Post by: Bob33 on October 04, 2017, 04:01:32 PM
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, WA 98501-1091
wildthing@dfw.wa.gov
Dear Elk and Deer Hunters,
As part of the outreach to the hunting public for the upcoming 2018-2020 three-year hunting season package, the Fish and Wildlife Commission requested the department include a discussion of muzzleloader equipment. Therefore, we are conducting a short survey at this time that is specific to whether 209 primers should be allowed as part of the ignition system for muzzleloader firearms during muzzleloader seasons. Currently, 209 primers or any primer designed to be used in centerfire cartridges are not allowed for muzzleloader hunting in Washington state except for muzzleloaders used during modern firearm seasons.
Please take 5 minutes out of your busy schedule to answer the four questions in the survey at the link provided below. The department will consider all survey input received before October 31 at 5:00 p.m.
Link: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/N2JZMPG
Thank you for all that you do for wildlife in the state of Washington and thank you for your interest in hunting season development for the 2018-2020 seasons.
Respectfully,
Anis Aoude
Game Division manager
Post by: bowhunterforever on October 04, 2017, 04:18:49 PM
Post by: Duckslayer89 on October 04, 2017, 04:27:51 PM
Post by: Mfowl on October 04, 2017, 04:29:38 PM
Post by: CP on October 04, 2017, 04:34:09 PM
Post by: steeleywhopper on October 04, 2017, 04:38:46 PM
Post by: cm2cb4 on October 04, 2017, 05:27:09 PM
Post by: vandeman17 on October 04, 2017, 05:36:04 PM
Just submitted the survey with a resounding yes. I wish I could have added a comment though. I think that 209 is fine as long as primitive / No 11 primer users get to hunt the last week of archery into the first week of October. Then 209 users get the first weekend of October up to modern rifle. After that, all can add scopes unless you have a medical reason for placing on a scope during muzzy season. Spreads the season out a bit and gives everyone a fair chance
In a word, no.
Post by: rackattack on October 04, 2017, 05:44:17 PM
Post by: Mallardmasher on October 04, 2017, 05:58:57 PM
No
[/quote
Nor should compound bows, carbon arrows or expanding broad heads. Right
I said yes, people are wrapping their breaches with siran wrap. Taping their barrel, we live in a rain forest. Anything to make your shot more powerful, it is not going to increase your range.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on October 04, 2017, 06:05:30 PM
Let us use 209,it’s just an ignition source it’s not turning a muzzy into a 7mm-08.maybe not that extreme, but it does add quite a bit to the muzzy. The hottest #11 magnums or musket caps are really only good for about 110-120 gr of FFg or two pellets. With the 209s you can go to 150+ gr or FFg or use three pellets.
Post by: Duckslayer89 on October 04, 2017, 06:12:13 PM
I had to put no. Until WDFW determines if it is supposed to be a primitive season or muzzleloading season, I'll defer to primitive. If just a muzzleloading season then scopes/209/two barrels/etc would be fine, but I would need to see how they move seasons and adjust lengths first.Let us use 209,it’s just an ignition source it’s not turning a muzzy into a 7mm-08.maybe not that extreme, but it does add quite a bit to the muzzy. The hottest #11 magnums or musket caps are really only good for about 110-120 gr of FFg or two pellets. With the 209s you can go to 150+ gr or FFg or use three pellets.
I don't think the extra 50 grains really gives the bullet all that much more power but could be wrong
Post by: Whitenuckles on October 04, 2017, 06:14:46 PM
Post by: CP on October 04, 2017, 06:16:21 PM
I had to put no. Until WDFW determines if it is supposed to be a primitive season or muzzleloading season, I'll defer to primitive. If just a muzzleloading season then scopes/209/two barrels/etc would be fine, but I would need to see how they move seasons and adjust lengths first.Let us use 209,it’s just an ignition source it’s not turning a muzzy into a 7mm-08.maybe not that extreme, but it does add quite a bit to the muzzy. The hottest #11 magnums or musket caps are really only good for about 110-120 gr of FFg or two pellets. With the 209s you can go to 150+ gr or FFg or use three pellets.
That's not my experience. I shoot 209s at the range over chrono and the FPS difference over musket caps is insignificant. velocity peaks around 110g and actually decreases with more powder -209 or MCs no difference
Post by: tbotts on October 04, 2017, 06:16:38 PM
Post by: Magnum_Willys on October 04, 2017, 06:21:00 PM
YES permit different primers that allow the primitive weapon to work as its designed.
Post by: lonedave on October 04, 2017, 06:40:40 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on October 04, 2017, 06:42:35 PM
Yes. Scopes too.:yeah:
Post by: cohochemist on October 04, 2017, 06:44:21 PM
Post by: Russ McDonald on October 04, 2017, 06:47:59 PM
Not sure how a dual cam, carbon fiber bowtech fits the "primative" definitions either... 209 primers are safe, reliable and will help make cleaner kills... anything that can help drop an animal faster and more humanely I fully support.:yeah: you beat me to it. Exactly what I wanted to say.
Post by: Odell on October 04, 2017, 06:50:43 PM
Post by: Pegasus on October 04, 2017, 07:11:55 PM
Post by: Sabotloader on October 04, 2017, 07:39:02 PM
It does not increase accuracy of the rifle nor the range that each us can effectively shoot the rifle.
Post by: carpsniperg2 on October 04, 2017, 07:46:06 PM
How many of the guys saying that hunt with a muzzleloader?
I have no problem with a more reliable ignition system, it does not help increase any range.
Yes for me.
Post by: northwesthunter84 on October 04, 2017, 07:53:16 PM
Post by: JakeLand on October 04, 2017, 08:26:51 PM
Post by: Timberstalker on October 04, 2017, 08:33:33 PM
It's 2017. We are advancing and it gives options to hunters. We need not limit anything at this time.
Post by: teanawayslayer on October 04, 2017, 08:38:23 PM
Post by: full choke on October 04, 2017, 08:41:25 PM
Post by: Alpine Mojo on October 04, 2017, 08:48:16 PM
Suck it up and enjoy what you have already been given.
That statement sums up what the anti-gun politicians have been telling us for years. :tdown:
Post by: SeaRun1 on October 04, 2017, 08:49:19 PM
Post by: hunter399 on October 04, 2017, 08:54:20 PM
Post by: Stein on October 04, 2017, 08:54:36 PM
I really don't know how much more of an advantage against the weather a 209 does, so I do admit this isn't a very well informed opinion. But, if you get 95+% ignition on the west side during your average week of hunting, I think you have something that is much different than the traditional muzzleloader in your hands.
I could get jacked about a true flintlock season though, wood stock, plain metal, 10 feet long.
Post by: HardCorpsHuntr on October 04, 2017, 08:57:09 PM
Post by: j_h_nimrod on October 04, 2017, 09:03:19 PM
This would be akin to mandating the type of release or rests for archery. Finger or string loop releases only, no mechanical releases. No drop away rests or Whisker Biscuits, stationary rests only. These are not things that increase the overall power or range of the system, just the reliability and accuracy assuring the chance of a more clean kill when the opportunity arises.
Big no here. What would be primitive about it if you take away exposed to the elements. Might as well be able to use a crossbow during archery seasons. :twocents:
No, using a crossbow during archery would be like using one of the smokeless powder muzzleloaders that drive .375 caliber bullets close to 3000 fps and are accurate over 300 yards. The 209 does not appreciably increase the effective range of a muzzleloader.
Post by: JakeLand on October 04, 2017, 09:08:51 PM
Before I started reading the posts I was against the use of 209s. My thinking was that this hunting method should be more difficult and not be given another edge. After further reflection I have changed my opinion to yes, which I will put on my survey. This is more of a means than an ends argument, the addition of 209 primers does not make the weapon more effective, increase the range, or more powerful, just more reliable.
This would be akin to mandating the type of release or rests for archery. Finger or string loop releases only, no mechanical releases. No drop away rests or Whisker Biscuits, stationary rests only. These are not things that increase the overall power or range of the system, just the reliability and accuracy assuring the chance of a more clean kill when the opportunity arises.
Well said :tup:Big no here. What would be primitive about it if you take away exposed to the elements. Might as well be able to use a crossbow during archery seasons. :twocents:
No, using a crossbow during archery would be like using one of the smokeless powder muzzleloaders that drive .375 caliber bullets close to 3000 fps and are accurate over 300 yards. The 209 does not appreciably increase the effective range of a muzzleloader.
Post by: snowshoes22 on October 04, 2017, 09:11:33 PM
Post by: Mallardmasher on October 04, 2017, 09:13:00 PM
Definitely NO. You get better seasons than modern rifle because the odds are less that you will kill something while being provided a less crowded field at a better time. If you continue the process of improving the weapon then you deserve less time in the field and at a time when it is harder to hunt. For example the muzzie season for elk is right on the edge of the elk rut. Years ago they took this favorable time for hunting away from the bow hunters who obviously were using a weapon that provides much less of an opportunity for a kill than a muzzleloader. Suck it up and enjoy what you have already been given.
Years ago they did not take the time away from bow hunters, the new season they currently have, put them at the beginning, and some years right in the meat of the rut. The season they now have, was fostered by KBH with the support of some past and present WDFW employees, and many other archery clubs.
Post by: j_h_nimrod on October 04, 2017, 09:13:38 PM
I tend toward no unless the notion of splitting the season into primitive and muzzleloader is an option. The primitive weapon idea in my mind is something with a) very limited range, b) open sights and c) something that doesn't always go bang when you pull the trigger.
I could get jacked about a true flintlock season though, wood stock, plain metal, 10 feet long.
I like the idea, but then you are splitting already short seasons into more short seasons. If there were a true primitive muzzleloader season then archery guys would want a season for recurve an long bows shooting wooden arrows with finger release. Then you would get the modern guys wanting a season for cartridges or guns designed before 1874. Then you would get the group wanting to use an atlatl or spear. Then a group only wanting air powered guns...
I like the idea of a true primitive season but would always want to use the most effective weapon for the season. I personally want my freezer to be full of game meat, not going out to the store buying beef solely because I chose to make an already difficult season more so.
Post by: Stein on October 04, 2017, 09:27:42 PM
Post by: wapiti hunter2 on October 04, 2017, 09:38:40 PM
Post by: Seahawk12 on October 04, 2017, 09:42:01 PM
Post by: Jimmy33 on October 04, 2017, 09:43:37 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: REHJWA on October 04, 2017, 09:45:44 PM
Post by: Old Dog on October 04, 2017, 10:59:14 PM
Post by: Fl0und3rz on October 04, 2017, 11:01:40 PM
Post by: winshooter88 on October 04, 2017, 11:04:58 PM
Post by: JeffRaines on October 05, 2017, 12:11:41 AM
First off I have no dog in this fight, but what I noticed in the posts, is that the majority of the folks are saying that the 209 primers don't make any difference most say in velocity. If that is the case why do they seem to want it so badly? To the person who said that Muzzleloader season isn't a primitive weapons season, you might want to check again, it is supposed to be a primitive weapons season, that is why you don't have to hunt with the modern rifle hunters. The reason that caps and nipples were allowed is that they were newest ignition system allowed was that on the primitive muzzleloaders, that was the best option that was still considered primitive, the 209 primers are not considered a primitive form of ignition by any standard I have seen.
Slightly more consistent ignition coupled with the ability to use BH209 powder.
If you voted no and use a modern muzzle loader like a Knight, you are a hypocrite. You are already using modern technology. The 209 primer doesn't change a thing. If you want it to be "primitive", go back to flint lock and an open pan only.
I agree. I was having an argument on Facebook and someone was trying to say that using musket caps are 'traditional' :roll eyes:
Look guys, I'd get it if we were voting to allow inlines with cap ignition and modern projectiles... that would be a huge jump in effectiveness over an older flintlock style with pan ignition and more primitive projectiles. Hell, I'd understand if it were a vote on optics(which I am 100% against). The inlines are hardly 'primitive', the projectiles used today are hardly 'primitive'.
I also think its incredibly ridiculous to think that the modern hunters are going to come running over to muzzy once 209 primers are allowed. I could see an influx of people if you were to allow optics, however. I realize the effective range of muzzleloaders nowadays is 150-200 yards, and I've even heard of 300 yard shots being made with optics. Your average guy who hunts modern probably hunts with a group of people, they're not going to jump ship unless a majority of the group does. The road hunter types? Well, I guess you could road hunt with a muzzleloader... wouldn't be too hard really, even in their current state. You'd certainly keep your powder and cap dry!
Post by: huntnphool on October 05, 2017, 12:23:14 AM
I've hunted with a muzzy once, although I've applied for years without a successful draw. Only time I've drawn was a coveted tag in Idaho, and had a blast.....no pun intended.
I see both sides of the debate, keep the points on both sides coming guys. :tup:
Post by: PolarBear on October 05, 2017, 12:28:58 AM
Post by: Fl0und3rz on October 05, 2017, 05:01:27 AM
I also think its incredibly ridiculous to think that the modern hunters are going to come running over to muzzy once 209 primers are allowed.
I would give it a go on a TC encore platform, if 209 primers were legal, because it is an economical platform to try, but I also prefer hunting by myself.
I suspect some resistance to the 209 primers from the primative objectors is that they would prefer to limit the hunters afield during their time.
Nobody likes a pumpkin patch.
Post by: trophyhunt on October 05, 2017, 06:16:23 AM
Big no here. What would be primitive about it if you take away exposed to the elements. Might as well be able to use a crossbow during archery seasons. :twocents:I'd rather shoot a compound than my dads crossbow to be honest, its not consistent at all and pulling that string back is no joke. Plus if you get your finger or thumb in the way of that string at all, it's gone.
Post by: floatinghat on October 05, 2017, 06:51:11 AM
I voted no, I would be open to a primative season, caplock or flintlock (exposed) no sabot. Ball or full lead conical etc. I guess I have never had an issue with making sure thinks are right and tight. I've had successful ignition after3-4 days of Western WA down pours. I believe add to the success and the opportunity will be reduced.
Post by: C-Money on October 05, 2017, 07:24:26 AM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on October 05, 2017, 07:48:45 AM
Post by: boneaddict on October 05, 2017, 07:51:46 AM
Post by: JDHasty on October 05, 2017, 08:15:21 AM
Definitely NO. You get better seasons than modern rifle because the odds are less that you will kill something while being provided a less crowded field at a better time. If you continue the process of improving the weapon then you deserve less time in the field and at a time when it is harder to hunt. For example the muzzie season for elk is right on the edge of the elk rut. Years ago they took this favorable time for hunting away from the bow hunters who obviously were using a weapon that provides much less of an opportunity for a kill than a muzzleloader. Suck it up and enjoy what you have already been given.
That is where I came down on this
Post by: dominknows on October 05, 2017, 08:17:22 AM
Post by: CP on October 05, 2017, 08:19:45 AM
Post by: fishsticks on October 05, 2017, 08:26:01 AM
Post by: Bob33 on October 05, 2017, 08:37:14 AM
If they do improve ignition, then it’s logical they should improve overall harvest.
If they improve overall harvest, then ultimately the seasons will be altered.
