Motivation for ML hunting restrictions

[Plinker147]

I would like to see the number of animals taken in ML season with these long range ML to see if the actions imposed are even justifiable. Or is this a just in case scenario with ML ?

The restrictions in NM were not based on herd populations, they were more based on quality. The three muzzleloader elk units that showed the most impact were known for trophy class bulls. 350+ bulls weren't hard to find. Now they are few and far between. The drought at the same time didn't help either. The late season November bull hunts were probably the biggest reason for decline in quality. Outfitters mainly but all hunters with the new muzzleloader were shooting bulls cross canyon at 500 yards. These guys are good at what they do and we're killing the top end of the bulls. If you kill todays 340 bull there isn't a bull left to grow 380 next year.

Now the state set rules based on 3 units because they were other units that had the same muzzleloader early hunts that didn't show the harvest or herd composition changing or any other species.

The game and fish should have just been honest and said we want to make muzzleloaders primitive again which was the real drive behind the rule.

I don't know why people always say it's about the money, the state employees don't get raises when game and fish makes more money, and the game and fish departments can't spend more more freely just cuz there is more in the account. There budgets are set year or more in advance. There is no drive from the employees to increase revenue. There pay check stays the same either way.

 

[Wanashoot]

Just my two cents but muzzle loading was always considered a primitive hunt. I have done reg rifle and muzzle loading and I think there should be regulations to keep it that way. It is more of a challenge if you have to get within 150 yards to shoot. The season is earlier and you are more likely to catch them in the rut so you already have one advantage. I agree that some of the new modern guns are capable of longer shots but to me that takes away the primitive part of the hunt. I know that some states already limit you to open sights and loose powder and I have no problem with that. I am old enough to have problems with open sites so I put peep sites on mine. As far as loosing game most of it is from either a caliber or bullet being too small or a lack of practice. I have lost a bull with a muzzle loader that we found two days later and it was ruined but have friends that have lost them with modern rifles so it happens occasionally. We used to have to shoot with scopes during rifle season and I have also done that knowing that I was limited on distance I could effectively shoot.

 

[Rosebud]

Many more animals are killed on Alabama highways each year than are lost to misplaced hunters projectile. Arrow, ML, or rifle bullets. Nobody likes losing a wounded animal, but my state has well in excess of a million deer. Its believed over fifty thousand are killed on the road each year. I've personally seen deer shot with a bow and gun show up on game camera week later no worse for wear. Not sure the argument about losing a wounded animal to justify using a modern weapon in a primitive weapons season is valid. Heck, I've seen a petition in a small town in south Alabama to shoot deer on site, day or night year round. They are tired of hitting them with their cars and trucks.

 

[Allen Lone wolf]

An unethical hunter with a primitive muzzle loader will be an unethical hunter with a long range muzzle loader. The equipment will not change the person's ethics. If his range is 100yds and he attempts a 200yd shot with a traditional muzzle loader he will try a 800yd shot with equipment that he can ethicly make at 600yds. As the old saying goes you can't fix stupid no matter what. The equipment sure won't fix it.Just my opinion.

 

[JAYgs8163]

Many more animals are killed on Alabama highways each year than are lost to misplaced hunters projectile. Arrow, ML, or rifle bullets. Nobody likes losing a wounded animal, but my state has well in excess of a million deer. Its believed over fifty thousand are killed on the road each year. I've personally seen deer shot with a bow and gun show up on game camera week later no worse for wear. Not sure the argument about losing a wounded animal to justify using a modern weapon in a primitive weapons season is valid. Heck, I've seen a petition in a small town in south Alabama to shoot deer on site, day or night year round. They are tired of hitting them with their cars and trucks.

I don't think you've got anything to worry about when you have herd sizes like that. When you're taking about Elk, especially in places like NM, Az and Nevada the Elk herds are very small in comparison to a "1 million" deer herd. In Az the Elk herd runs around 30-35000 total. I can't speak for the exact size in NM but it's not much different. The same can be said for the size of the Deer herds in Az and NM. They're nothing in comparison to the Midwest or back east. I can't speak for other Western states but I can understand some limitations being put in place where justification warrants it.

 

[JAYgs8163]

This thread will for sure get shut down if we start talking about "ethics". Be aware of the rules folks.

 

[mnoland30]

X2 on using the right bullet. Once I started using 405 gr. .458 bullets, I quit losing elk. Five out of six dropped in their tracks.

NM Game & Fish claims that the success rate for ML is almost the same as for centerfire.

 

[Wanashoot]

Agreed. Shooting 54 cal 430 grain maxi ball with 110 grains of FFG. Once the smoke clears you usually have a Elk or Deer down or at least a blood trail to follow. They usually do not go far if you do your part.

 

[rockingkj]

I g

I can see it from two ways.

More primitive weapon and keep the same amount of tags, or current muzzleloaders with less tags.

