Do you want to help preserve traditional hunting?

[captchee]

In my mind, the traditional hunters that are for traditional seasons want a season to themself with unlimited opportunities. They don't want to share the woods with the "evil" people that are in their minds "just looking for something quick and easy". They are being very selfish.

 At  fist this would seem so wouldn’t it .
 However remember  that back in 1992 it was traditionalist that got modern shooters through the door .
 In 2002 it was traditionalist that ask for  areas to be designated  as traditional only so as to provide  continued opportunity  for both systems .
 In the winter of 2oo6 it was traditionalist that ask for a  side lock definition to  protect the intent of those areas defined as traditional muzzleloading only .
 Now mind you each one of these steps could have simply been a vote for complete removal, it however was not  supported.

What was supported was when the Idaho fish and game management section came forward and ask the public state wide   and I do mean state wide . Not only was the issue posted on the IDF&G web site but also in  the IDF&G news  and a couple out door  papers  .
 As I posed above they ask   

RULE:13.01.08.410
Issue: Muzzleloader Opportunity:

In the late 1980’s, Idaho offered numerous big game hunts for muzzleloaders and over 10,000 hunter participated annually . Recently, the number of special  muzzleloader hunts for big game  and the number of  muzzleloader hunters have declined. Reduced mule deer numbers, improved muzzleloader technologies, and relatively high muzzleloader success rates are the primary reasons  for the declining muzzleloader hunting opportunity.
 The commission  is considering  whether to restrict all special season  big game  muzzleloader hunts to traditional  muzzleloader . In-line muzzleloaders would remain  legal in the any-weapons hunts . In short range  weapons hunts , only traditional muzzleloaders would be allowed. Converting  all regular muzzleloader  hunts to traditional muzzleloader hunt will allow the commission to offer additional special season muzzleloader season

 
 The different sportsman groups at the meeting I went to said basically , If this is what needs to be done lets do it  ASAP . That wasn’t just traditional muzzleloading  groups . There were representatives of  groups like salmon and steelhead united . Sportsman unlimited , the mule deer initiative. A couple archery groups  the rocky mountian elk foundation , ducks unlimited.............. .

 In fact when the state opened up the  from input   both on their web site  regional offices and  HQ they received the following . Mind you they also  took input from out of state folks

Regional input ,,,, 143 yes ,,,, 49 N0 OP,….122 NO
Website Input -Residents,,, 1183 Yes ,,,267 No OP,,,, 1032 NO
Website  Input -Non resident ,,, 534 yes ,,,, 95 NoOP,,,423 NO

That came to a 48% yes vote . An 11% NoOP and a 41% No vote

 Now that’s taken directly from the  2007 no biological big game rules recommendation  dated January 11 , 2007
 Now mind you this is not the Idaho fish and game commission but the fish and game proposal to the commission

 Now as to the reports . What I would recommend is  running down  to the station there in cascade and picking up the latest Idaho fish and game news . The  one just coming out  is labeled “special mule deer issue “ in there you will find  most all the information your looking for .
 Now while your reading keep in mind that Brad Compton is one of the   heads of management  for the IDF&G .   you will see him  giving information a lot through the pages .

 The news pamphlet is free .

 As to unlimited opportunities , no such thing , we don’t have a state wide muzzleloader season , just select areas spread out cross the state . Its nothing like archery which has a state wide  hunt  . also keep in mind that afew of those areas are in units with large amounts of privite lands 

What is meant by opportunity or less hunting ?
Well simple right now  we all have opportunity . Be that modern muzzleloading with their areas or  traditional muzzleloaders with theirs  , archery  have their state wide  hunt , and the center fire / general any weapons  which include all weapons .
 As I believe your aware we can hunt any and all season tell we fill our 1 deer tag “ couple units provide more “ 1 elk tag and 1 bear tag..

 What the state  I believe is saying is that without intervention  they will either   reduce Opportunity by shortening the season , closing areas  for given systems or maybe  hunting in general . OR go to a Draw/ permit   type of system thus  reducing less hunting opportunity .

