Do you want to help preserve traditional hunting?

[NONYA]

You will still be able to use your "traditional" weapon in the general season regardless of the the new rules,SO this thread really has nothing to do with saving your style of hunting,it has to do with eliminating the style you dont think is "traditional" enough,it should be titled "Do you want to do away with modern Mls?"

[jlbeebe]

Nonya,
  You have been branded a troll. This is what happens when you disagree with people who can't stand to see anyone use a weapon that doesn't conform to thier odd sense of "traditional". We should all petition the DNR to open the ML season to ALL muzzleloaders or do away with it completely.

[sabotloader]

jlbeebe     

We should all petition the DNR to open the ML season to ALL muzzleloaders or do away with it completely.

That sure would solve a lot of headaches for a lot of game departments.... but one simple rule either way is not the American way.... gotta make it complicated....

[jlbeebe]

If we could just get rid of all of the special seasons it would make life alot simpler for everyone. "Traditionalists" could still use thier choice of rifle. The only problem is they would have nothing to complain about.

[NONYA]

Thats how it is here,I didnt even know what a "traditionalist" was until our F&G considered an early season ML season,they came out of the woodwork like liberals at a clinton rally and caused so many problems the potential season was shelved,they are great for the sport of hunting,they campaign to remove the opportunity to hunt from anyone they deem unfit,they started bi***in before we even got a season and ruined it for everyone.I hope they lump the Idaho season into one like they do here so everyone can use the weapon they choose and those who dont like it can wipe their tears with a loincloth.

[cascadedad]

Interesting Internet article about Trolls.

Internet Trolls - An Overview

There are an average of 1-4 Trolls on the average sized website.
Trolls never contribute or initiate positive posts, nothing of positive value.
Trolls literally intend to cause controversy.
Trolls often sit at home on a PC under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
Trolls are unable to carry on rational conversations like normal adults.
Trolls typically display irrational behavior.
Trolls often display psychotic behavior.

The article made a big point that the Care & Feeding of Trolls is simple:
Trolls are to be ignored...do not interact with trolls...once a Troll is identified, ignore the Troll completely.

Very ironic YOU should bring this up.  How many posts have you made in this thread that has contributed to the discussion.  I can save you the time of looking, this is your first post.  After 4 complete pages of discussion, you swoop in and insinuate someone is a troll.   
I assume you were posting this for NONYA, but realize it may also just be for me and anyone else that disagrees with your beliefs.  Whatever your beliefs are, because you evidently don't want to share them.

Go back and read this thread.  NONYA and others have made some very good points.  Maybe you could try to explain a few things.  I guess you are just ignoring all of us trolls.  You have much better self restraint than I.

I actually recommend that this post be locked and made a sticky for all eternity!!!!!  This is the first time I have EVER seen Tim be wrong about something.   

[quickdtoo]

I actually recommend that this post be locked and made a sticky for all eternity!!!!!  This is the first time I have EVER seen Tim be wrong about something.  

No need to sticky it, your perpetual posting is keeping it at the top anyway!!

thanks, I'll take that as a compliment!!

Tim

[cascadedad]

Hey, over 15,000 posts and wrong only 1 time.  It was completely a compliment.

[quickdtoo]

That's the only one you know about!!!

[cascadedad]

Hey No,

Traditional was all there was when muzzle loading hunts began.  What came out of the woodwork was every lazy hunter that wanted an easier chance at a game animal but couldn't figure out how to make a black powder traditional rifle work.  They had to make things easier.

When I started - traditional was all there was.  Just where do you think in-lines came from? An 1840's rocket scientist?

What really sickens me is that the Boone and Crockett book is being filled with animals taken with scoped 30-06 rifles that happen to be loaded from the muzzle.

My guess is, MOST of the animals filling Boone and Crockett are NOT taken by lazy hunters.  Occasionally, these animals are taken because someone gets lucky, but I seriously doubt that is the norm.  My nephew took the number 1 Roosevelt elk ever taken with a bow in Oregon, two years ago with a Bowtech.  I have NO doubt he could have killed the same animal with a traditional style bow if that is all he had.  He is that good of a hunter and puts that much effort into it.  He proves it year after year and he is only in his mid 20s.  If you want to kill a record animal, you need to quit whining and become a better hunter.

Bringing a 30-06 into the discussion shows your ignorance.

[jlbeebe]

When muzzy hunts began all we had was "traditional". There were no rules regarding inlines because they were not around. After Tony Knight came up with the MK-85 people started using inlines. It was at this time that the traditionalists started crying foul and got laws against inlined passed. Inline hunters were not trying to get around the law using loopholes because until the traditionalists got the laws changed they were legal. I hunt with an inline and in archery season I hunt with a bow. I can assure you that hunting with a bow is more work than hunting with a traditional firearm. Many of the guys I know who hunt with an inline also bowhunt. Some bowhunters might even call you lazy for hunting with a firearm. Are you too lazy to take an animal with stick and string? Can you not figure out how to use a bow?

