Do we need more primitive hunts?

[Shortbowshot]

It seems to me that if the states would embrace more primitive hunting methods that it would be a great way to move folks through the system.
I'm talking really primitive longbow/ flintlock.
It kinda burns me to go hunt with a 500 yd muzzleloader although given the opportunity I would do it.
Success rates would be much lower which would translate into more people moving through the system.
Personally I would burn my points in any state to hunt a quality unit earlier with a longbow.
Just my 2 cents.

 

[ID_to_NV2012]

It seems to me that if the states would embrace more primitive hunting methods that it would be a great way to move folks through the system.
I'm talking really primitive longbow/ flintlock.
It kinda burns me to go hunt with a 500 yd muzzleloader although given the opportunity I would do it.
Success rates would be much lower which would translate into more people moving through the system.
Personally I would burn my points in any state to hunt a quality unit earlier with a longbow.
Just my 2 cents.

There are a lot of people out there that would agree with you. I think it just compounds the pressure on animals to have longer primitive seasons than how long they already are. Maybe some states could pull it off but a lot of western states are hunting critters from August through December and sometimes into January.

The way I figure it, people shouldn't be allowed to hunt with certain accessories on their primitive weapons, like range finding sights in bows and optics on muzzleloaders. Full disclosure, I hunted with a scope on my muzzleloader this fall in Utah and loved it. The buck in my profile picture was an open-sighted harvest with the same muzzleloader 2 years ago. I think those accessories really make them not long primitive.

Honestly I dont mind with state wildlife commissions start drawing lines in the sand saying certain things are allowed and others are not. Yes it is nuanced but that's the way it goes.

 

[brockel]

Good lord man don’t give Montana anymore ideas. They will just open it for 12 months instead of the 6 months we have now.

 

[choc dogs]

I kinda like that Idaho muzzleloader seasons are set up as “primitive”. Loose powder, no optics, exposed cap. Every year I see more people using in lines sold as “northwest” models, somehow, some way, people will always game the system. I do wish we could use something besides lead bullets however. Other than that, yeah, I’m good with it.

 

[Shortbowshot]

Good lord man don’t give Montana anymore ideas. They will just open it for 12 months instead of the 6 months we have now.

Lol, Just came back from there. Those poor elk don't need any more pressure.

 

[SilverDollars]

Howdy. I don't think we need an extended season for this. Hunting should allow some freedom of choice of weapon. I believe it should be separated by firing method. If it goes bang when fired, then it needs to have a separate season from those weapons that don't go bang. I choose my weapon based on what challenge I wish to place on myself. If I want to do some primitive archery, then I will use it during archery season when others may opt to use a compound bow, etc. If I choose to use a muzzle loader, then I must hunt during rifle season. This idea is no different, to me, than choosing what weapon and caliber I wish to hunt with. Perhaps I want to hunt with my hand built and hand loaded 35 Whelen and sneak through the woods, expecting a shorter type shot. Or, do I choose the 300WM or 270WSM to reach way out there and touch them.

I vote for: No new season, separate seasons by the firing method of bang or not.

 

[David658]

Being a traditionalist, I would simply say that muzzleloaders that aren't "primitive" are simply another kind of rifle for plain old rifle season. No need for another season.

As to bow hunting, that is a tough one. Research I read quite some years ago indicated that the long bow season had a negative impact on the rut due to the timing and number of bow hunters. I know too many that will stick an animal, lose it, then go stick another in the same season to be objective about bow hunting (even though I know many that are tremendously ethical). Ahhh, my anti-bow bias is showing - LOL!

But if I set the long-season-envy aside, shorter seasons or fewer seasons is better for the elk. I think.

 

[Pucky Freak]

I'd be for trying to remedy some of the problems with existing "primitive" hunts rather than add more of them.

 

[Nameless Range]

Yes.

I’ve said this a few times on here, and I am aware that I am speaking in fantasy, but if Montana took the right contiguous units, and made those units traditional archery hunting only, in less than a decade those units would hold the same mythos and grandeur for deer and elk, that the unlimiteds to do for bighorn sheep.

 

[ccc23454]

No...the montana model of just adding seasons and appeasing certain interest groups is already failing. Archery season isnt just for compounds, any weapon doesnt mean you have to use modern rifle. Seasons are already in place, leave them alone! Only so many slices of pie, solution can only be a bigger pie not handing out more smaller forks.

 

[antlerradar]

We do not need more primitive seasons in Montana, We need to start restricting parts of the 6 week archery and 5 week rifle to more primitive weapons. Stacking on more season is not going to help.

 

[Pagosa]

I would say cut the current rifle season in Montana down from five week to 10-12 days over 2 period section, archery down to 3 weeks, and black powder a week somewhere in between. And hunters should be restricted to choice of weapon. A lot of guys are archery hunting for 2 weeks and coming back and rifle hunting every weekend of season. They can hunt with a longbow or spear during the regular archery season, I used too and was successful on deer. Never felt comfortable to hunt elk with a recurve.