 This is basically what they were also saying in January . We either have to relegate some folks to the general season  during the muzzleloader specific hunts OR reduce that opportunity to all muzzleloading hunters even more .
Now some folks believe that when they did this they removed ALL modern muzzleloaders . This is not true , they only removed a  section . If your  modern muzzleloader has a hammer its still legal .
At first this dint make any since to me  and I questioned it .
 It was  then explained they were trying to simply remove  a give estimated %  of modern muzzleloading without having to  completely go to a draw system or remove more hunts .

 Now according to Brad Compton during his speech to the  commission in January , this was from harvest reports consistently coming in higher then  the average or higher then expected in units which provide opportunity for modern muzzleloading .

As stated above their other option was to reduce opportunity during muzzleloader and modern muzzleloading hunts  buy either  doing away with hunt areas OR going to a draw/permit style system which would have reduce numbers even greater  .

 IMO they were trying to effect the least amount of people and still  achive thier goals . however folks started into this modern vs tradtional thing  so now they are going to re look thier decission . which means what ?


 Basically putting  modern muzzleloaders back in and going the avenue of removing hunts IE opportunity  OR going to  more draw hunts .
 Modern muzzleloading shooters thing they have  won something when in fact  if this gets reversed they  simply cut all our throats to include theirs. Because  the way  it is this year , they can go down and pick up a traditional weapon  or a modern one that fit’s the rules and go hunting .
 Next year if this gets reduced they may find that their favorite muzzleloading  hunt is no more  OR that they have to pay a tag fee , put in for the drawings and maybe get a tag  and then pay a special hunt fee  to be able to use that tag .
 So if the stae say 125 tags in a give muzzleloading hunt , your now  fighting 10.000 other hunters for those tags  AND don’t forget the state could still designate  a given area traditional ONLY , just as we have had for the last few years .?

So now tell me , what do you want to do ?
 Put yourself in the position we were  in .
  You are given a choice .
1) relegate modern muzzleloading to the general hunt
 2) remove hunts and or reduce opportunity ? 
 Where do you stand ? Those are your choices
 The state has shown they will keep their word . Modern muzzleloaders in  northern Idaho screamed bloody murder . What happened . The two main hunts up there are now  short range weapons hunts , thus allowing archers and  shotguns .

[captchee]

sorry cascadedad i missed this part or your post

Capt, one thing I have a problem with in your position is that you often state that the season was set up as a traditional season and that is what it was always there for and that is the way it should remain.  And yet, at other times you say it is all about game management.  Which is it?

 when the opportunity was finally allowed back in the mid 1970’s  we were facing a problem of not being able to provide any real proof that muzzleloader numbers would  be able to provide a valid management tool .
 When they state  finally established an the opportunity it was really more  that   the were tired of  the requests . Thus they gave us two Late season hunts.  These were as I recall for elk and in an area  and time frame where a hunter had to over come  often times deep snow and cold .
 Later  those original folks got together and requested additional areas  by asking the state to allow muzzleloader hunts in areas where they needed a  small % of game reduction without  any real serious need  . The state agreed . However  we  were still never capable of  meeting  a valid management asset  in numbers . The state also had archers who  took the largest section of the available timeframes state wide . This is one of the basic reasons why even today there are only small given areas  defined as muzzleloading for a few days

 This was also why back in 1992 that  modern muzzleloading was   supported by many of those to include myself . We simply needed more numbers so as to get more opportunity.
 Now this isn’t to say everyone agreed even then with their allowance into   the muzzleloader hunts . It was pretty much split right down the middle ..

 Now the state is saying that those units/ areas that alow general muzzleloading , “which means all types muzzleloading “ are showing harvest rates higher then are acceptable  even though the numbers of muzzleloading hunters have declined .
 Because those harvest rates are  to high , they must  be reduced .

 Yes you are correct the largest numbers in harvest “ numbers wise  not % of harvest “ is in the general rifle season .

 But again  because of such a large  number of folks hunt the general season  it will be the very last impacted . I believe however in the end they to will have to  live with  new rules .
I don’t believe just  curtailing a given small section of folks is going to  make any great change very quickly .

[cascadedad]

So now tell me , what do you want to do ?
 Put yourself in the position we were  in .
  You are given a choice .
1) relegate modern muzzleloading to the general hunt
 2) remove hunts and or reduce opportunity ? 
 Where do you stand ? Those are your choices

Out of the pages you have written on the subject, I agree it boils down to this.  BUT, I certainly don't see it like you do.

