Idaho's Definition

[CrackStock]

<<<Is anyone here finally starting to understand what I've been trying to talk about or should we just continue to argue?
If argue, then PM me and I'll be happy to fistfight off line. Be prepared to bring your plan as to how adopting the beloved Idaho ML model is going to work everywhere.>>>

Tahquamenon,

I have carefully read your posts. I see that you are putting forth a great deal of logic and have offered some good insight.

Some remember your earlier position and seem to think that you are still pressing the modern agenda. I saw that you were watching for a method to implement a traditional season even then though and have been reading more carefully because of this.

We disagree on very little. I think that you wrote coiffure when you meant coffer. Or did you?
(Was this a test, typo or a joke?)

I do not want to argue with you as there is not a lot to argue about. I think that I will restate some of this and percolate on others.

Your pointing out that there needs to be a better definition of the guns is well taken. Mule ears and underhammers meet the given definition and may be the reason for its wording.

You seem to be saying that leaving openings to be exploited later is not wise given what has happened in the past.
Eliminating the cap removes one giant opening. Limiting to flint poses a strong challenge to the people who seek a method to exploit the season with some modern gun. It would likely pose such a great challenge that they might withdraw. It seems to remove all doubt regarding the concept of "traditional".

However, I think that the flint only would be a pretty hard sell in some locations. I would not mind it, but it is lessens some of our numbers to the point that you might be ignored by most state game departments in making such requests. Is that a good or bad thing? Maybe with low numbers, we can fly below the radar?

I think that some inclusion of the civil war vintage muskets might be wise in gaining enough people to be accepted if we determine that numbers are helpful. Other traditionally styles caplocks fall into this category as well.

Interesting balance point.

How inclusive do we want to be with this? How many people do we wish to exclude and why?

We should examine the concept, make a decision and then move forward.

Do we do this on a national level or state by state?

Tahquamenon,

There is inteligence in your writings. I appreciate your wit and wisdom. It is good to have a strong sounding board.

Thank you for your input.

YMHS,
CrackStock
TMA State Field Rep. Coordinator

 

[Pittsburghunter]

In NH muzzleloaders go before open season. I think an "after season" added to the books for traditional is a great Idea and would support it. If you can't bag your deer in the first season get it in the second. You can also hunt the rifle season with your traditional guns up here.

 

You seem to be saying that leaving openings to be exploited later is not wise given what has happened in the past.
Eliminating the cap removes one giant opening. Limiting to flint poses a strong challenge to the people who seek a method to exploit the season with some modern gun. It would likely pose such a great challenge that they might withdraw. It seems to remove all doubt regarding the concept of "traditional".

However, I think that the flint only would be a pretty hard sell in some locations. I would not mind it, but it is lessens some of our numbers to the point that you might be ignored by most state game departments in making such requests. Is that a good or bad thing? Maybe with low numbers, we can fly below the radar?

CrackStock,.... Good observation thet some might "withdraw" instead of put out the effort. Much regard should be given to the "numbers" of muzzleloading hunters it will take to prompt individual state's DNR's into even consider'n "changes/additions" to muzzleloader seasons across the nation.

When folks say "we need to stick together", thet's exactly what traditional shooter's should do, regardless of wether ther traditional muzzleloaders have "flint" or, "percussion" ignition.

I prefer flintlocks myself, but my rifles are convertibles, and I can switch from "flint to percussion", in a matter of minutes.

Tahquamenon would have my rifles "legal" one minute, and "illegal" the next with his proposal,.... even tho it would be the same rifle.
Such is also true, for any original flintlock muzzleloaders thet were "converted" from flint to percussion, like the Model 1842 Mississipi Rifles, I mentioned before.

Naw!!!!..... I don't like the word "primitive", unless I'm naked and hunt'n with a club. :haha:

YMHS
rollingb

 

[tg]

I think that caplocks or flionters would ne a good idea, if the projectile was limited to RB and sights to dsigns of the past that would put the brakes on any fudging or modernization.

