Wisconsin to allow scopes on Muzzleloaders!
MuleyMadness
4/24/09 6:47pm
North American Muzzleloader Hunting Association
Fighting For The Rights And Hunting Opportunities Of Today's Muzzleloading Hunters
News Release April 22, 2009
Wisconsin Muzzleloading Hunters Vote "Yes" To Allow Magnifying Scopes During The Muzzleloader Deer Season
On Monday, April 13th, thousands of Wisconsin sportsmen attended the 2009 Conservation Congress meetings conducted in all counties of the state. These annual meetings are held to give hunters and fishermen an opportunity to vote on regulation and season changes. And one of the more closely watched issues on the ballot this year was whether or not to allow the use of magnifying riflescopes during the 10-day muzzleloader deer season. And Wisconsin sportsmen have spoken, voting "yes" to allow hunters to use a precision telescopic rifle sight during the muzzleloader only deer season.
When the votes had been tallied, 62 counties approved the regulation change, while only 9 counties rejected the change. And in the one remaining county, the vote was tied.
Wisconsin's first muzzleloader deer season was held in 1992, and riflescopes have never been allowed during this post general firearms hunt. While 37 states permitted the use of a magnifying scope during the 2008 muzzleloader seasons, Wisconsin and 11 other states continued to deny hunters the right to choose whether to use a sight system that allowed them to better see their target and place their shots, or to stick with non-magnifying sights that added to the challenge of the hunt. And it has been that denied right of choice which lead to a federal discrimination complaint filed against 15 state wildlife agencies, including the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, back in July 2006 by the North American Muzzleloader Hunting Association. (Montana is the only state in the country that still denies muzzleloading hunters an opportunity to enjoy their own season.)
Shortly after that complaint was filed, scopes were legalized in Georgia. And last year, the wildlife agencies in Nebraska and Kansas acknowledged that hunters were becoming an older lot - with a growing percentage needing the use of such sights in order to participate in the special muzzleloader only seasons. That same realization may have spurred passage for a regulation change in Wisconsin, that will allow those with less than perfect eyesight to now take part in the muzzleloader deer season.
Today, sportsmen over the age of 40 make up the largest age class of hunters, and this is the group of hunters who tend to suffer from the loss of close up focus, plus the inability of aging eyes to switch focus back and forth rapidly enough to permit a rear sight, front sight and a deer at 50 or 75 yards to be somewhat in focus at the same time. Not only do these hunters need the use of a magnifying riflescope in order to precisely place their shots for a quick and humane harvest of deer, but to also positively identify the target as a deer and not another human.
Participation in the Wisconsin muzzleloader season has been lacking, specifically due to the regulation that prohibited the use of a riflescope. The deer harvest during this season the past two years has only been about 10,000 deer each year. The low number of deer taken has done little to contribute to managing the growing deer herd. Now that sportsmen have voted down the restriction that has kept many deer hunters from hunting the muzzleloader season, participation is expected to increase.
Unfortunately, two other muzzleloader issues on the 2009 Wisconsin Conservation Congress ballot failed to get hunter approval. Either would have set the muzzleloader season back several weeks, to give the deer a break. The current 10-day muzzleloader season follows right on the heels of the 9-day modern firearm deer season. One proposal would have seen a 10-day muzzleloader season begin on December 22nd and run until December 31. The other proposal would have established a longer 16-day muzzleloader season, that would have opened on the Saturday before Christmas, and run through until the Sunday following New Years Day. Either way, the season would have included the Christmas holiday season, and would have given school age hunters a season they could have fully enjoyed thanks to the time away from school.
Now that sportsmen have said they want change and the elimination of the unpopular restriction of magnifying scopes during the muzzleloader season, it will be interesting to see how long the Wisconsin DNR drags its feet before implementing the change. Most Wisconsin muzzleloading hunters who have contacted the North American Muzzleloader Hunting Association have voiced an opinion that it won't be in place until the 2010 season. -
Toby Bridges, North American Muzzleloader Hunting Association
North American Muzzleloader Hunting Association
100 Parker Court
Missoula, MT 59801
406 542-9751
Fighting For The Rights And Hunting Opportunities Of Today's Muzzleloading Hunters
News Release April 22, 2009
Wisconsin Muzzleloading Hunters Vote "Yes" To Allow Magnifying Scopes During The Muzzleloader Deer Season
On Monday, April 13th, thousands of Wisconsin sportsmen attended the 2009 Conservation Congress meetings conducted in all counties of the state. These annual meetings are held to give hunters and fishermen an opportunity to vote on regulation and season changes. And one of the more closely watched issues on the ballot this year was whether or not to allow the use of magnifying riflescopes during the 10-day muzzleloader deer season. And Wisconsin sportsmen have spoken, voting "yes" to allow hunters to use a precision telescopic rifle sight during the muzzleloader only deer season.
When the votes had been tallied, 62 counties approved the regulation change, while only 9 counties rejected the change. And in the one remaining county, the vote was tied.
Wisconsin's first muzzleloader deer season was held in 1992, and riflescopes have never been allowed during this post general firearms hunt. While 37 states permitted the use of a magnifying scope during the 2008 muzzleloader seasons, Wisconsin and 11 other states continued to deny hunters the right to choose whether to use a sight system that allowed them to better see their target and place their shots, or to stick with non-magnifying sights that added to the challenge of the hunt. And it has been that denied right of choice which lead to a federal discrimination complaint filed against 15 state wildlife agencies, including the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, back in July 2006 by the North American Muzzleloader Hunting Association. (Montana is the only state in the country that still denies muzzleloading hunters an opportunity to enjoy their own season.)
Shortly after that complaint was filed, scopes were legalized in Georgia. And last year, the wildlife agencies in Nebraska and Kansas acknowledged that hunters were becoming an older lot - with a growing percentage needing the use of such sights in order to participate in the special muzzleloader only seasons. That same realization may have spurred passage for a regulation change in Wisconsin, that will allow those with less than perfect eyesight to now take part in the muzzleloader deer season.
Today, sportsmen over the age of 40 make up the largest age class of hunters, and this is the group of hunters who tend to suffer from the loss of close up focus, plus the inability of aging eyes to switch focus back and forth rapidly enough to permit a rear sight, front sight and a deer at 50 or 75 yards to be somewhat in focus at the same time. Not only do these hunters need the use of a magnifying riflescope in order to precisely place their shots for a quick and humane harvest of deer, but to also positively identify the target as a deer and not another human.
Participation in the Wisconsin muzzleloader season has been lacking, specifically due to the regulation that prohibited the use of a riflescope. The deer harvest during this season the past two years has only been about 10,000 deer each year. The low number of deer taken has done little to contribute to managing the growing deer herd. Now that sportsmen have voted down the restriction that has kept many deer hunters from hunting the muzzleloader season, participation is expected to increase.
Unfortunately, two other muzzleloader issues on the 2009 Wisconsin Conservation Congress ballot failed to get hunter approval. Either would have set the muzzleloader season back several weeks, to give the deer a break. The current 10-day muzzleloader season follows right on the heels of the 9-day modern firearm deer season. One proposal would have seen a 10-day muzzleloader season begin on December 22nd and run until December 31. The other proposal would have established a longer 16-day muzzleloader season, that would have opened on the Saturday before Christmas, and run through until the Sunday following New Years Day. Either way, the season would have included the Christmas holiday season, and would have given school age hunters a season they could have fully enjoyed thanks to the time away from school.
