couple of rifles capable of 1000 yard Deer accuracy, but my longest shot on a Buck is half that, and the majority of the Bucks I've killed with those rifles have been 300 yards or less.

My point is, not everyone that has the tech, is using it to do anything out of the ordinary. Yes, there are idiots lobbing lead at distances they have no business attempting, but that's ALWAYS been the case.

Put me in the camp of, if we take capability away from the muzzy guys, and the archery guys, the rifle guys need the same treatment.

 

[elkassassin]

We Got 2 Kinds Of Hunters Here!

The Ones Of Us That Admit We're ALL Guilty Of Technology in All Weaponry!

And The Ones That Blame It On The Other Types Of Weapons & Technology Because They Mainly Use Only One Type Of Weapon!

 

[elkassassin]

More Like 45'-46'!

 

[elkassassin]

This Might Be Something-else To Look At!

 

[JakeH]

And if we are all honest, there is a reason people pushback on taking away some of the tech- tech simply makes it easier for us to kill the animal.

Well that is the goal right? If I didn't want to kill an animal I would pack my camera.

I get what you are saying to an extent, but I still find it disingenuous to limit a muzzleloader but barely do anything to a rifle. And the restrictions put on rifles also apply to muzzleloaders so any extra restrictions to them is above and beyond what they did with rifles.

 

[elkassassin]

OK!

Let's HASH & THRASH Again Tomorrow Night!

 

[Vanilla]

Not even sure why I’m doing this, but what the heck!

Technology discussions need to focus on what they are really about. It’s not about creating more opportunity. If you think the WB is going to take scopes off muzzleloaders and then all the sudden increase tags, I think you’re sorely mistaken. They are not about saving deer and elk herds. It won’t make a difference.

Here is what it comes down to, and nothing more. What is the policy this state wants for the muzzleloader hunts? If we want them to be different from the any weapon hunt, it probably merits having some restrictions on them. If that is not a policy we as a state care about, there really isn’t a reason to have the restrictions.

So that is the decision that has to be made. Are we okay with the muzzleloader hunt being an extension of the any weapon hunt? If we are okay with that, leave the technology alone. If we want it to be different from the any weapon hunts, then implement some reasonable restrictions to limit what they can do.

I’ll be honest, I don’t know where I fall on the spectrum. I used to exclusively hunt deer with a muzzleloader for over a decade. I’ve gone back to any weapon as I didn’t want to invest in all the gadgets for my muzzy, and I just picked back up a rifle instead. I haven’t personally had a muzzleloader tag for a long time, but have the ability to hunt with one this year if I choose. Not sure how it will go, and I’ll probably stay squarely on the fence of what the policy should be here in Utah. I can see both sides of the argument and neither has won out over the other in my mind yet.

But let’s not get distracted by red herrings about increased opportunity or helping herds. This is entirely about what we as a state decide the underlying policy on these weapons should be. And I suspect achieving a consensus will be impossible. I attended one technology committee meeting as a guest. You’d have thought most people in that room saw a ghost with the guy who wasn’t supposed to be there! (Odd, for a “public” meeting.)

Good luck to all involved! And many of us ought to prepare ourselves to be really disappointed. I believe that will be the case regardless of what decisions are made.

 

[Downrange]

how about we keep the muzzleloaders the same as they are now and just do away with the early 5 day rifle hunts in all areas. We would essentially have 2 rifle hunts instead of 3.?‍?‍?‍

 

[elkfromabove]

Not even sure why I’m doing this, but what the heck!

Technology discussions need to focus on what they are really about. It’s not about creating more opportunity. If you think the WB is going to take scopes off muzzleloaders and then all the sudden increase tags, I think you’re sorely mistaken. They are not about saving deer and elk herds. It won’t make a difference.

Here is what it comes down to, and nothing more. What is the policy this state wants for the muzzleloader hunts? If we want them to be different from the any weapon hunt, it probably merits having some restrictions on them. If that is not a policy we as a state care about, there really isn’t a reason to have the restrictions.