 

[3 stinky dogs]

Ok,Sofor the most part a traditonel gun that would be all right for the specal season would be like this,Must have a side lock load from the muzzle with lose powder and patched round ball.No 209 shot gun primers and no glass sights.As I never new of the debate till I came here how did it get so out of control? Were there just a few states with ML seasons for awhile and as the in lines got populer they just all got lumped in together?

 

[Claude Mathis]

Hey DWB! I don't know how all of the traditional hunters do it, but I know alot do use only traditional methods and many even hunt in period clothes.

"DWB" can no longer respond.

 

You guys wouldn

 

[Tahquamenon]

Holy Smokes!

That is one complicated muzzleloading arrangement! Not to mention the tag fees - outrageous!

Really does not sound that generous, nor fair and equitable by the way you describe. Sounds more like a tiny scrap with a surcharge for the privilege.

Michigan is buy your tags and then participate in whatever firearm season you like and always have the option of using lesser technology in method of harvest (example: regular firearm two week season you can use all ML's on down to longbow if you like). Bow hunters here have the best situation, they have the most time in the woods and they can hunt every season with exception to special hunts, overall I think over 70 days for deer and your bow.

 

[WSmitty01]

As I read more and more about Idaho "traditional" season, I tend to think (with their current attitude) that you will find that pretty soon you will lose the muzzleloader season altogether. As more and more restrictions are put on the season there will be more hunters not wanting to invest time & money to hunt seasons with those restrictions. Granted there will always be the hardline traditionalist BUT I doubt if those numbers will grow enough to have any significant bearing on the season. As the number of hunters declines in a particular season (ie muzzleloader, traditional, or otherwise) it will become easier to justify the closing of those seasons, and give them to the majority (gun hunters or archery hunters). I enjoy traditional hunting as much as the next person and will continue to hunt in both muzzleloader and gun season with both of my guns (a Sante Fe Hawken & Black Mountain Magnum). BUT I am NOT naive enough to think that here in Florida that restrictions such as Idaho has will justify the keeping of the short muzzleloader season that we have now. I consider those in-line hunters as brethren that helps to justify our current special quota hunts. I don't see as how they are taking anything away from my hunting experience, they are another voice to our conservation office. It's bad enough that the archery hunters don't like giving anything up to the muzzleloaders, and they all stick together and have a HUGE voice. Be very careful what you wish for, you may get it and lose what you have altogether. Don't ever think that the Idaho conservation department is not very closely monitoring the number of hunters in these special seasons, and if that number declines that season will definitely be up for grabs! So that's my 2 cents, you can take it or leave it,,it's all about numbers, the majority always has a louder voice, there is only so much time in a season. To give to one you must take away from another, and if that other has larger numbers in time it will certainly come around you to bite in the south end! Yep, I'll just leave them in-liners here alone, and enjoy the comradarie of their presence, though it just might be different than mine!

 

most of what fairchase says has been true and as i and others have said before Muzzleloading has never been considered much of a management tool here in Idaho .
we do have 32 BP hunts state wide for deer and elk most are draw and antlered only when it comes to deer . i would also point out that they are also most all traditional weapons only .

this years regs place 3 units in the general season muzzleloader for either sex and whitetail only and one in traditional . There are 8 new hunts /draw hunts this year as well for deer and most are bucks only and all but 3 are traditional only .
. I will also point out that Idaho also includes short range weapon units as general muzzleloading when it comes to management .

For elk you will also find that there units designated muzzleloader only for both cows and bulls
Here are a few
Units: 4,7,8A,10A,14,16, 19A,23,24,29.33,34,35,36,37,37A,51,56,61,70 73, 75,77,78
(21A,36B 30,30A,39 traditional ) and that not including the draw units

 

[Tahquamenon]

I do not support DMU (Deer Management Unit) ML hunting only. I think that is ridiculous and largely discriminative for the DNR/DF&G to apply muzzleloading hunting opportunities in that manner.

