Idaho F&G wants your input, considering new muzzleloader rules

[Jumpshot]

Then by that token, if someone wants to have an annual race for owners of modern reproductions of early motorcycles that consisted of nothing more than a bicycle with an engine clipped to the frame, I should be able to ride my Suzuki GSXR1000 in the same race. It's just a modern version of what existed a century ago, right? We'll just ignore the fact that it accelerates harder, has a higher top speed, brakes quicker, and corners faster than it's early predecessors.

An inline is still a muzzleloader, so it should be allowed in the primitive season. And a GSXR1000 is still just two wheels and an engine, so it should be allowed in a primitive motorcycle race.

But there's an upside... Maybe some of these guys that insist on using modern sportbikes in the primitive races will eventually want to try it the old way, and we'll have a few converts. So we should just keep that in mind and not worry about all the guys whizzing past us as we putter along on our primitive machines in the primitive race. Performance doesn't really mean anything. Their modern bikes are still just two wheels and an engine, after all, just like ours. That's all that matters.

 

[tmbrwlf]

Yes that can be one way to look at it.

But, I am not looking at short term, which is what most of the traditional or primitive style hunters are doing.

If an administration, finds that the returns or an interest in a season, is dwindling and the funds are not coming in to support it, then what are the options? and it is not reaching the harvest numbers that figure out in the overall game management scheme. what are your options?

Raise the price of a tag?

Issue multiple tags per license?

Rework the season, to generate more interest and bring in more hunters?

Do away with the season or reduce the number of days and add days to the more popular season?

Institute a cull and cost the tax payers a fortune?

I get questionaires from several wildlife agencies asking what I think, could be done to make their hunting seasons attract a wider more diverse and younger set of hunters and the last thing I would suggest is to implement a change that would disenfranchise a group, because their particular firearm of choice, does not fit what a small and dedicated group, feels is the only way to hunt.

Do you find that objectionable? Do I?

In several cases I have found a regulation change to be objectionable, to my way of thinking and my style of hunting and have lobbied against it. Do you know what the reply has been?

We (the agency making the change) thru consultation have found that there is an overwhelming number of respondents who feel that this change will increase the number of hunters in the field and to increase the number of animals harvested and better allow us to manage this valuable resource and lead to preservation for the future.

Well, what can you say?

I pay enough taxes to the various governments as it is and if changing a regulation or broadening what type of hunting arm or equipment is allowed, will lead to not having that burden placed on me as a tax payer to make up for the loss of revenue due to dwindling numbers of hunters...Honestly I am going to look at it, even if, it strikes at the core of some of my beliefs.

Unfortunately, that is the way it is and we have to face it.

 

[tg]

I will step back in for just one moment, in the scenario described above where harvest needs being met are an issue it would seem that there could easily be an additional season forn truely traditional MLs without bothering the modern ML crowd, in areas like mine the herds are down so the modern ML guys compete with the traditional guys for tags in a season the came to be due to the lobbying effort of the traditional guys 35 years ago, and it was set aside as a season for a more primitive technology with a lesser rate of success for MLs of the pre cartridge era for the most part, the long range bullit guns were just a blimp on the screen at the end of the ML era. This will never be resolved as we cannot go back and time with the knowledge that the terminology was to inclusive and someone would find the back door, and I do not expect any meaningfull changes but I know what was meant to be and what we have mow are two different things.

 

[Jumpshot]

You keep saying we believe there is only one way to hunt. That's simply not true. What we believe is there is only one type of equipment/ammo that should be used in the primitive season, that being what it was originally intended for. Just because some manufacturers devised more efficient weapons and ammo to take advantage of those rules and it was allowed to continue for too long before the various F&G deparments started to take notice of the guys bringing it to their attention doesn't mean that the original intent of the primitive season is now beside the point. It is the point.

Although I agree with tg in that I don't see anything changing anytime soon as the various departments value the almighty dollar more than sticking to the original purpose of their own regulations. Sad, too, because there are simply too many other options that could be implemented to increase their revenue besides just distorting the implementation of one small season.

You do make some good points, but I think you're stretching the whole hypothetical doomsday scenario thing too far in order to support your argument. Too many people seem to think that allowing all this modern equipment and ammo in the primitive season is the only way the F&G departments will ever make enough money to pay their own personnel and prevent Americans from having to suffer tremendous tax burdens. Sorry, that's just too unrealistic. I wonder how they managed to get by before 1985...

But regardless, even though I could continue to counter every point you make (you should have been here about a year ago, you would have had a field day), I think I'll drop out of this now, as I've been around this issue too many times with too many people in the past, and I'm getting tired of beating the same dead horse.

Happy hunting.

 

[tmbrwlf]

Yeah, I have been around this issue or ones similar for quite a few years and even for a period of time was one of those people who had a hand in framing/updating regulations and attempting to maintain the oh so fine balance between various groups and technology and funding and management and believe me when I say at times we pleased no one.

The doomsday scenario is real and while it is not one that will rear it's ugly head in 10 yrs, we were looking at 30 -50 yrs based on trends.

An agency in my experience, wants things to be as simple as possible and would be happy with 3 comprehensive seasons ( deer seasons, archery, muzzle loading/shotgun ,general/hi power), instead of say 6 and mostly it's simple economics and ease of administration/enforcement and wildlife management.

Special seasons with special requirements and additional regulations, means funding and the stretching of already thin manpower and administering it. Then there is scheduling and season dates, printing licenses and brochure and making sure the rules are actually workable and don't require the hunter to be a lawyer, to figure out if what they are doing is within the law or not. Making sure the enforcement personnel are aware of the various finer points of regulations inherent within each season, so that one doesn't have charges laid where they shouldn't be.

It seems real easy from the outside and simple, but that is far from the actual reality.

Nice talking with you both. :hatsoff:

Have a happy holiday season and good hunting.

Now to go bury a dead horse :grin:

 

[Decon]

hell fellas most of the sabot slingers are outa the woods by noon guzzling beer :grin: :wink: :thumbsup:

 

[barebackjack]

Keep your synthetic stainless weatherproof in-line, your 209 enclosed weatherproof primers, your jacketed sabots, and your pre-formed 777 pellets, but leave scopes out of it. I mean come on, they have a electronicaly fired MLer now, I suppose those guys will want that too, woo hoo!, no more fumbling with primers :shake: .

For me, personaly, scopes are the line. I think its un-realistic to fight against in-lines, as much as I hate them, their to popular and ingrained in muzzleloading today. But there has to be a line drawn somewhere.

 

[Mulebrain]

As always a well rounded and downright correct response from TG!

Nobody invited them into the traditional hunting table, they just barged in! The manners were left elsewhere.