Now that sportsmen have said they want change and the elimination of the unpopular restriction of magnifying scopes during the muzzleloader season, it will be interesting to see how long the Wisconsin DNR drags its feet before implementing the change. Most Wisconsin muzzleloading hunters who have contacted the North American Muzzleloader Hunting Association have voiced an opinion that it won't be in place until the 2010 season. -
Toby Bridges, North American Muzzleloader Hunting Association
North American Muzzleloader Hunting Association
100 Parker Court
Missoula, MT 59801
406 542-9751
37,743
What's more unethical - the modern muzzleloading hunter who takes a shot out to 200 yards with a scoped and deadly accurate .50 in-line rifle and load, with plenty of energy for a clean kill...or the traditional muzzleloading hunter who takes a shot at 75 or 80 yards with an open sighted patched round ball .50 caliber rifle, where the ball hits with about 30% less energy than needed to insure a quick, clean kill?
If we're so worried about hunters shooting too far...maybe it's time to ban scopes on all big game rifles - whether they load from the front or the back. After all, hot new calibers like the .338 Lupua Magnum retain enough energy to take deer out past 1,200 yards...THE GOOD OL' .300 WINCHESTER MAGNUM CAN DO IT TO OVER 900 YARDS!
Some folks just need a scope in order to play the game...to deny them that right is illegal discrimination.
Toby Bridges
NORTH AMERICAN MUZZLELOADER
HUNTIGN ASSOCIATION
Some states, like my home state of WA, does it right IMO. Scopes are not allowed, primer must be open to the elements, 209s are not legal, etc. The weapon must indeed STAY primitive.
Secondly, if I used your logic above, then anyone using a compound bow should be able to use a draw lock, right? After all, it would be "illegal discrimination" if we told them they couldn't, right?. What about lazers...why can't I use them too? Let me answer that as quickly as I can...it's an unfair advantage!
How about they just hit the firing range more often and get proficient with their weapon of choice before hitting the hills? Then maybe, just maybe, they wouldn't need the scope to "play the game." (I love it when folks use the word "game" when talking about handling and shooting a firearm too. Those are the folks that end up shooting themselves or someone else...after all, it's just a game.)
Discrimination: Treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit: racial and religious intolerance and discrimination.
In other words, it does not fit into this discussion. It is based on individual merit. They have an individual choice to get better with open sites by actually practicing once in a while (see my comment above).
Sorry if I offended anyone with my post. However, there are certain subjects that get me going and certain lines of arguement that quite frankly make no sense to me. If any of you have a VALID arguement as to why I may be off-base then PLEASE let me know.
Is archery considered primitive. I say it is. If we were to use the same logic then wouldn't compound bows with short carbon "bullets" be the equivalent in the archery world of a .209 inline with pellets in the muzzle loader world? I know of guys that will only archery hunt with a long bow and home made arrows. It's all up to the hunter as to what challenge they want to attempt.
I would love to have multiple muzzle loader mounts on the wall that show a progression of more challenging weaponry. That may be a future goal.
To hawk, killerbee, and sneekeepete, I very much respect your hunting views and posts here at muley madness. I just disagree with you a little on this one. To me it's still a mega challenge using my 30.06 and leupold scope. Until I'm a better hunter, I hope to use the best equipment I can afford.
Man, ya gotta stir the pot, don't ya?! Just kidding, my friend.
We just disagree on this matter a bit. Of course, Killer is right....if it's legal then more power to ya. However, I think that all the advances in technology have rendered it (Muzzy) MUCH LESS of a primitive weapon, that's all. I LOVE the way that WA and OR does it, with just about all of what you mentioned in your post illegal. Just my thoughts.
My biggest point of contention, if you will notice in my second post in this thread, was the statement that it was "Illegal descrimination" to disallow scopes. Pretty freakin' comical statement IMO and WAY off base.
I'll tell ya, I can't hit the broad side of barn with a Muzzy...even if I was STANDING in the barn. BUT...that is exactly why I do not hunt with one. The same goes with my bows (I own two bows and a muzzy). Until I get proficient in those weapons they will continue to be nothing but "practice weapons" until I get enough time to reach a level inwhich I feel comfortable shooting them at a living creature.
round ball cant kill animals my rear end. My elk went down fast with a .530 round ball from 140 yards with only 80gr pyrodex RS.
Smokeless Muzzleloader and high powdered scopes :>/
IMO and just my opinon, A lot of folks just want the scope so they can try them 250 yard pop shots.
As for the muzzle loader set up I started muzzleloading about 5 years ago. The only muzzle loading I've known is inline accuracy. When I started I never thought of it as a primitive weapon. It was just another season for me. I bought one the year I started the dedicated hunter program. It made me real selective on which animals I would shoot at knowing that I'd still have a chance at the rifle season. Looking back there are two bucks that I passed on that I sure wish I had taken. I do love the time of year and the fewer hunters on the muzzy hunt. If Utah changes the laws requiring a more primitive weapon I'll be getting one to practice and hunt with.
For now I'll stick with an inline and no magnification allowed. But I definitely don't feel like I've been discriminated by not haveing a scope and I dont need one to tell if I'm aiming at a deer, elk, human, or unicorn for that matter.
Toby Bridges
NORTH AMERICAN MUZZLELOADER
HUNTING ASSOCIATION
FRONTIER GANDER...You should be ashamed of yourself for bragging about shooting at an elk at 140 yards with a .54 caliber round ball rifle - you apparently have absolutely no idea about muzzleloader ballistics. At the muzzle, your load is good for about 1,580 f.p.s. and 1,240 foot-pounds of energy. At 50 yards, the load is down to around 1,210 f.p.s., with 728 foot-pounds of remaining energy. Then at 100 yards, that pumpkin ball is lollygagging along at just about 980 f.p.s., and hits with 477 foot-pounds of energy. But at the 140-yard distance you claim to have shot your elk, velocity is down to around 870 f.p.s. - and that ol' round ball of your's drove home with a WHOPPING 375 foot-pounds of energy.
Most elk hunting experts, apparently except for you, feel that 1,200 foot pounds should be considered the minimum acceptable energy level for insuring, with proper shot placement, consistently clean kills. The load you shoot drops below that at all of 10 to 12 yards.
I hunt with traditional muzzleloaders as well, but hate the lackluster performance of the old patched ball. Give me a good .50 caliber stuffed with about 90 or 100 grains of powder and a 400 to 450 grain conical bullet. At least such a rifle and load would maintain enough velocity and energy to about 100 yards to get the job done - every time. Not just when the angels are feeling sorry for you.
A lot of game, especially elk, are lost to the patched round ball - especially when hunters such as you push the effectiveness of those spheres of lead way beyond their maximum effective range. To do so is far more unehtical than the modern muzzleloading hunter who takes a shot, with a scoped in-line rifle, at 200 yards - with a saboted bullet. At least he has enough respect for the game being hunted to shoot a load that can deliver the knockdown power to insure it goes down quickly. Tradtional hunters like you give muzzleloading a black eye, and sooner or later all other hunters are going to demand that regulations are put in place to insure that inadequate projectiles are banned.
Toby Bridges
NORTH AMERICAN MUZZLELOADER
HUNTING ASSOCIATION
If you dont think a .54 + cal round ball can take game cleanly out to 150 yards, you set up a hunt ( no fenced hunts) Invite me on an all expense paid hunt and i will be more than happy to teach you a thing or two. Heck, i'll even bring along an inline and shoot an elk with a Powerbelt.
That's a pretty good internet name...