Really should be statewide ML hunt across all DMU's with additional special DMU hunts or doe tag's as required (with whatever method of harvest) to reduce populations as the DF&G/DNR deems appropriate.

I have not flip flopped.
For primitive hunting in my state (Michigan), I support addition of a statewide primitive ML hunt of some sort of definition to prevent technology from encroaching in (My thought is flintlock or earlier and PRB and so on). I believe this will create opportunities and economic development for everyone associated with hunting in Michigan. The cost is easy to implement, were talking printed text changes in the regulation that is published anyhow (the cost of ink and perhaps a 1/4 page in the regulation if that much. The benefit is obvious from getting the primitive ML hunt, additional revenue from local market sales, present herd management scheme will not be negatively impacted as there will be a very limited number of participants at first that will gradually increase over time, plus if we can keep with the present dual buck tag scheme then if folks harvest during the primitive then they will not be harvesting bucks in other seasons, no negative economic impact, additional firearm season for everyone to enjoy that wishes to focus on primitve method firearm.

I don't support changing the present statewide General ML seasons to primitive definition. Nor do I support any organization that does. I feel that this would do much more harm than good at this point and I don't feel it would ever pass. Plus, I'm trying to consider all of the hunting folks and economies that benefit from hunting that are also involved. Not just from a special interest perspective with disregard as to the larger economic impact which I mentioned earlier in the thread.

My plan is to continue to correspond with Legislators (including the Governor), DNR, Gun Shops and Manufacturers on this primitive season addition concept. We may also be able to get the production ML makers to help lobby this season addition as it will be a win for them as well.

There is my agenda for my state (Michigan), which has not changed. I'm sure this does not please many (any?) here. For which I am sorry, but that's where I am coming from and I'm not changing.

Grind your axes if you have them and chop away.

:hatsoff:

 

IMO, the "primitive lable" for such proposed seasons is detrimental to the unity of our entire group of "traditional" muzzleloader shooters across the nation, when the word "primitive" is used by someone to describe flintlocks-only.

1. I'm sure everyone agrees, it requires "numbers" to impress any of our state's DNR's.

2. I'm also sure thet everyone agrees, ther are "2 types" of muzzleloaders today (modern inlines and traditional), when we lable a "portion" of our traditional muzzleloaders as "primitive", this would (IMO) effectively split our ranks of traditional shooters and reduce our "numbers" even more until our traditional-"voices" are merely a "squeek".

Let's be careful, thet we don't split our "ranks", thus make'n ourselves vulnerable to the "devide and conquer" many of the inliners would like to see us inflict upon ourselves, as we struggle to reinstate the "intent" of our special muzzleloader seasons.

Sorry about all the "high-lights", but I think those words are important.


YMHS
rollingb

 

"Idaho has 193 elk hunts. Only 16 of those are

 

well no mater if you like it or not the basic reason for hunting in general in preasant day is now game management . without that management there is not a need that is valid enough to stand against the anit groups .

No mater what you call the organization DNR, DF&W, F&G .F&W their main purpose is game management , not forest , water , public or vehicle management . IMO if a given situation cannot be used for the basic need of game management in some way then it should not be aloud or used under the jurisdictions of those departments.
Hunting is the most effective and only proven way to manage game populations in this country .
Simple that management need is why here in Idaho we have Muzzleloading units . The need for short range weapons so as to manage game in high human population areas hence short range units that allow muzzleloaders

 

[Tahquamenon]

as we struggle to reinstate the "intent" of our special muzzleloader seasons.

Hello Rollingb,

Yes, it's no secret I only consider flintlock and earlier ignition truly the most primitive method of game harvest. Not cap ignition. And I am not trying to divide anyone. Just the way I feel, ok? If you don't agree that's alright too.