If they chose 1), what is REALLY going to happen?  Will it significantly reduce the number of animals taken?  I do not believe so.  Maybe a VERY small reduction, but in the big picture, with respect to all the total number of animals taken............virtually no change.  In the years that I have hunted and talked to hunters there is one conclusion I have come to.  People can hunt, or they can't.  Typically makes absolutely NO difference if they are using a centerfire, ML or bow.  As you suggest, if you "relegate modern muzzleloading to the general hunt" what will happen.  I believe a good portion will switch to a "traditional" weapon that meets the new requirements.  Is that going to change their success rate.  Again, I don't think so.  Personally, I have never shot traditional weapons, but several guys on different forums have shown just how accurate they can be at long ranges.  The other choice would be for that hunter to hunt archery or general hunt with either their inline or switch to a centerfire.  Again, I believe that the hunters who are successful will remain successful and those who are not, will not be successful.  I am not saying that people don't get lucky, but that can happen in any season using any method.

Again, this is a pretty small portion of the total numbers anyway and out of that small portion, I believe there will be little to no change in the number of animals taken.

So..............why do it?  It makes no sense.

The other choice is 2), "remove hunts and or reduce opportunity".  My guess is, if this is going to happen, it will happen.  The ML rule changes will not impact the outcome of this.

By the way, I went to two 7-11's and one Safeway, all of which have a pretty large magazine section, but could not find the Idaho magazine or pamplet you mentioned.

[cascadedad]

But again  because of such a large  number of folks hunt the general season  it will be the very last impacted . I believe however in the end they to will have to  live with  new rules .

I don’t believe just  curtailing a given small section of folks is going to  make any great change very quickly .

EXACTLY.  That is exactly my point.  So why do it?  The very minimal impact it will have will not be enough.  Idaho has wasted the taxpayers money making this change when it will be completely ineffective.  Compton and his crew should be fired for this fiasco.

[cascadedad]

But again  because of such a large  number of folks hunt the general season  it will be the very last impacted .

Taking a closer look at this portion of your statement.  The folks that hunt the general season will be IMMEDIATELY impacted.  A portion of the inline hunters will most definitely switch to the general season.  Thus, making the already crowded hunt, even more crowded.  Ultimately, those increased numbers in the general hunt will likely cause their future rule changes to be even more severe.

All the while, the "traditional" hunter has their own season.  Taking VERY few animals in the big picture.  Therefore, likely no further changes necessary in THEIR season.

Capt., none of this makes ANY sense at all except to the "traditional" hunter.

[captchee]

But again  because of such a large  number of folks hunt the general season  it will be the very last impacted .

Taking a closer look at this portion of your statement.  The folks that hunt the general season will be IMMEDIATELY impacted.  A portion of the inline hunters will most definitely switch to the general season.  Thus, making the already crowded hunt, even more crowded.  Ultimately, those increased numbers in the general hunt will likely cause their future rule changes to be even more severe.

All the while, the "traditional" hunter has their own season.  Taking VERY few animals in the big picture.  Therefore, likely no further changes necessary in THEIR season.

Capt., none of this makes ANY sense at all except to the "traditional" hunter.

Most times the Idaho fish and game news is not back on  in the racks but up next to where you buy your tags .

well see and i think there in IMo lays the real dilemma.
 When folks say ’well I simply will not hunt in a muzzleloader season  ? Does that work ? No, not here anyway .WHY ?
 Here is basically in so many words  what the state  gets in return from providing a muzzleloader and muzzleloading seasons .
1) a stamp revenue IE you have to purchase a muzzleloading stamp  to hunt in muzzleloading units
2) a % of  outdoor tax sales
3)? that’s about it
So what was the cost to the tax payer for this move ? 0 . The regs still have to be printed . The commissioners don’t get paid for their time just reimbursed for monies spent.
 The management section already  collects harvest data  on all seasons . Those folks are salary folks so they get paid no more if they are discussing harvest numbers in general rifle season or  fish counts coming over the dams , its all the same .