So that is the decision that has to be made. Are we okay with the muzzleloader hunt being an extension of the any weapon hunt? If we are okay with that, leave the technology alone. If we want it to be different from the any weapon hunts, then implement some reasonable restrictions to limit what they can do.

I’ll be honest, I don’t know where I fall on the spectrum. I used to exclusively hunt deer with a muzzleloader for over a decade. I’ve gone back to any weapon as I didn’t want to invest in all the gadgets for my muzzy, and I just picked back up a rifle instead. I haven’t personally had a muzzleloader tag for a long time, but have the ability to hunt with one this year if I choose. Not sure how it will go, and I’ll probably stay squarely on the fence of what the policy should be here in Utah. I can see both sides of the argument and neither has won out over the other in my mind yet.

But let’s not get distracted by red herrings about increased opportunity or helping herds. This is entirely about what we as a state decide the underlying policy on these weapons should be. And I suspect achieving a consensus will be impossible. I attended one technology committee meeting as a guest. You’d have thought most people in that room saw a ghost with the guy who wasn’t supposed to be there! (Odd, for a “public” meeting.)

Good luck to all involved! And many of us ought to prepare ourselves to be really disappointed. I believe that will be the case regardless of what decisions are made.

Since those restrictions don't benefit the opportunities to draw a tag and/or kill the animal, I'd only be really disappointed if they impose their ethical restrictions on ALL of the hunts.

 

[elkassassin]

Come On Niller!

That's Half Of A Novel You Typed There & Didn't HARP On me One Time!

You Feeling OK?

Not even sure why I’m doing this, but what the heck!

Technology discussions need to focus on what they are really about. It’s not about creating more opportunity. If you think the WB is going to take scopes off muzzleloaders and then all the sudden increase tags, I think you’re sorely mistaken. They are not about saving deer and elk herds. It won’t make a difference.

Here is what it comes down to, and nothing more. What is the policy this state wants for the muzzleloader hunts? If we want them to be different from the any weapon hunt, it probably merits having some restrictions on them. If that is not a policy we as a state care about, there really isn’t a reason to have the restrictions.

So that is the decision that has to be made. Are we okay with the muzzleloader hunt being an extension of the any weapon hunt? If we are okay with that, leave the technology alone. If we want it to be different from the any weapon hunts, then implement some reasonable restrictions to limit what they can do.

I’ll be honest, I don’t know where I fall on the spectrum. I used to exclusively hunt deer with a muzzleloader for over a decade. I’ve gone back to any weapon as I didn’t want to invest in all the gadgets for my muzzy, and I just picked back up a rifle instead. I haven’t personally had a muzzleloader tag for a long time, but have the ability to hunt with one this year if I choose. Not sure how it will go, and I’ll probably stay squarely on the fence of what the policy should be here in Utah. I can see both sides of the argument and neither has won out over the other in my mind yet.

But let’s not get distracted by red herrings about increased opportunity or helping herds. This is entirely about what we as a state decide the underlying policy on these weapons should be. And I suspect achieving a consensus will be impossible. I attended one technology committee meeting as a guest. You’d have thought most people in that room saw a ghost with the guy who wasn’t supposed to be there! (Odd, for a “public” meeting.)

Good luck to all involved! And many of us ought to prepare ourselves to be really disappointed. I believe that will be the case regardless of what decisions are made.

 

[Ballistic]

Precision Rifle Series - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I know I know -
This will be a shocker.
Rifles have not advanced in tech and accuracy for long range shooting for 50 years or have they ?

How many were posting videos of long range hunting with dial up turrets even 20 years ago ?
Has the quality of even a factory rifle increased several fold when combined with all the scopes -pre electronics ?
When did the explosion of long range shooting and hunting occur ?
Have the Hornady PRC cartridges (factory loaded ammo) and tighter chamber dimensions improved accuracy a lot for the average shooter or hunter and readily available over the counter.

Reloading and custom barrels and chambers were required before the latest surge of todays centerfire rifle.

I know - the muzzleloader is the only weapon that has moved forward - heaven forbid that rifles have.

The statement that rifles have always been long range weapons is not an accurate one. Before range finders and turrets -hunters guessed and held higher and higher when shooting at big game. Was it responsible? How many animals were shot at multiple times - not hit on the 1st shot ?

