Utah Muzzleloader Proposed Changes

[ENCORE]

I would support Idahos rules in Utah.........

Why?

Why do you feel the necessity to hinder one hunter and his/her methods, just to satisfy your own. Can't you still hunt without a scope?

For some reason, why I have no clue, everyone against others using a scoped rifle, feels that hunters are all making 500yd shots at game. That is total BS.

So I buy a new CVA rifle from Wal-Mart, that already has a scope mounted. Then the clerk sells me a box of pellets and a package of powerbutt bullets, and you think that's a 500yd rifle?

I'd almost bet that of all the forum members reading this, you could count on one hand the number of people that have ever shot 500yds with a muzzleloader.

 

[ENCORE]

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

Great question.

I wonder if Lee Shaver has ever used a "modern" scope? I've seen him shoot without a scope and shot with him and believe me, an animal at 500yds wouldn't stand a chance.
Its not the scope boys............

 

[ElDiablito]

More detailed info on this subject from the DWR

 

[CMP70306]

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.

But it really isn’t, after my Dad turned 40 his eyes started to go and now he doesn’t shoot anything with iron sights because he can’t see them well enough to shoot accurately. If they barred scopes from muzzleloader season he would have to give it up as he can’t shoot irons well enough to ethically harvest game. I have somewhere between 20/15 and 20/20 vision and can’t even see through his scopes without adjusting the ocular.

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

Multitude of different ways with powder type and projectile being the two biggest. I posted a chart earlier in this thread showing the trajectory difference between a Modern bolt action muzzleloader with Smokless & BH209 both with high BC bullets, Standard Inline with sabots and a true black powder with full bore lead bullets.

At 300 yards the drops were roughly 15” for smokeless, 20” for BH209, 55” for inline with sabots and the .50 cal lead bullets were 104”

Step out to 400 yards and the drops increase to roughly 25” for smokeless, 45” for BH209, 125” for inline with sabots and the .50 cal lead bullets were 225”.

And that’s just for trajectory that doesn’t take into account the killing power of the bullets at those ranges. But as you can see with a good set of irons one of the BH209 muzzleloaders with the high BC bullets is still easily capable of taking game out to 400 yards with less drop than an inline at 300 or a .50 cal lead bullet at 200 yards.

Simply requiring flintlock or cap lock ignition with full bore .50 Cal projectiles limits your range to the point that the scope becomes irrelevant as you can’t shoot far enough for it to matter.

 

[BBob]

For some reason, why I have no clue, everyone against others using a scoped rifle, feels that hunters are all making 500yd shots at game. That is total BS.

This seems the case to me. In all of my shooting down here and assisting on hunts an honest long range (lets call it 500yds) capable muzzleloader of any sort scoped or not is pretty damn rare. Most I know and have met aren't even shooting 300yds with scoped ML's. I'd say they are shooting 250yds and in. Unlike states such as NM, AZ ML tags have always been pretty limited keeping the harvest limited so I doubt restrictions will happen here.

 

[ElDiablito]

But it really isn’t, after my Dad turned 40 his eyes started to go and now he doesn’t shoot anything with iron sights because he can’t see them well enough to shoot accurately. If they barred scopes from muzzleloader season he would have to give it up as he can’t shoot irons well enough to ethically harvest game. I have somewhere between 20/15 and 20/20 vision and can’t even see through his scopes without adjusting the ocular.



Multitude of different ways with powder type and projectile being the two biggest. I posted a chart earlier in this thread showing the trajectory difference between a Modern bolt action muzzleloader with Smokless & BH209 both with high BC bullets, Standard Inline with sabots and a true black powder with full bore lead bullets.

At 300 yards the drops were roughly 15” for smokeless, 20” for BH209, 55” for inline with sabots and the .50 cal lead bullets were 104”

Step out to 400 yards and the drops increase to roughly 25” for smokeless, 45” for BH209, 125” for inline with sabots and the .50 cal lead bullets were 225”.

And that’s just for trajectory that doesn’t take into account the killing power of the bullets at those ranges. But as you can see with a good set of irons one of the BH209 muzzleloaders with the high BC bullets is still easily capable of taking game out to 400 yards with less drop than an inline at 300 or a .50 cal lead bullet at 200 yards.

Simply requiring flintlock or cap lock ignition with full bore .50 Cal projectiles limits your range to the point that the scope becomes irrelevant as you can’t shoot far enough for it to matter.

“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.

 

[willfrye027]

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….

They are proposing additional weapon restriction in some of the southern units as a 4 year “test” which includes some more traditional restrictions

 

[ElDiablito]

They are proposing additional weapon restriction in some of the southern units as a 4 year “test” which includes some more traditional restrictions

Yeah I understand that. Let me rephrase - no talk currently of traditional-only statewide for muzzy seasons. It will be interesting to see what comes out of the study in 4 years.

 

[CorbLand]

Why?

Why do you feel the necessity to hinder one hunter and his/her methods, just to satisfy your own. Can't you still hunt without a scope?

For some reason, why I have no clue, everyone against others using a scoped rifle, feels that hunters are all making 500yd shots at game. That is total BS.

So I buy a new CVA rifle from Wal-Mart, that already has a scope mounted. Then the clerk sells me a box of pellets and a package of powerbutt bullets, and you think that's a 500yd rifle?

I'd almost bet that of all the forum members reading this, you could count on one hand the number of people that have ever shot 500yds with a muzzleloader.