 Loss of revenue ?   Maybe a small % of muzzleloader tag sales . However  we have to remember a large number of folks who hunt with muzzleloaders “to include myself “ hunt predominantly the general season as it is ., why No real opportunity  within close proximity to them . Thus the general season has the greatest benefits . thus no  muzzleloader stamp sales for those people anyway

See you cant really say that moving a group of folks “ any folks Muzzleloader or otherwise “ to say the genral season will increase the population in that season .
 It simply doesn’t work that way when   something like 95% of muzzleloader and archery folks hunt all the seasons .
 Now most certainly I would agree with you that  IF we had a defined set of rules that said  a person could only chose to hunt one season , them most certainly you would see a reduction in say archery and muzzleloading .
 However there simply is only a given numbers  hunters each year . Those hunters have to all purchase tags  that are good in all season “ generally speaking”

 Now as to the accuracy of traditional muzzleloaders LMAO  what you say is very true and is in fact something folks  have been saying for 200+ years .
 In the learned hand a quality traditional muzzleloader is every bit as accurate as any modern center fire  and IMO more so then any modern muzzleloader on the market today .
 The key however is the learned hand .
 If we want to take a look at the comparisons between the two system then we have to really look no further the  NMLRA national events and compare scores in events . Even the smooth bore events exceeded the modern scores respectively  when compared to equal base . However your not going to convince the modern shooter of that .

 But again we are not talking about that here . What we are talking about is  basically . 

Do we trust the F&G to properly manage our wildlife . If not , then as you say we had better figure out how to fix that and do it quick .

 If we do , then we have to accept  what they are saying and the solutions they put forth  even if we personally don’t feel or see where it will work  .

And that my friend is why  so many sportsman groups supported this move .

 According to what the management section was saying , they had seen continued  high harvest rates  in areas allowing general muzzleloading . While in areas providing only traditional muzzleloading those same harvest rates  were within acceptable limits.

 There in I believe is the WHY the recommended what they did .

 I would also agree that  moving a weapon to the general season may not reduce numbers as a given % of  those folks would simply comply with the rules , purchase a weapon that meets those rules and continue hunting .
 However if the success rates  stayed the same then , is that not what the state is looking for ? If the rates climb then  I would agree they would cut back opportunity even more . that’s simply the way of it

So is it just the traditional muzzleloading hunters benefiting ? Well the simple answer is yes and no . most certainly by definition . However remember there are modern muzzleloaders also  . Muzzleloading in general benefits because we still have a chance at an open  season hunt without restrictions being applied   that a draw. Permit or lottery style management   brings  .

As I said before . The state is going to do something . This was an attempt at a simple , possible  approach .  If this gets reversed  then you will see reduce hunting opportunities for  general hunting seasons . I also believe the first to go will be muzzleloading .
 You don’t cut your leg off because you get a sliver  without first trying to remove the sliver or just a section containing the sliver . If the infection still grows then  the leg is the next to go .

[cascadedad]

Well, I LMAO too!   

I just started MLing in Washington state last year.  First experience with a MLer.  I haven't hunted big game in a number of years due to a growing family and I put them first.  My oldest son was 14 last year and I figured I would give him an opportunity to hunt big game, so I bought us both evil White inlines.  I did a TON of reading on the internet and asking questions on different forums.  I have to admit, MLing was intimidating to me, but I did it.  Why did I chose to take up ML hunting?  One reason, safety.  I know two people that were shot with centerfire rifles while hunting when I was a teenager in Oregon.  These were both stray bullets where someone was shooting at a deer.  As I have grown older, safety is a primary consideration with myself and my kids.

I have a friend in Idaho that is a member of this forum, but has not chimed into this discussion.  I think he is just too tired of it all to enter the debate yet again.  He hunts with both inline and traditional rifles.  He has proven to me that with a TC Renegade and a drop in barrel he can shoot big conicals right with any of the inlines.  I believe I or anyone else could duplicate this shooting with no more difficulties than it takes a person to learn to shoot an inline.

One other thing.  If you read many of the forums, there are MANY folks that have a lot of difficulties obtaining good accuracy with their inlines.  You can not just buy an inline, drop in 3 pellets and your choice of bullet and start hunting.  No doubt some do, but my guess is that they are not the type that would harvest an animal anyway.

And once again, with all your typing, you do not present a good case that there will be a reduction of number of animals taken.  This is the bottom line isn't it?

[cascadedad]

By the way, I am done with this here, at least for now.     I am growing tired and as always, no one changes their mind.

I have to hand it to you Capt., you appear to be a marathon typer.  Just keep getting stronger no matter how far you go.   

