1x scopes vs open sights

[lazydrifter]

So Full Choke, do you even muzzle load hunt.  And I hope to hell that if you do you still use a sidelock with percussion caps and an open breech exposed to the elements because if you don't, you're a hypocrit. 

[Taco280AI]

A 1x scope or red dot, why not 

I highly doubt you'd see a massive increase in harvest rates.

[Cougartail]

The solution is simple. Two tags. Modern muzzleloader and primitive muzzleloader.  Same season but 3 days extra for primitive muzzleloaders on the front of the season.

Over 60 gets the extra days regardless.

[dreadi]

I'm here for the spear chucking tag. It really would be great if I could post in a tree, throw some calls and jump onto the quarry of my choice with a sharpened hardwood.

If we are going to be honest, the laws and rules are changed based on technology with some credence to safety and some to some opinions of fair chase.


BLACK HAMMER ARMS
07/02 NFA Dealer

http://www.blackhammerarms.com
http://www.facebook.com/blackhammerarms
https://www.instagram.com/blackhammerarms

[duckmen1]

A fella can always use a scoped muzzy during the modern season. You can still hunt with your black powder rifle, even increase your vision with powered optics!

Muzzy season is what it is because it is supposed to be primitive. It is already tainted, why keep blurring the lines?

Anyhow it really it isn't going to matter in a couple of years anyways. Might as well eat your cake now.

If you believe it’s “supposed to be primitive” then don’t use a scope. Why stop others from doing what they want or feel comfortable with? You love primitive great. Go use a spear and stop caring if others want to use a scope or not.

Because the timing of the season is set for primitive weapons. If you cannot use a primitive weapon hunt during the season that allows for glass. Pretty simple.

Muzzleloaders became less primitive years back when they allowed closed breech and 209s. The reliability factor went way up for those that didn’t take good of care of their firearm in the field. I used to hear a bunch of folks over the years in areas say Well I should have got an elk or deer but my gun didn’t go off. Don’t hear that as much anymore. And success rates seem to be doing pretty well with muzzy seasons. That said I am not against those past rule changes one bit. Happy to see others showing more interest with less restrictions within that weapon catagory. That also said I still use an open breach plung style muzzleloader. With loose pyrodex powder. But that’s my choice. I chose to not use newer powders, closed breach systems, 209, etc. I don’t want to tell others restrictions just because I didn’t change. I do support 1x scopes too. Whether I put one on or not. But the one power scope really is most aiding in people with site issues with near and farsighted reasonings. Not in reliability aspect of the firearm. Now another thought is open sites never seem to be nocked off. In fact I have had a muzzy sighted in for over 10 years and never had to adjust the sites. Most cheaper 1x sites on the market that a lot will choose to put on their gun. How often will we hear oh my scope or red dot site was off and I missed the animal. Scopes have a higher tendency of those issues then open sites for the average blue collar hunter.  Just a few thoughts.

[The100Road]

A fella can always use a scoped muzzy during the modern season. You can still hunt with your black powder rifle, even increase your vision with powered optics!

Muzzy season is what it is because it is supposed to be primitive. It is already tainted, why keep blurring the lines?

Anyhow it really it isn't going to matter in a couple of years anyways. Might as well eat your cake now.

If you believe it’s “supposed to be primitive” then don’t use a scope. Why stop others from doing what they want or feel comfortable with? You love primitive great. Go use a spear and stop caring if others want to use a scope or not.

Because the timing of the season is set for primitive weapons. If you cannot use a primitive weapon hunt during the season that allows for glass. Pretty simple.

Muzzleloaders became less primitive years back when they allowed closed breech and 209s. The reliability factor went way up for those that didn’t take good of care of their firearm in the field. I used to hear a bunch of folks over the years in areas say Well I should have got an elk or deer but my gun didn’t go off. Don’t hear that as much anymore. And success rates seem to be doing pretty well with muzzy seasons. That said I am not against those past rule changes one bit. Happy to see others showing more interest with less restrictions within that weapon catagory. That also said I still use an open breach plung style muzzleloader. With loose pyrodex powder. But that’s my choice. I chose to not use newer powders, closed breach systems, 209, etc. I don’t want to tell others restrictions just because I didn’t change. I do support 1x scopes too. Whether I put one on or not. But the one power scope really is most aiding in people with site issues with near and farsighted reasonings. Not in reliability aspect of the firearm. Now another though is open sites never seem to be nocked off. In fact I have had a muzzy sighted in for over 10 years and never had to adjust the sites. Most cheaper 1x sites on the market that a lot will choose to put on their gun. How often will we hear oh my scope or red dot site was off and I missed the animal. Scopes have a higher tendency of those issues then open sites for the average blue collar hunter.  Just a few thoughts.

