Lots of guys on here talking about 300 or 600 yard iron sight shots (I don't remember a time I didn't go 10 for 10 shooting these kinds of targets with iron sights at 500yds while in the servitude of Uncle Sam). Sure, that works on high contrast targets on a bright sunny range. It might even work on game animals that are caught in a field on a bright day. It doesn't work on a mule deer bedded down on the shady side of a ridge, or under a juniper, or anywhere else he isn't contrasted against a background in hunting scenarios at anywhere close to those ranges.
Sure, you can still bang away, just like guys ineffectively bang away with scoped rifles on shots they shouldn't be taking. Either way, it's reducing hit rates and by extension hunter success, which is exactly the goal of the proposed legislation. Less success = more opportunity (which has absolutely zip to do with deer herd survival, but will put a tag in your pocket more often). We already show insane preferential treatment to youth hunters in draw odds and season/weapons type in most state. What's better for hunter recruitment, more tags or less?
I spent an entire week wandering around in my restricted unit in Utah sighting on various objects at various ranges and lighting conditions to try and better establish what my actual field capabilities were. 200-300yds is about it with irons outside of very special circumstances.
Also, Form has said it multiple times in this thread already, but GOOD irons work just as well for old dudes as they do for young dudes. Diopter focusing removes the issues that older folks have with multiplane focus on blade, buckhorn, or ring peep style sighting systems. I know, because 20 years after PRK, my eyes aren't doing so great either, and a diopter snapped my iron shooting right back into place.