Albany County Allows Rifle Usage

[88GW]

Got the news form my Sportsmans Club President today. Found this link showing the passage of the bill

http://legiscan.com/NY/bill/S05714/2013

[silent death]

It Would be nice to use rifles but with my rifled barrel shotgun with my sst slugs they work just as good out to 125yds...I can see using rifle if they restrict it to nothing bigger than a 308...cause I would never use my 300 mag anywhere around where I hunt..just to thick and not enough room...

Edited July 24, 2014 by H4W

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I can see using rifle if they restrict it to nothing bigger than a 308...cause I would never use my 300 mag anywhere around where I hunt..just to thick and not enough room...

Restrict at .308? why would that make sense? so you could use a 25-06 or 22-250 but not a 444 marlin or similar big bore, which are awesome tight quarter brush guns.

[silent death]

It was just a reference...if you lived in Albany county you would understand..we don't have a lot of wide open areas where the large caliber like a 7mm or bigger would work...half of the places around here you could use a 30-30...but if this passes people would use anything they wanted which is dangerous for around here that's all iam saying....besides it's just for 2 years according to the bill...

Edited July 24, 2014 by H4W

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I have hunted out there a lot. I used to live in that neck of the woods. I am a little dismayed that you would make the comments about it being dangerous and make it sound as though it is more dangerous that what currently is used. The previous counties that adopted this have not seen the sky fall as was talked about when they went with rifles. The counties I remember seeing change to rifle all went through a "trial" period. Each we made permanent following it.

[silent death]

Over the last 10 years people around here in 4b have been dealing. With trespassers ...and the thought of them said trespassers having high powered rifles scares a lot of the land owners around here...I ain't against the rifles being used . Iam just saying you don't need big calbers to do it....I ain't arguing. Everybody has there own beliefs.. around here every land owner has there land posted and only allow family to hunt it..to many people around here don't care .....certain parts of westerlo and berne would be ideal for rifle a lot more open land out there

[88GW]

I always use my smokepole out there but now I'll just use my trusty .308. I'm in the hills so I dont have to worry much about homes plus I can really reach ou there with my .308 which would be nice.

[Lawdwaz]

It Would be nice to use rifles but with my rifled barrel shotgun with my sst slugs they work just as good out to 125yds...I can see using rifle if they restrict it to nothing bigger than a 308...cause I would never use my 300 mag anywhere around where I hunt..just to thick and not enough room...

 

30-30, 308 and 300mag all use the same diameter bullets.  Only difference is how fast you make 'em go.............

 

 

 

[Lawdwaz]

Oh and a huge congrats to the Albany County hunters that are looking forward to using a CF rifle!

[Doc]

I'm a huge proponent of rifles being allowed for deer hunting, but I certainly do appreciate the uneasy feelings that some people might have. Can we point to the recent additions of counties and say that because they have not experienced any additional problems that the uneasy feelings are baseless? Not really. Most of those new rifle counties are only into their 1st, 2nd, or 3rd year. That really is not much of a base to draw any conclusions on. Also, I suspect that there is still a large percentage of hunters that have not yet switched over to rifle yet, either because of financial reasons or simply because they are still believers in that nice new shotgun that they bought not that many years ago.

 

My attitude is that time will tell if the change was a smart one or not. The debate is not finished yet. In the mean time, I will continue to enjoy hunting with my brand new .270, enjoying every minute of not having my shoulder mangled by my old 12 gauge. And I will be extremely upset if hunters start screwing up this opportunity.

 

But I will not criticize H4W for speaking a bit skeptically. I am skeptical too, and I am hoping that the next decade or so will make me feel completely at ease. One thing I am sure of is that if there is even a slight reversal in the safety records of recent years, the first thing that will be blamed is the change to rifles. So it is a pretty good idea to keep that in mind before pulling that trigger.

[Caveman]

I think the saddest part about the whole debate is that it would be an almost non-issue to the general public (and therefore the lawmakers) if every hunter put responsibility and safety first.  I, and the people I hunt with, have passed on plenty of deer that we wanted to take because the shot was not 100% safe for some reason.  Too many people get excited at the sight of a deer and all the gun safety rules go out the window.  Obviously there would still be the occassional accident.  There's no way to be 100% safe.  And obviously there would still be a small fringe element that is irrationally frightened by a rifle in a way that they're not by a shotgun.  But I feel like it would be less of an uphill battle if more people just used their heads.  

