Utah Muzzy Scope Controversy

[slamdunk]

That is exactly why I don't think you should llimt scope power. More power = less wounding I didn't mean take them away, but limit allowed shot distances by only allowing rangefinders to range a certain distance. Example: you can only use a 600-yard max rangefinding device...i was hoping to reduce wounding.

Just because something is ranged, does NOT ensure the bullet will hit the perfect instant killing zone.
This argument is extremely weak and stands on all three weapons.

There are a lot of variables between that weapon and the animal, even at a 20 yards arrow shot.

 

[elkassassin]

Pay Close Attention at about 2:20!

HELL-F'N-RIGHT!

 

[Hawkeye]

Gotta love Blake Shelton!

Hawkeye

 

[elkantlers]

I hate how being successful hunting is becoming a bad thing.

When you don't know how to manage wildlife, you manage hunters.

 

[gundog2]

When you don't know how to manage wildlife, you manage hunters.

I agree there is a need to protect as much habitat as possible but I would also argue that the original game and fish agencies were primarily intended for management of hunters. If you don’t manage the hunters, then its all a waste in my mind. No amount of human effort will change the fact that Utah is the second driest state. Climate and weather put some hard limits on habitat quality and wildlife in this state. Hunting pressure is relatively easy to manage, but sometimes I’m afraid that agencies are prioritizing revenues in the name of conservation.

The new Cinnamon Creek WMA is an impressive acquisition by UDWR and I’m glad they got it, but it seems unfortunate to me that we have to pay top dollar to state of Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA) to keep it in the public domain. How many licenses will have to be sold to cover the $20 million price?

 

[schoolhousegrizz]

Hmmmm, I am all for weapon restrictions on all weapon types if it helps our deer quantity or quality. Interesting that scopes on muzzys didn't make a difference in the success rate. I am always leary of black and white data by the numbers. Is there something we are missing? Anecdotal evidence can be useful and give a more complete picture.

Remember when the DWR told us that we had a record number of deer just a few short years ago? Hunters in the field were calling BS. Turns out the hunters were right despite the data the DWR presented.

Now if scopes on muzzys are not hurting quality or quantity, then leave them. However, sometimes I am more interested in what the data isn't saying vs. what it is saying. For example, how was data gathered, who was it gathered from, etc. These are just examples.

 

[MrShane]

Hmmmm, I am all for weapon restrictions on all weapon types if it helps our deer quantity or quality. Interesting that scopes on muzzys didn't make a difference in the success rate. I am always leary of black and white data by the numbers. Is there something we are missing? Anecdotal evidence can be useful and give a more complete picture.

Remember when the DWR told us that we had a record number of deer just a few short years ago? Hunters in the field were calling BS. Turns out the hunters were right despite the data the DWR presented.

Now if scopes on muzzys are not hurting quality or quantity, then leave them. However, sometimes I am more interested in what the data isn't saying vs. what it is saying. For example, how was data gathered, who was it gathered from, etc. These are just examples.

It is not about overall herd quality.
It is about Long Rangers being jealous that some muzzy guys killed a few top end bucks before they could gut shoot them at 1200 yards three weeks later.
If it was truly about herd quality then all scopes on both types of weapons would have a limiting factor.

 

[Vanilla]

If it was truly about herd quality then all scopes on both types of weapons would have a limiting factor.

Correction: If it was TRULY about herd quality we would quit talking about managing hunters and start talking about managing deer.

Hunters are not the limiting factor on Utah's deer herd. Until hunters become the (or even a) limiting factor on the health of Utah's deer herd, managing hunters will not impact the herd quality.

If you want a case in point, go look at how severely tags have been reduced on the Pine Valley unit the last couple years, and see what their deer herd looks like as a consequence. If reducing tags (and therefore hunter success) was the answer, that unit should be thriving. We have way less hunters in the field with tags than we have ever had in this state. Eventually I am expecting my fellow Utahn's to figure out that removing a tag from your pocket is not the answer. I hope it's not too late when they do figure that one out.

 

[MrShane]

Correction: If it was TRULY about herd quality we would quit talking about managing hunters and start talking about managing deer.

Hunters are not the limiting factor on Utah's deer herd. Until hunters become the (or even a) limiting factor on the health of Utah's deer herd, managing hunters will not impact the herd quality.

If you want a case in point, go look at how severely tags have been reduced on the Pine Valley unit the last couple years, and see what their deer herd looks like as a consequence. If reducing tags (and therefore hunter success) was the answer, that unit should be thriving. We have way less hunters in the field with tags than we have ever had in this state. Eventually I am expecting my fellow Utahn's to figure out that removing a tag from your pocket is not the answer. I hope it's not too late when they do figure that one out.

Unfortunately Mother Nature is taking a pretty good toll on our Deer ( waaaay too many Bears, Lions,Coyotes) teamed up with drought/ lack of forage we are going to have to manage hunters alongside managing our game.

 

[Vanilla]

I get what you’re saying, and it makes logical sense, but in reality, it’s not accurate. We’ve cut tags more than in half state wide, what has that done for us?

Hunters killing bucks is not what is harming the health of our deer herd in Utah. Of course, you can’t give unlimited tags and just do a free for all, but further tag cuts and restrictions are only going to get the same results they always have: Nothing.

