PEAX Equipment

This'll stir the pot!

Idaho's muzzleloaders are pretty basic.... rule:
• Equipped with only open or peep sights. Scopes and any electronics are prohibited.

• Loaded only with loose black powder, loose Pyrodex, or other loose synthetic black powder. Pelletized powders are prohibited.

• Loaded with a patched round ball or conical non-jacketed projectile comprised wholly of lead or lead alloy.

• Equipped only with a flint, percussion cap or musket cap. 209 primers are prohibited.

• Equipped with an ignition system in which any portion of the cap is exposed or visible when the weapon is cocked and ready to fire.

I don't know about you guy's but I think this is about as primitive as it get's with a muzzleloader here in Idaho, not sure how those stat's are accurate, I could be wrong thou, I don't see that muzzleloader/archery are the same as rifle as far as success rate, either that or there are more liar's out there than we thought that are untruthful in there harvest report just too be "cool" or skim the stat's.
Matt
 
mtmuley said:
magnet, I agree. Most hunters that do it casually probably use a rifle. Goes back to what you said about being easy. That being said, guys like that aren't hunters as I define them. Rifle hunting can be an obsession too. I sometimes wonder why I burn hundreds of rounds per year to only send one at a critter. mtmuley
Click to expand...
Most guys who do what you do are obsessed with shooting not hunting. From following your posts I think you qualified for both:eek:
 
Archery equipment is so much better than 20 years ago that it can't help but contribute. I'm surprised rifle success hasn't improved due to technology as well.

I'm a fan of the primitive muzzleloader rules. When you throw a scope, fancy bullets, and powders in the tube you might as well use a rifle.

Doesn't everybody love a good hang fire or dud when an animal is standing broadside?
 
Duck-Slayer said:
I don't know about you guy's but I think this is about as primitive as it get's with a muzzleloader here in Idaho, not sure how those stat's are accurate, I could be wrong thou, I don't see that muzzleloader/archery are the same as rifle as far as success rate, either that or there are more liar's out there than we thought that are untruthful in there harvest report just too be "cool" or skim the stat's.
Matt
Click to expand...

I honestly think they are fairly accurate. Idk maybe rifle guys under report to keep people from flooding "their" unit.
 
ShootsManyBullets said:
Archery equipment is so much better than 20 years ago that it can't help but contribute. I'm surprised rifle success hasn't improved due to technology as well.

I'm a fan of the primitive muzzleloader rules. When you throw a scope, fancy bullets, and powders in the tube you might as well use a rifle.

Doesn't everybody love a good hang fire or dud when an animal is standing broadside?
Click to expand...

I am also I was jacked the year the outlawed inlines. Had the hunts all to myself.

I can deal with a dud but a damn cap pop at 25yds really makes my knees shake.
 
I will say reporting is poor at best here. The first couple years we had mandatory reporting the report rates were pretty high, but I think it has dipped below 50% now. Also lots of inaccurate reports filed be it lying about what or if they killed or reporting the wrong unit.
 
There could be any number of reasons for the increase of success for archery and muzzleloader.
Archery equipment has become very advanced in the last 20 years or so. Inline muzzzle loaders are also more efficient and accurate with the use of modern bullets as opposed to round balls.
I think the advent of trail cameras has a lot to with it too. In the past a hunter had to scout an area or waterhole in person and sit there putting in a lot of time for just one spot. Now they just put cameras at multiple locations and are able to pinpoint where animals are frequenting.
 
Seasons make a big difference in my opine. Length & timing.

The equipment for bow & inline mz is worlds ahead of what it was 20 yrs ago.
I bow hunted with a recurve & started with a straight bow in Oct.
My scoped rifle I have hunted with since 78' has always worked,just a lot better with quality optics.

Here in NM the seasons for R & MZ are 5 days. Oct on. More post rut dates.
Bow just was changed to 2 seasons in Sept.
Our sort of mandatory harvest reports, sort of help get truer numbers.
I'm wondering how much the change in bow seasons have effected the success rate?
I do seem to see way more bow hunters these days where I live.
Most of the locals I know would be descibed as way of life hunters and pretty addicted to it regardless of weapon.And almost everybody hunts.
And very few that bow hunt after Sept. I have had one guy use a bow during any weapon season on my place.....any 5 days Oct -Dec.
The most successful and intense bow hunter I know goes in the late season 5 day hunt sometimes and is only 25% successful so far. Usually fills his Sept. tag, no problemo.
 
