Utah Muzzleloader Proposed Changes

[UpTop]

For the people that are interested in keeping the rules as is, I have an either or question for you. Because, at some point it's going to be one or the other. Not both.

Would you rather hunt half as much as you currently do and leave the regulations in place?
OR
Would you rather hunt as often as you currently do with iron sights? ​

It doesn’t really matter because iron sites are not going to change a thing. I don’t think the numbers of muzzy hunters will change in a significant enough manner to make a lick of difference. Archery hunting is way harder and those numbers are increasing yearly.

 

[CorbLand]

It was all about MONEY. To think different is extremely sad.

If that is the case, then there is no legitimate reason to have a specific season for muzzleloaders and we should stop talking about what is allowable and just do away with it altogether.

 

[CorbLand]

That’s the whole point though is they won’t. And at that point imo it’s just a bunch of crap. I’d love to see what you’re suggesting as well but it won’t ever happen. So until there’s a legitimately good reason to add the restriction on scoped muzzies it’s just feel good bs. Nothing more. Scoped muzzleloaders is waaaay down the list of problems needing to be looked at.

I dont think anyone really thinks that scopes on muzzleloaders is our biggest issue at the moment but it was presented as a potential change in the upcoming year and thus is being discussed.

 

[CorbLand]

It doesn’t really matter because iron sites are not going to change a thing. I don’t think the numbers of muzzy hunters will change in a significant enough manner to make a lick of difference. Archery hunting is way harder and those numbers are increasing yearly.

Taking scopes off of muzzleloaders is not going to change the number of hunters, thats a given backed by the survey that was done. What the intent is to help decrease success rates, allowing more tags to be issued, allowing people to hunt more often.

 

[UpTop]

Taking scopes off of muzzleloaders is not going to change the number of hunters, thats a given backed by the survey that was done. What the intent is to help decrease success rates, allowing more tags to be issued, allowing people to hunt more often.

IF we’re wanting to lower success rates then limit rifles as well. This is not going to drastically decrease success rates. 3% is the increase with an already low rate of success. Again this is nothing but feel good logic, nothing more. The same guys that get it done year after year will still get it done with or without the scope.They have the time and resources to do so. The everyday guy is who this affects.

 

[CorbLand]

IF we’re wanting to lower success rates then limit rifles as well. This is not going to drastically decrease success rates. 3% is the increase with an already low rate of success. Again this is nothing but feel good logic, nothing more

Then get that discussion going...I do not think that this is the end all be all, hunting is saved forever change but its being discussed.

If a success rate is 30 percent and you increase it to 33, that is a 10% increase to the success rate...which is significant.

There is going to have to be some hard decisions made in the next little bit if people want to continue to hunt. I dont mean that in the sense that we will lose the ability to hunt overall but that we, specifically Utah, are steaming towards only getting a general season deer tag every 5-15 years depending on weapon type.

We cannot keep throwing every ounce of advancement we make at animals and expect to be able to hunt. We are going to have to decide A) do we get 3-4 tags in our life or B) do we restrain ourselves and hunt more often. Personally, I am going to fight for hunting more often.


Seeing your edit. I agree with you that the people that get it done will still get it done with the help of their resources. Those same people generally have the resources to play in multiple states thus can also hunt more often. The everyday guy is getting screwed equally as much by not getting tags as he is by not having a scope on his muzzleloader.

 

[Ditt44]

I own and hunt with a flintlock, a percussion and an inline throughout the year. My favorite is a flintlock and if I have cheated iron sights, it is because I added a peep sight which greatly aids my aging eyes. My inline is a TC Encore and with a scope. That 'rifle' is easily a 250+ yard killer while I limit myself to 150. Take away that scope and I am hesitant to shoot over 100. Where I hunt in PA I can have shots out to 500 yards or 20. I carry my Encore more than my .308 during rifle season these days because it is more of a challenge and just more satisfying to take a deer with it. When I've got an archery buck, I hunt doe with the TC side locks through rifle season. That's my choice.