Centerfire rifle distances have increased equal if not more than a muzzleloader. The older days of muzzleloader hunting - hunters were using Kentucky windage and taking animals down at 300 yards -Yes it happened by the best or the luckiest. Most hunters had to stay under 150 yards.

So why is removing the scope such an issue on a modern muzzleloader but not on the centerfire rifle ?

I’m ok with a 4X recommendation (not happy about it).
Do the same with rifles and see what your response will be.

 

[Vanilla]

This is not about deciding what is a problem for one and what is not a problem for the other. This is another distraction in what is really being discussed in the technology discussions.

The any weapon hunt is a hunt that is going to have all the equipment advantages. That is just the reality of the situation. Of course, there are technological advances that should not be allowed on the any weapon hunt either.

But that said, don't get confused by people using the word "fair" or even implying fairness in all this. "All Give Some" mentalities simply are missing the boat in all this. (How's that, Whoopi?) That is not what any of this about, even if we want it to be about that.

Again, the powers that be simply have to decide if they want the muzzleloader hunt to be an extension of the any weapon hunt, or something very different. Once that decision is made, the technology decisions become easier. If they decide they are okay with it being similar, you don't need to make any more restrictions. Easy as pie. If you decide you want it different, regulating scopes is also an easy answer to that. (Remember, it was only a handful of years ago that magnification scopes were even allowed on muzzleloaders, and it was very controversial at the time it passed.)

 

[elkfromabove]

Not even sure why I’m doing this, but what the heck!

Technology discussions need to focus on what they are really about. It’s not about creating more opportunity. If you think the WB is going to take scopes off muzzleloaders and then all the sudden increase tags, I think you’re sorely mistaken. They are not about saving deer and elk herds. It won’t make a difference.

Here is what it comes down to, and nothing more. What is the policy this state wants for the muzzleloader hunts? If we want them to be different from the any weapon hunt, it probably merits having some restrictions on them. If that is not a policy we as a state care about, there really isn’t a reason to have the restrictions.

So that is the decision that has to be made. Are we okay with the muzzleloader hunt being an extension of the any weapon hunt? If we are okay with that, leave the technology alone. If we want it to be different from the any weapon hunts, then implement some reasonable restrictions to limit what they can do.

I’ll be honest, I don’t know where I fall on the spectrum. I used to exclusively hunt deer with a muzzleloader for over a decade. I’ve gone back to any weapon as I didn’t want to invest in all the gadgets for my muzzy, and I just picked back up a rifle instead. I haven’t personally had a muzzleloader tag for a long time, but have the ability to hunt with one this year if I choose. Not sure how it will go, and I’ll probably stay squarely on the fence of what the policy should be here in Utah. I can see both sides of the argument and neither has won out over the other in my mind yet.

But let’s not get distracted by red herrings about increased opportunity or helping herds. This is entirely about what we as a state decide the underlying policy on these weapons should be. And I suspect achieving a consensus will be impossible. I attended one technology committee meeting as a guest. You’d have thought most people in that room saw a ghost with the guy who wasn’t supposed to be there! (Odd, for a “public” meeting.)

Good luck to all involved! And many of us ought to prepare ourselves to be really disappointed. I believe that will be the case regardless of what decisions are made.

Frankly, I don't know why the DWR/Wildlife Board doesn't increase the muzzy (and other weapon) tags on many General Deer Units already! In spite of the increased technology, many unit 3-year success rates are ALREADY lower than they were in 2015 and would already qualify for additional tags. Additionally, 10%-15% of any year's current tags aren't even being used but are still counted in the unit tag quotas.

Of course, doing that would require we stick to the science, math and the statewide and unit deer management plans and ignore the emotion and politics. In other words, there's no chance in he!! it'll happen!

 

[Betterluckythangood]

Focus people!!!

Let’s all just be reasonable and just go back to 1x, open sights and peep sights. You still have a laser rangefinder.

It wouldn’t hurt to throw in an exception for seniors over a certain age. I am nowhere close to that age btw.

