Idaho Long Range Hunting

[IdahoPrecision]

The topic of long range hunting has been around for a long time, especially in Idaho. This topic ramps up in intensity especially before and during hunting season. I was recently watching a podcast with the Director of F&G Jim Fredericks made the claim that hunters are shooting elk out at a mile (1760 yards), and made it sound like your average joe blow was doing it on the regular, which is a lie.
Several of my coworkers and I were talking, and there’s no logical legal means, nor should there be, of regulating morals and ethics for hunters. That being said we also don’t believe that there should be a yardage limit (ex: 500 yard max) because it would turn into here say and nothing could ever be proven and create enemies where there should be allies.
The conclusion we came to, and the most logical rule would be a gear restriction on the maximum magnification allowed in your scope. For instance having a maximum magnification of 15x or 25x. Before you get all up in a tisy fit, this wouldn’t be any different than a caliber restriction, or rifle weight restriction (max 16lbs in Idaho). We think limiting a scope magnification would limit those hunters that don’t practice a lot to reasonable distances, but at the same time, keep the shooters who practice free to shoot as far as they want. Basically, the higher magnification scopes encourage bad shooters to shoot at something because they can see it too well. This can increase injuries and lost large game animals due to poor shots. “They get to see their misses in HD.” To discourage the shot that’s outside of their skill set, if they have a harder time looking at the target, maybe that will help save a few more animals from injury or suffering.
What would people think of that rule? What would you switch?
Again, I’m not for making more rules, so I would also suggest taking a rule off the books; the 16lb max rifle weight restriction would be taken away (if someone wants to carry a heavy rifle, that’s their prerogative).

P.S. The real reason that it’s harder to find game like elk and deer is due to people using quads, SxS, and E-Bikes to get further back in. And there are just generally more people and development.

 

[Pescetism]

I understand the intent but I can't see a ruling like that solving anything meaningful for several reasons. More than I really want to type out all at once.

Say the max is capped at 25x, how many people does that realistically restrict? 250 - 500, maybe 1,000 hunters have to change scopes or decide to bypass ID for other states?

Now change the cap to 10x/12x/15x and 50%+ are calling to eliminate the law or outright ignoring it.

I'd wager that a similar percentage of bad shots are taken regardless of magnification. In my personal experience, the worst shooters are the 3-9 crowd and the majority of them are shooting 250 yards or less. Seemingly, that isn't the case on this forum but that doesn't actually have anything to scope magnification. It's because that overwhelming majority of hunters don't practice or spend any real effort/money and the most common (cheapest) scopes seem to be various 3-9x40s from Walmart and sporting goods stores. That shouldn't be misconstrued to mean that spending more on equipment will mean better results.

It's frustrating but regardless of how most of us here feel about the ethics involved, the majority are still going to treat shooting/hunting like hitting on girls/dating. You miss all the shots you don't take, and if you wound a few in the process it sucks, but there's always another.

 

[ThunderJack49]

you can't have your cake and eat it too. If long range hunting was/is an issue to anyone, I would suggest getting rid of all scopes and laser range finders. I’m not advocating that but that is how I would approach the issue, if it was an issue to me.

 

[BigNate]

I think the heavy gun restriction should stand, I'm not upset by the restrictions on integrated technology, but think magnification restrictions I wouldn't support.
I like that these restrictions limit the success of people who don't practice.
I currently have a 14x as my highest magnification scope so it wouldn't affect me but I can see it might be worth having more in some circumstances.

I'd like to see SxS & quads restricted to recovery only for non-handicapped, and restrict what roads the handicapped can take them on. Too many times I've hiked in to non-motorized areas only have some noisy ahold show up riding where they don't belong.

 

[TaperPin]

A 4x scope will easily hold well enough for 1 MOA groups - even that isn’t all that limiting for big game. 6x groups in hunter class bench competition were in the 1/4 MOA to 1/8 MOA range. To be meaningful the limit would have to be 1x to keep shots under 300 yards, 2x for under 500 yards. In an accurate rifle everyone here could shoot a 2 MOA group at 2x.

Take away range finders and the max would be 400 to 500 yards just like the old days.

I’d love to see all electronics outlawed.

 

[RWT]

Still believe hunting is a privilege and should be treated as such. Beyond just obtaining a license a person would have to qualify and prove proficiency. You qualify every year and have a licensed issued to you with your proficiency limits.

If it is proven you break those rules then you lose hunting privileges in that state for 10 years.

The implementation by the incompetent govt is the issue. Clearly we can’t police ourselves as each person moral compass points to something different. This is why we have jails and prisons.

 

[wpeach1912]

If you want to limit it, you’d need to just eliminate rifles. You’d still have people taking unethically long shots with bows, muzzleloaders, and shotguns though. Most people just don’t care as Pescitism said.

 

[IdahoPrecision]

It’s not ethical just to eliminate rifles or be unrealistic about magnification, it stems from listening to the panels that were held and realizing that they’re coming for our way of living. They won’t rest until all of the freedom is taken out of it. I’m trying to get ahead of them by trying to offer a solution that won’t hinder real shooters, but will make them warm and fuzzy and leave us alone.

They can try to make licenses that you have to qualify for certain ranges, but how are you going to verify that in the field? You can’t.

Eliminating rifles definitely isn’t the answer, especially when it comes to wanting ethical kills. Bows are the farthest thing from an ethical tool. Bows injure more game, and shot game gets lost more often than firearms of any kind.

They need to regulate the vehicle usage and get people back to using their feet. I’m tired of road hunters in the mountains that blow out areas because they’re too lazy to walk.