LaneNebraska

I was there this morning.

Passed 5-3




Commission OKs muzzleloading scopes

BY JOE DUGGAN/Lincoln Journal Star

Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 - 12:54:58 pm CST
Deer hunters will be allowed to use magnifying scopes on their muzzleloading rifles next winter after a split vote Thursday of the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission.

Commissioners voted 5-3 to adopt perhaps the most significant change to blackpowder hunting in Nebraska since the December season started in 1989. Multipowered scopes not only will allow hunters to more accurately place shots, they will effectively double the lethal range of the rifles to about 250 yards.

The vote will be applauded by some hunters who say they need the scopes because of impaired eyesight. But others will decry the change, arguing modern scopes violate the traditions of hunting with close-range historic rifles and they will only encourage some people to take unethically long shots or hunt illegally from roadsides.

Many of the commissioners said the proposal triggered more calls and letters than any other controversy they have encountered on the board. They also generally agreed that roughly equal numbers of their constituents supported or opposed the proposal.

In addition, the commissioners heard about 50 minutes of testimony during a public hearing Thursday morning. Of the seven people who testified, five opposed multipowered scopes while two were in favor.

“This is a hard decision,” said Commissioner Lynn Berggren of Broken Bow. “This is tougher than what I do in business.”

Commission wildlife staff recommended the change because they annually receive requests to allow multipower scopes. 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.

The commission considered allowing impaired hunters to use the scopes on a case-by-case basis, but staff thought doing so would be administratively complicated and difficult to enforce.

About 16,000 people hunt with muzzleloaders in Nebraska. The commission expects that number to climb now that scopes are allowed, which was another reason they recommended the change. The agency has seen hunting permit sales, which help fund the commission’s work, decline over time.

Several commissioners expressed concerns that attracting more hunters, especially those who would potentially road hunt or trespass, could make private landowners less willing to tolerate a month-long muzzleloading season.

Commissioners voting for scopes were Gary Parker of Columbus, Mark Pinkerton of Wilber, George Hall of Bridgeport, James Ziebarth of Wilcox and Ron Stave of Omaha. Voting against were Berggren, Kent Forney of Lincoln and Jerrod Burke of Curtis.

“I think we are charged with trying to make it easier to hunt rather than more difficult,” Parker said.

cayugad

An interesting outlook on the issue... I've always felt it should be a matter of choice.

rockyshamrock

i feel it is a matter of choice. here in Iowa we have been able to use scopes on a ml for as long as i have been hunting with one. 6 years. 99% of the ml shots i take are under 100 yards. i do use a scope just because thats what I'm use to. i shoot 80% better with one be it deer ,coyote, fox or just punching paper. i finally put one on my 454 and i now shoot 2 inch groups at 100 yards. before that it was around 6 inch grouping. its no different then the shotgun hunters with slug guns using a scope in my opinion.

frontier gander

Booo Nebraska

alleyyooper

I like the part about Americans with disabilties act. Equals money for Nebraska. Never thought that act covered anything other than work for disabled Americans.
I use a scope and Might noteven hunt the muzzle loader season if it wasn't legal here in Michigan. Again it is the old eyes, and a peep does work for me but not as well.

Al

MLKeith

I sort of disagree with the "double the lethal range" comment. I use a scope as Arizona allows it and I think my longest shot to date has been 90 yards. I passed up an elk cow on my last hunt at 140 yards as I had not practiced that range enough to be confident. I need the scope to make a good shot as iron sights do not work well for me and a peep only helps a little. I plan on doing a lot more longer shots to be confident to 150 yards but personally think that is the limit of reasonable muzzleloader hunting distance. Passing up the elk was hard as I need the meat as I use it as the source of cancer free red meat. Since a bout with Prostate cancer I stopped using the local feed lot beef. I also think it should be a matter of choice. I think all the concern about ruining the muzzleloading hunting is crap. Arizona does not have any of the real problems that they talk about other than the normal amount of people that are week-end hunters and they would do the same things whether they had a scope or not.

petasux

Gotta agree with MLKeith on this, someone that untill now has limited thier shooting to under 125 yrds isnt going to miraculously be able to shoot 250 yrds due to a scope.Most people I think know thier limitations, the ones that dont are already shooting past thier effective ranges.Just because you can see something doesnt automaticaly mean you should be able to shoot at it.

Interesting, I always thought state game agencies were charged with doing whats best for the animals, not the hunters.

dmurphy317

To me effective range is defined by 2 primary factors, the ability of the shooter to consistantly place the bullet in the right spot in the conditions presented and the ability of the load to do the job once it gets there. While a scope may help one place the shot with a bit more accuracy it will not automatically make the gun or shooter have a doubled effective range. It probably will increase the shooters accurate range but most likely will not double it without practice (which would also help most shooters with regular sights).

As for the hunters who have questionable ethics, this change will make little or no difference in their character.

I also noted in the article that part of the reasoning was declining hunter numbers and thus revenue. This may help in that area but I do think herd health should stillbe their number one priority. I hope this is true in this case.

rem 700

Cheers, I know some guys will scope their guns, some new hunters will come to try, and the majority will probably go like they always have.