Idaho proposed special season open sight centerfire

[nevadabugle]

Those seasons/tags/limitations should be voluntary options - not forced limitations because some guys are too unethical, or too good with modern gear.

I would argue they should be voluntary "tools" available to our state wildlife agencies to meet specific objective.

Want to limit harvest in a unit for any management reason? There are only two options in my opinion. Limit tags and/or limit success rates.

One keeps hunters in the field. One does not.

 

[SDHNTR]

I love it. I hope this idea continues to spread. Put the hunt back in hunting.

 

[RockAndSage]

There are only two options in my opinion. Limit tags and/or limit success rates.

False choice here.

Having more tag types across shorter seasons limits success rates, while also giving more opportunities for guys to land a tag.

Completely eliminating the modern rifle season though, it's an absolute no-go for me - damn near at the same level as gun control itself. It's not right, to the point of immorality, to completely eliminate the ability for me, my 12yo daughter, or my 75yo dad, to hunt with the weapon that gives them the best chance of success.

 

[nevadabugle]

Having more tag types across shorter seasons limits success rates,

Ok, this is a fair point.

Completely eliminating the modern rifle season though, it's an absolute no-go for me -

I agree, and there is not a chance in hell that it ever goes this far. Look back at my point about the Oregon example. The trad only archery and Rifle hunt has coexisted for 30 years in that unit.

 

[realunlucky]

False choice here.

Having more tag types across shorter seasons limits success rates, while also giving more opportunities for guys to land a tag.

Completely eliminating the modern rifle season though, it's an absolute no-go for me - damn near at the same level as gun control itself. It's not right, to the point of immorality, to completely eliminate the ability for me, my 12yo daughter, or my 75yo dad, to hunt with the weapon that gives them the best chance of success.

Idaho has already collected data on season length and number of days afield by hunters and guess what - number of field days stayed the same.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

 

[HunterGatherer]

False choice here.

Having more tag types across shorter seasons limits success rates, while also giving more opportunities for guys to land a tag.

Completely eliminating the modern rifle season though, it's an absolute no-go for me - damn near at the same level as gun control itself. It's not right, to the point of immorality, to completely eliminate the ability for me, my 12yo daughter, or my 75yo dad, to hunt with the weapon that gives them the best chance of success.

I don’t think there has been any mention of taking away “any weapon” tags entirely. As hunting tech continues to advance it will be necessary to address every new technology and how it impacts management objectives and fair chase. Also, a “modern rifle” today is not the same thing as “modern rifle “ of 40, or even, 20 years ago.

It has always been the case that more “primitive” weapons are given better season dates and better units (better opportunity to compensate for lower potential success rate). I would expect to see the same with the new no-scope seasons - similar to the muzzleloader hunts we have. It would also make sense imo to make some units where herds are under objective more difficult to hunt, via weapon restrictions, to give herds a chance to recover, especially deer. Maybe give cow tags for the over objective elk units…

 

[RockAndSage]

I don’t think there has been any mention of taking away “any weapon” tags entirely.

I am all in for restricted weapons hunts. Trad bows, sidelock muzzloaders and straightwalled rifle cartridges. Let's give the animals a chance and limit our success in the meantime.

That's literally how I read this. Not as "in addition to", but "in lieu of". @nevadabugle , feel welcome to correct that impression if it was read wrong.

 

[nevadabugle]

As hunting tech continues to advance it will be necessary to address every new technology and how it impacts management objectives and fair chase.

This is spot on. I also see restricted weapons hunts as a way to organically grow sportsman who are willing to put some technology on the shelf.

If they are willing to put away the tech, they can hunt every year somewhere. Pretty good incentive if you ask me. This Creates opportunity and might slow the technological creep that all state agencies are faced with at the moment.

 

[RockAndSage]

It would also make sense imo to make some units where herds are under objective more difficult to hunt, via weapon restrictions, to give herds a chance to recover, especially deer.

Challenge: Go ask any wildlife management biologist what order of impact the following has on deer herds and overall deer kill on an annual basis:

1) Humans hunting under management
2) Winter Kill
3) Habitat Loss
4) Predator activity
5) Disease


I absolutely guarantee you, humans hunting deer will be at or near the bottom of that list in virtually every single zone in the West.

 

[rclouse79]

I am not sure if I am for or against it, but I have always wanted to buy a lever action rifle. Maybe this will be the excuse I needed.

 

[HunterGatherer]

Challenge: Go ask any wildlife management biologist what order of impact the following has on deer herds and overall deer kill on an annual basis:

1) Humans hunting under management
2) Winter Kill
3) Habitat Loss
4) Predator activity
5) Disease


I absolutely guarantee you, humans hunting deer will be at or near the bottom of that list in virtually every single zone in the West.

