Traditional vs. modern ratio

[David Teague]

Guys, hang it up. They outnumber you a lot more than was posted. It is that bad in the enthusiast groups that post online. It is much worse in reality. It is somewhere in the 20 to 1 category. The money machine supports the inlines because they produce revenue.

You are absolutely correct.

In-lines outnumber traditional muzzleloaders as do center-fire weapons. It will always be this way.

They are in a totally different class and I don't know why we keep trying to compare the two? Reality - get used to it, it's here to stay. :grin:

First I should state that I'm no longer a hunter...after growing up in Eastern OR and being spoiled with the game where I gerw up, I got turned off of hunting in Alaska as it is a traveling game that requires "MONEY". I can no longer head to the nearby hills for deer, black bear,Elk,quail,chuckers, squrils and marmots like I did in my childhood and teen years....

The point is, the rules in many of these states were crafted by muzzleloading hunters and shooters, some who I knen (or knew of) in the 70's and 80's... and the intent was to have a season to allow us to hunt (in historic camp and equipment if we wished) with the weapons of our forefathers, and needed the same kind of skill to make a clean kill that they used... not driving the roads slowly with a inline (or walking the field) with a weapon the in all intents is a modern centerfire rifle with out the brass.

It's time to realine the laws IMO. However the fact is, we lost the battle before firing a shot, as the firearms, bullet, and powder companies would bring their legal forces to bear against anyone who tried such a "stunt".It is a source of to much income to these companies now.

This fact still would not keep me from being "right" in the fact that no one 30 years ago saw this coming... that hunts were meant to be stalked with a traditional muzzleloader.

I remember when H&R brough out their single shot ML based off of their break open action... when some states created a rule requiring a exposed hammer... H&R cut a slot in the action so you could see the hammer... this was back in the 70's-early 80's as I remember... I also remember why the slot was needed... some sneaky ba****ds noted that H&R had a 45-70 in its lineup that had a range rod under the barrel, and looked just like the MUZZLER LOADER... it did not take too long before a few bad apples (please see"sneaky ba****ds") got busted for hunting in a ML season with a cartridge gun.

This is a classic case of the intent of a law being twisted to allow something not meant to be allowed unded the rules when they were first drafted.

Cheers for the land known for great hunting ( but I know better) :hmm:

David Teague

 

[oomcurt]

Er....I am trying to understand just what you meant by a traveling game that takes Money. I seem to be getting all kinds of way less than desireable images of leased land, leased rights and all the rest of that garbage. You mean to say one cannot just drive out of town so to speak and then hunt???? Man..... :cursing: I have not hunted here in Colorado as yet...but thankfully we don't seem to have that problem as yet. Well, we do if one wants to go to one of them dang outfits that OLN pushes...but that is not for me. I really don't have much respect for that kind of hunting or the people that do that, be it hunter or land owner.

 

[tg]

I might add that throughout history the bad have often outnumbered the good and the wrong have often outnumbered the right, but that does not automaticaly dictate the final outcome of the battle.

 

[David Teague]

Ok, I don't want to derail this thread but you asked...

Alaska does have some wonderful hunting..

When you have a floatplane or jet boat to access it.

Kodiak Island has great deer hunting(and Brown Bear) but if you don't live on the island you must pay for a plane ticket to it, once there, you have to find a guide who will take you out to the back country via boat or plane.

There is one heck of a caribou herd up near Tok and Fairbanks, they come near the road system for abour a day. That'a a 900 mile round trip by car from Anchorage.

We do have 2000 moose,150 black bear and about 20 brown Bear living in the Anchorage Bowl area, but it is off limits to hunting...

You can travel about 100 miles in either direction to hunt moose (along with every other yahoo on the same 2 roads...unless you have that jet boat or airplane).Many hunters have 4 wheelers to get further off road to moose hunt.

