Utah Muzzleloader Proposed Changes

[HighUintas]

I'd rather have the opportunity to hunt more often with less effective tools than hunt every 5 years with a damn scope.

Regular rifle and archery seasons should have weapon restrictions as well.

If this is all considered too radical or infringing on rights, we might as well allow night hunting with thermal scopes for all game. Year round.

 

[CorbLand]

Ok....... Let's talk FACTS about traditionalists vs modern inline shooters. Bare with me here, because this is FACT, a provable fact.

Taking into consideration the largest muzzleloading group in the world, the National Muzzle Loading Rifle Association (NMLRA), here's what happened. Modern inline rifles made their way to Friendship. The traditionalists went absolutely INSANE NUTS. They argued, raised hell, and some of them actually canceled their memberships. Others threated to never renew their memberships.
Then BH209 made a showing and just kicked every BP shooters ask. I mean stomped them into the ground. Well if you think insane nuts was bad............. OMG!

There was so much pressure put on the directors and rifle committee, that they started making up rules in an attempt to eliminate BH. When they couldn't do that, they decided that one way would be to limit the amount of propellant that could be used. That went over like a fart in church, because the rules also hindered other shooter's propellants to the "manufacturer's recommendations".

A much longer story shorter........... Attendance dwindled and there were other multiple contributing factors involved, such as age. Even today, the average member age in the NMLRA is 70yrs young.
After a change in directors/president, the NMLRA realized that in order to keep it functioning for decades to come, they needed to attract new and younger members.

Although it thoroughly P'D off many of the traditionalists, the NMLRA added more matches for modern inline rifles. In doing so, memberships started to increase, as more modern inline shooters became involved and became members.

Make a trip to Friendship next June and/or for the Nationals in September. It will amaze you the numbers of modern inline shooters attending. The traditionalists are still traditionalists, but it is slowly becoming more accepted by them.

You can't take a youngster who just bought a CVA Wolf with a scope from Wal-Mart and belittle him/her for shooting a modern inline rifle. You do nothing but turn them away.
Imagine this, take the smart phone away from your kids and hand them a rotary phone. I dare anyone.

And of course the guy who posted about a CVA Wolf being made into a 500yd hunting rifle, do the ballistics calculations on that, especially with the Pyrodex pellets and powerbutt bullets. I find you way off base..............

A. You said CVA, not a Wolf.
B. I never said it could be done with pellets and powerbelts. In fact, my response directly stated that if you play it and find the load it likes, it is capable of being a 500 yard gun.
C. Ironically, the muzzleloader that is most commonly being used in Utah to shoot 500 yards plus, is made by CVA.

I can change the stipulations to make them meet my expectations too.

The NMLRA has zero to do with hunting and the rules it chooses to implement and not have nothing to do with hunting. I know plenty of people that shoot NRL and other competitive shoots that do not hunt.

Nobody has talked about belitting anyone for the weapon they shoot.

Phones have zero to do with hunting.

 

[ElDiablito]

. Just saying that the over whelming numbers of Utah hunters are opposed to the elimination of scopes.

Says who? According to the Divisions own survey, it’s about 50/50. You talking Michigan guys?

 

[ENCORE]

A. You said CVA, not a Wolf.
B. I never said it could be done with pellets and powerbelts. In fact, my response directly stated that if you play it and find the load it likes, it is capable of being a 500 yard gun.

I can change the stipulations to make them meet my expectations too.

The NMLRA has zero to do with hunting and the rules it chooses to implement and not have nothing to do with hunting. I know plenty of people that shoot NRL and other shots that do not hunt.

Nobody has talked about belitting anyone for the weapon they shoot.

Phones have zero to do with hunting.

Go back and read post #73 again and the response to it.

Says who? According to the Divisions own survey, it’s about 50/50. You talking Michigan guys?

As I said, purchase your CVA from Wal-Mart and show me those 500yd groups. Shoot BP, or substitutes and any bullet you want. While your at it, include the ballistics information, especially the FPE at 500yds.