Hey No,

Traditional was all there was when muzzle loading hunts began.  What came out of the woodwork was every lazy hunter that wanted an easier chance at a game animal but couldn't figure out how to make a black powder traditional rifle work.  They had to make things easier.

When I started - traditional was all there was.  Just where do you think in-lines came from? An 1840's rocket scientist?

What really sickens me is that the Boone and Crockett book is being filled with animals taken with scoped 30-06 rifles that happen to be loaded from the muzzle.

[crow_feather]

The difference between the compound and traditional bow is not that much, especially if you look at England's long bow of the 1300's.  Maybe twenty yards at best.

You need to take a look at the Savage muzzle loader's ballistics to see what is going on in the world.  Even the less powerful Thompson's equal a 30-30 in ballistic performance.

As for Boone and Crockett and lazy hunters, once again, most of the entries these days are taken by rifles much superior to the traditional rifle of the 1840's, and those entries wouldn't have been taken if the hunter was carrying a traditional rifle.

cascadedad,
When states allow bow hunters to shoot very powerful crossbows with scopes, that will take elk at 200 yards, your son will go one of two ways.  He will fight the use of the new bows or he will evolve with them.  But the trophy he took will be a long way down on the list of the Pope and Young Book.

[NONYA]

Actuallly...when your so called traditional Mls came into the hunting world there had been smooth bore muskets for Hmmm....500 years and archery equipment in use for hmm.......100,000 years.So if you REALLY want to be traditional in the firearms hunting genre why dont you get a smooth bore hand cannon made in the far east several hundred years ago and show us what a hunter you are OR pick up a hand made bow and and get real "traditional".Crow you only joined this thread to incite argument,you have no other intrest in the subject.

[cascadedad]

The difference between the compound and traditional bow is not that much, especially if you look at England's long bow of the 1300's.  Maybe twenty yards at best.

Get real!  Have you ever pulled a compound bow back and held it?  You can pull the new bows back and hold them at full draw for a LONG time.  Can you do that with a traditional style bow?  This is a HUGE advantage.

I venture to say that a complete novice can walk into a good archery shop that has a range and get set up with a new bow and equipment and walk out in a few hours able to shoot a pie plate at 40 yards every time.  NOT POSSIBLE WITH A TRADITIONAL BOW!!!!  Those long bows of the 1300's were capable of shooting I am sure, but only with an expert archer who has trained for years.  Your talking apples and oranges.

To say that there is not much difference is laughable!

As for Boone and Crockett and lazy hunters, once again, most of the entries these days are taken by rifles much superior to the traditional rifle of the 1840's

Is there a link on the web that I can see this info? 

, and those entries wouldn't have been taken if the hunter was carrying a traditional rifle.

Well, this is your opinion.  I disagree.  You are making it all about the gun and the ability to shoot 200 yards as apposed to 100 yards (or whatever it might be) and I say it is more about the hunter.

cascadedad,
When states allow bow hunters to shoot very powerful crossbows with scopes, that will take elk at 200 yards, your son will go one of two ways.  He will fight the use of the new bows or he will evolve with them.  But the trophy he took will be a long way down on the list of the Pope and Young Book.  I don't care how good of a hunter he is, he'll be calling a big bull to within 50 yards and someone will take it 150 yards out.  Unless he buys his elk at the elk store.

200 yard crossbows???  Are you serious?  Never heard of that, but I don't know anyone that has a modern crossbow.

It is my nephew, not my son.  I would put him and his 50 yard bow up against 99.9% of other hunters, even if they had a 300 yard bow.  I'll post a picture of the rack next week.  I won't have the opportunity before then.

Just curious since your profile says you are from Idaho.  Have you attended any of the Idaho meetings that Captchee has discussed?

[cascadedad]

After doing a little searching I found this info.  It came from www.nwbiggame.com.  My nephews elk is #1 for non-typical Roosevelt.  Compare that to the #1 rifle!  The #1 rifle has stood since 1953.  It looks like records have been kept for rifle since the 1930's at least.  Since then, no one has killed one than has been scored higher than my nephew's.

Again, I'll post a picture next week.  There is an outside chance I will be able to post tonight.  I'll try.

