So, my experience and what I have seen with the little muzzy hunting I have done, some hold out for a better buck since they can shoot a bit further and more accurate. So, my thought is there are more mature bucks killed and less yearlings or 2 or 3 year olds. I think that is why the % have stayed close to the same. But that is just a small sample size of my group of hunting friends.
This!☝
What's your point?
Then the same alternative to a physical solution is like an archer who can no longer draw a bow.....switch hunts to match your physical abilities.
The major gripe I’ve heard about general hunts over the last 10 years is guy shooting yearlings, now we’re supposed to be upset that guys are killing more mature animals, at least according to their anecdotal evidence…
The point is that many complain that a guy shoots a small buck and now the same guys complain that we shoot some (damn few) mature bucks. Make up your mind unless you're just against other people harvesting.
Fair question:
Great post!
Or how about just not allowing rangefinders during muzzloader hunts?
Okay valid I agree. To a point.
Exactly hiw I fell and stated much better than I could have done.
I know I have, personally become much more effective… I’ve also become much more selective. I kill fewer animals now than 20 years ago. Part of that is probably a little age as well.
I wonder how many cows would be killed in antlerless hunts if they were only 5 days long...
If I understand it right now, you’re working with 14 days of rifle hunts. Early and late October. And how do we know if
Since opinions are the order of the day, here's mine:
He said… She said……
Yes to this^^^ AND, find out REALLY how many bucks and bulls are being killed at 100 yards with a bow, 300+ yards with a front stuffer and how many at 800 yards+ with a rifle.
Agree 100%
So now we are this deep from Tech#1 post threw Tech#3 and you brought this up.
I think they do they just don't have the man power to get Exact data.
Your probably right.
New Mexico has mandatory online harvest reporting. Whether you harvest or not. If you don't report, you get fined and also can't apply again until it's done. It's not brain surgery to get this done. Utah would just have to commit to it.
Zeke, I have complained my fair share about people shooting yearlings. I also complain about the scopes on muzzleloaders. I would like to see some people be more picky and then need to get closer on a muzzy hunt. I think there are a handful of people (I doubt many of them would be on this site) that may look for a larger deer but then when unable to kill one they shoot a small buck so they can say they killed a deer. If a guy feels he wants the meat and eats it then fine. If a guy doesn’t like it and gives it away then I would rather they just not fill that tag on a younger deer. I know, it’s a lot to ask!
See we could do something like that.
I believe it was mentioned that enforcement of reporting was one of the bigger hang-ups the DWR had to mandatory reporting.
I believe it is mandatory in person check in for CWD. I couple years ago that is what unit 61 was and we did get them checked. Seems like they move the mandatory check in units around each year.
Yes, it’s an undeniable fact that humans have consistently become more efficient hunters since the beginning of time. Like I’ve said, I’m all for limiting technology if the data at least points to it improving opportunity and herd health. I’m not for throwing a bunch of sh!t at the wall, and seeing if it sticks.
It’s a very low percentage of people that use electronics on bows, and the majority of those that do, are shooting the Garmin Xero sight or similar. It’s not going to be that big of a difference for them to switch back to a slider sight. I’m not against eliminating electronics on bows per se, but I highly doubt it will make a damn bit of difference.
I am in FAVOR of leaving scopes on muzzleloaders because of 1 reason. I am more accurate with the scope on vs. no scope. We owe it to the game we hunt to make clean ethical kills and a scope makes that objective possible.
Yes sir your absolutely right.
Emotions are not one sided either, the emotional posts in favor of keeping variable scopes in place suggests hard facts that they do in fact make an effect on success.
I do agree with a lot of your points.
Again, no one change whether it be technology related, hunt dates, habitat projects, tag allocation, etc, etc will "solve the overall problem", but collectively they can significantly help get us in a better place.
Says who? If scopes were never intended to sit on a muzzleloader why are the majority of them drilled and tapped for scope rings? That comment makes no sense? Please clarify!!
My old Hawkin isn't drilled for scopes.
When did the in-line come onto the market? I realize the hawkin was never meant for a scope, but I bought my first inline muzzleloader in 1996 that was drilled for a scope.
Is the committee considering the idea of banning inline muzzys in addition to scopes?
"They do in fact have an effect on clean kills [at longer ranges]"?
