Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Muzzleloaders Which state will implement the Idaho model next?

The key word is IF .
i dont know what Idaho will do maybe the same thing many states did when the feds removed funding for states with speed limits above 65 .
maybe say Pi$% off ???? seems to be what happened to that funding issue


Maybe it will not mater as the feds may remove funding to many states when they create open seasons on wolves . Who can say .
The point of the mater is it has to happen first and there are a he#$ of alot bigger issues going on right now more previlant then if Toby can use a scope Or for that mater IMO properly maintain and load a weapon without blowing the thing up <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

I certainly hope it is Washington State, then we get rid of those abominations that some call muzzleloaders others call in lines. Traditional has a meaning not what could have happened if the old folks had had something modern. We lost a lot of our ability to fish here in Washington simply because the word traditional was tossed out of court by some judge as he gave the tribes fishing rights they never had with the idea that some day they would have discovered such things as shrimp, or other deep water critters they havenot historically harvested.
washington state has chosen traditional as match lock, flintlock and caplock. They recently allowed "Fire Sights" as most cheap inlines come with some version of that sight. The primary reason there are so many inlines sold is that there are a great many sold through Wal-Mart and other discount stores for less than a couple hunders dollars. This allows people to do a couple things ; extend their season in states other than Washington where we have have to choose only one style of weapon or try out the sport.

Bullwnkl.

Baloney! Then why do the Walmarts that put up an equal number of sidelocks with inlines on store shelves find inlines outselling the sidelocks 7-1????

The reason why people buy inlines is four-fold. Its due to centralized ignition - waterproofing design - breechplug removal option - faster twists.

and familiarity of shape ,as well as manufactures statements and propaganda .

however maybe things are different in your neck of the woods but I have never seen a side lock in the rack at the Wally worlds around here .
sure they sell them but you got to order one

Same thing here in WA ST, Wally don't sell side locks here off the shelf. Lots of cheap abominations get sold and an occasional Knight. we live by different rules out here if you don't like them stay away. We don't have much to hunt any way.

Bullwnkl.

Trip 7 you are actually in a way supporting my arguement. The hunter who buys a in-line thinks he is getting an advantage. however if you treat the inline by Washington rules you have no advantage in fact you get one noticable disadvantage in that the cap is more difficult to remove. This has been my personal expirence and I'm gonna stand by it.
I see Wally world selling lots of cheap in-lines and not many if any quality muzzle loaders of either persuasion. Sort of makes my point, cheap guns for either beginners or extending a season.

Bullwnkl.

If this complaint goes through I have a feelin that Idaho will just say the hell with the muzzle loader season all together! An I feel that that would be a better choice than having the Feds. and a couple people who are in it for financle gain dictate what can be used.

i would agree reelman . who can say who will be sitting on the state game commission or for that mater be in the governors house 'IF" this thing were to ever happen .

but for right now , with this group of commissioners .
IMO the scope issue will never pass in this state . muzzleloading season will go completely first .

As to what other state may be next ?? As I said I don�t know . However realize that Idaho doesn�t stand alone in its decisions . Most certainly they can do different things . However what im getting at is the have regular contact with surrounding states , like Utah , Wyoming , Montana , Washington , Oregon, Arizona, Nevada.
Many times those states know what Idaho is going to do before the Idaho public .
Do I believe that most likely all those states knew of this change ? Ya I do .
In fact if you read the minutes of the Jan 11 2006 meeting you will see that the Idaho commission set a date then .
So is it likely that another state or states will follow this move ? Ya I think so . However the real question is how long before that happens

Montana does not have special seasons for muzzleloading. I'd guess it will stay this way due to the power of the archery lobby. Archery gets the elk rut in September. Rifles get the deer rut in late November. Herd management is done through tags, draws, tine restrictions, etc. Montana FWP has done a pretty good job of management.

It sure as hell won't be Missouri

2006/7 Harvest totals

9436 muzzleloader season - down slightly from last year's figure of just over 10,000.

235054 general firearms

23098 antlerless season

11918 youth season

1349 special urban hunts

43524 archery - post 11-22

324379 harvested in Missouri (this omits some special few special hunts and appears to leave out the first part of archery season)

Muzzleloader season accounted for 2.9% of the harvest - a tremendous burden on the whitetail deer herd in Missouri. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

The herd will most surely be destroyed unless round ballers are given the woods to themselves. Never let facts sway your opinions or your blind selfishness. Ever hear of shootin' yourself in the foot?

Is this not the way it works?? I can't speak for missouri, but in oregon, the "primitive" seasons are allotted a x amount of game to be taken in conjunction with what will be done by the General harvest and other seasons. Since in the past "primitive" hunters success rates are lower, they allow more hunters to hunt speculating that they will need more hunters to reach the alotted qouta of harvest. If technology or what have you allows for High success in these seasons over a number of years, Then the amount of hunters allowed will have to be lowered. Follow me?
So what do you limit to keep the harvest qouta down?
And of what you restrict, which provides more hunters recreation hours?
Just asking !!!

I follow you but that methodology no way applies here in Mo or in any of the great whitetail states. There is no parallel that can be drawn between the system you describe in Oregon and what happens here in Missouri. The Missouri deer herd is claimed to be so healthy and numerous (which is true in many locations) that your hunting recreation hours are only limited by the overall length of the season, your personal financial situation, or your endurance. Perhaps other western states approach herd management as you describe but I still fail to see what relevance that has to the decisions made in Idaho.

http://www.muledeernet.org/statusidaho.htm 6 HUNDRED mule deer taken by muzzleloader in 2005 out of a total harvest of 32,300 animals. 1.8% of the total Idaho mule deer take in that year attributed to any and all muzzleloader hunters. 1.8% !

1.8% and let's do away with inlines. Makes perfect sense to me. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" /> They may be leaning toward the traditional but they are sure using some funny new math to justify their herd management concerns.

and it shouldn�t . as we have 2 separate situations going on . You have 2 many deer . We are on the opeset of that scale .
However if suddenly you folks had a massive die off and ended up with problems in herd numbers being to low ? Who would you think would be the first to get restrictions placed on them ?

Roundball,

Don't see it happening in Virginia <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

We just legalized smokeless last year. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ooo.gif" alt="" />

Maybe your F&G Dept. needs to come here for some skollin' <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

FWIW, I still think all this infighting between hunters WILL be the demise of what I love to do, HUNT <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />.

DDD

P.S. If I wanted to I can put 100+ in freezer legally in my county.

I think and hope our game management professionals would take a more across the board approach. Singling out one type of firearm that has obviously no impact of consequence on the overall herd level is hardly what I would call a reasonable or even rational approach to such a problem.

I LOVE my Savage ML II topped with a US Optics Scope. It's pillar bedded and I'm getting close to 2500 fps with the 250 grainers. Beats a slug gun hands down.

Who wuolda thunk the People's Republik of Illinois would re-write the game laws to specifically include the ML II.

Will wonders never cease? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

cool but i got a question ? thought Mr wakeman said the smokless didnt put out anymore then black powder ?
help me out here, you loading it hot ?
is it a 45 cal ????

I haven't tried it with BP yet. I'm using some loads I found posted elsewhere. (H322). Is it loaded hot? Probably. I also had the barrel and receiver cryo-treated. I believe I could hold dead on out to 150 and not have to worry about anything except the wind. This thing will drive tacks.

You're probably mostly right in your argument but politics is always a factor in these matters and when politics enters a reasonable/rational approach often vanishes. The commission I believe felt it was time to draw a line in the sand as far as muzzleloaders were concerned especially given the fact that many are beginning to believe that the technology has gone beyond the orignal intent of a set-aside season.
Would the mule deer/elk resource be less impacted by more restrictions on rifle hunter? No doubt, but sheer hunter numbers pack political clout and bring in much more revenue to the department.

The IDFG commission are in for much tougher decision making in the future when it comes to game and people management.

Whether, given similar circumstances, your state would/will take a different course of action will remain to be seen. I think the reasonable/rational approach is the best way to go also, but that would be in a "perfect world". With a commission appointed by the governor that's never going to happen here in Idaho.

2Seventy