Post by: Rainier10 on October 05, 2017, 08:37:41 AM
I would say that if I was leaning one way or the other it would be towards allowing 209 primers just because there are more options for purchasing a muzzleloader with 209 primers. If that does happen I would definitely want them to keep a close eye on harvest data and adjust seasons if needed.
My guess is if they allow 209 primers you may see more people transition from modern to muzzy.
Post by: baker5150 on October 05, 2017, 08:56:25 AM
Are mis-fires a real issue for you?
Maybe a poll of our own is necessary. I'm just curious if adding these primers will actually cause an increase in the amount of game taken, or if it's just a luxury that would make things easier and more reliable.
Post by: Stein on October 05, 2017, 09:00:03 AM
Post by: CP on October 05, 2017, 09:01:42 AM
So, for all you smoke pole guys, how often do you have a filed ignition, one that a 209 primer would have prevented, and while attempting a shot at an animal? And how often did it cause you to not get a shot off ie: weren't able to re- cap in time for a second chance? (I'm not a muzzy guy so please bare with me on the lingo)
Are mis-fires a real issue for you?
Maybe a poll of our own is necessary. I'm just curious if adding these primers will actually cause an increase in the amount of game taken, or if it's just a luxury that would make things easier and more reliable.
I’ve had a hang fire, which resulted in a clean miss. I can postulate that it could have resulted in a bad hit and a lost animal. Anything that reduces the possibility of a bad hit and a lost animal should be legal, especially if there is no compelling reason to ban them.
Post by: Duckslayer89 on October 05, 2017, 09:03:02 AM
Bump stocks on muzzies should be banned.
:chuckle: :chuckle:
Post by: cohochemist on October 05, 2017, 09:04:50 AM
Why I vote yes for 209 primers, is because a modern muzzle-loader with a 209 primer is a safer, more reliable weapon. That is the only advantage to caps. You don't get the gain in FPS or range or knockdown power compared to caps, its just safer and more reliable. The first time I used a cap here in Washington, I had a misfire at the range. How long do you point your muzzle down range before clearing the barrel? That crap is dangerous, when I load a weapon, I want to be able to unload it without risking my face/life. Yes, using a 209 primer reduces the number of mis-fires, but, you still need to subscribe to the 1 shot - 1 kill mentality. This is still very different than a center-fire rifle hunting, where you load up 5-6 shots, or have back up mags ready and can play Rambo in the field. This difference, how the weapons are re-loaded, will keep most modern people away. Coupled with an earlier comment that center-fire users travel in packs... I worry the bigger draw for people getting into muzzle-loading will be reading the harvest reports and seeing there are fewer people, more kills leading to higher success %.
Post by: Sabotloader on October 05, 2017, 09:20:19 AM
I hunt modern, so I don’t have a strong personal interest but it seems to me that if primers don’t improve ignition there’s no need to make them legal.
If they do improve ignition, then it’s logical they should improve overall harvest.
I must admit when I first started hunting with a cap lock - I did experience - hang fires and no fire situations both at the range and while hunting. Today and with experience and education it does not happen at all, with the inline I currently use, or even one of my cap locks. If I have prepared it for wet weather (legally) I would have not problem putting it a creek. After retrieving it I am 99% sure that it will fire.
209 primers can improve reliability of ignition over cap ignition only IF you do not protect and understand your cap ignition. There are several things you can do to protect the integrity of the cap and the breech plug from moisture. Even the way you pore the powder in can often make a difference in ignition especially in sidelock. 209 ignition does not guarantee ignition. I believe it helps ignition for the most part but it does not insure ignition. 209 Ignition can also be susceptible to moisture getting into the breech if the 209 system is not water tight and in most cases from the factory they are not.
Quote
If they improve overall harvest, then ultimately the seasons will be altered.
The first question for me would be - are you meeting or even exceeding the States current achievement numbers. I would suggest that in most cases that is not happening and it is managed that way.
If you are meeting or exceeding as is then things would have to stay the same or altered as you have suggested.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 05, 2017, 09:24:58 AM
So, for all you smoke pole guys, how often do you have a filed ignition, one that a 209 primer would have prevented, and while attempting a shot at an animal? And how often did it cause you to not get a shot off ie: weren't able to re- cap in time for a second chance? (I'm not a muzzy guy so please bare with me on the lingo)
Are mis-fires a real issue for you?
Maybe a poll of our own is necessary. I'm just curious if adding these primers will actually cause an increase in the amount of game taken, or if it's just a luxury that would make things easier and more reliable.
I’ve had a hang fire, which resulted in a clean miss. I can postulate that it could have resulted in a bad hit and a lost animal. Anything that reduces the possibility of a bad hit and a lost animal should be legal, especially if there is no compelling reason to ban them.
Although I voted for the primer, I respectfully disagree with your statement as it is. With your reasoning, we all should only be allowed to hunt with a rifle. Maybe when you said "anything", you didn't mean it the way I took it. There are many advances in each category/implement of hunting which aren't allowed, and many, for good reason. Cohochemist also makes a valid point: who decides which advancements make the tool no longer a primitive hunting tool? We've had this discussion many times in different threads. There are ML hunters who would like to see only the most basic and primitive firearms allowed. Some archers feel that compound bows with 85% let-off are too advanced to be called primitive (and truly, they are far from primitive). Lighted nocks, mechanical broadheads, fiber optics on MLs - it goes on and on. The point is, in the end it's the state that gets to decide which advancements get to be used and which, not. It seems rather arbitrary to me. :dunno:
Post by: Sabotloader on October 05, 2017, 09:26:10 AM
So, for all you smoke pole guys, how often do you have a filed ignition, one that a 209 primer would have prevented, and while attempting a shot at an animal? And how often did it cause you to not get a shot off ie: weren't able to re- cap in time for a second chance? (I'm not a muzzy guy so please bare with me on the lingo)
Are mis-fires a real issue for you?
Maybe a poll of our own is necessary. I'm just curious if adding these primers will actually cause an increase in the amount of game taken, or if it's just a luxury that would make things easier and more reliable.
I’ve had a hang fire, which resulted in a clean miss. I can postulate that it could have resulted in a bad hit and a lost animal. Anything that reduces the possibility of a bad hit and a lost animal should be legal, especially if there is no compelling reason to ban them.
And if the truth were to be known - You can get a HANGFIRE with a 209 also... it happens
Post by: ctwiggs1 on October 05, 2017, 09:27:24 AM
With loose powder, I don't know that I see a benefit to 209 primers.
The one regulation I'd like to see fixed is a clarifying statement on the nipple being exposed to the weather.
Quote
Quote from: wapiti hunter2 on Yesterday at 09:38:40 PM
If you voted no and use a modern muzzle loader like a Knight, you are a hypocrite. You are already using modern technology. The 209 primer doesn't change a thing. If you want it to be "primitive", go back to flint lock and an open pan only.
I agree. I was having an argument on Facebook and someone was trying to say that using musket caps are 'traditional' :roll eyes:
Look guys, I'd get it if we were voting to allow inlines with cap ignition and modern projectiles... that would be a huge jump in effectiveness over an older flintlock style with pan ignition and more primitive projectiles. Hell, I'd understand if it were a vote on optics(which I am 100% against). The inlines are hardly 'primitive', the projectiles used today are hardly 'primitive'.
I also think its incredibly ridiculous to think that the modern hunters are going to come running over to muzzy once 209 primers are allowed. I could see an influx of people if you were to allow optics, however. I realize the effective range of muzzleloaders nowadays is 150-200 yards, and I've even heard of 300 yard shots being made with optics. Your average guy who hunts modern probably hunts with a group of people, they're not going to jump ship unless a majority of the group does. The road hunter types? Well, I guess you could road hunt with a muzzleloader... wouldn't be too hard really, even in their current state. You'd certainly keep your powder and cap dry!
I guess you would have to help me understand what you consider to be modern. Honestly I think that could be the next hunt-wa blowup debate. I still say house cat.
Post by: Sabotloader on October 05, 2017, 09:33:34 AM
While I'm not the most experienced muzzleloader hunter..... In my limited experience all of my problems that 209 primers supposedly would fix went away when i switched to using loose powder. It ignites faster and burns hotter than those pellets. I really liked the pellets at first, but after I got over the intimidation factor with the loose powder, it's the only way I'll go. You can still fill up a speed loader, you just get a higher quality shot.
With loose powder, I don't know that I see a benefit to 209 primers.
The one regulation I'd like to see fixed is a clarifying statement on the nipple being exposed to the weather.QuoteQuote from: wapiti hunter2 on Yesterday at 09:38:40 PM
If you voted no and use a modern muzzle loader like a Knight, you are a hypocrite. You are already using modern technology. The 209 primer doesn't change a thing. If you want it to be "primitive", go back to flint lock and an open pan only.
I agree. I was having an argument on Facebook and someone was trying to say that using musket caps are 'traditional' :roll eyes:
Look guys, I'd get it if we were voting to allow inlines with cap ignition and modern projectiles... that would be a huge jump in effectiveness over an older flintlock style with pan ignition and more primitive projectiles. Hell, I'd understand if it were a vote on optics(which I am 100% against). The inlines are hardly 'primitive', the projectiles used today are hardly 'primitive'.
I also think its incredibly ridiculous to think that the modern hunters are going to come running over to muzzy once 209 primers are allowed. I could see an influx of people if you were to allow optics, however. I realize the effective range of muzzleloaders nowadays is 150-200 yards, and I've even heard of 300 yard shots being made with optics. Your average guy who hunts modern probably hunts with a group of people, they're not going to jump ship unless a majority of the group does. The road hunter types? Well, I guess you could road hunt with a muzzleloader... wouldn't be too hard really, even in their current state. You'd certainly keep your powder and cap dry!
I guess you would have to help me understand what you consider to be modern. Honestly I think that could be the next hunt-wa blowup debate. I still say house cat.
I know it was not you that made the comment - but if you want to go primitive why stop at going back to the flint lock - go all the way back to the wheel lock or even the match lock
(https://media1.britannica.com/eb-media/00/134400-004-D5D66DB5.jpg)
(https://tse3.mm.bing.net/th?id=A15a37151bbbb482e6b4b54b3a672cb65&w=242&h=160&c=7&qlt=90&o=4&pid=1.7)
Post by: CP on October 05, 2017, 09:33:45 AM
So, for all you smoke pole guys, how often do you have a filed ignition, one that a 209 primer would have prevented, and while attempting a shot at an animal? And how often did it cause you to not get a shot off ie: weren't able to re- cap in time for a second chance? (I'm not a muzzy guy so please bare with me on the lingo)
Are mis-fires a real issue for you?
Maybe a poll of our own is necessary. I'm just curious if adding these primers will actually cause an increase in the amount of game taken, or if it's just a luxury that would make things easier and more reliable.
I’ve had a hang fire, which resulted in a clean miss. I can postulate that it could have resulted in a bad hit and a lost animal. Anything that reduces the possibility of a bad hit and a lost animal should be legal, especially if there is no compelling reason to ban them.
Although I voted for the primer, I respectfully disagree with your statement as it is. With your reasoning, we all should only be allowed to hunt with a rifle. Maybe when you said "anything", you didn't mean it the way I took it. There are many advances in each category/implement of hunting which aren't allowed, and many, for good reason. Cohochemist also makes a valid point: who decides which advancements make the tool no longer a primitive hunting tool? We've had this discussion many times in different threads. There are ML hunters who would like to see only the most basic and primitive firearms allowed. Some archers feel that compound bows with 85% let-off are too advanced to be called primitive (and truly, they are far from primitive). Lighted nocks, mechanical broadheads, fiber optics on MLs - it goes on and on. The point is, in the end it's the state that gets to decide which advancements get to be used and which, not. It seems rather arbitrary to me. :dunno:
You’ve disregarded my subordinate clause. But point taken, “anything” may be too far reaching.
Post by: ctwiggs1 on October 05, 2017, 09:37:34 AM
Mike - I'm not as well versed as others but the term "modern" seems to be used pretty loosely here. I mean the Henry rifle was produced 160 years ago and it would be considered a modern firearm.
Curtis
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 05, 2017, 09:39:37 AM
I did, that. :chuckle:So, for all you smoke pole guys, how often do you have a filed ignition, one that a 209 primer would have prevented, and while attempting a shot at an animal? And how often did it cause you to not get a shot off ie: weren't able to re- cap in time for a second chance? (I'm not a muzzy guy so please bare with me on the lingo)
Are mis-fires a real issue for you?
Maybe a poll of our own is necessary. I'm just curious if adding these primers will actually cause an increase in the amount of game taken, or if it's just a luxury that would make things easier and more reliable.
I’ve had a hang fire, which resulted in a clean miss. I can postulate that it could have resulted in a bad hit and a lost animal. Anything that reduces the possibility of a bad hit and a lost animal should be legal, especially if there is no compelling reason to ban them.
Although I voted for the primer, I respectfully disagree with your statement as it is. With your reasoning, we all should only be allowed to hunt with a rifle. Maybe when you said "anything", you didn't mean it the way I took it. There are many advances in each category/implement of hunting which aren't allowed, and many, for good reason. Cohochemist also makes a valid point: who decides which advancements make the tool no longer a primitive hunting tool? We've had this discussion many times in different threads. There are ML hunters who would like to see only the most basic and primitive firearms allowed. Some archers feel that compound bows with 85% let-off are too advanced to be called primitive (and truly, they are far from primitive). Lighted nocks, mechanical broadheads, fiber optics on MLs - it goes on and on. The point is, in the end it's the state that gets to decide which advancements get to be used and which, not. It seems rather arbitrary to me. :dunno:
You’ve disregarded my subordinate clause. But point taken, “anything” may be too far reaching.
Post by: Bob33 on October 05, 2017, 09:41:17 AM
Technology has progressed in all three hunting methods: modern, muzzleloader, and archery. A case could be made that of the three muzzleloaders have progressed slower than the other two in recent years.
Where the line is drawn to limit technological advances will always be debatable.
I do think it’s important to recognize that WDFW sets season dates and lengths based on anticipated harvests, and attempts to balance opportunity and harvest between the three methods.
Post by: ctwiggs1 on October 05, 2017, 09:42:45 AM
The terms “primitive” and “modern” are not necessarily two distinct points 180 degrees apart. There’s a continuous spectrum with many points between. A scoped inline muzzleloader with 209 primers is probably every bit as or more effective than an iron-sighted 30-30 lever action.
Technology has progressed in all three hunting methods: modern, muzzleloader, and archery. A case could be made that of the three muzzleloaders have progressed slower than the other two in recent years.
Where the line is drawn to limit technological advances will always be debatable.
I do think it’s important to recognize that WDFW sets season dates and lengths based on anticipated harvests, and attempts to balance opportunity and harvest between the three methods.
Every time I read your posts I feel that your Zebra is staring into my soul. :yike:
Post by: Fl0und3rz on October 05, 2017, 09:44:13 AM
Post by: Sabotloader on October 05, 2017, 09:47:48 AM
@sabotloader
Mike - I'm not as well versed as others but the term "modern" seems to be used pretty loosely here. I mean the Henry rifle was produced 160 years ago and it would be considered a modern firearm.