1. Because Idahos rules provide for a weapon that is more effective than a bow but less effective than a rifle. It provides better draw odds because less people are willing to hunt with the muzzleloaders you can in Idaho. It allows those that are willing to take that challenge with the opportunity to hunt more often.

2. Why do I want to hinder another hunter? Well, why do we hinder people with all sorts of regulations? I want to hunt deer with a rifle in July... I want to hunt them at night... I want to hunt them with a howitzer.... There are plenty of rules and regulations that limit/hinder how people want to hunt. My reason for wanting this is because the muzzy hunt is my favorite hunt and I want the success rate to be reduced, so they can issue more tags and I can go more often. Currently, I can maybe hunt every other year on the muzzy hunt in Utah. Selfish? Maybe but selfish can go both ways. Animals are a public resource and the "if you dont like it dont do it" philosophy doesnt work with public resources.

3. Not all are making 500 yard shots but it is and does happen. There is a company based here in Utah that has built muzzleloaders that people every year are killing deer at 600 plus. The muzzleloaders that are capable of doing that are becoming more and more common here in Utah. They are becoming more and more affordable and more and more people are buying them. I live here, I hunt here, I work here, I see it everyday.

4. With time and effort that CVA from Walmart could be a 500 yard gun. Spend the time finding the load it wants, shooting and tweaking as needed and yes, that CVA could be capable of 500 yard shots.


The bottom line of it is this. We, as hunters in this state, are going to have to make some hard decisions about how hunting is going to move forward. We are going to have to limit ourselves and make changes. The answer has always been cut tags, well we have cut tags by over half in 20 years and it isnt ******* working. Whats the definition of insanity?

Do we need better habitat? Yes. Do we need less tags? Maybe. Do we need to limit the technology we use? Yes. There are alot of things we need to do and this is one of them.

 

[CorbLand]

But it really isn’t, after my Dad turned 40 his eyes started to go and now he doesn’t shoot anything with iron sights because he can’t see them well enough to shoot accurately. If they barred scopes from muzzleloader season he would have to give it up as he can’t shoot irons well enough to ethically harvest game. I have somewhere between 20/15 and 20/20 vision and can’t even see through his scopes without adjusting the ocular.

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.

 

[wmr89]

It provides better draw odds because less people are willing to hunt with the muzzleloaders you can in Idaho. It allows those that are willing to take that challenge with the opportunity to hunt more often.

I actually wonder if this will be the reason the wildlife board will keep scopes on muzzleloaders. I don't think they worry too much about archery or muzzleloader odds but they care a lot about rifle odds since a majority of hunters fall in that category. If they can make muzzleloader odds worse and make rifle odds even slightly better I think they take that trade.

 

[CorbLand]

I actually wonder if this will be the reason the wildlife board will keep scopes on muzzleloaders. I don't think they worry too much about archery or muzzleloader odds but they care a lot about rifle odds since a majority of hunters fall in that category. If they can make muzzleloader odds worse and make rifle odds even slightly better I think they take that trade.

I wouldnt be surprised if this is true but this wildlife board has surprised me many times to be honest. Both in what I feel was good decisions and bad decisions.

 

[Dos Perros]

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

Respectfully, what in the world?

 

[wmr89]

The wildlife board vetoed the technology committee's recommendation to not allow peep enhancers on bows last year. A large part of the decision was that several of them use peep enhancers because their eye sight is getting worse. Peep enhancers do not provide the same advantage as scopes but I wouldn't be surprised to hear a similar discussion on Nov 28th when they meet.

 

[CorbLand]

The wildlife board vetoed the technology committee's recommendation to not allow peep enhancers on bows last year. A large part of the decision was that several of them use peep enhancers because their eye sight is getting worse. Peep enhancers do not provide the same advantage as scopes but I wouldn't be surprised to hear a similar discussion on Nov 28th when they meet.

It will 100% get brought up and be discussed, as it should be but I really hope that the answer is my answer to this argument above. Hell, they even state that you can get a COR if the new rule is implemented. Based on that, its a mute point.

 

[ElDiablito]

The wildlife board vetoed the technology committee's recommendation to not allow peep enhancers on bows last year. A large part of the decision was that several of them use peep enhancers because their eye sight is getting worse. Peep enhancers do not provide the same advantage as scopes but I wouldn't be surprised to hear a similar discussion on Nov 28th when they meet.

And the Division says they’re not ok with the status quo, but they can support “low power scopes” so I suspect that will have a good chance of being the end result.

 

[ENCORE]

Respectfully, what in the world?

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..............

 

[Dos Perros]

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..............

Is Utah DWR proposing to regulate muzzleloader shooting or muzzleloader hunting?

 

[ENCORE]

And the Division says they’re not ok with the status quo, but they can support “low power scopes” so I suspect that will have a good chance of being the end result.

View attachment 624416

View attachment 624415

I don't know how this may turn out but this I do know.............

There are a TON of people totally against this proposal and have put together an alliance to confront the State about the proposed changes. They are not "internet keybord experts". They have facts, an outline and will be attending the meetings.

Not saying either side is right or wrong, one or the other will win. Just saying that the over whelming numbers of Utah hunters are opposed to the elimination of scopes.

 

[ENCORE]

Is Utah DWR proposing to regulate muzzleloader shooting or muzzleloader hunting?

Post #73