Just ask Bessy what the definition of insanity is. I bet he can put it in ALL CAPS for us! Then he’ll ask for more tag cuts and yell at me that I’m not listening.

 

[MrShane]

I get what you’re saying, and it makes logical sense, but in reality, it’s not accurate. We’ve cut tags more than in half state wide, what has that done for us?

Hunters killing bucks is not what is harming the health of our deer herd in Utah. Of course, you can’t give unlimited tags and just do a free for all, but further tag cuts and restrictions are only going to get the same results they always have: Nothing.

Just ask Bessy what the definition of insanity is. I bet he can put it in ALL CAPS for us! Then he’ll ask for more tag cuts and yell at me that I’m not listening.

I also get where you are coming from.
In my perfect world there would be no tag cuts, more opportunity of course, but no new tags issued.
In my pea-sized brain the only way I see that happening is by limiting our fire power.
Not easy to do, I know that.
My point is that IF we do decide to limit our firepower, it cannot hurt one group of hunters to benefit another group.
I also get your point about Pine Valley not rebounding with tag cuts.
I will refute that point and use this example:
The City’s around here that do allow Urban Deer Hunting opportunities have MAJOR firepower restrictions yet the herd grows bigger and bigger to the point the Deer are even more of a nuisance ( to most people. I love’em ).

 

[Vanilla]

I’m not necessarily opposed to technological restrictions. I’m just not going to pretend any of them will help with the quality of our deer herd. They won’t. It’s really that simple.

We’re going to implement those for other reasons, like people wanting a better chance at bigger bucks, or giving the deer a sporting chance, or one group of hunters ethics over a different group’s ethics. None of that has anything to do with the health of the deer herd.

 

[elkassassin]

So Niller?

You Don't Like My Idea Of Doing Something To Improve QUANTITY & QUALITY of The SUFFERING Utah Deer Herd?

 

[Vanilla]

So Niller?

You Don't Like My Idea Of Doing Something To Improve QUANTITY & QUALITY of The SUFFERING Utah Deer Herd?

You haven’t given an idea to improve the quality or quantity of the deer herd.

I reserve judgment until you actually give one.

 

[elkassassin]

And You've Already Forgot HELL-F'N-RIGHT?

You haven’t given an idea to improve the quality or quantity of the deer herd.

I reserve judgment until you actually give one.

 

[Vanilla]

And You've Already Forgot HELL-F'N-RIGHT?

Nope. I said you haven’t shared any ideas to help improve the health of the herd. Your ranting has nothing to do with deer and everything to do with what you don’t like people doing while chasing them.

I’ll never forgive you for trying to ban my camo loin cloth!

 

[elkassassin]

Nope. I said you haven’t shared any ideas to help improve the health of the herd. Your ranting has nothing to do with deer and everything to do with what you don’t like people doing while chasing them.

I’ll never forgive you for trying to ban my camo loin cloth! OH I KNOW THAT,JUDAS!

So You Still Don't Wanna Do Your Part by Giving Up CAMO?

Is CAMO Not TECHNOLOGY/GADGETRY?

I Know!

I Know!

It Must Not Feel Right To Road Hunt On a SIDE X SIDE or Wheeler Without Being Fully CAMOED Up!

 

[2lumpy]

Unfortunately Mother Nature is taking a pretty good toll on our Deer ( waaaay too many Bears, Lions,Coyotes) teamed up with drought/ lack of forage we are going to have to manage hunters alongside managing our game.

Vanilla we manage live stock and up until now…….. we’ve never not had a domestic species decline and then not rebound with in a few years. We control the growth and decline of domestic livestock, in spite of droughts, floods, wind, rain or fire.

Managing wildlife is no different……. If the MotherFathers would get to work. We were nearly out of bison, elk, ducks, whitetail deer, wolves, cougars, bears etc etc. We can have what ever we want, in what ever numbers we want, in what ever age class we want.

You know that, I know that, we all know that. So do they. They’re going to piss it away because they choose to. We all know it.

 

[Dryfly]

Do not try to appease the anti-hunter in your argument of ethical or Fair Chase. They will never be happy with hunting.

Don't think that just because someone has a 1 X scope they won't try lobbing a 500 yard shot with a muzzleloader. And then don't be surprised if wounding rates go up and 1 shot kill harvests go down.

Leave the scopes on the muzzleloaders. Leave they technology in the hunt. Just because I have these tools and aids, doesn't mean I'm going to be any more successful.

My experience is most big bucks rub their velvet before the muzzleloader hunt and get into the thicker quakies during the muzzleloader hunt anyway.

I guess I'm frustrated with all of the purists out there that criticize one technology while utilizing the heck out of another.

Well said. In my opinion the biggest issue we have, has nothing to do with any weapon. We simply have far too many people coming into this state. I was born and raised here. I can't even explain how exponentially we have grown. I used to live in a small town that was mostly orchards, I now live in a bigger traffic ridden city. I am still in the same place I always was. I went nowhere...they came to me. Not a fan.

 

[txhunter58]

Exciting morning today! I had a nice 6x6 and his cows visit the water hole I am sitting by this morning. Broadside 75 yards from me. They were there AFTER legal shooting light. But literally 3-4 min. before I could see my front sight the elk well enough to shoot, he walked into the cedars. With a scope I am gutting that bull right now. But no way to ethically take the shot I had with open sights.

Nah. Scopes don’t increase success ?