Banning Hunting Tech in Idaho

[OrangeMan73]

You’re allowed to disagree and it’s all good.

Luckily for the sake of the NA model and ethics they will be banned, which is in alignment with every other western state.



You haven’t looked through a thermal before. Or you own them and want to keep them legal. Comparing glass to a thermal is like comparing a hang glider to a jet. You miss many animals hiding in thick cover or blending in at long distance. You miss exactly zero animals in same scenario with a thermal.

Assumptions about me are wrong, as well as your assertions that zero animals are missed. Continued misinformation. Again, this is not a cheat code.

I like your analogy about hang glider to jet, even though I would argue it's closer to maybe a P51 compared to an A10. But it still reaffirms my point. How can you pick and choose what aerial transportation fits within your self imposed and defined "ethics." You're arbitrating a completely gray line based upon your definition.

And just because every other western state is not good enough for me. Idaho is and always will be different and centered around opportunity--irrelevant and frivolous restriction flies in the face of opportunity. And regardless, populism of bad policy should not be a driver for decision.

 

[OrangeMan73]

That’s the whole defense of ungulates is being able to blend in with their environment. If their hide is the same color and the brush it is hiding within, then no matter the thickness of the brush you aren’t gonna see it with $4000 swaros but you can sure as hell see it with a thermal.

Yes some situations like a hot day it has its limitations that is without doubt just like every other piece of equipment. But you can’t tell me that seeing every little animal on a clear cut at 8 in the morning when the sun hasn’t come over the hill yet isn’t an advantage that you have over not even being able to see that deer hiding in the alder brush with your swaros. I just don’t buy that at all.
Where I live you can drive up the river road and spot every muscat, house cat, dog, squirrel, deer, elk or anything other living thing laying in the alder brush next to the river that would otherwise blend in. That is an advantage no doubt
If we can’t agree on that then there is no point in having this conversation


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk koi

In that scenario where you drive up the river road and spot your game in creek bottom adjacent to the road, do you just pull up your gun (maybe outside the window of your rig), throw the critter in the scope (which you argue you could only see in the thermal and not with traditional glass on your gun), and blast away? This is hypothetical, I'm not accusing you of anything. But do you see my point? Doing so would already violate so many other regs and established ethics. Still not a cheat code.

 

[IdahoJoe29]

In that scenario where you drive up the river road and spot your game in creek bottom adjacent to the road, do you just pull up your gun (maybe outside the window of your rig), throw the critter in the scope (which you argue you could only see in the thermal and not with traditional glass on your gun), and blast away? This is hypothetical, I'm not accusing you of anything. But do you see my point? Doing so would already violate so many other regs and established ethics. Still not a cheat code.

No but maybe I dump my buddy out in a spot I would have never hunted otherwise and I go to an escape route and he pushes the deer to me and blam dead deer that would have otherwise had a normal day of laying around in the alders.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Customweld]

If you are able to cruise around a couple of hours before daybreak and scan draws and across canyons to see if there are animals in there, that's a huge advantage. It would make killing way more simple if before daybreak, you knew the draw you were planning on hunting indeed had animals in it. Not being able to see them during the day isn't that big of a deal, it's knowing that they are there before you even leave the truck.

 

[OrangeMan73]

No but maybe I dump my buddy out in a spot I would have never hunted otherwise and I go to an escape route and he pushes the deer to me and blam dead deer that would have otherwise had a normal day of laying around in the alders.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sounds like an incredible amount of "hunting" and some substantial luck would need to align to make it a successful hunt. I wouldn't be ashamed of the effort that went into that!

 

[IdahoJoe29]

Sounds like an incredible amount of "hunting" and some substantial luck would need to align to make it a successful hunt. I wouldn't be ashamed of the effort that went into that!

Never said you are guaranteed to kill with a thermal. My whole argument is it gives you a substantial advantage that is otherwise unavailable without a thermal. That is all


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[robby denning]

1. Thermal Drones. Is there any proof or evidence of that even being used in Idaho? And it leading to successful harvest? Idaho already has rules about illegalities of spotting game with aircraft and then harvest. Feels like another strawman. On top of that, your "guy" wasn't hunting, so these proposed bans on technology wouldn't even apply to him!

2. Thermal for Poachers. If someone wanted to poach deer with thermal, it would be very easy. Yup and pretty sure adding more regs aren't going to stop the poachers. Feels like another strawman. Already regs about harvesting big game at night.

