June Fir,Fish,Game - Bridgers trashed traditional & PRB

[roundball]

June edition of Fur, Fish, and Game...Bridgers article puts down traditional and the PRB...recommends the modern techno crap as nausem...this is my letter to the magazine just now:
==============================================
The June issue of Fur, Fish & Game carries an article about muzzleloading which essentially portrays traditional forms of hunting with the patched round ball in a traditional style muzzleloader as an ineffective projectile for taking game. Instead, you recommend the latest and greatest modern high tech, high performance, long range, scope sighted, technological wonder-rifles using sealed weather proof ignitions, modern jacketed bullets, modern powder, modern primers for ignition, boasting centerfire ballistics and 200 yard shots.

The facts are that muzzleloading seasons were originally established by and for dedicated traditional muzzleloading enthusiasts who wanted to preserve a part of our American heritage...and a major way to do that was through special muzzleloading seasons that would continue to attract and encourage hunters to learn and master the ways of our forefathers muzzleloading equipment and hunting skills, and in so doing help keep the tradition alive.

And remember that powerful, scope sighted centerfire rifles were specifically excluded from these traditional muzzleloading seasons for obvious reasons. The equipment now being recommended by your magazine flies in the face of that tradition, and logic.

It is particularly disturbing to see that Fur, Fish & Game has lost sight of that special part of our heritage and now endorses the latest and greatest modern high tech, high performance, long range, scope sighted, technological wonder-rifles using sealed weather proof ignitions, modern jacketed bullets, modern powder, modern primers for ignition, boasting centerfire ballistics and 200 yard shots.

These high tech rifles are only referred to as "muzzleloaders" simply because they happen to load through the muzzle....all other forms of association to what is traditionally meant by the term "muzzleloading" are non-existent.

IMO, it is also disingenuous for a magazine to consider itself as being grounded in time honored traditional values of hunting, fishing, and trapping...yet endorse and publish muzzleloading articles such as this one in the June issue.

If new people are now running Fur, Fish, and Game and they simply don't know any better, I suggest they pause and reflect on the fact that the "patched round ball" has been completely effective in Flintlocks, later caplocks, across all the centuries since it was invented, right to the present and still going strong.

A .50cal lead ball through a deer's "boiler room" at 100 yards is still 100% as lethal today as it was 400 years ago...nothing has changed that.
I and many hunting acquaintances, do all our deer hunting with patched round balls.
I and they fill multiple deer tags that way every year at a variety of distances, most of which are beyond your articles suggested distance limitation.
Most of my deer have been taken with .45 & .50 caliber patched round balls in caplocks and Flintlocks.

Furthermore, I have never lost a deer using a patched round ball and resent the implications by your magazine that they are an inferior and ineffective projectile.

I cannot in good conscience renew a subscription to a magazine that endorses and promotes the kind of muzzleloading article you ran this month, which puts down a time honored, proven, effective form of early American traditional muzzleloading hunting equipment.

Sincerely,

[jmarriott]

Knight and T/c are major advertisers in FF&G. Mags sell equipment and dreams.

T/C sells some more traditional muzzleloaders but the encore and Omega most likely outsell the traditionals 3 to one. And the profit margin is is most likely higher than the traditionals also.

I don't muzzleload at all but in the 1980's Handgun hunting became legal for deer in Indiana. (Maybe earlier but I was to young for a permit.) Most likely it was thought that most would use the good old 44 mag revolver and such to harvest deer. 60 yards was about the limit. Did they expect T/c to produce the Encore pistol with rounds like 270 and 30-06. Most likely not.

I got my T/C contender to extend my harvest range from 100 yards(smoot barrel foster slug shotgun) to 160 yards (35 rem 14 inch pistol). Then advances in rifled slug barrels and sabot rounds found me turning to the hastings barrels and sabot round for clean shots up to about 200 yards with the slug gun. Now handloading and 7-30 waters barrels give my pistol the 200 yards range. Each time I spent alot of money upgrading barrels, scopes, and accesories.

Since 1985 I have never shot a Indiana deer over 100 yards. I could have saved lots of money sticking with the foster slug and smoothbore barrel.

I purchased each upgrade hoping the the deer of a lifetime would pop out in the field edge at 120 yards, 170 yards, 210 yards, and I might be able to make that shot.

