You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Illuminated Reticle-Good or Bad?
- Thread starter hogman
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
traks44
Well-Known Member
not legal in some states, I have one on my nighforce and really never use it. If conditions are bad to the point where I need it, I probably shouldnt be shooting in the first place. They are kinda cool to have but I really have not found a good use for it. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif
ss7mm
Well-Known Member
Re: Illuminated Reticle-Good or Bad? Interesting data
magicofmt and 4ked Horn:
Since I'll be hunting in Idaho next year and also possibly Montana this was of interest to me. I contacted both departments of game, described an illuminated reticle, like in a Nightforce, and they both replied that a scope with an illuminated reticle is legal in both states. Interesting to say the least.
Their replies differentiate between electronic devices, illuminated reticles and light projection. They both replied that an illuminated reticle is legal for big game hunting. Reading between the lines, it seems that they don't want you to have a light attached to the scope, or anything that projects a light, for big game hunting but an illuminated reticle is legal.
If you want to double check you can e-mail both states and see what their reply to you is. It should be the same if they know what they're talking about.
magicofmt and 4ked Horn:
Since I'll be hunting in Idaho next year and also possibly Montana this was of interest to me. I contacted both departments of game, described an illuminated reticle, like in a Nightforce, and they both replied that a scope with an illuminated reticle is legal in both states. Interesting to say the least.
Their replies differentiate between electronic devices, illuminated reticles and light projection. They both replied that an illuminated reticle is legal for big game hunting. Reading between the lines, it seems that they don't want you to have a light attached to the scope, or anything that projects a light, for big game hunting but an illuminated reticle is legal.
If you want to double check you can e-mail both states and see what their reply to you is. It should be the same if they know what they're talking about.
gonehuntingagain
Well-Known Member
Re: Illuminated Reticle-Good or Bad? Interesting data
Directly from the Big Game regs, page 9 http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/hunt/rules/bg/info.pdf
In any hunt, including any-weapon seasons, it is
unlawful to pursue or kill big game animals:
• With any electronic device attached to, or incorporated
on, the firearm or scope.
I would think that you would get a ticket if you used a illuminated reticle.
Did you talk to an Enforecement Officer or just the people that answer the phones at the front desk?
Directly from the Big Game regs, page 9 http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/hunt/rules/bg/info.pdf
In any hunt, including any-weapon seasons, it is
unlawful to pursue or kill big game animals:
• With any electronic device attached to, or incorporated
on, the firearm or scope.
I would think that you would get a ticket if you used a illuminated reticle.
Did you talk to an Enforecement Officer or just the people that answer the phones at the front desk?
ss7mm
Well-Known Member
Re: Illuminated Reticle-Good or Bad? Interesting data
gonehuntingagain:
The response from Idaho did not specify who the person was or what department and capacity they were in. The answer is worded a little vaguely. The person that made the reply did not consider an illuminated reticle to be an electronic piece of equipment attached to, or incorporated on, the firearm. If I get time tomorrow I will call one of the offices over there and try to talk either to the enforcement division or a field enforcement officer and see what their response is.
The reply from Montana said specifically that if it only illuminated the reticle and did not project a light from the scope it was legal. They said specifically that a scope with illuminated reticle was legal for big game hunting. The response from Montana came from the Enforcement Division and was signed by a person in that division.
I may call Montana also and see what an officer over there says. Not getting this defined ahead of time could be costly to say the least.
gonehuntingagain:
The response from Idaho did not specify who the person was or what department and capacity they were in. The answer is worded a little vaguely. The person that made the reply did not consider an illuminated reticle to be an electronic piece of equipment attached to, or incorporated on, the firearm. If I get time tomorrow I will call one of the offices over there and try to talk either to the enforcement division or a field enforcement officer and see what their response is.
The reply from Montana said specifically that if it only illuminated the reticle and did not project a light from the scope it was legal. They said specifically that a scope with illuminated reticle was legal for big game hunting. The response from Montana came from the Enforcement Division and was signed by a person in that division.
I may call Montana also and see what an officer over there says. Not getting this defined ahead of time could be costly to say the least.
gonehuntingagain
Well-Known Member
Re: Illuminated Reticle-Good or Bad? Interesting data
[ QUOTE ]
Not getting this defined ahead of time could be costly to say the least.
[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely - better safe than sorry. The reason that I asked if you talked to an enforcement person comes from hearing about 4ked's adventures with trying to get a correct answer (he got answers that didn't make sense) from the office - the people up front are not the ones that will write the ticket. He did get in touch with an enforcement officer and the questions were answered.