Curtis
Curtis - I know exactly what you mean! One of the things that we need to remember or think about Traditionalists and Archers are very well organized and make their presence and wishes known in the right places. On the other hand we the regular shooters hunters - really including the bulk of the modern day rifle hunters - WE are not organized and do not offer a united front. I compare us to the farmers of America - do you know how strong and powerful they could be it they were truly organized and united. The problem is as with us a lot of the time, how do you tell a group of independent strong willed farmers - this is the way we are going to do it because that is the way we want you to do it!!
Post by: Sabotloader on October 05, 2017, 09:51:54 AM
The terms “primitive” and “modern” are not necessarily two distinct points 180 degrees apart. There’s a continuous spectrum with many points between. A scoped inline muzzleloader with 209 primers is probably every bit as or more effective than an iron-sighted 30-30 lever action.
Not necessarily true!!! I can get a lot of extra shots with a 30-30, actually even many more than a normal modern bolt action rifle. With a modern ML I still only get normally one good shot! And you know what I still way prefer the ML.
Quote
Technology has progressed in all three hunting methods: modern, muzzleloader, and archery. A case could be made that of the three muzzleloaders have progressed slower than the other two in recent years.
Where the line is drawn to limit technological advances will always be debatable.
I do think it’s important to recognize that WDFW sets season dates and lengths based on anticipated harvests, and attempts to balance opportunity and harvest between the three methods.
Post by: Bob33 on October 05, 2017, 09:53:06 AM
It is, but I won't post what is sees. :chuckle:The terms “primitive” and “modern” are not necessarily two distinct points 180 degrees apart. There’s a continuous spectrum with many points between. A scoped inline muzzleloader with 209 primers is probably every bit as or more effective than an iron-sighted 30-30 lever action.
Technology has progressed in all three hunting methods: modern, muzzleloader, and archery. A case could be made that of the three muzzleloaders have progressed slower than the other two in recent years.
Where the line is drawn to limit technological advances will always be debatable.
I do think it’s important to recognize that WDFW sets season dates and lengths based on anticipated harvests, and attempts to balance opportunity and harvest between the three methods.
Every time I read your posts I feel that your Zebra is staring into my soul. :yike:
Post by: Mr Mykiss on October 05, 2017, 10:21:57 AM
Post by: Machias on October 05, 2017, 10:55:26 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 05, 2017, 11:00:52 AM
Post by: Jonathan_S on October 05, 2017, 11:42:05 AM
Post by: Karl Blanchard on October 05, 2017, 11:44:39 AM
Post by: The100Road on October 05, 2017, 12:08:59 PM
If you hunt muzzy and don't like 209 then don't use them.
If you don't hunt muzzy then why do you care what I use? If it makes it more "modern" then stop rifle hunting and switch to muzzy.
I don't archery hunt, but why would I vote no to lighted knocks and expandable broad heads? If you want to use them then go for it. If you don't then don't. Why would I care what you use as long as its not illegal?
Post by: JDHasty on October 05, 2017, 12:15:36 PM
Yes!
If you hunt muzzy and don't like 209 then don't use them.
If you don't hunt muzzy then why do you care what I use? If it makes it more "modern" then stop rifle hunting and switch to muzzy.
I don't archery hunt, but why would I vote no to lighted knocks and expandable broad heads? If you want to use them then go for it. If you don't then don't. Why would I care what you use as long as its not illegal?
The reason for the discussion being opened up is because if a change in equipment affects harvest rate then the way that WDFW will address that is by changing the Season length. I personally think the longer ML Season is worth having to deal w/caps instead of primers being allowed. If you think allowing 209s will not have any affect on ML Season length or you think a more reliable ignition is a fair tradeoff for having a shorter ML Season then you probably will be for the allowance of 209 primers.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on October 05, 2017, 12:38:57 PM
Yes!I don't think it is about being a muzzy hunter or a bowhunter. If muzzy is someone's it thing, they have a few seasons to use it in (early muzz, modern, late muzz, bear, cougar). There are a few guys that do go after bear with muzzy because they like using muzzy. Mostly, it seems like trying to get as close to having a 'modern' weapon outside of the 'modern' season especially in an optimally timed season. Basically trying to use a rifle ahead of the rifle guys. If modern had an Oct 1-7 option for elk, how many muzzies would still be out in the woods? If modern was Sept 15-30, what percent of current bowhunters would be switching to a rifle?
If you hunt muzzy and don't like 209 then don't use them.
If you don't hunt muzzy then why do you care what I use? If it makes it more "modern" then stop rifle hunting and switch to muzzy.
I don't archery hunt, but why would I vote no to lighted knocks and expandable broad heads? If you want to use them then go for it. If you don't then don't. Why would I care what you use as long as its not illegal?
Post by: WSU on October 05, 2017, 12:54:40 PM
Post by: BENCHLEG on October 05, 2017, 01:10:51 PM
Post by: superdown on October 05, 2017, 01:27:00 PM
Post by: elkboy on October 05, 2017, 01:34:27 PM
So, for all you smoke pole guys, how often do you have a filed ignition, one that a 209 primer would have prevented, and while attempting a shot at an animal? And how often did it cause you to not get a shot off ie: weren't able to re- cap in time for a second chance? (I'm not a muzzy guy so please bare with me on the lingo)
Are mis-fires a real issue for you?
Maybe a poll of our own is necessary. I'm just curious if adding these primers will actually cause an increase in the amount of game taken, or if it's just a luxury that would make things easier and more reliable.
Good question! It's happened to me on three different animals, twice with a Knight Bighorn, and once with a Knight Mountaineer. I am personally OK with this as an additional limitation on my chosen hunting method. I understand the argument that a modern inline isn't very "primitive" or "traditional", but I believe we do have to draw the line somewhere.
Post by: Russ McDonald on October 05, 2017, 01:57:31 PM
Post by: Stein on October 05, 2017, 02:00:35 PM
Post by: r67968 on October 05, 2017, 02:09:47 PM
Post by: Sabotloader on October 05, 2017, 02:13:34 PM
So I got curious and started looking at other states. In the west it seems like it is WA and Idaho that are the only ones that don't allow 209 primers during muzzle loader season only in the western states.
Think you need to add in Oregon. It is a Pacific Northwest thing...
Quote
I did see some states don't allow pellets and a lot of open sights only. I didn't have time to go through all 50 states but I did some random ones here and there and I see that almost all allowed 209 primers during ML only season. So for the one that say no to 209 primers is it just because of season length. I agree with I think Machias that said it is pretty bad that all of us as hunters are split and pitted against each other. I like learning all methods of hunting and enjoy aspects of them all. I know as an archery hunter we do get a pretty good dates for elk season but I don't mind changes to allow for others to get in on a better part of the season for the method. I think ML season pretty much stinks one week. I said 3 years ago a wrote the game department. I even talked to the manager of game management back then and asked them why can't we at least give each method at least 2 weekends for their seasons. I have the chance to talk to the manager who put out the survey. The NWTF is working with the department to rewrite the turkey plan. He is willing to listen and make some changes that will benefit us all as hunters.
Post by: Russ McDonald on October 05, 2017, 02:24:42 PM
So I got curious and started looking at other states. In the west it seems like it is WA and Idaho that are the only ones that don't allow 209 primers during muzzle loader season only in the western states.
Think you need to add in Oregon. It is a Pacific Northwest thing...QuoteI see it now. Didn't see it because they used center fire primer instead of 209 :chuckle:
Post by: jagermiester on October 05, 2017, 02:51:18 PM
For a guy like him it's a no brainer he needs every advantage he can get. Or take a young hunter let's not handicap them. If you don't want to use a 209 don't if you want to use flintlok do it but why restrict people who want to use it. I'm thinking about going back to iron sights during modern for deer. I've also thought about using a crossbow just for the challenge. But my kid's aren't there yet they are focused on success. Same as all of us were when we first started. Now it doesn't seem as important.
A 209 ignition is more reliable let the people who want to use it do so. That's what I say.
Post by: Machias on October 05, 2017, 03:05:51 PM
I don't see it as hunters pitted against each other. The state reached out to see what we think and we are having an open discussion. It doesn't seem too realistic for hunters to agree on 100% of the things 100% of the time. Nothing wrong with a good discussion in my book.
This survey is not pitting us against each other, the state has already done that with creating the choose your weapons requirement. You don't have this fighting in the vast majority of states, because modern firearms guys are not jealous of the long season the bowhunters have, because if they wanted to bowhunt they could. We on the other hand are jealous if the archery hunters get an extra day or if the muzzle loaders dates are in a more prime time, because we are all fighting for days in the field and the "enemy" is the other user groups. In other states they could care less if you hunt with a lighted sight on your bow with mechanical heads, shooting lazers out of the nock. They don't care if you have a scoped crossbow in archery season. They could care less if you have a scoped, inline muzzleloader, shooting 209 primers. None of the hunters fight like we do, because if you don't want to use that equipment then you don't. If you do, great. I was a big proponent, for a long time, of no electronics on the bow or arrow. After living there and realizing what other guys were using had ZERO impact on me, I stopped worrying about. I personally don't like lighted nocks, so I didn't use them. Despised crossbows during the archery season, then went to a state that allowed them, so I tried them. Hunted for 2 weeks with a crossbow and hated it. Sold it and went back to a compound bow.
Post by: Russ McDonald on October 05, 2017, 05:17:05 PM
Just what I wanted to say and meant :tup:I don't see it as hunters pitted against each other. The state reached out to see what we think and we are having an open discussion. It doesn't seem too realistic for hunters to agree on 100% of the things 100% of the time. Nothing wrong with a good discussion in my book.
This survey is not pitting us against each other, the state has already done that with creating the choose your weapons requirement. You don't have this fighting in the vast majority of states, because modern firearms guys are not jealous of the long season the bowhunters have, because if they wanted to bowhunt they could. We on the other hand are jealous if the archery hunters get an extra day or if the muzzle loaders dates are in a more prime time, because we are all fighting for days in the field and the "enemy" is the other user groups. In other states they could care less if you hunt with a lighted sight on your bow with mechanical heads, shooting lazers out of the nock. They don't care if you have a scoped crossbow in archery season. They could care less if you have a scoped, inline muzzleloader, shooting 209 primers. None of the hunters fight like we do, because if you don't want to use that equipment then you don't. If you do, great. I was a big proponent, for a long time, of no electronics on the bow or arrow. After living there and realizing what other guys were using had ZERO impact on me, I stopped worrying about. I personally don't like lighted nocks, so I didn't use them. Despised crossbows during the archery season, then went to a state that allowed them, so I tried them. Hunted for 2 weeks with a crossbow and hated it. Sold it and went back to a compound bow.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Post by: Bob33 on October 05, 2017, 05:48:42 PM
i know you guys seem to despite WDFW, but here are some facts on regulations in other Western states:Just what I wanted to say and meant :tup:I don't see it as hunters pitted against each other. The state reached out to see what we think and we are having an open discussion. It doesn't seem too realistic for hunters to agree on 100% of the things 100% of the time. Nothing wrong with a good discussion in my book.
This survey is not pitting us against each other, the state has already done that with creating the choose your weapons requirement. You don't have this fighting in the vast majority of states, because modern firearms guys are not jealous of the long season the bowhunters have, because if they wanted to bowhunt they could. We on the other hand are jealous if the archery hunters get an extra day or if the muzzle loaders dates are in a more prime time, because we are all fighting for days in the field and the "enemy" is the other user groups. In other states they could care less if you hunt with a lighted sight on your bow with mechanical heads, shooting lazers out of the nock. They don't care if you have a scoped crossbow in archery season. They could care less if you have a scoped, inline muzzleloader, shooting 209 primers. None of the hunters fight like we do, because if you don't want to use that equipment then you don't. If you do, great. I was a big proponent, for a long time, of no electronics on the bow or arrow. After living there and realizing what other guys were using had ZERO impact on me, I stopped worrying about. I personally don't like lighted nocks, so I didn't use them. Despised crossbows during the archery season, then went to a state that allowed them, so I tried them. Hunted for 2 weeks with a crossbow and hated it. Sold it and went back to a compound bow.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Idaho Muzzleloaders
In addition, the muzzleloading rifle or musket must be:
• Capable of being loaded only from the muzzle.
• Equipped with only open or peep sights. Scopes and any electronics are prohibited.
• Pelletized powders are prohibited.
• Sabots are prohibited.
• Loaded with a patched round ball or conical non-jacketed projectile comprised wholly of lead or lead alloy.
• 209 primers are prohibited.
Idaho Archery
During an archery-only season, it is illegal for hunters to use any firearm or implement other than a longbow, compound bow or recurve bow in compliance with general archery equipment requirements, or:
• Any bow equipped with magnifying sights.
• Any crossbow. Except disabled hunters possessing a permit may use a crossbow. Applications for the use of crossbows by disabled hunters are available at Fish and Game offices.
Oregon Muzzleloader
• Scopes (permanent and detachable), and sights that use batteries, artificial light or energy are not allowed during muzzleloader-only seasons
• During muzzleloader-only seasons and 600 series hunts where there is a weapon restriction of shotgun/muzzleloader only or archery/muzzleloader only, it is illegal to hunt with jacketed bullets, sabots, and bullets with plastic or synthetic tips or bases.
• It is illegal to hunt with centerfire primers as an ignition source during muzzleloader-only seasons and 600 series hunts where there is a weapon restriction of shotgun/muzzleloader only or archery/muzzleloader only.
• It is illegal to hunt with pelletized powders or propellants during muzzleloader-only seasons and 600 series hunts where there is a weapon restriction of shotgun/muzzleloader only or archery/muzzleloader only
• For muzzleloader-only seasons and 600 series hunts where there is a weapon restriction of shotgun/muzzleloader only or archery/muzzleloader only, the muzzleloader must have an open ignition.
Oregon Archery
• No device secured to or supported by a bow may be used to maintain the bow at full draw.
• No electronic devices may be attached to bow or arrow, except lighted arrow nocks that have no function other than to increase visibility of the arrow are allowed.
Nevada Muzzleloading
• During a “Muzzle-loader-Only” Hunt: Only open sights or peep sights are permitted; scopes prohibited. A sight that is operated or powered by a battery, electronics or a radioactive isotope such as tritium is prohibited.
Nevada Archery
• A crossbow cannot be used for archery only hunts.
Colorado Muzzleloading Rifles:
• Only open or iron sights allowed in muzzleloading seasons. Fiber optics and fluorescent paint incorporated into or on open or iron sights are legal. Scopes or any sighting device using artificial light, batteries and electronic gear are prohibited during muzzleloading seasons.
Colorado Archery:
• CROSSBOWS: Illegal during archery seasons.
New Mexico Restricted Muzzleloader
• Only black powder, Pyrodex or an equivalent substitute may be used. Smokeless powder, inline ignition, pelleted powder, sabots, belted bullets, multiple projectiles and scopes are illegal.
Post by: Mallardmasher on October 05, 2017, 05:49:16 PM
Post by: snake on October 05, 2017, 06:45:07 PM
Post by: Mallardmasher on October 05, 2017, 07:47:11 PM
Post by: Machias on October 05, 2017, 07:57:57 PM
Post by: konradcountry on October 05, 2017, 08:07:31 PM
Absolutely no reason not to allow 209 primers. If you are a High and Mighty on primitive go get a Hawken. Still primitive with a 209 btw
High and mighty? What about adding a laser? That was developed before 209 primers. Still primitive?