"Primitive" muzzleloaders will still do the job, you just have to limit your range. If not you may see more wounding, but that's up to the person pulling the trigger to get closer. If they decrease tags and keep the same muzzleloader people would be complaining about less opportunity.

A friend has a few smokeless muzzleloaders. He brought one out for us to try. 3 of us each took one shot at 400 yards and the group was around 3 inches. So 3 different people shooting, 2 of us shooting the gun for the very first time, was sub moa at 400. A little different the the open sighted flintlock and percussion guns. I suppose if you want to shoot with all the technology available then put in for a rifle tag.

I got into ML hunting because it originally fit my idea of what hunting should be. Careful planning , a single well placed shot at a sure range. ( yes that's the criteria or should be with any hunting) Additionally the ML hunter was basically out there alone. Around here rifle season was more like military maneuvers. There is hunting and there is killing. I like to hunt but am as fulfilled if I never take a shot. Yes the modern ML bears little resemblance to the traditional rifle. If the goal is to take as many animals as possible and the super effective in-line sure is the tool for that. But I think the original intention was "primitive" and the modern in-line is not that. I expect if states put restrictions on , the in-line owners will still have the opportunity to use those in regular rifle season. There will be those who agree with me and probably as many who do not.

 

[Mtn Dawg]

Great question. You could ask the same of the traditionalists. For myself, I hunt all firearm seasons with a muzzleloader and have done so for decades, with one partial year change.
About 5yrs ago, I did hunt and harvest a nice whitetail with a 450 Bushmaster during the general season. However, I used a muzzleloader during the designated "Muzzleloader Season", to harvest a second buck. The only reason I used the Bushmaster was because the scope I was using on my muzzleloader was in to Leupold for repairs.

I've said it before and will again. A known fact is hunter numbers across the country are actually dropping considerably. Hunter numbers using muzzleloaders are dropping like a rock. Oh, by the way, how many muzzleloader manufacturers are left? In many states they are now allowing "straight wall cartridge rifles" to be used during the "muzzleloader season".
Young people, having any choice, would never use a rotary phone over their "Smartphone". Most now days have never seen a rotary phone, soon to be a museum piece.

We should be encouraging and supporting ALL firearms, not debating rather one firearm is ethical for this or that and another isn't. If one doesn't understand the WHY in that, our shooting and hunting sports are in dire jeopardy.

Try hunting out here in Colorado and you wouldn't be talking about hunter numbers dropping. Western hunting has become the new fad. 20k-30k increase in non resident applications following Covid. Huge increase in resident hunter numbers and applications as well. Even my tried and true duck hunting spots are overtaken with people. The takeaway is CPW is doing its best to maintain opportunity with harvest in the face of this. Not to mention NW CO just had the most severe winter in 60 years. Severe reduction in tags and licenses available for at least the next few years. The scopes on MZ issue is part of a much bigger conversation.

 

[6.5x300 WBY]

Try hunting out here in Colorado and you wouldn't be talking about hunter numbers dropping. Western hunting has become the new fad. 20k-30k increase in non resident applications following Covid. Huge increase in resident hunter numbers and applications as well. Even my tried and true duck hunting spots are overtaken with people. The takeaway is CPW is doing its best to maintain opportunity with harvest in the face of this. Not to mention NW CO just had the most severe winter in 60 years. Severe reduction in tags and licenses available for at least the next few years. The scopes on MZ issue is part of a much bigger conversation.

So in your limited area and not country wide Encore is correct. Over all Encore is correct. Hunter numbers are dropping.

 

[Mtn Dawg]

So in your limited area and not country wide Encore is correct. Over all Encore is correct. Hunter numbers are dropping.

Absolutely, for most of the nation he is correct. Increasing hunting pressure is the rule for most of the western states though. Colorado has had no scopes, loose powder only, no sabot's and 50 caliber minimum for elk since before I started doing it. I would expect other western states to follow suit, like New Mexico is doing. And most likely for the same reasons Colorado did. That is to say not necessarily for greed. I personally don't have a problem with it. But I think each state is unique and as such it might be appropriate to argue about limiting weapons or choice of weapon etc. I don't see how that hurts the hunting tradition. It does feel like we are under attack at times though, which is what I think the OP was really worried about with his question about regulations.

 

[George Dean]

I don't have time to absorb the arguments for or against. I appreciate all of the views but, when I hunt, I hunt to my plan. To each his own as long as it is legal and ethical.

 

[Pilsner]

Another example of a dept not knowing anything about what they are trying to do. Better to have the best possible, most efficient means of harvesting any game animal. it is not to make it harder for the hunter, but easier that the harvest is more complete. STUPID...

By their state charter the employees of game agencies are mostly experts on GAME.
That doesn't mean F all when it comes to expertise in firearms, bullets, optics, et al.
Br a great spot for the agencies to open up a couple of employee slots in my opinion.

Hell, half of these dumb conservations could be avoided if they just walked across the metaphysical hallway and asked the firearms expert that every state employees in the criminal division/crime lab of the state police or game wardens.