Michigan BP substitute so-called Regulation

[RandyWakeman]

http://www.hpmuzzleloading.com

Toby Bridges has updated his site, see the bottom of the home page-- and the focus is on Michigan, a DNR that apparently has great difficulty understanding "black powder substitute."

Most do. :?

Quoting from Toby's site:

It seems they do not say what Michigan Department of Natural Resources conservation officers interpret them to say.

          Presently, the regulations are pretty simple...and state:  
"During the December muzzleloading seasons, muzzleloading deer hunters can use only a muzzleloading rifle or muzzleloading shotgun or black powder handgun loaded with black powder or a commercially manufactured black powder substitute."

          It is the interpretation of the wording "commercially manufactured black powder substitute" which causes all the confusion for those hunters who have taken to the Savage Model 10ML II muzzleloader.  For them, in this rifle, powders like IMR-SR4759, H-4227, Accurate Arms 5744 and VihtaVuori N110 are all "substitutes for black powder" and these powders are definitely "commercially manufactured".  

[MFinMA]

Hi Randy
I really enjoy your forum and the web articles which I have seen.

Does the National Muzzleloading Association feel that smokeless powders are 'black powder substitutes'?

I have been a muzzleloader for around 30 years and really enjoy the sport, both the target shooting and the solititude that the BP hunting seasons offer. I have never been a traditional and always of the Modern ML ilk.

I must admit that I personally feel that the 10ML-II rifles using smokeless powder overstep the bounds of what MLing has been about - at least for me.

Back in the early 70' Massachusetts relaxed the MLing laws and allowed cap locks if they were smoothbores in addition to the rifled barrelled flintlocks. I was hunting opening day. It was raining hard. I met a flintlocker. He said he had a shot at a doe but his flintlock had misfired. He looked at my smoothbore 56 caliber T/C Renegade with a rather jaded eye. He was not too happy that was evident. He said that 'we guys' would ruin the the volunteer work he and others had done to secure a separate deer season for MLers.

Now that there are MLers that shoot 250 gr bullets at higher velocities than a 220 gr. 30/06, maybe he was right!

[RandyWakeman]

Hi Randy

I must admit that I personally feel that the 10ML-II rifles using smokeless powder overstep the bounds of what MLing has been about - at least for me. . .

Now that there are MLers that shoot 250 gr bullets at higher velocities than a 220 gr. 30/06, maybe he was right!

As to what the NMLRA might say, I have no idea. They never have any authority in classification, such as the D.O.T. does. You are not alone in your feelings, to be sure-- I had the same initial reaction, believe me, and said so. But, I was quite wrong. As to velocity, there have been plenty of blackpowder fired round ball loads that well exceed 2200 fps.

Like most things, there is no right or wrong. Current production motorcycles well overstep the "bounds" of what motorcycles are "all about" to many. Some likely feel the same way about rangefinders and scopes.

What is very problematic is that Pyrodex pellets or Triple Seven pellets are not powders at all, but flammable solids that require no user measuring. It is quite a leap to call this an authentic "powder substitute." Triple Seven powder itself is not a blackpowder performance substitute, if that is the supposed criteria. Most Triple Seven users really have no idea what it is made from. Also, just by saying the word "smokeless" does not mean anything specific, or automatically mean any performance advantage at all.

The responses are as varied as individual hunters and states themselves. In some areas, there are far more deer than wanted-- just not enough hunters, period. Those states need to control their herds badly by some means.

Some like to think of "challenge"-- handgun hunting is challenging, yet enjoys few long, special seasons of privilege by comparison. In Illinois, there is a primary "general firearm season"---- semi-auto scoped slug guns firing saboted projectiles, last year 6 shot (or more) .454 Casull revolvers along side, and you can hunt with a one-shot 10ML-- but not with smokeless. If there is some sense to that, it escapes me.