Dreams sell equipment, Mags advertise equipent, Writers recieve free gear to write pieces about equipment that might sell the dream.

I bought in, Others did also. Last year the old smoothbore Browning auto 5 open sighted shotgun with 75 cent each Winchester foster slugs broought down my only deer of the season in a family deer drive running at 30 yards. I purchased 5 boxes of the newest rifled slugs at 57 dollars plus tax, Still dreamimg that deer would pop out of the woods at 175 yards. One box of rifled shells was shot up sighting in the load all 4 others are still in the dream closet with my hunting clothes.

[jplonghunter]

Attaboy Roundball, keep them honest!! I too enjoy hunting with traditional muzzleloader and believe the in-lines are a hi-powered rifle that happens to load through the muzzle.

jplonghunter

[skeet]

Roundball, I guess I understand the issues you have with the magazine writing that the roundball isn't the best projectile for hunting. ...But understand ...I have killed quite a few deer with roundballs...and lots have been killed over the centuries with the roundball. Honestly though, is the roundball the BEST to use to shoot an animal? Even though you feel they are adequate and all you need you must admit that the conicals or solid slugs are for the most part better killers. Not saying that they can't be killed with roundballs..but be objective. If the roundball was better that is what we would be using today in all our rifles. I really liked the early seasons with the muzzleloaders. I used a T-C Hawken in 45 and then 50(roundballs, too). Sad to say but the average muzzleloading hunter now goes with convenience rather than tradition. JM Marriott was probably off with the numbers of traditional muzzys to inlines etc. More like 20 to 1 now. I happen to still have my Hawkens and an original Pennsylvania gun and will shoot them occassionally when I have a desire for pain. Not the shooting understand...but the interminal cleaning and oiling and re-cleaning later for for safety's sake. I also have a Savage Smokeless ML that I do shot more often..mainly because the cleaning chore is minimal. In that regards for me it is more fun. Oh and yes I am a traditionalist in most regards when it comes to guns. I like wood stocks and steel for metal. Blue over stainless. And I surely don't need all the "new" short wonder cartridges Not trashing you..not saying you are wrong..just saying that we both are falling behind the curve when it comes to guns and shooting. If the magazine was trashing muzzleloaders completely I'd really be on 'em too. But don't trash the whole rag just for one or 2 issues you don't agree with. I buy the mag every now and then.. and have for years...will continue in the same way in the future.

[roundball]

I simply posted something that might have been of iterest to other traditionally minded muzzleloading enthusiasts...that modern Savage smokeless powder advocates take issue with it is no surprise.

My professionally prepared expressed opinion to a magazine editior about one article they printed does not constitute "trashing a magazine"...and I have a right to offer my comments to them...I have a multi-year subscription prepaid well in advance.

[Skinny Shooter]

Roundball, that is a well written response.
Thanks for standing up and being counted. Seems like that writer used silly arguments to trash traditionalists...
Aways back, Steve Hornady lobbied the Pa Game Commission to have conicals be allowed in primitive season.
It seems to be all about the money...

Oh yeah, I heard one time that nipples don't belong on a man's gun...

[Adam Helmer]

roundball,

Thanks for sharing your excellent letter. I agree, the "Traditional Muzzleloader Season" is for the traditional muzzleloaders.

I have opined to the Pennsylvania Game Commission that the modern MLs belong in the rifle deer season along with other MODERN rifles. About 2 years ago, PGC modified the regulations to allow "Any Muzzleloader" in the October ML season.

Lewis and Clark and the Corps of Discovery used pathed roundballs from May 1804 until September 1806 to literally walk from St. Louis to the Pacific Ocean and back. Yes, they did find the grizz a bit of a challenge for PRB, but for the most part, PRB did just fine.

I like your theme (and I now paraphrase a bit) that the traditional arms require attention to details while the modern MLs are a shortcut for many folks who want to hunt a second season with not too much effort on their part.

Again, I like your letter and you state my feelings very well.

Adam

[popplecop]

I too, applaud you Roundball. To me it is hunting in the old ways that atracted me to sport 30-40 years ago. Same with handguns I still prefer the SA revolvers with open sights. I know my limitations and am happy to hunt at those ranges. I have a number of scoped rifles if I choose to hunt at longer distances. And flintlocks are forever.