 

That being said, congrats to Albany County.  You couldn't have passed this law during the three years that I lived there and hunted Berne with a muzzleloader during gun season?

[Pygmy]

It is really very simple..

MANY, if not MOST shotgun hunters use a pump or auto with a 5 shot mag capacity.

This results in lots of projectiles flying around when the deer begin running.

MANY, if not most rifle shooters use scoped bolt action rifles.. Certainly fast firing rifles such as autos and pumps are available, but I'll bet if you poll rifle shooters, 15 out of 20 will shoot bolt actions. with the remainder divided between pumps, autos , levers and single shots.

In any rifle legal places where I have hunted, the volume of fire is MUCH less than what I have listened to in 50 years of shotgun hunting here in Steuben County NY. Since rifles were legalized, a single shot is the norm, rather than the 5 shot volleys that were so common when everyone was using shotguns.

A safe hunter is a safe hunter with any weapon, and an idiot is an idiot with any weapon.

It's just that with rifles, there is a lot less lead flying around.

Statistics show that accident rates are about the same with either weapon.

Personally, I feel safer being in the woods with hunters armed with scope sighted rifles, rather than fast shooting pumpkin slingers.

[Caveman]

I know what you're saying Pygmy.  I think a concern that people have though is less about idiots lobbing tons of lead at once--I almost fell victim to this moronic behavior my first year hunting and I don't want to think about what would have happened if I hadn't hit the deck--I think for the general public the concern is the increased effective distance of a rifle.  If you aren't sure of your backstop, or shoot uphill at a target, there is a greater danger to the people some distance away washing their cars.  Obviously it's improbable that the round will miss every tree and potential backstop between your target and the victim, but it does happen occasionally.  When it does, you can bet the media keys in on the "high-powered rifle" that was used.  Obviously that can still happen with a shotgun, and idiots are idiots no matter what's in their hands.  But idiots + a round that's lethal at 1000 yards + a heavily populated and/or flat county = people get nervous.   

[Doc]

Here's what runs through people's minds. Everyone is aware that there is a certain percentage of hunters that are absolute idiots and unsafe with any weapon simply because of their carelessness and lack of concern for rules of safety. So along comes a law change that puts a weapon of longer distance in the hands of those idiots so now they can be stupid from a farther distance. Of course they are concerned. Is the concern rational? That remains to be seen. We just have to be sure that we don't wind up proving them right.

[adkbuck]

Pigmy,

 

I agree with you.  You are quite right in that some hunters try to use volume of fire to make up for a lack of marksmanship, and that's a shame. 

 

Old Indian saying, given to me by one of my early hunting mentors... "One shot...deer,  two shots ... maybe deer, three shots....no deer!"

 

"A safe hunter is a safe hunter with any weapon, and an idiot is an idiot with any weapon."  Well said!
 

Edited July 25, 2014 by adkbuck

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I'm a huge proponent of rifles being allowed for deer hunting, but I certainly do appreciate the uneasy feelings that some people might have. Can we point to the recent additions of counties and say that because they have not experienced any additional problems that the uneasy feelings are baseless? Not really. Most of those new rifle counties are only into their 1st, 2nd, or 3rd year. That really is not much of a base to draw any conclusions on. Also, I suspect that there is still a large percentage of hunters that have not yet switched over to rifle yet, either because of financial reasons or simply because they are still believers in that nice new shotgun that they bought not that many years ago.

 

My attitude is that time will tell if the change was a smart one or not. The debate is not finished yet. In the mean time, I will continue to enjoy hunting with my brand new .270, enjoying every minute of not having my shoulder mangled by my old 12 gauge. And I will be extremely upset if hunters start screwing up this opportunity.

 

But I will not criticize H4W for speaking a bit skeptically. I am skeptical too, and I am hoping that the next decade or so will make me feel completely at ease. One thing I am sure of is that if there is even a slight reversal in the safety records of recent years, the first thing that will be blamed is the change to rifles. So it is a pretty good idea to keep that in mind before pulling that trigger.