Last edited:
What makes the success?

Good hunters do. I think many hunters that were in the 90% successful rates area, have went the way of archery and muzzy. They like the challenge and maybe even the 15 minutes of fame they receive when they take an animal the hard way.

It might mean more if the animal was harvested by bow or muzzy.

So those guys that were killing elk every year with the rifle, are now killing elk every other with the bow. That bumps the success up for archery, but does it mean there's more impact from bow hunting? I feel these elk would have died by the hands of these people no matter what. By what weapon is the question.

A dead elk by any means makes no difference so I don' think there's the impacts to the resource.

Some limited areas might be more impacted by archery gear because those good hunters are taking more game than the rifle hunters that are limited.

Colorado has around 44,000 archery hunters and they killed 6400 head of elk for a 14% success rate. There was 161,000 rifle hunters there that took 33,000 head of elk for a 21% success rate.
 
I have always considered myself a hunter with no hyphen needed. I enjoy all these methods and do not believe that by virtue of being anyone of these singularly makes you the better hunter.

I believe experience in each of these makes you a better hunter but if I had to pick one that has helped to hone my hunting skills the most it would be archery. Simply because the limited range of the weapon you have to develop the patience and skills to get closer to your game.

It's an interesting chart I wonder what the population line would look like next to these as well as timing of the rut and weather. A lot of factors here.
 
I have seen this here in Michigan with our whitetail deer. There are a lot of deer taken during our long archery season as there are a lot more archery hunters than there was say 30 years ago. Mostly do to the advancement in archery equipment.When30 years ago a 15-20 yard kill was near the archery range limit for most of us but today I hear hunters shooting 50 plus yards with great accuracy.
Not me,I still hunt with my 40 year old recurve.
 
Last edited:
TheTone said:
I will say reporting is poor at best here. The first couple years we had mandatory reporting the report rates were pretty high, but I think it has dipped below 50% now. Also lots of inaccurate reports filed be it lying about what or if they killed or reporting the wrong unit.
Click to expand...
This is obviously news to me. Is it no longer mandatory?
 
Equipment is better and there are more guys. Lots more Cam Haynes types blasting up the mountains too.

I never saw guys bowhunting 20 years ago. Now it seems like everyone is doing it. Very scientific, I know.
 
I say it is because more and more hunters are taking up archery and muzzle loaders for many reasons and riffle hunters are dying off.
 
Bambistew said:
My thought... 90% of the game is killed by 10% of hunters. Those guys that are successful can get it done with whatever they have in their hands. The reason for the slight decline in rifle hunter success, is because those 'real' hunters are killing animals with other weapons and leaving the causal hunters to drag down success.

Very interesting to see them all converging though. Thanks for sharing.
Click to expand...

I wondered this myself. Are the bowhunters more successful percentage wise because of equipment, or learning to be better hunters, or both?

Do the semi-crappy bowhunters go to muzzleloaders and do much better? Does this then reflect in increased success by archery hunters?

Do the semi crappy muzzleloaders go back to rifles?

It's an interesting trend for sure, and I am quite certain that technological advances do play a role in it. I wonder though, is it because it has a big impact on making the killing easier, or is it easier and therefore draws hunters into that realm that would be successful regardless of what they are using?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Braveheart
Finally first Elk hunt, harder than you think!!!
2 3 4
Replies
73
Views
8K
Chief23
C
P
Do we need wildlife?
2 3
Replies
41
Views
2K
AvidIndoorsman
AvidIndoorsman
atlas
Up to 65% CWD prevalence in Wyoming Mule Deer Herd
Replies
9
Views
1K
BuzzH
B
elkduds
CPW Roundtable official summary for 7/22/23 meeting
Replies
9
Views
888
CptCasual
C
tomengineer
Archery Elk Hunting - Media Tactics vs Reality
2
Replies
39
Views
4K
dmarsh2
D
Ollin Magnetic Digiscoping Systems

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
111,057
Messages
1,945,279
Members
34,995
Latest member
Infraredice

Share this page

Back
Top