Free: Contests & Raffles.
While I agree that if 209 primers were allowed it wouldn't make a huge difference if everything else stayed the same, (a potentially big if that I'll get to in a moment) you cn't argue that it won't make a difference, then argue that there will be less hang fires and less wounded deer. That argument essentially says that it will make a difference. But the big "IF" is, IF muzzleloaders become more efficient, more people would be willing to hunt with them. That has the potential to be both bad and good. The bad would be more crowded woods during muzzleloader seasons. And muzzleloaders already have the worst seasons and least area to hunt of the weapon choices. So it's understandable some diehards would be a little touchy about more competition in a limited season. We've seen it with bow hunting. There is no doubt that compound bows have made it easier for many people to use a bow to harvest an animal. And it led to more people hunting with a bow and more animals harvested with a bow. Back in the 60s and early 70s before the proliferation of compounds, you didn't see a lot of people hunting with bows even though you could hunt any season you wanted. Pulling a 60# + bow and holding it for a good shot wasn't something everyone could do. and most shots were probably 25 yards or less. With compounds, I regularly read about shots being made out to 100 yards and beyond. I'm not going to tell you what I think of that. I'm just going to say that compounds made bowhunting more attractive to more hunters. Add in longer seasons, earlier season, and rut seasons and archery hunting has boomed. If there were still just the few archery units and shorter seasons from back then, it would make for some miserable hunting now that you are stuck hunting with one weapon. But what happened was, archers got more political pull because there were more of them. Even though they were more efficient, they got more time and more area and rut hunts because they still argue that they aren't that efficient and need an advantage in time and area to be successful. In reality, archers today are every bit as efficient as a muzzy hunter. I'd even argue that they can get off more shots than a blackpowder hunter. About the only advantage a muzzleloader has over a bow is being able to shoot through brush without messing up your shot. I know there are guys who will take longer shots with a bow than I will take with my muzzy.Who knows, maybe if there were more black powder hunters, there would be more and better seasons? Right now all they get is table scraps except in a few instances.
It is a skill that takes effort to keep yer powder dry and your ignition ready. Part of what I love about the sport. Learn To be proficient with your weapon. What is next, brass cartridges with black powder. Do you get it?? Go modern and leave me be!
United States Musket Caps all the way!!!
OMG!There are folks here against 209 ignition?Please naysayers, get back into that outhouse then. Cut the electricity line and buy more candles.New-age sure-fire technology over weak ignition systems any day and twice on Sunday.
You may not call it weak. But those that have seen the advantages of 209 ignition systems sure call it weak.Your state-game regulators field call all the time and many are complaints. Then when the complaints start sounding the same over & over & over, they begin to take surveys, begin to folder those same complaints - then begin to have meetings on those same complaints..Then they begin to address how to fix those complaints. So what you have in Washington is irate hunters who want a better ignition system implemented.If you like yours, then keep it. You obviously haven't been stung yet - meaning your ML hasn't failed to fire the powder, with an 8-pt buck standing 20 yards in front of you.I hope your luck continues. But never tell those who were stung that their ignition source wasn't the problem - wasn't the reason why their gun didn't go bang.If you do, then hopefully they don't punch you in the noggin for telling them it was their fault -- when in truth, it was the State Of Washington's fault for being behind the times.
What I don't get is you choose a primitive weapon,to hunt with,then u wanna complain about it,something that was your own choice to begin with.I say go for it add 209 primers then go ahead and add scopes to muzzle loaders,then just add your season to modern firearm,cause keep complaining and that's what you might get .
Quote from: GoexBlackhorn on December 30, 2017, 07:03:48 PMYou may not call it weak. But those that have seen the advantages of 209 ignition systems sure call it weak.Your state-game regulators field call all the time and many are complaints. Then when the complaints start sounding the same over & over & over, they begin to take surveys, begin to folder those same complaints - then begin to have meetings on those same complaints..Then they begin to address how to fix those complaints. So what you have in Washington is irate hunters who want a better ignition system implemented.If you like yours, then keep it. You obviously haven't been stung yet - meaning your ML hasn't failed to fire the powder, with an 8-pt buck standing 20 yards in front of you.I hope your luck continues. But never tell those who were stung that their ignition source wasn't the problem - wasn't the reason why their gun didn't go bang.If you do, then hopefully they don't punch you in the noggin for telling them it was their fault -- when in truth, it was the State Of Washington's fault for being behind the times.Not to mention dangerous hangfires that could wound animals and send bullets where they weren't intended. I remember reading a thread a while ago about a guy shooting the antler off his buck then killing it later with a hangfire. Luckily he didn't wound it
