Idaho Lighted Nock and Expandable Broadheads.

[CorbLand]

I knew it would be a slippery slope as soon as they pulled the wolf bill fiasco. There's really no reason to put something as trivial as lighted nocks and expandable heads in front of a legislative assembly. I can think of a thousand other things they should be focusing on before that, and even then, it's not a burden on any person in this country to use a fixed head on an arrow with a regular nock. They need to stop listening to their idiot buddies in Utah.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Hey now, leave the hating on Utah to us guys that still have to deal with the bullshit. Some of us aren't as lucky as those that have escaped.

 

[WeiserBucks]

One of these days people will figure out that IDFG stands for Idaho Farm and Game.

 

[Marble]

The problem is, the commission, how they are appointed and how long they sit.

Every damn one of them should be replaced. Time and time again they ignore the people who they are suppose to represent. Idaho Sportsman.

I’ll bet if you polled Idaho Sportsman, asked them, do you approve or disapprove of the job IDFG is doing, the approval rating would be in the 20%

You ignore your constituents wishes, time and time again, this will happen. IDFG is a joke. If they would have managed wolves as they were OBLIGATED to do, wouldn’t be here.

We have the same problem in CA. The type of people who had historically operated the board were apolitical and made decisions bad on ethics, science, biology, past practices and future need. Now it's just a bunch of people that come from the upper ranks of the university system that specialize in mostly environmental type subjects.

No real described avid hunter.
No rancher
No farmer
No one that has been in the outdoor industry for decades.

And they are all from the central/bay area portion of the state.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[idelkslayer]

I don't like the legislature getting involved. Several of us raised concerns over this very issue when the wolf bill was being debated. The legislature got a taste, and now they will keep meddling. If this bill is introduced I will encourage my legislators to vote against it and leave it up to the IDFG Commission.

IDFG has its flaws but I think in general that the Commission has done a pretty good job of listening to hunters in Idaho. They stuck up for us during several recent legislative sessions when point systems, landowner tags, depredation fees and auction tags were being pushed onto us. The commission withdrew their own fee increase bill to avoid being held hostage for auction tags and point systems. Two of the commissioners were ultimately replaced by the Governor for siding with sportsmen.

When it comes to lighted nocks, I understand the purpose of the regulation. IDFG has chosen to draw the technological line in the sand at not allowing anything electronic to be attached to bows or arrows. The line has to be drawn somewhere, it might as well be there.

Expandable broadheads? I can take it or leave it. But I don't want the legislature deciding.


As for the wolf side discussion that has developed in this thread, IDFG lengthened seasons and increased tags and methods with every regulation cycle. By doing it slowly they were able to avoid the big headlines and lawsuits that resulted from the legislature grandstanding for votes. The legislators don't care about hunting, the wolf bill was just political grandstanding for their rancher friends. The increased methods and seasons will do very little to increase harvest or reduce wolf populations. Many hunters are also unaware of just how many wolves are killed annually in control actions by IDFG and USFWS.

 

[WeiserBucks]

Just give it another 15 years, all the good farm ground will be subdivisions and then perhaps the farmers won't have as much influence.

 

[Mtnboy]

Just give it another 15 years, all the good farm ground will be subdivisions and then perhaps the farmers won't have as much influence.

The farmers don't have the influence, the ranchers do. There is a difference in both the way they make a living and in where they make a living. It's gonna be a LONG time before ranchers give up their land to development.

 

[WeiserBucks]

The farmers don't have the influence, the ranchers do. There is a difference in both the way they make a living and in where they make a living. It's gonna be a LONG time before ranchers give up their land to development.

In my neck of the woods most of the ranchers are farmers, hay ect. The ranchers and farmers operate their business right next door to one another when the ranchers cows aren't in the mountains. You don't see F&G sharpshooters whacking elk or paying millions for damaged cattle pasture, the farmers have a huge influence.

 

[Mtnboy]

In my neck of the woods most of the ranchers are farmers, hay ect. The ranchers and farmers operate their business right next door to one another when the ranchers cows aren't in the mountains.

You're not wrong, I should have been more specific. The farmers who are close to the cities and selling out for development are small time and don't have much influence.

