Just like Nebraska,



The following is an email I received after inquiring about scopes for muzzys in Kansas.


"Allowing scopes on muzzleloaders for the upcoming deer season in 2008 is being considered and probably will pass. Please check our website for changes."

Marilyn Alberg
KS Dept. of Wildlife & Parks
L.E. Division
512 SE 25th Ave.
Pratt, KS 67124


Sweet!:D:)<!-- google_ad_section_end -->

OK...go ahead and shoot at me if you must, but I don't agree with the whole trend of "modern muzzloaders" OR scopes on them either. Just so nobody thinks I'm some young whipper-snapper that wants to exlude the older folks with aging eyes...I'm WELL into my 50's. I have all kinds of eye issues, but still manage to hunt with an iron-sighted Hawken and kill Whitetail and hogs cleanly and humanely by practicing A LOT,AND.. knowing my limitations. If these states feel like raising the success numbers for hunters, I would prefer they keep a tradtional season without modern scopes, inlines, sabots, etc,etc... and liberalize the general season for everybody. Otherwise...just eliminate the entire farce the "muzzleloader" season has become, and simply extend the general so folks don't have to buy another rifle to take advantage of a "muzzleloader season".
Your opinio may well differ, whiich is OK...this is just mine.
Cheers,
Don

OK...go ahead and shoot at me if you must, but I don't agree with the whole trend of "modern muzzloaders" OR scopes on them either. Just so nobody thinks I'm some young whipper-snapper that wants to exlude the older folks with aging eyes. If these states feel like raising the success numbers for hunters, I would prefer they keep a tradtional season without modern scopes, inlines, sabots, etc,etc... and liberalize the general season for everybody. Otherwise...just eliminate the entire farce the "muzzleloader" season has become, Cheers,
Don

I'm sure some of the focus is to sell more licenses and harvest more does. When applying for my late season tags there were still 7,000 plus tags available for muzzleloaders state wide.

Part of the deal could be enforcement. I'm sure as the rules open up there will be less time involved for wildlife officers in determining who is legal.

If a person would ask 25 people to describe a muzzleloader you could get 25 different answers. It could be anything from a relic to modern smokeless front stuffers that look just like their centerfire counterparts. In the mix there is real black, synthetic black and smokeless powders. Add round balls, bore sized bullets and sabots. There are many ignition sources just to add more debate.

Sights are just a part of the defination.

Guido has raised some good points. "Muzzle loaders" have evolved into a category very close to that of the "caseless cartridge", which the military has been expermenting with for many years. Frankly, hunting with a scoped rifle, shooting a smokeless powder load that has external ballistics similar to that of many standard cartridges, is not in tune with the original concept of the muzzle loading hunting seasons.

If a single shot rifle season is what we really have now, why not allow single shot rifles like the Sharps, 1885 Winchester, Ballard, and many others that shoot cartridges with ballistics similiar to modern in-line rifles.

I'm also in my 60's. I can still shoot open sight rifles. In fact, the with the vernier sight on my Sharps rifle I can shoot down into the low minutes of angle at 100 yards.

Indeed Muzzy's have evolved just like Bow hunting. Gone from stick bow at 200fps to 85% let off, 350fps compound wheeled bows with Biscuits, Hind Sights, laser range finders, carbon arrows, overdraws, etc, etc...

You still have to put the arrow on the string and pull it back. Oh, and do all your pre-season scouting and preparation, as ALL good outdoorsman should.
<O:p</O:p

You still have to load from the muzzel, and you still only get ONE shot. And NO ONE is dictating to anyone that they HAVE to use a scope. You are FREE to CHOOSE. You have a choice. Sounds very American to me.
</O:p
You have an opportunity to embrace the future, while still enjoying your personal preference of hunting style. You can chose to live and let live, or appeal for change.
Or you can choose to harass new muzzy hunters, that just got an inline for Christmas, and are trying a new thing. This makes them feel bad and sets them against traditional style hunters, and gives everyone in the sport a black eye. :(
Or you can paint everyone with having the same blessed eyesight you have. But that would be silly.
I'm just 48, and can no longer use open sights, and my vision is getting worse every year. The fact is, we are NOT all equally blessed. We all have our strengths and weaknesses.