Oregon - Roosevelt Elk, Non-Typical (Rifle)  [maps]
   1. 378 0/8 Douglas County 1953   
   2. 377 5/8 Coos County 1970   
   3. 372 4/8 Coos County 1958   
   4. 371 7/8 Coos County 1951   
   5. 371 0/8 Benton County 2002   
   6. 362 0/8 Tillamook County 1939   
   7. 361 2/8 Coos County 1972   
   8. 361 1/8 Clatsop County 1938   
   9. 360 5/8 Tillamook County 1965   
 10. 357 4/8 Clatsop County 1945   
 
 
Oregon - Roosevelt Elk, Non-Typical (Archery)  [maps]
   1. 381 4/8 Douglas County 2005   
   2. 371 1/8 Tillamook County 1985   
   3. 354 1/8 Curry County 1993   
   4. 320 3/8 Benton County 1992   
   5. 315 5/8 Douglas County 1999   
   6. 310 2/8 Yamhill County 1993   
   7. 308 7/8 Tillamook County 1998   
   8. 291 2/8 Clatsop County 2000   
   9. 288 2/8 Douglas County 1996   
 10. 284 0/8 Coos County 2000   
 
 
Oregon - Roosevelt Elk, Non-Typical - Cascade (Rifle)  [maps]
   1. 374 5/8 Jackson County 1950   
   2. 371 1/8 Linn County 2004   
   3. 347 4/8 Klamath County 2002   
   4. 345 7/8 Linn County 1996   
   5. 341 7/8 Lane County 2004   
   6. 336 0/8 Linn County 1997   
   7. 332 4/8 Lane County 2004   
   8. 332 0/8 Lane County 1995   
   9. 319 0/8 Lane County 1990   
 10. 315 5/8 Douglas County 1998   
 
 
Oregon - Roosevelt Elk, Non-Typical - Cascade (Archery)  [maps]
   1. 360 0/8 Clackamas County 2005   
   2. 352 3/8 Linn County 1995   
   3. 330 1/8 Lane County 2003   
   4. 312 1/8 Jefferson County 1998   
   5. 307 7/8 Linn County 1992   
   6. 303 4/8 Douglas County 1990   
   7. 303 0/8 Klamath County 1998   
   8. 285 1/8 Jackson County 1999   
   9. 278 1/8 Clackamas County 1992   
 10. 262 2/8 Douglas County 2002
 

[crow_feather]

This has just become a rehash of the same old battle that used to darken the black powder rifle threads until they were split.  They were split because there was always arguing without anyone ever giving way.  Except now we have old No throwing barbs trying to sound knowledgeable.

cascadedad,
I will not argue the same old song with you.  It will do neither of us any good.  I am glad that your nephew did well in his hunt and wish him much success in his endeavors.  May his record stay high for many years.  I also wish you the best of success in your hunts.  If we interact again, may it be on the same side for a good cause.

C F

[jlbeebe]

The difference between the compound and traditional bow is not that much, especially if you look at England's long bow of the 1300's.  Maybe twenty yards at best.

You need to take a look at the Savage muzzle loader's ballistics to see what is going on in the world.  Even the less powerful Thompson's equal a 30-30 in ballistic performance.

As for Boone and Crockett and lazy hunters, once again, most of the entries these days are taken by rifles much superior to the traditional rifle of the 1840's, and those entries wouldn't have been taken if the hunter was carrying a traditional rifle.

cascadedad,
When states allow bow hunters to shoot very powerful crossbows with scopes, that will take elk at 200 yards, your son will go one of two ways.  He will fight the use of the new bows or he will evolve with them.  But the trophy he took will be a long way down on the list of the Pope and Young Book.

200 YARD CROSSBOWS!!!!!!!!!!! where can I get one. Are you from earth or some other planet?

[huntersmurf]

Wow, who makes that cross bow that will shoot 200 yds??? I'm gona have to git me one of those!!!! Must have to use a really Strong hydraulic press or a 20 foot long lever to cock it though??

Anyone else notice how some of the trads tend too, too, well,  over exaggerate???

In the beginning there were only muzzleloaders. Traditional is something invented a couple of years ago by the buck skin (lets play dress up) crowd. You know, the fashion police of the hunting world.   Some of you guys need to go find your dictionary and look up the definition of MUZZLELOADER, try Websters, Wickpedia or the ATF&E.

Anyone else getting tired of the comparisons to 30 caliber center fire ballistics??? Come on, who you trying to kid here, or are you just trying to impress all of us with ignorance and baffle us with BS. For example, if we have two bullets, one a 30 caliber of 200 grains and one of 45 caliber of the same weight and both are driven to the same velocity. The 30 cal bullet will always outperform the 45 caliber bullet in retained velocity, energy and trajectory due to its Superior ballistic coefficient and sectional density, (sorry to use the technical terms but if you don't understand them go find a dictionary or better yet a good cartridge reloading manual and study up on ballistics.) Simple physics my friends.

Buck up and quite yur belly aching

[NONYA]

They must be building that 200 yard crossbow in your *ss because thats where your head is if you think its gonna happen.It has become a rehash of every other thread you join to stir up and then try to sound like some mother hen telling us how silly we are.

A bit strong there me thinks. Let's tone it down and keep the disagreement civil on both sides. Graybeard.