The long range lunatic fringe should be dealt with another day

 

[roadrunner]

This Might Be Something-else To Look At!

Already have and already have one on, sighted in, and ready to go for my UT muzzy antelope hunt this year. I took my scope off when my state "outlawed" them way before I even applied in UT. I could put a scope back on, but why? I don't have the time, patience, or desire to try and work up a load and slug that will allow an accurate shot at a speedgoat at 400 yds.

The setup I'm running right now has me dead on at 150, and 4" of drop at 175. The BDC hashmark is dead on at 225. If I can't shoot an antelope within 200 yds, it's because the any weapon guys 2 days before my hunt has them so jacked up they'd likely cut loose and run when they see you 500 yds out.

The reticle used in the infomercial (and the one I have on right now) does crowd the sight picture at 200 yds. It would do WWP well to thin down the crosshairs more instead of transitioning from thick to thin...

 

[Gator]

How about ML that has the tech stuff on them join rifle season.
ML that are ONLY ML have a season with out any tech stuff on them.
Would that work. ?????

 

[slamdunk]

August 1st Agenda

 

[JakeH]

How about ML that has the tech stuff on them join rifle season.
ML that are ONLY ML have a season with out any tech stuff on them.
Would that work. ?????

No tech stuff allowed on either already so how is that doing anything?

 

[slamdunk]

This is not about deciding what is a problem for one and what is not a problem for the other. This is another distraction in what is really being discussed in the technology discussions.

The any weapon hunt is a hunt that is going to have all the equipment advantages. That is just the reality of the situation. Of course, there are technological advances that should not be allowed on the any weapon hunt either.

But that said, don't get confused by people using the word "fair" or even implying fairness in all this. "All Give Some" mentalities simply are missing the boat in all this. (How's that, Whoopi?) That is not what any of this about, even if we want it to be about that.

Again, the powers that be simply have to decide if they want the muzzleloader hunt to be an extension of the any weapon hunt, or something very different. Once that decision is made, the technology decisions become easier. If they decide they are okay with it being similar, you don't need to make any more restrictions. Easy as pie. If you decide you want it different, regulating scopes is also an easy answer to that. (Remember, it was only a handful of years ago that magnification scopes were even allowed on muzzleloaders, and it was very controversial at the time it passed.)

Well said, thank you.

They don't want to listen to me because I am the boogeyman, hopefully they'll let your words sink in a little better.

 

[Gator]

No tech stuff allowed on either already so how is that doing anything?

Well you can have 3x12 scope on a rifle during rifle season so if you have a 3x12 on a ML it would still be the same deal YOU want tech then hunt with a ML during rifle season.
ML season no tech.

 

[Vanilla]

Slam- I'm not even defending the committee or anything it has done or will do. (As you know)

I'm simply trying to point out that so much of the debate online I see on this topic is irrelevant to what is actually being determined by the committee, and then in turn, the Wildlife Board for actual rules and regulations.

If you've convinced yourself this is about fairness, opportunity, or building herds, you are in the wrong boat. Right or wrong, this is simply a policy discussion that has nothing to do with any of the other stuff. And that type of stuff is inherently messy as we all bring our own visions to the table when what is good vs bad becomes very subjective.

 

[slamdunk]

Slam- I'm not even defending the committee or anything it has done or will do. (As you know)

I'm simply trying to point out that so much of the debate online I see on this topic is irrelevant to what is actually being determined by the committee, and then in turn, the Wildlife Board for actual rules and regulations.

If you've convinced yourself this is about fairness, opportunity, or building herds, you are in the wrong boat. Right or wrong, this is simply a policy discussion that has nothing to do with any of the other stuff. And that type of stuff is inherently messy as we all bring our own visions to the table when what is good vs bad becomes very subjective.

Nope not at all, and exactly what I have been trying to explain since last winter when this started.
I appreciate your insight as well as input and clarifications.

 

[Bigwiffy]

August 1st Agenda
View attachment 116008

What's for dinner?

 

[JakeH]

Well you can have 3x12 scope on a rifle during rifle season so if you have a 3x12 on a ML it would still be the same deal YOU want tech then hunt with a ML during rifle season.
ML season no tech.