Facts are facts, you cannot romance game to death...it takes precise shot placement and enough energy to get the job done.
How is it I get "paid off" Ganderman? I'm the one who decided to work in the muzzleloading industry close to 40 years ago...and I have made a living at it...and still do - mainly because I've taken the time to research and learn muzzleloading...to teach muzzleloading...to write about muzzleloaders and muzzleloading hunting...to design muzzleloaders...to work with the development of muzzle-loaded components...and to fight for the right for ALL muzzleloading hunters to participate in the muzzleloader seasons - not just those who wanted to slip on a set of buckskins and go play Jim Bridger. Playing mountain man has nothing to do with hunting...those who simply want to relive history can do that at the historical re-enactments held all around the country.
Believe me, I've earned every penny I've received for the work I do. And I do that work because I believe in that work.
Maybe you hate your job. I love mine. So, what is it you do to get your pay off...do you earn it?
Big R - I just have to ask, what do you mean by..."I sure do think they are on par to at least 200 yards"???
Someone once wrote..."Only Accurate Rifles Are Interesting Rifles"...or something to that effect.
Do you feel that 200-yard muzzleloader performance came along only because of the modern in-line rifles and loads? If you do, I'd like to recommend one book for you - "THE MUZZLE-LOADING CAP LOCK RIFLE" by Ned Roberts. Theres a reprint of this book available from George Shumway. The fast-twist bored bullet rifles of the 1840s and 1850s were fully capable of punching ten-shot groups at 40 rods (220-yards) that often stayed inside of 2 to 3 inches - and that kind of accuracy was with elongated bullets that weighed 400 to 500 grains, and they hit with a pretty darn good wallop. A heck of a lot more than the patched round ball. And, guess what, many of these rifles were topped with telescopic rifle sights (a.k.a. riflescopes) that were very often of 8x...10x...12x magnification.
So, I take it your muzzleloader is not accurate! Mine are...and whether I'm shooting a scoped modern in-line rifle with saboted bullets, or a traditional 1840-1860 style bullet rifle (with a period correct riflescope), I strive for 2 to 3 inch groups at 200 yards. That's the challenge for me. When it's time to take a shot at game, all I want to be concerned with is putting the shot exactly where it needs to go...I already know the rifle and load will deliver the energy needed to insure a clean kill.
Do you shoot center-fire rifles at all? The 7mm Remington Magnum is the 2nd or 3rd best selling caliber today. With a hot factory load, like the 150-grain Winchester Ballistic Silvertip, muzzle velocity is 3,100 f.p.s., with 3,200 foot-pounds of energy. This bullet has a ballistic coefficient of .495. At 400 yards, it is still flying at 2,359 f.p.s. - and hits with 1,853 foot-pounds of energy. In fact, all the way out at 900 yards - this one is still good for more than enough retained energy for deer (800 f.p.e.) - and enough for elk (1,200 f.p.e.) at 750 yards.
It just takes an "accurate rifle" and someone who can shoot it. Taking game with a .50 caliber in-line at 200 to 250 yards is a long, long way from that kind of performance. Anyone who claims that today's in-line rifles shoot like a center-fire rifle doesn't know much about ballsitics - muzzleloading or modern cartridge rifle.
Toby Bridges
NORTH AMERICAN MUZZLELOADER
HUNTING ASSOCIATION
Maybe this year i'll get another, but this time with a CVA Accura and a custom tipped powerbelt :thumb
Oh and Toby, for the record, I do like your work a lot more than i do randy wakemans lol
muzzleloader season or rifle season, i use an open sight muzzleloader.
What I fight for is the RIGHT for ALL muzzleloading hunters to go out and hunt the muzzleloader seasons...not just a select few.
Big R....how do you feel about compound bows and carbon arrows? They're faster...easier to use...and give the average hunter significantly greater range that a traditional stick bow. Should these mechanical arrow launchers be allowed during the archery seasons?
This is a better analogy than compring "vertical bows" with a crossbow. If the modern compound is allowed during the bow seasons...then the in-line rifle has its place during the muzzleloader season. Although I didn't bring up the crossbow, I will sahre my feelings about them. I think they should be allowed. They're not the hundred yard wonders some folks try to make them out to be. However, they would allow the aging bowhutner to stay in the game another 15 to 20 years, and are easier for the disabled hunter to use.
Hunter numbers are on the decline, and those who continue to hunt are quickly becoming an ever older lot. The largest age class is now the age group over 40 - a time when eyesight begins to dwain. A riflescope on a muzzleloader allows hunters in this age class to continue hunting the muzzleloader seasons into their 70s or even 80s, by permitting the use of a sighting system that allows them to precisely place their shots. And despite what someone objected to earlier, to deny those hunters that right is discrimination.
Toby
AGCHAWK - Since you like to portray yourself as an armchair legal expert, do you have any idea what the above statement pertains to? Well, it is the first line of an anti-discrimination policy that each and every Federal agency or department must operate under. It deals with preventing U.S. citizens being treated differently due to their differences...whether those differences are ethnic, age related or due to a disability.
That policy goes on to state...
"Discrimination includes: Denial of services, aids or benefit; provisions of different service or in a different manner; and segregation or separate treatment."
For you to say that the issue of denying hunters the right to use a scope during muzzleloader season is not discrimination clearly shows that you don't have a clue what constitutes discrimination - or you wouldn't have had to look up the definition in a dictionary. Tell you what, run down to your nearest Barnes & Noble bookstore, and hit the dictionary section. Look up the word in four or five different dictionaries, and you'll find different reads in each - but all will have one common thread in their definitions- the unfair treatment of people just because they are not exactly like the one(s) discriminating...not exactly like YOU!
If that's you in the photo that accompanies your post, I'd say you're likley in your mid to late 30s. And since you seem to have absolutely no use for an optical sight on a muzzleloader, you must have perfect or close to perfect vision. So...where in the WA or OR regs does it clearly say that the muzzleloader season is "Only For Hunters With Perfect Or Near Perfect Vision"??? It doesn't does it...but it might as well.
Not everyone can use open sights, no matter how much one gets out and practice. It's not about a developed skill, it's about physical ability...or in this case a disability. The older one gets, the more one begins to lose close focus. Likewise, the older eye cannot shift focus back and forth fast enough to allow a rear sight...front sight...and a deer at 50...70...90 yards away (three focal planes) to appear somewhat in focus simultaneously - which is necessary to use open sights precisely enough to ethically attempt shots on game. Once over 40 years of age, 60 to 70 percent of us begin to suffer from this natural age related sight impairment. And to deny these hunters the opportunity to mount a riflescope on their muzzleloader (reducing aiming to a single focal plane) violates Federal discrimination laws.
That injustice to disabled aging hunters disqualifies the game departments in WA and OR from receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department of Interior/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. And in 2008, the WA DFW illegally accepted $14,150,531 U.S. taxpayer dollars, and the OR DFW illegally accepted $16,175,968 of the same - because these agencies enforce discriminating regulations.
Since I started the push to get fair and equal regulations for all who hunt the muzzleloader seasons, Georgia, Nebraska, Kansas, and now Wisconsin, have realized the need to allow hunters to use scopes duirng these seasons. But, rest assured, it was the thought of losing all those millions of dollars in Federal assistance that was truly the driving force. And it will happen there. Even state wildlife agencies must operate inside of the law.
Toby Bridges
NORTH AMERICAN MUZZLELOADER
HUNTING ASSOCIATION
Big R - Face it, you don't have any ammo to fight with. Guys like you have opinions without anything to defend them with.
