G
If you have any input submit comments before 1-16-08, here's mine...
Fish & Game Regional Manager,
It has come to my attention that the following is being proposed for the 2008 muzzleloader season; please correct me if I am wrong, in-line or side lock muzzleloaders, priming systems using only #11 or Percussion Caps no 209 Shotgun Primers, open sights only, lead bullets, sabots are no longer allowed. I realize that the goal is to create more of a “traditional” season and have some middle ground between modern muzzleloader hunters and traditional muzzleloader hunters, but it is my opinion that you are limiting those that will be able to hunt with muzzleloaders, potentially allowing more animals to be wounded and finally giving the environmentalist one more reason to chase us due to the required use of lead.
Limiting the priming systems to #11 or Percussion Caps should be clearly reviewed and discussed in detail. The term “Percussion” has a basic definition of something that makes noise when hit. By definition any primer could be a percussion type primer. In fact, an Idaho Fish and Game field officer first pointed this out to me. That person told me that he would not issue a citation for using a 209 primer simply because they felt in a court situation it would never stand up. Is the state also prepared to list all other primers as not being acceptable? Breech plugs can be adapted to use alternative primers such as small shotgun, large rifle, small rifle and pistol primers. The only real advantage a 209 primer gives is a hotter flame that takes most of the delayed fires out of the picture and in some cases tests have shown it is too hot and can affect the overall accuracy of the gun. In those cases small shotgun primers have been shown to out perform the 209’s. There is a misconception that a 209 primer creates a waterproof cavity and almost guarantees that the muzzleloader will fire; this is simply not true. The only muzzleloader that creates a nearly watertight cavity at the nipple of the breech plug is Knight Rifle’s Disc; the Disc creates the weather proofness not the 209 primers.
Why does the state feel that pelleted powder is such an advantage to the hunter and that it must be banned? Pelleted powder doesn’t really offer any advantage to the hunter other than saving that person a little money when first getting into muzzleloading. Since the pellets are pre-measured the hunter is not required to purchase the tools to measure loose powder. It is not any faster to load in the field because with both pellets and loose powder hunters carry speed loaders that are pre-loaded, and it doesn’t shoot any better so why eliminate it as a tool? I personally do not use pellets because I like to shoot loose. It gives me more versatility in building a load for my gun.
The use of scopes should also be reconsidered. Many people, like myself, that are 35 to 45 are starting to lose the ability to focus on both the front and rear sight of an open sighted gun which will ultimately limit who can muzzleload hunt. Most hunters effective shooting range is limited to 200 yards regardless of using open sights or a scope and this is even more true when muzzleload hunting, even when using a scope. A muzzleloader loaded with a 250 grain bullet and 100 grains of Pyrodex powder shooting a velocity of 1800 fps will drop nearly 17 inches at 200 yards, 28 inches at 250 yards and more than 50 inches at 300 yards, scope or not, and very few people have the ability to make those adjustments. It would be great to see at least a 4-power scope approved for use for those of us that having failing eyesight.
As hunters we constantly have different environmental groups telling us how to hunt, where to hunt and what we are doing wrong when we are hunting. By limiting muzzleloading bullets to non-sabot leaded bullets we are giving the environmentalist one more thing to use against us. Lead is constantly in the media about how bad it is for individuals and the environment and now the state of Idaho wants us to throw more lead out there and cause more contamination. There is also the kid factor. We won’t let kids play with particular toys because it is coated with a lead based product but now that you are 12 and can legally hunt here are some lead bullets to hunt with, don’t worry about the lead anymore it won’t hurt you. Besides the environmental impact of lead bullets, you also need to keep in mind that leaded bullets typically are not as lethal as the new bullets. Because of this there is a much greater chance that more game animals will be wounded, giving hunters just another black eye.
In my opinion these limitations will ultimately a result in more game animals being killed due to wounding rather than being harvested and taken home. This could be caused by delayed fires resulting in misplaced shots, non-penetrating bullets that expand on contact and never make it to the vital organs and shots that are not placed as accurately as they could be with the aid of a scope.
If the new laws are intended to take Idaho back to a more traditional muzzleloading season I feel your thinking is flawed and I cannot support it. If the state wants to encourage traditional muzzleloading, and take tools away from modern muzzleloaders, the traditionalist should be required to wear traditional clothing and not have the benefits of Gortex and other fabrics and materials that make hunting just a little more comfortable. If this were accomplished I would be much more understanding of the limitations that you are putting on the rest of us. Maybe it’s time to ask those people getting a muzzleloader permit whether or not they are modern or traditional muzzleloaders.
Please take my comments into consideration prior to making any final decisions. It would be very disappointing to see the Fish and Game Department make final decisions concerning a season I hunt based on the thoughts of just one group.