This reinstatement you are referring to, please clarify who's agenda you are referring to here when you say "we"?

It this yours, this forum or some other organization?

eace:

Tahquamenon - "If you don't watch where you are going, how will you ever learn from where you have been?"

 

[Tahquamenon]

:agree:

Captchee, that's it. Game and habitat management.

In fact, in areas where regular hunting is not allowed there have been occassions where sharp shooters or special hunts approved and have been brought in to eliminate the game (deer) in areas where they do too much distruction.

 

as we struggle to reinstate the "intent" of our special muzzleloader seasons.

Hello Rollingb,

Yes, it's no secret I only consider flintlock and earlier ignition truly the most primitive method of game harvest. Not cap ignition. And I am not trying to divide anyone. Just the way I feel, ok? If you don't agree that's alright too.

This reinstatement you are referring to, please clarify who's agenda you are referring to here when you say "we"?

It this yours, this forum or some other organization?

eace:

When I say "we",..... I'm refer'n to "ALL" traditional muzzleloader hunters, (both, flintlock and percussion, shooters) who honestly wish to see muzzleloader seasons simular to what we had before the introduction of commercial modern inlines.

IMO, try'n to git a "primitive" muzzleloader season, is NOT the BEST WAY, and could very well be "counter-productive" in pull'n all traditional shooters together in order to have a "LOUD enough voice" for anyone to hear. (of course I'm jest state'n the obvious here, and I'm sure most "traditionalists" here are already aware of this!)

rollingb

 

ok so now im confused you are not against doing away with special seasons .
but then you against Muzzleloading as a management tool and call it foolish
your for traditional forms of Muzzleloading but want to exclude cap locks while at the same time supporting modern inlines firearms into muzzleloading season
Call me simple but that flip flopping and beating around the bush

when you see units designated as Muzzleloading only and by that i mean traditional only those are units that need low numbers or short range only to maintain herds and thats where we fit.
now of course the F&G could just make that unit a draw for centerfire but they have been gracious enough to allow us to enter in .
rest assured if those units are not adequately maintained or abused they would be opened to other forms of hunting .

I also disagree with excluding the cap locks that use #10 or 11 primers . The Paten date of the primer is 1810 and many of these were used thought out the fur trade and hold a lot more precedent in the west then the east . so maybe for your state they dont really fit but here in idaho they do .
IMO percussion side lock are also traditional.

 

Captchee,.... I fully agree!! :thumbsup:

All "traditional" muzzleloaders, are of a "primitive design" (by 2005 standards) dateing from the Civil War era, back to the earliest matchlocks (which includes "percussion").

YMHS
rollingb

 

[Tahquamenon]

You lost me Captchee. ::

Michigan DNR does not designate DMU's as anything specific hunting method (thank goodness as I think that is rediculous, but hurray for Idaho). Sometimes the DNR and some land owners will sponsor a special hunt but that varies from one year to the next. Some years there are some years there are not. For example, this year there is a Doe tag available during a special 100 hunter General ML hunt lottery. There are two days for this particular hunt and one doe tag only. So if you don't get the one day, you can go the other.

I never said I was for or against muzzleloading as a management tool?

I agreed with you that DNR's are using hunting for game management as their tool. In fact, that's exactly what the Michigan DNR is doing: using muzzleloading season for, game management by extending our zone 3 season this year.

I answered you earlier ok? But here is again:

We have presently one type of General ML season in Michigan. Here is the letter of the Michigan regulation:
"Muzzleloading Deer Seasons
During the December muzzleloading seasons, muzzleloading deer hunters can use only a muzzleloading rifle or muzzleloading shotgun or black power handgun loaded with black powder or a commercially manufactured black powder substitute."
While unpopular with some folks, I don't or do not and will not ever support altering this.

However, I would like to add another season that is Flint or earlier, PRB and open fixed sights. A first firearm season in front of everything else. For this I will support the very best I can.

Do you now understand?