[BILLY D.]

roundball and Adam

Although I am not a strict traditionalist, I use Clean Shot Powder and Sabots...sometimes but I do shoot a lot of PRB'S. My firearm is a caplock, CVA St. Louis Hawken. I have professed these shenanigans before.

I have also remarked on the advent of the belt or magazine fed muzzleloader.....looks like we are one step closer with the electronic ignition system.

Now granted this thing loads from the front designating it a muzzleloader but.....busses load from the front also and they are not muzzleloaders. We are stretching terms here.

Our mz season up here is at the tail end of the rest of the seasons. We are sucking hind teat to put it mildly. I would like to hunt in a truly traditional manner during this season but I'll be dipped in doo doo before I go out across the countryside at 30° below zero weather in buckskins. I've done some less than smart things in my life but that ain't gonna be one of them.

Muzzleloaders that shoot faux powders, are in lines, have any kind of lit sight or a scope do not belong in the woods or plains during muzzleloader season. PERIOD.

Thats my story and I'm stickin' to it.

Best wishes, Bill

Let the flames begin. I've been shot, stabbed and burnt before. Whats new?

[skeet]

As a shooter and hunter I feel I owe it to the game to use the most efficient tools for hunting. I am first off not advocating the Savage. I simply said for ME at this time I do not like to clean black powder guns. As far as advocating I feel that we should introduce as many new people into the sport as we can. Traditional and non traditional. I did NOT say that the roundball isn't able to kill animals..I simply said that there are more efficient projectiles. As I said I used roundballs in my traditional Hawken type rifles. And as far as trashing the magazine? YOU wrote the letter to them stating you would not renew the subscription because they printed an article contrary to what you believe. So I take it you are going to cancel the subscription? I have a lot of respect for the traditionalist black powder shooter and hunters. At the same time I am not blind to the other side of the issue either. When I was hunting quite a bit with the Hawken I kept my shots under 100 yds and tried hard to keep them under 50(which wasn't too hard in my neck of the woods) Other than Natty Bumpo of Leatherstocking fame.AKA .La Long Carabine..I feel that the round ball should be used in like manner now too. I imagine you do too. Sorry if you took offence. It wasn't written that way

Hey Billy... There were quite a few people bumped off during the War of Northern Aggression(Civil War) with a frontloading percussion firearm with a scope. One famous Confederate General was one. Ain't hardly nothing new under the sun. But Berdan's sharpshooters did use conical bullets...hehehe! Not dissing y'all...just reminding ya. I also just have to remind you of the Ferguson Rifle of the Revolutionary War era. Breechloading rifle that never really got the time of day because of the Stiff British traditionalism. If it had been adopted by the Brits...we might have lost that fight..oh if I am not wrong..it shot a round ball too!

[roundball]

Originally posted by Adam Helmer
roundball,

Thanks for sharing your excellent letter. I agree, the "Traditional Muzzleloader Season" is for the traditional muzzleloaders.

I like your theme (and I now paraphrase a bit) that the traditional arms require attention to details while the modern MLs are a shortcut for many folks who want to hunt a second season with not too much effort on their part.

Again, I like your letter and you state my feelings very well.

Adam

Yes, it's pretty obvious to most people...to be clear, there's nothing wrong at all with anybody choosing to use some different form of firearm for deer hunting...different noses and all that.

But what is disgusting is the common theme of excuses among 99% of those who use those other choices in what were clearly established as traditional muzzleloading seasons...to cheat by using technology to maximum advantage because it's easy...and then tries to rationalize / defend doing it on the most ridiculous justification...it fools no experienced, thinking adult what-so-ever.

If somebody wants to use a long range high tech scope sighted centerfire ballistic comparable rifle in traditional ML seasons they need to at least be man enough about it to just stand up and say so...all the other retoric is just self serving hot air to asuage their guilty consciences becase they KNOW they're cheating their way into traditional muzzleloading seasons just to get an extra week of deer hunting for more chances to fill their tags. At least honesty can be respected.

Next time one of them says they're not doing that, saying they're using all the new high tech stuff because "they like it", ask them if they also use it to hunt through the entire deer season, not just the special muzzleloading week, etc...and you'll get a new list of excuses why they don't do that.

By contrast, ask dedicated traditional muzzleloder hunters if they use their sidelocks right on during the whole deer season and you'll get a long list of people who do.