3. Deer drives? How does that even apply to Idaho banning technology? Now I feel like we're crossing from strawman to red herring.

I see & understand your counterpoints to this issue.

...small sample size but you asked.


in S. Utah, roughly 2021 a trusted friend was hunting a unit and witnessed that the guides were doing all their scouting at night with drones/thermals, then hunting during the day. There was no law against it at the time either.

in 2022-ish, there was an investigation going on in N. Utah. Another trusted friend was hearing drones way after dark (on his way hiking out) on the mountain DURING the hunt on multiple evenings. He reported it. At that time, UT didn't have good law to stop them. That's been addressed.

Last year, on the ranches I outfit on, clients were using therms before daylight (from the ground, no flying--that's already illegal same day in Idaho) to figure out where the elk were going. This was not illegal but really made me start to see their potential for damage. Interestingly enough, one of the guys using them TOTALLY supported banning them. That really convinced me.

To be clear, in all three instances, no laws were broken.

Other than those 3 instances, all I hear are rumors.

 

[OrangeMan73]

And thats the heart of the disagreement IdahoJoe. You're arguing that it gives you a substantial advantage, one measured enough to claim we should ban its use. I'm arguing that it does not, and certainly not an advantage that has actually been measured or studied by anybody which is the heart of the opposition of the ban--rather just committees of echo chambers and misinformed perceptions. Frivolous and irrelevant regulation is being proposed that is based on nothing but feelings.

I do appreciate the civility of this discussion. I think we landed on agree to disagree.

 

[IdahoJoe29]

And thats the heart of the disagreement IdahoJoe. You're arguing that it gives you a substantial advantage, one measured enough to claim we should ban its use. I'm arguing that it does not, and certainly not an advantage that has actually been measured or studied by anybody which is the heart of the opposition of the ban--rather just committees of echo chambers and misinformed perceptions. Frivolous and irrelevant regulation is being proposed that is based on nothing but feelings.

I do appreciate the civility of this discussion. I think we landed on agree to disagree.

Yeah man we can only base our opinions on personal experiences and sounds like our experiences have been different


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ShootOkHuntWorse]

Hunting with a thermal provides the motivation to hunt/hike/stalk into areas that would not have been accessed otherwise due to the time/effort required. If a group of people can see an animal on the shit end of a ridge, they can form a much more effective plan to maneuver on that animal than bumbling through brush not knowing if or when there are animals there. Increased efficiency leads to decreased opportunity in the long run. In a perfect world I’d say no thermals for hunting ungulates. In reality, I’d say no thermals on your person or in use during big game seasons due to the enforcement issues. Or maybe anytime a big game tag is in your possession and in season.

 

[OrangeMan73]

I see & understand your counterpoints to this issue.

...small sample size but you asked.


in S. Utah, roughly 2021 a trusted friend was hunting a unit and witnessed that the guides were doing all their scouting at night with drones/thermals, then hunting during the day. There was no law against it at the time either.

in 2022-ish, there was an investigation going on in N. Utah. Another trusted friend was hearing drones way after dark (on his way hiking out) on the mountain DURING the hunt on multiple evenings. He reported it. At that time, UT didn't have good law to stop them. That's been addressed.

Last year, on the ranches I outfit on, clients were using therms before daylight (from the ground, no flying--that's already illegal same day in Idaho) to figure out where the elk were going. This was not illegal but really made me start to see their potential for damage. Interestingly enough, one of the guys using them TOTALLY supported banning them. That really convinced me.

To be clear, in all three instances, no laws were broken.

Other than those 3 instances, all I hear are rumors.

I can't believe I got a direct reply back from the great ROBBY! Not being sarcastic, sincerely, kinda neat. Whole family listens to your podcasts and I got your books and someday I hope to kill deer as big as you.

But since I got your attention, let me ask you two questions:

1. How do you feel about using two way radios? Its my understanding that Idaho allows them. I think that two way radios could produce way more advantage than any other technology thats being proposed to be banned--refer back to the river road scenario above that IdahoJoe pointed out.
2. Have you ever thought about how thermals can actually help in production of big mule deer? By identifying a buck in an area, you can see what kind of class it is. Most of them are going to be smaller than the true trophies (190+, my standard), an honest but sad reality of today. But by prior identifying them, it allows you to a) not disturb them and b) not still hunt into that area trigging a potential bump and split-second-shoot-on-the-hoof-decision that us mule deer fanatics (ok, especially me) are all too familiar with.