I voted no. Allowing 209 is just one step closer to getting rid of NW rules and allowing scopes. Then more people will flood the already short muzzle season.
You are the one being "high and mighty" by not considering all viewpoints. Easier equipment = more people. It really it is that simple.
Post by: hunter399 on October 05, 2017, 08:30:02 PM
A few points good points,the choose your weapon ,i can't imagine muzzy,bowhunter,trying to hunt public land in Washington with all the rifle hunters,out at the same time,or having any deer left.I'm also for choose the side of the state your hunting for deer.I'm for equipment changes in all user groups ,I do agree with the idea behind if you don't like it ,than use a different method.But I'm like most people if I don't get changes in my user group than I'm not gonna vote yes for better changes ,At this point I don't want any change in weapon restrictions.Just like the 4pt min in the NE corner a lot people complaining made it go away , now the quality of bucks,or lack of bucks is really starting to take effect,I guess what I'm sayin is sometimes people don't know what's good for them,or know what they had till it's gone.Sometimes no change is needed,if muzzy people don't like the rules there is other options ,multi season permit,or other weapon.I don't see it as hunters pitted against each other. The state reached out to see what we think and we are having an open discussion. It doesn't seem too realistic for hunters to agree on 100% of the things 100% of the time. Nothing wrong with a good discussion in my book.
This survey is not pitting us against each other, the state has already done that with creating the choose your weapons requirement. You don't have this fighting in the vast majority of states, because modern firearms guys are not jealous of the long season the bowhunters have, because if they wanted to bowhunt they could. We on the other hand are jealous if the archery hunters get an extra day or if the muzzle loaders dates are in a more prime time, because we are all fighting for days in the field and the "enemy" is the other user groups. In other states they could care less if you hunt with a lighted sight on your bow with mechanical heads, shooting lazers out of the nock. They don't care if you have a scoped crossbow in archery season. They could care less if you have a scoped, inline muzzleloader, shooting 209 primers. None of the hunters fight like we do, because if you don't want to use that equipment then you don't. If you do, great. I was a big proponent, for a long time, of no electronics on the bow or arrow. After living there and realizing what other guys were using had ZERO impact on me, I stopped worrying about. I personally don't like lighted nocks, so I didn't use them. Despised crossbows during the archery season, then went to a state that allowed them, so I tried them. Hunted for 2 weeks with a crossbow and hated it. Sold it and went back to a compound bow.
Post by: j_h_nimrod on October 05, 2017, 10:35:15 PM
Absolutely no reason not to allow 209 primers. If you are a High and Mighty on primitive go get a Hawken. Still primitive with a 209 btw
High and mighty? What about adding a laser? That was developed before 209 primers. Still primitive?
I voted no. Allowing 209 is just one step closer to getting rid of NW rules and allowing scopes. Then more people will flood the already short muzzle season.
You are the one being "high and mighty" by not considering all viewpoints. Easier equipment = more people. It really it is that simple.
Not sure about high n mighty but a 209 does not make a muzzleloader hunting easier or more effective. There are only a few wet side areas that would benefit from the intrinsic water resistance of most 209 systems. The major difficulties of hunting with a mz are one shot, slow and difficult reload, and limited range. The 209 primer changes none of this and only adds the benefit of using different powders and pellets reliably and having a slightly better chance of ignition in the relitively small portions of the state that are very wet. The 209 type primer has been around for a long time, not sure of the full history but the shotshells of the 50s n 60s had a very similar primer design and in reality they are very similar to other primers in their constituent parts.
I would say you are wrong in stating lasers have been around longer than the 209 type primers. Lasers started in the late 50s or early 60s in a very rudimentary form. The 209 is a refinement of existent primer design that has been around since the mid 1800s.
I cannot see the addition of 209 primers to a legal mz season would make more that a minute difference in the number of hunters or the amount of game killed. There was much less reason for mechanical broadheads being added to archery than the 209 being allowed for mz. I thought archery was supposed to be a "primitive" season as well :dunno:
Post by: Damnimissed on October 05, 2017, 11:37:11 PM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on October 05, 2017, 11:46:50 PM
Bob33, I don't dispise Wa Fish and Game, I save that for Liberals and Terrorist, but I repeat myself. I'm not happy with some of their management...er mismanagement decision, but I don't dispise them. My point wasn't about restrictions on equipment, if you thought that, I'm guessing you missed my whole point about not caring what equipment they allow or restrict. My whole point, and thank you for posting Idaho's regs, is in Idaho the various user groups don't care about season lengths or equipment because everyone is not fighting for more time in the field or different dates. They can all already participate in each of the three seasons. Now they certainly have discussions about how far to push those restrictions, but you don't have guys bitching about season dates and length of seasons some other guy is getting, because they aren't pitted against and competing against each other.Idaho has got a ton more animals per hunter, though. They can have all kinds of seasons before hand by different user groups and still have decent odds at a legal animal. Some of the more elky westside units are down below 5% success. You can drive by some pastures and see a couple hundred elk, all cows/spikes/two points.
Post by: Mallardmasher on October 06, 2017, 12:33:37 AM
Post by: Machias on October 06, 2017, 07:53:48 AM
Bob33, I don't dispise Wa Fish and Game, I save that for Liberals and Terrorist, but I repeat myself. I'm not happy with some of their management...er mismanagement decision, but I don't dispise them. My point wasn't about restrictions on equipment, if you thought that, I'm guessing you missed my whole point about not caring what equipment they allow or restrict. My whole point, and thank you for posting Idaho's regs, is in Idaho the various user groups don't care about season lengths or equipment because everyone is not fighting for more time in the field or different dates. They can all already participate in each of the three seasons. Now they certainly have discussions about how far to push those restrictions, but you don't have guys bitching about season dates and length of seasons some other guy is getting, because they aren't pitted against and competing against each other.Idaho has got a ton more animals per hunter, though. They can have all kinds of seasons before hand by different user groups and still have decent odds at a legal animal. Some of the more elky westside units are down below 5% success. You can drive by some pastures and see a couple hundred elk, all cows/spikes/two points.
And yet they cram us all into a few GMUs
Post by: baker5150 on October 06, 2017, 08:32:47 AM
If you are not shooting a Hawkins with flint, how can you make a statement, like keep it primitive, if you are shooting winged Muscat caps, sabots, anything other then BP and rifles barrels, and say I voted "no" keep it primitive. Please look in the mirror. Choose your method of modernization, and don't choose for others. To each their own
I think by "keep it primitive" they mean keep it at it's current level of primitiveness (is that a word, probably not).
From what I gather (because it's been stated multiple times already) they are more concerned with making things easier and less challenging, thus creating more hunters in the field, a good point in my opinion.
Post by: Fishmaker57 on October 06, 2017, 09:10:08 AM
Post by: The Deacon on October 06, 2017, 09:47:31 AM
Is there WDFW evidence to support the claim that harvest rates will (dramatically) increase resulting in GMU closures and shortened seasons, if 209 primers were allowed? Have harvest rates increased since the inclusion of pelletized powders and saboted bullets? Is there any data pertaining to how many hunters will join the ranks of the primitive weapons crowd should 209 primers be permitted?
Isn't referring to a modern inline muzzleloader as a "primitive weapon" somewhat - well - misleading?
If it's a question of technology in hunting, how can one defend the use of trail cameras? Laser rangefinders? Mechanical broadheads? Compound bows? Synthetic (black)powder? Wireless electronic predator calls?
My concerns are the (constant) wedges being driven into the ranks of today's consumptive user BY the consumptive user. Us versus Them. Us versus Them. Does anyone remember 2000 and WA trapping? Hounds? Bait?
Post by: Sabotloader on October 06, 2017, 10:01:42 AM
Yes on 209 primers. Yes on scoped muzzleloaders. It's not a "primitive weapons" season; it's a muzzleloader season. From an ethical standpoint, why not allow hunters to use the most effective tool for the task at hand? You can use a hammer; however, you have to drive the nails with the handle. It's never made any sense (to me) -
Is there WDFW evidence to support the claim that harvest rates will (dramatically) increase resulting in GMU closures and shortened seasons, if 209 primers were allowed? Have harvest rates increased since the inclusion of pelletized powders and saboted bullets? Is there any data pertaining to how many hunters will join the ranks of the primitive weapons crowd should 209 primers be permitted?
Isn't referring to a modern inline muzzleloader as a "primitive weapon" somewhat - well - misleading?
If it's a question of technology in hunting, how can one defend the use of trail cameras? Laser rangefinders? Mechanical broadheads? Compound bows? Synthetic (black)powder? Wireless electronic predator calls?
My concerns are the (constant) wedges being driven into the ranks of today's consumptive user BY the consumptive user. Us versus Them. Us versus Them. Does anyone remember 2000 and WA trapping? Hounds? Bait?
Excellent point!
Post by: Magnum_Willys on October 06, 2017, 10:13:10 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 06, 2017, 10:22:53 AM
Post by: blackveltbowhunter on October 06, 2017, 10:34:23 AM
Similar to the lighted nock and mechanical debate. Neither really help in creating additional opportunity. Those who are successful will remain so, the guy who is in the middle may see a slight increase in opportunity, and the guy who is currently unsuccessful is not likely to benefit either. There is technology that exists that certainly makes both "primitive" weapons far more effective. Those remain restricted, for good reason.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 06, 2017, 10:47:45 AM
Post by: blackveltbowhunter on October 06, 2017, 11:02:18 AM
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.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 06, 2017, 11:45:13 AM
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. :tup:
Post by: The Deacon on October 06, 2017, 11:45:45 AM
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?
Post by: Stein on October 06, 2017, 12:03:16 PM
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.
Post by: blackveltbowhunter on October 06, 2017, 12:06:36 PM
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.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 06, 2017, 12:52:00 PM
Post by: blackveltbowhunter on October 06, 2017, 02:07:59 PM
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.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 06, 2017, 02:34:41 PM
Post by: jnordwell on October 06, 2017, 02:58:11 PM
Post by: The Deacon on October 06, 2017, 02:58:49 PM
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?
Post by: Bob33 on October 06, 2017, 03:02:48 PM
Post by: Stein 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?
Post by: JimmyHoffa 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 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.
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.
Post by: Kazekurt on October 06, 2017, 04:06:22 PM
Post by: blackveltbowhunter 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 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.
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.
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.
Post by: steeleywhopper on October 06, 2017, 04:43:53 PM
Post by: SureThing on October 06, 2017, 08:51:23 PM
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.
Post by: Machias on October 06, 2017, 10:31:14 PM
Post by: snake on October 07, 2017, 03:13:21 PM
Post by: bobcat on October 07, 2017, 03:46:49 PM
Post by: Mallardmasher on October 08, 2017, 12:58:09 PM
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.
Post by: DOUBLELUNG on October 08, 2017, 01:19:37 PM
Post by: Mallardmasher on October 08, 2017, 05:07:57 PM
Post by: Romeo 2-6 on October 08, 2017, 06:31:57 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: JDHasty 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.
Post by: WSU 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!
Post by: LOVEMYLABXS on October 09, 2017, 08:16:07 AM
I guess this will be next :dunno: after all it is a muzzleloader
https://www.remington.com/rifles/muzzleloading
Post by: oldschool on October 09, 2017, 08:24:56 AM
Post by: floatinghat 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.
Post by: elkonastick on October 09, 2017, 08:41:55 AM
Post by: bobcat on October 09, 2017, 08:46:26 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.
Maybe I should say they won't extend the range or the effectiveness of a muzzleloader. Sure, they'll likely be more reliable. Just doesn't seem like that big of a deal to me, I guess. Like I said, musket caps and #11 caps are often in short supply and can be hard to find at times. 209 primers are much more readily available. That's the main reason I'd vote to allow them. My real preference would be no inlines, no jacketed bullets, no sabots, etc. But since all these modern things are already being allowed, I don't see how also allowing 209 primers would change much.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on October 09, 2017, 08:53:24 AM
Post by: Sabotloader on October 09, 2017, 10:48:44 AM
bobcat, There are two types of 209 primers--muzzleloading and shotshell. And shotshell even has a magnum variety. All have different levels of power.
you are correct but none of them have a much different effect on the velocity of the bullet leaving the barrel. That is determined by the powder load and weight of the projectile.
This target is one of many that I have shot across a chrono testing different primers...
(https://s26.postimg.org/e27mr51yx/4-25-10_KDEx_BHTest.jpg)
You can see the results from the hottest primer a Federal 209A to the weakest a Remington 209-4 which were made for the 410 shotgun.
I have the same comparison shooting caps versus primers - no remarkable difference...
Post by: Fl0und3rz on October 09, 2017, 10:52:28 AM
Post by: JDHasty on October 09, 2017, 01:23:33 PM
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!
Friday I had a very nice BT buck in front of me w/~ ten minutes of legal shooting time left. This was a few minutes after I quit my tree stand because I could no longer see my sights. It was under a dark overcast, drizzling and "foggy," and I have shot a number of bucks under similar circumstances w/my slug guns. I was sneaking out of the area of my stand and came up on four deer, one of which when I checked him out with my binocular was quite nice. W/either my scoped slug gun or scoped crossbow it would have been an easy job to have dropped him.
That's part of the game and I was hunting w/my compound bow during Muzzleloader Season, if I had my muzzleloader instead I still would have quit when I did. It doesn't change my opinion that scope sights should not be made legal for either Muzzleloader or Archery Seasons and neither would having a cap misfire due to getting damp change my opinion that muzzleloader Season in Washington should keep the same "Western legal" standard we have now.
Post by: WSU on October 09, 2017, 01:26:07 PM
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!
Friday I had a very nice BT buck in front of me w/~ ten minutes of legal shooting time left. This was a few minutes after I quit my tree stand because I could no longer see my sights. It was under a dark overcast, drizzling and "foggy," and I have shot a number of bucks under similar circumstances w/my slug guns. I was sneaking out of the area of my stand and came up on four deer, one of which when I checked him out with my binocular was quite nice. W/either my scoped slug gun or scoped crossbow it would have been an easy job to have dropped him.
That's part of the game and I was hunting w/my compound bow during Muzzleloader Season, if I had my muzzleloader instead I still would have quit when I did. It doesn't change my opinion that scope sights should be made legal for either Muzzleloader or Archery Seasons and neither would having a cap misfire due to getting damp change my opinion that muzzleloader Season in Washington should keep the same "Western legal" standard we have now.
I was making fun of myself for saying so unequivocally that your gun will go off if you keep your powder dry. Karma proved me wrong just days later!
Post by: bear hunter on October 12, 2017, 11:30:35 PM
Post by: jagermiester on October 13, 2017, 05:42:04 AM
I say yes. Bow hunters get glowing nocks, and mechanical broadheads.
Right... It doesn't make you shoot better or make the weapon more lethal it just makes it a little more reliable.
Post by: luckyman on October 13, 2017, 05:46:08 AM
Post by: roentgenranger on October 18, 2017, 01:03:53 PM
Yes to 209's!
Post by: Pegasus on October 18, 2017, 07:33:55 PM
[/quote]
If it makes your weapon more reliable, it makes it more lethal. A higher kill rate will ensue. Stop trying to make your weapon a modern weapon and enjoy the privilege of the best season for elk in this state.
