bigngreen
Well-Known Member
It's far easier to find them. One of the huge advantages to LR hunting IMO!!
Idaho Investigating Technology Limitations for Rifles
- Thread starter Muddyboots
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Same at my club, Bayou rifles, you have to qualify to shoot at 600
BrentM
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I have no idea what they are proposing or the why yet. Pure speculation. Speculation is what triggers emotional responses that are the rabbit hole. I am hoping to be on the committee to get facts. Idaho is not headed the way of Europe. California...... well yeah probably. We are over run with them and they brought all their issues with them. We have restrictions and I cannot argue against any of them in the end. Our only significant restrictions are weapon weight, less than 16 lbs, has to be centerfire, no electronics on the rifle, fully automatic. I just looked again at the regs to see if anything has changed. Muzzleloaders and archery have an absolute pile of rules.
xsn10s
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2016
- Messages
- 7,553
I understand the bias against Californians. But look at the history of California. I've said it over and over again. California was once a sportsman's/ firearms mecca. Sierra Bullets, Weatherby, Barrett, Berger, US Optics and probably more got their start in California. CA had great hunting and fishing. Look at how CA went from that to what it is now. Idaho like other states like to blame Califonia, but the problems existed prior to them coming there. It's the tactics they need to look at. Look for p$$$ed off people. What p$$$es them off? Promise them change. It's the same all over.
xsn10s
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2016
- Messages
- 7,553
So I'm not for it. But understand this doing nothing probably allows them to move forward. So get involved if you like. I did. But just be aware that though they might sound reasonable I wouldn't give them an inch. I'd lean towards them enforcing existing laws, or increasing penalties of existing laws. If they cannot enforce existing laws then no new law will help.
xsn10s
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2016
- Messages
- 7,553
And let me say I'm all for true bipartisan efforts. I believe there needs to be compromise. But when it comes to firearms, hunting and another topic that shall be nameless there is no compromise with the other side. Because their objective imo is NOT compromise. It's part of their "hundred year marathon".
Anytime ethics or technology is argued, it turns out to be pitting hunters against hunters or hunters jealous of other hunters. The antis know this and use it against us every chance they get. Yet, hunters always fall for it and help the antis.
Colorado already limits technology "Smart Rifles". It came about after "tracking point" was developed and available. Any scope that has a computer processor falls into this catagory. So electronic rangefinding rifle scopes or rifle scopes that link to other electronic devices are verboten.
However, your Kesterel, rangefinder, or RF binos, can talk to anything they want outside your rifle scope. This seems like a better compromise than banning everything outright. Banning electronics won't stop people from taking long range shots, the hunters who can shoot LR will just go back to more analog ways of doing it.
I think the cheap electronic rangefinder has benefited the humane taking of game at all ranges more than any other piece of equipment. I know when I started out with my first rangefinder, if I couldn't range my game I didn't shoot at it. As RFs got better I extended my range I'd shoot at, but I'm still not what most would consider a LRH.
However, your Kesterel, rangefinder, or RF binos, can talk to anything they want outside your rifle scope. This seems like a better compromise than banning everything outright. Banning electronics won't stop people from taking long range shots, the hunters who can shoot LR will just go back to more analog ways of doing it.
I think the cheap electronic rangefinder has benefited the humane taking of game at all ranges more than any other piece of equipment. I know when I started out with my first rangefinder, if I couldn't range my game I didn't shoot at it. As RFs got better I extended my range I'd shoot at, but I'm still not what most would consider a LRH.
Last edited:
Ckleeves
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure where I land on this. I have seen enough stupidity the last few years in the elk woods - guys attempting 1400 yard shots with another hunter (my brother) between them and the elk, guys shooting 30+ rounds and hitting a bull and not following up to see what died out of their view etc that when I see things like this it does give me pause on what things have become.
It's like many things in life, only 5% of the population needs a law in place to keep them from doing something that 95% of people wouldn't even consider doing in the first place. But that 5% sure can affect things for the other 95% even if the 95% wasn't going to do the things that got the law put in place that now affects them.
20 years ago I didn't think Colorado needed a season on shed antlers and that it was crazy to even consider. Now, due to stupidity from the 5% I'm really glad we have one.
It's like many things in life, only 5% of the population needs a law in place to keep them from doing something that 95% of people wouldn't even consider doing in the first place. But that 5% sure can affect things for the other 95% even if the 95% wasn't going to do the things that got the law put in place that now affects them.
20 years ago I didn't think Colorado needed a season on shed antlers and that it was crazy to even consider. Now, due to stupidity from the 5% I'm really glad we have one.
bigngreen
Well-Known Member
I believe most of this is driven by the FUDS that are willing pawns of the enviro groups to drive a wedge in the hunting community.
I've see guys with zero tech at close range flock shooting elk, zero follow up, just take the easiest one with the least holes if they take any.
Range and tech has zero to do with poorly killing an animal.
Now fair chase, that can be a different story, the hugest factor I've seen that has changed the fair chase landscape is the UTV, in my area they've completely disrupted the elk migrations and the elk have no corridors where they can get away from them. Hunting like a pack of wolves has changed things that and we see large groups camp in an area for the entire season, the elk literally have no rest.
I've see guys with zero tech at close range flock shooting elk, zero follow up, just take the easiest one with the least holes if they take any.
Range and tech has zero to do with poorly killing an animal.
Now fair chase, that can be a different story, the hugest factor I've seen that has changed the fair chase landscape is the UTV, in my area they've completely disrupted the elk migrations and the elk have no corridors where they can get away from them. Hunting like a pack of wolves has changed things that and we see large groups camp in an area for the entire season, the elk literally have no rest.
Ckleeves
Well-Known Member
I agree that stupidity doesn't have a range and it's the same 5%. However just in the last few years there has been a huge increase in guys taking shots that I don't think they would have dreamed of taking 20 years ago. That 1000 yard out of the box rifle and one trip to the range where on their 9th shot they luck out and hit the 1200 yard steel sure puts some confidence in people.
I feel like 20 years ago most of the guys who were shooting 700+ yards were pretty serious about it and dented a lot of primers getting to the point of being confident. Now days if you were to take a poll at the trailhead just about everyone is "Good to 800 easy" as they explain that their mil based scope they just dial to the 6 for 600 yards, the 8 for 800 yards etc and last week they hit the lifesize steel Buffalo at 1000 on only their 5th shot.
Last edited:
