new proposal to define ML in AK

[homerdave]

PROPOSAL 50 ”“ 5 AAC 92.085. Unlawful methods of taking big game; exceptions; and 5
AAC 92.990. Definitions. Define a legal muzzleloader for hunting in Alaska, clarify legal
muzzleloader requirements for big game hunting, and clarify legal muzzleloader requirements in a
restricted muzzleloader-only hunt.
5 AAC 92.990. Definitions.

( ) “muzzleloader” means any firearm where firing components are loaded into the muzzle
end of the firearm.


5 AAC 92.085. Unlawful methods of taking big game; exceptions. The following methods and
means of taking big game are prohibited in addition to the prohibitions in 5 AAC 92.080.
(1) with the use of a firearm other than a shotgun, muzzle-loading rifle, or rifle or
pistol using a center-firing cartridge, except that
...
(B) the use of a muzzleloader [MUZZLE-LOADING RIFLE] is prohibited
unless the firearm is a shoulder mounted long gun, 45 caliber or larger, with a barrel that
is either rifled or smoothbore, and discharges a single projectile; and
(C) the use of a muzzleloader [MUZZLE-LOADING RIFLE] equipped with
a scope, or a muzzleloader using smokeless powder as a charger, during any permitted,
registered, or special season hunt for muzzleloaders [MUZZLE-LOADING RIFLE] only, is
prohibited;.

ISSUE: No standard definition of a muzzleloader for use in hunting all game, big game, or big
game in restricted hunts. This proposal defines a standard muzzleloader legal for use in hunting all
game, sets muzzleloader standards for hunting big game, and standards for muzzleloaders used in
restricted weapons hunts.
WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF NOTHING IS DONE? Current wording in the regulation book has
no definition and as a result there is no consistency in the wording used in the various hunt
descriptions. This allows for unrestricted interpretation as to what is legal.

Example:
Kodiak 8 “Muzzleloader only”
14C “Muzzle-loading blackpowder rifle”
20A “Muzzle-loading firearms”
20B “Muzzleloader”

WILL THE QUALITY OF THE RESOURCE HARVESTED OR PRODUCTS PRODUCED
BE IMPROVED? The wildlife resource should benefit in reduced wounding loss rates resulting
from individuals who were using substandard muzzleloaders or projectiles.

WHO IS LIKELY TO BENEFIT? Those hunting with muzzleloaders in Alaska will have a
consistent definition, particularly for big game.

WHO IS LIKELY TO SUFFER? Those who may have been using substandard muzzleloaders
(pistols) or projectiles to hunt big game in Alaska will no longer be able to do so. Individuals that
may have been using smokeless powder in their muzzleloaders to achieve higher velocities may
suffer. Higher bullet velocities increase hunter success because hunters can shoot further. Increased
hunter success results in less hunting opportunity.



PROPOSED BY: Alaska Department of Fish and Game (HQ-08W-G-078)
*************************************************************************

 

[tg]

"This allows for unrestricted interpretation as to what is legal.'

Unfortunatly this has been the biggest problem in nearly every state since they started having"ML" seasons,and it has been exploited beyond what anyone ever thought or imagined would happed, many ML's are nearly unrecognizable as such and equal to modern centerfires as a result.The last quarter of the 20th century was a sad time for ML hunting seasons.

 

[flintlock75]

HomerDave,
Has this new proposal been made known to the Alaska State Muzzleloadeing Association?

I have not heard this one before, how new is the proposal and which Game Board meeting will it be submitted to?

 

[homerdave]

i have no idea if the state ML association knows about it, but i would bet so...

here is the link to all the BOG proposals:
http://www.boards.adfg.state.ak.us/g...jan08-prop.pdf

i think it is #50.

 

[Muskeg Stomper]

I stumbled across this thread by accident. Yes, the AK State Muzzle Loaders Assoc (ASMLA) and our NMLRA State Coordinator/Field Rep. are aware of the proposal and it was a subject of conversation at our fall rendezvous. I believe that the ASMLA President, who is also the NMLRA AK State Coordinator, submitted comments to the Board of Game backing up the definition of a muzzle loader as any gun which loads through the muzzle.