And the hot air in the high performance advocate's claim of "more reliable terminal ballsitics out to 200yds and beyond" is two fold:
1) all the wannbe deer hunters will try those shots and wound many, many animals without killing them mercifully on the spot...if they hit them at all.
2) Traditional muzzleloader hunters know better than to take shots like that...and don't WANT to in the first place...no challenge to it.

That's why several Remingtons & Leupolds lay oiled in their cases in my safe...anybody can kill a deer with a modern high powered scoped rifle like my Remingtons & Leupolds...and the modern hi tech space guns are no different.

I'm just glad all the great men of the early to mid 1900s who pioneered and championed the focus on our heritage, the early American muzzleloading era, got traditional muzzleloading seasons established in every state in the country, are not here to see how all their work is being bastardized by all the space gun technology...laser range finder scopes, modern smokeless powder, electronic ignition...simply unbelievable

[rattus58]

Hi Roundball...

Although I agree with your letters ending, your arguments with these people is mostly wasted. Nobody cares that muzzleloader seasons were for the "challenged" muzzleloader or equipment. Nobody cares that you haven't lost a deer to a roundball, but that should have been more of your argument.

A muzzleloader is loaded through the muzzle. To argue otherwise makes us look foolish. I didn't read the article you mention, but it probably is not unlike many others I have read. These folks are driven much of time by sponsors, and Jim Chambers, Euroarms, Pedersoli, L&R and the like, just aren't out there paying the freight, and aren't getting the press.

Things are as they are. If someone challenges the roundball, you are not going to win the argument by saying roundballs are better than than an expandable sabot pushed along by smokeless powder at 2500 fps.

What has to be argued is that the expandable is NO BETTER than a properly placed roundball. What has to be argued is that traditionalists take hunting more seriously than do the moderns. What has to be argued are that roundballers apply themselves to be better woodsmen than do the moderns. What has to be argued is that the roundballer is more into the challenge of the hunt than are the moderns. What has to be argued is that the modern companies like T/C, Knight, and CVA are more into the instant gratification crowd than they are into "true" hunters.

Now you may get an argument about a lot of this from the modern muzzleloader shooter, but challenge them nonetheless. Modern muzzleloaders are here to stay, but so to is the traditional archer and bow. Expand the hype of getting close, being one with nature, being up to the challenge, not being a sissy, is a better approach in MY OPINION, than the whining I hear from most traditionalists about modern muzzleloaders. They are here to stay, so lets just expand our ranks instead.

You did do the right thing in responding. I wish that more of us would.

Aloha,

Tom

[rattus58]

Ok... Roundball... you have begun to lose your credibility with me. Cheat??? Give me a fricken break pal, modern muzzleloader shooters are not a nefarious bunch of cardsharks. They are folks that like to hunt like you and I, but now that you are stooping to the common whine I keep hearing from other traditionalists who are insecure and unprincipled means to me that you are just that. A whiner. Its folks like you that damage the cause.

[roundball]

Credibility??

That's laughable...it's always easy to spot the ones who sit on the sidelines and do nothing on their own...then take pot-shots after-the-fact at people who actually go to lengths to do things in a pro-active manner.

So save your phony self-rightous attitude for someone else, as you personal attack comments are wasted on me...they sound just like more of the typical attitude from inline advocates who want to use centerfire equivalent firearms in the traditional season for an extra week because they can't fill their tags during the regular gun seasons.

[rattus58]

You don't have a clue as to who or what I am Roundball, nor do you know anything about me or what I do for muzzleloading, kids, or hunting. So before you start mouthing off you should confirm your facts.

Secondly, credibility, it is an important part of the argument. I don't know anything about you, and in your first post, which I responded to, I gave you the benefit of the doubt Roundball, but when you start saying things like hunters with inlines are out to cheat, you brand yourself as a whiner who has no facts to support your positions.

I have been in these battles already Roundball, and when you start calling people self-righteous, you should look in the mirror. Face the facts Roundball... people don't give a damn about your whimpering about scopes, sabots, primers or smokeless, in fact people are tired of those lame overused pathetic wails from traditionalists.

I AM A TRADITIONAL HUNTER and the manner in which many traditionalists try to fight these battles is embarrassing, and your calling inliners cheaters is just more evidence of your insecurity and lack of a cogent argument. If you want to stand up for traditional hunting and equipment then do so, but your divisive comments are so typical that you have lost your audience, and yes, YOUR CREDIBILITY.