 

[ENCORE]

Says who? According to the Divisions own survey, it’s about 50/50. You talking Michigan guys?

I suggest you look at the real numbers from the alliance. Its above........ 76% want to keep scopes.

Of course the division is going to provide you the numbers like that. Its all political.

POLITICS 101............. Tell them what you want them to know, not what you know!

 

[CorbLand]

Go back and read post #73 again and the response to it.

As I said, purchase your CVA from Wal-Mart and show me those 500yd groups. Shoot BP, or substitutes and any bullet you want. While your at it, include the ballistics information, especially the FPE at 500yds.

Post 73 was Dos asking you "what in the world?"

Your response to it, is the one I quoted.


This thread is about scopes on muzzleloaders for hunting. That is what is being discussed. Not what is allowable at competitions.

 

[HighUintas]

Probably the dumbest statement I've ever seen regarding rifles

"The traditionalists will ruin the sport of muzzleloading if they don't except modern advances."

 

[ENCORE]

Post 73 was Dos asking you "what in the world?"

Your response to it, is the one I quoted.


This thread is about scopes on muzzleloaders for hunting. That is what is being discussed. Not what is allowable at competitions.

And what is the problem?

That was a question that Dos wrote. See the question mark? He was given an answer.

I think everyone fully understands that the post is about scopes. However, things do get off track at times.

 

[HighUintas]

I suggest you look at the real numbers from the alliance. Its above........ 76% want to keep scopes.

Of course the division is going to provide you the numbers like that. Its all political.

POLITICS 101............. Tell them what you want them to know, not what you know!

I 100% would not trust a survey produced by an alliance who's goal is to oppose the committee's recommendation

 

[ElDiablito]

I suggest you look at the real numbers from the alliance. Its above........ 76% want to keep scopes.

Of course the division is going to provide you the numbers like that. Its all political.

POLITICS 101............. Tell them what you want them to know, not what you know!

Never heard of “The Alliance” but I have seen recent polls of western hunters like this one where nearly 300 guys voted and 62.8% said they’d like to see 4x or revert to 1x scopes/open sights…..

 

[CorbLand]

Probably the dumbest statement I've ever seen regarding rifles

"The traditionalists will ruin the sport of muzzleloading if they don't except modern advances."

Its actually a true statement, minus the incorrect spelling of "accept."

The problem is that he is talking about the sport and we are talking about hunting... big difference.

 

[CorbLand]

And what is the problem?

That was a question that Dos wrote. See the question mark? He was given an answer.

I think everyone fully understands that the post is about scopes. However, things do get off track at times.

I am not sure what the "problem" is...What in my response to your response to post 73 could be answered or changed by rereading post 73?

 

[ENCORE]

Never heard of “The Alliance” but I have seen recent polls of western hunters like this one where nearly 300 guys voted and 62.8% said they’d like to see 4x or revert to 1x scopes/open sights…..

View attachment 624439

Go read post #8

 

[ENCORE]

I am not sure what the "problem" is...What in my response to your response to post 73 could be answered or changed by rereading post 73?

Never mind............

 

[CorbLand]

Go read post #8

How many people voted in that poll from Post 8?

 

[CorbLand]

Never mind............

I am genuinely curious as to what the point of me rereading post 73 was and what that would answer or change in my response to your response to it?

If I read your response right, you are saying that NMLRA saw a decrease in participation because they wouldnt allow modern inlines at their competitions. Thus, if we dont allow the same thing, that will happen to hunting.

My comment back was that competitions and hunting are two completely different things and are not in any way shape or form connected. Those "facts" may be true if we were trying to start a muzzleloading league but they are not "facts" related to the proposal at hand.

If your response was not what I stated, please correct me.

If you are talking about the sport of muzzleloading, well, this change will have no effect on that, this is in regards to hunting.

