interesting read


Recommended Posts

https://www.fieldandstream.com/story/hunting/are-wireless-trail-cameras-cheating/?utm_source=internal&utm_medium=email&tp=i-1NGB-Et-QVY-160qDo-1c-AM9C-1c-160iXK-l52AeQ1o9O-1XMd1N

Something to think about.  Or not.  Long time forum members know my stance on the use/overuse of technology.

Thoughts?  And please, no "if it's legal" arguments.  It goes beyond that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have not read the article but can see that the link suggests this is in regards to wireless cameras.  I think a cell phone sending you to a deer at your camera crosses the line.  That takes out a big part of the puzzle of putting yourself in the right place at the right time.  Honestly Tennessee has allowed the use of atvs and utvs for years now so long as you are stationary when you shoot.  A camera telling you where to go, then riding there and killing the deer does not seem like much of a challenge to me. 

Seems here these days they just want the deer killed.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Mathews XT Man said:

Where do you draw the line?, side view fish finders,underwater cameras, list goes on and on Dave

Where do we draw the line?  That is a very good question and just why this discussion needs to happen.  If we as hunters and anglers do not draw a line, it might just be drawn for us.  I find the fishing thought quite interesting in that putting out a net or trap to catch fish (crabs or lobster too) is even considered fishing, and certainly the use of electronic equipment to locate is not fair chase.  If the whole purpose is merely to reduce the prey to "possession" than why can't we trap deer or maybe net them from the air.

If we were still chucking spears, the invention of the atlatl would surely cause a stir among the purist.  In our insatiable quest to put trophies on the wall, money in the pockets of marketing gurus and with less effort maybe, just maybe, we have lost the importance and joy of the journey.  I believe that success should be in the hunt, not the kill.  Hunting is not a game and there is no winning, just a journey with an ending.  We take a life, or we don't.  Do we have to make it easy?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading the article, I agree that the use of a cellular camera while on stand in real time in my opinion is not fair chase and crosses the line.  As for guys that have the means and who hunt states away, and have their cell cameras send them a weeks worth of pics so they do not have to drive a day to retrieve cards, I see nothing wrong with that.  I am just not on board though with using drones or cams or tech to locate deer in "real" time.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, elkoholic said:

  "In our insatiable quest to put trophies on the wall, money in the pockets of marketing gurus and with less effort..."

That's the key point right there.

Normally I just like to ask questions on posts like this.  Try to make people think... But I do have opinions about all these topics, I just don't often voice them here because they go against the grain of this place.

In my not so humble opinion "commercial deer hunting" ie, the monomaniacal focus on big racks is the problem, not the technology that's used.

When people go back to hunting to take a deer for the freezer, whether it's a doe or a spike or something bigger the "problem" of  using technology and the ethical issues that causes will end.

I think the quest for big racks is the problem. I think it's a form of greed and greed in it's many forms is an unhealthy attribute.

If you are one of those who has that insatiable need to hang trophys on your wall you are doing as much damage to hunting as those who push ethical boundaries with technology. In fact, that insatiable need to take a huge rack is what is pushing the technology in the first place. The two go hand in hand.

If you are a big rack hunter please spare me the hand wringing over some new device that doesn't fit your definition of ethical.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually shot a nice 8pt last year because of my cam. i pulled the card mid day, saw a buck heading up to bed, and figured he'd be coming back thru to feed late...he did and I shot him. Still had to put the time in, because of wind, I woulda been in that stand anyways... That buck could have went anywhere and went past a stand I was NOT in...all the cam did was tell me he came by.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Ultradog said:

I think the quest for big racks is the problem. I think it's a form of greed and greed in it's many forms is an unhealthy attribute.

Why beat down those who choose to challenge themselves to not take the first thing that happens along?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Ultradog said:

Who said anything about taking the first deer that comes along?

I prefaced my post with a quote from Elkoholic.

"In our insatiable quest to put trophies on the wall..."