Hey hey hey. You doing What you want and me doing what I want and staying legal isn’t allowed in this Thread. You must not want anything allowed that you don’t want to use in order to have a comment. Take that nonsense elsewhere. 

[SuperX]

100, I think things are pretty well laid out now as far as allocating the resource across different user groups, rifle, muzzy and archery.  If we make changes that increase the effectiveness of a weapon group, or we have a greater influx of hunters into a group, then that group will need to either lose days to hunt or become a draw with only a set number of hunters to remain within the allocated take for that user group.  It's how herds are managed in North America.

[kentrek]

A 1x scope or red dot, why not 

I highly doubt you'd see a massive increase in harvest rates.

Utah already did this and reported only a 3% increase in harvest when they went to unlimited scopes...so you can expect a 1x scope would be substantially less than that

[duckmen1]

100, I think things are pretty well laid out now as far as allocating the resource across different user groups, rifle, muzzy and archery.  If we make changes that increase the effectiveness of a weapon group, or we have a greater influx of hunters into a group, then that group will need to either lose days to hunt or become a draw with only a set number of hunters to remain within the allocated take for that user group.  It's how herds are managed in North America.

With so few hunters for muzzy during many deer seasons and the slaughter of modern season? It isn’t a good idea to maybe take some of that pressure off modern with a pretty regulated eastern Washington season for muzzy? Some units hardly see a muzzy hunter. Yet modern is a slaughter fest of orange pumpkins with extreme long range shooting compared to the minimal range muzzleloader gets. 1x or red dot isn’t like a 24 power scope on these modern rifles these days with the calculated dope charts and all that modern has been seeing the last number of years becoming more effective. 1x is still just 1x like open sites.  I think if some made the switch from modern to hunt muzzy we may even see lower over all harvest with combined seasons. Just a thought.

Or another thought. We should lower the ability of modern. Take away raised turrets and dope chart legality and go back to hold overs. Think about that. Same concept.

Kenetrek showed a good harvest statistic. I think the bigger issue is finding a legal animal to try to harvest if a hunter can’t locate that animal to get into range it doesn’t matter if he tries to shoot that deer at 100yards with a peep or 1x scope.

[SuperX]

100, I think things are pretty well laid out now as far as allocating the resource across different user groups, rifle, muzzy and archery.  If we make changes that increase the effectiveness of a weapon group, or we have a greater influx of hunters into a group, then that group will need to either lose days to hunt or become a draw with only a set number of hunters to remain within the allocated take for that user group.  It's how herds are managed in North America.

With so few hunters for muzzy during many deer seasons and the slaughter of modern season? It isn’t a good idea to maybe take some of that pressure off modern with a pretty regulated eastern Washington season for muzzy? Some units hardly see a muzzy hunter. Yet modern is a slaughter fest of orange pumpkins with extreme long range shooting compared to the minimal range muzzleloader gets. 1x or red dot isn’t like a 24 power scope on these modern rifles these days with the calculated dope charts and all that modern has been seeing the last number of years becoming more effective. 1x is still just 1x like open sites.  I think if some made the switch from modern to hunt muzzy we may even see lower over all harvest with combined seasons. Just a thought.

Or another thought. We should lower the ability of modern. Take away raised turrets and dope chart legality and go back to hold overs. Think about that. Same concept.

Kenetrek showed a good harvest statistic. I think the bigger issue is finding a legal animal to try to harvest if a hunter can’t locate that animal to get into range it doesn’t matter if he tries to shoot that deer at 100yards with a peep or 1x scope.