 

[CorbLand]

Never heard of “The Alliance” but I have seen recent polls of western hunters like this one where nearly 300 guys voted and 62.8% said they’d like to see 4x or revert to 1x scopes/open sights…..

View attachment 624439

285 people is a pretty small sample size compared to the number of hunters in Utah.

Getting information like this from forums is pretty bias.

 

[CMP70306]

“Killing power” and trajectory are irrelevant to this discussion, IMO. Optics dramatically enhance aiming precision, drop compensation and being able to clearly see the target. As others said when you posted the original chart, the overwhelming majority of hunters aren’t capable of 300+ yard shots with open sights. But put a dialable-turreted scope on any muzzy and they are certainly 300+ yard rifles in many guys’ hands.

The stated goal of this proposal is to make the muzzy hunt distinguishable/unique/more primitive than the rifle hunt. (Currently we have a one-shot rifle hunt.) Removing scopes is the simplest (and least radical) way to differentiate it from the rifle hunt without going full trad.

Killing Power and trajectory are what this entire debate is about, nobody cared if the muzzleloaders had scopes when they were shooting .50 cal power belts that had the BC of a brick at 1500 fps with minute of deer accuracy. It wasn’t until advancements in muzzleloader tech allowed for accurate 300, 400 and 500+ yard shots that people started to say “wait that wasn’t the intention”

As for the trajectory, if it’s limited enough then it doesn’t matter how good your scope is you simply run out of adjustment at extended ranges. You are talking 30+ MOA of adjustment just to get to 300 yards, not to mention range errors of just a few yards can result in a complete miss and even a 10 mph wind can push the bullet almost a foot at that distance. Having a highly restrictive trajectory greatly stacks the deck against you regardless of how good your scope is and forces you to get closer.

On top of that by 300 yards the projectile is down to less than 850 fps and around 600 ftlbs of energy. That requires very good shot placement to ensure an ethical kill, something made difficult by the softball trajectory and high variability of windage.

But it kind of is. As we get older, things change for everyone. My wifes grandpa cant hike the 8 miles to where they use to hunt in the wilderness. He sold his horses because he cant physically ride them anymore. He could drive there though, so should he be allowed to drive there?

Accepting that as you get older, your life changes and you have to change with it is part of life.

We cannot eat our cake and have it too.

Except we can, limiting the rifles but allowing scopes doesn’t hamper anybody’s ability to cleanly and ethically take game, it just means you have to get closer to make the shot.

That being said I would be onboard with a 1x or 4x max power restriction as well I just don’t think scopes should be banned altogether.

 

[CorbLand]

Except we can, limiting the rifles but allowing scopes doesn’t hamper anybody’s ability to cleanly and ethically take game, it just means you have to get closer to make the shot.

That being said I would be onboard with a 1x or 4x max power restriction as well I just don’t think scopes should be banned altogether.

Trust me, I dont want to stop at scopes but that is not what has been brought up, it is not what this thread is about.

I would still disagree about 1 or 4 power scopes. I keep my variable scopes on 4X all the time. It is enough to shoot to 500-600 yards. Scopes also allow for the ability to dial and there is a big difference between holding over with iron sights and dialing your scope. Even with some of the advancements in peeps that you can dial with, a scope allows for much much more.

IF I had to concede and allow scopes, take it back to 2016 rules and allow 1X only. I would support a change that would allow for red dots or similar sights that are 1X only.

 

[ElDiablito]

It wasn’t until advancements in muzzleloader tech allowed for accurate 300, 400 and 500+ yard shots that people started to say “wait that wasn’t the intention”

Which “advancements in muzzleloader tech” are we talking about and when did all that come about?

On top of that by 300 yards the projectile is down to less than 850 fps and around 600 ftlbs of energy.

You keep throwing out these vague numbers. What load specifically are you referring to that would produce those figures?

I think you’re placing way too much emphasis on bullets/powders and not nearly enough on scopes.