Ohh, so a scope is now considered "tech"

How about we all go back to rocks and pointy sticks then.

 

[MrShane]

Remember, these muzzleloader restrictions are for saving big bucks……
for about three weeks so long rangers can gut shoot them in a crosswind at 1200 yards.
Then MAYBE hike across the canyon to look for blood or hair.

 

[slamdunk]

What's for dinner?

Roadkill of course!

 

[Vanilla]

What's for dinner?

Don't let Slam fool you. They are eating filet and lobster tail with all the money the DWR is flush with from their money grubbing tag numbers they set!

 

[slamdunk]

Don't let Slam fool you. They are eating filet and lobster tail with all the money the DWR is flush with from their money grubbing tag numbers they set!

Just when I thought you were showing signs of logic.......then this. Lol

 

[Bigwiffy]

Do you just draft a recap of your meeting and send it to the wildlife board to maybe have them read?

It seems like when the board votes on these things nothing you guys discuss is even mentioned, they just talk a little bit about it, then Wade pushes his agenda and they vote.

Do any of the wildlife board members attend your meetings?

 

[slamdunk]

Do you just draft a recap of your meeting and send it to the wildlife board to maybe have them read?

It seems like when the board votes on these things nothing you guys discuss is even mentioned, they just talk a little bit about it, then Wade pushes his agenda and they vote.

Do any of the wildlife board members attend your meetings?

Yes, we have board members present.

I gave up on attending RAC meetings personally, the public comments were too much.

Keep in mind, all a committee's job is to offer suggestions and proposals to the board, they do what they want in the end regardless of our position.

 

[Bigwiffy]

Yes, we have board members present.

I gave up on attending RAC meetings personally, the public comments were too much.

Keep in mind, all a committee's job is to offer suggestions and proposals to the board, they do what they want in the end regardless of our position.

Right that's why I ask if the feedback you all give them even gets to the Board prior to their vote to implement or not. Or if you all would be as productive just to eat, hangout, drink energy drinks off of Dettamani's list, watch the 1100 yard muzzy shot on Youtube then go home. Thanks for the insight and answering our questions. Good luck at the meeting!

 

[slamdunk]

Right that's why I ask if the feedback you all give them even gets to the Board prior to their vote to implement or not. Or if you all would be as productive just to eat, hangout, drink energy drinks off of Dettamani's list, watch the 1100 yard muzzy shot on Youtube then go home. Thanks for the insight and answering our questions. Good luck at the meeting!

It follows all the steps and channels where it eventually winds up in the laps of the WB.

You can always visit with Paul Washburn, he is our leader and I believe resides in Cedar City.

 

[quest]

Well I’m telling the Task Force not to change anything. I like it just the way it is.

 

[slamdunk]

Well I’m telling the Task Force not to change anything. I like it just the way it is.

Serious question-

What was your stance in 2015 when they voted to allow the change for 2016 and why?

And why is your stance to keep as it currently is?

 

[Bigwiffy]

It follows all the steps and channels where it eventually winds up in the laps of the WB.

You can always visit with Paul Washburn, he is our leader and I believe resides in Cedar City.

Is he your law enforcement voice?

 

[slamdunk]

Is he your law enforcement voice?

No, he's running the show.
I just figured since you were close, maybe you could physically speak with him.

Gabe Patterson is law enforcement along with another female law enforcement.

 

[shootem]

Focus people!!!

Let’s all just be reasonable and just go back to 1x, open sights and peep sights. You still have a laser rangefinder.

It wouldn’t hurt to throw in an exception for seniors over a certain age. I am nowhere close to that age btw.

The long range lunatic fringe should be dealt with another day

Speak for yourself man, no one is forcing you to use a scope. You can manage yourself and go back to your 1x scope. This kind of mentality pisses me off.

 

[quest]

I didn’t have a stance back then. I wasn’t even interested in muzzle loader hunting until they offered variable power scopes. It was more of an opportunity for me to get a tag and hunt with family/friends. When you start changing things somebody’s losing.

 

[slamdunk]

I didn’t have a stance back then. I wasn’t even interested in muzzle loader hunting until they offered variable power scopes. It was more of an opportunity for me to get a tag and hunt with family/friends. When you start changing things somebody’s losing.

Fair enough

 

[elkhuntn247]

I didn’t have a stance back then. I wasn’t even interested in muzzle loader hunting until they offered variable power scopes. It was more of an opportunity for me to get a tag and hunt with family/friends. When you start changing things somebody’s losing.

So nobody lost when they changed the law to any scope and all the riff raff like you poured in for the new opportunity?

 

[elkassassin]

Well!

The Long Rangers & The StickFlippers Up-Graded Their GADGETRY As Well!

 

[slamdunk]

So nobody lost when they changed the law to any scope and all the riff raff like you poured in for the new opportunity?

Exactly my point.
He answered my question without answering my question.

 

[slamdunk]

Well!

The Long Rangers & The StickFlippers Up-Graded Their GADGETRY As Well!

But not because a law was changed

 

[slamdunk]

You can Google this stuff all day long

 

[elkhuntn247]

Slam don’t dig too hard… there is one of me dumping an elk at 500yds on there somewhere ?

 

[GunCarver]

Slam don’t dig too hard… there is one of me dumping an elk at 500yds on there somewhere ?

There's one of me dumping a deer at 1100 with my original CVA Accura MR... ?

 

[GunCarver]

There's one of me dumping a deer at 1100 with my original CVA Accura MR... ?

At 3800 FPS

 

[GunCarver]

At 3800 FPS

Using Pyrodex

 

[Hunter21]

You can Google this stuff all day long

Slam, I know decisions aren’t being made on success rates. I also understand your stance and what the committee is trying to accomplish. That being said I see many of your posts with all this high tech equipment and long range shooting making it so easy to kill animals. With all this technology in weapons, scopes, gear and equipment why do you feel it doesn’t appear to lead to much higher success rates?? Success rates seem to be relatively flat across all weapons even though all this technology makes it so easy. Just curious on your thoughts about it?

 

[GunCarver]

Using Pyrodex

Can I be on the committee now?!

 

[elkfromabove]

Frankly, I don't know why the DWR/Wildlife Board doesn't increase the muzzy (and other weapon) tags on many General Deer Units already! In spite of the increased technology, many unit 3-year success rates are ALREADY lower than they were in 2015 and would already qualify for additional tags. Additionally, 10%-15% of any year's current tags aren't even being used but are still counted in the unit tag quotas.

Of course, doing that would require we stick to the science, math and the statewide and unit deer management plans and ignore the emotion and politics. In other words, there's no chance in he!! it'll happen!

To clarify:
13 units had lower muzzy 3-year success rates in 2022 than their 2015 success rate. 16 had higher: ( Unit----2015----2022 3yr)
---------HIGHER-------------------------------LOWER-------------
BoxElder---------21.9---27.5---------Beaver-----------51.2---35.3
CntMtnsManti---30.4---32.0---------Cache------------30.4---27.4
CntMtnsNebo---25.7---31.1---------ClkCr/ECyn/Mor-33.7---23.9
Fillmore----------33.7---43.6---------Kamas-----------24.0---16.5
LaSalMtns--------31.6---40.7---------MtDutton-------47.4---35.0
Monroe----------42.7---45.2----------NSlope----------30.3---21.0
NineMile---------29.2---34.6----------Ogden----------30.4---30.3
Oqurh/Stans-----34.5---37.3----------Plat,Fishlake----52.5---47.7
PangLk-----------39.3---46.5----------Plat,Thou Lks---47.6--26.6
PineVly-----------36.2---37.4----------SSlpe,Bon/Ver--68.9--50.2
Plat,Bould/Kaip---46.7---52.5----------SWDesert------35.1---27.8
SanJuan,Abajo----42.2---48.4----------WasMtnsEast--44.0---36.7
SSlopeYllowstn---40.4---54.2----------WasMtnsWest-25.4---24.9
WDesertTintic----26.7---34.3
WDesertWest-----21.3---25.0
Zion---------------42.3---45.3-----------Statewide-----34.3---32.8

Biology, math, management plans OR politics, emotions, ethics? We'll find out, won't we!