Appreciate the input.

 

[IdahoJoe29]

I can't believe I got a direct reply back from the great ROBBY! Not being sarcastic, sincerely, kinda neat. Whole family listens to your podcasts and I got your books and someday I hope to kill deer as big as you.

But since I got your attention, let me ask you two questions:

1. How do you feel about using two way radios? Its my understanding that Idaho allows them. I think that two way radios could produce way more advantage than any other technology thats being proposed to be banned--refer back to the river road scenario above that IdahoJoe pointed out.
2. Have you ever thought about how thermals can actually help in production of big mule deer? By identifying a buck in an area, you can see what kind of class it is. Most of them are going to be smaller than the true trophies (190+, my standard), an honest but sad reality of today. But by prior identifying them, it allows you to a) not disturb them and b) not still hunt into that area trigging a potential bump and split-second-shoot-on-the-hoof-decision that us mule deer fanatics (ok, especially me) are all too familiar with.

Appreciate the input.

I believe using two way radios to aid in harvesting an animal is illegal in Idaho

Edit: that is incorrect


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[fattyboy70]

I swore I wouldn’t comment again but here it is, again based off of the podcast and what these working groups have seemed to accomplish in short order with what they “personally” feel is not right in regards to pursuing or big game. The younger guest and his group went after certain harvest tactics with the idea of better deer numbers over time due to elimination of said tactic. It started off as opinion of few and they got that unit changed. Older gentlemen was on the HAT group and we all know what they’re trying to accomplish. The problem is these are all issues starting off with what he/they deem as a moral advantage. Could you imagine if I pushed ( and I could get enough support) to ban all motorized use during hunting seasons because I truly do think this is a problem. Grandpa with bad knees isn’t going, a 5yr old isn’t tagging along now, a disabled vet is out of luck. See how this starts. Just because it’s not what you do doesn’t mean it should be banned (I understand the thermal/drones/ camera advantages). Hunting elk/deer during the rut gives us an advantage, lets push for season changes to give them a fighting chance. The younger guest wants to see “long range” hunting eliminated. Why? Because he personally sees things differently thus change the game for everyone.

I’m just happy to be able to go out and pursue even though we all do it differently. They need to change the idea of why these discussions are happening to “ethical/moral” not “advantages over ungulates” because data isn’t matching.

 

[Smithb9841]

1. Thermal Drones. Is there any proof or evidence of that even being used in Idaho? And it leading to successful harvest? Idaho already has rules about illegalities of spotting game with aircraft and then harvest. Feels like another strawman. On top of that, your "guy" wasn't hunting, so these proposed bans on technology wouldn't even apply to him!

The last year I hunted in Idaho I had a drone fly over me while glassing a couple canyons. It came over then followed down the main ridgeline looking into each canyon that fed off. I know this is a case of one time and no way to know if it had a thermal and there is a law already in place for spotting game using aircraft but it shows that people are using drones to spot game.

 

[robby denning]

I can't believe I got a direct reply back from the great ROBBY! Not being sarcastic, sincerely, kinda neat. Whole family listens to your podcasts and I got your books and someday I hope to kill deer as big as you.

But since I got your attention, let me ask you two questions:

1. How do you feel about using two way radios? Its my understanding that Idaho allows them. I think that two way radios could produce way more advantage than any other technology thats being proposed to be banned--refer back to the river road scenario above that IdahoJoe pointed out.
2. Have you ever thought about how thermals can actually help in production of big mule deer? By identifying a buck in an area, you can see what kind of class it is. Most of them are going to be smaller than the true trophies (190+, my standard), an honest but sad reality of today. But by prior identifying them, it allows you to a) not disturb them and b) not still hunt into that area trigging a potential bump and split-second-shoot-on-the-hoof-decision that us mule deer fanatics (ok, especially me) are all too familiar with.

Appreciate the input.

Hey thanks on the books

1. Having used 2-way radios (where legal) over 20 years, I can’t say they’ve lead to a direct big buck harvest. Although we’ve tried on stalks to use them. Now we’re doing same thing with cell phones (texting, calling “I see the elk over at X, can you get there?). That’s certainly helping us harvest. Haven’t used my Motorolas in years.

2) peeling away darkness IN REAL TIME goes against growing more big deer IMO. I haven’t ever used a therm outside of a show but have used cell cams since 2018. Haven’t harvested a buck yet because even though they’re (sorta) real time, it’s hard to get anywhere before animals move. Therms move the line closer

I agree with those who say “show us the data of impact”. It doesn’t seem to be there. For me, it’s about drawing a line before it’s too late. When therm guys I trust say they’re that good, that’s good enough for me.

