Am I Getting Old? Image Stabilized, Cell Trail Cams Too Far?

[Muleys32]

Wondering if I’m just getting old or are these just random personal things that feel too far for me? Do you have other things that are similar?

Image stabilized optics seem a bit too much. Not a big deal if others use them but for me, a perfectly physically able bodied fella, I’d rather be the one putting in the work of glassing through a tool and not a machine. I understand this argument falls flat on all kinds of levels compared to range finders, onx, etc…

I’ve tested them out and they absolutely make a difference while moving around and hand holding. So not putting down the effectiveness of them.

Cellular trail cams? If there was a mandatory week delay that makes a lot of sense. But the real time hunting decisions are too far it feels like. You see it quite consistently in hunting videos.

Just curious on if I’m the only one? I’m guessing the cell cams might get some support. Image stabilized optics being too far a lot less?

Again, I understand the reverse argument can easily be made about other technology I use, just curious if anyone else has a similar thought on these items?

 

[Cwsharer]

Absolutely not out of line to think it’s gone too far , with all of the anti hunting agenda being pushed hard at us we are dang sure not helping our case by utilizing technology that I. Their eyes makes us look unethical . All of us understand the science behind game management but they have said it themselves that they are operating on emotion/ public perception rather than science and science is the only argument we have until we start regulating ourselves before they do it for us !

 

[Pacific_Fork]

In every corner of life humans can’t stop making better things and consumers can’t help but think they need the newest gadget.

You’re not wrong to have these feelings, and having ethical dilemmas in hunting technology is the only reason why we have any sliver of opportunity left to hunt every year.

There are those of us who have drawn a line on ethics and fair chase. I use a range finder and high end optics on a tripod. I can hit targets out to 1200 yards in perfect conditions, but my personal limit on game is half that. I have killed deer at 800 yards and after many days thinking of fair chase I’ve lowered my max to 600. Might keep lowering as the years go on.

There are guys, many I’ve seen on this forum, who justify drone use. I don’t give one inch to this technology even for recovery reasons. It’s a hard line and I’ll fight for them to never have any place in the natural world. Thermals, stabilizing optics, auto dope adjusting range finding rifle scopes, and (in some cases) cell cameras fall in this category. For me, there’s not a single new gadget I’d feel ok about using past what I already have. I still want to hunt and give the deer/elk a fighting chance. At the end of the day if we don’t limit tech we will be lucky to have a tag in our pocket once every 5 years.

 

[omicron1792]

Absolutely not out of line to think it’s gone too far , with all of the anti hunting agenda being pushed hard at us we are dang sure not helping our case by utilizing technology that I. Their eyes makes us look unethical . All of us understand the science behind game management but they have said it themselves that they are operating on emotion/ public perception rather than science and science is the only argument we have until we start regulating ourselves before they do it for us !

They hate the hunting not the tech. We could all hunt off the ground with spears and they would say it’s not humane.

Giving ground on tech feeds the antis IMO

 

[omicron1792]

In every corner of life humans can’t stop making better things and consumers can’t help but think they need the newest gadget.

You’re not wrong to have these feelings, and having ethical dilemmas in hunting technology is the only reason why we have any sliver of opportunity left to hunt every year.

There are those of us who have drawn a line on ethics and fair chase. I use a range finder and high end optics on a tripod. I can hit targets out to 1200 yards in perfect conditions, but my personal limit on game is half that. I have killed deer at 800 yards and after many days thinking of fair chase I’ve lowered my max to 600. Might keep lowering as the years go on.

There are guys, many I’ve seen on this forum, who justify drone use. I don’t give one inch to this technology even for recovery reasons. It’s a hard line and I’ll fight for them to never have any place in the natural world. Thermals, stabilizing optics, auto dope adjusting range finding rifle scopes, and (in some cases) cell cameras fall in this category. For me, there’s not a single new gadget I’d feel ok about using past what I already have. I still want to hunt and give the deer/elk a fighting chance. At the end of the day if we don’t limit tech we will be lucky to have a tag in our pocket once every 5 years.

My problem with this is you’ve already crossed that rubicon with a scope and rifle that can shoot to 1200 yards. Incremental changes aren’t what’s preventing giving animals a fighting chance.

Seems we all feel the stuff we use now is ok but anything new isn’t. Seems to be ingrained in what our dad or grandad taught us and used.

 

[bowkill]

Every time this conversation comes up, everyone always wants to immediately argue that if you don't like this or that, then you have to go all the way back to chipping your own heads out of stone and throwing a spear or something. In my opinion, it all comes down to whatever you feel comfortable with and what gives you that warm, fuzzy feeling while you're doing it. I, personally, use a recurve or longbow for hunting. I haven't gun hunted for probably 30 years. I have been thinking lately about getting/building a flintlock muzzleloader and trying that, but I still use binoculars and modern clothing. Absolutely not a "purist" in the true meaning of the word but the way I do it makes me feel good about it.