It's not that you can't hunt, it just most forms require travel(money),airfair(money),a way to get off the road system(money)and spl equipment(4 wheeler/float plane/ jet boat...i.e. money)

You just don't hop in the old pick up truck, drive 15-20 minutes and get out to stalk...

Cheers,

David Teague

 

[Bearbait2]

Mr. Teague,
Ain't it the truth. :shocked2:
Best Wishes

 

[T-bone]

David --

Yours is a good idea in theory. However, the problem I see in putting it into practice is that a fairly broad definition of "traditional" will allow the use of guns that aren't -- while too strict a definition will outlaw the use of guns that might be considered marginal, in terms of their authenticity.

For instance, "no fast twist barrels" (or the sorts of bullets shot from them) would prevent the use of guns such as the Great Plains Hunter, as well as anything that shoots a minie ball, in spite of the fact that many guns of this type are 100% correct to the historical muzzleloading period. On the other hand, broadening the field to include the various sidehammers that feature fast-twist barrels will lead to arguments as to why this, that, or the other feature causes THIS gun to be banned while THAT one is okay. This discussion would get particularly ugly if the guns in question were variants of the same model. T/C used to make a line of fast-twist sidehammers that could be had with stainless barrels and synthetic stocks, or blued and walnut; which of these, if any, would you attempt to ban? If none, then why ban inlines? If only the stainless and synthetic variant, how does the stock material matter in terms of performance? If all, then it begs the question -- why the fast-twist walnut and blued variant, but not such guns as the T/C and CVA Hawkens, with their 1-48 twists? And, if you narrow the definition of what's acceptable to only historically correct guns, you put a price tag on the game that's beyond the means of many hunters. Aside from the question of fairness to those who own traditionally-styled but historically incorrect guns, there's the distinct possibility that, if you reduce the number of BP hunters to a sufficient degree, the bureaucrats involved in the process will decide that too few licenses and tags are being sold to justify the existence of an additional hunting season.

A reasonably fair rulebook could be written that eliminated inlines without substantial impact on more traditional styles of muzzleloaders, if you and I wrote it and interpretations of what we'd written were limited to what we intended. However, law and politics in the United States neither one work that way. The rules will be written by people who often have no idea what it is they're regulating, or why, and they will be interpreted by lawyers, who can take as simple a statement as "the sun shines during the day" and construe it to mean exactly the opposite.

Add in the fact that advocates in favor of inlines have equal say in the discussion, and I personally think that trying to make a legal issue of this would open a Pandora's box full of problems that none of us can even foresee. I'd rather spend my free time shooting, hunting, and building guns than fighting what looks, to me, to be a no-win battle.

I wonder why the NMLRA doesn't give more support to those of us that use traditional muzzleloaders?

Couldn't the NMLRA write a "rule-book" as discribed above?

Wasn't the express interest of those who organized the NMLRA (over 70 years ago) to preserve traditional muzzleloading?(what is this organization doing today, to accomplish it's goal?)

Why doesn't the NMLRA use their considerable membership-base as a way to pressure our states game departments into getting "reconnected" to the original concept of our muzzleloading seasons?

Am I missing something,.... and the NMLRA is already doing these things?

 

[roundball]

I wonder why the NMLRA doesn't give more support to those of us that use traditional muzzleloaders?

Couldn't the NMLRA write a "rule-book" as discribed above?

Wasn't the express interest of those who organized the NMLRA (over 70 years ago) to preserve traditional muzzleloading?(what is this organization doing today, to accomplish it's goal?)

Why doesn't the NMLRA use their considerable membership-base as a way to pressure our states game departments into getting "reconnected" to the original concept of our muzzleloading seasons?

Am I missing something,.... and the NMLRA is already doing these things?

I hesitate to say this, but the NMLRA is no longer dedicated to it's original charter when it was formed...it's new charter is on it's website.

