Utah Muzzleloader Proposed Changes

[CMP70306]

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.

I’d be fine with 1x, I just shoot better with some type of optic even at close range.

Though it’s not a muzzleloader I am familiar with Vernier sights as I have them on my Sharps and have shot in Buffalo matches out to 200 yards and it is easily doable under the right conditions with prior testing to determine the correct adjustment.

On the flip side I lost out on the opportunity to take a bull bison because it got dark enough I couldn’t confidently take the shot at 100 yards despite there being plenty of daylight. Had this been the last day I would have risked the shot as to not lose out on the thousands it took to get to that point.

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


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.

The two big advancements are high bc projectiles like the Parker and Arrowhead bullets and high energy black powder substitutes like BH209. When I was introduced to muzzleloading in the late 2000’s the common muzzleloaders were either flintlocks or inlines using pyrodex pellets and power belt bullets. They shot well enough to kill deer but weren’t accurate enough to shoot past 200 yards with most shots being under 100.

It wasn’t until we got the break action T/C muzzleloaders with the sabots and BH209 that you could confidently shoot past 200 yards but over 300 would be a stretch. The only muzzleloader I would confidently shoot over 300 yards with is my suppressed smokeless muzzleloader, pretty much the most accurate and flattest possible muzzleloader combination.

My trajectory numbers are based on a hypothetical 400gr 50 caliber bullet with a .182 BC being shot at 1200 fps. I just picked a similar weight soft point bullet since most of the lead muzzleloading bullets don’t have a BC listed. This is the type of performance you would get from a caplock shooting black powder with lead bullets.

If bullets and powders didn’t matter then answer this, how far would you shoot at game with a subsonic 300 blackout vs a .300 Win Mag because that is the kind of power/trajectory difference we are talking about. Last time I checked nobody was calling the .300 Blackout a 300+ yard cartridge.

 

[MarkOrtiz]

After jumping into muzzleloader hunting this year in Nevada, I don't mind the no scopes rule. Most of the people I know here in NV wait 12-14 years for a bull elk tag. I was on that route and switched to muzzleloader because the draw odds were so much better. I was able to pull a bull elk tag and harvest after 9 years of putting in.
I learned the weapon, practiced, and knew that I was comfortable out to about 200 yards with open sights. We blew a couple of stalks trying to get close enough. I had a great 350+ bull, but couldn't get past the 250 yard mark and the 30 cows on the hill with him spooked and took off when the wind changed. I took my first shot at 190 yards and then followed up at 230 yards. Both were good shots and put him down quickly.
The open sights did limit me though. I just watched a video on theTube where a hunter in Utah shot his bull at 750 yards across the canyon with a muzzleloader. Big difference with or without a scope. I think having the no scope rule would keep some people from putting in and possibly increase hunting odds for others that are willing to keep with it.

 

[Wrench]

I’d be fine with 1x, I just shoot better with some type of optic even at close range.

Though it’s not a muzzleloader I am familiar with Vernier sights as I have them on my Sharps and have shot in Buffalo matches out to 200 yards and it is easily doable under the right conditions with prior testing to determine the correct adjustment.

On the flip side I lost out on the opportunity to take a bull bison because it got dark enough I couldn’t confidently take the shot at 100 yards despite there being plenty of daylight. Had this been the last day I would have risked the shot as to not lose out on the thousands it took to get to that point.

View attachment 624570



The two big advancements are high bc projectiles like the Parker and Arrowhead bullets and high energy black powder substitutes like BH209. When I was introduced to muzzleloading in the late 2000’s the common muzzleloaders were either flintlocks or inlines using pyrodex pellets and power belt bullets. They shot well enough to kill deer but weren’t accurate enough to shoot past 200 yards with most shots being under 100.

It wasn’t until we got the break action T/C muzzleloaders with the sabots and BH209 that you could confidently shoot past 200 yards but over 300 would be a stretch. The only muzzleloader I would confidently shoot over 300 yards with is my suppressed smokeless muzzleloader, pretty much the most accurate and flattest possible muzzleloader combination.

My trajectory numbers are based on a hypothetical 400gr 50 caliber bullet with a .182 BC being shot at 1200 fps. I just picked a similar weight soft point bullet since most of the lead muzzleloading bullets don’t have a BC listed. This is the type of performance you would get from a caplock shooting black powder with lead bullets.

If bullets and powders didn’t matter then answer this, how far would you shoot at game with a subsonic 300 blackout vs a .300 Win Mag because that is the kind of power/trajectory difference we are talking about. Last time I checked nobody was calling the .300 Blackout a 300+ yard cartridge.

View attachment 624803

I disagree. My personal hawken in action.

 

[Wrench]

That's not a fluke either. Here's load testing a 495gr bullet with loose powder in a side lock. I'm minute of milk jug to damn near 500.