To me, a 'traditional' or 'primitive' season is all in the word used, not it's dictionary definition. Change the terms to 'loose black powder' only and it is an entirely new meaning. Further amend it to 'open sights' only and there is further narrowing. Go one more step to 'iron sights' only and you have removed optic tubes and peep sights etc. (which were illegal in PA for decades). Now you have punished hunters with failing eyesight. But, definition of and intent of the words used is critical.

Scope limitations? I'm good with that and could see limits such as 1x fixed being the only legal scope. It does not overly aid the hunter but it could be the difference in humane kills. Removing scopes does not take away any hunting days but modifies how and with what you hunt. Modern inline muzzle loaders are highly effective. You cannot argue that. It is, as some said earlier, an early single-shot rifle season.

I equate inline hunting with scopes vs traditional flint/cap muzzle loaders to a special week for crossbow only, with scopes, following 'traditional' archery season... what is the difference? Vertical compound bows are far more deadly than a 'primitive/traditional' recurve. Make a recurve only season out of the first half of the as-is archery season and watch the hunter numbers swell.

CorbLand makes great points. The advancement of everything from weapons, ammo, clothing, technical gear, GPS, hunting aps, weather monitoring, scents and lures...and on and on, give any hunter a massive advantage that did not exist 20 years ago, let a lone 50 or 100.

You cannot have your cake and eat it too, nor should you be eating someone else's cake while hording your own. Facts and math are real and cannot be argued. Objective and critical thinking needs to be the norm, not reactionary rhetoric, which is all too common these days.

Disclaimer: I archery hunt with a crossbow now because I cannot pull a compound due to physical injuries. I choose to use it because it is legal here and it gets me hundreds more of hours in the field. If I wanted to hunt another state that did not allow the crossbow, then I wouldn't hunt that state. Simple if even disappointing. I am pretty firmly on the side of using whatever weapons are legal in a state for a specific season. I do not believe in semi-auto rifles for big game. Personal opinion. I think muzzle loader seasons should be 'traditional' loose black powder, no inlines. I don't make the laws but I abide by them.

Money is the driver here. Once the firearm industry got the first inline rifles to market they were lobbying hard in all states to legalize them, for $$$. The firearm industry drives far too much political and hunting law across all elements of daily life.

 

[Wrench]

Remember that your user group's exposure is what the people see. When opportunities for seasons are visualized and the general public are shown a picture of a hawken and a Remington 700ml with a scope.....which seems like it may be more difficult and traditional?

Irons are not the limit that everyone thinks and the sights themselves can make an average gun great.

The seasons are not set by the number killed in a 1:1 fashion. They figure by chance deaths and use the entire user group to factor in the rate of death for the critters.

 

[Wrench]

.....and typically muzzleloader is the smallest user group.

 

[ElDiablito]

I’m all for it. I’ve muzzy deer hunted Utah just about every year since 1987. The DWR should have never made the reg change to allow variable power scopes. The only guys against this proposed change are not dedicated muzzy hunters. Rolling back some of the tech in all weapon choices is the right thing to do.

We sure don’t need any more hunters here in the west…. And limiting sights on muzzys won’t deter any significant number of guys from hunting - they’ll just go back to any legal weapon hunts.

 

[ENCORE]

I’m all for it. I’ve muzzy deer hunted Utah just about every year since 1987. The DWR should have never made the reg change to allow variable power scopes. The only guys against this proposed change are not dedicated muzzy hunters. Rolling back some of the tech in all weapon choices is the right thing to do.

We sure don’t need any more hunters here in the west…. And limiting sights on muzzys won’t deter any significant number of guys from hunting - they’ll just go back to any legal weapon hunts.

Hummmmmmmmmmmmmm..............

Over on MM I see where there's a lot of discussion about LONG range???

I see you just finished a week of muzzleloader hunting in NV. Beautifyul photo. Was the rifle loaded with smokeless or BP?? What brand scope is that?

 

[ElDiablito]

Hummmmmmmmmmmmmm..............

Over on MM I see where there's a lot of discussion about LONG range???

I see you just finished a week of muzzleloader hunting in NV. Beautifyul photo. Was the rifle loaded with smokeless or BP?? What brand scope is that?

View attachment 623990

I’m one of those dedicated muzzy hunters that uses a muzzy on any weapon hunts…..