When the smoke clears (or not), what is left is the familiar note that 95% +++ of all North American deer are taken sub-100 yards, sub-50 yards in some area. The velocity / range "advantage" that is imagined, is just that. One day, the more level heads will wonder what the fuss was really about. For most hunters, shooting a Savage just means no corrosive fouling to obsess about at the end of the day, little more. If that somehow upsets "other" hunters, or somehow negatively affects their hunt-- I can't see why.

Everybody is free to make their own equipment choices, why not just let them? Perhaps we just worry too much about how the "other guy" chooses to hunt. If use of a Savage 10ML has somehow "tarnished" the hunt of another muzzleloader, anywhere-- I have never, ever heard of it. Has anyone?

[MFinMA]

Hi Randy
I pretty much agree with what you have said. In fact, I have been giving a lot of consideration to purchasing one of the Savage MLers for the very reasons you state - not the least of which is ease of cleaning. But I am sort of caught up in this paradox.

As you state, I certainly don't need the additional performance potential. I think on average my shots have been around 50 yards, hunting here in the NE for about 45 years. It certainly is nice to have the option of shooting when a buck pops up a couple of hundred yards distant across a clearcut.

But since states have a separate ML deer season, there has to be some means of defining what a MLer is. Herein lies the problem. One persons definition is liable to be quite different than someone elses. Not that one is any more right than the other.

In general, most states allow  separate bowhunting and ML seasons for deer hunting. The reason I've most often heard is because it would be unfair for the primitive hunters to have to compete with modern firearms. In the past, F&G departments allowed generous seasons for the primitive weapons since they had little impact on the overall kill stats. Of late I have read of states making the restrictions on the primitive weapon seasons more restrictive since they are now making an impact on the numbers of animals harvested.  Certianly a fear that I have is that if you continue to push these F&G Depts for more liberal regs regarding the use of smokeless powder, is that they will make the MLing seasons shorter and more restrictive.

I'm not sure if its the new bows and muzzleloaders that are rthe real cause of more animal;s being harvested so as to impact the overall kill figures. Certainly the hunter today has a lot more info concerning the habits of deer at their disposal to allow them to be more successful. The newer treestands which are light years ahead of their predessors have much to do with the higher success rates of todays primitive hunters.

I could be wrong but I was under the impression that smokeless powders were nitro cellusose based whereas black powder and black powder substitutes are not.

I agree that the laws concerning firearms vary a lot from state to state. Many of these laws make completely no sense as you state. They appear to be based on some preconceived notion that the powers that be have.

As I have gotten older, I found it harder and harder to see ONE front sight. It was very hard to hunt with a MLer here when scopes were not allowed. Was this a form of age discrimination? It would seem that at least a 1 power scope would be legal since it allows you to shoot more accurately.

Well I guess that I have a lot more questions than answers. I will continue with the dilemma of whether or not I should get a Savage MLer. Is it too modern? I don't know.  Is it too heavy for hunting in an area where you carry the gun a heck of a lot more than you shoot it? I don't know, but I know from hunting with my scoped 1100 last season that guns that weigh 10 lbs are a real pain to still hunt with.

[Underclocked]

Perhaps if the laws ONLY allowed black powder there would be less confusion?

[MFinMA]

UC,
If I remenber correctly, weren't the MLing deer seasons in many (most) states referred to as Black Powder seasons prior to the widespread acceptance of Pyrodex? I'm pretty sure that was the case here in MA.

The exclusive use of BP certainly would be a simple solution to a complex problem. Simple solutions always seem to work the best.  Great idea!

But ....

[RandyWakeman]

Hi Randy
But since states have a separate ML deer season, there has to be some means of defining what a MLer is. Herein lies the problem. One persons definition is liable to be quite different than someone elses. Not that one is any more right than the other.

Loads from the muzzle most states can understand. Apparently, not all. It sure wasn't just "blackpowder only"-- if that was the only basis, there would be a lot more .45-70 Government rifles in the woods.

In IL, the "muzzleloading" season is a one-weekend LATE season that is a way to sell a few more tags, and generate more income. As to "intent" then (whenever then was) and intent now-- ask 50 states, get 50 answers. Some states automatically deny intent to do much of anything-- and are successful at that.