 

[ElDiablito]

I’d be fine with 1x, I just shoot better with some type of optic even at close range.

Though it’s not a muzzleloader I am familiar with Vernier sights as I have them on my Sharps and have shot in Buffalo matches out to 200 yards and it is easily doable under the right conditions with prior testing to determine the correct adjustment.

On the flip side I lost out on the opportunity to take a bull bison because it got dark enough I couldn’t confidently take the shot at 100 yards despite there being plenty of daylight. Had this been the last day I would have risked the shot as to not lose out on the thousands it took to get to that point.

View attachment 624570



The two big advancements are high bc projectiles like the Parker and Arrowhead bullets and high energy black powder substitutes like BH209. When I was introduced to muzzleloading in the late 2000’s the common muzzleloaders were either flintlocks or inlines using pyrodex pellets and power belt bullets. They shot well enough to kill deer but weren’t accurate enough to shoot past 200 yards with most shots being under 100.

It wasn’t until we got the break action T/C muzzleloaders with the sabots and BH209 that you could confidently shoot past 200 yards but over 300 would be a stretch. The only muzzleloader I would confidently shoot over 300 yards with is my suppressed smokeless muzzleloader, pretty much the most accurate and flattest possible muzzleloader combination.

My trajectory numbers are based on a hypothetical 400gr 50 caliber bullet with a .182 BC being shot at 1200 fps. I just picked a similar weight soft point bullet since most of the lead muzzleloading bullets don’t have a BC listed. This is the type of performance you would get from a caplock shooting black powder with lead bullets.

If bullets and powders didn’t matter then answer this, how far would you shoot at game with a subsonic 300 blackout vs a .300 Win Mag because that is the kind of power/trajectory difference we are talking about. Last time I checked nobody was calling the .300 Blackout a 300+ yard cartridge.

View attachment 624803

I agree with most of what you wrote. I’m very familiar with the recent history of muzzy advancements. I’ve been exclusively muzzy hunting since the mid 1980s.

To add to the improvements you mention - the rise in availability/popularity of heavier/stronger barrels (larger max charge) and faster twist .50, .45 and .40 barrels that will stabilize long for caliber (higher BC) bullets have been a huge advancement. And of course the use of smokeless (but that’s not allowed during the UT muzzy hunt so irrelevant to the discussion).

But scopes and specifically dialable-turret (and the now illegal rangefinder-connected) scopes have allowed this tech to be used at long range. (Yes, there are a small percentage of IdahoLewis type guys out there that can shoot (hunt) long range with open sights - but not very damned many!).

So, limiting optics on muzzys is the simplest and easiest-to-enforce, way of limiting muzzy range (distinguishing muzzys from rifles is one stated goal of the proposal). None of the improvements you or I mention (other than optics) that have allowed guys to be proficient past 300 yards are easily regulated or enforced. Are we going to limit .45 and .50 cal rifles to 1:28 or slower twist? Or outlaw Bh209? (Similar performance can be had with 777). Or limit the BC of bullets used? Maybe require guys to use saboted bullets (I’m told those cannot be shot long range…)? Or do we require full bore conicals? (Oh, that’s right, all the LONG range shooting is being done with sized full-bore bullets). We could go back to patched round balls and bullets no longer than (insert number here).

Or, we could just limit muzzys to open sights only and the overwhelming majority of hunters would be limited to sub-300 yard shots.

 

[Wrench]

My rifle above is a 48 twist....so don't be afraid.

 

[wind gypsy]

How many muzzleloader shooters do you know that are shooting accurately beyond 500yds? Very few I'd bet.
There are more shooting beyond 500yds with a CF rifle, which is scoped too and I dare say more animals lost. So lets eliminate scopes all together, right? No scopes on any firearm. Eliminate scopes on cross bows, eliminate pins on compounds, along with kisser buttons.
Everyone can dress up in drag too, pretending to be someone they are not.

About the same as that muzzle loader in your avatar being used in a primative weapons season.

 

[ENCORE]

About the same as that muzzle loader in your avatar being used in a primative weapons season.

Here, and most other states call it "Muzzleloader Season". Primitive is what some think it is.

There's so few muzzleloader hunters anymore, that states are now allowing straight wall cartridge rifles during the "Muzzleloader Seasons".

 

[CorbLand]

Here, and most other states call it "Muzzleloader Season". Primitive is what some think it is.

There's so few muzzleloader hunters anymore, that states are now allowing straight wall cartridge rifles during the "Muzzleloader Seasons".

I can tell you that Utah is not seeing a decrease in muzzleloader hunters.

 

[ElDiablito]

And unlike many of the eastern states, our deer hunts in Utah (and most other western states) aren’t designed to kill as many deer as possible….

