Click the link.
http://www.hpmuzzleloading.com/legislation.html

This might be interesting to some who live in these 14 states affected.
Alaska, California, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington and Wisconsin.
Some might like it, others won't. For Southern Idaho it will be the beginning of the end to ML hunting for mule deer bucks. if this passes the only hunts we will get will be doe tags if we are lucky. What most of you don't understand is our ML hunts just started less that 10 years ago. Before that we had to go to Eastern Id, or Northern Id to go on a ML hunt. Even today we have NO open ML hunts here in Southern Id. We are not over run with deer like some states. The F&G have to carefully weigh the options when allowing hunts.
Some of you guys wanted proof. Here it is, along with the proof of 300, 400, and 500 yard shots with ML's I posted before.
Ron

OMG, OMG! I get a choice in the muzzleloader I get to use, the sky is falling, the sky is falling, we will never get to hunt bucks again because I get a choice of muzzleloaders!!! BS.

Nicely written article, but there is still no legislation, just some stupid complaint, and the article is four months old.

I guess what bothers me about this whole thread is that we have definitive evidence that cheatgrass continues to encroach on a lot of land in Idaho, and it has very low nutritional value, so mule deer forage is being affected... Above and beyond that, the mule deer population in Idaho has never recovered from a series of very harsh winters well over ten years ago. So the mule deer population declines, while the elk population soars.

We have people that want to blame increased efficiency of muzzleloaders as the reason for the decline of mule deer. And we have those that want to continue to be able to hunt mule deer, but want everyone else to be forced to hunt the same way these "traditionalists" hunt. I might remind some of the readers that the Pauley in-line is not a new design. It has been around for well in excess of 100 years. Is that widely known? Probably not, but that does not negate the fact.

I wish Idaho would go back to in-lines for a couple of reasons... They make for a more efficient and humane dispatch, and because I have several of them I bought with the strict intention of hunting Idaho. It won't happen for the time being, but maybe a few years down the road. In the meantime I will stay out of Idaho because I am not going to spend more money on another firearm just to have it be outlawed as well. The way Ron says it, ML season in Idaho is dying a slow, miserable death. If that be the case, so be it. I won't have affected the population, and since he sees the reason as being more efficient MLs, I won't have hastened the season's demise,either, since I never shot an animal in Idaho with a ML. Wanted to, just never got the chance...

Doubless,
It is not "ME" that is blaming the inlines. Hell I own one! it is the department, and their success numbers. In a lot of the hunts the success was actually higher in the ML hunts than rifle hunts.
Yes habitat is the nummber one reason for mule deer problems. I won't argue that one minute.
We just had the largest wildfire in history. I have been out there to see the deer and they are in bad shape.
The winter of 92-93 is long history. We have had some rebound in some areas. But buck to doe ratios over all are very low. The F&G are trying to solve this problem but it takes time. We are already seeing tag reductions and season changes to help survival for bucks.
Please tell me this. With the technology going through the roof on inline rifles, bullets, and powder, how do we (Idaho) have a ML hunt that allows for high oppertunity, and not negativly affect the population? The F&G must sell tags and licences to be able to opperate. The F&G gets NO money from the state tax pool. If they don't sell tags they don't have cash. SO, they have to make hunts that provide oppertunity for the hunter, cash for the F&G and hold impact to the herd as low as possable.
Doubless, Idaho would love to have you hunt here. But if we have low buck to doe ratios, low tag numbers, and limited hunt times why would you want to come?
Larry, you have nothing to lose now do you.I would like to see what you would say if you were in our shoes. Then again you sound like the kind of guy that would put a bullet in the last mule deer on earth. Good luck with that way of thinking. Ron

Ron, it is so simple it really doesn't take much thinking... There are only two options:

Eliminate all MZ hunting for about ten years... That is a long time. I would be 63, and probably way too fat and with too bad a set of knees to even pound the mountains. But that is one solution...

The second is to allow the MZ hunts for does only. A doe will give two fawns if given enough nutrition. Plan the hunt before the rut, so all you shoot is a single doe, and elminate all the bucks. Or make a guy earn a buck by taking a doe first. And have him draw for it.

I am just about of the age that it is the hunt more than the harvest... If I ever get back to Idaho for another hunt I will probably try to hunt cow elk with a MZ, even if I have to do it during regular season. Idaho is some of the most gorgeous country this world has, and I miss seeing it. That in enough is reason to come back. That, and some Idaho friends that mean a whole lot to a Texan...