Doc, I would like to point out that many counties were added quite a few years back, not 1, 2 or 3. In this area of the state yes but there is more data than you are giving credit for n those regions.

[Doc]

Doc, I would like to point out that many counties were added quite a few years back, not 1, 2 or 3. In this area of the state yes but there is more data than you are giving credit for n those regions.

Yeah, that's true. In fact you have the whole of the Northern Zone has decades of rifle safety data. But the inroads of rifle into the more populated Southern Zone counties is a fairly recent event with only a few exceptions with several just entering this year. But don't get me wrong, I am hoping that the safety record remains as good or better. I'm just saying that it may be a bit premature to be declaring success. Just because everything has been going well, doesn't mean that it will continue. Also, there is a built-in delay due to everyone getting switched over from shotguns to rifles. I don't know how widespread that is, but I do know people who recently bought brand new shotguns and either don't have the cash or the will to run out and buy a new rifle, so they are still using their shotguns ..... for now.

 

Another thing that I find curious is our recent success with safety numbers. I haven't heard anyone officially making any guesses as to why that is happening. And of course there is always the possibility that it is simply a run of good luck that could reverse at any time regardless of what kinds of weapons are being used. So I guess I am always a bit conservative on doling out the congrats. I'm a bit of a hard-sell, and I'm afraid its going to take some undetermined length of time before I feel confident enough to declare complete success. I can still see factors that may be skewing things a bit.

[mrmagoo]

I' ll put my 2 cents in on this. I hunt in Chenango county, one of the first counties to go to rifles. I love it personally, the number of volleys I hear has gone way down, and single shot or two seem to be the norm. At times you can tell the difference between shotgun and rifle others hard to. That is a plus, less things flying in the woods.

 

Like with most of you I had concerns about safety. The area I am in has woods, meadows and houses all in close quarters to one another. When this was started it was a trial period and it made it through fine people are and have been aware of their surroundings. Will this change in time maybe, but so far all is good. The group I am with are even more careful because we know that there are houses down the valley and we make sure of our angles, and where the bullet is headed, of coarse we were careful with shotguns, but not as nearly so. Plus not everyone in our group has rifles, and to be honest there are some I hope never get one.

 

But like anything new, or with change it will take time for people to adjust and become comfortable with the new law.

 

Every deer season I get excited and scared all at once. Excited the season is here and scared that something will happen, either to our group or some one near by. that's why I can't wait for opening day to get over with, then most people are done and the woods start having fewer people in them

 

mr magoo

[dbHunterNY]

There's a big difference between some other counties and Albany. There aren't much for big sections of woods and places with people or structure. Any gun rifle or shotgun can be a problem. Might as well be a rifle. One idea would be to limit caliber and bullet weight. They could even you pistol cartridge rifles like some states. Regardless safety is required more so than other less populated counties. At least when talking 4j.

[dbHunterNY]

Out skirts at the boarder of 4j would be a grey area that I'm talking about. Not a problem. Just saying there's a difference.

[GreeneHunter]

I live in the 4B area one mile south of 4J (Bow Only) area ,  has there ever been (and i have no clue just wondering) any research done on an area that went from shotgun to rifle as far as Deer take is concerned and its effect on DMP's  for the following year ?

[dbHunterNY]

Not sure I think the take would go up a little going to gun.

[Doc]

I live in the 4B area one mile south of 4J (Bow Only) area ,  has there ever been (and i have no clue just wondering) any research done on an area that went from shotgun to rifle as far as Deer take is concerned and its effect on DMP's  for the following year ?

I've never heard of such a study. There are so many different factors that go into deer take that I doubt you would be able to draw any conclusions about rifle vs. shotgun except maybe over a long period of time. It's an interesting thing to ponder. My guess would be that there are some accuracy advantages to rifles so that may mean that more of the deer shot at are harvested. Probably the added range of rifles wouldn't be of much effect since most deer in NY are seen at shotgun distances in wooded or brushy areas. I don't know..... good question.