With this below:

2 hours ago, Ultradog said:

When people go back to hunting to take a deer for the freezer, whether it's a doe or a spike or something bigger the "problem" of  using technology and the ethical issues that causes will end.

Really in my opinion a hunter should hunt for his/her own satisfaction and that can be to put meat on the table as well as put a nice trophy on the wall.  I just don't see why some people feel the need to blame those that do for the commercialization of deer hunting.  Sure some "pros" contribute to that but to make such a blanket statement does none of us any good.

As was posted above, the hunt does not have to be about killing, and for many it is not.  So much more goes into a season.  Whether it be scouting in wide open out west, or planting food plots and setting up your box blinds.  

Just my 2 cents in this discussion, but think those who ridicule or blame those of us who like to sit for just the right deer further cause division amongst hunters.  I have not seen on this site where those who choose to kill a deer others might not think worthy of the wall get blasted, usually it is right opposite and they congratulated.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mathews XT Man said:

all the cam did was tell me he came by

And did he have the info that you were headed to that stand?  Fair is fair.  Knowing where a deer beds and feeds should not require a camera and same day info gathered through technology allowing you to make a high percentage decision made that decision an easier one.  Maybe you would have chosen that stand anyway.  The many variables of any hunt in any way reduced or altered by technology reduces the challenge of the hunt.  Then we must ask; Does there need to be a challenge?  Bottom line, I believe all "same day" tech related animal location methods are not for me.

 

5 hours ago, wtnhunt said:

Why beat down those who choose to challenge themselves

That is my main point, making it easier through technology is not challenging ourselves.  Every little thing that makes it easier reduces the challenge.

As for trophy hunting, if the only reason you hunt is to hang antlers on the wall, I find that the wrong reason to take a life.  Targeting a particular animal (that you named?) is an interesting aspect that makes it like a "game" in our minds.  It is not a game.  For the animal it is life or death in a dance they do not realize is even happening.

 

6 hours ago, Ultradog said:

In my not so humble opinion "commercial deer hunting" ie, the monomaniacal focus on big racks is the problem, not the technology that's used.

The "pros" definitely push the big rack cause, and every new gadget is a must have.  Surely if they use it, I must have it.  Why is commercial hunting even legal?  Well that's another post entirely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Mathews XT Man said:

because of wind, I woulda been in that stand anyways.

 

7 hours ago, elkoholic said:

Maybe you would have chosen that stand anyway.

yes, either way knowing he came by or not, I was going to be there. i had last encountered that buck two weeks prior. he was the target buck for me last year. he very well could have passed entirely beyond my property, or chose a different route back to feed where I figured he may go.

I thought it was as fair chase as possible

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Mathews XT Man said:

I thought it was as fair chase as possible

It sure was.  As we all know, there is no guarantee in hunting and even same day information can't provide that.  I do believe that all remote surveillance should be discontinued during hunting seasons and preferably ending a week before.  By that time feeding and bedding area(s) along with preferred travel routes are already determined.  I can see the day that we attach tracking chips so that we know where our target animal is at all times.  That would be fairly easy to do.....  God, I hope not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I am not here to impugne or denigrate  anyone for what they hunt or how they hunt it.

This conversation started with a question about using technology to increase your success rate and the use of technology naturally causes ethical questions to be asked.

When we go afield there is a high likelihood that a deer will die. Whether that deer is a button buck or a monster is somewhat immaterial as it is still just as dead.

What seems to be happening though is we are not seeing a deer as one of God's own creatures or even as meat for our family.  We are objectifying the deer as a set of antlers to hang on the wall. The more horn it has the higher value we place upon it and the more we lust after the thing. And the more  likely many are to bend the fair chase deal to be in their favor with technology.

If you hunt for horns, well that's what you do. I didn't come here to impugne, remember? 

But I will say that I will be far more a stickler for holding big rack hunters to the notions of fair chase, of morals and hunting ethics than I would some country boy who can't afford all the latest and greatest stuff and is still out there using the old ways to  feed his family.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ultradog said:

But I will say that I will be far more a stickler for holding big rack hunters to the notions of fair chase, of morals and hunting ethics than I would some country boy who can't afford all the latest and greatest stuff and is still out there using the old ways to  feed his family.