 

[TheTone]

I kinda like that Idaho muzzleloader seasons are set up as “primitive”. Loose powder, no optics, exposed cap. Every year I see more people using in lines sold as “northwest” models, somehow, some way, people will always game the system. I do wish we could use something besides lead bullets however. Other than that, yeah, I’m good with it.

I’d like to see us have more here because of our restrictions. I know a lot of areas around me would probably benefit from shortening rifle seasons and changing them to archery and/or muzzleloader seasons. I’m constantly told though we can’t mess with the tradition and opportunity rifle season provides.

 

[howl]

I'm generally against primitive seasons because people who are not proficient with primitive weapons are encouraged to use them. The result is more wasted game.

 

[shines@times]

I see that the topic has generated quite varied and diverse thought--you've all given me ideas to mull over.

I will disclose up front that I am personally not suited for political activism. The taste of it that I experienced in my twenties when I briefly got involved with a coalition of outdoor clubs and organizations seeking to establish a public shooting range was not pleasant. Some of you are already active politically in areas of concern to wildlife and outdoor enthusiasts; others might be contemplating entering that arena. Whatever you seek to promote, and perhaps lobby on behalf, here are a couple things to consider that I take away both from reading the discussion and from more than half-a-century observing changes, primarily in Washington State.

Keep the health of the resource foremost in your mind; but do so based on objective data. Realize that everything is affected by politics these days, and that includes even the motives of some game managers whose salaries you provide through your taxes. (It doesn't matter your home state; if you purchase sporting arms or ammunition you pay an 11% Federal Tax [https://www.fws.gov/laws/lawsdigest/fawild.html], part of which is redistributed to the states for wildlife restoration efforts.)

Don't snipe, especially publicly, at other user groups who have the same general objective that you have of expanding, or at least preserving, the opportunities to enjoy consumptive outdoor recreation on both public and private land. Better to work cooperatively toward mutual goals to improve outdoor ethics and competency generally, and especially do so within your own interested hunting fraternities.

When special considerations are offered land owners in the form of tags and licenses, especially to owners of huge blocks that concentrate and hold prestigious animals from which the (often corporate) owners profit by selling hunts, insist that a reasonable proportion of the tags be available to the public together with the necessary access to hunt those species*. Volunteer projects to periodically repair damage and clean up litter left by the unethical few can go a long ways to improving relationships with land owners. Under "current use" provisions, agricultural land, particularly in The West, is often taxed at a pittance in regards its true market value. I know, I've owned and currently own small tracts of "timber land" in WA and MT. Wildlife in the USA is not, at least for now, "the King's deer." Neither does it belong to the landed gentry. In states without a state income tax, such as WA, how is the public justly compensated for the value of public wildlife harvested for profit on private land? Wild animals are the states' property in the USA, but the states' interests are not perfect, but rather for the purpose of preservation and management only.

* As I understand it, such a program has been established for elk on private holdings in Utah. If I am mistaken, I welcome correction as well as elaborative anecdotes. (I have not hunted outside of WA in nearly forty years.)

My personal opinion is that, at the very least, large tracts that also effectively block access to public lands lying behind their closed gates, or in some cases wholly enclose sections of public land, ought be required to provide an access corridor for the public in exchange for any special considerations in the form of landowner tags or licenses.

 

[44hunter45]

I’d like to see us have more here because of our restrictions. I know a lot of areas around me would probably benefit from shortening rifle seasons and changing them to archery and/or muzzleloader seasons. I’m constantly told though we can’t mess with the tradition and opportunity rifle season provides.

TRIGGER ALERT !

I disagree.

You know what I'm going to say, @TheTone. I know I'm going the graphic route here to make my point. But that IS my point.

This is a hot button for me. I find dead elk every year during late Muzzy hunts. It's easy. Just look for the carrion birds the second or third day of the season.

So what if the agencies figure in a percentage of wound/loss into harvest quotas? The animals are still WOUNDED, or LOST.
Agencies will not invest in any kind of mandatory education for primitive hunters, because that goes to the expense line. So more elk die with a round ball in their gut.

I've reached out to IDFG and the RMEF about this. I got nothing from the agency more than, "...thank you for your letter...." I had an exchange of emails with RMEF about it. That
too eventually fizzled out. These days they just want to know if I want to enter another raffle for a Savage Axis rifle, or buy tickets for our new Second Banquet this year.

Agencies spend untold dollars educating us to report poachers because they are stealing game from us (and they are. ) But the agencies have no interest in reducing wound/loss from primitive hunts. I find that to be a huge disconnect.

You can't put this on the Wardens. These seasons come late in the year, when over-stretched enforcement officers are exhausted from months of chasing slobs.

Ditto @howl -
Too many JimBobs think a .50 Hawken knocks an elk on it's ass. It doesn't.

