Ethical Hunting Pushing the Envelope

[rickjump1 0]

I got this off excite.com
New Gadgets Push the Envelope in Hunting

Mar 4, 7:46 AM (ET)

By JEFF BARNARD

GRANTS PASS, Ore. (AP) - Ever since man picked up a rock to kill dinner, hunters have been technology pioneers. These days, they've got more gadgets than ever to choose from.

Heat sensors will spot wounded game in dense brush, remote-controlled cameras can scout game trails. There are motorized duck and deer decoys, electronic duck and coyote calls and even holographic archery sights.

But some of the latest in hunting tech pushes the ethical envelope, and some states are outlawing high-tech innovations that game managers feel give hunters an undue advantage.

A San Antonio entrepreneur recently created an uproar with a Web site, www.live-shot.com , that aims to allow hunters to shoot exotic game animals or feral pigs on his private hunting ranch by remote control, with the click of a mouse, from anywhere in the world.


"The idea of sitting at a computer screen playing a video game and activating a remote controlled firearm to shoot an animal is not hunting," said Kirby Brown, executive director of the Texas Wildlife Association, a hunters' group. "It's off the ethical charts."

The Texas game commission appears to agree, and is moving to outlaw remote-control hunting for native game animals. But it will take an act of the legislature to stop it with exotic game animals on private property, and at least one lawmaker says that is just what he will do.

Live-Shot owner John Lockwood figured his idea was not much of a stretch from the predominant Texas practice of shooting from a tree stand at deer drawn to mechanical feeders and would allow disabled hunters and servicemen overseas to continue to enjoy the sport.

Under his plan, the hunter would aim and fire a .30-06 rifle by remote control from a computer terminal, with a video camera allowing him to sight in on his prey. An attendant in the blind with the rifle could override any unsafe or unethical shots.

"It's just like it was if you paid for a guided hunt on my ranch, or any one of a thousand of them here in Texas," said Lockwood. "Ever since we stopped running after our prey and killing it with our hands we have evolved into distancing ourselves farther and farther from the game and making it more and more efficient, for whatever reason we want to take it."

For some game regulators, it was mechanical duck decoys with spinning wings - one of them goes under the brand name Robo Duk - that crossed the line when they began showing up at blinds. Following Pennsylvania's lead, Washington state outlawed them in 2001.

"The issue for Robo Duk is similar with some of the other technological advances," said Dave Ware, game division manager for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Because they appear to give hunters an advantage, they presented regulators with a dilemma: should the devices be allowed but the duck season be shortened?

"When we asked hunters what their preference was, outlaw equipment or shorten seasons, they were very definite they would rather we outlaw equipment than shorten seasons because time in the field is so important to them."

Oregon followed suit in 2002, and included a prohibition against mechanical deer decoys. California restricted mechanical decoys to the latter part of duck season.

When Alabama decided last year to begin allowing decoys for turkeys, the state drew the line at motorized decoys.

The issue continues to be hotly debated around the country.

Finlay Williams created Robo Duk in Santa Maria, Calif., after seeing that a kite with shiny metallic spinners would draw in ducks mistaking the flash for the wings of birds landing on water.

He figures the mechanical decoy gives the occasional hunter a chance to have a more satisfying outing. Besides, the ducks that survive one encounter with Robo Duk aren't often fooled again.

To justify the longer seasons for archery hunters, Oregon outlaws such innovations as mechanical broadheads, which have blades that expand on impact, allowing the arrows to fly more accurately without the wind resistance of broadheads.

Another group that enjoys longer hunting seasons around the country are hunters who use muzzleloader rifles. In Oregon, whether they set off their blackpowder charge by flintlock, side-lock percussion, or the modern inline percussion, the ignition systems must be exposed to the wind and rain.

"It's back to the intent of maintaining a primitive weapons hunt," said Tom Thornton, game program manager for the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Rather than going more modern, Walt Christensen, past president of the Washington State Muzzleloaders Association, is heading the other way. He plans to hunt next season with a flintlock, joining friends seeking the challenge and romance of the older technology.