[ QUOTE ]
Not getting this defined ahead of time could be costly to say the least.
[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely - better safe than sorry. The reason that I asked if you talked to an enforcement person comes from hearing about 4ked's adventures with trying to get a correct answer (he got answers that didn't make sense) from the office - the people up front are not the ones that will write the ticket. He did get in touch with an enforcement officer and the questions were answered.
ss7mm
Well-Known Member
Re: Illuminated Reticle-Good or Bad? Interesting data
gonehuntingagain:
I followed up on this today with some interesting results. I called and talked to an enforcement officer in Salmon, Idaho and talked to him quite a bit. I explained the illuminated reticle and he said that anything electronic, or battery powered can't be incorporated in, or attached to, a scope. This makes sense and follows what the regs say. I read the e-mail reply I had received to him and he asked me to forward it to him so he could communicate with their info department that they are giving out the wrong information. He was very friendly and helpful. He also said that removing the battery would still mean that you have an illegal device and it would be treated as such.
I also called the enforcement division in Montana and confirmed that the e-mail response they sent was correct. This time a different person than the one that replied via e-mail also told me that if it only illuminates the reticle and doesn't project a light or beam out of the scope then it's legal to use in the state of Montana.
Montana seems to sort their e-mails and distributes them to the correct department for replies. If you have an enforcement question, you get a reply from the enforcement division, not just from someone in the "state info department". Idaho should do the same as it would eliminate a lot of potential problems.
gonehuntingagain:
I followed up on this today with some interesting results. I called and talked to an enforcement officer in Salmon, Idaho and talked to him quite a bit. I explained the illuminated reticle and he said that anything electronic, or battery powered can't be incorporated in, or attached to, a scope. This makes sense and follows what the regs say. I read the e-mail reply I had received to him and he asked me to forward it to him so he could communicate with their info department that they are giving out the wrong information. He was very friendly and helpful. He also said that removing the battery would still mean that you have an illegal device and it would be treated as such.
I also called the enforcement division in Montana and confirmed that the e-mail response they sent was correct. This time a different person than the one that replied via e-mail also told me that if it only illuminates the reticle and doesn't project a light or beam out of the scope then it's legal to use in the state of Montana.
Montana seems to sort their e-mails and distributes them to the correct department for replies. If you have an enforcement question, you get a reply from the enforcement division, not just from someone in the "state info department". Idaho should do the same as it would eliminate a lot of potential problems.
gonehuntingagain
Well-Known Member
Re: Illuminated Reticle-Good or Bad? Interesting data
That would be so nice if Idaho routed their emails like Montana - it might save someone a ticket too.
That would be so nice if Idaho routed their emails like Montana - it might save someone a ticket too.
ss7mm
Well-Known Member
Re: Illuminated Reticle-Good or Bad? Interesting data
Late this afternoon I talked to a fella that is in the north central part of Idaho and he has been pushing to get the laws changed in Idaho about the reticle issue. He says that the game wardens and their supervisors in his part of the state have told him that they would not cite anyone for using an illuminated reticle. This means that in different parts of Idaho the laws will be interpreted differently.
Late this afternoon I talked to a fella that is in the north central part of Idaho and he has been pushing to get the laws changed in Idaho about the reticle issue. He says that the game wardens and their supervisors in his part of the state have told him that they would not cite anyone for using an illuminated reticle. This means that in different parts of Idaho the laws will be interpreted differently.
Re: Illuminated Reticle-Good or Bad? Interesting data
To add to this I called Wyoming's fish and game and they said that an illuminated reticle is illegal as well even with no battery in it..
Colorado's regulations are much more clear. They address this. Illum reticles are LEGAL in Co.
To add to this I called Wyoming's fish and game and they said that an illuminated reticle is illegal as well even with no battery in it..
Colorado's regulations are much more clear. They address this. Illum reticles are LEGAL in Co.
I've used a Nightforce 5.5x22 with illuminated reticle for the last four years. I've hunted deer in the Black Belt of Alabama and deer and hogs in South Georgia. The limit on deer is two per day in the county where I hunt in Alabama and the deer density is 75-100 per sq mile. I've killed many does when it was too dark to see an unlit reticle. I've used the illuminated reticle to kill does out to 300 yards. I've not shot a buck under those conditions because the available light is inadequate to access the antlers. In Georgia I've killed several hogs and one doe this year using the illuminated reticle.
I'm sold on Nightforce with its illuminated reticle.
I'm sold on Nightforce with its illuminated reticle.
