Idaho Seeks to Limit Scope Turrets and Rangefinders

[seeth07]

Hunting under 500 yards, I now rely on a scope turret for easily dialing my range and just putting the crosshairs right on target. There is a pretty large drop when shooting a 185 grain bullet from just 250 to 350 yards and its obviously a lot more from 350 to that 500 yard mark. To prevent wounding and make the most ethical shot possible, I don't want to be limited on exactly what type of rangefinder and scope I use. This just seems completely silly.

 

[David58]

Hunting under 500 yards, I now rely on a scope turret for easily dialing my range and just putting the crosshairs right on target. There is a pretty large drop when shooting a 185 grain bullet from just 250 to 350 yards and its obviously a lot more from 350 to that 500 yard mark. To prevent wounding and make the most ethical shot possible, I don't want to be limited on exactly what type of rangefinder and scope I use. This just seems completely silly.

I think it's a start. Idahoans need to provide input, and not let a few "smart folks" make the decision.
Those that know me know that I will provide input...so moving to Idaho might give me an outlet.

David
NM

 

[cgasner1]

Honestly probably be better off to make the dial on a bow illegal

 

[Nick87]

Hunting under 500 yards, I now rely on a scope turret for easily dialing my range and just putting the crosshairs right on target. There is a pretty large drop when shooting a 185 grain bullet from just 250 to 350 yards and its obviously a lot more from 350 to that 500 yard mark. To prevent wounding and make the most ethical shot possible, I don't want to be limited on exactly what type of rangefinder and scope I use. This just seems completely silly.

Don't shoot so far ? Shoot something flatter?

 

[manitou1]

W

It appears recent discussions at IDFG meetings seem to point to a move to outlaw scope turrets. Also, there are talks to limit rangefinders to ones not capable of finding ranges over 500 yards.

Two days ago they announced they are seeking input for a hunting technology discussion group.

Wow, so guys who spent $2K on a scope and $3.5K on a binocular RF because they target shoot long range and hunt with it would now have to buy a whole new setup.
Unbelieveable!

Or if they hunt several states and the others allow it.

 

[cgasner1]

W

Wow, so guys who spent $2K on a scope and $3.5K on a binocular RF because they target shoot long range and hunt with it would now have to buy a whole new setup.
Unbelieveable!

Can always sell it and buy a fixed power if they need the money.

 

[Pucky Freak]

W

Wow, so guys who spent $2K on a scope and $3.5K on a binocular RF because they target shoot long range and hunt with it would now have to buy a whole new setup.
Unbelieveable!

The crux of the problem right here. It’s not the hunters, it’s the gear manufacturers selling the technology.

The discussion on limiting technology for LR hunting is overdue. Ok so rangefinders and turrets are not the best intersection, but the general idea is palatable.

Can’t enforce shot distances, but gear limits are within the realm of possibility. I like the 4x scope limit idea. I’d also add no computer-assisted target acquisition, a la Jimmy John’s rifle that shoots on its own.

It’s still possible to get a pretty far poke w/ 4x in good glass.

 

[cgasner1]

The crux of the problem right here. It’s not the hunters, it’s the gear manufacturers selling the technology.

The discussion on limiting technology for LR hunting is overdue. Ok so rangefinders and turrets are not the best intersection, but the general idea is palatable.

Can’t enforce shot distances, but gear limits are within the realm of possibility. I like the 4x scope limit idea. I’d also add no computer-assisted target acquisition, a la Jimmy John’s rifle that shoots on its own.

It’s still possible to get a pretty far poke w/ 4x in good glass.

Can always just strap that stuff onto a muzzy and take it to Utah. Ow wait last year they changed the scope restrictions to a straight 1x. Would be nice from time to time to see a game agency get some praise for trying to put its resources first. Sure wish Montana would start trying something different.

 

[winmag]

It’s almost impossible to write regulations to stop stupid people from doing stupid things and force unethical people to be ethical.