You can 'dial in' a scope for any range, less so with iron sights though those quigly shooters can hit a buffalo at 1000 yards with them.  I think that maybe the fear is that people will be shooting at a far further distance than the season setting accounts for and harvest would exceed goal.  If a muzzy can shoot consistently at that long a range we'll see more animals taken and wounded.  In archery they don't allow scopes at all, and regulate arrow weight to be sure the weapon is not too effective.  Even with that, people can shoot 100y, though few would given the cost of arrows.  At least you still have to draw and hold the bow until you get a shot, usually while the animal is close enough to hear your arrow chattering on the rest.

[duckmen1]

100, I think things are pretty well laid out now as far as allocating the resource across different user groups, rifle, muzzy and archery.  If we make changes that increase the effectiveness of a weapon group, or we have a greater influx of hunters into a group, then that group will need to either lose days to hunt or become a draw with only a set number of hunters to remain within the allocated take for that user group.  It's how herds are managed in North America.

With so few hunters for muzzy during many deer seasons and the slaughter of modern season? It isn’t a good idea to maybe take some of that pressure off modern with a pretty regulated eastern Washington season for muzzy? Some units hardly see a muzzy hunter. Yet modern is a slaughter fest of orange pumpkins with extreme long range shooting compared to the minimal range muzzleloader gets. 1x or red dot isn’t like a 24 power scope on these modern rifles these days with the calculated dope charts and all that modern has been seeing the last number of years becoming more effective. 1x is still just 1x like open sites.  I think if some made the switch from modern to hunt muzzy we may even see lower over all harvest with combined seasons. Just a thought.

Or another thought. We should lower the ability of modern. Take away raised turrets and dope chart legality and go back to hold overs. Think about that. Same concept.

Kenetrek showed a good harvest statistic. I think the bigger issue is finding a legal animal to try to harvest if a hunter can’t locate that animal to get into range it doesn’t matter if he tries to shoot that deer at 100yards with a peep or 1x scope.

You can 'dial in' a scope for any range, less so with iron sights though those quigly shooters can hit a buffalo at 1000 yards with them.  I think that maybe the fear is that people will be shooting at a far further distance than the season setting accounts for and harvest would exceed goal.  If a muzzy can shoot consistently at that long a range we'll see more animals taken and wounded.  In archery they don't allow scopes at all, and regulate arrow weight to be sure the weapon is not too effective.  Even with that, people can shoot 100y, though few would given the cost of arrows.  At least you still have to draw and hold the bow until you get a shot, usually while the animal is close enough to hear your arrow chattering on the rest.

 I think my point was missed on my post. Maybe I miss worded. Idk. Point being we keep trying to split each other up. Instead of sticking together. As Kenetrek pointed out success rates would not greatly increase. Few animals more, maybe but maybe that is the few animals that were recovered and not lost wounded to shoot at another animal due to eye sight issues. That could be said with individuals trying to take longer shots too. And my point about the switch in interest from modern hunters going to muzzy I think is a very valid point. You would be taking away a guys opportunity that may be trying 500 plus yard shots and he would be hard pressed to make it to 200 yards. But he gained that ability to put a fixed optic on a muzzy. Not realizing he lost his ability to use a adjustable power scope with turrets etc.

For me and my own muzzleloader if I look into the ballistics of my load I shouldn’t be shooting past 125yards to 150 yards tops with open sight or fixed one power scope. Either way I look down the sight if I am being a responsible hunter for my firearms capabilities  sight isn’t changing my effective range in this case.
 
Reminds me of people saying a 410 isn’t ethical to hunt waterfowl, upland birds and turkey with. Yet my success history would say different. But I see so many people unethically shooting 12 gauges and 10 gauges


Or comments of individuals saying a 6.5 Creedmoore is unethical to shoot elk with out to 200 to 300 yards but they then say their 6.5 PRC is an 800 yard elk shooter.

Ballistics play a huge roll in all firearms, muzzy, modern, shotguns, and bows. Wish more took the time to learn them.


One of many units results with muzzy success and hunter numbers compared to the ol mighty modern season. I feel very afraid of what this new rule might do!!! Come on help a muzzy brother out a bit. I mean look at the success rate and hunter numbers. Lol

[duckmen1]

100, I think things are pretty well laid out now as far as allocating the resource across different user groups, rifle, muzzy and archery.  If we make changes that increase the effectiveness of a weapon group, or we have a greater influx of hunters into a group, then that group will need to either lose days to hunt or become a draw with only a set number of hunters to remain within the allocated take for that user group.  It's how herds are managed in North America.