And I really do get it...those who oppose any modernization of muzzleloader hunting do so for one reason - to keep interest in the muzzleloading seasons as minimal as possible - making it easier for them to draw a muzzleloader tag.
If any on you following this shoot and hunt with an in-line, it is the traditional muzzleloader associations in your state who are your enemy. They feel the muzzleloader seasons should be all theirs'.
Pure greed...that's all it is.
Toby
I shoot carbon arrows as well out of my compound. This year I plan to buy one of the Bear traditional stick bows and hunt turkeys with it next spring.
Toby
do i think they are on par with a center fire rifle?-- yes. BUT i'm not trying to say they are as good as a 338-378wby. but would i be just as comfident at 150 yrds with a 30-30 and a 50 cal in-line, both scoped the in-ling with all the new bells and whistle you think should be legal? absolutly! and since special muzzleloader season have been around for a very long time, a 30-30 was a lot more popular round then. so WHY would they get a special season if they were just as capable as a popular round in thet era? because they weren't. the special hunts were there because the weapon of choice was not capable at the same distances. am i saying that you cant use that type of gun if you want to? NO! BUT USE IT IN A REGULAR RIFLE SEASON. funny, i bet that to you sounds absurd? but if a traditional weapon gets special season, keep it traditional.
and comparing them to a bow and arrow using carbon arrows? that is showing a bit of ignorance IMO. in the mid 80's what was a standard MAXIMUM range for a bow and arrow? 40yrds. today what is a standard range? 50yrds. yes people shoot farther, and there is people who shoot muzzleloaders 300+yrds. so we cant really compare the guys who try and max out any weapon they use. but if asked these type of forums for a poll, i bet 60 yrds with a bow would be considerd to far by the majority.
so--- useing carbon arrows has increased the bows ranges by 20 yrds+/- compared to using all your bells and whistles on a muzzleloader has increased their range from 75yrds to 200 yrds. thats over double.
like i said, to each their own. i dont look down on anyone who uses a legal weapon in their state to hunt with.and it would be silly to use a flintloc style ML in a season where the most modern ML was legal. but if i was asked to vote to make those things [scopes,powder pellets,sabots/powerbelts,etc,etc..] i would vote NO--- keep it like it was meant in the firstplace---TRADITIONAL.
I refuse to get into a "back-and-forth" with anyone on an internet forum. Quite frankly it's a waste of time an energy.
Secondly, I have not been playing "armchair legal expert." In addition to my other duties within my command, I am also our EO Officer. Let me tell you what that stands for...Equal Opportunity Officer. I know what the definition of "discrimination" is, the legal aspects pertaining to same, and what consistutes discrimination. Quite frankly I could care less whether you like my opinions on the subject of this post or not. It will in no way change my stance. Claiming that disallowing scopes on a muzzy is discrimination is quite simply wrong...end of story.
Thirdly, if you read the entire thread you would have saw that one of our regular members here at MuleyMadness uses a scope on his muzzy and likes it. Good for him...after all, it was perfectly within the law in the state/area in which he was hunting. Does it change my thoughts on the individual? No, of course not. He's a stand up guy who contributes a lot to this site and I have the upmost respect for him. We just happen to disagree on this subject.
Lastly, to categorize EVERYONE who posted their thoughts on this subject and happened to disagree with the idea as, and I quote: "oppose any modernization of muzzleloader hunting do so for one reason - to keep interest in the muzzleloading seasons as minimal as possible - making it easier for them to draw a muzzleloader tag" just as irresponsible as those who do indeed discriminate. I for one do not NEED to "draw" for a muzzy tag. If I choose to hunt with one then I can simply buy it over the counter. My thoughts are on the ethical side, not the side of greed.
You posted your thoughts, the majority disagree. Leave it at that and move on. I've said my piece and that's it. I will monitor this thread as part of my duties as a Moderator here but that's it.
Killerbee - Now, there you've gone and done it, you've brought up the old .30-30.
What's the difference between the ability of a .30-30 CF and a .50 caliber in-line rifle? First, how about the fact that with that in-line you've got a single-shot...and 1/2 to 1 minute until you can get the rifle loaded and take another. Heck, even with one of the break-open H&R single-shot rifles in .30-30, I could still get off 4 to 6 aimed shots, maybe more, in the time it takes to get a muzzleloader (any muzzleloader) reloaded.
Let's take a look at the old .30-30 ballistically.
Winchester 170-grain factory loads are one of the most widely used loads. At the muzzle of a 24" barrel, the bullet gets on its way at 2,200 f.p.s., with 1,827 f.p.e. At 200 yards, velocity is down to 1,619 f.p.s., and energy has dropped to 989. Somewhere about 275 yards, retained energy drops below the 800 foot-pounds needed to cleanly take deer.
And, you are right, ballistically that's only slightly better performance than the loads being used by some in-line rifle shooters today. But, you like to try pointing out that carbon arrows and compounds only give the bowhunter an added 20 yards (yeah right???) over traditional archery gear of the 1960s or so...and that the average bowhunter does not shoot at 70 or more yards. In the same light, the average in-line rifle hunter does not shoot 150-grain charges. The most widely used load(s) in this country today are made up of two Triple Seven Pellets or two Pyrodex Pellets (100 gr. charge) and a saboted 240- to 260-grain bullet - for velocities of 1,600 to 1,650 f.p.s. ...with energies of 1,360 to 1,570 f.p.e. ...for maximum effective ranges (where the load drops below 800 f.p.e.) of 130 to 160 yards (depending on the bullet used).
I've been hunting with muzzleloaders for 45 years, have hunted with hundreds of other who do...and I've yet to meet the man or woman who has taken shots out to 300 yards with a muzzleloader.
AGCHAWK - You're right about one thing, I do not know you...but I know more than a few folks like you...who like to throw things out without any backing, any documentation whatsoever.
And it's not the end of the story. Maybe you can bully folks around where you work, because you are the not-so "Equal Opportunity Officer"...but here, you better come to the table with some facts...or your's is just another opinion. Oh yeah, do you know the No. 1 reason why the wildlife agencies in GA, NE, KS and WI have taken steps to eliminate their "No Scopes" muzzleloader regulations? It's because they were discriminatory...and they have acknowledged them as such.
But, I am curious, what is your "ethical" reasoning for not wanting the hunter who needs to use a scope to have that right?
Everyone likes to talk about traditional rifles. Like I said, I shoot and hunt with them as well.
I have two different very tradtional half-stock percussion rifles, both .50 caliber, and both with a fast turn-in-24 inches bore. And both can shoot inside of 3 inches at 220 yards (40 rods)...just like the originals of the 1840s and 1850s. And they will retain the 800 foot-pounds needed for deer at that distance. Now, both of these rifles are as traditional as any other muzleloader of traditional styling, and so are the 1840-1850 period long tube-type scopes that are mounted on them. If it's tradition were trying to protect here, then why would historic minded muzzleloaders have a problem with such front-loaded rifles?
Quite honestly guys, you're fighting a loosing battle. The 3 1/2-million-plus hunters who do hunt the muzzleloader seasons in this country favor modern in-line rifles by a margin of more than 9 to 1. That means that 3,150,000-plus of them are using an in-line rifle...and polls around the country show that more than 85-percent of these modern muzzleloaders have a scope aboard. When GA legalized scopes in late 2006...when NE legalized scopes in January 2008...and when KS legalized scopes in March 2008 - gunshops could not keep scopes in stock.