Post by: bobcat on October 18, 2017, 07:42:46 PM
Post by: Pegasus on October 18, 2017, 07:46:28 PM
Archery has the best season.
Ha. Archery used to have the best season until it was stolen and given to the ML crowd. ML has real rut time. Archery has more days based upon lower kill rates.
Post by: blackveltbowhunter on October 18, 2017, 08:11:16 PM
But having spent a significant amount of time during both seasons, I think overall archery has the best dates. This was certainly debatable when the season started earlier in September. But the archery season timing as is IMO is very appropriate. Both seasons fluctuate from year to year so some year the dates may have slight advantages one way or the other. Other factors not considered, If I had to choose my season going into and including the equinox ( archery)/ or 2 plus weeks after the equinox ( the case with muzzy this year) I will always choose the first.
Post by: Machias on October 18, 2017, 08:20:04 PM
Archery has the best season.
Ha. Archery used to have the best season until it was stolen and given to the ML crowd. ML has real rut time. Archery has more days based upon lower kill rates.
Exactly what I was talking about earlier, user groups pitted against each other. Divided we fall.
Post by: bobcat on October 18, 2017, 08:25:02 PM
Archery has the best season.
Ha. Archery used to have the best season until it was stolen and given to the ML crowd. ML has real rut time. Archery has more days based upon lower kill rates.
Exactly what I was talking about earlier, user groups pitted against each other. Divided we fall.
I don't agree that it divides us. I don't consider myself a rifle hunter, an archery hunter, or a muzzleloader hunter. Just a hunter, and I hunt all three methods. I don't ever know which one I'm hunting until just before the special permit deadline each year when I'm forced to decide.
Post by: Pegasus on October 18, 2017, 08:25:52 PM
I would disagree for the majority of the west side anyway. Although the Nooksack permit is a straight up gift from the heavens above for anyone with a muzzy :chuckle:
But having spent a significant amount of time during both seasons, I think overall archery has the best dates. This was certainly debatable when the season started earlier in September. But the archery season timing as is IMO is very appropriate. Both seasons fluctuate from year to year so some year the dates may have slight advantages one way or the other. Other factors not considered, If I had to choose my season going into and including the equinox ( archery)/ or 2 plus weeks after the equinox ( the case with muzzy this year) I will always choose the first.
Well I hunted eastside archery for years and until they changed the dates archery had the best dates. Now I don't think so especially since the archery season starts so early now which is normally hotter than hell and ends normally before the rut really begins. I am a believer that cold weather starts the rut. My wife's birthday is at the end of the first week in October and I hate to tell you what a problem that caused when we were newlyweds that I was gone elk hunting every time.
Post by: floatinghat on October 18, 2017, 11:06:11 PM
Archery has the best season.
Ha. Archery used to have the best season until it was stolen and given to the ML crowd. ML has real rut time. Archery has more days based upon lower kill rates.
Be more than happy to trade, rally support from the Archery crowd and I am pretty sure muzzy will swap.
Post by: JDHasty on October 19, 2017, 08:21:59 AM
Archery has the best season.
Ha. Archery used to have the best season until it was stolen and given to the ML crowd. ML has real rut time. Archery has more days based upon lower kill rates.
Exactly what I was talking about earlier, user groups pitted against each other. Divided we fall.
I don't agree that it divides us. I don't consider myself a rifle hunter, an archery hunter, or a muzzleloader hunter. Just a hunter, and I hunt all three methods. I don't ever know which one I'm hunting until just before the special permit deadline each year when I'm forced to decide.
I buy multi Season deer and can hunt w/my slug guns, muzzleloader, crossbow or compound bow. I haven't taken my slug guns out yet this year, I have taken my muzzleloader along while hunting Muzzleloader Season and set it in the back corner of my blinds (Damnable coyote/dog cross was hanging out behind a screen of brush a couple days in a row watching the same feeding area I was and I had about enough of that crap. He hasn't been back, but neither has the deer herd that had been using that area), and haven't hunted with my crossbow yet.
I shot a doe last Saturday, first day of Modern Firearm Season, w/my bow and when I hunt again around Halloween I will probably be hunting /my bow. What I just don't have any time for is people who want to hunt primitive weapon seasons, for whatever reason, and then don't want to put in the time and effort to become proficient with "primitive" weapons. And part of becoming proficient w/a muzzleloader is learning how to make percussion caps perform reliably, particularly in western Washington.
I just haven't felt like hunting w/anything other than my bow. About half of the properties I have been hunting are places I could use the muzzle loader or slug guns. If I go out w/my muzzleloader one of two things will happen, either I have protected the cap from the elements and it will go off or I need to become more proficient at that aspect of hunting w/a muzzleloader.
Post by: sjhgraysage on October 19, 2017, 08:45:37 AM
Post by: Alpine Mojo on October 19, 2017, 05:09:12 PM
I don't agree that it divides us.
Of course it does. This thread is 7 pages long already and still growing.
Post by: bobcat on October 19, 2017, 05:24:14 PM
I don't agree that it divides us.
Of course it does. This thread is 7 pages long already and still growing.
That doesn't mean only being able to hunt one season in a particular year "divides us." This discussion is only about whether 209 primers should be allowed. Everyone is free to hunt any of the three methods each year. So there's no reason for division. You like the muzzleloader season better? Then hunt that season. Next year you decide maybe modern season is better? Switch to that. Nobody's locked in to only one method. As I said, I've hunted all three and I like all three. They all have their advantages and disadvantages. We have too many hunters in this state to allow each person to hunt all three seasons. That's why we have to choose only one. What would be the other option? Probably draw only for all deer and elk hunting.
Post by: JDHasty on October 19, 2017, 07:00:23 PM
I don't agree that it divides us.
Of course it does. This thread is 7 pages long already and still growing.
That doesn't mean only being able to hunt one season in a particular year "divides us." This discussion is only about whether 209 primers should be allowed. Everyone is free to hunt any of the three methods each year. So there's no reason for division. You like the muzzleloader season better? Then hunt that season. Next year you decide maybe modern season is better? Switch to that. Nobody's locked in to only one method. As I said, I've hunted all three and I like all three. They all have their advantages and disadvantages. We have too many hunters in this state to allow each person to hunt all three seasons. That's why we have to choose only one. What would be the other option? Probably draw only for all deer and elk hunting.
If ya' want to use 209s or even 209s and a scope, why not just hunt Modern Season. I hunt Modern w/my bow a lot just because I want to hunt w/my bow instead of w/a slug gun or blackpowder.
Post by: Alpine Mojo on October 19, 2017, 07:05:58 PM
why not just hunt Modern Season.
Because it's about some people trying to stop others from doing things they don't like, no matter what the consequences.
Post by: JDHasty on October 19, 2017, 07:09:37 PM
why not just hunt Modern Season.
Because it's about some people trying to stop others from doing things they don't like, no matter what the consequences.
What about those who prefer the length of the Muzzleloader Season as it stands and are willing to put up with caps as a fair trade off. What WDFW has come right out and said is that they expect harvest rates to increase and that in response Season length will be adjust to reflect that dynamic.
Post by: Sabotloader on October 19, 2017, 07:20:31 PM
why not just hunt Modern Season.
Because it's about some people trying to stop others from doing things they don't like, no matter what the consequences.
What about those who prefer the length of the Muzzleloader Season as it stands and are willing to put up with caps as a fair trade off. What WDFW has come right out and said is that they expect harvest rates to increase and that in response Season length will be adjust to reflect that dynamic.
I am not sure why you feel that the use of 209 will result in a greater harvest. If you a seasoned cap hunter you really do not have any problems with ignition. So the belief that a 209 might save you from misfires or no-fires is probably not a significant factor.
I feel season dates, weather, available units, and open sights are the greater factors in determining harvest totals.
Post by: bobcat on October 19, 2017, 07:22:57 PM
I don't agree that it divides us.
Of course it does. This thread is 7 pages long already and still growing.
That doesn't mean only being able to hunt one season in a particular year "divides us." This discussion is only about whether 209 primers should be allowed. Everyone is free to hunt any of the three methods each year. So there's no reason for division. You like the muzzleloader season better? Then hunt that season. Next year you decide maybe modern season is better? Switch to that. Nobody's locked in to only one method. As I said, I've hunted all three and I like all three. They all have their advantages and disadvantages. We have too many hunters in this state to allow each person to hunt all three seasons. That's why we have to choose only one. What would be the other option? Probably draw only for all deer and elk hunting.
If ya' want to use 209s or even 209s and a scope, why not just hunt Modern Season. I hunt Modern w/my bow a lot just because I want to hunt w/my bow instead of w/a slug gun or blackpowder.
Well, that would be an option I guess, for those who have a muzzleloader set up to use 209s. I don't. However, if the WDFW makes 209s legal for muzzleloader season, I will convert my muzzleloader to use them.
Post by: Pegasus on October 19, 2017, 07:30:36 PM
What about those who prefer the length of the Muzzleloader Season as it stands and are willing to put up with caps as a fair trade off. What WDFW has come right out and said is that they expect harvest rates to increase and that in response Season length will be adjust to reflect that dynamic.
For some it is not about about keeping the sport of hunting pure and fair chase. Its about killing as many animals as possible with the best season with total disregard as to the remaining animal population. Modifying "primitive weapons" until they are modern weapons should result in everyone hunting the same season with a lot less animals. Look how many ML's want to put scopes on their weapons. Enjoy what you have because it isn't going to get any better especially when you improve the weapon's lethality.
Post by: JDHasty on October 19, 2017, 07:45:10 PM
why not just hunt Modern Season.
Because it's about some people trying to stop others from doing things they don't like, no matter what the consequences.
What about those who prefer the length of the Muzzleloader Season as it stands and are willing to put up with caps as a fair trade off. What WDFW has come right out and said is that they expect harvest rates to increase and that in response Season length will be adjust to reflect that dynamic.
I am not sure why you feel that the use of 209 will result in a greater harvest. If you a seasoned cap hunter you really do not have any problems with ignition. So the belief that a 209 might save you from misfires or no-fires is probably not a significant factor.
I feel season dates, weather, available units, and open sights are the greater factors in determining harvest totals.
Post by: Sabotloader on October 19, 2017, 08:40:15 PM
What about those who prefer the length of the Muzzleloader Season as it stands and are willing to put up with caps as a fair trade off. What WDFW has come right out and said is that they expect harvest rates to increase and that in response Season length will be adjust to reflect that dynamic.
For some it is not about about keeping the sport of hunting pure and fair chase. Its about killing as many animals as possible with the best season with total disregard as to the remaining animal population. Modifying "primitive weapons" until they are modern weapons should result in everyone hunting the same season with a lot less animals. Look how many ML's want to put scopes on their weapons. Enjoy what you have because it isn't going to get any better especially when you improve the weapon's lethality.
But as it has been pointed out before in this thread - it is not a 'primitive season' any longer they are 'muzzleloding seasons' created by Fish and Game for 'controlled game management seasons'
And as other have presented even archery has long ago surpassed the 'primitive season' moniker with the equipment they are using. And actually it is a much more humane season for the animals than it has been in the past. And in those regards Washington is far ahead of the other PacNorWest States - so congrats to Washington
Post by: j_h_nimrod on October 19, 2017, 09:04:02 PM
The 209 primer makes much less difference than many on here seem to believe. How many animals are missed annually because of a failure to fire in a MZ? I would venture it is much less than 1%. Who with a negative bent can really give a f^<& about such a small increase in safety and reliability? What have you uber mz hunters learned about protecting a cap that really means anything? How many areas in the state would benefit from an increased reliability in wet conditions? As many have said, the addition of 209 priming will not change the fundamental difficulty of MZ season. A solid 2/3 of the MZ areas will have no benefit aside from choice in ignition system.
The Muzzelloader season is the most restrictive season by a wide margin. Archery has pretty much free rein as long as it is not electronic and modern has very little restrictions. The main difficulties in MZ hunting are not going to be lessened by the addition of a 209 primer.
For background, I have not actually participated in MZ season though I have had the opportunity twice with a multi season tag. Both times I have taken my deer with a bow so a 209 priming system had no bearing on my hunting. In the future I would probably switch my rifle back over to 209 priming for no other reason then my rifle is easier to prime with a 209 then a cap.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on October 19, 2017, 09:10:02 PM
I don't think it is really about the seasoned muzzy hunter that knows how to keep the #11 dry. Even those guys have the occasional misfire/hangfire. Part of it is people want to hunt in a season that still has unpressured, legal animals running around and they want to climb over stumps, cross creeks, walk through wet reprod and ferns and not have to wonder the whole time if the gun will go boom or not.why not just hunt Modern Season.
Because it's about some people trying to stop others from doing things they don't like, no matter what the consequences.
What about those who prefer the length of the Muzzleloader Season as it stands and are willing to put up with caps as a fair trade off. What WDFW has come right out and said is that they expect harvest rates to increase and that in response Season length will be adjust to reflect that dynamic.
I am not sure why you feel that the use of 209 will result in a greater harvest. If you a seasoned cap hunter you really do not have any problems with ignition. So the belief that a 209 might save you from misfires or no-fires is probably not a significant factor.
I feel season dates, weather, available units, and open sights are the greater factors in determining harvest totals.
For the argument about making it more humane, then 209 and scopes should be allowed.....and scoped crossbows should be in archery. :peep:
Post by: JDHasty on October 20, 2017, 08:54:33 AM
I don't think it is really about the seasoned muzzy hunter that knows how to keep the #11 dry. Even those guys have the occasional misfire/hangfire. Part of it is people want to hunt in a season that still has unpressured, legal animals running around and they want to climb over stumps, cross creeks, walk through wet reprod and ferns and not have to wonder the whole time if the gun will go boom or not.why not just hunt Modern Season.
Because it's about some people trying to stop others from doing things they don't like, no matter what the consequences.
What about those who prefer the length of the Muzzleloader Season as it stands and are willing to put up with caps as a fair trade off. What WDFW has come right out and said is that they expect harvest rates to increase and that in response Season length will be adjust to reflect that dynamic.
I am not sure why you feel that the use of 209 will result in a greater harvest. If you a seasoned cap hunter you really do not have any problems with ignition. So the belief that a 209 might save you from misfires or no-fires is probably not a significant factor.
I feel season dates, weather, available units, and open sights are the greater factors in determining harvest totals.
For the argument about making it more humane, then 209 and scopes should be allowed.....and scoped crossbows should be in archery. :peep:
And at that point Archery and Muzzleloading would incrementally be shortened until ultimately they are close to the same length as Modern Firearms Season. This is not my pie in the sky prognostication, it is what WDFW has said.
Post by: JL on October 20, 2017, 10:16:08 PM
Post by: JL on October 20, 2017, 10:25:20 PM
Post by: Sabotloader on October 21, 2017, 08:23:08 AM
I throw that out there - but I actually do not know what the Washington seasons are.
