Utah Wildlife Forum banner

1 - 20 of 144 Posts

·
Member
Joined
·
1,666 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I received an email for a survey for potential changes to Utah's Primitive Weapons.

Dear :
The Utah Division of Wildlife Resources is conducting a survey to obtain opinions from deer and elk hunters about the use of primitive weapons and emerging technologies. Results of this survey may be used to guide management recommendations and regulations on lawfully allowable hunting equipment. The survey should only take a few minutes of your time.
The survey is located online by clicking the link below:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/PrimitiveWeapons
If clicking on the web address above does not link you directly to the survey, then try copying and pasting the entire web address into your web browser, or simply type the entire web address as you see it above into the address bar of your web browser.
To participate in the survey, you will be asked to enter a Survey ID number.
Your Survey ID number is .
If you lose this Survey ID number, or do not have it when you take the survey, you may enter your name and email address instead. This information is used to verify that only licensed hunters take this survey, and is limited to one survey per person.
Your input is very important to the management of wildlife in Utah. Thank you for taking the time to participate in this survey and for your support of hunting in Utah.
Sincerely,
Utah Division of Wildlife Resources

I would like to see crossbows as an option during the archery hunt.

I would like to use a magnifying scope on a muzzle-loader.

In case you didn't get it, You can click on the link and fill out the survey.

Hopefully it results in changes in the future.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,320 Posts
I have no opinion on crossbows, but I do about muzzle-loaders. With the current technology and design of muzzle-loaders, if you allow magnifying optics, in my opinion, there is very little disadvantage from a rifle shooting a modern cartridge. And if that's the case, why a special season with special regs? To me, the muzzle-loader season should be for people who enjoy the challenge of a primitive weapon, not just about another avenue to a less competitive tag.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
With the current technology and design of muzzle-loaders, if you allow magnifying optics, in my opinion, there is very little disadvantage from a rifle shooting a modern cartridge. And if that's the case, why a special season with special regs? To me, the muzzle-loader season should be for people who enjoy the challenge of a primitive weapon, not just about another avenue to a less competitive tag.
This. Exactly.

Archery and muzzleloader hunts are supposed to be more primitive styles of hunting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
95 Posts
I am all about keeping it primitive but what are thoughts on this, how many wounded animals would a magnafying scope for a muzzleloader eliminate or at minimum reduce? I know I see people trying and somtimes connecting on shots with 1X scopes that I take with a rifle that has a 6x or larger scope. Our own ethics aside cause a lot of folks don't have many. Do you think it would help keep a few deers legs intact?
 

·
Member
Joined
·
1,666 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
This. Exactly.

Archery and muzzleloader hunts are supposed to be more primitive styles of hunting.
For the sake of discussion.

Primitive to me is a recurve bow.

Compound Bows today are far beyond primitive.

With There is really not if any a advantages of a crossbow over a compound bow.

I don't think there is a huge difference between the two.

With muzzleloaders.

Primitive to me is the flint lock system with iron sights.

Inline Muzzleloaders are far beyond primitive.

There in my mind is only one big advantage of using a magnifying scope on a muzzleloader, it is more clean and ethical kills by allowing the hunter to focus his eye piece.

If we want primitive, why not go to recurves and flintlocks rather than finding middle ground.

If we want to be progressive utilizing the technology currently available, then give hunters all the tools to succeed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
647 Posts
.50 cals, smart guns, crossguns and high powered rifles
That just happen to have a sabot loaded at the muzzle.

Remember when hunting was a fair chase event??

Take all of the above and turn them loose during the ANY WEAPON SEASON in
October.

Bull$&[email protected]!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
155 Posts
Getagrip, IMO it wouldn't help at all and would make it worse. Instead of guys lobbing lead 2-400 yards with a 1x scope you would have those same guys lobbing lead at 500, 600+ yards! I hate the idea of allowing magnifying scopes during muzzleloader season. If you want to use a scoped muzzleloader there is already a hunt for you, it's called the any weapon hunt!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
790 Posts
I think if it was limited to 3x or less it would be good for the Muzzy hunts. That way you can be more ethical because you have a better view of your target, while still keeping it "Primitive". That is just me though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,861 Posts
With muzzleloaders.

Primitive to me is the flint lock system with iron sights.