Happy hunting.

[captchee]

And once again, with all your typing, you do not present a good case that there will be a reduction of number of animals taken.  This is the bottom line isn't it?

 i can claim no such thing , one way or another , all i can tell folks is what i have seen and heard first hand from the idaho fish and game and from talking to the commissioners personaly . thats basicly all i can say

[NONYA]

Your plan has nothing to do with "preserving traditional hunting",its has to do with removing weapons from the hunting field that you find superior and therfore unacceptable,I hope they remove the restrictions and allow EVERYONE to use the ML of their choice.Even if the ml season were removed you can still use your"traditional" weapon in the regular season,right now you have your own special season and you are still bi***in,Id like to see how youd feel using a ML when everyone else is using centerfires,thats how it is here.

[jlbeebe]

I agree with NONYA. Let people use the ML of thier choice and let the chips fall where they may. If apportunity is lost then it is lost equally instead of making one group lose out. As I see it this is what the traditionalists are trying to do. I still can't see any reason for special hunts anyway. If we didn't segregate hunters no one would have anything to complain about.

[Graybeard]

I am one of those who sits firmly AGAINST any special seasons. Set the dates and bag limits and let folks use the weapon of choice. The die hard bow fans will still hunt with a bow. The true die hard traditionalists will still use their flint locks and rbs and the rest will fall where ever their interest lies. Yeah I've been known to "take advantage" of special seasons in the past too but that still doesn't mean I support having them and would be just as happy without any of them personally.

Lots of folks have tried to convince me to lobby for a handgun season for deer here in Bama and I have refused as I'm dead set against having one even tho I'm a handgun hunter. I can legally do that during firearms deer season and have done so since they made it legal to do so. I don't need a special season to use what I chose to use. Neither does anyone else really.

[jlbeebe]

I agree with greybeard. Here in Iowa they started allowing handguns during the firearms season. I plan on using a handgun as soon as I can afford the one I want. I don't need a special season for a handgun or a ML. I us my ML during the shotgun season and I don't feel that anyone has an "advantage" over me just because they can shoot five shots to my one. We have no restrictions on ML's in Iowa and I don't hear the bickering and complaining I hear in other states. Here it is a matter of choice and everyone has the same choices.

[captchee]

 cant say i disagree with either of you two fellas
But  as I said before , OVER AND OVER .
 If the intent is simply to take big game ,  then there is no reason for said special season .
And for the record again , I predominantly hunt with my flintlock in the general any weapons season  we simply have no  quality muzzleloader hunts IMO  near where I live . When I say predominantly hunt I mean  season wise . I have not used a center Fire  rifle now for 20+ years  and I still regularly fill my tags  during the general season
.
  Again think on this , and I will make it short LOL .
 If you are only aloud one of each  species  a year , how many modern folks will chose their  system over a center fire when given a choice  ?
 What do you think the end result would be for the modern muzzleloading hunter ?
 don’t get me wrong here , im not saying ALL would stop hunting with modern muzzleloading weapons . But I feel a very large majority would .
So is not the end result the same ?
 You still have a large % of traditional shooters  who will continue to use their system just as they do now  and a large % of modern weapons drawing dust from lack of intended value

[NONYA]

So you think because you use a flint lock that you deserve some kind of special treatment?Its a choice you have made,live with it.

[cascadedad]

OK, I wanted to stay out, but I can't.  This is just too fun.   

Graybeard, I agree with what you said very strongly.  Except........As I mentioned, I got into ML hunting because I feel it is safer for my son and I.  We have a seperate ML season, but there is definitely not any advantage to the hunt, other than the fact that their are fewer hunters.

I HATE the idea of walking around in hunting season and having the realistic possibility of a guy sitting on the ridge 3-400 yards away (I have no idea he is even there), watching me and/or my son with his scope and having a 300 RUM pointed at us.  I know the chance of actually being shot in this scenerio is very small, but it does happen.  If I have another choice I will take it.

Captchee,  You make some aweful big assumptions.  I have a friend that lives in Moscow that has been using an inline in the general season, so he cancels you out.  I put in for a Washington state moose tag special hunt this year.  It is a very hard draw and I like most will never get one in my lifetime.   It is an "any weapon" hunt.  If I would have drawn a tag this year, I was going to use my White Ultra-Mag (inline) with a 460 grain Bullshop conical.