But we all love our sport and would like to continue in it as long as possible. The scope will allow myself and others to enjoy our beloved sport a little longer.:)

I would say about 90% of all Muzzy hunters now use modern inline rifles. They/we are the majority now. In the early years, most gun sales were traditional guns..cause that was what the market was selling. Just like the compound is now the dominate bow of choice.

Maybe Kansas can be convinced to set aside some days for the minority to hunt with just themselves. Using their caseless 45-70's and 50-120's muzzies with just open sights. That would allow you guys to argue between yourselves about which is better, cap locks or rock locks and such stuff like gat;)

If a single shot rifle season is what we really have now, why not allow single shot rifles like the Sharps, 1885 Winchester, Ballard, and many others that shoot cartridges with ballistics similiar to modern in-line rifles.


I've listened to debate concerning that comment. Those who wanted black powder cartridges to be included in the muzzleloader season were outraged when told they could use the BPCR in the regular season. But some of the whiners are the same ones that brag of shooting buffalo silhouettes at 500 and 1000 yards. I'd guess if the season was called "blackpowder" instead of "muzzleloader" they would have a valid arguement.

If scopes were legal in my state I'd probably use 'em on the muzzleloader. Since they aren't I'm not complaining. If i want to use a scope on the front stuffer, nothing prevents me from doing so in the regular rifle season.

I certainly apologize if anyone feels upset about my earlier comments. It is important to keep the forum on a high plain of conduct.

However I have a legitmate question; Just where are we headed with the concept of the muzzleloading season?

Back in the 60's, when states started to offer this special type of hunting it was called "the blackpowder season". That term of course is long gone. Technically, today we are very close to a smokless powder caseless cartridge, a solid pellet of smokless powder with a sabboted jacketed bullet attached to the end, ignited electronically, with muzzle velocities and external ballistics comparable to present magnum cartridges. This is all existing technology, it merely needs to be assembled into one rifle.

We would then have a modern single shot rifle that just happens to load from the front rather than the rear. When we arrive at this point how can we refuse those who want to hunt with their Ruger #1. The basic concept of muzzleloading season, through the years, has proven to be a moving target. How far does it go until the concept becomes blury with the regular rifle season? Is it getting to be time to establish another separate primitive hunting season?

Again, no offense intended. We are all involved with the future of our hunting sport.

Ruger#1 loads from the breech=Breech loader

Rifle that loads from the muzzle=MuzzleLoader

Not to blurry.

No new seasons are needed. Everyone can hunt together using the Muzzy of their choice. Scope or no scope, rock ,caplock or inline :)

Probably the reason that most ML sold over there are in lines is because they are legal for use in the ML season. They are thus sold to guys who want to extend their hunting season, while still using a "modern" rifle.

Wether this is "right" or not should be considered in the light of the reason for having an ML season?

To some one from across the water (and I am likely wrong), it is apparent that the ML season (which appears to me to usually be before the main season) was probably originally intended for those guys who wanted to hunt with traditional ML, which neccesitated getting closer than required with a modern weapon. The early season would thus allow these hunters an opportunity before the game were spooked by high densities of hunters with modern weapons!

If I am correct, then I feel that allowing modernised ML in this season is defeating the point, as it allows guys who have no wish to go to the extra effort associated with ML to hunt during this season, increasing the numbers of hunters, and spooking the game earlier!

Having said that, I have one sidelock ML with a scope on it (looks kinda cool!). I wish i could have afforded an old fashioned brass scope, but that would have meant selling my car and the rifle to pay for the scope! I also have a kentucky rifle which will never be scoped, as well as a Hawken that wears a peep sight! I hunt with which ever one takes my fancy.

In SA, we have one season, and the choice of weapon is up to you. The benefit is that we hunt mainly on private land, and so hunter density is not an issue - the only issue is that we pay a fair amount for the privilege of hunting!

Probably the reason that most ML sold over there are in lines is because they are legal for use in the ML season. They are thus sold to guys who want to extend their hunting season, while still using a "modern" rifle.