And since passing to legalize scope on muzzlelaoders last month in WI, dealers have already started to witness the same thing. (The issue passed in 62 of the state's 72 counties.)
For most,it's not about want, it's about need. The majority of today's hunters are over age 40, and have experienced some age-related sight impairment. Regulations that prohibit them from using a sight that would allow them to participate is discrimination...even if Mr. Equal Opportunity Officer thinks it's not.
Toby Bridges
NORTH AMERICAN MUZZLELOADER
HUNTING ASSOCIATION
i believe it has been said again and again.
nobody said it is "UNETHICAL" please dont try and put words into mine or anyone elses mouth.
just to say it again, incase you just over looked it, TO EACH THEIR OWN. IF IT'S LEGAL IN YOUR STATE MORE POWER TO YOU. NOBODY IS LOOKING DOWN ON ANYONE FOR USING A PERFECTLY LEGAL METHOD OF HUNTING.
i just do not believe you should have "SPECIAL HUNTING DATES for a wepon that is supposed to be traditional. if you would like to hunt with it in my state, where it is still traditional, i have no problem with you using you most modern muzzleloader during rifle season.
i'd Say the majoriy of the people in my state, and in washinton, and in any other state where it is not legal. in your state it is probably also legal to hunt with a crossbow during archery season? same thing it's not a bow and your muzzleloader is not the muzzleloader these hunts were made for. so you said it your self. your supposed "muzzleloader" is basically the same as a 30-30? but the guys with a 30-30 have to hunt the hot part of the season but you get to hunt the animals in the rut? and as far as your re-loading time. are you the guys who startes blazing rounds at animals while they are running full speed over the next ridge? i hope not, but if you also use your scope to make sure that "I" am not a deer you want to shoot, then you probably are.
and in the LITTLE muzzlloader hunting i've done i can re-load my ML in 20-22 seconds.IF you have hunted with all these different ML's you should be able to load quit a bit fast i would think. we see it all the time done on t.v. in 10-15 seconds. good for you eastern guys to be able to hunt with whatever you want. if you had experiance out west you would know there are more states that dont allow all your bells and whistles.
once again i think NOTENOUGHTAGS has an awsome buck that i would love to have shot with his exact same setup. never has anyone tried to bring down anyones trophy for what they used.
simply stated IF I WAS ASKED TO VOTE FOR ALL THOSE THINGS TO BE LEGALIZED IN OREGON, AND STILL BE ABLE TO HUNT THE BUCKS/BULLS IN THE RUT, I WOULD VOTE NO
New Mexico also has a few areas that are open for ONLY Archery a few weeks...then open again for ONLY muzzleloaders for a few weeks...no modern center-fires at all. And the hunting is great.
Killerbee...I didn't say that modern in-lines were equal to a .30-30. Heck, a guy with a Marlin 336 can lever in and fire 6 rounds before the in-line muzzleloading hunter even has his rifle HALF WAY reloaded for the second shot. Also, if you read closely, you would see where I also showed that a .30-30 had an effective range for deer to about 275-yards - while the typical modern in-line rifle and load is good to about 160 yards when it comes to delivering the killing energy needed.
As far as stating you said it was unethical...you need to learn to read a bit closer. It was AGCHAWK who said he was against muzzleloader regulations that would allow scopes...for "ethical" reasons.
Again, I'm curious to what that "ethical" reasoning could be. The way I, and about 90-percent of all other muzzleloading hunters in this country see it...a scope allows for more precise shot placement. That means a projectile that's hitting exactly where it needs to go, insuring a quicker and cleaner kill...AND FAR LESS GAME THAT'S WOUNDED AND NEVER FOUND! That's good hunting ethics.
Any hunter who feels otherwise is the one who is the fool.
Your game department has absolutely no idea of how much game is lost because of their idiotic and backward muzzleloader hunting regulations.
Toby Bridges
NORTH AMERICAN MUZZLELOADER
HUNTING ASSOCIATION
but it is FARLESS then the 275 yrds your trying to pass off to prove your point.
and really WHO CARES how fast you can work an action from your hip trying to play MATT DYLLON while deer hunting. the first shot is BYFAR your highest percentage shot. so increasing your range by double outwieghs less shots by a long ways.
lastly in your last statement you talked about archers regularly taking 70yrd shots? do a search on here and see what the majority think about shooting that distance. there are people in all weapon catagories that shot farther than they should. thats why i used 200yrds for your mL and 50 yrds for archery. yes some guys launch arrows at 70-80yrds but are you deying that people shott 300yrds with their muzzleloaders? if so , your just dissproving your argument over again.
i think my game department would be happy to hear that people are not trying those 200+yrds shot with a muzzleloader.
my Question is why do you have a problem hunting with your muzzloader during rifle season? the first 2 yrs i hunted when i was 12@13 yrs old i bought my own 30-06. but i couldn't afford a scope so i went out and sighted my OPEN SIGHTED gun in. some how ,amazingly, i was able to kill both deer and elk with that gun. are you not capable of getting into closer ranges where you dont need a scope? with open sights you can be VERY accurate at 50-75 yrds. so why not just get that close? it's not that hard to do in the rut. thats why you get to hunt the rut with that gun. I"LL SAY IT AGAIN: TO EACH THEIR OWN. IF IT'S LEGAL IN YOUR STATE I ABSOLUTLY THINK YOU SHOULD USE IT. YOU JUST SHOULD NOT GET "SPECIAL SEASONS" FOR IT. IF YOU WANT TO USE ONE IN MY STATE FEEL FREE TO USE IT DURING THE REGULAR DEER AND ELK SEASONS. AND IF I WAS ASKED TO VOTE ON IT I WOULD VOTE "NO"
i think it's funny that just cause you still put the bullet in through the muzzle, you still think your being danial boone. and should be treated like it's impossible to kill something with that primative of a weapon. for the record MY WIFE KILLED A WHITETAIL DEER AT 100YRS WITH HER OPEN IRON SIGHTED,OPEN IGNITION,LOOSE GRANULATED POWDER, AND A ROUND BALL. untill now i never realized what a feat she accomplished. apperantly theirs guys who are life members of the muzzleloading foundation that consider that impossible.
The muzzle loader hunt in Utah used to be in early November. It was prime rut hunting. The state DWR are not dummy's. They changed the season dates. They want as many dollars incoming without too high of a success rate. The muzzle loader hunt in Utah is now the last week in September. The bucks have shed their velvet, been hunted during the archery, and seen elk hunters afield. Trust me, the Utah muzzle loader bucks are not rut crazed bucks that ignore humans. The big ones are already nocturnal where I hunt. I hunt the same area during the rifle season. The deer get pushed a lot harder and there are many a buck shot that would not have broke cover during the muzzy hunt. It is plenty challenging. I do like the idea that was put forth of opening a rut hunt that is traditional only. I feel the Utah the muzzy hunt as is challenges every muzzy hunter regardless of their set up. I failed to mention earlier that in Utah only magnified scopes are illegal. I use a 1x red dot scope. The mil dot can be reduced in size so that it does not cover the entire target. I shoot a 6-8" group at 200 yards, with 150 gr(three pellets) and a .348 grain power belt. I have tried numerous powder/bullet set ups bu thats the one that performs best in my gun. I can shoot very tight 100 yard groups. I do not take 200 yard shots in the field. Four years ago my friend spotted a 26-27" four point bedded under a tree at 250 yards out. He had seen a bigger buck and decided to pass. It took him an hour to find me and get us back to the vantage point. The buck was still there. I made my way closer to 210 yards but did not want to shoot. To get another shooting lane I would have to stalk up to 80 yards from the buck. I tried. The buck got up for his early afternoon bedding switch while I was in the trees. He got spooked by a hunter on horse back at the top of the mountain and took off. I know my set up is completely capable of the 210 yard shot but I did not want to make a poor shot on a buck like that. I would not be one to force a long shot if I had a 3x9 or 4x scope on my gun. The buck I shot last year was at 110 yards. It was barely light enough for legal shooting. I just happened to be lucky enough to have risen before daylight and be in the right place at the right time. The set up at 110 yards put him down.
in oregon the muzzleloader seasons are in the middle of November. in fact i'm hopeing to draw my tag with 8 points this year [-o< i just hope that oregon doesn't try changing to the modern add ons. but i wouldn't be against a season earlier in the year for those type of ML's just not using the same seasons now and making them into a handicapped rifle hunt.
TOBY:really if a person cant draw back a legal bow, should we just let him use a crossbow? no he could switch to a muzzleloader. but if a guy cant see to shoot with a muzzleloader with out a scope or if he cant get close enough to to use the open sights should we just allow anything to make him capable of it? no he can switch to rifle. and if the guy cant hunt with a legal rifle should we allow a .50 cal so he can just sit at his truck and shoot 2500 yrds? no it's time to hang it up. since when do we need to adjust a weapon to make up for someone not being able to do something? seems like thats the way america is anymore, if i cant do it, you need to do it for me.
KillerBee and Hawk I'm not offended at all. Just voices my opinions as are you both. This is definitely one of the more contentious threads that is active right now. I'm not sure how many more posts I'll be making to this thread.
What are you doin' huntin' big game with a 125-grain bullet out of .30-30...Are you ballistically challenged?
On the other end of the spectrum of ballistics for the .30-30 is the hottest factory load available today - the Hornady 160-grain Evolution. This is a soft-tip (Flex-Tip) spire-point bullet that can be safely used in lever-action rifles like the Marlin Model 336. At the muzzle it is good for 2,400 f.p.s., with 2,046 f.p.e. Thanks to the improved aerodynamics of the soft plastic spire-point frontal surface (around a .440 to .445 ballistic coefficient), this bullet is still flying at 1,699 f.p.s. at 300 yards...where it hits with 1,025 f.p.e. These are factory ballistics...not mine.
Also, for the record, 800 f.p.e. is considered minimum for deer, 1,000 to 1,100 f.p.e. considered minimum for elk. And with the Hornady 160-grain Evolution load, the old .30-30 is actually good for deer to about 350 to 375 yards...and elk at 300 yards.
If we use your 1,000 f.p.e. figure for deer, that means the maximum effective range of the modern in-line rifle with the typical 2-pellet Pyrodex or Triple Seven charge and a saboted 250-grain bullet drops to about 80-85 yards. And the maximum effective range for a .50 caliber patched round ball rifle, shooting a 100-grain charge of Pyrodex shrinks to around 40 yards.
Try as you may, you cannot truthfully claim that a modern in-line rifle shoots and performs like a modern center-fire rifle - not even the 115-year-old .30-30. The most widely used center-fire calibers today include the 7mm Remington Magnum....30-06 Springfield....308 Winchester...and the various .300 Magnums. These have maximum effective ranges for deer from 500 to 1,000-plus yards (depending on the factory load shot)...and from 400 to 900 yards for elk (again depending on the load shot).
And as much as you try to conjure in your voodoo ballistics, you're not going to change any of that documented data.
Toby Bridges
NORTH AMERICAN MUZZLELOADER
HUNTING ASSOCIATION
i think that could apply here :-k
so apperantly we get are info from different places i could scan the entire informational pages of my 2 balistics books but that would take to long. it would be quiker for you to just run out to your garage and grab a chain and pull.
the 125 gr. bullet out of the 30-30 has the greatest MAXIMUM EFFECTIVE RANGE for that calliber. if i scanned the 150's or the 165's your yardage was less ](*,) A BULLET NEED TO CARRY 1000FT.LBS OF ENERGY
STILL BE TRAVELING 2000 FT.PER.SEC.
like i said, i wont argue if they can kill at greater distances, we all know they can.
just use simple logic, a 30-30, 300 yrds for elk? are you serious?? ](*,) ](*,)
and what is the about 350-375 yrds?? my info is exact yardage that has bean mathmatically figured. your on the other hand is "about in the, oh lets just say,somewhere around, if you were to have a tail wind, probably could maybe pull off a,ohhhhhhhhhh 350-375yrds-if you were lucky"
in your own comparison ](*,)
but this is my last beat a dead horse to death post on this topic:
good hunting to you this fall no matter what you decide to carry :thumb
Like I said, these are not my ballistics...these are Hornady's ballistics.
The ballistic coefficient of the bullet (it's aerodynamincs) are crucial to how well it retains velocity and energy down range. The 125-grain bullet you reference is from the old school of thought - "Light bullet, higher velocity, longer range".
But that bullet probably has a b.c. of only about .160 to .180. The bullet that Hornady is loading into the 160-grain Evolution round has a b.c. of around .445. The higher the b.c. factor, the better it retains velocity and energy out at longer ranges.
I once had a friend that had one of the old Savage bolt-action Model 340 rifles in .30-30, and always complained about how he wish he had an honest 200-yard deer rifle. But then, he was always shooting the factory ammo loaded for the old lever action guns - with flat or rounded nosed bullets to prevent recoil from detonating the primer on the cartridge ahead in the magazine. I pulled out a set of .30-30 loading dies, and loaded him some ammo using a 165-grain spire-point .308" dia. Speer bullet (.444 b.c.) that we could get out of the muzzle at 2,250 f.p.s. - out of his bolt-action Savage rifle, the load shot great...and thanks to the improved aerodynamics of the bullet, his rifle bacame an honest 300-yard deer rifle.
Comparing the performance of muzzleloaders to the performance of center-fire rifles is like comparing the performance of bows to the performance of modern muzzleloaders. The gap between the maximum performance level of a modern in-line rifle and the low end of center-fire rifle performance is significant. In fact, that gap is much greater than the gap that exists between the modern compound bow and traditional round ball rifles. Some bowhunters today are taking shots that are farther than the maximum effective range of a hot loaded .50 caliber patched round ball rifle.
Maybe it's time to allow the bowhunters and traditional muzzleloader shooters to enjoy a "Primitive Weapons Season"....then establish a "Muzzleloader Season" for all other muzzleloading shooters. I'm thinking the only ones who would object would be the bowhunters...but I'm sure the traditional and modern muzzleloader hunters would be thrilled to death.
Toby Bridges
NORTH AMERICAN MUZZLELOADER
HUNTING ASSOCIATION
I have two Win Mod 94's, one in .32 Win Special and the other in .30-30. I also have two .50 cal muzzys, one in-line and one percussion. NONE have a scope and I will not be putting a scope on any of them either.
The two Mod 94's are what I consider my brush guns. No need for a scope. Down here in MS, I hunt muzzy season with the in-line and always get asked why I have no scope. The percussion I will use in CO if I ever draw a tag for there.
My eyes have been steadily going down hill since I turned 40, yet I see no reason for CO to accomodate me. Not only does CO not allow scopes but you can't use pelletized powder nor sabots.
Toby, you do know your business when it comes to the muzzy world. Far more than I ever will. But, because CO doesn't not allow pellets or sabots, will you now call that discrimination?
I think "primitive weapon" should mean just exactly what it says. Although, I will give you this, you hunt with "primitive scopes", though I'm sure the optics may just be a tad bit more technologically advanced than 150 years ago. But putting today's scope on a today's in-line muzzy is NOT following in the "primitive weapon" tradition.
Oh, one last note, I wouldn't even think of taking a shot out past 100 yards with either of my lever actions or muzzys. Kinda boils down to that whole ethics thing and taking a clean shot, IMHO.
Do you not believe in the right of choice?
You say your eyes are getting weaker now that you are over 40. Well, the bad news is that it doesn't get better...it continues to get worse.
What if hunters had to take an eye exam, just like when you go get your driver's license? And if you could not pass that exam, meaning your eyes are not good enough to allow you to use open sights, you would be forced to use a scope...just like you cannot operate a vehicle with sight impairment unless you wear corrective eye glasses?
No one would like that, not even me, even though I am now approaching 60, and quite honestly cannot use open sights well enough any more to preciesely place shots on game. And neither can a growing segment of today's hunters who are in their late 40s, 50s, 60s and 70s. Unlike driving a car, where your eyes are not having to precisely align three focal planes (rear sight, front sight, distant target)...eye glasses do not remedy the inability of the older eye to change focus rapidly enough to permit use of open rifle sights.
To deny these hunters the right to use a scope forces them out of hunting muzzleloader seasons where scopes are not allowed - and that is very, very discriminatory. It violates their rights, and it's illegal.
It's a shame that a wildlife agency like the Colorado Division of Wildlife openly breaks the law and violates hunters' rights. But, just because the CO DOW refuses hunters the right to choose whether to use a scope or not does not mean that some hunters who need one will not hunt the muzzleloader season. And unfortunately, the more folks who are out there using open sights they cannot see well enough to use, the more wounded and lost game there's going to be. That's not intelligent wildlife management. Actually, it crosses the line into the realm of stupidity.
And so does their ban on saboted bullets and compressed pellet powder charges. It simply shows the CO DOW's ignorance of muzzleloader hunting today.
If scopes had not been invented until the early 1900s, the traditional or primitive intention of the muzzleloader season may have some validity. But scopes were developed right here in the good ol' U.S. during the late 1830s...about the same time that American rifle makers began producing percussion rifles.
Toby Bridges
NORTH AMERICAN MUZZLELOADER
HUNTING ASSOCIATION
As far as modern in-line muzzys they do have their place. It is just not in a primistive weapons hunt. Set aside a seperate hunt for modern Muzzys with all their bells and whistles. IMHO the only people who should be permitted to use a modern set up during a primitive weapon hunt is a handiscapped individual. Just like handicapped Archery hunters can use crossbows in some states. Other than that have two seperate seasons for Modern Muzzys and Traditional Muzzys.
That would accomodate both parties.
With your way of thinking, how would you address the problem I've had with my eyes since birth? See, I have what is called "color deficient" vision. Not color blind as I can still see colors but I have problems seeing the difference between a few colors such as red/green, green/brown, brown/red, and a few others.
This makes it fairly hard to see critters at a distance (whether I'm wearing glasses or using optics) unless they are moving.
Sooooooo...being as I am disabled, shouldn't someone be out there fighting for me to make whatever state I hunt in to put a big blaze orange target on game animals? Your arguement is that you are fighting for disabled hunters so they can still hunt with a muzzy using a scope. I want it the fight to include me and others like me for all seasons. This is only right as I am being discriminated against as I am not on the same footing as hunters with normal color vision. Right?
Doesn't make much sense, does it? MOST folks know when they can no longer do the things they could when younger and move on to some other form in their chosen hobby, or whatever they happen to like to do, so they can continue to enjoy what they have always done, just in a different way. (Man, my English teachers would kill me if they ever see that sentence!)
Plain and simple, it is called "getting older". What happens to the fisherman who gets arthritis and can no longer tie a knot? Should the F&G dept's across the country assign each one a personal knot tier? What if I lose my vision until I am legally blind? Do I get a personal spotter, stalker and shooter? I can go on and on with examples but I hope I've made my point.
Bottom line, as the vision slides down hill the shots need to get shorter. As you've said before, MOST shots on big game are taken under 100 yards. When the day comes that I can't get good groups at 100 yards, I will shorten my max distance to 75, or 50, or where ever it ends up to get those good groups.
Some eyesight problems can't be countered by optics on a rifle...or in this case a muzzleloader...but some of the most common can. And by age 50, between 60 and 70 percent of us will suffer from the loss of close focus...and the ability of the eye to switch focus rapidly enough to allow the use of open rifle sights.
And despite what sneekeepete claims, a riflescope that can be focused to the individual shooter's eyesight does alleviate the latter problem by reducing sighting to a single focal plane.
Prescripiton eye glasses or contacts DO NOT speed up the ability of the older eye to change focus rapidly enough from one focal plane (three in all) to another, allowing precise shot placement with open sights.
Again, as far as "traditional" goes...riflescopes have been around longer than percussion Hawkens.
Toby Bridges
NORTH AMERICAN MUZZLELOADER
HUNTING ASSOCIATION
I still think states should have a primitive season and then an (All goes) season for muzzleloaders with no restrictions. That will keep all the hunters happy and bring in more $$$$$$ to the states.
During the 1850s, scopes became a lot more common than some folks want to give credit. In my lifetime, I've owned three original circa 1845 to 1855 rifles (2 Billinghurst & 1 just marked "Cincinnatti, OH") that had period correct scopes on them. The two Billinghurst scopes were 12x...the other 6x magnification. I worked for Dixie Gun Works for 7 years, as their catalog editor, a gunsmith and antique gun buyer. During that period, we bought and sold easily more than a dozen muzzle-loaded rifles with period correct scopes on them, and the most common magnification was generally between 6x and 8x. (One was a wonderful late 1850s St. Louis "Dimick" .45 rifle with a mint fast twist bore...and an origianl circa 1855 Wm. Malcolm scope...which was 3x.) I also know one individual who collects scoped bullet muzzleloaders and early cartridge rifles. He has at least 20 circa 1840-1860 rifles, complete with scopes from that period, and more of those scopes are of 6x and greater magnification than lower magnification.
If it were up to me, I'd say "screw the scope restriction...use any power you want" - after all, a scope does not make any rifle shoot farther. It's simply a sighting aid, and allows for more precise shot placement.
But, it's not up to me to decide. However, it is my responsibility to the sport of muzzleloader hunting to continue to show the idiocy of prohibiting muzzleloader hunters from having the right to choose whether or not to use a scope. And the idiocy of arguments against scopes that claim allowing them would increase harvest to the point that permit numbers would be cut back...WITHOUT GIVING ANY CONSIDERATION TO HOW MANY DEER AND ELK ARE LOST BECAUSE HUNTERS CANNOT SEE OPEN SIGHTS WELL ENOUGH TO PLACE THEIR SHOTS.
Maybe it's time to take the CO DOW, OR DFW and WA DFW to court and force them to spend the money and time to conduct an honest wound loss survey. Rest assured, these professionals don't have a clue how much game is being wasted due to their scope and muzzleloader projectile restrictions.
Toby Bridges
NORTH AMERICAN MUZZLELOADER
HUNTING ASSOCIATION
Im taking my brother in law hunting, muley/elk and he goes, set me up with a good fast bullet around 100 grains. I just about crapped my pants from laughing. I tell him if hes going after elk, we're going to be using a 348gr powerbelt and hes like. wwhhhhhy!! thats not needed dude! I shot a cow elk with my .270 and it was only 160 grains.