I guess I should really ask, can you hunt a regular season deer hunt with a ML and then also hunt the ML season? :dunno:
My son-in-law hunts Washington and it seems his rifle season are really short also.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on October 21, 2017, 08:33:30 AM
Would part of the reason that ML hunters might have a shorter season be the fact that if you are a true ML hunter you can hunt the regular season also - so actually you can get a double season with you ML?You can't hunt both without a multiseason tag. For elk it is draw only, and success is about once every seven or eight years to get one. We get two muzzleloader seasons--early and late. The early one is a week long and is in early October, some years starting Oct 1 (which many folks consider about as close to prime elk rut as anybody gets with a general season). The late season is about three and a half weeks long in late Nov-mid Dec. Late season usually has only a few units open, lots of weather events. The early is usually pretty pleasant weather and has lots of units open. The rifle season is early Nov for 12 days.
I throw that out there - but I actually do not know what the Washington seasons are.
I guess I should really ask, can you hunt a regular season deer hunt with a ML and then also hunt the ML season? :dunno:
My son-in-law hunts Washington and it seems his rifle season are really short also.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on October 21, 2017, 08:58:25 AM
Post by: j_h_nimrod on October 21, 2017, 08:59:17 AM
Would part of the reason that ML hunters might have a shorter season be the fact that if you are a true ML hunter you can hunt the regular season also - so actually you can get a double season with you ML?You can't hunt both without a multiseason tag. For elk it is draw only, and success is about once every seven or eight years to get one. We get two muzzleloader seasons--early and late. The early one is a week long and is in early October, some years starting Oct 1 (which many folks consider about as close to prime elk rut as anybody gets with a general season). The late season is about three and a half weeks long in late Nov-mid Dec. Late season usually has only a few units open, lots of weather events. The early is usually pretty pleasant weather and has lots of units open. The rifle season is early Nov for 12 days.
I throw that out there - but I actually do not know what the Washington seasons are.
I guess I should really ask, can you hunt a regular season deer hunt with a ML and then also hunt the ML season? :dunno:
My son-in-law hunts Washington and it seems his rifle season are really short also.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on October 21, 2017, 09:01:00 AM
:tup:Would part of the reason that ML hunters might have a shorter season be the fact that if you are a true ML hunter you can hunt the regular season also - so actually you can get a double season with you ML?You can't hunt both without a multiseason tag. For elk it is draw only, and success is about once every seven or eight years to get one. We get two muzzleloader seasons--early and late. The early one is a week long and is in early October, some years starting Oct 1 (which many folks consider about as close to prime elk rut as anybody gets with a general season). The late season is about three and a half weeks long in late Nov-mid Dec. Late season usually has only a few units open, lots of weather events. The early is usually pretty pleasant weather and has lots of units open. The rifle season is early Nov for 12 days.
I throw that out there - but I actually do not know what the Washington seasons are.
I guess I should really ask, can you hunt a regular season deer hunt with a ML and then also hunt the ML season? :dunno:
My son-in-law hunts Washington and it seems his rifle season are really short also.
Post by: slowhand on October 24, 2017, 05:10:43 PM
209 :tup:
Post by: jagermiester on October 24, 2017, 07:38:16 PM
I voted Yes, I have hunted ML three seasons for elk and never had a misfire using the musket caps. I really don't think that a 209 will make even a 1% difference in success for ML hunters. I know it would save Me from buying a ton of musket caps. I like to change them out after a 1/2 day of hunting so I know there will be no issue when the time comes to fire the gun. I save the ones I swappend out during the hunt and use them at the range. FYI still have yet to have one of the musket caps fail at the range. :twocents:
209 :tup:
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Haaaaaaaaaaaaaa Haaa Haa Haaaa Ha ha Ha Ha!!!!!
Don't forget that you wrote this next time you shoot at an elk.
Post by: Sabotloader on October 24, 2017, 09:07:55 PM
I voted Yes, I have hunted ML three seasons for elk and never had a misfire using the musket caps. I really don't think that a 209 will make even a 1% difference in success for ML hunters. I know it would save Me from buying a ton of musket caps. I like to change them out after a 1/2 day of hunting so I know there will be no issue when the time comes to fire the gun. I save the ones I swappend out during the hunt and use them at the range. FYI still have yet to have one of the musket caps fail at the range. :twocents:
209 :tup:
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Haaaaaaaaaaaaaa Haaa Haa Haaaa Ha ha Ha Ha!!!!!
Don't forget that you wrote this next time you shoot at an elk.
I do not understand your remark...
What he has written is entirely possible and it happens - I can say the same thing only I use #11 mag caps and I do not rotate them out as he does. I can not even remember the last time I had a failure to fire.... wait to be completely honest - I know I did a couple of time 10-12 years ago when I first started hunting with a side hammer Lyman Trade Rifle...
Post by: jagermiester on October 25, 2017, 06:42:46 AM
I was just making a joke. Like he jinxed himself.
Post by: Sabotloader on October 25, 2017, 07:24:51 AM
It's called a Jinx (not sure on the spelling ).
I was just making a joke. Like he jinxed himself.
O now that makes all the sense in the world!!! Being the really OLD coach that I am I would never really subscribe to such a thing as a Jinx or superstition.... But you know the game ain't over til its over - or coming off a baseball field - do not change your game socks while you are in a winning streak! - DO NOT step on the lined these things and a heck of a lot of things are not a jinx or superstition at all - But you really do not want to 'Temp Fate' you know - Well you know what I mean :chuckle: :chuckle:
Post by: Sabotloader on October 25, 2017, 07:26:37 AM
It's called a Jinx (not sure on the spelling ).
I was just making a joke. Like he jinxed himself.
O now that makes all the sense in the world!!! Being the really OLD coach that I am I would never really subscribe to such a thing as a Jinx or superstition.... But you know the game ain't over til its over - or coming off a baseball field DO NOT step on the lines - or do not change your game socks while you are in a winning streak! - these things and a heck of a lot of things are not a jinxes or superstition at all - But you really do not want to 'Temp Fate' you know - Well you know what I mean :chuckle: :chuckle:
Post by: jagermiester on October 25, 2017, 08:00:50 AM
Its the Italian in me. My mom actually smacked me in the mouth one time for asking if grandpa was going to die... Like saying it out loud might make it happen.
The truth is most all of us are going to have misfires or hang fires and if were able to use 209's then what are we going to blame it on.
I change my vote. I need an excuse for my bad habits. :)
Post by: bobcat on October 25, 2017, 08:45:22 AM
Post by: Sabotloader on October 25, 2017, 10:33:33 AM
I voted yes but if I wanted to use 209s I'd need to buy a new rifle. Unless CVA begins making a Washington legal breech plug that uses 209s. They do have a 209 breech plug that would fit my gun, but it wouldn't meet the "exposed to the elements" requirement. Well, maybe the WDFW will remove that rule as well? In that case, I could have a 209 capable muzzleloader for only about $35.
Just out of curiosity... which CVA do you have?
Post by: bobcat on October 25, 2017, 10:44:58 AM
I voted yes but if I wanted to use 209s I'd need to buy a new rifle. Unless CVA begins making a Washington legal breech plug that uses 209s. They do have a 209 breech plug that would fit my gun, but it wouldn't meet the "exposed to the elements" requirement. Well, maybe the WDFW will remove that rule as well? In that case, I could have a 209 capable muzzleloader for only about $35.
Just out of curiosity... which CVA do you have?
It's the CVA Optima Northwest, and yes, I already know you hate CVAs. :tup:
Post by: JDHasty on October 25, 2017, 11:33:56 AM
Right?
Its the Italian in me. My mom actually smacked me in the mouth one time for asking if grandpa was going to die... Like saying it out loud might make it happen.
The truth is most all of us are going to have misfires or hang fires and if were able to use 209's then what are we going to blame it on.
I change my vote. I need an excuse for my bad habits. :)
My Irish mother thought I had more likely than not summoned down the wrath of God on the entire family when at the age of ~ 17 I proclaimed that Archbishop Hunthausen was an unrepentant heretic and a NeoMarxist as well as a crackpot. I think she considered any and all options available to get me to recant before hell-fire and brimstone rained down on the entire clan. Ya' can't criticize the Archbishop, dontcha' know that? Well I didn't know that and I stood by my analysis and if history of that nutjob's tenure at the helm of the Seattle Archdiocese is anything to go by and how he was eventually dealt with by The Church, what I recognized early on was a valid observation.
Post by: Sabotloader on October 25, 2017, 12:30:00 PM
I voted yes but if I wanted to use 209s I'd need to buy a new rifle. Unless CVA begins making a Washington legal breech plug that uses 209s. They do have a 209 breech plug that would fit my gun, but it wouldn't meet the "exposed to the elements" requirement. Well, maybe the WDFW will remove that rule as well? In that case, I could have a 209 capable muzzleloader for only about $35.
Just out of curiosity... which CVA do you have?
It's the CVA Optima Northwest, and yes, I already know you hate CVAs. :tup:
No I wouldn't say I hate them... I had a few once.. but today I do not have any for good reasons in my mind. The fact is ifn they work for you and the confidence is there - have at it....
I am just not sure why you do not think you could convert it to shoot 209's
Wait first... if Washington were to make 209's legal they would have to do something with the visible ignition rule also. Safety would almost dictate that.
What twist is the barrel?
It should convert with just a few parts...
But as you know I am not a CVA expert...
mike
Post by: bobcat on October 25, 2017, 01:13:28 PM
I voted yes but if I wanted to use 209s I'd need to buy a new rifle. Unless CVA begins making a Washington legal breech plug that uses 209s. They do have a 209 breech plug that would fit my gun, but it wouldn't meet the "exposed to the elements" requirement. Well, maybe the WDFW will remove that rule as well? In that case, I could have a 209 capable muzzleloader for only about $35.
Just out of curiosity... which CVA do you have?
It's the CVA Optima Northwest, and yes, I already know you hate CVAs. :tup:
No I wouldn't say I hate them... I had a few once.. but today I do not have any for good reasons in my mind. The fact is ifn they work for you and the confidence is there - have at it....
I am just not sure why you do not think you could convert it to shoot 209's
Wait first... if Washington were to make 209's legal they would have to do something with the visible ignition rule also. Safety would almost dictate that.
What twist is the barrel?
It should convert with just a few parts...
But as you know I am not a CVA expert...
mike
It's 1 in 28.
This one: https://www.muzzle-loaders.com/rifles/cva-optimatm-v2-northwest-legal.html
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on October 25, 2017, 02:16:16 PM
I don't think it is really about the seasoned muzzy hunter that knows how to keep the #11 dry. Even those guys have the occasional misfire/hangfire. Part of it is people want to hunt in a season that still has unpressured, legal animals running around and they want to climb over stumps, cross creeks, walk through wet reprod and ferns and not have to wonder the whole time if the gun will go boom or not.why not just hunt Modern Season.
Because it's about some people trying to stop others from doing things they don't like, no matter what the consequences.
What about those who prefer the length of the Muzzleloader Season as it stands and are willing to put up with caps as a fair trade off. What WDFW has come right out and said is that they expect harvest rates to increase and that in response Season length will be adjust to reflect that dynamic.
I am not sure why you feel that the use of 209 will result in a greater harvest. If you a seasoned cap hunter you really do not have any problems with ignition. So the belief that a 209 might save you from misfires or no-fires is probably not a significant factor.
I feel season dates, weather, available units, and open sights are the greater factors in determining harvest totals.
For the argument about making it more humane, then 209 and scopes should be allowed.....and scoped crossbows should be in archery. :peep:
And at that point Archery and Muzzleloading would incrementally be shortened until ultimately they are close to the same length as Modern Firearms Season. This is not my pie in the sky prognostication, it is what WDFW has said.
In my chosen unit, the muzzy season is already shorter than modern or archery. Archery gets 30 days in the early season and 40 days in the late season and they can shoot any deer they see. It's either sex. Modern season is 18 days early season and 4 days late season. Bucks only. Muzzy is 9 days in the early season. No late season. Bucks only. So evidently Muzzle loaders are already the most effective killers out there. (I'm being facetious)
Then there are special permits. Modern hunters can put in for 20 antlerless tags and they have the 18 day early season to succeed. Muzzy hunters can draw for 5 antlerless tags and have only 9 days to succeed.
So it isn't all about success rate. Some of it is about how much pull you have. Archery definitely has more pull than muzzy hunters. Muzzies are the red headed step children of this state when it comes to hunting and hunting opportunities.
Ohhhh and both modern and archery hunters get a shot at the bucks after the rut has kicked in and the leaves are gone for better visibility.
Post by: W_Ellison2011 on October 25, 2017, 04:22:45 PM
Post by: goldenhtr on October 25, 2017, 05:25:52 PM
I don't think it is really about the seasoned muzzy hunter that knows how to keep the #11 dry. Even those guys have the occasional misfire/hangfire. Part of it is people want to hunt in a season that still has unpressured, legal animals running around and they want to climb over stumps, cross creeks, walk through wet reprod and ferns and not have to wonder the whole time if the gun will go boom or not.why not just hunt Modern Season.
Because it's about some people trying to stop others from doing things they don't like, no matter what the consequences.
What about those who prefer the length of the Muzzleloader Season as it stands and are willing to put up with caps as a fair trade off. What WDFW has come right out and said is that they expect harvest rates to increase and that in response Season length will be adjust to reflect that dynamic.
I am not sure why you feel that the use of 209 will result in a greater harvest. If you a seasoned cap hunter you really do not have any problems with ignition. So the belief that a 209 might save you from misfires or no-fires is probably not a significant factor.
I feel season dates, weather, available units, and open sights are the greater factors in determining harvest totals.
For the argument about making it more humane, then 209 and scopes should be allowed.....and scoped crossbows should be in archery. :peep:
And at that point Archery and Muzzleloading would incrementally be shortened until ultimately they are close to the same length as Modern Firearms Season. This is not my pie in the sky prognostication, it is what WDFW has said.
In my chosen unit, the muzzy season is already shorter than modern or archery. Archery gets 30 days in the early season and 40 days in the late season and they can shoot any deer they see. It's either sex. Modern season is 18 days early season and 4 days late season. Bucks only. Muzzy is 9 days in the early season. No late season. Bucks only. So evidently Muzzle loaders are already the most effective killers out there. (I'm being facetious)
Then there are special permits. Modern hunters can put in for 20 antlerless tags and they have the 18 day early season to succeed. Muzzy hunters can draw for 5 antlerless tags and have only 9 days to succeed.
So it isn't all about success rate. Some of it is about how much pull you have. Archery definitely has more pull than muzzy hunters. Muzzies are the red headed step children of this state when it comes to hunting and hunting opportunities.
Ohhhh and both modern and archery hunters get a shot at the bucks after the rut has kicked in and the leaves are gone for better visibility.
Wow where to start, First of all I do hunt archery because of the longer season. You can to if you want to. To say archery hunters can shoot at ANY deer, you need to reread the regs. There are plenty of areas that you can't just shoot any deer. There are several units that do allow this as there are several MZ units that do the same. I don't know what unit you chose to hunt but the regs say all MZ general season units were Sept.30 - Oct. 8 you have the late season starting on Nov 20 until Dec 15 depending on what unit you want to hunt. I spent 33 years hunting modern and another 6 hunting MZ. I have now chose for the last 6 years to hunt with a bow, yes it affords me more time in the field if I want. I was never a fan of the choose your weapon when it came out and there brain washing has worked now pitting each group against each other over time in the field. 18 days for modern? Not where I used to hunt. Back then it was reduced to 9 and only recently they upped it to 11. You seem to be nitpicking the seasons, if you are not happy with your time in the field take more vacation or choose a different weapon it really is that easy. Good Hunting...........