We have only had maybe 200 ML tags for only 4 or 5 years out of the last 10. Or ML hunt is very new. On the Shoot does only. That can't work either. Right now they are already giving out what most people say is the MAX number of doe tags avaliable. We don't have any extra to give out without hurting the population. We can't do a earn a buck with a doe because all our draw doe tags fill in the first draw. I personally would rather shoot a doe than a small buck.
Our ML hunts are for the most part before the rut. In some cases they are not but the hunt is so poor they don't care about harvest.
All of our hunts are draw only. We don't have enough deer to do what you are saying. In a warmer climate like yours that would be fine. We don't have that. Ron

Ron, Thanks for posting the link.

A lot of morons calling "liar" when I posted the first thread on this subject. What can you expect from internet jockies.

Doubless wrote:

quote:

ML season in Idaho is dying a slow, miserable death. If that be the case, so be it. ::
MZ hunts for does only

What a selfish, asinine comment. ME, ME, ME, I, I, I.... Then to say shoot doe mule deer. Really?? Shoot the reproductive portion of herds which are BELOW population objectives?? Really?

I will reiterate some of my points from the other post.

--This isn't about primitive vs modern. This is about MY opportunity in MY state to hunt LOCAL species. MY opportunity is REDUCED because of this ruling. I can not post you links, BUT the stir in the UDWR and other LOCAL Utah groups is already using the new rule to vote against muzzleloader opportunity. (I have sat in the meetings and seen it)

--The Federal Gov't once again dictates to ALL states how they must run. EVEN THOUGH each state has different needs, different goals. Blanket management which may be good for Kentucky and bad for Wyoming.

--Mule deer and elk are different than whitetails. If people can't understand that then they are uneducated morons. The whitetail population in most states is above the population objectives, while mule deer populations are barely at objectives or 90% LOWER than desired.

--The success rates WILL increase and NOT allow additional opportunity and WILL decrease what opportunity we have here in UTAH. Ron can see the effects in Idaho.

--There will be 400+ yard shots being made with 20 power scopes. Heck, put a 20x on my old TC Hawken and I can reach 300. Not a modern vs trad, but why not just issue ALL the tags to Rifle (Any Weapon in Utah). There goes the muzzleloader season.

Finally, this is already effecting me and the hunting in my state. You guys can say "so be it", but only if you can't see past the nose on your face.

Could be that in some States with marginal habitat for Mule deer all seasons need to be shut down for a period of time.Here in Wi. The State tried to do the right thing and offered us use of scoped muzzleloaders,but the State Muzzleloader assoc.quashed it by flooding the Spring Fish and Game hearings to vote it down.There is no Biological reason to not allow it here.I can`t speak for Idaho or Utah.I have no idea what your local problems are and will probably never hunt in either State anyway.Change happens every day,either you bend with it or break.

Ron, I will say one thing. You certainly do not know anything about me. You certainly know nothing about hunting here. You are not even old enough to remember when there were no deer tags at all in Kansas, and that was not so long ago, so quit bitching. I didn't say shoot them all, quite the opposite, I was the one that said have some guts and shut the mule deer hunts down until they rebound, but that takes more guts that anyone in Utah has. They did it in Kansas years ago and evidently it worked. Your fire will certainly help, in the long run, provided some rain and snow happen.

It is a cycle, let science manage the herds, not emotions or politics. If the department needs funding, then the state needs to find other methods, or THEY will be the ones eliminating the seasons, not inlines or .498-super-long-distance-boomer rifles. What you want them to do is sell gobs of low chance tags just so you can say, "at least we still have a season". Eventually no one will buy them, especially non-residents, where the real money is. Now there is an idea...sell ML tags only to non-residents so he department can be better funded to manage the herd. (Yes, I am not serious)

Blaming technology for lack of herd management is absurd. If that is the case, bow hunting only and with re-curves at most.

why not have a bucks only season?it wont have a significant effect on reproduction,and you can still have a season?
And just how high at 100 yds is that ML when sighted for 400 yds?Probably out of the field of view of a 20 power scope.

quote:

Originally posted by larrys:
Ron, I will say one thing. You certainly do not know anything about me. You certainly know nothing about hunting here. You are not even old enough to remember when there were no deer tags at all in Kansas, and that was not so long ago, so quit bitching. I didn't say shoot them all, quite the opposite, I was the one that said have some guts and shut the mule deer hunts down until they rebound, but that takes more guts that anyone in Utah has. They did it in Kansas years ago and evidently it worked. Your fire will certainly help, in the long run, provided some rain and snow happen.

It is a cycle, let science manage the herds, not emotions or politics. If the department needs funding, then the state needs to find other methods, or THEY will be the ones eliminating the seasons, not inlines or .498-super-long-distance-boomer rifles. What you want them to do is sell gobs of low chance tags just so you can say, "at least we still have a season". Eventually no one will buy them, especially non-residents, where the real money is. Now there is an idea...sell ML tags only to non-residents so he department can be better funded to manage the herd. (Yes, I am not serious)

Blaming technology for lack of herd management is absurd. If that is the case, bow hunting only and with re-curves at most.