Your attitude is one of arrogance and the more you post the more it shows.  Your words say traditional hunters are superior to inliners just by definition.  All this adds NOTHING to the discussion and just tires everyone reading it.

Bottom line.  All of this discussion SHOULD be about game management and equal opportunity for all hunters.  Taking that into consideration, Graybeard is right.  One season for everyone, use whatever you want.  Some special hunts in certain areas would still need to be short range only, for herd reduction.

If there are seperate seasons, for say CF, ML and archery, the decision should be game management.  NOT a "We're better than you, so we deserve OUR season." attitude.

In previous posts you stated that you and your "groups" included modern MLers into the mix when this all started in Idaho because you "needed their numbers".  Real nice, use them when you need them to get what you want and then drop them like a bad habit when they are in your way.   

[sabotloader]

I really hate to even get in here because it is useless, people like captchee have already made up there minds and they are just a brainwashed as I probably am, BUT would somebody explain to me the difference between a then legal Idaho inline muzzleloader and a mordern TC Hawkin.

A then legal Idaho inline was:
no scopes - no electronic sights
no 209's - must be percusion ignited
.428 size minimum bullet

Now what is the difference between these and a Hawkin other than looks?

I guarantee you that I can shoot the the Hawkin just as well as the inline.... do not go to lock time - the new TC's have the lock time down to just as fast as a falling bolt.

Under these rules the inline was not responsible for any more harvest than the traditional guns other than the there was more inlines being used than traditional guns.  If the state is trying to force and everyone could afford the go out and purchase a replacement the harvest numbers would continue... If the state is trying to reduce harvest by reducing hunters - that they will do that but limiting the type of ML is not the way to do it, other than it satisfies a very vocal group of people that have the time to spend in the laps of the IF&G in Boise as captchee does - does he represent us - NO! he represents his special interest.  Add up the number of people that participated in the state forum - how many people is that? - then compare that number to number of hunting licenses sold.

At one time Idaho had the rules in place that could/would satisfy the majority of the people in Idaho - not now... I believe there are 38 states that seem to have ML hunting figured out and 7 or now 8 that seem to be going the other way.

I really hope Idaho reverses its current stand - and I also believe it will happen because of economics... as the IF&G is finding out - money speaks

[cascadedad]

Hey buddy from Moscow, thanks for joining in!   

How did you manage to boil it down to that in such a small amount of words?  That pretty much says it all, but I think I am brainwashed too.   

One thing though.  I kind of think it will be reversed also, but maybe because they are receiving a HUGE push-back from inline hunters that they really weren't expecting, plus the fact that their original reasoning was flawed and they know the change won't make a difference.  Too bad they wasted all that time.

[Graybeard]

I HATE the idea of walking around in hunting season and having the realistic possibility of a guy sitting on the ridge 3-400 yards away (I have no idea he is even there), watching me and/or my son with his scope and having a 300 RUM pointed at us.  I know the chance of actually being shot in this scenerio is very small, but it does happen.  If I have another choice I will take it.

Me too but then that is a matter of stupidity on his part and folks who do such should be culled from the ranks of hunters period.

If there is a safety related reason to use weapons of limited range in an area I fully support the use of limited range weapons in that area. I don't see that as a problem and it's not a special tool season per se but rather a safety issue related hunt. I see that far differently than each person thinking their tool of choice needs a SPECIAL season and most wanting to also still be able to hunt each other season as well. Not all mind you but most. Like I said I've done it myself because the special seasons were offered and I took advantage.

We have a bow season here that begins long before gun season and I've used bows during that season to extend my season and then switched to guns as soon as it began. I'd NOT have bow hunted without a special season but I still did not and do not support such a special season. In the WMAs here they have a muzzle loader hunt that once was about the only way you could hunt does and I took advantage of it. I also always shot does not bucks on those hunts even tho both were legal. For the most part I tried to take does with bow as well since back then you couldn't with gun where I hunted. I didn't kill does exclusively with bow but did take far more of them than bucks intentionally.

[cascadedad]

I HATE the idea of walking around in hunting season and having the realistic possibility of a guy sitting on the ridge 3-400 yards away (I have no idea he is even there), watching me and/or my son with his scope and having a 300 RUM pointed at us.  I know the chance of actually being shot in this scenerio is very small, but it does happen.  If I have another choice I will take it.

