News from Idaho.
01-17-2008, 09:13 PM
#1
Typical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 666
News from Idaho.
Just picked this up off the IDFG site.
IDAHO FISH AND GAME
HEADQUARTERS NEWS RELEASE
Boise, ID
Date: January 17, 2008
Contact: Ed Mitchell
(208) 334-3700
commission changes muzzleloader rule
The Idaho Fish and Game Commission Thursday, January 16, dropped the requirement for an external pivoting hammer from the rules on muzzleloader-only seasons.
In January 2007, the Idaho Fish and Game Commission adopted new equipment rules for muzzleloader-only hunts.
Nearly 4,000 hunters commented during 2006 on the original proposals with roughly equal numbers supporting and opposing the proposed rule changes. While many traditional muzzleloader hunters support the new rules, many others, including modern muzzleloader hunters, did not.
The most controversial rule change was been the requirement for a pivoting hammer, functionally prohibiting the use of many in-line muzzleloaders in muzzleloader-only hunts. Additionally, the pivoting hammer requirement has been confusing to many hunters, generating numerous requests to Fish and Game to clarify whether individual muzzleloaders are legal to use.
In-line muzzleloaders have no ballistic, or overall range, advantage over "side-lock" muzzleloaders.
Thursday's action allows most in-line muzzleloaders back into muzzleloader-only hunts.
Other rules for muzzleloaders, including the requirements for loose power, exposed percussion cap ignition, all-lead (no sabots or bullets with plastic gas seals attached) bullets, remain in effect.
IDAHO FISH AND GAME
HEADQUARTERS NEWS RELEASE
Boise, ID
Date: January 17, 2008
Contact: Ed Mitchell
(208) 334-3700
commission changes muzzleloader rule
The Idaho Fish and Game Commission Thursday, January 16, dropped the requirement for an external pivoting hammer from the rules on muzzleloader-only seasons.
In January 2007, the Idaho Fish and Game Commission adopted new equipment rules for muzzleloader-only hunts.
Nearly 4,000 hunters commented during 2006 on the original proposals with roughly equal numbers supporting and opposing the proposed rule changes. While many traditional muzzleloader hunters support the new rules, many others, including modern muzzleloader hunters, did not.
The most controversial rule change was been the requirement for a pivoting hammer, functionally prohibiting the use of many in-line muzzleloaders in muzzleloader-only hunts. Additionally, the pivoting hammer requirement has been confusing to many hunters, generating numerous requests to Fish and Game to clarify whether individual muzzleloaders are legal to use.
In-line muzzleloaders have no ballistic, or overall range, advantage over "side-lock" muzzleloaders.
Thursday's action allows most in-line muzzleloaders back into muzzleloader-only hunts.
Other rules for muzzleloaders, including the requirements for loose power, exposed percussion cap ignition, all-lead (no sabots or bullets with plastic gas seals attached) bullets, remain in effect.
01-18-2008, 05:37 AM
#3
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location:
Posts: 3,246
RE: News from Idaho.
ORIGINAL: goatbrother
Just picked this up off the IDFG site.
IDAHO FISH AND GAME
HEADQUARTERS NEWS RELEASE
Boise, ID
Date: January 17, 2008
Contact: Ed Mitchell
(208) 334-3700
commission changes muzzleloader rule
The Idaho Fish and Game Commission Thursday, January 16, dropped the requirement for an external pivoting hammer from the rules on muzzleloader-only seasons.
In January 2007, the Idaho Fish and Game Commission adopted new equipment rules for muzzleloader-only hunts.
Nearly 4,000 hunters commented during 2006 on the original proposals with roughly equal numbers supporting and opposing the proposed rule changes. While many traditional muzzleloader hunters support the new rules, many others, including modern muzzleloader hunters, did not.
The most controversial rule change was been the requirement for a pivoting hammer, functionally prohibiting the use of many in-line muzzleloaders in muzzleloader-only hunts. Additionally, the pivoting hammer requirement has been confusing to many hunters, generating numerous requests to Fish and Game to clarify whether individual muzzleloaders are legal to use.
In-line muzzleloaders have no ballistic, or overall range, advantage over "side-lock" muzzleloaders.
Thursday's action allows most in-line muzzleloaders back into muzzleloader-only hunts.