"No matter what kind of weapon you use, in hunting you still have to come back to that concept: You don't shoot a game animal that is 4,000 yards away just because some advertisement says that's a reasonable thing to do," said Christensen.

As hunting innovators develop more reliable ways to take game, more ethical questions are sure to arise.

Lockwood, the Web site-hunting entrepreneur, thinks the ultimate innovation is just around the corner and is a technology that won't be very difficult to adopt.

"The next one will be lasers," he said. "How far can you shoot a laser in a straight line? As far as the eye can see, basically."

[url]

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[DrunkMonkey 0]

Hunting is fine with me, but I don't personally do it. What gets me is that doesn't effectively taking an AK-47, a Anti-duck SAM battery, and a dozen claymore mines take the sport out of it?

Isn't the whole point of outdoorsman sports to enjoy being outdoors, and not specifically to schwack Bambi or Daffy?

[rickjump1 0]

This type of hunting is for corporate level. You know, it's for the guy who can't get out of the office or the guy who wants to drive up, shoot, and go home. Eating what he shoots is not part of the picture. He just wants to kill something for amusement. After all, it's a busy world and a mans got to have some fun. I just don't understand it myself.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[Rebecca 0]

Grrr. I have so many problems with modern "hunting".

What part of waiting in a tree-stand for deer to approach the feeder right in front of you so you can blow their brains out is actually hunting?

Go out, on foot, with a rifle or a bow, track the buck using hunter skills, kill him cleanly, and respect him enough to eat his meat. Keep trophies as you please. That's cool.

LASERS, Remote controlled anything, automatic anything, shooting more than you can eat, and waiting for the animals to come to your food trap are BS, IMHO.

you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk?

[Darius11 12]

I have absolutely no problem with hunting if the animal that is hunted is fully used.Like the Native Americans did.

With modern hunting specially this web site all you are doing is taking a life. I don’t see the point.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[wmw999 2,121]

What he said. Venison is delicious. Chicken fried steak is much better with venison than with beef.

The hunters I've known (and been married to) have been appalled at the practice of releasing animals from a pen to be shot in the gate, and anything else of this ilk.

If you're not willing to eat it or use it, don't kill it for fun. That's chickenshit.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[DrunkMonkey 0]

Quote

If you're not willing to eat it or use it, don't kill it for fun. That's chickenshit.

Better yet, the hunters ought to be required to beat the animal to death with their bare hands...

• Quote

[miked10270 0]

Quote

What part of waiting in a tree-stand for deer to approach the feeder right in front of you so you can blow their brains out is actually hunting?

Oh c'mon Becky-Boo, Y'All KNOW that hunting from a stand isn't risk-free... What about if they release armed psychotic Asians with a race persecution complex into the park an hour before the hunters arrive? Wouldn't that make it fairer?

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[alana 0]

This is sad..... these people have brought in technolgy to hunt innocent prey.

These people aren't strong enough or smart enough to actually kill an animal with their own two hands. We already use guns and other vises to kill and hunt animals. My theory has always been (besides the fact that I am against it) "if you're a true hunter and you want to call yourself one, you would put yourself on the same level as the animal and try to beat them in a fare hunting match, mano a mano". The people who hunt with guns or other vises are not strong enough to beat the animals at their own game....and the sick part is that they feel strong afterwards, it gives them a high! Sad individuals!

[Zenister 0]

since there are very few instances where hunting is a matter of survival..all technological advances should be prohibited... if you want to play with your new high tech, high powered toys/scope/rifle etc... go to the range, set up equally advanced mechanical targets for you to shoot...

given that...ive always been an advocate that you should be able to hunt ANY animal (even endangered species) so long as you do it with a spear...

and wear video too... because i'm definately cheering for the bear/tiger etc... and those those who succeed deserve the rug......

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

This type of hunting is for corporate level. You know, it's for the guy who can't get out of the office or the guy who wants to drive up, shoot, and go home. Eating what he shoots is not part of the picture. He just wants to kill something for amusement. After all, it's a busy world and a mans got to have some fun. I just don't understand it myself.

Your last senctence explains all.

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[alana 0]

and wear video too... because i'm definately cheering for the bear/tiger etc... and those those who succeed deserve the rug......