Indeed, in official memo's received from them, they claim that all muzzleloaders are the same, allow inlines right in along side of everything else, and the latest example was to open the "Longhunters Record Book" to include game taken with modern inlines...all this past couple years change in their MO led to ongoing discussions which led in part to the formation of the fledgling TMA organization.

I can find nothing to indicate that NMLRA has any uniquely specific focus on promoting the traditional side of muzzleloading any differently than they are embracing the modern inline side...indeed, they have demonstrated they are dancing to the money from the inline ranks.

If you want national support for the advancement of traditional muzzleloading over anything else, you'll have to look elsewhere.

 

[T-bone]

I hesitate to say this, but the NMLRA is no longer dedicated to it's original charter when it was formed...it's new charter is on it's website.

Indeed, in official memo's received from them, they claim that all muzzleloaders are the same, allow inlines right in along side of everything else, and the latest example was to open the "Longhunters Record Book" to include game taken with modern inlines...all this past couple years change in their MO led to ongoing discussions which led in part to the formation of the fledgling TMA organization.

I can find nothing to indicate that NMLRA has any uniquely specific focus on promoting the traditional side of muzzleloading any differently than they are embracing the modern inline side...indeed, they have demonstrated they are dancing to the money from the inline ranks.

If you want national support for the advancement of traditional muzzleloading over anything else, you'll have to look elsewhere.

Roundball, thanks for the information, although I am greatly saddened to hear it.

I'll check out the young TMA, and if it's dedicated to preserveing traditional muzzleloading... I'll certainly do what I can to help them in turn.

T-bone

 

[netoleon]

Vis a' vis getting folks interested in traditional MLs I'd like to re-emphasize Mssr. Zonie's well made points with my own experience.

I've got two hunting buddies down my road. They both have inlines, not trad. MLs. My buddy Joe was a centerfire hunter only, until he got a second hand, scoped inline last year. This year he took a doe in early ML season with it. He described that shot as "200 yards", but I reckon if one subtracts the "...it was that big !" fisherman-factor - it was likely a bit over 100. Later on, he complained during shotgun season because he'd missed taking a 75' shot one day. So he was going to carry his inline (allowed in MD ) for the rest of shotgun season. OK, he was starting to make the right connections. Then after the season was over, he groused to me that he'd missed 3 shots at under 50 yd.s with his scoped inline. Accordiing to him, the lack of a see-through scope mount caused him to overshoot, his sights are set for 100'. I pointed out to him that I couldn't remember missing any target at under 50' with open rifle sights, and that I was probably better than 90% at 100. Clearly he was thinking about that right then, and the 3 deer he'd missed. Next time we get a chance I'll give him a Demo and let him prove it to himself.

My other bud, Kevin, has had an inline for two seasons also. Last time he stopped by, he was complaining that he got lots of misfires, partly because he has a double-safety, etc.,etc... OK, I wasn't going to debate the hardware or operator efficacy with him. I just pointed out that I'd fired dozens of rounds through my new caplock and hadn't had a misfire once. I invited him over for a little target shooting, but he had to run. Just like Joe, I'll get him next time.

I think there's hope of turning some of these new fangled guys around. Until we can get a stronger minority opinion in the Trad. vs. Modern population it'll be hard to get our voices heard. I know that MD DNR responds to numbers when addressing hunter concerns, and we're outnumbered.

I hear Pennsylvania has a Flintlock Only seaon, but I don't know how they started that. Might be something to lobby for in your (or my!) state. It sounds a little restrictive, but it sure must beat sharing the woods with "Moderns". Courage, mon Freres !

 

Amen to your statement tg. When I conduct my Hunter Safety classes we are required to teach a segment on black powder firearms. As instructors we bring our personal firearms to the classes for demonstrative purposes. Oh, by the way, under no circumstances are we allowed to refer to these firearms as WEAPONS! that's politically incorrect!!!!!!! This being said, I show the students in my classes samples of a flintlock as well as a sidelock muzzleloading rifle. I explain as well as demonstrate to them how to load, prime and fire each of them. We then have them watch a video tape on the proper use and safety of flintlock and sidelock rifles as well as sidelock handguns. Being that none of us instructors has or would even think of having one of these undesireable scope mounted *#@ines we only briefly touch on the subject of same. The bottom line is this, the only impression I give my students is that there are only two types of muzzleloading rifles with which you can hunt with. There's the sidelock or there's the flintlock.