Other rules for muzzleloaders, including the requirements for loose power, exposed percussion cap ignition, all-lead (no sabots or bullets with plastic gas seals attached) bullets, remain in effect.
Just picked this up off the IDFG site.
IDAHO FISH AND GAME
HEADQUARTERS NEWS RELEASE
Boise, ID
Date: January 17, 2008
Contact: Ed Mitchell
(208) 334-3700
commission changes muzzleloader rule
The Idaho Fish and Game Commission Thursday, January 16, dropped the requirement for an external pivoting hammer from the rules on muzzleloader-only seasons.
In January 2007, the Idaho Fish and Game Commission adopted new equipment rules for muzzleloader-only hunts.
Nearly 4,000 hunters commented during 2006 on the original proposals with roughly equal numbers supporting and opposing the proposed rule changes. While many traditional muzzleloader hunters support the new rules, many others, including modern muzzleloader hunters, did not.
The most controversial rule change was been the requirement for a pivoting hammer, functionally prohibiting the use of many in-line muzzleloaders in muzzleloader-only hunts. Additionally, the pivoting hammer requirement has been confusing to many hunters, generating numerous requests to Fish and Game to clarify whether individual muzzleloaders are legal to use.
In-line muzzleloaders have no ballistic, or overall range, advantage over "side-lock" muzzleloaders.
Thursday's action allows most in-line muzzleloaders back into muzzleloader-only hunts.
Other rules for muzzleloaders, including the requirements for loose power, exposed percussion cap ignition, all-lead (no sabots or bullets with plastic gas seals attached) bullets, remain in effect.
Renegades up and running. Chap Gleason
01-18-2008, 09:17 AM
#4
Typical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 771
RE: News from Idaho.
Even though I'm surethis will cause extreme hearburn amongst the "traditional ML only" enthusiasts...
This is really a very reasonable compromise approach in my view. Hat's off to the Idaho DFG.
Tahquamenon
This is really a very reasonable compromise approach in my view. Hat's off to the Idaho DFG.
Tahquamenon
01-18-2008, 10:21 AM
#5
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Idaho
Posts: 11,703
RE: News from Idaho.
goatbrother
Wonder why this does not apply in Idaho???
Wonder why this does not apply in Idaho???
Jim Douglas, administrator of the agency's wildlife division, said the average age of Nebraska deer hunters is 42. Under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, the agency must provide reasonable accommodations for people with visual disabilities or risk losing millions in federal money used for wildlife conservation in Nebraska.
01-18-2008, 12:12 PM
#6
Typical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 973
RE: News from Idaho.
Wonder why this does not apply in Idaho???
[blockquote]quote:
Jim Douglas, administrator of the agency's wildlife division, said the average age of Nebraska deer hunters is 42. Under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, the agency must provide reasonable accommodations for people with visual disabilities or risk losing millions in federal money used for wildlife conservation in Nebraska. [/blockquote]
[blockquote]quote:
Jim Douglas, administrator of the agency's wildlife division, said the average age of Nebraska deer hunters is 42. Under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, the agency must provide reasonable accommodations for people with visual disabilities or risk losing millions in federal money used for wildlife conservation in Nebraska. [/blockquote]
The EEOC says:
"A vision impairment is a disability if: (1) it substantially limits a major life activity; (2) it was substantially limiting in the past (i.e., if an individual has a ‘record of’ a substantially limiting impairment); or (3) an employer ‘regards’ or treats an individual as having a substantially limiting vision impairment…
"Major life activities are those basic activities, including seeing, that an average person can perform with little or no difficulty…
"A totally blind person still meets the ADA's first definition of ‘disability,’ even if she can move about freely with the use of a white cane or service animal, can work with assistive technology or a reader, and can use her hearing to do what others can do using sight (e.g., cross a street)…
"A person who has a record of an impairment that substantially limited a major life activity in the past or who is regarded by his employer as having such an impairment also has a disability and, therefore, is covered by the ADA."
It might be better to say the law doesn't apply any more to Idaho than to Nebraska. Mr.Douglas was bigtime stretching theintent of ADA in his statement, though there's little doubt a lawsuit brought by a bunch of gray-haired, spectacle-wearing, 50-somethings might wellhave founda sympathetic jury and cost the state of Nebraska much moola. I'd have to say, he was simply "dodging bullets"
[/align][/align]