With so few hunters for muzzy during many deer seasons and the slaughter of modern season? It isn’t a good idea to maybe take some of that pressure off modern with a pretty regulated eastern Washington season for muzzy? Some units hardly see a muzzy hunter. Yet modern is a slaughter fest of orange pumpkins with extreme long range shooting compared to the minimal range muzzleloader gets. 1x or red dot isn’t like a 24 power scope on these modern rifles these days with the calculated dope charts and all that modern has been seeing the last number of years becoming more effective. 1x is still just 1x like open sites.  I think if some made the switch from modern to hunt muzzy we may even see lower over all harvest with combined seasons. Just a thought.

Or another thought. We should lower the ability of modern. Take away raised turrets and dope chart legality and go back to hold overs. Think about that. Same concept.

Kenetrek showed a good harvest statistic. I think the bigger issue is finding a legal animal to try to harvest if a hunter can’t locate that animal to get into range it doesn’t matter if he tries to shoot that deer at 100yards with a peep or 1x scope.

You can 'dial in' a scope for any range, less so with iron sights though those quigly shooters can hit a buffalo at 1000 yards with them.  I think that maybe the fear is that people will be shooting at a far further distance than the season setting accounts for and harvest would exceed goal.  If a muzzy can shoot consistently at that long a range we'll see more animals taken and wounded.  In archery they don't allow scopes at all, and regulate arrow weight to be sure the weapon is not too effective.  Even with that, people can shoot 100y, though few would given the cost of arrows.  At least you still have to draw and hold the bow until you get a shot, usually while the animal is close enough to hear your arrow chattering on the rest.

The arrow comment has me Rollin. “Few would shoot 100yards due to cost of arrows” !!! Exactly!!!! few try to extend the range with every weapon further than they should. And most everyone should be thinking more about the animal then the cost of the arrow. Meaning if you are worried about the cost of your arrows you are probably shooting too far.  True true statement

[The100Road]

100, I think things are pretty well laid out now as far as allocating the resource across different user groups, rifle, muzzy and archery.  If we make changes that increase the effectiveness of a weapon group, or we have a greater influx of hunters into a group, then that group will need to either lose days to hunt or become a draw with only a set number of hunters to remain within the allocated take for that user group.  It's how herds are managed in North America.

Who doesn’t want to increase the effectiveness of a weapon? Also, did everyone jump to archery when the allowed lighted knock and expandables? I’m not scared of a little more competition during the muzzy season. Con for a few more people muzzy hunting instead of riffle. Pro a scope. I’ll take the 1x scope.

If more hunter come to muzzy then how about opening up more GMU’s for muzzy? Right now it insane how little GMU’s are open for muzzy compared to archery and modern. 

[85yota]

May have missed it, what's the benefit of this rule?. This seems like a feel good sounds good rule that benefits a small minority under the guise of expanded opportunities. I honestly can't see a benefit to the general hunting experience/regulations that would justify this decision.. if this is all about bad eyesight, than unfortunately there's other options to continue hunting..maybe doctors notes, etc.. there seems to be a lot of negative responses to this, (me included) but the overall positives to this rule seem to be lacking..  for muzzleloader hunters, this seems like a superficial benefit

[duckmen1]

May have missed it, what's the benefit of this rule?. This seems like a feel good sounds good rule that benefits a small minority under the guise of expanded opportunities. I honestly can't see a benefit to the general hunting experience/regulations that would justify this decision.. if this is all about bad eyesight, than unfortunately there's other options to continue hunting..maybe doctors notes, etc.. there seems to be a lot of negative responses to this, (me included) but the overall positives to this rule seem to be lacking..  for muzzleloader hunters, this seems like a superficial benefit

What are the true negatives to the rule? How is it such a negative toward other user groups for other seasons for those that choose not to use muzzleloaders. A positive I see is if a few people choose to hunt muzzleloader season and make the switch from modern or archery it makes better distribution of hunters.