For sure there are a lot bigger challenges facing the deer herds than hunters but why continue to overpressure already decimated herds for the sake of opportunity and tag revenue. Many deer hunters I’ve talked to would support regulations that would give the deer a break for awhile- even if it means not getting to kill a buck every single year. Sure they could all die in the next big winterkill event but we gotta do something here. Look at the stats on deer herd numbers across the west- they’re collapsing.

 

[nevadabugle]

That's literally how I read this. Not as "in addition to", but "in lieu of". @nevadabugle , feel welcome to correct that impression if it was read wrong.

I think we are talking past one another. To your point, I suppose you are correct, proposals like this could take away a rifle hunt in a given unit. My point was that these efforts will never take away modern rifle hunting completely. Not even close.

But I would argue if a wildlife agency is worried about a wildlife population, they could close the unit to all, or restrict harvest in other ways which still allows hunters (albeit not all) to go hunting.

If given those two options I would choose the later. You may not and that's OK too.

 

[jayhawk]

O God, I can only imagine all the wounded deer running around from guys flinging bullets arrows at them at a range they shouldn't be, and not being able to see where they hit either.

Fixed it for you

 

[nevadabugle]

Fixed it for you

Don't take the bait, don't take the bait, don't.......

Cheers!

 

[RockAndSage]

I think we are talking past one another. To your point, I suppose you are correct, proposals like this could take away a rifle hunt in a given unit. My point was that these efforts will never take away modern rifle hunting completely. Not even close.

But I would argue if a wildlife agency is worried about a wildlife population, they could close the unit to all, or restrict harvest in other ways which still allows hunters (albeit not all) to go hunting.

If given those two options I would choose the later. You may not and that's OK too.

Agreed, I think we're probably 99% on the same sheet of music.

Something I should clarify, is that a big part of my approach to all of this comes from knowing how the anti-hunting/Earth-first types strategically go after their objectives, salami-slicing over long time-horizons. I'm looking at this issue of weapon restrictions from the perspective of the long-term, strategic protection of our ability to both hunt and pass this cultural tradition and skill down to our kids.

Think about this: if your kid can hunt big game for exactly 6 years while at home (age 12-18)...how many tags do you think the average family can get for that kid before they leave home? How many years go by with no chance to hunt? How much harder is it to generate and preserve hunting as a value in a home, if they get 1 or 2 tags and then they're off somewhere else?

How many generations of that does it take to kill off the interest in hunting, broadly?

Every single lost tag pushes us down that slippery slope.

I look at this from the shoes of those who do not have your interests at heart, or even that of deer populations - and how they use issues just like this to salami-slice things away from us over long time-horizons.

Once the anti-hunting/Earth-first crowd figures out how to pack the leadership and oversight of our wildlife agencies, they'll salami-slice our opportunities to hunt down to nothing over time. They've done this indirect salami-slicing that plummets tag numbers by eliminating the ability to control the populations of 3 apex-predator species (cougars, wolves, grizzly), all of which kill deer and elk on a weekly basis in many places. That's just one approach, but if it limits hunters over time, especially over decades, it kills off interest in hunting. And that also kills off interest and "justification" in the mind of the left for people to have guns. Or have vehicle access to vast swaths of the West. It is ALL interrelated - I've seen their documents and talked to their people. It's very real.

You can look at the wildlife management agencies in both CA and CO to see this happening, with far less hunting opportunity than decades past - and it has nothing to do with tags getting filled by hunters. And it could easily happen to us here in NV, with Clark County's population base, and what's happened in Washoe over the last decade.

That was a very long way of saying that I see danger in limiting modern-weapon tags - and why I see it as part of a slippery slope danger for a lot more than just my ability to get a nice buck.

 

[nevadabugle]

Agreed, I think we're probably 99% on the same sheet of music.

Something I should clarify, is that a big part of my approach to all of this comes from knowing how the anti-hunting/Earth-first types strategically go after their objectives, salami-slicing over long time-horizons. I'm looking at this issue of weapon restrictions from the perspective of the long-term, strategic protection of our ability to both hunt and pass this cultural tradition and skill down to our kids.

Think about this: if your kid can hunt big game for exactly 6 years while at home (age 12-18)...how many tags do you think the average family can get for that kid before they leave home? How many years go by with no chance to hunt? How much harder is it to generate and preserve hunting as a value in a home, if they get 1 or 2 tags and then they're off somewhere else?

How many generations of that does it take to kill off the interest in hunting, broadly?

Every single lost tag pushes us down that slippery slope.

I look at this from the shoes of those who do not have your interests at heart, or even that of deer populations - and how they use issues just like this to salami-slice things away from us over long time-horizons.