This is where we differ in opinions.  You say you would view these different types of hunters differently and are calling them the "big rack hunters" implying you believe they are responsible for tech used in an unfair way and this decline in what some feel is ethical.  Just the way what you wrote reads to me as I read it. 

I get it though, you don't intend to denigrate, but still hold a different view.  I might admit I would be a little envious of some who have incredible opportunities for monsters, but would never hold it against them or look at them differently so long as they are following the law and acting in an ethical manner.  Reality is we are all different and have different motivating factors.  I don't think someone like Al or Frank here have any different or lesser regard for the animals they kill than what you seem to have, even though both have taken absolute monsters that I would be thrilled to even see.  With that being said why would I look at them any differently because they like to kill bigger racked deer, than the guy who is "hunting to feed his family".   Personally I enjoy watching deer, enjoy sitting in the stand with my kids and watching deer and waiting for mature bucks.  It is just more challenging to me.  We do hold high regards for the animals despite liking to kill more mature animals.  And we do have remorse for taking a life.  We do also like to look at our mounts though, does that make us somehow wrong?  

As far as technology goes, where to draw the line is subject to opinion and we all are different.  What I see as ethical another might not.   This could go on and on and has been brought up in this thread as well as others, you could say all modern methods are unethical because they give an unfair advantage.  Reality is your rifle and scope could be viewed as unfair to the traditional archer, it is a perception.  Last I knew, there was no spear season or knife season for deer.  Man has adapted, and that is good.  

I personally think remote cell cameras in real time would be cheating.  Really has nothing to do with the cost factor or the idea that only the wealthy have these toys, but with the idea that it takes away the element of true fair chase.  Just my opinion. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mathews XT Man said:

Ditto!  Seems a bit far fetched to me....we do know DNR has tracking collars for research, so it could be possible I suppose

The technology already exists, with the limiting factor being battery life, which I'm sure can be overcome with better "technology" (https://www.globalsupplies.co.za/pneu-darts/transmitter).  While intended to help in recovery of tranquilized animals it may already have been used on a "hunt".  One scenario being, the guide finds an animal a couple of days before arrival of customer and miraculously leads the client to trophy.  Hmmm

4 hours ago, wtnhunt said:

As far as technology goes, where to draw the line is subject to opinion and we all are different.

This is unfortunately, or fortunately, a fact of life.  My thinking is that as hunters we need to have these discussions and maybe come to a consensus before the anti-hunters use certain "hunting techniques" to back us up against a wall.  It would be better if we draw the line and not have it drawn for us.  The moment of the kill is not as important in my mind as how one arrived at that opportunity.  Unless you are a subsistence hunter, successfully filling a tag is more of a pat on the back type thing, for surely more resources were spent than received into your freezer or hung on your wall.  The harder I hunt, the colder and more tired I get, the greater the rewards I receive.  It''s all in my head, but making it easier does not make it more rewarding.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, elkoholic said:

  While intended to help in recovery of tranquilized animals it may already have been used on a "hunt".

where is proof of that??

 

22 hours ago, elkoholic said:

before the anti-hunters use certain "hunting techniques"

they already do Dave...I have a LIBTARD neighbor who thinks hound hunters use the collars to find the dogs after they treed the bear! In reality, it,s to get the dogs back if they get lost or lose the scent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/31/2020 at 11:08 AM, Mathews XT Man said:

where is proof of that??

Like I said, it may have already been used on a hunt.  It is often used in animal studies in both Australia and Africa to locate tranquilized (via dart) animals.  The misuse of this technology would not surprise me.

Yes, the antis often use misconstrued happenings in their arguments, but why give them more "bullets".  The people sitting on the fence and the direction they fall, will ultimately determine the future of hunting.  Like athletes and the steroid issue, hunters would benefit from a cleaner image.  Maybe we don't really give a hoot, and maybe we should.  Being in the minority, presenting a positive image can only be a good thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.