 

[omicron1792]

Every time this conversation comes up, everyone always wants to immediately argue that if you don't like this or that, then you have to go all the way back to chipping your own heads out of stone and throwing a spear or something. In my opinion, it all comes down to whatever you feel comfortable with and what gives you that warm, fuzzy feeling while you're doing it. I, personally, use a recurve or longbow for hunting. I haven't gun hunted for probably 30 years. I have been thinking lately about getting/building a flintlock muzzleloader and trying that, but I still use binoculars and modern clothing. Absolutely not a "purist" in the true meaning of the word but the way I do it makes me feel good about it.

And that’s all that matters.

Problem I see is that many don’t stop there. They want to regulate their warm and fuzzy moral line onto others. Then they use “we have to draw a line here or the antis will get us.”

 

[Pacific_Fork]

My problem with this is you’ve already crossed that rubicon with a scope and rifle that can shoot to 1200 yards. Incremental changes aren’t what’s preventing giving animals a fighting chance.

Seems we all feel the stuff we use now is ok but anything new isn’t. Seems to be ingrained in what our dad or grandad taught us and used.

You skipped over my limit of 600. And I said I killed a buck at 800, thought about it, and adjusted my threshold. Before this rifle I was killing plenty with a .30-06 and still 99% of my success is under 300 yards regardless of which rifle.

Some units are going open sights on rifles in my state. Im all for it.

 

[omicron1792]

You skipped over my limit of 600. And I said I killed a buck at 800, thought about it, and adjusted my threshold. Before this rifle I was killing plenty with a .30-06 and still 99% of my success is under 300 yards regardless of which rifle.

Some units are going open sights on rifles in my state. Im all for it.

Wouldn’t people using new tech also have the ability to limit how they use it similar to your self imposed limit on a 1200 yard rifle?

 

[fisherman983]

If you dont like using advancing technology, don't.
Just dont support limiting my use of it.
We should fight to keep more animals on the landscape with better predator management and herd management. Limiting tags when winter kills hurt herd numbers.
Set management goals/numbers based on science and stick to them.
Hold anyone accountable for not using science based management
Quit managing with feelings.

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

 

[Scoot]

OP- so long as you only hunt with rocks and an atlatl you're not a hypocrite.

 

[Kodiak06]

Amazed at how many people care what other hunters do, even when doing it withing the law. Most cell cam bans are backed by hunters but in reality, more animals are killed due to high end optics than there are due to cell cams. Hunters are more of an enemy to hunters than the anti crowd lol.

 

[Muddler]

Im a fan of cell cams. My favorite area to hunt is almost 3 hrs from where I live. I basically change batteries once or twice a year and dont have to worry about trying to pull cards. I can get intel without making a 6 hr round trip.
I disagree with the guys who get a pic from a cell cam and then run out and try to intercept the animal. Doing that honestly never dawned on me until I started reading about ppl being anti cell cam. I dont intend to do it either. Losers and criminals will always exploit something. I dont care to be punished because of them though.

 

[rookieforever33]

OP- so long as you only hunt with rocks and an atlatl you're not a hypocrite.

I think I would hurt myself with an atlatl. Just like a trebuchet slingshot. Never been close to either when they are used. But from videos I've watched they look like something my mom was right to not let me play with.

 

[littlebigtine]

If you dont like using advancing technology, don't.
Just dont support limiting my use of it.
We should fight to keep more animals on the landscape with better predator management and herd management. Limiting tags when winter kills hurt herd numbers.
Set management goals/numbers based on science and stick to them.
Hold anyone accountable for not using science based management
Quit managing with feelings.

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

I think that the relationship between tech, harvest rates and opportunity is much more nuanced than you lead on. If tech is never limited, human population will continue to grow, and the game population continues to shrink, each hunter year over year if everything else is equal will have less opportunity.


I will speak for Idaho hunters because they are continually asked what is the most important aspect to hunting.

Trophy quality? Harvest? Opportunity?

Every time they are asked and the majority answers with Opportunity. And that is why IdFG continues to manage for opportunity. When you add in advanced technology that increases harvest rates, something has to give to maintain balance.

Ill mention that Idaho has tried to limit some of these technologies for a majority of big game species but not for wolves. Mostly because wolf harvest is so difficult to begin with the increase in technology does not move the needle in a unsustainable way.

The tech today will be 10x or more powerful next decade and even more into the future after that. Hunters will have to limit its use eventually.