Should 209 primers be legal?

[pianoman9701]

The only reason they're considering it in the first place is because it doesn't present a possible major change which would noticeably increase the success rate. We're both saying basically the same thing.

[blackveltbowhunter]

I understand. But the discussion was heading toward allowing anything that could be classified as a "muzzleloader" to include scoped optics.  Do we also allow smokeless powder as long as its loaded from the muzzle? If that were the case I am sure that would open a whole new realm of technology.

Deacons analogy is off IMO, Although not old or cavemanish, during "Primitive" seasons we are choosing to use a hammer vs a pneumatic air nailer. Even though we have options to use a Titanium Stilleto, or a appropriately shaped rock.

[pianoman9701]

I understand. But the discussion was heading toward allowing anything that could be classified as a "muzzleloader" to include scoped optics.  Do we also allow smokeless powder as long as its loaded from the muzzle? If that were the case I am sure that would open a whole new realm of technology.

Deacons analogy is off IMO, Although not old or cavemanish, during "Primitive" seasons we are choosing to use a hammer vs a pneumatic air nailer. Even though we have options to use a Titanium Stilleto, or a appropriately shaped rock.

Nope, just with regards to the 209 primers. 

[The Deacon]

The "realm of technology" is already open. It's already here -

Two-O-Nine (209) primers would not necessarily make muzzleloaders more efficient, and there's a debate as to whether or not they'd actually make them more reliable. Much, as most shooters know, depends on the person pulling the trigger -

As for the scope/no scope debate - How do you explain a single GMU offering both a muzzleloader season (no scopes) AND a modern rifle season (scopes permitted)? What's the difference there? Increased harvest by muzzleloader users simply due to the addition of a scope? Which would be preferred? Or, better, be more ethical - Muzzleloaders with open sights being used at 150 yards in a Kentucky Windage type fashion - or precise bullet placement at the same distance, thanks, in part, to the use of a glass-filled optical device?

Primitive? Petition the WDFW to allow only sidekick percussion or flintlock muzzleloaders filled with traditional black powder and patched roundball or conicals. Modern muzzleloaders? Two-O-Nine primers, saboted bullets, pelletized powder, AND scopes permitted. Individuals can choose the muzzleloading style they wish. Why hover, noncommittal, somewhere in the middle?

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?

[Stein]

It's pretty straight forward, if you make it easier to harvest, the seasons will be shorter.  There is no way around the math.

Scopes will absolutely do that.  Closed breaches will absolutely do that.  I don't know about 209, but very likely it won't have an impact near the other things mentioned.

[blackveltbowhunter]

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.

[pianoman9701]

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.

[blackveltbowhunter]

I don't think we disagree at all Piano , 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.

[pianoman9701]

 

[jnordwell]

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.

[The Deacon]

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?

[Bob33]

Washington's general season deer harvest by hunting method, from 2000 through 2016:

[Stein]

I do wonder what will be next on the chopping block?

What is on the chopping block now?

[JimmyHoffa]

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.

[Kazekurt]

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.