Idaho proposed special season open sight centerfire

[Q_Sertorius]

I guess I did not realize using open sights was such a difficult thing to do.

Is it easier or harder to place your shot where you want it to go with a good scope or a good set of iron sights?

 

[wind gypsy]

Form, what you describe is not “hunting,” by my personal definition. But neither is sitting in a blind shooting deer at a corn feeder. And that is “hunting” for a lot of Americans.

If your hypothetical “hunter who doesn’t do anything” wants to brag about his skill or post his trophy elk on social media, I can’t stop him. But I can ignore him.

If you want to limit technology, I am entirely in favor of banning the mobility advantages. If you want to limit all public land access to leather personnel carrier and animal transport, I would be just fine with that. I’m also quite okay with banning all scouting technology beyond regular optics (no drones, no thermals, no game cameras, etc.). And ban all hunting over bait. And ban all scent lures. And get rid of all NR tags on state land.

But when it comes to the act of killing, I am not interested in “feats of skill.” I am interested only in the humane killing and recovery of the dead animal. I practice so that the shot is the least remarkable part of hunting. If someone else wants to have you spot for him and make the wind call for him, I don’t care. My competition isn’t with some dumb animal or other hunters. It’s with myself.

And the reason that an “iron sights only” hunting area doesn’t appeal to me is that it is a totally futile gesture that will do nothing to solve the problem. If you can’t fix the systemic problems, then you have to accept crowding or limit tags. All these special seasons - be they archery, muzzleloader, iron sights - are just attempts to keep selling access to more people than are actually sustainable. It’s like Disney selling “skip the line passes” so that the rich don’t have to wait in line with the hoi polloi.

When it comes to public land hunting, my sympathies are with the average resident hunter who wants to go into the local lands to hunt. I want sustainable local traditions of hunting open to the common man. And I want the average person to be able to kill humanely, recover dead animals, and eat them.

Didn't you make a thread asking people to tell you why a western hunt would be worth your time and then poopooed most the reasons? It's clear you're looking at something you're not all that interested in doing through the lens of Virgina (or wherever out east) whitetail hunting. Mule Deer are not the same as eastern whitetails that the game agencies treat like varmints they cant kill enough of.

The dudes who actually hunt out west and value it that have different takes are at least worth considering.

 

[IDMNT17]

I guess I did not realize using open sights was such a difficult thing to do.

I agree its not and that's my hang up. This does nothing to address the real issue. Some complain about about "long range hunting" with scoped rifles. These will be the same people will complain about people taking long shots with non scoped rifles. There will be just as much wound/loss. Successful harvest % will be the same.

 

[IdahoBeav]

Is it easier or harder to place your shot where you want it to go with a good scope or a good set of iron sights?

Depends on the situation. Scoped rifles that are set up for dialing turrets, shooting prone, suppressor, etc. are not great for taking standing shots. I would much rather have a light rifle with iron sights.

 

[Steve300xcw]

Is it easier or harder to place your shot where you want it to go with a good scope or a good set of iron sights?

Used within their limitations its a toss up IMO. Scope would be faster on the shots further out though.

 

[Steve300xcw]

I agree its not and that's my hang up. This does nothing to address the real issue. Some complain about about "long range hunting" with scoped rifles. These will be the same people will complain about people taking long shots with non scoped rifles. There will be just as much wound/loss. Successful harvest % will be the same.

You'll never stop folks from lobbing rounds at things that are outta range. Be it ducks, deer or elk. But how many folks do you know of that could make, say a 300yrd open sight shot? How many folks do you know of that could do that same shot with their normal scoped hunting rifle?

 

[IDMNT17]

You'll never stop folks from lobbing rounds at things that are outta range. Be it ducks, deer or elk. But how many folks do you know of that could make, say a 300yrd open sight shot? How many folks do you know of that could do that same shot with their normal scoped hunting rifle?

I agree there's less currently that could make that shot with open sights. But... people adjust. Hunter's will just have peeps that dial or what not. I mean take look at these high end muzzleloaders guys are using. Like it has been stated previously they are like a one shot centerfires that adhere to muzzleloader regs. Guys are shooting critters at 300 plus no problem. I just believe this does nothing to solve the problem. This just feels like this has been proposed by a few hunters that haven't been successful and by doing this they believe there will be big bucks up every canyon, draw, etc...