 

[ismith]

What about follow up shots on a wounded animal? If they want to limit first shots on game, then they should do that directly. Outlawing/banning/hindering accuracy doesn't seem like the right path when we also want ethical, humane kills, etc. Still, I'm willing to be persuaded, so I'll listen.

There will be fewer follow up shots, which probably aren’t using the turrets and range finders anyways.

 

[huntnpack]

The crux of the problem right here. It’s not the hunters, it’s the gear manufacturers selling the technology.

The discussion on limiting technology for LR hunting is overdue. Ok so rangefinders and turrets are not the best intersection, but the general idea is palatable.

Can’t enforce shot distances, but gear limits are within the realm of possibility. I like the 4x scope limit idea. I’d also add no computer-assisted target acquisition, a la Jimmy John’s rifle that shoots on its own.

It’s still possible to get a pretty far poke w/ 4x in good glass.

I’d wager shooting to 500 with 4x and a dialing turret isn’t too terrible on elk. 300 hasn’t been.

 

[Forkyfinder]

I’d wager shooting to 500 with 4x and a dialing turret isn’t too terrible on elk. 300 hasn’t been.

I mean - its certainly possible with open sights too.

Ever hear of shiloh sharps or quigley shoots?

 

[F250]

Unenforceable. Another Government Agency creating a law that is not enforceable for the Warden in the field. If your range finder is in your pocket, he cannot pat you down looking for it. He can observe the turret on your rifle and make a guess as to what it does… but that’s not really conclusive. The law would put the Warden in a bad spot.

 

[Trial153]

Good.

 

[338win]

Unenforceable. Another Government Agency creating a law that is not enforceable for the Warden in the field. If your range finder is in your pocket, he cannot pat you down looking for it. He can observe the turret on your rifle and make a guess as to what it does… but that’s not really conclusive. The law would put the Warden in a bad spot.

Yeah because it’s impossible to see a dial turret with index marks and numbers exposed on top of the scope. It’s easier than checking someone’s license and way easier than checking legal muzzleloader bullets.

 

[Nick87]

Unenforceable. Another Government Agency creating a law that is not enforceable for the Warden in the field. If your range finder is in your pocket, he cannot pat you down looking for it. He can observe the turret on your rifle and make a guess as to what it does… but that’s not really conclusive. The law would put the Warden in a bad spot.

I'd imagine it's like anything. Keeps honest folks honest. But I'll take your word on this with your experience.

 

[rjthehunter]

People need to self regulate. More government regulating isn't the answer.

 

[Forkyfinder]

People need to self regulate. More government regulating isn't the answer.

Hate to say it man - but isnt this sort of the point of tech? To be able to have more capabilities?

Also - i dont think you can self-regulate whats not widely agreed on. No ones proud of a gutshot, for example. There is really no consensus in my opinion on how hunters feel about target turrets/rangefinders.

 

[seeth07]

Don't shoot so far ? Shoot something flatter?

I think you missed my point. Even at what most would consider to be typical rifle range shots, the value of having a rangefinder and a turret on your scope is high to help reduce the chance of a bad shot.

Honestly, what would you rather have on the mountain chasing elk in ID: a) The WI redneck with his Savage that he shoots 1 time a year to "check his rifle" the day before deer season that goes "looks to be about 400 yards, I'll just aim for the top of the back" or b) the guy that practices at all ranges in all conditions from 200-500 yards with the tools of a rangefinder and a turret scope to help ensure that shot placement?

 

[BuzzH]

Hunting under 500 yards, I now rely on a scope turret for easily dialing my range and just putting the crosshairs right on target. There is a pretty large drop when shooting a 185 grain bullet from just 250 to 350 yards and its obviously a lot more from 350 to that 500 yard mark. To prevent wounding and make the most ethical shot possible, I don't want to be limited on exactly what type of rangefinder and scope I use. This just seems completely silly.

Easiest way to prevent wounding and make an ethical shot is learning how to hunt and getting close before you start yarding triggers.