collapse

Author Topic: Should 209 primers be legal?  (Read 6431 times)

Offline blackveltbowhunter

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2009
  • Posts: 2937
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #125 on: October 06, 2017, 12:06:36 PM »
I don't know the GMU you refer to. But would agree, if the GMU is open to both simultaneously then it makes sense to allow scoped muzzies, during that hunt in that unit.

  The day we let technology determine ethics, is a day I would rather not see. By design the muzzy is a more difficult weapon to master and comes with self imposed limitations, the hunter should be determining what's ethical.

   You seem stuck on the term "primitive". Implying that if your not wearing buckskin thongs and carrying a bowie as backup then its not "primitive". I agree to an extent, the term is probably outdated. BUT it still denotes imposed limitations based on a weapons inherent design and/or regulations in place to handicap it.

   Everything you speak of is already legal. 209, scopes, blah blah. Its called MODERN season.

Online pianoman9701

  • Mushroom Man
  • Off-Topics
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Legend
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2011
  • Posts: 25954
  • Location: Vancouver USA
  • NRA Life, MH, WFW, CCRKBA, NAGR, RMEF, WSB
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #126 on: October 06, 2017, 12:52:00 PM »
Here's where we disagree. If you choose ML, you get to hunt wherever MLs are allowed, during an earlier season which has a better chance of catching the end of the rut. Just because you choose to hunt a unit which also has Modern going on doesn't mean you get to improve your chances by adding otherwise prohibited accessories. You pick ML, then you hunt by ML rules, whatever they are.
"Restricting the rights of law-abiding citizens based on the actions of criminals and madmen will have no positive effect on the future acts of criminals and madmen. It will only serve to reduce individual rights and the very security of our republic." - Pianoman

Offline blackveltbowhunter

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2009
  • Posts: 2937
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #127 on: October 06, 2017, 02:07:59 PM »
I don't think we disagree at all Piano :tup:, If your last comment was aimed at me. I don't see any problem with 209, although admittedly, I don't know as much as many on here about muzzy equipment.  Some others have posted about scopes on muzzies, insinuating that scopes etc should be allowed since its not a "primitive weapon".  I would be opposed to such changes if that were the case. I understand that is not the discussion WDFW is having.

The argument that we need to stick together so all individuals are accommodated is moot IMO, since any muzzy hunter who wants to use a breech lock, 209 capped, scoped muzzy is free to do so during the modern season.

Online pianoman9701

  • Mushroom Man
  • Off-Topics
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Legend
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2011
  • Posts: 25954
  • Location: Vancouver USA
  • NRA Life, MH, WFW, CCRKBA, NAGR, RMEF, WSB
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #128 on: October 06, 2017, 02:34:41 PM »
 :tup:
"Restricting the rights of law-abiding citizens based on the actions of criminals and madmen will have no positive effect on the future acts of criminals and madmen. It will only serve to reduce individual rights and the very security of our republic." - Pianoman

Offline jnordwell

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Pilgrim
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2012
  • Posts: 29
  • Location: Camas Washington
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #129 on: October 06, 2017, 02:58:11 PM »
Primitive is one thing but jacketed bullets are primitive but neither is compound bows,mech broad heads, mech releases,etc... why not do what some states do offer some units as primitive only. Recurve,longbow only, and flint lock or lead ball only. When they allowed mech broad heads they didn't shorten the seasons. Would have to see how they would word it.

Offline The Deacon

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Pilgrim
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2008
  • Posts: 32
  • Location: Cathlamet
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #130 on: October 06, 2017, 02:58:49 PM »
If I may repeat myself -

Truthfully? My crystal ball says 209 primers will be okayed; however, scopes will not. Perhaps never. And why no scopes? Too many hunters - HUNTERS - are selfishly against them. It's not a matter of concern for the resource, but rather a question of "How is this going to affect MY hunting?" Shorter seasons? Fewer open GMUs? Reduced opportunity? What's in it - or NOT in it - for me?

No bait. No hounds. No trapping. What's next?

It's not about "stick(ing) together so all individuals are accommodated." Such is not possible. It's about presenting a united front as consumptive users in order to (1) prevent the loss of existing hunting opportunities, and (2) hopefully expand opportunities which do not currently exist -

Will scoped muzzleloaders guarantee this loss or expansion? Absolutely not, but - again - I do wonder what will be next on the chopping block?