[Kennedy 0]

Think about it. How many of those "trophy" endangered animals would be on the endangered species list if you had to take them with spear or bow?

(I have to admit, tigers scare me a lot more than any other land animal; that's one trophy I could live without)

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Zenister 0]

next to none... and we'd have a lot less assholes (and fewer adventurous geniuses)... but the lions, tigers and bears would be MUCH better fed....

honestly the scariest sound i've ever heard, was the deep low growl of a nursing tiger.... no where else have a felt that little monkey in the back of my skull quiver or wanted to run in terror, but it was also one of the most incredible experiences of my life...

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[steve1 5]

I think most hunters are sickened by the idea of fenced in hunting. The idea of hunting at home from a computer is really sick in my mind.

Here in Montana, hunting game animals such as deer and elk, in a high fenced in area, is now illegal. There is still lot's of debate over this. Personally I'm glad it isn't allowed.

A few years ago it was perfectly legal to hunt a fenced in ranch here. Wealthy clients, from out of state, would fly in, and then that same day, shoot a huge bull elk in a fenced in area. Often times they would preview the trophy sized elk on the ranch, by watching a video, and pick out the one they would shoot. The bigger ones cost more money. These so called hunters would then pay ten or fifteen thousand per elk, and then fly out again. Many didn't even want the meat. Many of these same heads were then entered in a record book such as Boone and Crocket. This isn't hunting in my mind.

But then again hunting on an outfitted ranch these days isn't much better. Hordes of hunters, who hunt public ground, end up pushing most of the wildlife onto these ranches where only the rich can hunt. There's just too many hunters hunting public land these days, and the wildlife often moves out of these areas. Game Depts. need to start limiting the number of hunters on public land and this scenario probably wouldn't happen.

Since most game depts end up getting most of their money from selling licenses, I doubt this will ever happen. What they are doing is helping the outfitters in the process. The more licenses they sell the more money is in their multi-million dollar budget. Don't get me wrong, much of this money goes to a good cause, but the Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks seldom if ever cut back on the licenses they sell, even after a tough winter when there isn't a lot of wildlife left.

Hunting is changing fast, even in Montana. I'm not optimistic about the future of hunting. I doubt if the common person, without lots of cash, will even be able to hunt in the near future. It's just another sign we have too many people in the world.

As far as new technology goes, game depts. watch this closely. If something comes along that makes hunting unethical, it is often outlawed.....Steve1

[Guest]

Quote

Another group that enjoys longer hunting seasons around the country are hunters who use muzzleloader rifles. In Oregon, whether they set off their blackpowder charge by flintlock, side-lock percussion, or the modern inline percussion, the ignition systems must be exposed to the wind and rain.

Man, that's so bogus. Even hunters in the 18th and 19th centuries used simple techniques to protect their ignition systems (a quill in the touch-hole; a sleeve to cover the mechanism known as a Cow's Knee).

I think that the more primitive the method used, the longer the season should be, e.g., Modern Arms 1 week; semi-primitive (in-line black powder, compound bow) 1&1/2; full primitive (pre-1840 firearms, longbow) - 2 weeks. Bambi will at least have half a chance.

mh

.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

doesn't effectively taking an AK-47, a Anti-duck SAM battery, and a dozen claymore mines take the sport out of it?

All of those are illegal for hunting. The firearms to be used are strictly regulated by each state.

Quote

Isn't the whole point of outdoorsman sports to enjoy being outdoors, and not specifically to schwack Bambi or Daffy?

Bringing home some meat is a great bonus.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

My theory has always been "if you're a true hunter and you want to call yourself one, you would put yourself on the same level as the animal and try to beat them in a fare hunting match, mano a mano".

If your theory had controlled evolution, mankind would not now exist, nor would you. It's only our brains which allowed us to create tools with which to defeat stronger animals, that allowed us to survive.

Quote

the sick part is that they feel strong afterwards, it gives them a high! Sad individuals!

I imagine that our ancient ancestors got quite a thrill from killing game - it meant that their families back in the cave wouldn't go hungry for a few days. The thrill of recreating that ancient cycle of nature today, is not "sad".