Oh and as far as 209s go I could really careless either way. But I would like to be able to mount a camera on my bow.......................
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on October 25, 2017, 06:08:28 PM
As for the season lengths I just posted, you can check yourself if you don't believe me. Early season rifle Oct 14-Oct 31. That is 18 days in my book. Archers get it Sept 1- Sept 29 Ooops only 29 days, not 30, my bad. and Nov 22 - Dec 31. That is 40 days. So 69 days of any deer archery and only 9 days of muzzleloading buck only season. And this is in a unit I am paying to hunt in. You can't tell me that there is a management reason that Archery can't give up some days to muzzleloading. Especially with bucks only for muzzy season. It's not management, it's political. I'd hunt muzzy there if the season was reasonable. Instead I hunt modern so odds are better I'll get my deer. In fact I already have. Politics is forcing me to hunt with a more efficient weapon.
Post by: snake on October 25, 2017, 06:53:57 PM
I have been paying to hunt Unit 660 Minot Peak because it's close to home and I can take my son out after school. I'm not paying to hunt another unit in the late season. I probably won't pay to hunt there after this year. As for archery, I have a bad should so it's not comfy to do any more. I do like hunting muzzy, but the season frankly sucks.
As for the season lengths I just posted, you can check yourself if you don't believe me. Early season rifle Oct 14-Oct 31. That is 18 days in my book. Archers get it Sept 1- Sept 29 Ooops only 29 days, not 30, my bad. and Nov 22 - Dec 31. That is 40 days. So 69 days of any deer archery and only 9 days of muzzleloading buck only season. And this is in a unit I am paying to hunt in. You can't tell me that there is a management reason that Archery can't give up some days to muzzleloading. Especially with bucks only for muzzy season. It's not management, it's political. I'd hunt muzzy there if the season was reasonable. Instead I hunt modern so odds are better I'll get my deer. In fact I already have. Politics is forcing me to hunt with a more efficient weapon.
"More efficient weapon" is the key statement here.
Post by: goldenhtr on October 26, 2017, 08:47:07 PM
I have been paying to hunt Unit 660 Minot Peak because it's close to home and I can take my son out after school. I'm not paying to hunt another unit in the late season. I probably won't pay to hunt there after this year. As for archery, I have a bad shoulder so it's not comfy to do any more. I do like hunting muzzy, but the season frankly sucks.
As for the season lengths I just posted, you can check yourself if you don't believe me. Early season rifle Oct 14-Oct 31. That is 18 days in my book. Archers get it Sept 1- Sept 29 Ooops only 29 days, not 30, my bad. and Nov 22 - Dec 31. That is 40 days. So 69 days of any deer archery and only 9 days of muzzleloading buck only season. And this is in a unit I am paying to hunt in. You can't tell me that there is a management reason that Archery can't give up some days to muzzleloading. Especially with bucks only for muzzy season. It's not management, it's political. I'd hunt muzzy there if the season was reasonable. Instead I hunt modern so odds are better I'll get my deer. In fact I already have. Politics is forcing me to hunt with a more efficient weapon.
First of all good for you getting your son out. I also enjoy hunting with my sons. If paying to hunt helps that's great but it's your choice. You are correct on the number of days but wrong on the point that it's ANY DEER for 69 days, now some units offer that option but others only offer any buck or 3 pt min. Just like MZ seasons some units offer any deer as well and others any buck. The number of days is a direct reflection of the success between archery and long guns. Sounds like you have hunted archery before?? I will say since I changed to archery I totally enjoy hunting alot more having to get VERY close to the game I'm after. With rifes getting out to 1000 yards now and MZs going out to 200+ archery is much more of a challenge and more fun, at least for me. Enjoy your time with your son now. Mine are grown with kids of their own. So it can be a challenge to get all three of us together on a hunt now. Oldest grandson is turning 9 next spring so in the next couple years it's been my goal to hunt all three generations together.
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on October 26, 2017, 10:15:18 PM
I have been paying to hunt Unit 660 Minot Peak because it's close to home and I can take my son out after school. I'm not paying to hunt another unit in the late season. I probably won't pay to hunt there after this year. As for archery, I have a bad shoulder so it's not comfy to do any more. I do like hunting muzzy, but the season frankly sucks.
As for the season lengths I just posted, you can check yourself if you don't believe me. Early season rifle Oct 14-Oct 31. That is 18 days in my book. Archers get it Sept 1- Sept 29 Ooops only 29 days, not 30, my bad. and Nov 22 - Dec 31. That is 40 days. So 69 days of any deer archery and only 9 days of muzzleloading buck only season. And this is in a unit I am paying to hunt in. You can't tell me that there is a management reason that Archery can't give up some days to muzzleloading. Especially with bucks only for muzzy season. It's not management, it's political. I'd hunt muzzy there if the season was reasonable. Instead I hunt modern so odds are better I'll get my deer. In fact I already have. Politics is forcing me to hunt with a more efficient weapon.
First of all good for you getting your son out. I also enjoy hunting with my sons. If paying to hunt helps that's great but it's your choice. You are correct on the number of days but wrong on the point that it's ANY DEER for 69 days, now some units offer that option but others only offer any buck or 3 pt min. Just like MZ seasons some units offer any deer as well and others any buck. The number of days is a direct reflection of the success between archery and long guns. Sounds like you have hunted archery before?? I will say since I changed to archery I totally enjoy hunting alot more having to get VERY close to the game I'm after. With rifes getting out to 1000 yards now and MZs going out to 200+ archery is much more of a challenge and more fun, at least for me. Enjoy your time with your son now. Mine are grown with kids of their own. So it can be a challenge to get all three of us together on a hunt now. Oldest grandson is turning 9 next spring so in the next couple years it's been my goal to hunt all three generations together.
goldnhtr, I'm talking about the unit that I hunt locally, 660 Minot Peak. It is any deer for 69 days for archery. As for black powder, I treat it like I'm hunting with a bow. I certainly don't take 200 yard shots. My limit for a first shot is 50-60 yards. Most of the deer I have taken hunting black powder have been under 20 yards with 4 of them being 5-10 yards. We used to hunt Lincoln, 501 back when it was open access. But I'm not willing to pay for more than one unit to hunt in. As I said, I chose the local area to be able to take my son out after school.
As for challenging...... The success rates in my unit (660) are 21% for Modern, 18% for archery, and 5% for muzzleloaders. Part of that is because of the liberal archery season and the short muzzy season. There is no biological reason that muzzy hunters can't have more time in there. Especially when they are paying to hunt there.
Go down to deer table 5 through table 7 and you will see the state's own data on this.
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/prospects/2017/district17.pdf
Post by: goldenhtr on October 27, 2017, 07:43:40 PM
I have been paying to hunt Unit 660 Minot Peak because it's close to home and I can take my son out after school. I'm not paying to hunt another unit in the late season. I probably won't pay to hunt there after this year. As for archery, I have a bad shoulder so it's not comfy to do any more. I do like hunting muzzy, but the season frankly sucks.
As for the season lengths I just posted, you can check yourself if you don't believe me. Early season rifle Oct 14-Oct 31. That is 18 days in my book. Archers get it Sept 1- Sept 29 Ooops only 29 days, not 30, my bad. and Nov 22 - Dec 31. That is 40 days. So 69 days of any deer archery and only 9 days of muzzleloading buck only season. And this is in a unit I am paying to hunt in. You can't tell me that there is a management reason that Archery can't give up some days to muzzleloading. Especially with bucks only for muzzy season. It's not management, it's political. I'd hunt muzzy there if the season was reasonable. Instead I hunt modern so odds are better I'll get my deer. In fact I already have. Politics is forcing me to hunt with a more efficient weapon.
First of all good for you getting your son out. I also enjoy hunting with my sons. If paying to hunt helps that's great but it's your choice. You are correct on the number of days but wrong on the point that it's ANY DEER for 69 days, now some units offer that option but others only offer any buck or 3 pt min. Just like MZ seasons some units offer any deer as well and others any buck. The number of days is a direct reflection of the success between archery and long guns. Sounds like you have hunted archery before?? I will say since I changed to archery I totally enjoy hunting alot more having to get VERY close to the game I'm after. With rifes getting out to 1000 yards now and MZs going out to 200+ archery is much more of a challenge and more fun, at least for me. Enjoy your time with your son now. Mine are grown with kids of their own. So it can be a challenge to get all three of us together on a hunt now. Oldest grandson is turning 9 next spring so in the next couple years it's been my goal to hunt all three generations together.
goldnhtr, I'm talking about the unit that I hunt locally, 660 Minot Peak. It is any deer for 69 days for archery. As for black powder, I treat it like I'm hunting with a bow. I certainly don't take 200 yard shots. My limit for a first shot is 50-60 yards. Most of the deer I have taken hunting black powder have been under 20 yards with 4 of them being 5-10 yards. We used to hunt Lincoln, 501 back when it was open access. But I'm not willing to pay for more than one unit to hunt in. As I said, I chose the local area to be able to take my son out after school.
As for challenging...... The success rates in my unit (660) are 21% for Modern, 18% for archery, and 5% for muzzleloaders. Part of that is because of the liberal archery season and the short muzzy season. There is no biological reason that muzzy hunters can't have more time in there. Especially when they are paying to hunt there.
Go down to deer table 5 through table 7 and you will see the state's own data on this.
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/prospects/2017/district17.pdf
Ok I see where you are going with this I think. I see in the regs that IN YOUR UNIT 660 archers have the late hunt. There for you have no late hunt close to home that you paid for. BTW you don't pay the WDFW for your access so that is a non factor to me and has nothing to do with the season length. I have the same gripe in the unit I spend most of my time in unit 130. Several years ago they took this unit (late hunt)from archers and gave the late season in this unit to MZ users. Tell you what I will give up the late archery hunt in unit 660 if you give up the late MZ hunt in unit 130. :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: Bottom line is you want more time in the woods. Sounds like you need to take up archery. My brother still hunts MZ and has not connected in the last 5 years and he takes the whole 9 days off work and hunts every day. Looks like success is directly related to the area you hunt, surprise. But I think you know that. Take advantage of the time you have with your son in the field and remember it's not all about harvesting an animal at this point. You didn't say how old your son is but as he gets older maybe an incentive for good school work he can get a couple days out of school to hit the field for several days in a row.(TFSS)
Post by: Lefty315 on October 27, 2017, 09:01:34 PM
I voted no. Many reasons why! One would be that it is a more consistent ignition system even in the elements thus the amount of kills would greatly increase. That takes away from the idea of the muzzle loader. Its bad enough that the muzzy guys and gals are skirting the law by putting plastic and tape over their caps.. which technically is illegal because that means the cap wasnt exposed to the elements at all times. When i think muzzle loader hunting i think like my old hawkens .50 cal with a side hammer or even older muzzle loader rifles. If you are good you can hit targets at 100 yards with a round ball. These modern inline muzzle loaders using saboted rounds and such can shoot 150-200 yards no problem. If there is no significant difference between the 209 primers and caps then why push so hard for the 209’s? Doesnt make sense.
So by your thinking you would rather see possible hang fires and wounded animals? The limitations that muzzleloader hunters have has more to do with open sights and having one shot available until they can reload. I'm guessing with practice someone might get that done in 15-20 seconds, but most people will not. You could make the same argument regarding compound bows versus traditional bows. To ask the same question you did, if there isn't significant difference between 209 primers and caps then why should anyone care? Especially other hunters....sticking together on hunting issues is more beneficial to all hunters. Someday you may need the voice or vote of someone who hunts with a different weapon than you do.
Post by: JDHasty on October 28, 2017, 05:11:56 PM
I voted no. Many reasons why! One would be that it is a more consistent ignition system even in the elements thus the amount of kills would greatly increase. That takes away from the idea of the muzzle loader. Its bad enough that the muzzy guys and gals are skirting the law by putting plastic and tape over their caps.. which technically is illegal because that means the cap wasnt exposed to the elements at all times. When i think muzzle loader hunting i think like my old hawkens .50 cal with a side hammer or even older muzzle loader rifles. If you are good you can hit targets at 100 yards with a round ball. These modern inline muzzle loaders using saboted rounds and such can shoot 150-200 yards no problem. If there is no significant difference between the 209 primers and caps then why push so hard for the 209’s? Doesnt make sense.
So by your thinking you would rather see possible hang fires and wounded animals? The limitations that muzzleloader hunters have has more to do with open sights and having one shot available until they can reload. I'm guessing with practice someone might get that done in 15-20 seconds, but most people will not. You could make the same argument regarding compound bows versus traditional bows. To ask the same question you did, if there isn't significant difference between 209 primers and caps then why should anyone care? Especially other hunters....sticking together on hunting issues is more beneficial to all hunters. Someday you may need the voice or vote of someone who hunts with a different weapon than you do.
So why does this demand they accept your position and not compel you to come their way?
Post by: Kazekurt on October 28, 2017, 07:04:52 PM
Post by: Sabotloader on October 28, 2017, 07:35:13 PM
A sad reality in this country is that people are very willing to vote or advocate away the rights of other people; or vote them into a position of disadvantage simply because they have little to no skin in the game or perceive that they will gain some sort of benefit at no cost to them personally. This is very flawed thinking because it almost always eventually comes calling. People who are not gun owners will almost always vote to legislate guns, people who do not own property will almost always vote to raise property taxes, etc. I honestly believe the vast majority of the people who would be against this are people who believe it would somehow disadvantage them in someway. It's just like the illuminated Knocks, mechanical broadheads, etc. I have no doubt if you were to take a survey of only muzzle loader or bow hunters and ask them if they would be willing to ban scopes on rifles that a majority would do it. Do you guys honestly believe that changing the ignition system is going to cause a monumental shift in The harvest statistics? I don't, and it's because as a previous poster said, you are still limited to no optics and a single shot. Unfortunately, rifle hunters are the biggest user group, and they almost always gang up on the other user groups with help from traditionalists who want to drive as many people out of their user group as possible so they can hunt alone. My philosophy is to live and let live. If it isn't something that will monumentally affect safety in an adverse way or devastate herds then let it be. I have a neighbor that works for the WDFW and he told me long ago that there are some very selfish hunters in this state that make it hard to do the right thing a lot of the time. One example I will site is that we do very little for youth hunters compared to other states and my neighbor said every time they discuss lengthening the season for youth, letting them start earlier, or letting them shoot animals that others cannot, people throw a fit. Heaven forbid, somebody else might get someone's buck, and at the end of the day that is what drives all of these decisions. The day will come when the antis will vote away our right to hunt and we will largely have our own self to blame because we seem to do our darndest to discourage other hunters from hunting by making it it as difficult on them as possible.