Me too but then that is a matter of stupidity on his part and folks who do such should be culled from the ranks of hunters period.

Unfortunately, IF the trigger gets pulled, they aren't the one that is potentially dead.

If there is a safety related reason to use weapons of limited range in an area I fully support the use of limited range weapons in that area. I don't see that as a problem and it's not a special tool season per se but rather a safety issue related hunt. I see that far differently than each person thinking their tool of choice needs a SPECIAL season and most wanting to also still be able to hunt each other season as well. Not all mind you but most. Like I said I've done it myself because the special seasons were offered and I took advantage.

Exactly like I see it.

We have a bow season here that begins long before gun season and I've used bows during that season to extend my season and then switched to guns as soon as it began. I'd NOT have bow hunted without a special season but I still did not and do not support such a special season. In the WMAs here they have a muzzle loader hunt that once was about the only way you could hunt does and I took advantage of it. I also always shot does not bucks on those hunts even tho both were legal. For the most part I tried to take does with bow as well since back then you couldn't with gun where I hunted. I didn't kill does exclusively with bow but did take far more of them than bucks intentionally.

When I was a teenager living in Oregon, I hunted the archery season for deer and elk.  The time was better and the seasons were longer.  I did enjoy archery hunting, but I primarily did it for the opportunity.  With some peoples' logic, that apparently makes me less of a hunter.

[captchee]

If there are seperate seasons, for say CF, ML and archery, the decision should be game management.  NOT a "We're better than you, so we deserve OUR season." attitude.

please show me 1 place i said such a thing ?
 i dont think  you will find it . again let me remind you  that i only gave my oppenion after ask . the rests of this is only exsplaining what im seeing happening and why

as to the safty issue ? maybe you didnt here about the  young girl killed in main this last fall ?
 the issues are still the same just the people are closer

[captchee]

so tell me sabot shooter , where is your season this year ? where are the units  you hunted in ?
 if you don’t believe what im saying fine , but how about telling the others here  what happened to the main unites up there this year MMMMMMM. Lets here it ? 

 you fellas want so badly for this to be a modern vs traditional fight  that you cannot get it through you heads that this came from the fish and game management section .
 i can only speak for myself but i heard not one group ask for this change .
 again after it was  recommended by the fish and game to the commission   it had support . not just  from the Idaho muzzleloading association
 or traditional groups but also  all the other  groups that were present as i recall .
so tell me , what stakes did the folks from the MI , DU GA and others ?  i seem to recall even the fella from sportsman united  backed the proposal ?
 I would personally like to know ? Most have no association with muzzleloading

[cascadedad]

If there are seperate seasons, for say CF, ML and archery, the decision should be game management.  NOT a "We're better than you, so we deserve OUR season." attitude.

please show me 1 place i said such a thing ?
 i dont think  you will find it . again let me remind you  that i only gave my oppenion after ask . the rests of this is only exsplaining what im seeing happening and why

What I was tying to say is IF MLers had a season, which they did and still do....any change made to this SHOULD be as a result of game management or at least have some sort of logic to it.  This was Idaho's stance from the beginning.  They needed to do this for the mule deer.  You as well as others I have asked on this and other forums have yet to provide any type of explanation.  Then you said something that really shocked me.  Something like, "We should all trust the F&G, they will do what is right."  I will trust them if they show me the numbers and explain their logic.  I won't just trust them and bury my head in the sand.

Therefore, it is MY opinion that you and others just want your own season. 

Can't wait for Sabotloader's response.  By the way it is Sabotloader, not Sabot Shooter.  He's too old to actually shoot.   

[captchee]

 well do what we do and call the fish and game , get your information first hand .

 now greybeard  im going to end this here at least concerning me  . i have done my best to explain whats happening .

 folks here like cascadedad say it should be about management . yet when  given first hand information from the management section of this states fish and game .  the actual recommendation by said  department they still wish and chose to make this a modern vs. traditional problem over seeing the real issue .

 So this is my last say on it .
 Mark my words , don’t believe  what I have been telling you .
 When what I have said comes true , remember , you were warned of the out come .
Be safe

[cascadedad]

as to the safty issue ? maybe you didnt here about the  young girl killed in main this last fall ?
 the issues are still the same just the people are closer

Didn't see this the first time I read it, got stuck on the first section.

Yes I did hear about it.  I was not trying to justify a season based on safety, was just giving some background. My logic regarding my personal safety really isn't up to your questioning.   But I will humor you anyway.

Where I hunt is wide open country.  Primarily CRP around rolling wheat fields.  There are no trees and the brush is typically about waist high.  Much different than in heavy trees and brush.  Like I said before, I worry about someone several hundred yards away watching me with their scope.  It is not legal to use a scope on a MLer.

I realize there is a risk every time you go hunting.  I would like to minimize that risk where I can.  One way that I do that is to hunt MLer season only.  That is my logic and that is what I do.

[sabotloader]

captchee

so tell me sabot shooter , where is your season this year ? where are the units  you hunted in ?
 if you don’t believe what im saying fine , but how about telling the others here  what happened to the main unites up there this year MMMMMMM. Lets here it ?

I guess I am not sure what the heck you are asking?

Where is your season this year? Under the new rules in the same place it was last year unit 8A - I have always used a sidehammer during ML season anyway, altough there is a short range season over in 10A - which I can use any ML.

What happened to the main units?  I am, again as usual, not sure what you are talking about.  Is the fact that several of the old ML seasons have switched from ML to Short Range with no restrictions on ML's? I am not sure what you are talking about.

Are you inferring that the northern part of the state got what they were asking for "unlimited use of any ML scope even
Savage"  If this is where you are working it is not the answer it really does not serve the majority of Idaho hunters needs or beliefs.

The fact is that the IF&G and game was supplied with false information and direction and made decisions with what they thought was valid information. It wasn't and the decisions resulting from that are also faulty.  One example is the ridiculous statement Brad made to me that an inline (under old Idaho rules) was equal to hunting with a 30-30 with an effective range of 300 yards. there are two really bad errors in that statement alone - yet that is one of the most used statements I hear or read from several traditional boards - simply not true...

Somebody made a statement - true hunters will harvest with what ever they are using - If you are going to require me to hunt with a sidehammer so-be it - I at least one but what about joe average that can afford to run out and buy one just because without notice the state changed their ideals.... do you have any ideal how many people that applies to in the state of Idaho and how many Sporting Goods Dealers are left with guns they can not sale.

We should all trust the F&G, they will do what is right

You have got to be crazy - it is a political organization the feels pressure from groups (lobbies) and the almighty buck - Why do you think things have changed so drastically - money speaks....


Cdad - I am old but I kin still pull da trigger.... i will sho u dis weaknd with i git out 2 da rock pit...

WHY! did I get into this anyway - it is like talking to a hardened old brickwall - it will not bend.  i just hope the F&G commisioners have open ears - a couple of them do not but not all of them are set in granite..

Captchee: yet when  given first hand information from the management section of this states fish and game .  the actual recommendation by said  department they still wish and chose to make this a modern vs. traditional problem over seeing the real issue .

Well that is not quite true either when we requested the numbers from the state and they supplied them on-line they did not match up with what was being said.  We even had a follow-up discussion but could not get an accurate (mathematically) explanation.... they like any other organization can make numbers say anything they want them to say....  UI has a degree in that field called "statisitcs"



 

[cascadedad]

Captchee,
I was still typing while you were posting.

Fine, I have said it a hundred times.  They recommended something.  It makes no sense to me.  I don't see how it will possibly make a difference.  I wish I could have an explanation of how this proposed change will make a difference.  I HAVEN'T SEEN IT YET.

I don't see this as a modern vs. traditional problem.  I think that a MLer is a MLer and we should all hunt together and enjoy the season together.  You are the one that wants me to hunt with the centerfire people, or become like you and buy a traditional rifle.

I don't understand your big warning.  That there will be changes if this decision is reversed?  Big deal, my warning is, there will be changes no matter what because their proposed change will do nothing to change the number of animals that are taken.  Keep sidestepping this real issue.

[forest2]

 no sence kickin a dead horse, ain't worth nutnin anyways.

If ya come to a fork in the road.?>,




,,,,pick it up.

[quickdtoo]

 

[merhunts]

I guess the new CVA ELECTRA is out of the question.