Thats what loses game, not open sights. but poor knowledge of muzzleloading,muzzleloading projectiles.
Ive lost 2 deer since i started muzzleloading in 2001. Each one of those was lost due to poor bullet performance from the 240gr tc maxiball. I barely got my third deer. Open sights was not to blame. Nor was shot placement. The bullet that did not penetrate/expand was the cause of the loss. When you shoot a deer through the lungs at 30 yards and the bullet fails to even make it to the other side of the hide and the deer runs well over 1/2 mile, its not a good bullet to use ( for me)
I've been hunting with a muzzleloader since 1964...and since 1972, during most of those years, I make an average of 6 or 7 hunts every fall...many of them "Muzzleloader Only" hunts, and often in a very prescribed area - like on a wildlife management area, or during a state park hunt to bring deer numbers down. And I've often shared those hunts with plenty of other muzzleloading hunters...so I have partaken in many tracking jobs. More than a fair share of which were due to an aging hunter, using an open sighted patched round ball rifle. And many, many times the game was never found.
Open sights in the hands of a hunter who cannot see them well contributes tremendously to the rate of wound loss. If you don't think so...why do you have sights on your rifle in the first place? Why not just screw a shotgun bead into the barrel at the muzzle? It wouldn't be much different than forcing someone to use open sights even though they cannot see them clearly enough to use them.
There are a lot more places on a deer or elk where a hit results in a wounded animal than there are which insures a clean kill. Shot placement is extremely important...Do you not agree???
Face it, the vast majority of us are not the 20-something-year-young Natty Bumppo deer killing hero of James Fenimore Cooper's "The Deerslayer". More aptly, we're 50 to 60 year olds who need all the help we can get to keep on doing what we enjoy doing.
Toby Bridges
NORTH AMERICAN MUZZLELOADER
HUNTING ASSOCIATION
Quoting your own words, that is purely unethical.
And you have not replied to my situation of being "color disabled". Do you not want me to be on fair footing with everyone else? Or, perhaps, are you only concerned with your own "rights" and thus have taken up the cause to try and force states to change their regulations to suit your own personal needs yet claiming to do it for the "vast majority" of hunters?
Have they developed eye glasses for your sight condition? What other steps have been made to accomodate or remedy your sight condition?
Scopes cannot alleviate all sight impairment...but they can counter the most common, such as the loss of close focus and the inability of the older eye to focus quickly at three different focal planes. That's the sight condition that will eventually affect nearly all of us, and as we grow older which will prevent us from being able to hunt any season that requires the use of open sights.
Me, I'm not ready to throw in the towel, even though I turn 60 next month...and I truly need the use of a riflescope in order to precisely place my shots. Yes, I have taken up the fight for my needs, since I have come to realize the problem that has affected aging hunters for some time.
It is a fact that the largest age class of hunters today is that segment that is over 40 years of age - the same age class that suffers most from age-related sight impairment. For any state wildlife agency to enforce regulations that prohibit this group from using a sight that allows them to participate during the muzzleloader seasons is a violation of anti-discrimination laws. And that's exactly what I'm working to get changed. Since August 2006, four states that banned the use of scopes during the muzzleloader seasons have come to that realization, and now permit the use of scopes during the muzzleloader seasons.
Only 11 state game departments still prohibit the use of scopes during these seasons, and it is only a matter of time before they will also have to change - if not driven by common sense to do so, perhaps by a U.S. District Court judge who is willing to uphold the anti-discrimination policies and laws of this country.
Toby Bridges
NORTH AMERICAN MUZZLELOADER
HUNTING ASSOCIATION
That's kind of like asking why don't all muzzleloading hunters just hunt the "General Firearms Season"?
Forcing a hunter to hunt that season because he or she needs the use of a scope, instead of being allowed to hunt with other muzzleloading hunters during the muzzleloader season is just another form of discrimination or segregation. And we have laws in this country to prevent that.
You know, in 39 states the muzzleloading hunter can choose whether or not to use a scope on his or her muzzleloader...during the muzzleloader season. And in those states, none of the game departments have acknowledged the over-harvest or game-loss phobias suffered by the 11 state agencies which continue to deny muzzleloading hunters that right of choice.
In Kansas and Nebraska, where scopes were legalized last year, traditional muzzleloader hunters fought the change tooth and nail. But, common sense and the reality of conforming to Federal anti-discrimination laws pushed passage of allowing scopes during the muzzleloader seasons. Since, there hasn't been a peep out of those groups who opposed the regulation change. Several newspaper editors in each of those states that I know were flooded with e-mails and letters from opposing traditional shooters before the change to allow scopes...now they hear nothing. It's like it was never an issue. And game department officials have admitted they should have done it years earlier.
Toby Bridges
That is what makes the primitive weapon hunts so great. The experience and the challenge. If someone is handicapped to the point that they cannot do this then of course give them what they need to participate in the hunt; but if people don't want the challenge that comes with a primitive weapon hunt then hunt then they should hunt the any weapon season. I am not discriminating against anyone here except for lazy unethical hunters.
I'm sure that's you in the photo accompanying your posts. And that looks like a center-fire rifle laying up against that buck you're holding onto. And with a scope on that rifle.
How well do you think modern rifle hunters in your state would take to a regulation that only allowed the use of single-shot black powder cartridge rifles in calibers like .45-70, .50-90 and so forth...with open sights only? The reason: Modern flat shooting center-fire cartridge rifles and modern riflscopes make it too easy...detracting from the experience and challenge of hunting.
You know as well as I do, there would be a lot of tar and feathers flying at your wildlife agency headquarters...and a new crew in place in very short order.
Same with bowhunting...what if bowhunters were restricted to only traditional stick bows - no recurves or compounds...no aluminum or carbon arrows...no modern mechnanical broadheads...no whatever - just extremely traditional archery gear????
That wouldn't fly as well.
Some folks hunt with a muzzleloader for the challenge...some hunt for the experience...and some hunt for the opportunity.
Tht's the right of choice. Not everyone does things just like you or I do it, or for the same reasons.
Toby Bridges
Sorry it has taken me so long to get back on this issue, but it seems we have more "wrong" than "right" today...and I have been busy elsewhere.
Toby Bridges
I personally do not have a problem with it. Having the new law does not mean you have to go to use one. Not all Muzzy seasons are an advantage, for instance Kansas is in late September which can be near three digits in temps. Nebraska's is the whole month of December but is the very last of the three different hunt types.
There are also a lot of older hunters that just can't see open sights well at all.
I mean really what is the difference between a longbow hunter that shoots instinctively compared to a compound shooter using fiber optic sights. My effective range with a compound is almost double that of a traditional archer but you don't hear much gruff about that.
In Kansas now for residence anyway my one tag is good for archery, muzzle loader, and rifle so it really does not matter much.
I own an TC Omega inline that I have a Bushnell 3x9 250 doa on but also have a Lyman Great Plains flintlock. I love hunting with them both.
The DNR estimated the deer population statewide at 1.5 million to 1.7 million but few veteran hunters saw deer during last years nine day rifle hunt with a 20% drop in the number of deer killed statewide. Earn a Buck was stopped this year only because frustrated a land owners told the DNR if there wasn't a change they were shutting their land down to deer hunting witch I have to imagine would be a huge hit to the overall hunting season revenue to the state. My only guess is DNR is getting major pressure from insurance companies to thin the herd so what's next??