 

[chuck-ia]

we are really outmumbered here. I (we) shoot traditional because we enjoy it, shoot every chance I get. around here, when I hear someone say I'm gonna get a muzzleloader, I know that they are gonna get an inline. I just don't get it, they get an inline to hunt the muzzleloader seasons, and then hunt like shotgun season. to me the muzzleloader is a personal thing, I think it is meant to be one on one hunting situation, not the deer drives they do around here. advertizing doesn't help, how many have seen the advertizment on t.v. when the guy takes the inline out of the box and the first shot is a bullseye? I don't think we stand a chance of converting the inline guys to use a sidelock percussion, or god forbidd a flintlock. too much work involved. there are 2 of us in this area that shoot flintlocks, might see an occasional perc. the rest inlines. sad thing about it, I know quite a few that own inlines, and I never see them at the range. sorry, but I can get a bit carried away on this subject. flinch

 

flinch, as I stated in regards to tg, I'm trying to do my part to instill traditional muzzleloading to the students in my Hunter Safety classes. I'm in total agreement with you in that many hunters buy muzzleloading tags just for the extra week of hunting. I also know from first hand experience that the overwhelming majority of them use #%$ines. What really gets me is that a lot of these folks actually think that these *()ines are just like centerfire rifles and that they don't have to clean them right away. Because I work with a large number of pro gun/hunters who know of my background I'm constantly being plagued with requests from fellow employees to help them with their severely corroded **line rifles. You just would'nt believe it! I'm a die hard Hawken Rifle enthusist, that's all I ever hunt with. Regular as well as Muzzleoder season. It's always muzzleoader season during deer season for me. You'ld be amazed at the looks I get when other hunters see me with my PC Hawken in hand> I've actually had a few guys tell me that they think I'm cracked!

 

[David Teague]

Well, when they ask for help cleaning the Inline...

Don't. :hatsoff:

Muhahahahahaha. :blah:

but always help a fellow muzzleloader. :winking:

 

[3 stinky dogs]

Now when I got started in this ML stuff it was when I bought a really stupid looking flint lock pistol for $20.00. Since then I have put about $3,000 into my new hobby. I have spent alot of time looking at all the folks who sell the guns and make the associated products and it is plain to see that they too are in it for the money. Take track of the wolf as an example. Look on Pg 100-101 of the catalogue. For $670.00 + S&H I get a gun that is covered by no warranty and is nothing special. I have to do all the work. How much does a stock blank really cost ? How much effort does it take to set up a machine that carves a stock for you or machine out a lock and parts on a CNC machine ? For that money I just bought a Winchester 94 at Walley world and some ammo.10 Min's at the range and I hit the Wood's . if I got a CVA super in-line I get my pellets, sabots , and pistol bullets.10 Min's and I am ready to hunt. I can do the same with that amount of $$ and get a production side lock from T/C and have money to spare. The problem also lies with the two sides of the debate. Each try there hardest to offend the other by saying how lazy one is or how arrogant the other is instead of doing what they can to make there own experience in the woods a better one. There are Jerks and gut shooters in both camps in equal numbers. I am lucky. I shoot at a small indoor range and alot of the guy's I shoot with have varied interest and knowledge in all aspects being debated. They are not bothered by the debate because in there years of going to the woods it hasn't been a problem. they except the facts that things change and that the woods are shrinking and they spend the time they have making the best of what they got instead of complaining about it.

 

[Runner]

I believe we were just told to shut up and leave those poor inliners alone!