Notwithstanding any applicable laws that may affect the legalities, would you consider it unethical to use a drone in the place of a spotting scope to locate game. Please explain whatever position you take.

You poor retard!

No

🦫

That was actually much more thoughtful and intellectual in character than I expected from you.

Keep the helmet on 24/7 dummy. LOL.

Questions like this need answers. TO THE TOP GENTS!! Don’t leave Paul hanging. He blocked traffic all day and deserves answer.

PS 100 points for clipping cycles. LMFAO.

Paul Barnyard wants to plant his nut sack on the drone's camera.

Yes, no.

That’s the exact kinda feed back a question like this deserves.
Absolutely almost perfect.

I use google earth.

I'd have no problem using a drone to find downed game.

I'll have to think about using them to spot. Not sure about that.

I am 100 % confident that more then a few people have used them for that purpose already.

Here's how I think about it. Moat states have regulations that prohibit hunting the same day you fly, the rationale being, spotting game from the air and then hunting it is not fair chase.

Seems like spotting from the air with a drone is the same in that respect.

My spotter makes no noise and does not intrude on other folks experience. And is legal in Wilderness area. Whatever is legal is OK w/ me until it bothers others. Drones, motorized vehicles, barking dogs all bother the hell out of me.

YMMV


mike r

PaulBarnard,

I'm with Ted here. He once said on T.V. if it was legal to use hand grenades he would.

I don't have a drone, but don't see a problem with someone else using them as long as it is legal.

I don't really care what someone else does as long as it is legal and doesn't bother other people
who hunt legally. If it bothers a greenie and is legal I love it.

No. Get off your lazy asses and go look for whatever game animals you’re hunting.

Only a self absorbed douche would consider using a drone...

Agreed. This OP is a never ending source of dumbass questions and answers.

Yes, because it’s a recreational activity, not war.

Same applies to real-time remote trail cams. In any case, your question is mostly moot, as the laws are keeping up with the techno-cheaters.

And you are in a never ending state of butthurt.

That's where I am. Not too sure. We have embraced a lot of technology over the years that help us better find and/or kill animals. A spotting scope is one such device. Range finders. Modern high tech scopes. GPSs. Illuminated reticles. Trail cameras. In a very basic way a spotting scope is a technological extension of the human eye. That's what a drone is.

That’s a hell of a leap, Paul.

How so? I am sitting on the porch of a condo right now. There is a hill about a mile away. I can't see the deer that feed on it with my naked eye. I can set my spotting scope up, and that allows me to see that which I could not otherwise see. If I had a drone rather than a spotting scope, and I used it to see deer I couldn't see with my naked eye, how is that different? It's simply another form of optical technology that serves as an extension of the human eye.

Line of sight vs motorized mechanical advantage with steerable optics.

Perhaps that wasn’t clear enough. Your telescope isn’t flying over the nearest mountain and looking on the backside.

Paul is one of those that is educated above his intelligence

Agree. ^

Paul,
Depending on elevation and ground cover, the human eye can’t see all the way down into a canyon while standing at the top, on the same side...You can see up from the bottom, a smidge better, but that also depends on elevation, height of trees, brush, etc, even with optics.

The same for seeing the opposite side of a hill, hogback, or ridge with glass. You can’t see the hidden space without physically moving yourself to a different vantage point.

A drone is a nimble, mechanically controlled machine that deployed, could cover areas that would require boots in the dirt or tires on a road to get to a point of seeing.

Sorry, but a drone is a far reach away from being an extension of the human eye, like a spotter...IMO

🦫

A spotter also doesn’t sound like a swarm of bees overhead interfering with someone else’s hunt.

Deploy a drone...Bust out the gauge and call “PULL”

😬🦫

Exactly!

Silence is a skill a hunter tries to improve over a lifetime. A buttnugget running any kind of a motor is compromising his own integrity and the quality of other people's experience.


mike r

Mike I’m not sure how much the new hunters care about silence anymore. Get a rifle that shoots a thousand yards out of the box who needs to be quiet? Sad really and I blame whoever is mentoring them to hunt.

Quite is still required, no one knows for certain were game is going to show near or far

This⬆️

Until they come up with (and they will, or its cousin) x-ray spotting scopes, game still has to be in sight to see it with ordinary optics.

Funny how some get to the point where they purposely increase the challenge of taking their game, while others never stop trying to make it easier, or surer.

Use the drone, maybe you can mount a small machine gun on it, and kill game from the front porch of your condo.Yeah, thats the ticket!!!