If our great States cannot figure out the Second Amendment, the chance of them figuring out a "blackpowder substitute" seems remote.

[Walker]

I think the States have a better grasp of what a black powder substitute is than the Savage shooters.

[RandyWakeman]

All I got from New Jersey was a dial tone. California wants to know so they can tax it, then ban it. Something like an assault weapon substitute?

Noah Webster defines it: : a person or thing that takes the place or function of another , but sadly, he did not give his "intent."

If I ever get an accurate description of what "Savage shooters" look like, I'll suggest they phone their respective states for clarification. May not have worked in the past, as it all depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is, but some thing come to an end. Thankfully.

[Wolfhound]

In the past, F&G departments allowed generous seasons for the primitive weapons since they had little impact on the overall kill stats. Of late I have read of states making the restrictions on the primitive weapon seasons more restrictive since they are now making an impact on the numbers of animals harvested.  Certianly a fear that I have is that if you continue to push these F&G Depts for more liberal regs regarding the use of smokeless powder, is that they will make the MLing seasons shorter and more restrictive.

In states where the population continues to shrink I can understand that. However in places where deer populations continue to expand (and even expand out of control) I would expect regulations to be relaxed. However that is not happening in many places. And where it is, it's usually too little and maybe too late.

Here in my home county my father hit a deer then reported it to police. The police officer told him to hit a few more before he left the county (he was just passin through). The officer told my father he had hit three already this year (back in July). Situations like this are symtoms of a problem that continues to get worse because of the state ignoring the deer problem. In some counties there are too little deer and others far too many. In places like this seasons should be expanded and more liberal definitions of legal arms (and powders in the case of ML's). Not all rules are right for all areas. Some places simply need stricter regs and some need looser regs.

[jhm]

Randy :  If my memory hasnt completely left me about 25 or so years when Mich. had their first muzzle loading season I believe it was call the black powder season and they did have a problem with some hunters bringing out the OLD real smokepoles someone who is a little older than me and who still lives in Mich. may be able to varify that though.   JIM

[RandyWakeman]

they did have a problem with some hunters bringing out the OLD real smokepoles     JIM

What "problem" would that be? That's what I grew up with-- Springfields, Burnside carbines, etc.

[jhm]

Randy:  I agree but I was living in Mich. during their first B P hunting season and I seem to recall that the Mich. Game and fish dept. had to change the term of the season from B P to muzzleloading after that.   JIM

[whitecloud]

Indiana is or will be voting on this issue in 2004.It is said that "smokeless powder" will NOT be LEGAL to use during the" black powder only" season.It wil however still be leal during the "regular" firearms season.My personal regard to this is simple.Go with a "primitve" BP season (side locks/flinters BLACK powder only)and a "Modern "BP season to include all types of  BP firearms.Personally I dont see any advantage using smokless other than clean up,sure a little increase in velocity,but that is only a gain if the bullet holds up.I mean DEAD is DEAD.

[RandyWakeman]

Indiana is or will be voting on this issue in 2004.It is said that "smokeless powder"

That's already over with-- Indiana dropped its once-proposed smokeless ban.

[MFinMA]

Since there seems to be a great deal of confusion, especially of the selfserving nature, as to wghat constitutes a black powder substitute; perhaps the following is of some help.

(h) must be used only with black powder or an approved substitute such as "Pyrodex" which is approved by the National Muzzle-Loading Firearms Association;
It kind of makes a little bit of sense, although I'm sure it won't to some.

[PA-Joe]

Why do they even need that language. In PA we have a fall muzzleloading season and a winter flintlock and iron sight season.  If it loads from the muzzle your ok.

PS - another concern - Aren't there a lot of black powder handguns that use brass cases with black powder? What do they do in this case, it doesn't load from the muzzle?

[RandyWakeman]

The National Muzzle Loading Rifle Association, with its national membership of 20,000 or so members-- has no jurisdiction outside of its own matches. That is the only time that they are in a position to "approve" anything at all. Unless the issue is competing at a NMLRA event, their position is moot-- they aren't selling any deer tags.