Best Regards,
Brady Kolden
Fish & Game Regional Manager,
It has come to my attention that the following is being proposed for the 2008 muzzleloader season; please correct me if I am wrong, in-line or side lock muzzleloaders, priming systems using only #11 or Percussion Caps no 209 Shotgun Primers, open sights only, lead bullets, sabots are no longer allowed. I realize that the goal is to create more of a “traditional” season and have some middle ground between modern muzzleloader hunters and traditional muzzleloader hunters, but it is my opinion that you are limiting those that will be able to hunt with muzzleloaders, potentially allowing more animals to be wounded and finally giving the environmentalist one more reason to chase us due to the required use of lead.
Limiting the priming systems to #11 or Percussion Caps should be clearly reviewed and discussed in detail. The term “Percussion” has a basic definition of something that makes noise when hit. By definition any primer could be a percussion type primer. In fact, an Idaho Fish and Game field officer first pointed this out to me. That person told me that he would not issue a citation for using a 209 primer simply because they felt in a court situation it would never stand up. Is the state also prepared to list all other primers as not being acceptable? Breech plugs can be adapted to use alternative primers such as small shotgun, large rifle, small rifle and pistol primers. The only real advantage a 209 primer gives is a hotter flame that takes most of the delayed fires out of the picture and in some cases tests have shown it is too hot and can affect the overall accuracy of the gun. In those cases small shotgun primers have been shown to out perform the 209’s. There is a misconception that a 209 primer creates a waterproof cavity and almost guarantees that the muzzleloader will fire; this is simply not true. The only muzzleloader that creates a nearly watertight cavity at the nipple of the breech plug is Knight Rifle’s Disc; the Disc creates the weather proofness not the 209 primers.
Why does the state feel that pelleted powder is such an advantage to the hunter and that it must be banned? Pelleted powder doesn’t really offer any advantage to the hunter other than saving that person a little money when first getting into muzzleloading. Since the pellets are pre-measured the hunter is not required to purchase the tools to measure loose powder. It is not any faster to load in the field because with both pellets and loose powder hunters carry speed loaders that are pre-loaded, and it doesn’t shoot any better so why eliminate it as a tool? I personally do not use pellets because I like to shoot loose. It gives me more versatility in building a load for my gun.
The use of scopes should also be reconsidered. Many people, like myself, that are 35 to 45 are starting to lose the ability to focus on both the front and rear sight of an open sighted gun which will ultimately limit who can muzzleload hunt. Most hunters effective shooting range is limited to 200 yards regardless of using open sights or a scope and this is even more true when muzzleload hunting, even when using a scope. A muzzleloader loaded with a 250 grain bullet and 100 grains of Pyrodex powder shooting a velocity of 1800 fps will drop nearly 17 inches at 200 yards, 28 inches at 250 yards and more than 50 inches at 300 yards, scope or not, and very few people have the ability to make those adjustments. It would be great to see at least a 4-power scope approved for use for those of us that having failing eyesight.
As hunters we constantly have different environmental groups telling us how to hunt, where to hunt and what we are doing wrong when we are hunting. By limiting muzzleloading bullets to non-sabot leaded bullets we are giving the environmentalist one more thing to use against us. Lead is constantly in the media about how bad it is for individuals and the environment and now the state of Idaho wants us to throw more lead out there and cause more contamination. There is also the kid factor. We won’t let kids play with particular toys because it is coated with a lead based product but now that you are 12 and can legally hunt here are some lead bullets to hunt with, don’t worry about the lead anymore it won’t hurt you. Besides the environmental impact of lead bullets, you also need to keep in mind that leaded bullets typically are not as lethal as the new bullets. Because of this there is a much greater chance that more game animals will be wounded, giving hunters just another black eye.
In my opinion these limitations will ultimately a result in more game animals being killed due to wounding rather than being harvested and taken home. This could be caused by delayed fires resulting in misplaced shots, non-penetrating bullets that expand on contact and never make it to the vital organs and shots that are not placed as accurately as they could be with the aid of a scope.
If the new laws are intended to take Idaho back to a more traditional muzzleloading season I feel your thinking is flawed and I cannot support it. If the state wants to encourage traditional muzzleloading, and take tools away from modern muzzleloaders, the traditionalist should be required to wear traditional clothing and not have the benefits of Gortex and other fabrics and materials that make hunting just a little more comfortable. If this were accomplished I would be much more understanding of the limitations that you are putting on the rest of us. Maybe it’s time to ask those people getting a muzzleloader permit whether or not they are modern or traditional muzzleloaders.
Please take my comments into consideration prior to making any final decisions. It would be very disappointing to see the Fish and Game Department make final decisions concerning a season I hunt based on the thoughts of just one group.
Best Regards,
Brady Kolden