There's a big difference between an extension of the human eye and growing wings.

I'll go along with that. It would allow a better extension of human sight in some ways.

A spotter is stationary device that allows a human to see things they otherwise couldn't. A drone is a mobile device that does the same thing, typically with inferior optics. So the fact that the drone is a mobile extension of the human eyesight is what would make it unethical in your mind? Fair enough.

Part of what got me thinking about this is how drones have been used in fishing. They are used to sight redfish in the marsh...no need to cast the banks of a brackish pond if the fish aren't there. A lot of people who have fishfinders on their boats think it's unethical to use a drone to find fish. Ironic? Surf fisher are even using drones to deliver baits to the outer bar.

It's interesting to see where people draw the line between embracing technology and eschewing it, and why.

I can see it now. Somebody spent 20 grand on a hunt and here comes Spandex Barnyard piloting his Walmart drone overhead. Paul would be wearing his spandex up over his head and missing half his teeth after that.

Tennessee has already banned this exact practice

I don't consider a cell service capable trail camera to be too much different.

But if they are legal in your state that makes it all good I guess. Personally I just go hunting, don't need to kill the biggest animal in the woods at all costs.

My personal approach is that to be interesting, sport hunting must involve some form of challenge and using all the technology available would turn hunting into an unnatural, boring act.

Not that I need to run naked with a spear in my had but I feel like we need to draw the line somewhere.

With hunting so much under scrutiny these days I feel like using drones is the sort of thing that does not help strengthen our position.

Not even remotely the same. By your logic the drone is the same as a scope or binoculars. Except the fact that with optics you can only see the area you walked or drove your ass too of course terrain dependent. With the drone depending on battery life you can cover countless miles of hills from one spot, totally runs afoul of fair chase principles.

I think people can identify somewhat with game animals and are more inclined to want to “play fair” with them. Fish, not so much.

I think drones are great tools for some things, but the potential for abuse is considerable particularly as regards privacy. Never saw one buzzing around my digs, but suspect a dose of Less-Lethal plastic buckshot might be a good way to handle it without endangering anyone. There might even be some of that lying around here somewhere, maybe.

Ignoring law, ethics are largely personal. And traditional.
Just read stuff on this site.

Otherwise good guys are ready to fight over some stupid hunting method
or another. All because they only know what's common in their area.
And judge everything through what they know.


Personally, and in theory only,
I don't like the idea of using a drone
to locate game.

Would have no issue using one after the shot, to find down or wounded game.
Chasing a wounded animal with one would be despicable.

Using one to look at animals first located by eyeball?
In season? Out?
Scouting or just observing?
Trying to acclimate them to it for later exploitation? Hell no!


Moving away from theory, into the real world?
No. Allowing them in any way would allow abuse.

In Pa?
When our annual game law book has ads for drones, legality will
be within 3 years. When I saw ads for inlines I wondered "WTF, we
can't use them in blackpowder, and no one will buy one to rifle hunt".

Within 2 years we had a season for them.

When I saw ads for crossbows, "Hmmm, The fix is in. Money has been
payed. They are coming". And within 2 years, legal. Across the board.

I actually don't care what someone else does so long as it isn't on my property.

I was watching an episode of Wicked Tuna and one of the crews used an airplane to spot schools with and then directed them to it. Kinda cheating but legal. I have used a drone to take aerial photos and videos of my hunting property but I couldn’t imagine using it on an actual hunt. At what point do we say enough is enough with technology?

Yes. First and foremost a competent drone pilot could find, flush, and "drive" a target animal right to themselves.

Take away the above and my answer and look at it from a pure "optical" perspective and yes, IMO, it's still unethical.

I live in some of the flattest country in all of the USA. A harvested wheat or soybean field from the road "looks" pancake flat. That said, there are folds, ditches, and just enough natural topography that animals learn to hide where they cannot be seen from horizontal viewing angles even with an absence of cover like CRP, woods, tree-rows, or cattail sloughs which make up the bulk of our game's habitat. Corn harvest, deer rut, and our deer gun season typically all run at the same time in mid-late Nov. Corn stubble prior to being flailed or disced down can hide a lot of deer from a horizontal angle, but, from vertical, nearly every deer would be visible. Elevated stands/blinds help a bit, but nothing like "A view from the Top" looking essentially straight down onto a landscape.

