|
|
Post by mbogo on Sept 13, 2005 9:25:51 GMT -5
Given the increasing deer herd would you support the use of centerfire carbines for deer? Would the results of Iowa's first centerfire rifle season (in a part of the state) change your opinion? Would the inclusion/exclusion of cartridges originating in the bp era(.30-30, .45-70, .38-55, etc.) or standard lever action cartridges (.35 rem, .444 and .450 Marlin) change your opinion?
|
|
|
|
Post by DEERTRACKS on Sept 13, 2005 14:45:54 GMT -5
Yes, I would support the use of centerfire carbines for deer.
Iowa's results would not effect my opinion.
Both types of cartridges would be fine with me.
Thank you for the clarification.
|
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Sept 13, 2005 17:50:28 GMT -5
Sorry, that was worded rather awkwardly. If a rule change like this were made in the future, would you prefer that only pistol calibers were allowed? Or would you prefer that blunt nosed, lever-action type rounds were also allowed?
|
|
|
|
Post by jajwrigh on Sept 13, 2005 22:20:53 GMT -5
Both of those categories that you mention should be allowed.
|
|
|
|
Post by kevin1 on Sept 14, 2005 4:49:16 GMT -5
I would support the inclusion of centerfire rifles , I would not want them limited to pistol calibers only though . I don't care what happened in Iowa , that's Iowa's problem to deal with .
|
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Sept 14, 2005 5:49:53 GMT -5
It will be interesting to see what happens, Iowa's move may well start a trend.
|
|
|
|
Post by drs on Sept 14, 2005 6:49:12 GMT -5
<Yes, only if limited to standard pistol cartridges> Cartridges that SHOULD be allowed in Rifles, in Indiana, are: .357 Mag, .41 Mag., .44 Mag., .45 Long Colt, .454.
|
|
|
|
Post by jajwrigh on Sept 14, 2005 7:26:17 GMT -5
How likely do you think it is that we will ever really have this chance?? I would think that if enough people moved for it something may happen in a season or two.
|
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Sept 14, 2005 8:18:22 GMT -5
How likely do you think it is that we will ever really have this chance?? I would think that if enough people moved for it something may happen in a season or two. That is an excellent question, but one without a simple answer. An excellent case can be made for their inclusion, but that may not be enough. If I were to speculate however, I would say that I think the change will be made eventually. How soon it happens depends not only on the amount of support but also to the degree that support is organized. The DNR's efforts to control the deer herd and the potential revenue that may be generated would serve as strong internal motivation. |
|
|
|
Post by duff on Sept 14, 2005 8:41:10 GMT -5
Why does the size of the herd have anything to do with what type of weapon should be legal? How would this generate an additional revenue? So there are people who don't hunt right now cause they can't use a centerfire, or maybe they will buy additonal tags to use a centerfire. Would you suggest that they have a seperate season and license?
|
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Sept 14, 2005 9:52:14 GMT -5
The size of the herd is a motivating factor for many rule changes. The recent changes in the bonus permits make this clear. Other DNR proposed changes make this even clearer.
Additional revenue would be generated by P-R funds from the purchase of rifles and ammo without the creation of additional licenses or seasons. How much depends on how popular the change would turn out to be.
While I'm sure there are a few people that do not deer hunt because they are restricted to shotguns that is not of the greatest importance. Of greater importance, is that women, kids and others of small stature have a more effective option than the .410.
I'm not suggesting a separate season but I wouldn't be opposed to late season oppurtunities in Herd Reduction Counties either. Nor am I suggesting additional licenses, though I suspect that more than a few people would be willing to pay for them.
|
|
|
|
Post by drs on Sept 14, 2005 9:54:28 GMT -5
Why does the size of the herd have anything to do with what type of weapon should be legal? How would this generate an additional revenue? So there are people who don't hunt right now cause they can't use a centerfire, or maybe they will buy additonal tags to use a centerfire. Would you suggest that they have a seperate season and license? The type of weapon would have very little to do with revenue increases. I beieve it involves FREEDOM to choose which firearm/cartridge a Deer Hunter wishes to use. Personally, I find it prudent to allow the use of "Pistol" cartridges, on private property, that are strightwalled, like the .44 Magnum in rifles for Deer. But I don't think rifle cartridges like the .243, .308, ect. should be allowed as they have too much range for the population (Human) density in just about every county in Indiana. The pistol cartridges are a great deal cheaper than sabot shotgun slug that cost $12 to $15 per box of 5 shells, while a box of 50 .44 Magnum shells cost around $28/box and are reloadable. I should also add that State owned properties & Special Hunting areas, should stay with Shotgun slugs or M/L only. |
|
|
|
Post by duff on Sept 14, 2005 10:59:11 GMT -5
.... Of greater importance, is that women, kids and others of small stature have a more effective option than the .410. .... There is, inline muzzleloader. I have not used a shot gun for the last 4 or 5 seasons. I would recomend an inline to any person big or small if they don't like the recoil or accuracy of a shotgun. |
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Sept 14, 2005 11:43:38 GMT -5
Inlines are a great choice, but they create more problems than they solve as far as young, or small of stature shooters are concerned. So why not a carbine?
|
|
|
|
Post by duff on Sept 14, 2005 12:05:49 GMT -5
How do you figure they create more problems?
Why not a carbine, I don't have a good answer to that.
|
|
|
|
Post by drs on Sept 14, 2005 13:05:40 GMT -5
How do you figure they create more problems? Why not a carbine, I don't have a good answer to that. A Black Powder firing rifle is more suited to those individuals that are interested in that type shooting/hunting. The average Hunting person would not be interested in the cleaning, reloading, maintenance, or trying to choose the "Best" load for his or hers' M/L. LETS LEGALIZE THE USE OF PISTOL CARTRIDGES IN RIFLES FOR DEER!! ENOUGH TALK! JUST DO IT ALREADY!!! |
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Sept 14, 2005 14:28:41 GMT -5
The main reason I see that they can cause more problems than they solve is the physical difficulty in loading them. My old Knight took considerable force to properly seat the bullet even for me and I'm not small of stature by any stretch of the imagination, lol. Any person old enough to hunt probably could manage to load a muzzleloader for the first shot but if a second shot is required before swabbing the bore they would have a very difficult time seating the bullet.
|
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Sept 14, 2005 15:21:33 GMT -5
I admire your enthusiasm but discussing issues and generating ideas is about all that can be accomplished on a forum. Unless of course one of our fellow members is actually Mr. Hupfer and happens to agree. ;D The best thing to do is bring the issue up for discussion any chance you get and make a strong case for it whenever the DNR has a hearing on proposed rule changes.
|
|
|
|
Post by hoosier on Sept 14, 2005 16:17:47 GMT -5
I'd be all for carbines with handgun cartridges for deer hunting. Sign me up !!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by steiny on Sept 14, 2005 18:01:30 GMT -5
Don't support it, and don't see it happening. Actually, those pistol rounds are a pretty poor deer round anyway, compared to modern slugs.
Would be pretty sweet however, if they'd give me permission to use my .270 or .300 mag.
|
|