Al-Right :tup:
Post by: JDHasty on October 28, 2017, 07:43:49 PM
A sad reality in this country is that people are very willing to vote or advocate away the rights of other people; or vote them into a position of disadvantage simply because they have little to no skin in the game or perceive that they will gain some sort of benefit at no cost to them personally. This is very flawed thinking because it almost always eventually comes calling. People who are not gun owners will almost always vote to legislate guns, people who do not own property will almost always vote to raise property taxes, etc. I honestly believe the vast majority of the people who would be against this are people who believe it would somehow disadvantage them in someway. It's just like the illuminated Knocks, mechanical broadheads, etc. I have no doubt if you were to take a survey of only muzzle loader or bow hunters and ask them if they would be willing to ban scopes on rifles that a majority would do it. Do you guys honestly believe that changing the ignition system is going to cause a monumental shift in The harvest statistics? I don't, and it's because as a previous poster said, you are still limited to no optics and a single shot. Unfortunately, rifle hunters are the biggest user group, and they almost always gang up on the other user groups with help from traditionalists who want to drive as many people out of their user group as possible so they can hunt alone. My philosophy is to live and let live. If it isn't something that will monumentally affect safety in an adverse way or devastate herds then let it be. I have a neighbor that works for the WDFW and he told me long ago that there are some very selfish hunters in this state that make it hard to do the right thing a lot of the time. One example I will site is that we do very little for youth hunters compared to other states and my neighbor said every time they discuss lengthening the season for youth, letting them start earlier, or letting them shoot animals that others cannot, people throw a fit. Heaven forbid, somebody else might get someone's buck, and at the end of the day that is what drives all of these decisions. The day will come when the antis will vote away our right to hunt and we will largely have our own self to blame because we seem to do our darndest to discourage other hunters from hunting by making it it as difficult on them as possible.
I hunt ML and I am in favor of not changing the restriction.
Post by: Bob33 on October 28, 2017, 07:51:46 PM
Post by: JDHasty on October 28, 2017, 07:53:18 PM
Those opposed to making 209 primers legal aren't voting away anyone's rights. First, they are not legal currently so there is no right to take away. Second, there is no vote. Those opposed are satisfied with the status quo. Those who want to make them legal are the ones who want change. It's ok to disagree. Disparaging others you don't agree with doesn't accomplish anything constructive.
Thank you for putting our point in context so concisely.
Post by: Kazekurt on October 28, 2017, 08:56:59 PM
Post by: Kazekurt on October 28, 2017, 09:12:11 PM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on October 28, 2017, 09:16:47 PM
Post by: Kazekurt on October 28, 2017, 09:30:24 PM
So, where does the line get drawn at?
That is the million dollar question. I feel that the majority of the people who are against this change, feel that allowing it would be making a muzzleloader too much like a modern rifle. To me, that is crazy, since modern hunters are allowed magazines and scopes which are clearly a much bigger advantage then a full proof ignition. Then there is a small group of muzzleloader hunters, who probably are mainly traditionalist, who just don't like the fact that somebody is using a superior weapon. I spent much of my youth hunting with a recurve, full well knowing that my chances at success would be much better with a compound, but I still never begrudged anyone from hunting with a compound. I chose to hunt with a recruit because I enjoyed it, and like the challenge, but I didn't feel the need to hold others to my standard. There are some things I definitely feel must be regulated for the good of the herd. Ariel spotting, drones, etc but if it doesn't drastically shift harvest trends To an unsustainable point, then I'm just not in favor of over regulating others.
Post by: Lefty315 on October 29, 2017, 08:00:44 AM
I voted no. Many reasons why! One would be that it is a more consistent ignition system even in the elements thus the amount of kills would greatly increase. That takes away from the idea of the muzzle loader. Its bad enough that the muzzy guys and gals are skirting the law by putting plastic and tape over their caps.. which technically is illegal because that means the cap wasnt exposed to the elements at all times. When i think muzzle loader hunting i think like my old hawkens .50 cal with a side hammer or even older muzzle loader rifles. If you are good you can hit targets at 100 yards with a round ball. These modern inline muzzle loaders using saboted rounds and such can shoot 150-200 yards no problem. If there is no significant difference between the 209 primers and caps then why push so hard for the 209’s? Doesnt make sense.
So by your thinking you would rather see possible hang fires and wounded animals? The limitations that muzzleloader hunters have has more to do with open sights and having one shot available until they can reload. I'm guessing with practice someone might get that done in 15-20 seconds, but most people will not. You could make the same argument regarding compound bows versus traditional bows. To ask the same question you did, if there isn't significant difference between 209 primers and caps then why should anyone care? Especially other hunters....sticking together on hunting issues is more beneficial to all hunters. Someday you may need the voice or vote of someone who hunts with a different weapon than you do.
So why does this demand they accept your position and not compel you to come their way?
It doesn't demand they accept my position. I currently use a musket cap and wouldn't change a thing with my muzzleloader. But I would not care if they allowed 209 primers either. It's still a single shot muzzleloader with open sights. It's not giving anyone a huge advantage and if it did I would be afforded the same advantage. It's my choice to use it or not. When I bowhunt it's with a recurve but I don't care if my neighbor uses a compound either.
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on October 29, 2017, 11:02:36 AM
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.
Post by: Jellymon on October 29, 2017, 12:13:33 PM
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.
Yep, my compound is much more effective than my muzzleloader that can shoot 1 1/2" groups at 100yds, has dropped almost every animal its shot in its tracks with one shot, and in my hands has a range of 125yds.
Post by: Twang on November 02, 2017, 09:40:22 AM
What is next, brass cartridges with black powder. Do you get it?? Go modern and leave me be!
Post by: Biggerhammer on November 12, 2017, 01:54:02 PM
Post by: steeleywhopper on November 12, 2017, 03:08:11 PM
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!
The great thing is that you would still be able to use musket caps, flint, or whatever else option there is. 209 just gives guys another option and you still gotta keep that powder dry. I vote yes for 209
Post by: Brushcrawler on December 22, 2017, 03:13:35 PM
Post by: Calvin Rayborn on December 28, 2017, 08:57:07 PM
Post by: Sabotloader on December 29, 2017, 07:50:05 AM
United States Musket Caps all the way!!!
Might want to check that - most US manufactures have gone back to producing musket caps with only a re-enactment charge in them. They are not as hot as they once were.
You might check and make sure you have the multiple use musket caps
Post by: GoexBlackhorn on December 29, 2017, 10:59:23 AM
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.
Post by: Jonathan_S on December 29, 2017, 12:46:57 PM
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.
The point many of us are trying to articulate and which you are skipping over in your insult is that change begets change. Also and unfortunately, change by the WDFW is rarely a positive thing for us.
I’d never call my setup a weak ignition system either :twocents:
Post by: GoexBlackhorn on December 30, 2017, 07:03:48 PM
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.
Post by: Duckslayer89 on December 30, 2017, 07:14:19 PM
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.
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
Post by: hunter399 on December 30, 2017, 07:44:10 PM
Post by: Sabotloader on December 30, 2017, 07:50:33 PM
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 . :twocents:
It is not a primitive weapons season it is a short range weapon season! Primitive ML's are not required. The State makes requirements to limit the ability of the ML to a true short range rifle.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 30, 2017, 07:58:59 PM
If wounding is the concern, then scopes should be allowed. But then that leads to maybe it should all go modern for all the seasons and let each hunter pick their own weapon.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.
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
Post by: hunter399 on December 30, 2017, 08:26:54 PM
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on December 30, 2017, 08:27:05 PM
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 . :twocents:
It is not a primitive weapons season it is a short range weapon season! Primitive ML's are not required. The State makes requirements to limit the ability of the ML to a true short range rifle.
The State's rules for muzzleloaders have nothing to do with range. Has everything to do with using modern contrivances to make them more efficient or accurate.
Post by: hunter399 on December 30, 2017, 08:29:24 PM
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 . :twocents:
It is not a primitive weapons season it is a short range weapon season! Primitive ML's are not required. The State makes requirements to limit the ability of the ML to a true short range rifle.
The State's rules for muzzleloaders have nothing to do with range. Has everything to do with using modern contrivances to make them more efficient or accurate.
I was thinking the same thing,you can shoot 200-250 yards with a peep or open site.
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on December 30, 2017, 08:38:37 PM
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
Hangfires are generally caused by damp powder that doesn't want to ignite, not your cap. This is caused by either getting water down your barrel or nipple, or more common in wet western Washington, from condensation. Powder is like salt, it draws moisture. Just like the salt in your salt shaker. Don't touch your muzzleloader off at the end of the day and leave the powder in and bring it into the warm house then take it out into the cold damp/wet air and it naturally forms water. The heated barrel adds to it. Also carrying your gun in the warm car and jumping out into the cold wet air many times a day does the same thing. Always touch your gun off at the end of the day and use fresh powder the next day.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 30, 2017, 08:39:11 PM
Post by: Jonathan_S on December 31, 2017, 05:02:56 PM
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.
The awesome thing that western States have that many Eastern states don’t have is bottle-necked cartridge seasons. Our ML seasons are not implemented forcefully because we are cramming dozens of hunters per square mile of farmland.
The biggest reason I’m agains it is because its easy to see what’s next...BH209, scopes, enclosed ignition systems etc. what’s the point? If somebody is dead set on using that then hunt the modern season, there is better dates anyway
I’ve had misfires yes but that doesn’t make it weak. Limitation sure.
Post by: bearpaw on December 31, 2017, 05:14:52 PM
Post by: Dan-o on December 31, 2017, 05:24:13 PM
Enough technology creep has already occurred.
If you are careful and proficient, you can avoid misfires.
Post by: AWS on December 31, 2017, 07:30:12 PM
Muzzle loader season was meant to be primitive season. All the improvements to the muzzle loaded were made 100+ years ago and we call it modern deer season. Muzzle loader season was meant for some hunters to experience harvesting game with the weapons of our early forefathers. All the improvements we are adding to the mix is just dumbing down the season so it is easier for more to be successful. If we keep adding improvements we will be very close to being just a Single Shot Modern season and we might as well just allow Ruger #1's, H&R Toppers and Browning Highwalls.
Post by: Special T on January 01, 2018, 08:31:16 AM
Yes!This is the attitude that I wish was more prevalent.
If you hunt muzzy and don't like 209 then don't use them.
If you don't hunt muzzy then why do you care what I use? If it makes it more "modern" then stop rifle hunting and switch to muzzy.
I don't archery hunt, but why would I vote no to lighted knocks and expandable broad heads? If you want to use them then go for it. If you don't then don't. Why would I care what you use as long as its not illegal?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Post by: Special T on January 01, 2018, 08:34:06 AM
Before I went to Virginia in 2012 I would have voted no. I voted yes. I've never been to a state that pits it's user groups against each other like this state does. Pretty sad really, pit each user group against each other and cram everyone into certain GMUs, so more over crowding goes on. Amazing.The WDFW manages people, and it is easier to do so when we are divided.
Most people don't realize this, but harvest numbers for deer are nearly the same now as back in the hay day when when had the most hunters.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Post by: mallardaddict on January 03, 2018, 08:55:55 AM
To date all of my muzzleloader hunting has been done with a .54 Hawken and Pyrodwx RS and most recently a .50 TC Black Diamond XR and T7. I have never had issue with wet powder, hangfires or failure to ignite but I am sure it is coming.
I plan to buy a Knight UL and would like the option to run B209 powder just for the ease of cleaning and lack of a carbon ring. Unfortunately in my Black Diamond I have been unable to get reliable ignition of B209 with either musket caps of #11 magnum caps. B209 of course requires a 209 primer for reliable ignition.
I am not at all a proponent of scoped muzzleloaders, battery powered optics, fully sealed ignition systems or full smokeless ML’s etc. and for the most part enjoy the added difficulty of ML seasons. That said I just do not see how allowing 209 primers takes that away based on the “western” rules as currently set.
We already allow jacketed bullets and sabots as well as BP substitutes so why not allow a primer that helps with the ignition of already legal powders.
Like I said my desire is only to run B209 for its decreased fouling and ease of cleaning with common rifle solvents I already own this my desire to use a 209.
I also voted yes based on my moral compass. I personally have a hard time condoning someone else for using a particular item when legal strictly due to my own personal feelings on it. It’s somewhat alarming to me when a group of people with similar interests freely divide themselves over such small details as this is what gun grabbers want to see happen.
Post by: Curly on January 03, 2018, 09:39:39 AM
Also wish they would make inlines illegal.
I've also long thought they should never allow 209's.
But with that said, what the hell........I really don't care anymore.
I'm sure that in 10 years or so, sealed inlines will be allowed, smokeless powder will be allowed and eventually even scopes will be allowed. It never ends. The line keeps moving and people keep asking for more and more allowances. I guess someday the season name will need to change from muzzleloader to simply single-shot. :twocents:
Post by: Lead ball 54 on January 03, 2018, 09:49:30 AM
Post by: hunter399 on January 03, 2018, 09:55:00 AM
http://www.namlhunt.com/mlprimers.html
This is also new muzzleloader that just came out ,and can be coverted to 209 primers.I know this does not have ignition exposed.but I bet most of you guys wish you could use it.
https://www.americanhunter.org/articles/2014/4/29/remingtons-300-yard-muzzleloader/
This is no direspect but you will get more bang for your buck, long range with better ignition.Just like any rifle primers.
So I still say no 209 .
Post by: Sabotloader on January 03, 2018, 12:05:03 PM
I have found a few articals on this subject,a lot of you are saying you want reliable ignition ,but you are failing to mention that with a hoter primer will allow you to shoot longer ranges with more powders that like hot primers.so I'm kinda calling bs on the reliable ignition after reading most of this thread.here's the artical,more fps means less drop in my mind.
http://www.namlhunt.com/mlprimers.html
This is also new muzzleloader that just came out ,and can be coverted to 209 primers.I know this does not have ignition exposed.but I bet most of you guys wish you could use it.
https://www.americanhunter.org/articles/2014/4/29/remingtons-300-yard-muzzleloader/
This is no direspect but you will get more bang for your buck, long range with better ignition.Just like any rifle primers.
So I still say no 209 .
There really is only one ML sub powder that can not be ignited with a cap. BH-209 is and does qualify for a ML sub - even though it is really a smokeless powder with Potassium and Sulphur added to allow it to be classified as a ML sub. But even then if you are willing to do it you can duplex a load of BH and ignite it with a percussion cap in either an inline or a side hammer.
Three powders T7, Swiss, and Olde Eynsford are all very energetic and can be ignited with a cap.
Igniting any of these powders with a 209 primers does not significantly increase velocity of the projectile shot.
This is the results of one of the many tests that I have run... I shot the same load with several different 209 primers. From the hottest Federal to the coolest Remington 209-4 (410 shotgun primer). Really there is/was not a significant difference in velocity..
(https://s26.postimg.org/g86izdut5/5-21-10_DEx_Target-_L-1.jpg)
Igniting the same load of T7 with a cap will give you nearly the same results.
Post by: boneaddict on January 03, 2018, 12:12:35 PM
I wish they would roll back the rules and eliminate jacketed bullets.yep
Also wish they would make inlines illegal.
I've also long thought they should never allow 209's.
But with that said, what the hell........I really don't care anymore.
I'm sure that in 10 years or so, sealed inlines will be allowed, smokeless powder will be allowed and eventually even scopes will be allowed. It never ends. The line keeps moving and people keep asking for more and more allowances. I guess someday the season name will need to change from muzzleloader to simply single-shot. :twocents: