Rifle hunting

[French Creek Outdoors]

Has anyone herd anything about the use of rife for Chautauqua county?

[fasteddie]

Big-game hunters in Cortland and Wyoming counties and a portion of Chautauqua County will be able to use rifles this fall under legislation approved last month by the state Assembly and Senate.

http://outdoornews.com/new_york/news/article_4f5f9f4c-a32b-11e0-8937-001cc4c03286.html

[Lawdwaz]

I know it's only a formality but..........it still needs the Gov's signature.

Git 'er done...........

[wdswtr]

Glad this came up I have been looking for quite awhile to see where this was at.  Should be interesting.  I would rather take my rifle than the shotgun anyday but not sure I want to see some of the yahhos with one in their hand. 

[Doc]

I would rather take my rifle than the shotgun anyday but not sure I want to see some of the yahhos with one in their hand.

That's kind of the deal isn't it? There really is no reason why the rifle should not be used except for the fact that it would make some of the crazies that we have all seen afield, effective at even greater distance .... lol. That can be a scary thought.

[wdswtr]

I would rather take my rifle than the shotgun anyday but not sure I want to see some of the yahhos with one in their hand.

That's kind of the deal isn't it? There really is no reason why the rifle should not be used except for the fact that it would make some of the crazies that we have all seen afield, effective at even greater distance .... lol. That can be a scary thought.

Yes it is a scary thought.  I think I just might put armour plated walls up at camp and stay inside on opening weekend.  Maybe a big old stobe light hooked to my head lol.  I wonder how many yahoos would run out and buy a rifle to hunt one weekend out of the year. Hopefully none.

[Doc]

When we had the failed rifle hunting resolution proposed here in Ontario County, I really wanted to hunt deer with a rifle. Just everything about it seemed to point toward a better hunting experience for me. However, I am also a resident with a concern about extending the range of some of the goofy people that I have encountered while hunting. Both positions nullified each other and I spent the entire debate in sort of a neutral position. It certainly was a change that I would have loved to experience, but the additional risk was something I wasn't real crazy about.

[Pygmy]

I heard all of the fears regarding use of rifles a few years ago when they were legalized here in Steuben County. Many folks were quaking in thier boots worrying about how much more dangerous rifles are because the projectiles travel farther.

Well, those long range incidents have failed to materialize. There have been a few incidents, but many involved shotguns. I haven't heard of a single incident in which the increased range of a rifle was a factor. The fact is, that type of long range accident where a bullet travels hundreds of yards and strikes person or property is so rare that it is inconsequential.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I feel safer sharing the woods with hunters armed with scope sighted rifles than I ever did with a bunch of shotgunners spraying five shot volleys around.

About the only difference I have observed since rifles were legalized is that I hear many more single shots and fewer volleys of five quick ones.

Much ado about nothing.

[Lawdwaz]

As usual Pygmy shows up with common sense reasoning.

If you want to follow the lead of anybody on here, look his way. 

[WNYBuckHunter]

I heard all of the fears regarding use of rifles a few years ago when they were legalized here in Steuben County. Many folks were quaking in thier boots worrying about how much more dangerous rifles are because the projectiles travel farther.

Well, those long range incidents have failed to materialize. There have been a few incidents, but many involved shotguns. I haven't heard of a single incident in which the increased range of a rifle was a factor. The fact is, that type of long range accident where a bullet travels hundreds of yards and strikes person or property is so rare that it is inconsequential.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I feel safer sharing the woods with hunters armed with scope sighted rifles than I ever did with a bunch of shotgunners spraying five shot volleys around.

About the only difference I have observed since rifles were legalized is that I hear many more single shots and fewer volleys of five quick ones.

Much ado about nothing.

Thank you for spreading some common sense 

[Pygmy]

Thanks for the vote of confidence, guys...

I'm not a crusader, but after living all my life on the Pennsylvania border where the guys south of me have been able to use rifles FOREVER, and until recently we were limited to shotguns here in NY I just get SO TIRED of hearing the same lame old saws about rifles being more dangerous. It just ain't so, and it mostly involves the fact that people are uncomfortable with change.

It just seemed to me that if rifles were inherently more dangerous, there would be a higher rate of accidents down in northern Tioga County, Pa, just across the border, where housing and population levels are about the same as they are here in southern Steuben County.

There never seemed to be a signifcantly higher rate down there...Sure ,there were some accidents, but they were caused by the same things down there with rifles as they were here in Steuben County with shotguns. People did not take time to properly identify thier targets. They shot in directions that they knew were unsafe. They shot when they did not know if they had a safe background, such as at a skylined deer. They were careless about where thier muzzles were pointed and shot thier buddy or brother or whomever.

An unsafe hunter is going to be an unsafe hunter, regardless of what implement he uses.

[RobC]

I was told any thing south of rt 20 in Chatauqua was going to be open to rifle. which is pretty much all of it.

[Doc]

The problem I have is that there is nothing inherent in a rifle that makes the shooter any smarter or more responsible than a shotgun hunter so I can't believe that just because a guy puts down his shotgun and picks up a rifle he all of a sudden gets smarter. As far as scopes are concerned, just about any shotgunner you run into will have one mounted on his shotgun. There really is only one difference between a rifle and a shotgun and that is the range at which they are normally shot and the distance that the projectiles can travel. And as far as what is inconsequential and what is not, I suppose that depends on just who the recipient is ..... lol. And while recognizing that shooting incidents happen with shotguns as well as rifles, lets no be thinking that there are no rifle incidents. And also, it seems that nearly every year there is the obligatory picture in the paper of some gray-haired old lady pointing to a bullet hole in their living room wall. So if some are concerned about extending the range of reckless shooters. I think I can share that concern to a certain extent.

[Pygmy]

Well, have a ball, Doc. I picture YOU as that grey haired old lady, and chances are, that hole in the wall was made by a shotgun slug... : ...

[Doc]

Well, have a ball, Doc. I picture YOU as that grey haired old lady, and chances are, that hole in the wall was made by a shotgun slug... : ...

Picture what you want, however it doesn't change my reply. 

That family up in Swan Lake have a hole in the wall to look at, and a 4 year old dead grand-daughter to go with it, and it had nothing to do with shotguns. There is also another hole in the wall that passed through a baby's crib mattress before it made a second hole in the next wall. That one had nothing to do with a shotgun either.

[Pygmy]

Okay, I'll check that out.. Sounds like a very sad situation.

Since you use this as an example, I assume that whatever happened occurred because the shooter  was proven to be a rifle shooter and was beyond shotgun slug range.

Actually, it's a moot point anyway. If it happened with a rifle at 1000 yards, it could have just as easily happened with a shotgun at 300 yards.

[Pygmy]

Okay, Doc, that didn't take long.. A very tragic event and my heart goes out to the family, but the fact that the person who fired the shot was using a rifle ( which have been legal in the Catskills for years) had nothing to do with it.

The shot was fired in the direction of a mobile home by a guy with a .300 mag at a distance of 400 feet...

When I was  in school, 400 feet was about 133 yards.. I suppose a shotgun slug would bounce off a mobile home at 133 yards, but a .300 mag will not..?..

So what was your point.?..

[wdswtr]

Okay so you guys throw the common sense crap out there right.  I will tell you I live in norther tier and have hunted with a rifle as soon as I was able to pick one up.  I am well aware of the common sense factor between shotguns and rifles.  I am neutral as well on them.  Now with that said how about some other common sense.  A semi auto rifle can rip off rounds just as fast as a semi auto shotgun and a single shot rifle with a bolt action on it can be pretty darn close to ripping off a shots as fast as a pump shotgun. EIther with or without a scope.  What you people fail to reconize is it is not the weapon that kills people its the friggin idiots who have no idea how to hunt, now idea how to ethically and safely harvest an animal.  These dumbasses are more rare in northern tier than southern tier for some common sense reasons as well.  There are more opportunities in Southern tier to harvest a deer.  Theres more deer per mile and bigger cities with a higher population of humans who think they know how to safely dispatch a firearm and well I bet that atleast half of them dont.  Just listen come opening morning in southern tier and do tell me if I am wrong. I have never had a deer run buy me full of holes from its ears to its ass in northern tier on any day of the season let alone opening day.  A rifle in an ethical and safe hunters hands I have no problem with its the others that I do.  I wish the DEC would regulate the amount of shells we can have loaded at one time to 2.  So to sum this all up there will be zero difference in the way these types of hunters hunt wether they are shouldering a shotgun or a rifle.  The only difference is the effective killing range of the bullet.   

[Lawdwaz]

Okay so you guys throw the common sense crap out there right.  I will tell you I live in norther tier and have hunted with a rifle as soon as I was able to pick one up.  I am well aware of the common sense factor between shotguns and rifles.  I am neutral as well on them.  Now with that said how about some other common sense.  A semi auto rifle can rip off rounds just as fast as a semi auto shotgun and a single shot rifle with a bolt action on it can be pretty darn close to ripping off a shots as fast as a pump shotgun. EIther with or without a scope.  What you people fail to reconize is it is not the weapon that kills people its the friggin idiots who have no idea how to hunt, now idea how to ethically and safely harvest an animal.  These dumbasses are more rare in northern tier than southern tier for some common sense reasons as well.  There are more opportunities in Southern tier to harvest a deer.  Theres more deer per mile and bigger cities with a higher population of humans who think they know how to safely dispatch a firearm and well I bet that atleast half of them dont.  Just listen come opening morning in southern tier and do tell me if I am wrong. I have never had a deer run buy me full of holes from its ears to its ass in northern tier on any day of the season let alone opening day.  A rifle in an ethical and safe hunters hands I have no problem with its the others that I do.  I wish the DEC would regulate the amount of shells we can have loaded at one time to 2.  So to sum this all up there will be zero difference in the way these types of hunters hunt wether they are shouldering a shotgun or a rifle.  The only difference is the effective killing range of the bullet. 

Very eloquent.  You should fire off a letter to the DEC with your feelings.

[Doc]

Okay, Doc, that didn't take long.. A very tragic event and my heart goes out to the family, but the fact that the person who fired the shot was using a rifle ( which have been legal in the Catskills for years) had nothing to do with it.

The shot was fired in the direction of a mobile home by a guy with a .300 mag at a distance of 400 feet...

When I was  in school, 400 feet was about 133 yards.. I suppose a shotgun slug would bounce off a mobile home at 133 yards, but a .300 mag will not..?..

So what was your point.?..

My point is that you were stating how you "feel safer sharing the woods with hunters armed with scope sighted rifles" as if simply because someone is using a rifle with a scope that somehow they become super responsible and safe. Well given the example that obviously isn't true. And also, you seemed to forget that I gave two examples. The second situation also involved a rifle and was way beyond the 500'. But I'm not going to discuss individual incidents because I'm sure there are far more of them than I am aware of. Just let it be sufficient that the point has been made that rifles don't make safer hunters. That coupled with the fact that reckless hunters who are given a weapon that can extend the impacts of their recklessness might just cause a reasonable person to have some concerns. Now if you can't understand why people might have some concerns along those lines I can't help you out there. I am simply explaining why I think Ontario County nixed the rifle bill. And while I would have loved to use a rifle for deer, I am not completely unsympathetic to those who had some doubts about the change.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

What I find curious on this topic is there is no restriction on the pistols that can be used in shotgun only areas. I now the ballistics of the high opowered poistols aren't what a rifle is but they have to be more than a shotgun. Say a .30-06 Contender.....even some of the more commonly used calibers. I am eagerly waiting for my paperwork to come and I wil be buying a rifle cartrige single shot pistol. I will also be using it in no rifle zones. I now the numbers of guys out there aren't what would participate in an open rifle season but it just got me thinking that is there really a difference?

[Doc]

What I find curious on this topic is there is no restriction on the pistols that can be used in shotgun only areas. I now the ballistics of the high opowered poistols aren't what a rifle is but they have to be more than a shotgun. Say a .30-06 Contender.....even some of the more commonly used calibers. I am eagerly waiting for my paperwork to come and I wil be buying a rifle cartrige single shot pistol. I will also be using it in no rifle zones. I now the numbers of guys out there aren't what would participate in an open rifle season but it just got me thinking that is there really a difference?

The other thing that nobody ever thinks about is the predator hunters with their rifles, or the muzzle loaders which seemed to have been implemented without any county input. I realize that it isn't quite the same thing, but is somewhere between a shotgun and a rifle.

What I found in our little struggle with deer rifles in Ontario County was that what people don't know doesn't seem to bother them.....lol.

The deer rifle proposal actually passed the county legislature once and made it through the state senate and assembly and was laying on the Governor's desk. Then they realized that the wording allowed rifle use in all of Ontario County which they didn't want so Ontario County requested that the Governor veto it ..... which he did. Second time through, the bill died in the senate committee because they were all tied up doing the state budget. On the third attempt, it went back to square one, with a public hearing (which they didn't do first time around) and a new vote by the County. This time everyone was aware what was happening and those against rifles got organized and it didn't pass. So we actually had the whole thing in the bag as a nearly done-deal when nobody knew what was going on ....  . That's a little heads up for those that are trying to implement rifles into their counties.....lol.

So yes, pistols and all kinds of flatter trajectory weapons have been and will be used in NYS deer season and out of deer season, but that doesn't seem to occur to anybody.

What I don't understand is that rifles in deer season seems to be a county by county decision, and yet all these other situations seem to be changed at the overall state level with no county input. Why is that ?

[WNYBuckHunter]

What I find curious on this topic is there is no restriction on the pistols that can be used in shotgun only areas. I now the ballistics of the high opowered poistols aren't what a rifle is but they have to be more than a shotgun. Say a .30-06 Contender.....even some of the more commonly used calibers. I am eagerly waiting for my paperwork to come and I wil be buying a rifle cartrige single shot pistol. I will also be using it in no rifle zones. I now the numbers of guys out there aren't what would participate in an open rifle season but it just got me thinking that is there really a difference?

Yep, guarantee you my 260 Encore will outdo 99% of shotguns, range wise. I can use it anywhere a shotgun can go. 

[Pygmy]

Doc, I understand your points...

I wholeheartedly agree that an unsafe hunter is an unsafe hunter, whether he is using a single shot muzzleloader or a semi auto centerfire rifle.

My position that hunting in an area where rifles are legal may be safer than shotgun only areas is based on my personal experience in the deer woods over the last 50 years.  I have done a lot of hunting in shotgun only areas and quite a bit of hunting in rifle areas. In my experience, there tends to be a lot more lead flying around in the shotgun areas.

Certainly a person can use a semi auto rifle ( as long as the mag holds no more than 5 rounds) and be just as much a menace as someone with a semi auto or pump shotgun. However, I see MANY more hunters with bolt action rifles than I do with pumps or autos, which are the norm with shotgun hunters.

There just seems to be a LOT less bangin' going on when hunters are using rifles rather than shotguns. To me than equates to a safer environment. Less shots fired more than offsets the longer effective range of a rifle, ESPECIALLY since so few hunting accidents occur BEYOND the effective range of a shotgun slug.

[Doc]

Most likely your observations come less from the style of weapon than from the fact that most "shotgun only" counties are closer to cities and thicker population areas which of course supply a greater volume of hunters per square mile. I myself have seen some state land conditions where I was constantly running into other hunters. My guess is the general rule might be that "the more hunters packed into any one area, the more likelyhood that some percentage of them are careless or reckless". I guess that's probably why they became "shotgun only" areas in the first place. Placing a rifle in their hands is not going to change the attitudes of unsafe hunters. But it will extend the range of their recklessness. I have to be honest, I think it is the crazy stuff that residents in these more populated areas have seen during shotgun seasons that make them a bit concerned about the change to rifles.

Don't get me wrong, I was pushing for the change to rifles in Ontario County. I have no love affair with that 12 guage Ithaca mangling my shoulder every year. But I have also listened to concerned people and much of what they had to say was very hard to argue with. When you talk to anyone that adjoins state land, they all have a long list of personal horror stories, so their opposition comes from some very real scenarios.