Inline Muzzleloaders are far beyond primitive.
Ah! Ok so the T/C Black Mountain Magnum flintlock is primative right? Composite Stock, 1/28" fast twist barrel for sabbots, 150grn mag charges, special flame channel designed to ignite pyrodex pellets... fiber optic sights... oh yea, it screams primative to me!

Inline muzzleloaders predate the "Hawkin" styles by over 100 years. Germany had inline frontstuffers in 1734.

What has changed is the computer CNC machines and lathes that turn out incredibly tight tolerance parts for guns that in turn make them super accurate and reliable, both todays sidelocks and inlines both benefit from those advances.

-DallanC
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
I agree on up to 3x power for muzzle loader scopes. At least 2x since 1x is lower than the natural vision of the human eye. I highly doubt that a slightly better scope with change the ethics of the hunter. I do believe that it will result in less wounded animals not being recovered.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
188 Posts
All sports have rules

Once again it's about playing by the rules.

I have made the argument that for hunting ethics, the regulations set the low bar. Lots of examples were "unethical" behavior does not violate a law.

For equipment, I would make the argument the regulations set the high bar. Lots of examples were people use equipment far less powerful/sophisticated/technological than allowed by law.

The DWR is asking our opinion on what we think the "sport" of pursuit of game with primitive weapons is. Your opinion. I would be personally OK if they decided low bows and recurves; flintlocks with open or peeps. I would personally disappointed if they decided cross bows and high-power scopes on state-of-art MLers. 50 cal sniper rifles - now your just yank'n my chain right?

Primitive arms means something special to me and I personally hate to see it too diluted. Where the exact line is though?

However you've established the fact I've got no "sport cred" here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
188 Posts
For the record

I hunt with:
compound bow, graphite arrows, fixed blades;
In-line muzzy, 120 gr blackhorn, sabots, and 1x scope;
Rifles - a lot (but no 50's).
 

·
Member
Joined
·
1,666 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Ah! Ok so the T/C Black Mountain Magnum flintlock is primative right? Composite Stock, 1/28" fast twist barrel for sabbots, 150grn mag charges, special flame channel designed to ignite pyrodex pellets... fiber optic sights... oh yea, it screams primative to me!

Inline muzzleloaders predate the "Hawkin" styles by over 100 years. Germany had inline frontstuffers in 1734.

What has changed is the computer CNC machines and lathes that turn out incredibly tight tolerance parts for guns that in turn make them super accurate and reliable, both todays sidelocks and inlines both benefit from those advances.

-DallanC
Touche
 

·
Member
Joined
·
1,666 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·

·
Registered
Joined
·
692 Posts
Yep, I have to weigh in here...

I've hunted with and shot muzzleloaders for over 25 years... and I've been a huge fan of bow hunting for about the same amount of time... (this year will be the first in 21 years that I'm actually hunting with a bow again though)

All of my life, muzzleloaders have been about traditional! Be it side lock or flint lock... I even passed up shooting a buck one year when--after I missed--a friend tried to hand me his scoped inline... it's just not my thing, and in my group, I would have never lived that down.

Now on to my opinions and observations...

Since inlines became popular, the "muzz crowd" has grown by leaps and bounds! I'm sure some of that has to do with the limited tags, and rifle hunters being "forced" to hunt a different season.

I've also seen more "crazy" shots being taken than I ever could have imagined. (a buck shot in the Crawfords at 384 yards to be exact)

Sure, sometimes you get lucky, but the effective range--and ethical range--of ANY muzz is under 200 yards.

This kind of stuff isn't limited to muzzleloaders either... As I've been DEEP into shooting my bow over the past year, I've met a ton of archers, and I've swapped a lot of stories... I can't tell you how many times I've heard from guys talking about how they were trying to shoot a buck at 90, 100, even 120 yards... and these are guys that have a hard time hitting the 6 ring in a Vegas 3 spot at 20 yards.

Add crossbows to the archery hunt, and magnifying scopes to the muzz hunt, and all you're doing is AMPLIFYING the actual problem... and that is guys taking shots beyond their ability (be it equipment, the shooter, or both)

The same probably goes for the any weapon hunt with .50 rifles, but since "that crowd" seems so crazy in "my book", I voted, "go for it"... (not like they aren't taking 1500 yard pot shots with their 300 win mags as it is... may as well have some kinetic energy if they connect)

Okay, rant's over... that's my 2 cents.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,856 Posts
1 - 20 of 144 Posts
Top