Seem's to me I read that 63% of Idaho's F&G funding come from the sale of non-resident tags so you may want to have out of state hunters send in comments with their required big game survey's this year. Follow the money trail.

quote:

Doubless wrote:
quote:
ML season in Idaho is dying a slow, miserable death. If that be the case, so be it. ::
MZ hunts for does only


What a selfish, asinine comment. ME, ME, ME, I, I, I.... Then to say shoot doe mule deer. Really?? Shoot the reproductive portion of herds which are BELOW population objectives?? Really?

I will reiterate some of my points from the other post.

--This isn't about primitive vs modern. This is about MY opportunity in MY state to hunt LOCAL species. MY opportunity is REDUCED because of this ruling. I can not post you links, BUT the stir in the UDWR and other LOCAL Utah groups is already using the new rule to vote against muzzleloader opportunity. (I have sat in the meetings and seen it)

--The Federal Gov't once again dictates to ALL states how they must run. EVEN THOUGH each state has different needs, different goals. Blanket management which may be good for Kentucky and bad for Wyoming.

--Mule deer and elk are different than whitetails. If people can't understand that then they are uneducated morons. The whitetail population in most states is above the population objectives, while mule deer populations are barely at objectives or 90% LOWER than desired.

--The success rates WILL increase and NOT allow additional opportunity and WILL decrease what opportunity we have here in UTAH. Ron can see the effects in Idaho.

--There will be 400+ yard shots being made with 20 power scopes. Heck, put a 20x on my old TC Hawken and I can reach 300. Not a modern vs trad, but why not just issue ALL the tags to Rifle (Any Weapon in Utah). There goes the muzzleloader season.

Finally, this is already effecting me and the hunting in my state. You guys can say "so be it", but only if you can't see past the nose on your face.

Okay, MC. Gloves off. How in the world is my saying that muzzleloader season is dying a slow death in Idaho something to do with ME? Explain that to me, would you?

And yes, shoot does only... BEFORE the rut, just like I said. That, or shut it all down, which if you will read carefully, was the other suggestion... An out of state hunter is not going to come to Idaho to shoot does, so your chance of drawing a tag goes up. DUH... And if each doe that is bred gives you two fawns, does it not stand to reason that one will be a doe fawn and one a buck? For every doe that has two doe fawns, there will be very close to one doe that has two buck fawns, although Mother Nature typically sides toward procreation of the species. Now, very carefully, do the math. Even assuming a 30% fawn crop, every three years the doe population will double if no one shoots does. Does it start to make sense now?

And who is whining about "MY opportunity in MY state to hunt LOCAL species. MY opportunity is REDUCED because of this ruling."? Look in the mirror...

And "elk and mule deer are different than whitetails." My, how observant you are.

Read my post about cheatgrass and habitat. I wasn't born yesterday.

And if you have people in your state that are willing to shoot 400+ with a mz, welcome to the club. You shouldn't feel special; they are everywhere. They are in my home state of TX, even in WI where I am residing and working at present. So I have no pity for you at all. It is just life.

Since when did the federal people start dictating to the Utah Fish and Game Department how to run their hunting programs? Sounds to me like the folks in Utah ought to grow some spine. Darned sure doesn't happen in my home state, and I really don't think it does in yours, either. But I could be wrong... I believe there is something in the Constitution that covers the issue of the feds messing around in the states' business...

And as far as calling someone an "uneducated moron", isn't name calling rather childish?

quote:

And who is whining about "MY opportunity in MY state to hunt LOCAL species. MY opportunity is REDUCED because of this ruling."? Look in the mirror...

Hey Ron and mc.. Why don't you whine to Toby Bridges? Hes got a website, probably love to hear from ya Course hes kinda on the rough side if ya call him names....better tie your pants legs Maybe you'll do better with part two than again maybe not

12 seems like a and can't admit when he is wrong.

Doubless. I just get fed up with people not seeing how things work in other states and what works in one state is not the best for others.

--Muzzleloader hunts in Utah and most Western states were instituted to give more opportunity at a lower success rate. That held true in Utah until about 5 years ago when success rate became comparable to rifle. So, muzzleloader opportunity will decrease as the success rates increase.

--If a herd is struggling why would doe be killed? Kill the reproductive portion of the herd? That makes no sense and is contrary to all wildlife management when trying to grow herds. In other words, that is not an option.

