Are Thermal Devices Ethical For Predawn Scouting and Hiking?

[bigsky2]

Whether they are effective during daylight is irrelevant in my opinion. They are a huge advantage even if only used at night. The biggest obstacle to me killing animals is time. I only get so many days in the field, especially now that I have a young kid at home. If I could locate animals at night and not have to waste daylight hours trying to locate animals, my efficiency would go up exponentially. They have no place in hunting for game animals in my opinion.

 

[Pacific_Fork]

Honestly, I expect a lot of that reaction, but IMO they aren't the "cheat codes" a lot of folks think. I personally played with one on a hiking trip (I never hunted with one, even things like hogs where they're standard) and my opinion is they're moderately useful in the morning but not useful at all in the day or evening. Their ranges are not very long - most advertise "up to" 500-1000yd but practically speaking the consumer-grade options have resolutions too low to be useful past 200yds or so.

I know some folks have mentioned they're helpful picking game out of treelines but that wasn't my experience, etiher. I'm not saying that's not possible, but these things don't pick a head out of a bush. You really need the body of the animal exposed to get a clear dot worth a second glance, and their field of view is very narrow - you aren't glancing at an entire hill and saying "oh, 3 elk over there, let's take 'em!"

Here's a real-world image I took with one on that hike, for reference.

View attachment 866544

Now here's another a few minutes later. Tell me what we're looking at here (hint: it was nothing, just some sage bushes)

View attachment 866545

Now here's one where I was actually looking at three deer. Would you have guessed that's what this was, or that it was more interesting than those bushes above?

View attachment 866546

Now this is a terrible photo, I forgot to adjust my phone's camera settings. But this was taken about 10 seconds later looking at those same deer. It was still 15 minutes BEFORE what would have been legal shooting hours if it had been a hunt season, and was already already MUCH easier to see those deer with the naked eye. Even with this terrible photo you can see the dark body just right of center (no trees - I had stepped to the right just a bit to get a clearer view).

View attachment 866547

I'm not saying we shouldn't still argue the ethical considerations here. It's worth discussing. But don't think of them as easy cheat-codes, either. Maybe they'll get there, but they aren't there yet.

Try using a thermal that you didn’t purchase from Walmart on the clearance rack. The high end ones that cost like 3K minimum are extremely effective. The one and only one I’ve looked through was so easily picking up deer and elk at 1,000+yards. You could even see what was a bull vs cows. In the middle of the day if temps were low enough late season you can pick them out easily as well.

Thermals need a hard ban across the board in any hunting scenario, period. I have faith it will surely come to that very soon in Idaho.

 

[Pcecil]

This is a very interesting discussion. Now, even more, I want to buy a thermal optical device.

 

[def90]

Pretty sure using them in Colorado is illegal

 

[ozyclint]

You might as well just hunt a high fence operation, even better if they chain one up for you.

Hey, that sounds like a hunt for one of those 57 point gold medal stags in New Zealand

 

[Rbyrd]

I say no, that isn’t hunting.

 

[MuleyFever]

Honestly, I expect a lot of that reaction, but IMO they aren't the "cheat codes" a lot of folks think. I personally played with one on a hiking trip (I never hunted with one, even things like hogs where they're standard) and my opinion is they're moderately useful in the morning but not useful at all in the day or evening. Their ranges are not very long - most advertise "up to" 500-1000yd but practically speaking the consumer-grade options have resolutions too low to be useful past 200yds or so.

I know some folks have mentioned they're helpful picking game out of treelines but that wasn't my experience, etiher. I'm not saying that's not possible, but these things don't pick a head out of a bush. You really need the body of the animal exposed to get a clear dot worth a second glance, and their field of view is very narrow - you aren't glancing at an entire hill and saying "oh, 3 elk over there, let's take 'em!"

Here's a real-world image I took with one on that hike, for reference.

View attachment 866544

Now here's another a few minutes later. Tell me what we're looking at here (hint: it was nothing, just some sage bushes)

View attachment 866545

Now here's one where I was actually looking at three deer. Would you have guessed that's what this was, or that it was more interesting than those bushes above?

View attachment 866546

Now this is a terrible photo, I forgot to adjust my phone's camera settings. But this was taken about 10 seconds later looking at those same deer. It was still 15 minutes BEFORE what would have been legal shooting hours if it had been a hunt season, and was already already MUCH easier to see those deer with the naked eye. Even with this terrible photo you can see the dark body just right of center (no trees - I had stepped to the right just a bit to get a clearer view).

View attachment 866547

I'm not saying we shouldn't still argue the ethical considerations here. It's worth discussing. But don't think of them as easy cheat-codes, either. Maybe they'll get there, but they aren't there yet.

I don't mean this as an insult but you have no clue. I mean that as you don't know what you dont know. Those pics you posted are pathetic. Not a representation of what a quality thermal is capable of. I could pick out deer at 1000 yards in the evening, before dark, on a shaded hill.