I can assure you it was discussed quite extensively, especially for the HAMS hunts but it was decided to leave them alone and simplify the distinction between "primitive" and "modern" by the use of a scope.
Thats a valid comment, but centerfire rifles were invented and designed to shoot extremely farther than a muzzleloader.
The first modern inline muzzleloader was invented in 1985 by Tony Knight.
www.therange702.com
Lol, right?Hey PUNK!
When I Was Younger!
A 400 Yard Shot With a Rifle Was BRAGGIN Rights!
stinky Would Call That a PISSCUTTER Shot!
Good input thank you.
That is exactly what someone on the committee said, almost identically.
Even if Utah goes back to 1x scopes on Muzzleloaders, any power scope on a muzzleloader will still be legal during any weapon hunts, such as OIL hunts.
They can where there Camo just have to where it under a orange vest.
and wear camo
Why… because there was no reason to change it in the first place. It was just fine, the aging eyes got 1x scope or if open sights worked better for you then you had that option. I have said this before but go back and watch the WB meeting when variable scope was passed and listen to the naïve comments from the WB chair. The sight/optic you put on a gun/bow is the limiting factor or the advantage of the weapon you shoot regarding distance period. The first year after the change to variable scopes on muzzleloaders I witnessed more lob shots than I had ever seen, resulting in no dead deer but the deer cleared out of the open basin country fast and hit the timber just like the early high country rifle hunts. Hunt experience was diminished for sure. There are several members stating there are no fact to support taking away variable scope the same as there was no need to change it years ago. No different, they did not listen to all the hunters that did not want the change back then and did what they wanted. This time around will likely be no different. Either way, life goes on for me but my preference would be to go back to what it was before the change was made to allow variable scopes on muzzleloaders. There was a post above that had other points that I agree with as well regarding going back to something that was not broken and letting the rifle guys take the long shot. I like not having to wear hunter orange on the muzzleloader hunt and with these long range muzzleloader those days are like numbered. I could go on and on about this subject but in short, limiting technology is needed for a lot of reasons and I support the DWR in look at this issue and thank those on the committee for their time a efforts. I liked putting out cameras and mineral but supported the changes they recently made and I am glad they are looking at other items as well. Everyone has their right to their opinion so this is mine. Good discussion post. Have a great night and good luck this season.
Just because someone else is doing something doesn't always mean we should also ?
Too many are overthinking this and have assumed the DWR is looking for a "fix all" out of one entity.
This committee was put together to for technology only.
How would this COR exemption be enforced?
Same way a guy with a bow sees another guy with a crossbow who has a COR exemption.
Trust me when I say there are DWR personnel, board members and the like that watch and read these posts.
If the data produces the same results why the hell change?
Unfortunately, this is the sad truth and ultimately what happens behind closed doors. We witnessed the same move with trail cams and now we’ll take another one in the rear with muzzleloader optics.
Can you provide us the data showing that muzzleloader hunters aren't harvesting more trophy quality animals at ranges beyond beyond what the muzzleloader hunts were traditionally intended for?
Can you supply us with data that show they are. Also please supply the data that shows if a few do get past the muzzleloader hunt because of your change how many of those will survive the rifle hunt.
Bearpaw Outfitters
Experience world class hunting for mule deer, elk, cougar, bear, turkey, moose, sheep and more.
Wild West Outfitters
Hunt the big bulls, bucks, bear and cats in southern Utah. Your hunt of a lifetime awaits.
J & J Outfitters
Offering quality fair-chase hunts for trophy mule deer, elk, shiras moose and mountain lions.
Shane Scott Outfitting
Quality trophy hunting in Utah. Offering FREE Utah drawing consultation. Great local guides.
Utah Big Game Outfitters
Specializing in bighorn sheep, mule deer, elk, mountain goat, lions, bears & antelope.
Apex Outfitters
We offer experienced guides who hunt Elk, Mule Deer, Antelope, Sheep, Bison, Goats, Cougar, and Bear.
Urge 2 Hunt
We offer high quality hunts on large private ranches around the state, with landowner vouchers.
Allout Guiding & Outfitting
Offering high quality mule deer, elk, bear, cougar and bison hunts in the Book Cliffs and Henry Mtns.
Lickity Split Outfitters
General season and LE fully guided hunts for mule deer, elk, moose, antelope, lion, turkey, bear and coyotes.