It's the Ranchers who are in rural areas and typically own huge tracts of land that have the influence. It is also easier for them to have influence as the "good ol' boys club" is alive and well in rural Idaho.

 

[WeiserBucks]

You're not wrong, I should have been more specific. The farmers who are close to the cities and selling out for development are small time and don't have much influence.

It's the Ranchers who are in rural areas and typically own huge tracts of land that have the influence. It is also easier for them to have influence as the "good ol' boys club" is alive and well in rural Idaho.

Agreed.

 

[HuntHarder]

Why are expandable not allowed anyway?

 

[WeiserBucks]

Why are expandable not allowed anyway?

When they were first introduced, quality, reliability and lethality weren't great on elk. Many still have the same feelings. ID didn't believe they were ethical.

 

[CorbLand]

When they were first introduced, quality, reliability and lethality weren't great on elk. Many still have the same feelings. ID didn't believe they were ethical.

Idaho also does a good job at keeping primitive seasons primitive. They have strong restrictions on weapons. Expandables allow for better flight, which increases accuracy, which allows for longer shots. Same thing with muzzleloaders.

Continue to fight for these restrictions. If not you will end up like Utah where the only different between a muzzleloader and a rifle is that its a single shot and you have to load it from the muzzle.

 

[ODB]

Idaho also does a good job at keeping primitive seasons primitive. They have strong restrictions on weapons. Expandables allow for better flight, which increases accuracy, which allows for longer shots. Same thing with muzzleloaders.

Continue to fight for these restrictions. If not you will end up like Utah where the only different between a muzzleloader and a rifle is that its a single shot and you have to load it from the muzzle.

I agree here. Idaho does allow 80% let off now though. Back in the day it was restricted to 65% and when we’d get bows from the manufacturers there were always a bag of 65% modules along with them.

If people really think about the purpose of “restrictions” they will see them less as a restriction and more as something that helps maintain a certain aesthetic to a specific type of hunting which requires (typically) greater discipline to master.

 

[HuntHarder]

Gotcha, makes sense. I can appreciate keeping primitive seasons as primitive as possible with today's tech. I used to be sponsored by a fixed blade broadhead company and loved them. 2 years ago I switched to a mechanical hybrid and the blood trails and carnage got considerably better. The animals are not any more dead, but the blood trails are pretty impressive with mechanicals.

 

[sneaky]

How are the harvest numbers so far this year? The last report I seen was the second lowest in 5 years. The new rules are not going to be the panacea that everyone thinks it is. Now we are looking at them being seriously considered for relisting, causing a huge financial liability for the state to fight in court.

I talked to someone who was at the commission meeting in Boise today. Wolf numbers are within 20 of last year's population estimate, and harvest this year is less than 10 different than last year. Too little, too late. We aren't killing off enough to offset the new pups born every year.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[CorbLand]

If people really think about the purpose of “restrictions” they will see them less as a restriction and more as something that helps maintain a certain aesthetic to a specific type of hunting which requires (typically) greater discipline to master.

Its the same thing that @ntrlbrnhunter has been saying. Its pretty hard to have liberal regulations on technology and maintain high levels of opportunity.

 

[Customweld]

I talked to someone who was at the commission meeting in Boise today. Wolf numbers are within 20 of last year's population estimate, and harvest this year is less than 10 different than last year. Too little, too late. We aren't killing off enough to offset the new pups born every year.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Given Idaho's remoteness (especially in the winter) nothing short of poison or mange was ever going to keep up with their population growth.

 

[WeiserBucks]

1080

 

[Customweld]

I could not find any reference to this. Do you have a link that has the proposal?

@ODB Here is the link:

https://legislature.idaho.gov/wp-content/uploads/sessioninfo/2022/legislation/H0507.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1zZZX5ji_HyONkx8iAVpdrxXqLOtLQgtg-tsEo69wD2lGX9FhOQz0EGy0

 

[Chad E]

@ODB Here is the link:

https://legislature.idaho.gov/wp-content/uploads/sessioninfo/2022/legislation/H0507.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1zZZX5ji_HyONkx8iAVpdrxXqLOtLQgtg-tsEo69wD2lGX9FhOQz0EGy0

It's even an emergency....gee better get right too it. I get it they want immediate implementation and that is the terminology to get there but the irony is to much for me.