It is their "barely tolerate the in-line" stance that has caused their membership to shrink, year after year-- despite the numbers that show inlines are the choice, by a huge margin, of most muzzleloading purchasers today.

The ATA sets the rules for their events as well, so does the NBRSA and the IBS. Unless you are hunting paper or clay, their "rules" are just trivia.

[MFinMA]

Pa-Joe
There was more to the regs concerning MLers. Here is another more complete synopsis:

4. The primitive firearms period of the open season is intended to provide an opportunity to hunt deer in a manner similar to the way our forefathers hunted in the mid-1800's. The primary consideration is to limit the weapons to a type similar to those in common use during that period of history. Basically, that means a single-shot, muzzle-loading firearm with no break-open breech and limited range and firepower. Secondarily, the hunter participating in this season should have a relative degree of solitude significantly different from the hunting pressure which is characteristic of the shotgun deer season.

Beginning the third Monday after Thanksgiving and ending on December 31, all days inclusive, deer may be hunted only by means of a primitive firearm using a single lead projectile, or by means of a bow and arrow. Black powder (or synthetic substances such as "pyrodex" which are approved for competitive muzzle-loading meets by the National Muzzle Loading Rifle Association) is the only powder to be used during this season. Primitive firearms may have smooth or rifled bores and shall not contain more than one usable barrel. In the case of primitive firearms with double bore barrels, one barrel shall be made inoperative by removal of the nipple and hammer. The caliber of a primitive firearm shall be not less than .44 nor more than .775 and only those primitive firearms having a barrel length of 18 inches or longer shall be permitted. A person shall not, except during the paraplegic and shotgun deer seasons, have in his or her possession a shotgun shell loaded with a rifled slug, single ball, buckshot of any size, BB shot or air rifle shot in any place where birds or mammals might be found, except on a skeet, trap or target range between sunrise and sunset, and except for the hunting of waterfowl as provided in 321 CMR 2.03. During the primitive firearm season, nothing in 321 CMR 3.02(4) shall prevent the otherwise lawful hunting of birds and mammals in accordance with established statutes and regulations.

Randy

Maybe the NMLRA doesn't sell deer tags but evidently they determine what you can pour down your barrel at least in MA. It makes perfect sense to me.

[woodseye]

It is their "barely tolerate the in-line" stance that has caused their membership to shrink, year after year-- despite the numbers that show inlines are the choice, by a huge margin, of most muzzleloading purchasers today.

You got that right Randy, they are the ones up here trying to redefine ML'ing to ban smokeless which we've had since our ML'ing season began on day one. They are traditionalists that want to turn back the ML'ing season to what they want and don't understand why the inliners will have nothing to do with them.

Leave the criteria "loading from the muzzle" and keep it muzzleloader season. This going to black powder only will never happen with the money pyrodex and triple 7 generates. You also won't see inlines loose popularity to the more traditional guns either as the sales ratio is 5 to 1 for inlines. Besides that the smokeless powder ban is totally unenforcable from an in the field standpoint and our wardens have already said they're stretched to thin to start making field tests to determine what ML'ers are shooting.

     woods

[MFinMA]

Woodseye,
I think you may be putting the cart before the hosrse on this issue. Prior to the Savage 10ML--II the use of smokeless was a mute issue, since none of the rifles to that point were made to use anything other than BP. So its the smokeless shooters who are trying to change something not the BP shooters.

Since Pyrodex and T7 are approved substitutes (by the NMLRA) for BP that is also a mute point.

Most game laws are depend on the ethics of the sportmen involved. So I guess sportsmen w/o ethics will flaunt the laws.

Would I get a 10ML-II and use it if it were legal. Probably! I'm not a tradtionalist, I use a T/C Firehawk. I'm thinking about either a Knight Disc Extreeme or Savage for the near future. I guess I'm getting too old for long range plans.

I love hunting in the NW part of your state. I look forward to the week I spend there each season.