Maggie, January 1994 - 5 May 2008

Offline Bob33

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Posts: 16711
  • Groups: SCI, RMEF, NRA
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #131 on: October 06, 2017, 03:02:48 PM »
Washington's general season deer harvest by hunting method, from 2000 through 2016:
Nature. It's cheaper than therapy.

Online Stein

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2013
  • Posts: 2795
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #132 on: October 06, 2017, 03:49:58 PM »
I do wonder what will be next on the chopping block?

What is on the chopping block now?

Offline JimmyHoffa

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Old Salt
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2010
  • Posts: 9700
  • Location: 150 Years Too Late
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #133 on: October 06, 2017, 03:50:33 PM »
I don't know the GMU you refer to. But would agree, if the GMU is open to both simultaneously then it makes sense to allow scoped muzzies, during that hunt in that unit.

  The day we let technology determine ethics, is a day I would rather not see. By design the muzzy is a more difficult weapon to master and comes with self imposed limitations, the hunter should be determining what's ethical.

   You seem stuck on the term "primitive". Implying that if your not wearing buckskin thongs and carrying a bowie as backup then its not "primitive". I agree to an extent, the term is probably outdated. BUT it still denotes imposed limitations based on a weapons inherent design and/or regulations in place to handicap it.

   Everything you speak of is already legal. 209, scopes, blah blah. Its called MODERN season.
the high hunt allows either muzzy tag or modern tag and both could be hunting simultaneously.  One is scope/primer/tech restricted and the other is a free for all.  I've never seen any muzzies on the high hunt though.  It is about half old school deer rifles and half long range tacticool artillery pieces.

Offline Kazekurt

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Nov 2012
  • Posts: 413
  • Location: Ephrata
  • The trophy is in the hunt; the animal is a bonus!
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #134 on: October 06, 2017, 04:06:22 PM »
I voted yes.  I have performed a couple of two hour stalks(crawls) through wet grass to get in range of a nice muley buck only to have my ignition fail.   As a person who hunts routinely with all three weapons, I will say that making this change will not increase the range of the muzzleloader, just the reliability.   I joke with my friends all the time that in some ways I prefer archery because at least I know I'm going to get something in the air.  Furthermore, there are already a lot of guys cheating the "exposed to the elements"  requirement by using tape, surgical tubing, etc. 

Offline blackveltbowhunter

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2009
  • Posts: 2937
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #135 on: October 06, 2017, 04:17:08 PM »
I don't know the GMU you refer to. But would agree, if the GMU is open to both simultaneously then it makes sense to allow scoped muzzies, during that hunt in that unit.

  The day we let technology determine ethics, is a day I would rather not see. By design the muzzy is a more difficult weapon to master and comes with self imposed limitations, the hunter should be determining what's ethical.

   You seem stuck on the term "primitive". Implying that if your not wearing buckskin thongs and carrying a bowie as backup then its not "primitive". I agree to an extent, the term is probably outdated. BUT it still denotes imposed limitations based on a weapons inherent design and/or regulations in place to handicap it.

   Everything you speak of is already legal. 209, scopes, blah blah. Its called MODERN season.
the high hunt allows either muzzy tag or modern tag and both could be hunting simultaneously.  One is scope/primer/tech restricted and the other is a free for all.  I've never seen any muzzies on the high hunt though.  It is about half old school deer rifles and half long range tacticool artillery pieces.

Thanks for the clarification!! In that case I understand if the user purchased a tag allowing them to hunt their respective season and also participate in the high hunt.

 

Offline steeleywhopper

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2007
  • Posts: 1186
  • Location: Snohomish co.
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #136 on: October 06, 2017, 04:43:53 PM »
I donít see where an exposed nipple and 209 primer will all the sudden make Muzzy guys into lead slinging 500 yard marksmen. Itís still an exposed to the element ignition with open sights and black powder. I also canít see it making all the modern hunters want to jump to muzzy season tag holders, the multi season tags did that already. I vote yes on 209.