As proposed, this new law would move the tech in question out of the big game hunt and only to scouting (except spring bear, early archery antelope, and a few greenfield elk hunts.)

To me, that is a good place to compromise.

 

[Pacific_Fork]

Assumptions about me are wrong, as well as your assertions that zero animals are missed. Continued misinformation. Again, this is not a cheat code.

I like your analogy about hang glider to jet, even though I would argue it's closer to maybe a P51 compared to an A10. But it still reaffirms my point. How can you pick and choose what aerial transportation fits within your self imposed and defined "ethics." You're arbitrating a completely gray line based upon your definition.

And just because every other western state is not good enough for me. Idaho is and always will be different and centered around opportunity--irrelevant and frivolous restriction flies in the face of opportunity. And regardless, populism of bad policy should not be a driver for decision.

I love when someone arguing a point clearly hasn’t used said product, or the one they did use was $100 a Walmart special.

The high end thermals see animals when body temps are higher than air temps, or when rocks/trees are cold. I’ve seen bull elk at 1,000 yards on a sept morning. Don’t get me going on October-November conditions. They work as intended. Period, end of story. Not a cheat code?? Now I’m just speechless. Carry on.

 

[43.6N]

Hey thanks on the books

1. Having used 2-way radios (where legal) over 20 years, I can’t say they’ve lead to a direct big buck harvest. Although we’ve tried on stalks to use them. Now we’re doing same thing with cell phones (texting, calling “I see the elk over at X, can you get there?). That’s certainly helping us harvest. Haven’t used my Motorolas in years.

2) peeling away darkness IN REAL TIME goes against growing more big deer IMO. I haven’t ever used a therm outside of a show but have used cell cams since 2018. Haven’t harvested a buck yet because even though they’re (sorta) real time, it’s hard to get anywhere before animals move. Therms move the line closer

I agree with those who say “show us the data of impact”. It doesn’t seem to be there. For me, it’s about drawing a line before it’s too late. When therm guys I trust say they’re that good, that’s good enough for me.

As proposed, this new law would move the tech in question out of the big game hunt and only to scouting (except spring bear, early archery antelope, and a few greenfield elk hunts.)

To me, that is a good place to compromise.

Well said Robby.

As I posted earlier, I have thermal tech and am in favor of its restriction for deer and elk. But the data to show how restricting it will be effective is non-existent. These propositions from IDFG are not data driven. Which is unfortunate, because it means we can only argue on the grounds of opinion rather than fact.

 

[Customweld]

Well said Robby.

As I posted earlier, I have thermal tech and am in favor of its restriction for deer and elk. But the data to show how restricting it will be effective is non-existent. These propositions from IDFG are not data driven. Which is unfortunate, because it means we can only argue on the grounds of opinion rather than fact.

Without 100 percent participation with factual harvest reports, the data will never be more than what it is.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

There are two factors at play here. One, which is basically incontrovertible, is that most of the means and methods restrictions in the world do practically nothing for animal herd health when compared with habitat and other environmental factors.

The regulations that help herds are the seasons, the bag limits, the tag allocations, and habitat protections. Limiting means of access can also help protect habitat.

The other reality is that means and methods restrictions are almost entirely about leveling the playing field between hunters, not about making it more fair for the animal. It’s been unfair for the other animals since the first humans got organized, good at breaking rocks, and great at throwing sharp sticks. We are so effective as apex hunters that we have other apex hunters as assistants and pets. The prey species have only their senses, wariness, and ability to run and hide. Until deer start shooting back, it won’t be a level playing field.

But, as hunters in a democratic society, we have the ability to set the restrictions for our fellow hunters, or we can let unelected bureaucrats do it for us.

Personally, I live in a world where I will happily accept the state’s right to protect the common resource (so long as they are subject to supervision via the democratic process). But I really hate someone else telling me how I *must* do things. And I can resist the urge to do more than suggest to someone else what I think they *should* do.

 

[Customweld]

If/when they switch to 100% e-tagging, participation in terms of harvest success could be automatic if they set it up so the app automatically transmits the data. There would probably be a few guys that would not tag their animals, but I think it would be far less than the number that currently do not participate in harvest reporting.

I think that would certainly help. I would like to think the majority of hunters would comply/