 

[wind gypsy]

And unlike many of the eastern states, our deer hunts in Utah (and most other western states) aren’t designed to kill as many deer as possible….

Montana enters the chat:

 

[ENCORE]

Hummmm........... according to the data from the Utah Muzzleloaders Association, there has NOT been an increase in muzzleloader ....... HUNTERS. There has been an increase in applicants, many out of state hunters.
It appears there's been a decrease in tags allocated due to lower and lower deer numbers. Mismanagement and weather they indicate, have done a number on the deer herd. Most don't believe they ever recovered from the 92 winter when there was a 40% die off statewide.

 

[CorbLand]

Hummmm........... according to the data from the Utah Muzzleloaders Association, there has NOT been an increase in muzzleloader ....... HUNTERS. There has been an increase in applicants, many out of state hunters.
It appears there's been a decrease in tags allocated due to lower and lower deer numbers. Mismanagement and weather they indicate, have done a number on the deer herd. Most don't believe they ever recovered from the 92 winter when there was a 40% die off statewide.

If more people are applying, it means more people are willing to hunt with a muzzleloader or in other words, more muzzleloader hunters. Utah is not seeing a decrease in muzzleloader hunters…your data literally proves that to be true.

Application numbers is the number of hunters, not the number of tags given.

 

[ENCORE]

If more people are applying, it means more people are willing to hunt with a muzzleloader or in other words, more muzzleloader hunters. Utah is not seeing a decrease in muzzleloader hunters…your data literally proves that to be true.

Application numbers are the number of hunters, not the number of tags given.

You have had some doozy comments but this one may take the cake.

The increase in numbers of applicants, does mean that there's more people interested in muzzleloader hunting, which is because of the rifle hunts where so hard to draw and muzzleloader tags were not. Also, since scopes were allowed, there was a large increase in applicants from out of state, who bring in a ton of money.
I know exactly the difference between applicants and the number of hunters, and I understand that its not the number of tags issued. That was a doozy comment you made.
Read it all over again............ Maybe you should join the Utah Muzzleloaders Association and realize what's really happening in Utah with muzzleloader hunters. Its free..........

 

[CorbLand]

The increase in numbers of applicants, does mean that there's more people interested in muzzleloader hunting, which is because of the rifle hunts where so hard to draw and muzzleloader tags were not. Also, since scopes were allowed, there was a large increase in applicants from out of state, who bring in a ton of money.
I know exactly the difference between applicants and the number of hunters, and I understand that its not the number of tags issued. That was a doozy comment you made.
Read it all over again............ Maybe you should join the Utah Muzzleloaders Association and realize what's really happening in Utah with muzzleloader hunters. Its free..........

You keep telling everyone to reread your comments, yet it doesn’t change anything.

Either you
A) are horrible at conveying your point
or
B) you have no idea what your point is

Either way I have no idea what you have been getting at in this entire thread other than using “facts” that really don’t prove your point nor does your point make any sense.

I would love to join the Utah Muzzleloaders Association but can’t find a link to join…unless you mean the Facebook page? If so, I generally don’t find anything posted on Facebook to be reliable source, nor would I find 623 people to be an accurate representation of Utah hunters.

 

[ENCORE]

You keep telling everyone to reread your comments, yet it doesn’t change anything.

Either you
A) are horrible at conveying your point
or
B) you have no idea what your point is

Either way I have no idea what you have been getting at in this entire thread other than using “facts” that really don’t prove your point nor does your point make any sense.

Maybe you just don't understand or comprehend very easy?

 

[CorbLand]

Maybe you just don't understand or comprehend very easy?

I will never claim to be smart. I was a below average student but I think in this case, I will stick with my A or B theory.

Have a good one. I will bow out of this one. Someone else can take it from here.

 

[ElDiablito]

Maybe you should join the Utah Muzzleloaders Association and realize what's really happening in Utah with muzzleloader hunters. Its free..........

I’ve never heard of this group and I’ve been hunting in Utah for forty years. Is this where guys in Michigan get all their facts about Utah deer hunting?

 

[2five7]

Why don't they just outlaw laser rangefinders? This would curb almost all long range hunting. Yes, there are other ways to estimate range using scope reticles and whatnot, but those are not as accurate, they take time, and lots of people aren't good enough at math to do it successfully.

I'd like to see Utah keep the muzzy hunt as is, or go full primitive, flintlocks and round balls only. Better yet, smooth bore barrels with the bell shapes muzzle, so you can't even see what you're aiming at

 

[roadrunner]

In the report it states that allowing scopes only increases the success rate by 3% so what exactly is removing them accomplishing?

That number is wrong, it's higher than that.

On another note, looks like 1x or open sights going forward.