Offline SureThing

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Pilgrim
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Posts: 26
  • Location: Over the Hills and through the Woods
  • Groups: RMEF,WSAA,IBO
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #137 on: October 06, 2017, 08:51:23 PM »
I don't have a dog in the fight. I'm an archer and believe the primitively weapon user groups need to police themselves. Bob33 has constantly provided powerful information and data. i think the WDFW has done a good job balancing out the user groups and the opportunity afield. If you look at the last chart Bob posted the highest line year in and year out is Muzzleloader. So if you think using the 209 primer will have no effect on harvest I would vote yes and you can expect to have the same length of season and the same percentage of success. However, from what I have read from the posts the successful muzzleloader hunters won't be affected by the 209 primers but the guys that only hunt muzzleloader part time or put less time into learning their weapon or are less experienced will have more success which will equate into shorter seasons.
I definitely believe in choosing your weapon and season methodology. I value quality time afield more than quantity of time in the field. Have you guys forgotten what it was like with the orange pumpkin patch hunting we had prior. The state has even accommodated the few guys that feel they have to hunt all three seasons with the multi season tags. You just have to pay to play. 
As far as the latest Archery technology advances that were allowed I personally think that was a mistake. It only helped guys that didn't want to spend the time to master their weapon and I believe was pushed through for the manufacturers of equipment. If and when archery success rate goes up then the season is going to get shorter. It's simple math. With shrinking habitat, access, comes shrinking resources compounded with a rising population we all better stick together and defend what we have and be realistic in what we are asking for.
The other issue I always read about is making it easier for our youth to be more successful. I disagree with this thought process as well. I Believe  we need to encourage our youth to into experiencing the outdoors fishing/hunting and getting them outside instead of leaving them plugged in. The kill is not the success but the time spent afield with family and friends experiencing the thrill of the chase and learning our quarry. So, when we do get to experience the kill it means something. The focus should not be triggering something. They can do that with with their video games. The things I remember the most is all the mistakes I have made over the years  wth my Dad, wife and buddies. The camp fires and lies I have told.
I do believe the short youth only hunts that WDFW have provided are good and help promote our sport without detracting from it.
In the end, I did not participate in the 209 survey but will support what ever the muzzleloader user group decides on. I just hope they get what they truly want and be happy with it in the end.

Offline Machias

  • Trapper
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Mar 2007
  • Posts: 14747
  • Location: Cheney, WA
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #138 on: October 06, 2017, 10:31:14 PM »
 :twocents:  Worst thing ever is CYW, makes all the user groups fight each other and constantly fight for more time.  Most other states NEVER have this BS arguments about how unfair it is that this user group gets this time out or OMG they get an extra day.  That and the fact the state ruins bow and muzzy season by cramming us all in a few GMUs is why I mostly gave up hunting WA.  Just not worth it.
Fred Moyer


History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.

Online snake

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hunter
  • ***
  • Join Date: Aug 2015
  • Posts: 240
  • Location: Washington
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #139 on: October 07, 2017, 03:13:21 PM »
Its obvious lots of people here do not understand what a 209 primer does or is compared to percussion caps.  It will most definitely not "flood"people to go use a muzzle loader, just like using lighted nocks and mechanicals didn't "flood" the archery seasons with people. Obviously a YES for me on the 209, but in the end I will hunt either way, I will hunt with a blow dart gun if i have to and I would use a rocket launcher as well if they open a season for it.

Offline bobcat

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+6)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2007
  • Posts: 34030
  • Location: Rochester
    • robert68
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #140 on: October 07, 2017, 03:46:49 PM »
I'll vote for the 209's to be legal, for nothing other than the fact that they'll be easier to find in the stores. It won't really change the effectiveness of a muzzleloader significantly, so I don't have an issue with it.

