Rules for primitive weapons need to be set in stone and technology arrested. As far as I'm concerned what other states do is their business but Idaho shouldn't follow the whims of the firearms or archery industries or the latest gadget or craze on the "Outdoor Channel".
Idealistic statement but very grossly naive to think that is even possible.
If it was followed by your grandfather, archery today would be wood arrows and lemonwood bows only, and you would have the real tradionalists crying like a rat eating onions of the unfair advantage those guys have over the self bows and flint arrows.
Technology will never be arrested. Here is a perfect example. We have fast twist sidelock barrels now and super high BC "lead" bullets that make a 200 yd shot highly accurate with less than 8' drop from a 100 yd zero.
We already know inlines have been here before caplocks. So if they were here before caplocks, and this is as 150 yrs ago, they must be legal also. Maybe the arguement should be that the caplock that is the modern technology?
What you consider modern technology today, your grandson will consider primitive.
Lets not limit the modern technology prohibitions to just primitive seasons. Mandate use lever action 44-40s for general firearms. Got to hold them technological advances, heaven forbid another hunter get those advantages and I get my panties in a wad over that.
For those wanting to use modern technology, let them hunt during the general season. Using 200 to 300 yd. muzzleloaders violates the intent of what a muzzleloader season is really about.
Says who? Once again, people are inserting their personal beliefs and desires what it should be based on "what you want" and trying to mandate how eveyone else should hunt. that is what this whole discussion is about.
Where is it written that everyone else has to hunt like "you" want them to??
Quite simply it is nothing more than personal whims/desires and trying to mandate those on everyone else!
What is really interesting, I have only heard one or two commenters here talk about opening more land for hunting, trying to get kids involved, grow hunting opportunities. Yet we see numerous comments about restricting it for the protection of the chosen ones because they basically do not want to compete with the extra competition. Oh, they normally will not say it in those open terms but even Ray Charles can see it. Once again, IMO totally selfish motives and have nothing to do with the good of the sport or programs.
How is that good for hunting, the game mgmt programs and the sport?
I am not a personal fan of crossbows, but it put more hunters in the field in VA and has overall been positive, except for the required O2 that must be given routinely to the die hard traditional archers.
Yes, that helped companies, but more importantly it helped hunting and allowed more hunters to hunt and to keep hunting. No one stays 25 yrs old and can always use traditional archery or open sights.