Lastly, we go back to my 1st statement regarding the ability to drive game with the drone and discuss how that potentially effects private land boundaries and driving game OUT of a parcel you don't own onto a parcel you own or have the ability to hunt. If someone get's caught driving say bighorn sheep, mountain goats, or wolves out of YellowStone, Glacier, or any other number of National Parks out onto public/private ground where they CAN hunt, there'll be a public backlash the likes of which hunters have never seen.

Logical and good answer.

It can't get worse than it is now. The anti's use any and everything to stop us. Doing what you posted would be no more than one more thing for them.

New drone rules by our Gbmint say you cant fly a drone more than 400' above where it takes off from and you MUST be able to maintain sight of it at all times.
So its a moot point f you are following the law..
YMMV

I hadn't thought about people using them to drive game. I reckon down here in the south the dog hunters would find that highly unethical.

Those are some interesting thoughts. You know, a lot of fish and game departments are looking for ways to draw new hunters into the mix. As you have identified, we have seen quite a bit of technological "creep." Back in the day, it was traditional muzzle loaders only. Then they allowed in-lines. Then they allowed crack barrel single shots in certain calibers. I'd never use a drone in the place of a spotting scope, but when I try to articulate just why, I come up short. It crosses a line I cannot define. I guess that's the way it works with values and beliefs.

I think you are being sarcastic.

Even though you are right.

The guys whose dogs drive deer of posted property towards their guns
would be pissed to find "some SOB using a drone to drive deer".

And that illustrates my above post.

Flint vs percussion vs inline vs smokeless frontloader.

Longbow vs recurve vs compound vs crossbow.
Ironic that crossbow Is older than compound.

I laugh at archers especially.
Guys at work, dropping $1500+ annually in a rapidly depreciating tool.
"Gotta buy the fastest/bestest bow" outfit it with the latest sights, silencers,
whatever arrow gives the newest advantage, cutting edge broadheads....
In pursuit of their traditional primitive sport.

Whatever floats the boat.

Untill they start on crossbows!

Then, I can't keep my mouth shut.
The hypocrisy is unreal .
And I point that out.

(No, I don't use a crossbow)

This is like the CB.

We are walking on each other.
My last post was in response to your earlier one

You can't control a dog's path nor how a dog trails or runs game with a remote. A talented drone pilot could make a deer dance a jig.

That's a good response. As soon as someone sues the word "should" they become like the government and step on other folk's toes.

Other states have too.

Depends on where and what I’m doing.

For CA I might use a drone for scouting deer, as there is usually very few of them around. But probably not for hunting in CA or other states with better deer,elk, or moose populations.

If it's legal, whatever floats your boat. Personally, I would call it unethical and is against fair chase.

I guess that tactic might work out West. But here, back East, I can't see where that would do you any good. The woods are too thick for the drone to see anything. Out West, you guys find the animal and go to it until you can get a shot. Here, we generally hunt in one spot and let the deer come to us. Trail cams are more effective to let you know how they're traveling to find the right spot to set up a tree stand.

There's a lot of technology that we all use and everyone has an idea as to what they consider ethical and non-ethical. I use a crossbow and an in-line ML. Some people might frown on that, but .gov allows me to use those, so I do. My son calls me a cheater because I use a crossbow. Personally, I choose to hunt out of an open tree stand to give the deer a chance of seeing, smelling, or hearing me. I think it's more challenging. Personally, I think that hunting out of a closed in, elevated box blind wouldn't be as fun because you're limiting the ability of the deer to detect your presence. I think it makes it too easy. I wouldn't call it un-ethical because it's legal, but that's not my cup of tea. Again, everyone has a different idea and whatever floats your boat.

I think that hunting out of an enclosed blind would rob me of the blessings of fresh air and sunshine, major reasons to be outdoors.

If you say so.
By this same logic, viewing an image transmitted by satellite from halfway around the world would also be a “form of optical technology that serves as an extension of the human eye.”
I think it goes a bit beyond that.

I'd hate to see drones used for hunting game, maybe finding down game though would be ok.

Last elk hunt in Wyoming my son and I were on. We hiked a good distance up a mountain into prime elk habitat and "hunters" were already there on 4-wheelers. They had rifles in scabbards. It was illegal for them to be doing so. But they didn't stop to ask my opinion of what they were doing. (I suppose it would have been illegal for me to shoot the reprobates.) I don't think they ended up seeing or at least shooting elk. and as it turned out, we ended up never seeing elk. There was a lot of sign where the 4-wheelers were running around and where we had planned on hunting.

My point? There will be people using drones even if it's illegal. Unethical people (reprobates) are in all forms of humanity.