I'm not saying not to do these hunts. I love the late Muzzy hunt. I schedule time for it every year. My gripe is that there are too many hunters out there just slinging lead.
I'm saying that just adding seasons for this group or that group is not the NAM, its pander politics. Science and citizen education be damned if it takes away from the revenue line.

 

[Sytes]

Hell yes! With the specific caveats:

1. A hunter must choose his/her weapon per tag at time of tag selection.
2. A tag is specific to District at time of tag selection.
3. Set Seasons structured as repeatedly discussed. Shortened.

@44hunter45 , wanton waste should not be tolerated (what a bummer seeing the pics) though to chop a tree down due to a few bad apples, I'm not a fan of that methodology. IMO, one should pass testing pre eligibility to apply for such hunt. Special tag fee to cover expense of "In Persson" testing / education. Not this online B.S. Same as wolf trapping (MT education to receive certificate to trap, etc.)

 

[TheTone]

TRIGGER ALERT !

I disagree.

You know what I'm going to say, @TheTone. I know I'm going the graphic route here to make my point. But that IS my point.

This is a hot button for me. I find dead elk every year during late Muzzy hunts. It's easy. Just look for the carrion birds the second or third day of the season.

So what if the agencies figure in a percentage of wound/loss into harvest quotas? The animals are still WOUNDED, or LOST.
Agencies will not invest in any kind of mandatory education for primitive hunters, because that goes to the expense line. So more elk die with a round ball in their gut.

I've reached out to IDFG and the RMEF about this. I got nothing from the agency more than, "...thank you for your letter...." I had an exchange of emails with RMEF about it. That
too eventually fizzled out. These days they just want to know if I want to enter another raffle for a Savage Axis rifle, or buy tickets for our new Second Banquet this year.

Agencies spend untold dollars educating us to report poachers because they are stealing game from us (and they are. ) But the agencies have no interest in reducing wound/loss from primitive hunts. I find that to be a huge disconnect.

You can't put this on the Wardens. These seasons come late in the year, when over-stretched enforcement officers are exhausted from months of chasing slobs.

Ditto @howl -
Too many JimBobs think a .50 Hawken knocks an elk on it's ass. It doesn't.

I'm not saying not to do these hunts. I love the late Muzzy hunt. I schedule time for it every year. My gripe is that there are too many hunters out there just slinging lead.
I'm saying that just adding seasons for this group or that group is not the NAM, its pander politics. Science and citizen education be damned if it takes away from the revenue line.

View attachment 198922View attachment 198927

I can’t disagree with any of that

Behaviors I think we could curtail though would be people spending all day driving around hoping they see a buck from the road and blasting it from the truck window. I just don’t think people are going to be as effective road hunting with a bow or wanting to fill the cab with blackpowder if they touch off a muzzleloader.

I’d also like to see a few whitetails and elk get past two years old. I’ve been told though that makes me a trophy hunter and I can’t expect others to share my thoughts

 

[geetar]

I mean how primitive y’all wanna go? I’d be down for some spear chunking?

 

[44hunter45]

I can’t disagree with any of that

Behaviors I think we could curtail though would be people spending all day driving around hoping they see a buck from the road and blasting it from the truck window. I just don’t think people are going to be as effective road hunting with a bow or wanting to fill the cab with blackpowder if they touch off a muzzleloader.

I’d also like to see a few whitetails and elk get past two years old. I’ve been told though that makes me a trophy hunter and I can’t expect others to share my thoughts

@TheTone - You've known my opinion about this for years.

I don't disagree with you, at all. Even though I see guys people every year putt-putting around on ATVs with their "primitive" Muzzy across the handle bars. I know some who pray for snow so they can use their sled to get deeper and farther from the road in December. Primitive hunt indeed.

Why does Idaho restrict muzzle loader tech, and then allow you to strap it to a motorized conveyance? Beats me.

Primitive hunts are a very cool fair chase experience where the hunter limits themselves by using "ancient" tech. Love it. That comes with an inherent risk of wound/loss if the hunter doesn't adjust to those limits. That is why I get bothered about more seasons without more education. And about agencies instituting niche seasons with the entire planned harvest fitting into the annual wound/loss bucket in "over objective" zones. Nothing to be concerned about, nothing to see here. @geetar nails it. If the wound/loss doesn't matter mathematically, why not allow an atlatl season? Ethics. More specifically, social acceptability thresholds. Agencies DO spend money on studies for social acceptability thresholds. As they should.

How do agencies separate the fair chase self limiters from the hunters who buy a primitive weapon to get another week of taking stupid shots at game? I don't know.
I don't want the hunter who shot a moose in the face with a arrow anywhere near me with even a primitive firearm.
@Sytes post has merit in terms of weeding out the opportunists from the purists.

I didn't mean to hijack this thread. I have more passion than answers on this. I'm actually really glad its getting discussed, but I've said enough.