Offline Mallardmasher

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hunter
  • ***
  • Join Date: Jan 2016
  • Posts: 126
  • Location: Port Orchard, Washington
  • IBEW LU 46
  • Groups: CCA WWA
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #141 on: October 08, 2017, 12:58:09 PM »
CYW came around because our animal population where dwindling rapidly, We are a state with half the critter population and 3-4 times the hunter population compared to the PNW states. CYW lowered the overall success rate considerably. I would venture to say that the multi season tag holders share a success rate at least twice as high as the other user combined.
And my rant for the multi season tag is no every user group get to use a weapon they for most part are not comfortable with, ranges ect. So the critters suffer.
USN 1985-94, IBEW Local 46 1994-Present
Matt

Offline DOUBLELUNG

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2007
  • Posts: 4638
  • Location: Wenatchee
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #142 on: October 08, 2017, 01:19:37 PM »
While I like the idea of faster and more reliable ignitions, I don't do much muzzleloader hunting and think preference should go to the guys who primarily hunt muzzleloader.  I will caution that increased harvest efficiency reduces opportunity, one has only to look at the shortening of seasons and loss of antlerless opportunities for the archers to see the impact of technology on opportunity. 
As long as we have the habitat, we can argue forever about who gets to kill what and when.  No habitat = no game.

Offline Mallardmasher

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hunter
  • ***
  • Join Date: Jan 2016
  • Posts: 126
  • Location: Port Orchard, Washington
  • IBEW LU 46
  • Groups: CCA WWA
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #143 on: October 08, 2017, 05:07:57 PM »
Tech had nothing to do with the loss of antlerleas for archers, the years of continued assault on cows and the low calf escapment, causing the herd on the coast to drop to almost half of what was desired, when you have a low recruitment. Every cow is worth her weight in gold. Now if you look at the data, the herds started to plummet in western Washington just a couple years after hounds and baiting of alpha preditors was banned. An upspike in bears and cougars cause a downturn in the food supply, coupled with us taking cows, caused a dire situation
USN 1985-94, IBEW Local 46 1994-Present
Matt

Offline Romeo 2-6

  • Not on the top of the ladder, but not on the bottom either.
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Pilgrim
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2015
  • Posts: 14
  • Check...check...is this thing on?
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #144 on: October 08, 2017, 06:31:57 PM »
No


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Opinions are like...well...you know, yeah, I have one too...

Offline JDHasty

  • Site Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Old Salt
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2015
  • Posts: 6815
  • Location: Tacoma
  • Groups: NRA Benefactor Member, GOA Life Member, Father of 3 NRA Life Members
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #145 on: October 09, 2017, 05:41:02 AM »
I'll vote for the 209's to be legal, for nothing other than the fact that they'll be easier to find in the stores. It won't really change the effectiveness of a muzzleloader significantly, so I don't have an issue with it.

If they didn't "really change the effectiveness of a muzzleloader significantly" they would not be almost exclusively used in States that allow their usage.  Fact is they do make a big difference in ignition reliability, particularly among individuals who do not put time and effort into learning how to protect caps from moisture.  High quality 209s have a waterproof lacquer covering the flash hole in the cup that seals out moisture.   

Offline WSU

  • Off-Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Posts: 3423
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #146 on: October 09, 2017, 07:52:41 AM »
The limiting factor for a muzzy is a single shot and open sites.  Keeping your powder dry is a pain and a 209 might be more reliable (I don't know, never used them), but I've never had ignition problems with No. 11 or musket caps.  Keep your powder dry and the gun goes boom every time.   :twocents:

I said this like I was a bit too sure! Saturday and had a bull at 30 yards. I pulled the trigger and the cap didn't fire! Apparently elk don't like that sound. The bull bolted never to be seen again!

Come on 209 primers!

Offline LOVEMYLABXS

  • Retired
  • Off-Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Longhunter
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2007
  • Posts: 531
  • Location: Davenport
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #147 on: October 09, 2017, 08:16:07 AM »
No

I guess this will be next  :dunno:  after all it is a muzzleloader

https://www.remington.com/rifles/muzzleloading

Scratch a dog once and you'll have a job for life and life is good.....  Mike

Offline oldschool

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Hunter
  • ***
  • Join Date: Sep 2009
  • Posts: 231
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #148 on: October 09, 2017, 08:24:56 AM »
Voted no harvest will go up slightly.Thats just a reason for wdfw to take more away. Been using the smokepole 20 years try buying quality primers and changing them out several times during the day, they are cheap. Good luck everyone. :twocents:

Offline floatinghat

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Posts: 634
Re: Should 209 primers be legal?
« Reply #149 on: October 09, 2017, 08:29:50 AM »
No

I guess this will be next  :dunno:  after all it is a muzzleloader

https://www.remington.com/rifles/muzzleloading

I voted no but this would be the next step as it's not a 209.