[RandyWakeman]

Maybe the NMLRA doesn't sell deer tags but evidently they determine what you can pour down your barrel at least in MA. It makes perfect sense to me.

If the great State of Massachussetts wants to serve a shooting range in Friendship, Indiana, instead of their citizens-- that's their problem. A better choice than having Ted Kennedy cut up all your muzzleloaders, perhaps-- but no more logical.

If so-called primitive is what the hunters that buy the tags want, then that is what they should have. The sentiment is interesting, but false on its face.

The primitive firearms period of the open season is intended to provide an opportunity to hunt deer in a manner similar to the way our forefathers hunted in the mid-1800's. Rangefinders, binoculars, GPS's, Gore-Tex, etc., would all be banned as well. And, conservation officers.

The notion that Savage "shooters" ever made it an issue is not the case. It was made "an issue" by those who quickly saw the Savage 10ML as a threat to their own sales and profit dollars. That's the way the pellet crumbles.

[MFinMA]

Randy,
Initially I felt just as you stated. What do the ML laws in MA have to do with the NMLRA? But I guess I was a little slow a-mind. Its perfect logic. Why have to deal with the paid shills of companies every time there is a new break through in technology. We will just let the people in Friendship be our guides. And let them take the heat, since I'm sure they have more ready answers than the average F&G dept. If MI had its laws worded this way they wouldn't have to feal with the mini-firestorm the smokeless shooters are making. THey could just refer the law questioners to the NMLRA!


The notion that Savage "shooters" ever made it an issue is not the case. It was made "an issue" by those who quickly saw the Savage 10ML as a threat to their own sales and profit dollars. That's the way the pellet crumbles.

So what you are telling me is that Savage isn't paying people to lobby for favorable legislation? I can assure you that the vast majority of MLers that I'm aquainted with as well as article in a publication that I've come across is anti-smokeless.

But as I've stated I don't really care either way. I don't in any way shape or form get any compensation from anything or anyone related to MLing. Nor do I want to, its fun to me, thats all.

[RandyWakeman]

So what you are telling me is that Savage isn't paying people to lobby for favorable legislation? I can assure you that the vast majority of MLers that I'm aquainted with as well as article in a publication that I've come across is anti-smokeless.

If they are, they sure aren't doing a very good job of it! Savage has had a very muted, tame, quiet approach to 10ML in ad-copy, marketing, everything I can think of. People can elect to be "anti" whatever they want, but it rings more true if they have some good reasons for being "anti."

The Savage has a lot of what many, many hunters and shooters SAY that they want. They have said they want easy maintenance and sealed actions-- take a peek at the Omega. They want easy loading, see the Powerbelt. Many can't be bothered to measure powder-- bingo, we have pellets. So-called "Magnum Muzzleloaders" have been touted and re-touted. Bingo, increased levels of performance with Triple 7 and triple pellet loads. Higher BC bullets like SST's, Dead Centers complimenting that as well, with better sabots.

It seems people really do want what some smokeless powders can be-- inexpensive, clean, non-corrosive. They just wish it was called Triple Nine, or something  / anything else than "smokeless." And they didn't have to measure it.

[woodseye]

Yes that is a nice area to hunt, and we have very unrestrictive ML'er regs to boot. Not much longer if the old traditional boys have there way though. Our season has been unfettered from restrictions since its inception and if it ain't broke don't monkey around trying to fix it is my feeling. Yes its also unenforcable from the wardens view and that means only honest hunters will suffer discontinuing smokeless.

I never thought much about traditionalists before meeting and hearing what they had to say on these I-Net forums..........now I've met the antis and they are intolerant fellow hunters who insist I hunt like they want me to!

   woods

[Wolfhound]

Prior to the Savage 10ML--II the use of smokeless was a mute issue, since none of the rifles to that point were made to use anything other than BP. So its the smokeless shooters who are trying to change something not the BP shooters.

Since Pyrodex and T7 are approved substitutes (by the NMLRA) for BP that is also a mute point.