Do you buy your meat all packaged nicely in cellophane shrink-wrap at the grocery store?

[Zenister 0]

by using modern technological methods and advances designed to 'ensure' a successful hunt (remember it was a matter of survival not sport) you defeat any attempt to claim you are 'recreating an ancient cycle'

get out there with a bow and track your prey... anything less is simply cheating yourself and the ideal of 'hunting'

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[craddock 0]

I would have a hard time feeling cheated while I am eating a big steak, even if I did kill it with a rifle. I bagged two deer last year. One from 15 yards and one from 150 yards. I get just as much enjoyment eating either one.. Or my grouse of pheasants.

I hope you are a vegetarian and don't eat any fish either. Fish die the worst death.

That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

[kmcguffee 0]

Quote

get out there with a bow and track your prey... anything less is simply cheating yourself and the ideal of 'hunting'

I level the playing field by giving the deer a rifle too. So far, I've been able to outshoot all of them.

"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

[Zenister 0]

i guess you think you 'earned' them somehow? even when you (most probably, and if you are one of the VERY few, then certainly the majority of hunters who couldnt explain the complete process to create the weapon they use, much less build one themselves) had little to nothing to do with the creation of the actual means you used to kill them?

please.. hunting with rifles is a joke. the 'skills' you exhibit are pale shadows of those used by men as little as 400 years ago...but somehow you equate yourself with primitive hunters who hunted for survival instead of sport??

i'm not interested in 'how they die' so much as "what did you do to earn the badge of 'great white hunter'" you seem to wear so proudly...you could quite easily exercise the exact same 'skill' you demonstrated on a firing range...then stop by arby's on your way home..

do you think you could create that weapon and its propellant on your own? if not dont pretend to claim the 'tool' defense.. you 'bought' your deer in the same manner someone buys their steaks from the grocery store...you just picked yours out with a rifle...

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[steve1 5]

I do a lot of bow hunting. It is a great challenge. Rifle hunting isn't always easy though. Particularly if you are holding out for a big one. I know some who rifle hunt all fall and never kill a single deer because they are still holding out for Mr. Big.....Steve1

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

I do a lot of bow hunting. It is a great challenge. Rifle hunting isn't always easy though. Particularly if you are holding out for a big one. I know some who rifle hunt all fall and never kill a single deer because they are still holding out for Mr. Big.

That kind of proves his point, though. If you don't bag and tag one just because you're waiting fora better one, that pretty much disproves the "connection with tradition" argument. Tree stand hunting is a fairly young form of hunting, and hence not very 'traditional.' Other reasons are still valid and logical, but that particular reason is out.

Zenister strikes me as a person thinking if you can't make it and use it yourself, you're not doing it right. Traditional bows being ok, Primitive bows being best, composite, compund, convoluted bows being better than guns but just barely.

If all goes well, later this year I may get to make my own black powder rifle pretty much by hand. (at first I'll be buying propellant, but I paln on being able to mix my own soon thereafter, and finding and mixing my own eventually)

A self bow is still on the to-do list, but not a high priority.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

by using modern technological methods and advances designed to 'ensure' a successful hunt (remember it was a matter of survival not sport) you defeat any attempt to claim you are 'recreating an ancient cycle'

get out there with a bow and track your prey... anything less is simply cheating yourself and the ideal of 'hunting'

No hunt can be "ensured". If you think that using a modern rifle ensures a kill, then you have obviously never been out in the woods trying to bag a deer during hunting season. Even with that modern tool, the deer still have the edge.

Do you live in a cave? Or in a house with central heat and air and running water? Do you drive a car? Or do you walk to work wearing sandals hand-woven from reeds?

Oh, and one more question: did you sew your own parachute? If you didn't raise your own silkworms, gather their silk strands, weave your own fabric, and sew your own parachute - then you're not a real skydiver - you're simply cheating yourself and the ideal of "skydiving".

Quote

i'm not interested in 'how they die' so much as "what did you do to earn the badge of 'great white hunter'"

How much skill do you exhibit when buying pre-packaged meat at the grocery store? Are you somehow superior to hunters because you pay a third party to do your killing for you?