Once the anti-hunting/Earth-first crowd figures out how to pack the leadership and oversight of our wildlife agencies, they'll salami-slice our opportunities to hunt down to nothing over time. They've done this indirect salami-slicing that plummets tag numbers by eliminating the ability to control the populations of 3 apex-predator species (cougars, wolves, grizzly), all of which kill deer and elk on a weekly basis in many places. That's just one approach, but if it limits hunters over time, especially over decades, it kills off interest in hunting. And that also kills off interest and "justification" in the mind of the left for people to have guns. Or have vehicle access to vast swaths of the West. It is ALL interrelated - I've seen their documents and talked to their people. It's very real.

You can look at the wildlife management agencies in both CA and CO to see this happening, with far less hunting opportunity than decades past - and it has nothing to do with tags getting filled by hunters. And it could easily happen to us here in NV, with Clark County's population base, and what's happened in Washoe over the last decade.

That was a very long way of saying that I see danger in limiting modern-weapon tags - and why I see it as part of a slippery slope danger for a lot more than just my ability to get a nice buck.

I can fully understand and appreciate your point of view. As you likely know, my views on this are not coming from an antihunter standpoint. But I get your concern.

My views are coming from a kid that grew up in deer camps in Northen Washoe, where everyone had a tag. And from a young man who noticed how hard rifle tags where becoming to draw, so he started bowhunting to ensure he could go every year. And now a borderline old guy who sees even those tags drying up.

I fully believe that is a two fold problem. 1. Habitat (not gonna open that can of worms in this thread)
2. Success Rates because of technology have greatly increased and therefore decreased tags. I have not looked at rifle data, but archery success pre compound bows in Nevada was around 10%. Today we see success rates in some units above 50% for archery. Doesn't even take a calculator to do that math. Modern success rates have hurt the number of tags issued. Period.

Because of that belief, I support wildlife agencies with some of these new restrictions, to see if we can increase hunter opportunity and get more of us in the field each year.

 

[WRO]

Challenge: Go ask any wildlife management biologist what order of impact the following has on deer herds and overall deer kill on an annual basis:

1) Humans hunting under management
2) Winter Kill
3) Habitat Loss
4) Predator activity
5) Disease


I absolutely guarantee you, humans hunting deer will be at or near the bottom of that list in virtually every single zone in the West.

Of course they will, idfgs job is tag sales.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WRO]

Probably a typo, but I’m not understanding what you’re saying, can you rephrase?

The thought of limiting units to draw, capped, etc is unpalatable to allot of Idaho.

You can get away from people on the otc hunts and kill good bucks, but it’s not nearly as enjoyable as medium quality draw unit in other states. Being stuck hunting within a couple hours of Boise doesn’t help although the worst crowing I’ve ever been a part of was 5 hours away on opening weekend in an otc unit.

It becomes do you want quantity of hunts or quality of hunts.

(Yes it was a typo)

 

[Alanders]

Looks like I need to go gun shopping again! Dang! Haha

 

[RockAndSage]

I have not looked at rifle data, but archery success pre compound bows in Nevada was around 10%. Today we see success rates in some units above 50% for archery.

Those are some crazy numbers.

It also reminds me of some stuff I've been thinking about a lot the last couple of years. Pretty sure there's also something else going on with success rates, beyond just weapon tech. I think guys are just becoming better hunters, on average. At least with Western big game. It might sound crazy at first, when thinking about Grandpa going out every year, always getting a buck, etc, but think about how serious you and your circles are, compared to how past generations prepped pre-season. Normal back then for most guys was like getting ready for a long camping trip, with maybe an overnight pre-season scouting run somewhere.

Nobody was going out multiple times, totalling a couple of weeks, to scout. And that's pretty common now.

With tags getting harder to land, and many years apart in most places out here, I think a lot of guys are taking their hunt a lot more seriously than we would have 40 years ago. Guys are researching how-to a lot harder, they're scouting a lot more pre-season, and they've got access to vast catalogues of world-class buck hunters hunters they can watch or listen to on youtube, podcasts, etc, by the tens of hours each, who would have been a once-in-a-lifetime conversation to stumble into back in the 1980s. I'd argue that on average, each guy going out into the field per tag is probably more serious, with more info between his ears, than was the case even 20 years ago.

I think this is also why guys are putting a lot more into their gear - they spend 3-5 years waiting for the next tag, and put money into guns, optics, camo, SxS's, that they just probably wouldn't if they were getting drawn every year. But with opportunity becoming more rare, they want to make the absolute most, and best, of the hunt.

I don't see that as much with Blacktail or Whitetail guys. Might be wrong, admittedly. But I just don't perceive that level of obsessive preparation, gear hoarding, and bonkers exploits into the middle of nowhere backcountry on a BOAL pursuit.