 

[quest]

So nobody lost when they changed the law to any scope and all the riff raff like you poured in for the new opportunity?

Wow you just alienated a whole bunch of people nice ??

 

[roadrunner]

I know this is UT and UT can do what UT wants. But, coming from a state that recently did away with scopes on muzzleloaders, we went through the same uproar for and against it.

At the end of the day, the game commission did the hell what they wanted and made a new rule. The sun rose the next morning and people still put in for muzzy tags just like always. We all just put Western Precision peep and globe sights on. And the sun came up again the next day...

 

[elkhuntn247]

This has been stated multiple times since this topic has surfaced. This has nothing to do with success rates. This has to do with drawing a line in the sand to regulate “emerging technology” and curb manufacturers advances.

When LR muzzleloaders surfaced I saw very few of them. They were expensive, most people would never fork over the money for one. Since there have been multiple options surface for very affordable prices. So now when I’m at the range I see almost exclusively high performance muzzleloaders. Hardly any run of the mill old inlines. See the problem there? Should we let it keep growing to a point the success do become an issue?

 

[GunCarver]

I know this is UT and UT can do what UT wants. But, coming from a state that recently did away with scopes on muzzleloaders, we went through the same uproar for and against it.

At the end of the day, the game commission did the hell what they wanted and made a new rule. The sun rose the next morning and people still put in for muzzy tags just like always. We all just put Western Precision peep and globe sights on. And the sun came up again the next day...

Well, some of you did. Others just got their names added to a backorder list because that's what happens when everybody in the entire state suddenly needs the same thing at the same time.

 

[elkhuntn247]

Wow you just alienated a whole bunch of people nice ??

I forgot it’s 2023 and people can’t handle facts anymore.

 

[quest]

I know this is UT and UT can do what UT wants. But, coming from a state that recently did away with scopes on muzzleloaders, we went through the same uproar for and against it.

At the end of the day, the game commission did the hell what they wanted and made a new rule. The sun rose the next morning and people still put in for muzzy tags just like always. We all just put Western Precision peep and globe sights on. And the sun came up again the next day...

Your right on the money

 

[JakeH]

This has been stated multiple times since this topic has surfaced. This has nothing to do with success rates. This has to do with drawing a line in the sand to regulate “emerging technology” and curb manufacturers advances.

When LR muzzleloaders surfaced I saw very few of them. They were expensive, most people would never fork over the money for one. Since there have been multiple options surface for very affordable prices. So now when I’m at the range I see almost exclusively high performance muzzleloaders. Hardly any run of the mill old inlines. See the problem there? Should we let it keep growing to a point the success do become an issue?

Man you are trying really hard to drum up business for your new muzzleloader open site system. How bout you disclose your true reason for wanting scopes removed. Do you really care? Or are you just seeing a bunch of new potential customers? ?

 

[elkhuntn247]

Man you are trying really hard to drum up business for your new muzzleloader open site system. How bout you disclose your true reason for wanting scopes removed. Do you really care? Or are you just seeing a bunch of new potential customers? ?

I wanna see the muzzleloader hunt go back to what it was, when I started. I designed the sight for myself, because there isn’t jack sh!t on the market for open sights. Figured I might as well sell a few along the way. I probably can’t even satisfy the demand if UT goes, NM has been hard enough.

 

[quest]

$119.00 for long range sites not bad if this goes down the tube.

 

[elkfromabove]

This has been stated multiple times since this topic has surfaced. This has nothing to do with success rates. This has to do with drawing a line in the sand to regulate “emerging technology” and curb manufacturers advances.

When LR muzzleloaders surfaced I saw very few of them. They were expensive, most people would never fork over the money for one. Since there have been multiple options surface for very affordable prices. So now when I’m at the range I see almost exclusively high performance muzzleloaders. Hardly any run of the mill old inlines. See the problem there? Should we let it keep growing to a point the success do become an issue?

In other words, this technology committee and this debate could go on forever!