Idaho Long Range Hunting

[willfrye027]

It’ll be interesting to see what comes out of the southern Idaho and Utah experimental weapon restrictions. Maybe there will be more big bucks on the hill because of it, and maybe not.

I’m all for experimenting with open sights. Heck I don’t own a rifle with open sights but I’d be happy to go on a hunt with open sights IF it meant I’d probably see bigger/more bucks. Or if that was the only way to get a tag every year.

To be fair, right now I’m in the “there is no problem” camp. I seem to find some nice deer now and then even with crappy/otc type tags. I can shoot long range, but that is always a means to an end—if my odds are better killing an animal at 600, I’ll do it. If there is a high percentage stalk that will put me at 300, I’ll do it. I think the vast majority of “long range guys” fall into that camp, with a select few attention-seeking types who title their YouTube video 1000 YARD KILL SHOT GIANT BUCK. Those guys are a different problem entirely and a small minority of hunters out there. I don’t think you can really fix that short of demonetizing hunting content on YouTube/insta/whatever. Even then they would probably still do it for attention.

I don’t see a compelling need to drastically change regulations across the board. I also don’t see a problem experimenting with and implementing some open sight seasons/units and see if that has a positive affect on numbers of big deer, and potentially allowing more tags/engagement so we can all continue to have a tag every year.

Keep in mind we as hunters need to have the long game in mind. 30 years from now, can we still get a tag? Can we still own a gun? Are there deer herds left to hunt? Those kinds of things matter..someone taking a shot beyond their capability and wounding..does not matter in the scheme of things.

 

[Pistolpete28]

It’ll be interesting to see what comes out of the southern Idaho and Utah experimental weapon restrictions. Maybe there will be more big bucks on the hill because of it, and maybe not.

I’m all for experimenting with open sights. Heck I don’t own a rifle with open sights but I’d be happy to go on a hunt with open sights IF it meant I’d probably see bigger/more bucks. Or if that was the only way to get a tag every year.

To be fair, right now I’m in the “there is no problem” camp. I seem to find some nice deer now and then even with crappy/otc type tags. I can shoot long range, but that is always a means to an end—if my odds are better killing an animal at 600, I’ll do it. If there is a high percentage stalk that will put me at 300, I’ll do it. I think the vast majority of “long range guys” fall into that camp, with a select few attention-seeking types who title their YouTube video 1000 YARD KILL SHOT GIANT BUCK. Those guys are a different problem entirely and a small minority of hunters out there. I don’t think you can really fix that short of demonetizing hunting content on YouTube/insta/whatever. Even then they would probably still do it for attention.

I don’t see a compelling need to drastically change regulations across the board. I also don’t see a problem experimenting with and implementing some open sight seasons/units and see if that has a positive affect on numbers of big deer, and potentially allowing more tags/engagement so we can all continue to have a tag every year.

Keep in mind we as hunters need to have the long game in mind. 30 years from now, can we still get a tag? Can we still own a gun? Are there deer herds left to hunt? Those kinds of things matter..someone taking a shot beyond their capability and wounding..does not matter in the scheme of things.

My thoughts exactly, well said!

 

[magnum]

I don’t see a compelling need to drastically change regulations across the board. I also don’t see a problem experimenting with and implementing some open sight seasons/units and see if that has a positive affect on numbers of big deer, and potentially allowing more tags/engagement so we can all continue to have a tag every year.

Keep in mind we as hunters need to have the long game in mind. 30 years from now, can we still get a tag? Can we still own a gun? Are there deer herds left to hunt? Those kinds of things matter..someone taking a shot beyond their capability and wounding..does not matter in the scheme of things.

Great post Will! I think we have a similar outlook. Especially regarding hunter engagement and the long game.

 

[BLJ]

I didn’t, it was just a range referenced earlier in the thread so I ran with it.

I missed it then. My fault on that.

I’m just curious where the range numbers come from.
Seems like 500-600 is a common number.

I wonder if there is info anywhere to substantiate those numbers.

 

[longrangelead]

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.

Do they have any actual data on range/wounding or are they just using a hot topic to create a problem to fix?
A guy I know had a good LE tag in Utah this year. Just last week he had someone lobbing bullets at over 1000 yards at a bull he was watching, presumably to knock it down before anyone else could get to him.
The result was the bull was not hit and nobody got him.
A guy like that would probably do the same thing even with open sights. More laws won't change much.