 

[jtmattison]

I talked to the ADF&G warden in Eagle River about muzzleloader hunting. The only place there is a restriction..i.e. caliber, projectile, sights...etc is in special muzzleloader only hunts. You can use muzzleloaders in any configuration during general season hunts. I don't have the book in front of me to look at the definitions of legal means for taking game but I think if they define a legal muzzleloader and apply it to all hunts it will benefit everyone in the long run. They will have to make their muzzleloader only hunts for primitive weapons only.

My two cents.

HD

 

[homerdave]

not to hijack my own thread Huntingdawg, but the way our enforcement works up here is TROOPERS enforce the regs, there is no such thing as an ADF&G "warden"... and there is no F&G office in eagle river, so i assume you spoke to a trooper. "brownshirts" are F&W enforcement, "blueshirts" chase tailights. ADF&G is biologists and bean counters...
indeed, any ML is legal in general hunts, but a restrictive definition of ML for the purposes of "ML only" hunts is a good thing for the intent of the regulations.

 

[bob1961]

(B) the use of a muzzleloader [MUZZLE-LOADING RIFLE] is prohibited
unless the firearm is a shoulder mounted long gun, 45 caliber or larger, with a barrel that
is either rifled or smoothbore, and discharges a single projectile; and
(C) the use of a muzzleloader [MUZZLE-LOADING RIFLE] equipped with
a scope, or a muzzleloader using smokeless powder as a charger, during any permitted,
registered, or special season hunt for muzzleloaders [MUZZLE-LOADING RIFLE] only, is
prohibited;.

sounds like no smokeless powder or scopes allowed, but smokeless powder muzzleloaders are only 1 or 2 that can use smokeless powder....sounds like lots of grey area in the regulations :v ................bob

....

 

[jtmattison]

not to hijack my own thread Huntingdawg, but the way our enforcement works up here is TROOPERS enforce the regs, there is no such thing as an ADF&G "warden"... and there is no F&G office in eagle river, so i assume you spoke to a trooper. "brownshirts" are F&W enforcement, "blueshirts" chase tailights. ADF&G is biologists and bean counters...
indeed, any ML is legal in general hunts, but a restrictive definition of ML for the purposes of "ML only" hunts is a good thing for the intent of the regulations.

My mistake, I spoke to a "biologist" in Palmer. Pardon me for getting old :haha:

GMU 14(A), 14(B), 16(A), 16(B)
Tony Kavalok ([email protected] )
ADF&G/Wildlife Conservation
1800 Glenn Highway, Suite 4
Palmer, AK 99645-6736
(907) 746-6300 phone
(907) 746-6305 fax

I never once saw a trooper enforcing regs. All I ever saw was "brownshirts", and plenty of them. I call anybody who works for F&G a "warden".

HD

 

[flintlock75]

I contacted the ASMLA President about this, Here is the response he sent. For those in Alaska we should try to attend the March meeting or at least send comment letters.
"From Keith Bayha"
Yes, I am awareof it. ASMLA and NMLRA , through me weighed in with comments to ADF&G staff in October to their then undefined proposal to seek a consistent definition. We argued to retain smoothbores [ they did], to recognize the diference in modern in-line with sabots and traditional rifles with roundballs [they didn't]. We accepted that muzzle loading pistols should not be used to hunt large bodied big game because in the hands of most hunters accuracy and insufdficient penetration would likely lead tro wounding loss. I am not aware that they have any docyumentation that this has been a problem. Apparently this effort to seek a consistent definition stems from questions the ML certification instructors have received and their inability to provide a clear consistent definition. The current regulation use several different terms, as they point our in their proposal. This has its origins in the specific proposals made to establish the various hunts [come from different authors and aimed at different areas and hunting/risk conditions. we argued that they think long and hard about this before reaching a conclusion that a single consistent definition was the way to go. Apparently they rejected this advice, at least as far as I have been informed. It may be that they are using the BOG proposal process to elicite more input from the public. MMMLRC [Jim Anderson?] and ASMLA/NMLRA [me] are planning to testify and utilize the opportunity to provide information that may elevate the Board's understanding of the issue and all that is involved. You and other members can also testify. I believe this will come up before the Board at the March meeting. Check the ADF&G website for confirmation.

 

[homerdave]

what changes would you like to see made to the proposal?
and why?
i sit on the homer AC, so i could have us address the issue at our jan meeting...