What a lot of the Flatlanders don't understand is using them in canyons. You get so much more time from the sun. Literally half the day in some of the steep stuff. You can also get a line of sight to everything and any part of the animal showing will stick out.

 

[mudslinger021485]

With trail cameras, scopes that provide instant ballistic information, how would this been any different?

Exactly!

 

[TxRPLS]

I don't mean this as an insult but you have no clue. I mean that as you don't know what you dont know. Those pics you posted are pathetic. Not a representation of what a quality thermal is capable of. I could pick out deer at 1000 yards in the evening, before dark, on a shaded hill.

What a lot of the Flatlanders don't understand is using them in canyons. You get so much more time from the sun. Literally half the day in some of the steep stuff. You can also get a line of sight to everything and any part of the animal showing will stick out.

That is for sure. I picked up an aoudad over 1 mile away in west Texas this year. Couldn’t tell for sure it was 100% aoudad but, as we closed the distance I was able to verify. Handy devices for sure.

 

[Casinocow]

I don’t think they should be allowed except for hogs and predators.

Now using the technology for tracking wounded animals… I think it’s a good deal when available.

 

[taskswap]

I don't mean this as an insult but you have no clue. I mean that as you don't know what you dont know. Those pics you posted are pathetic. Not a representation of what a quality thermal is capable of. I could pick out deer at 1000 yards in the evening, before dark, on a shaded hill.

Prefacing something with "I don't mean this as an insult" doesn't mean you're automatically off the hook for being rude. You can offer your input without being offensive.

That was a $1400 thermal. Granted it was 2 years ago and the tech has come a long way. My original point wasn't that they aren't useful, just that they also aren't what's shown in the movies any more than "silencers" make shots inaudible. I have plenty of higher quality results, but as I mentioned in my post I was illustrating one of the worst-case scenarios.

This post was an example of how to reply and state your opinion without being deliberately offensive, except this last bit: If you're going to be rude about it, at least post pics and details of your own.

 

[cal30_sniper]

Prefacing something with "I don't mean this as an insult" doesn't mean you're automatically off the hook for being rude. You can offer your input without being offensive.

That was a $1400 thermal. Granted it was 2 years ago and the tech has come a long way. My original point wasn't that they aren't useful, just that they also aren't what's shown in the movies any more than "silencers" make shots inaudible. I have plenty of higher quality results, but as I mentioned in my post I was illustrating one of the worst-case scenarios.

This post was an example of how to reply and state your opinion without being deliberately offensive, except this last bit: If you're going to be rude about it, at least post pics and details of your own.

I’m with MuleyFever on this one. The photos you posted were of exceptionally bad quality compared to the results I’ve had even with my $2k Cinder, and your post here seems to admit you cherry picked even your own experience for poor quality in order to support your argument.

I’ve spent a lot of time behind high quality FLIR. Great for hunting fellow man. No place in hunting big game.

 

[repins05]

Quality thermals available to the public are like what you see in the movies. 4k easily gets you one. Guessing you could spend less even.

I found your post to be very misleading with misinformation based on your pics.

 

[Bugger]

Honestly, I expect a lot of that reaction, but IMO they aren't the "cheat codes" a lot of folks think. I personally played with one on a hiking trip (I never hunted with one, even things like hogs where they're standard) and my opinion is they're moderately useful in the morning but not useful at all in the day or evening. Their ranges are not very long - most advertise "up to" 500-1000yd but practically speaking the consumer-grade options have resolutions too low to be useful past 200yds or so.

I know some folks have mentioned they're helpful picking game out of treelines but that wasn't my experience, etiher. I'm not saying that's not possible, but these things don't pick a head out of a bush. You really need the body of the animal exposed to get a clear dot worth a second glance, and their field of view is very narrow - you aren't glancing at an entire hill and saying "oh, 3 elk over there, let's take 'em!"

Here's a real-world image I took with one on that hike, for reference.

View attachment 866544

Now here's another a few minutes later. Tell me what we're looking at here (hint: it was nothing, just some sage bushes)

View attachment 866545

Now here's one where I was actually looking at three deer. Would you have guessed that's what this was, or that it was more interesting than those bushes above?

View attachment 866546

Now this is a terrible photo, I forgot to adjust my phone's camera settings. But this was taken about 10 seconds later looking at those same deer. It was still 15 minutes BEFORE what would have been legal shooting hours if it had been a hunt season, and was already already MUCH easier to see those deer with the naked eye. Even with this terrible photo you can see the dark body just right of center (no trees - I had stepped to the right just a bit to get a clearer view).

View attachment 866547

I'm not saying we shouldn't still argue the ethical considerations here. It's worth discussing. But don't think of them as easy cheat-codes, either. Maybe they'll get there, but they aren't there yet.

Check out some newer hog hunting videos on YouTube. The one in your pics looks like what I’d expect out of the gen1 FLIR models that attach to a phone.