[jlbeebe]

The modern inline is not a centerfire. It has range limitations that for the most part extend somewhat beyond that of the average sidelock. In all the years I have hunted with an inline rifle my farthest shot was on a doe at about 150 yards. I think most people would agree that this is doable with a good sidelock shooting concical bullets. The advantage I see in a modern inline is that it cleans up nicely and is more dependable. This does not mean I can take a trophy buck at 300 yards as would be possible with a centerfire. I have a .54 hawkins that does the job out to 100 yards give or take. After listening to all the crying and whining I just don't have the desire to use it much anymore.

[cascadedad]

C F,
I understand.  If I were you, I wouldn't want to get into this one any deeper either.

Good luck to you also and stay safe.

Cdad

[beerbelly]

unless I can't read this is suppose to be the TRADITIONAL Muzzle Loading Rifles & Shotguns Forum. So all you in-liners aren't even suppose to be here unless you want to talk about traditional guns!         
                                          Old Charlie

[Graybeard]

unless I can't read this is suppose to be the TRADITIONAL Muzzle Loading Rifles & Shotguns Forum. So all you in-liners aren't even suppose to be here unless you want to talk about traditional guns!         
                                          Old Charlie

A valid point. I seldom pay attention to which forum I'm reading or posting to since I use the "what's new since last visit" option and am seldom aware of the forum I'm reading in. But this is a Traditional Forum so take the inline/modern talk to the correct forum guys.

OK Guys I knew I was sleepy and it was time for my nap but dang I didn't know I was already alseep. Quote has been fixed. I did take my nap not long after posting that and I'm still sleepy.  GB.

[cascadedad]

Whoops, I don't think you meant to hit that quote button.   

Personally, I'm glad you didn't "pay attention" this time.  I doubt this thread would have happened in a different forum.

It certainly has been an eye-opener for me.  While I don't think any of this has changed anyone's mind, it definitely gives me a better understanding of the traditional MLing groups' thought process.

[cascadedad]

A healthy discussion or debate like this concerning traditional AND modern doesn't seem to fit into any of the forum catagories.  Does this mean it is off limits?

Suggestions GB?

[Graybeard]

A healthy discussion or debate like this concerning traditional AND modern doesn't seem to fit into any of the forum catagories.  Does this mean it is off limits?

Suggestions GB?

I've fixed that quote. It was already past my nap time. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

But yeah the whole reason for the split of the Modern Inline forum off from the Traditional was really to avoid the continual arguing between the two factions. I really don't think such does any of us any good. But if you really just "gotta" we do have the Shooting and Hunting General Discussion Forum, The Humor and Off Topics Forum and the Old Pot Bellied Stove Forum all of which are pretty wide open to most discussion topics.

It really was my intention to stop such bickering on the two Muzzle Loading forums however as it was about to end us having a Muzzle Loading forum at all before the split.

[huntersmurf]

The newest sidelock and rock lock guns currently available from T/C, Traditons , RMC  and Lyman are all capable of duplicating the performance of the newest inline guns. The argument about an inline having a performance advantage over a sidelock or flintlock is not valid. Consider it like twins wearing different clothing. They are the same inside.

[cascadedad]

Graybeard, I will admit, some of the stuff in this thread would definitely fit into the humor section.   

Sorry for my part if this has been a sore spot.  I wasn't around when the ML section split.  That, combined with the fact that I am relatively new to MLing, I don't know all that happened back then.

[crow_feather]

huntersmurf,
It doesn't have to do with the appearance" of the weapon.  I wish that it was that easy.  I could go into the spiel about the spirit of our ancestors who braved the Rockies pre 1840.  I could discuss the traditionalists working to get the BP hunts so they could relive those olden days.  I could tell you of the frustrations felt when the hunts were flooded with people not interested in the old ways and skills, but just the desire for the easy kill.

I think that there are some people who can't understand about a hunt being more than just killing a deer......................................

[cascadedad]

Idaho went very traditional this year. The problem is we might loose it. The Idaho Fish and Game commission will meet the 18 th of July to probably reverse the traditional rule. If you want to help stop the reversal of the traditional rule please contact them here is a link to do it.  Ron
http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/about/commission/members.cfm

This was the original post, and since this is a traditional forum I will keep my post on topic to the original post and traditional in content.   

CF,  Please go into the "spiel about the spirit".  Please elaborate, I'm sure it will be entertaining reading for all of us.  And then when you are finished, please tell us what that has to do with the rule changes that were made in Idaho.

I think that there are some people who can't understand about a hunt being more than just killing a deer.................

Who exaclty are you refering to and why do you come to that conclusion?  It really doesn't matter anyway.  When you buy your license and tag, the states don't really give a rip WHY you hunt, as long as you follow the laws.  They are happy to collect the money.

I'd also still like to know if you attended the meetings in Idaho in representing traditional hunters.  If you care not to answer, just say so.