That is exactally the reason I started in muzzleloading! However in my state muzzleloading starts AFTER the regular season ends and runs for an additional 1 1/2 months. A person can use any firearm in the regular season providing it meets the minimums.

Archery guys get the early start here.

Mississippi went to scopes on muzzleloaders and later single shot rifles manufactured before some certain date in certain calibers. Doesn't seem very primitive but hardly anyone complains. I really believe we have fewer wounded deer now. I no longer take a possibles bag full of various necessities. Just my 45-70 Handy Rifle mounted with a 3-9x50 Leupold and a couple extra bullets.
Is this primitive? I don't think so, but I ain't making the rules.

Don't mean to hijack here, but it seems like a good jumping off point.

I've had this topic on the mind for a while now, and want to float some notions out to this forum because I think this is a healthy conversation for the hunting community to have in general. So here goes:

Elements that havenot come up in the Traditional vs Modern debate are the inescapable realities of game management, supply & demand, and lisencing. All of these factors are somewhat in conflict of our basic human nature and ingenuity to increase the potentcy, efficiency, and effictiveness of our gear. (Personally, I'm guilty-as-charged whether hunting with a recurve or centerfire!) And from here it is easy to get into any number parallel discussions... my-o-my it's a slipery slope! :D

The premise I humbly submit to you is this:

Historically, archery and muzzleloader seasons were established because those methods of take do not and cannot compete with the range and effectiveness of modern centerfire rifles. These seasons were placed ahead of the rifle season so that these "close quarters" hunters would have better odds with animals that had not been disturbed all year. Longer seasons in or near the rut, and more plentiful tag quotas tended to encourage participation.

Many of us have enjoyed this situation for many years.:cool:

Eventually, things have taken their natural course, and advancements in equipment are made each year. Thus extending the range, reliability, potentcy, and ease of use of these "Primitive" or "Traditional" weapons light years from when the season was istituted. Regardless of whether or not you like these overengineered contraptions, or even believe in how much they've actuall improved upon the classic weapons, one thing is sure; the weapons have increased and renewed interest in using these methods of take, and it's caught on in a big way. Especially if the season dates but the animals at their most vulnerable time, i.e. the rut. :D

For many, the lightbulb went on and they realized modern ML rifles gave them a HUGE advantage.

And that my friends, is the doubled edged sword I'm getting at here. Economically speaking "too much of a good thing is a diminishing return". Really it's a matter of arithmatic, and the end result eventually falls to the realities of game management on the local level. Something has gotta give, and that ultimately is the number of lisences, length of season, animal quality, game populations, and the availibility of hunting opportunity. Either in part or in whole.

Given a fixed huntable population the simple management equation is this: More hunters + more effective weapons = shorter seasons & fewer tags. & No tag = No hunting = No opportunity. Or Few Tags = Little Hunting = Less Opportunity

In some areas of the country, game populations are such that Fish & Game Departments are giving out tags like parade cany and begging folks to shoot them. This whole discussion becomes exceedingly moot in those places! However, many places this is NOT the case and my over-simplified equation will tend to hold true for hunters individually and collectively. Most especially in the western half of the country. Or, in any place where one must draw a tag. (Colorado is where I dwell and hunt, so I do have a dog in this fight). ;)

To conclude what I've laid out here, my opion (which you may not share) is this is not a 2 dimentional modern vs. traditional debate. It has many, many more dimentions than I've touched on, but from my perspactive Modern vs. Traditional is for me a question of More Lisences vs. Less Lisences. More Opportunity vs. Less Opportunity.

I'm of the persuasion that this the crux of the debate. Hence, I'm in favor of most any ML rifle/gear restrictions that limit these weapons to their historical vices and effective ranges. So long as I don't have to hunt wearing a loin cloth, I'm happy!


What's your opinion... and I don't mean the part about me in a loin cloth! :eek:

Thanks, and let's keep it cordial! :)

Don't mean to hijack here, but it seems like a good jumping off point.

I've had this topic on the mind for a while now, and want to float some notions out to this forum because I think this is a healthy conversation for the hunting community to have in general. So here goes:

Elements that havenot come up in the Traditional vs Modern debate are the inescapable realities of game management, supply & demand, and lisencing. All of these factors are somewhat in conflict of our basic human nature and ingenuity to increase the potentcy, efficiency, and effictiveness of our gear. (Personally, I'm guilty-as-charged whether hunting with a recurve or centerfire!) And from here it is easy to get into any number parallel discussions... my-o-my it's a slipery slope!

The premise I humbly submit to you is this:

Historically, archery and muzzleloader seasons were established because those methods of take do not and cannot compete with the range and effectiveness of modern centerfire rifles. These seasons were placed ahead of the rifle season so that these "close quarters" hunters would have better odds with animals that had not been disturbed all year. Longer seasons in or near the rut, and more plentiful tag quotas tended to encourage participation. In Nebraska, Muzzleloader season runs 1-31 DECEMBER...after all other seasons

Many of us have enjoyed this situation for many years.

Eventually, things have taken their natural course, and advancements in equipment are made each year. Thus extending the range, reliability, potentcy, and ease of use of these "Primitive" or "Traditional" weapons light years from when the season was istituted. Regardless of whether or not you like these overengineered contraptions, ( My Inline still only fires one bullet at a time:D) or even believe in how much they've actuall improved upon the classic weapons, one thing is sure; the weapons have increased and renewed interest in using these methods of take, and it's caught on in a big way. (Almost every state has reported HUGE declines in the number of hunters and NEW Young Hunters in particular!!!:( With or With-Out Scopes on muzzie's:() Especially if the season dates but the animals at their most vulnerable time, i.e. the rut. (See Nebraska and New York)

For many, the lightbulb went on and they realized modern ML rifles gave them a HUGE advantage. (You mean there is a semi-auto Wheel Bow/Muzzie I can buy now??:rolleyes:)

Even 80% of scoped rifle hunter's only shoot 100yards or less. With most deer taken at 50-70 yards--Scope or No Scope!;)

And that my friends, is the doubled edged sword I'm getting at here. Economically speaking "too much of a good thing is a diminishing return". Really it's a matter of arithmatic, and the end result eventually falls to the realities of game management on the local level. Something has gotta give, and that ultimately is the number of lisences, length of season, animal quality, game populations, and the availibility of hunting opportunity. Either in part or in whole.

Given a fixed huntable population the simple management equation is this: More hunters + more effective weapons = shorter seasons & fewer tags. & No tag = No hunting = No opportunity. Or Few Tags = Little Hunting = Less Opportunity (See hunter numbers Decline statement above.)

In some areas of the country, game populations are such that Fish & Game Departments are giving out tags like parade cany and begging folks to shoot them. This whole discussion becomes exceedingly moot in those places! However, many places this is NOT the case and my over-simplified equation will tend to hold true for hunters individually and collectively. Most especially in the western half of the country. Or, in any place where one must draw a tag. (Colorado is where I dwell and hunt, so I do have a dog in this fight).

To conclude what I've laid out here, my opion (which you may not share) is this is not a 2 dimentional modern vs. traditional debate. It has many, many more dimentions than I've touched on, but from my perspactive Modern vs. Traditional is for me a question of More Lisences vs. Less Lisences. More Opportunity vs. Less Opportunity.

I'm of the persuasion that this the crux of the debate. Hence, I'm in favor of most any ML rifle/gear restrictions that limit these weapons to their historical vices and effective ranges. So long as I don't have to hunt wearing a loin cloth, I'm happy!


What's your opinion... and I don't mean the part about me in a loin cloth! :eek:

Thanks, and let's keep it cordial!


Bottom line: State DNR folks Make it crystal clear...Deer Management is the #1 Priority, NOT pacifying historical or modern hunting ideals/Hunters.

DNR folks have TOO MANY DEER and not enough Hunters-Old and New.:o

This is not about Modern and Traditional any more. This is about getting NEW Young hunters interested and active!!
If they start out with a simpler/easier weapon ie..Compound or Scoped In-Line---SO What?! Later they will probably look into more historical/traditional forms so that it might fulfill in them/Us a greater challenge/Satisfaction!:)

:)The above comments are of course my informed opinions...and actual FACTS here in Nebraska:)