--I never said you were a moron, just those who don't/won't understand the difference. That is where this debate is based. Those living in whitetail rich areas won't understand the different problems associated with Western Game Species. If you understand and accept the differences, than you are not a moron.

Scoped muzzleloaders will increase the harvest rate, which will lead to less muzzleloader tags in my state. If scoped muzzleloaders don't increase success then why do so many want to use them? Increased success means LESS hunting opportunity. (Not less harvest, less opportunity)

Utah has performed habitat improvements on over 1 million acres. Yet still the pie (game) has not rebounded significantly to produce more opportunity. Utah has around 300,000 mule deer. Hunters harvest around 25,000. I wager there are counties in Texas which produce more deer. The deer can only handle a certain amount of take, so higher success = more take = less tags to offset that, where I live.

There is no argueing the ruling made by the Feds. They made the decision and the amount of opportunity lost won't be enough to warrant more recourse on the issue. Some may call it whining, but lets see how you feel IF your opportunity to hunt is diminished due to Federal involvement.

I see no point in further argueing these points. It is reality here where I live. I can see that the reality in whitetail states is different.

I hope your seasons all bring you the best of luck and success.

quote:

12 seems like a troll and can't admit when he is wrong.

Prove anything I've said wrong with anything but internet forum claims (like maybe real facts) still waiting on your links to support your first post......Like I said talk to Bridges.....you quoted him.....hes got a website....just if you are going to resort to name calling, be aware he'll not respond nearly as tactfully as Doubless. Its you that seems to be effected by all this...you thats crying....and when someone don't hand you a hanky, you're done responding and leaving the sandbox......for the second time.

Dave

12- You have your opinion and I have mine. No reason to sit in the "sand box" and throw sand back and forth at each other.

You played the whining card. I don't see it as whining, but more of concern of how it effects muzzleloader opportunity in my state. If you can't see that this effects others then that is your choice. I can't change your mind because you are sitting in Maine and don't want it changed.

You can come to Nebraska and hunt an additional late season with whatever you want, because our deed population is nearly out of control. G&P said if it is not reduced very soon, we will not be able to control. I have no issues with iron sights or a scope with a letter from eye doc!

quote:

Originally posted by MC:
No reason to sit in the "sand box" and throw sand back and forth at each other.

What else you got to do?

Hate to wade into this pit, but the link is to an article from the Toby Bridges school of trashing traditionals while in the pay of the disk rifle makers. This guy makes me nauseous. He spent a career writing about traditionals, then sold out to the inline makers and is feeding the anti-hunters' camp by claiming traditional round ball guns aren't humane killers.

With the increase in accuracy and reliability of muzzleloaders maybe it is time to combine the season with modern rifle.

I wish minnesota had an early flintlock and round ball only season,and a late inline season.I'd hunt both.

I think its time to legalize scopes on muzzleloaders.The age of the average hunter is over 40.I quit hunting with my muzzleloaders until I got to use a scope.It was getting to where 50 yards was my maxium shot.I just shot some 1/2 " groups with my .54 caliber marlin with 325 gr speer .50 caliber bullets.I was really suprised.The maxium load is 100 grs in this rifle.Did it change the range of my rifle no.It changed the range I could use my rifle.In years to come if there is still hunting there will be alot more crossbow hunts and muzzleloader hunts and less centerfire hunts,.

We can argue among ourselves all we want. Any way you cut it, high tech equals increased success rates. Archery or muzzle-loader! Too say traditional equipment is going to increase the rate of cripples doesn't fly. People using traditional equipment tend to be more in it for the "experience". Modern equipment users tend to be more sucess driven. If you cripple an animal at 100 yds with a traditional ML or cripple it at 200 yds with a modern ML its still crippled. The shot probably shouldn't have been taken. Besides, here in Washington and Idaho we have bigger problems and threats to our hunting. Wolves and cats !! OH! BY THE WAY DID I MENTION WOLVES!!!! MY opinion for what its worth !

Here in Oklahoma it appears that the lawmakers are very concerned with getting more people to hunt. It appears that many young people are growing up non-hunters. The state appears to do all they can to encourage more people to hunt. They have increased the limit for muzzle-loader season and modern in-lines and scopes are allowed. If someone can't hold a bow at full draw due to a health problem, they can get a permit to use a crossbow during bow season. Here the thought is that, more hunters improve the sport and secure its future. I'd rather not have to contend with other hunters--having a whole area to myself--but the truth is, if the number of hunters (and gun owners) decline, our clout with lawmakers declines as well. More (properly trained) hunters is good for the sport and if new innovations encourage that, great! The Fish and game Department, though, must regulate in such a way that maintains the health and numbers of the deer population. In all honesty, although there are more hunters, there are more deer to hunt. Well, it's just my two cents worth.