Looks like Pyrodex is "smokeless powder" too. 777 is as well, but I have no pictures of that lable.  The DOT makes no distinctions between real smokeless powder and BP substitutes. In any state that does not specifically state that Nitrocellulose powders are illegal, Nitrocellulose powders are legal. Going with a group such as the NMLRA for determining legality of powder is silly. They are no governing body of anything exept their matches. I don't belong to that group as they do not represent me with their views on muzzleloading.

[RandyWakeman]

The hunter patiently waits in his tree stand with his trusty Savage 10ML-II Accutrigger. He scouted well, he knows his new stand is close to one of the biggest regularly used game trails in the area.

The sleet shatters against his face like broken dreams upon the cracked concrete curb of his life. He sees a few does, but nothing that he really wants. Shivering at the end of a long day, he scampers home to dry off and warm up.

The third morning, a few minutes before dawn, he sees his chubby corn-fed buck. The nice six-pointer is silently poking his way along the hedgerow 75 yards out. The Savage shooter flicks off his safety, locks his X hairs onto the fur right on the shoulder. The bullet enters right behind the shoulder, destroying the lungs and taking away the very top of the heart. Fifteen yards, and the buck piles up for good. He has what he worked for, and is thrilled.

Not everybody is, though. The boys at the check station frown a bit when he mentions he used a Savage. Al Gore's Internet provides a venue for the notion that he somehow cheated, and was not really a hunter-- though he knows he worked as hard at it as anybody else.

Later, when he recounts the details of the hunt for his wife and young daughter, though, he casually mentions, "Just goes to show what happens when 100 grains of Pyrodex puts a 405 grain Powerbelt in the right spot, Honey." The shrill echoes of catcalls from the murky distance fade away.

A week later, one of his buddies asked him why he bought that Savage. "Well, I was originally going for an Encore. But, I bought the Savage because it has a better trigger-- and, it was more affordable for me. Two-piece stocks are not my favorite on anything called a rifle, that's just me. It handles the heavier, longer bullets that I prefer a bit better with its 1:24 barrel. Really, though-- I just plain like it. It fits me better, and flicking off that tang safety is quicker and quieter for me than cocking a hammer. Forgot to call the NMLRA though, I guess they wouldn't have approved of what I do with my own money. I can live with that."

[Flatland Hunter]

Good post :wink: !!

[woodseye]

:grin:    :grin:   "the cracked concrete curb of his life"? Glad I wasn't drinking soda pop when I read that or it would have been coming out of my nose afterwards  :wink: You mean the NMLRA don't approve of my Savage ML'er? I never approved much of groups that preached their traditional techniques as the "moral high ground" and then drove to their spots in SUV's, armed with GPS and aerial photos, dressed in gore-tex and camo, and climbed into their climbing stands to hunt in the " old fashioned traditional way"  :eek:

    woods

[RandyWakeman]

There will likely never be an "answer" that thrills everyone. I happen to believe that State DNR's exist to protect our natural resources, and serve their constituents that pay their salaries, not the other way around.

To define a "season" on the basis of propellant only has little merit. To define on the premise of "effective range" is hollow-- handgun hunters and slug gun hunters operate inside most "muzzleloading envelopes." Or, rather than direction from a shooting range go with the BATF definition of a non-GCA arm. Contenders, Encores, Huntsmans are now gone-- they were, after all, modern smokeless cartridge guns first, muzzleloaders much later.

The "old policy" was Clinton-esque, as in "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." There are no "rights to hunt," but like most things-- the right to use your fist ends where another's nose begins. If the smokeless Savage if hitting other hunter's noses-- it is not common knowledge. Where / when has that ever happened?

Want BP-only? Fine, lobby for it-- tell Hodgdon the good news, and tell anyone selling muzzleloading propellants that they NOW need an explosives license and might have to start buying a few safes. A few states, hearing enough squabbling about the pie, might say "Fine, kids. It's not your special pie anymore-- there are now no equipment based seasons at all. Everyone should now be happy, it is a public pie, share and share alike-- and thank you for your input."