 

[CMP70306]

Remember that your user group's exposure is what the people see. When opportunities for seasons are visualized and the general public are shown a picture of a hawken and a Remington 700ml with a scope.....which seems like it may be more difficult and traditional?

Irons are not the limit that everyone thinks and the sights themselves can make an average gun great.

The seasons are not set by the number killed in a 1:1 fashion. They figure by chance deaths and use the entire user group to factor in the rate of death for the critters.

.....and typically muzzleloader is the smallest user group.

Here in PA our muzzleloader harvest is roughly 6% of the total with archery being 34.5% and Rifle being 59.5%.

It is funny though, years ago they said we couldn’t have an early muzzleloader buck season because it would kill too many bucks before the rut. Since then the archery buck harvest has tripled from 27k to 76k, that increase is double what the expected muzzleloader buck harvest of 20k to 25k would be.

 

[ENCORE]

I’m one of those dedicated muzzy hunters that uses a muzzy on any weapon hunts…..

I guess so. As am I but...................

After going through 45 pages of one of your posts, there's not a single photo of a traditional muzzleloader (side hammer). Everything on those pages are photos of rifles WITH SCOPES and a lot of discussion about shooting smokeless propellants. Lots of modern inline bullets, but no round balls or conical that I seen. Very little responses in the traditional forum?

Nice rifles though, every one of them are beauties but, they all sport scopes????

 

[ElDiablito]

I guess so. As am I but...................

After going through 45 pages of one of your posts, there's not a single photo of a traditional muzzleloader (side hammer). Everything on those pages are photos of rifles WITH SCOPES and a lot of discussion about shooting smokeless propellants. Lots of modern inline bullets, but no round balls or conical that I seen. Very little responses in the traditional forum?

Nice rifles though, every one of them are beauties but, they all sport scopes????

View attachment 624009

View attachment 624008


View attachment 624007


View attachment 624006


View attachment 624005


View attachment 624004

Those are nice!

They all get scopes for load development. That may be where you got confused.

 

[ENCORE]

Those are nice!

They all get scopes for load development. That may be where you got confused.

K

 

[ElDiablito]

Some are also apparently confused about what is being proposed - the DWR (based on the tech committee recommendations) is not proposing anything other than removing scopes from muzzys during muzzleloader seasons. There is no talk of ignition, bullet, powder or other restrictions. No talk of “traditional” rifles only….

 

[CMP70306]

Some are also apparently confused about what is being proposed - the DWR (based on the tech committee recommendations) is not proposing anything other than removing scopes from muzzys during muzzleloader seasons. There is no talk of ignition, bullet, powder or other restrictions. No talk of “traditional” rifles only….

No we understand and that’s the issue, if they are concerned about harvesting too many animals due to the increased range a modern muzzleloader provides then limit the range of muzzleloader itself. No need to penalize the people with poor eyesight or those trying to make an ethical shot in low light because they want to stop people from shooting game at 500+ yards.

It’s a bassakwards way of solving the problem when there are better ways to specifically restrict what you want without penalizing everybody.

 

[CorbLand]

No we understand and that’s the issue, if they are concerned about harvesting too many animals due to the increased range a modern muzzleloader provides then limit the range of muzzleloader itself. No need to penalize the people with poor eyesight or those trying to make an ethical shot in low light because they want to stop people from shooting game at 500+ yards.

It’s a bassakwards way of solving the problem when there are better ways to specifically restrict what you want without penalizing everybody.

I would support Idahos rules in Utah. But that is not what is proposed. Taking scopes off of muzzleloaders is the step towards restricting muzzleloaders.

The whole poor eye sight thing is kind of a joke of an argument. We all have an issue that makes something harder for us and we cannot make a rule to make it equal for everyone.

I am colorblind as ****, like people see 10X the animals I do. Never once have you heard me say that I should be allowed to use thermal scopes.

 

[ElDiablito]

if they are concerned about harvesting too many animals due to the increased range a modern muzzleloader provides then limit the range of muzzleloader itself.

It’s a bassakwards way of solving the problem when there are better ways to specifically restrict what you want without penalizing everybody.

How do you propose limiting the range of muzzleloaders (if not by removing optics)?!