 

[wind gypsy]

I agree there's less currently that could make that shot with open sights. But... people adjust. Hunter's will just have peeps that dial or what not. I mean take look at these high end muzzleloaders guys are using. Like it has been stated previously they are like a one shot centerfires that adhere to muzzleloader regs. Guys are shooting critters at 300 plus no problem.

Peeps that dial dont make it easy to discern a deer at 300 yards in brush through a peep/globe/crosshair. I thought i had a pretty good site setup and beyond 200 on deer aint happening for me and even that is probably too far without further practice. There's a bunch of people shooting animals at 800+ yards too but it's not the norm or "no problem" just because it turns out ok some of the time.

I just believe this does nothing to solve the problem. This just feels like this has been proposed by a few hunters that haven't been successful and by doing this they believe there will be big bucks up every canyon, draw, etc...

Depends what one identifies as the problem? I haven't seen anyone thinking its a magic bullet but it could contribute to incremental improvement to huntable buck populations if most hunters have to get inside 200 yards of them. People want to say hunters dont impact population.. Ok, so are hunters happy seeing 30 does/fawns and a few juvenile bucks on a hunt? Sift through the does and fawns to find a trophy forky.

 

[Steve300xcw]

I agree there's less currently that could make that shot with open sights. But... people adjust. Hunter's will just have peeps that dial or what not. I mean take look at these high end muzzleloaders guys are using. Like it has been stated previously they are like a one shot centerfires that adhere to muzzleloader regs. Guys are shooting critters at 300 plus no problem. I just believe this does nothing to solve the problem. This just feels like this has been proposed by a few hunters that haven't been successful and by doing this they believe there will be big bucks up every canyon, draw, etc...

Pretty easy to shit on any idea. I can at least respect them for wanting to try something... Hop over one state and they went from fork or better to visible horn, and extended the season. Only reason to do such a thing IMO is to improve their stats

 

[philcox]

Reality is that without NR hunters, resident opportunity goes away. Don't kid yourself into thinking residents (in any of the popular "western states") are willing to make up the funding difference that will be lost if you exclude NR. Hunting is politics, and money rules politics. Sad reality.

 

[HunterGatherer]

Reality is that without NR hunters, resident opportunity goes away. Don't kid yourself into thinking residents (in any of the popular "western states") are willing to make up the funding difference that will be lost if you exclude NR. Hunting is politics, and money rules politics. Sad reality.

100 %. I’m actually thrilled about the increased revenue for NR tag apps. I think Idaho has been selling it’s tags off at Rollback Prices for far too long. We were the cheapest NR state in the West for a long time. Hopefully IDFG will use the revenue to preserve habitat, to prevent more development on the winter range, build more wildlife overpasses, re-seeding projects, etc etc

Since you NR hunters now have to buy an Idaho hunting license anyway and a wolf tag costs less than a tank of gas, we expect to see you all out here helping us beat back the lions and wolves ! Then we’ll all have more buck and bull tags to fight over.

 

[philcox]

100 %. I’m actually thrilled about the increased revenue for NR tag apps. I think Idaho has been selling it’s tags off at Rollback Prices for far too long. We were the cheapest NR state in the West for a long time. Hopefully IDFG will use the revenue to preserve habitat, to prevent more development on the winter range, build more wildlife overpasses, re-seeding projects, etc etc

Since you NR hunters now have to buy an Idaho hunting license anyway and a wolf tag costs less than a tank of gas, we expect to see you all out here helping us beat back the wolves ! Then we’ll all have more buck and bull tags to fight over.

Yep. No reason to not have one (Wolf tag) in the pocket. I think the ID move for NR is gonna be positive (the fiasco over the last few years had kept me away, now I'll try again). I like the idea of having to have a bit of skin in the game (license) win or lose.

 

[idahodave]

Successful harvest % will be the same.

Wanna bet?

Let me state for the record I fully support the idea. I’m all for anything that continues to allow general season hunts for the masses. I’ve killed elk with a bow, MZ, and rifle.

I don’t much care so long as I get to keep hunting. Most of us in Idaho feel that way,….which is why IDFG is trying this. Game is a finite resource and they are trying to maximize hunter opportunity while preserving that finite resource.

It’s that simple. If you can’t see that, you’re either being deliberately obtuse or you were dropped on your head as a baby. Nobody is being MADE to hunt with irons. Lots of other options across the state. If it works well (more/larger game)…expect it to take hold. If not, they’ll likely abandon it.

Maybe wait and give it a chance?

Dave