Banning Hunting Tech in Idaho

[IdahoJoe29]

You’re exhausting lol. Maybe I’ll send you my end of year numbers starting now. I own a thermal and cameras. 0 deer killed in the last 5yrs, 1 elk in the last 5. For some reason my cameras and thermal won’t put the deer I’ve been chasing for the last 5yrs in front of me when I’m hunting. I thought thermals block their noses from my scent and cameras blinded them just enough for me to stay concealed. Now that I’m typing this out I realize I really suck at hunting. I have everything at my fingertips and still can’t get it done. Maybe I’ll give it up and join a group that makes suggestions for regulations that will in turn make everyone else’s time in the field miserable.

lol I’m sorry I just feel passionately about this and honestly there’s 3 guys I work with right now that feel the same way so I’m just expressing our concerns. I’m also over talking about it I’m trying to ignore every time I get a notification about it. Have a good night!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[35WhelenAI]

Lol, some folks do really suck at hunting. Might be a hint.

 

[Mwoody]

It’s no use these guys refuse to admit that thermals give you any advantage.
Does make a guy wonder why they are using it if it doesn’t give an edge?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That would take them admitting they can’t hunt without them

 

[fattyboy70]

Lol, some folks do really suck at hunting. Might be a hint.

I guess I forgot to share how many wolves/cats/coyotes I shoot yearly. No one cares about those #s though. Fish and game doesn’t send that harvest report out ( other than the mandatory checkin). It’s easier to take from a resource instead of giving back to it. May I propose something to our mule deer working group podcast guy, advocate for a point system. If all you do is shoot deer it’s -3pts, elk -5, shoot a cat +5, shoot a wolf +10. That would eliminate almost all NR and 99% of the resident big buck/bull killers. Are you starting to see the issue…everyone complaining about the take and how to regulate the take, not how they can give back to the resource.
Technically I guess I’m a horrible hunter but if I consistently harvest the hardest animal to pursue in NA am I part of hunting deity

 

[IdahoJoe29]

I guess I forgot to share how many wolves/cats/coyotes I shoot yearly. No one cares about those #s though. Fish and game doesn’t send that harvest report out ( other than the mandatory checkin). It’s easier to take from a resource instead of giving back to it. May I propose something to our mule deer working group podcast guy, advocate for a point system. If all you do is shoot deer it’s -3pts, elk -5, shoot a cat +5, shoot a wolf +10. That would eliminate almost all NR and 99% of the resident big buck/bull killers. Are you starting to see the issue…everyone complaining about the take and how to regulate the take, not how they can give back to the resource.
Technically I guess I’m a horrible hunter but if I consistently harvest the hardest animal to pursue in NA am I part of hunting deity

I think we can all agree that we don’t do enough when it comes to predators. That’s the proven way to help with deer and elk and for some reason most hunters aren’t interested


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[IDMONK]

Let's take tech away from lawful hunters before we get a grip on existing laws.

Zero support from me.

There's people known to F&G to shoot every deer and elk they see indiscriminately because "it's fun, who cares?" Those same people run dogs and shoot and leave every bear they tree regardless of training or kill season because "it was a mean one". These people hunt statewide and F&G has been "investigating" them for decades.

F&G officers are looking for low hanging fruit and making sure their pension is intact. They're also not interested in pursuing violent felons who have their families names and addresses. Ban thermals and nothing will change outside of 9/10 people who use thermals will hang em up.

I know people who speed to work every morning, speed limits should not exist when we can’t enforce the laws we have.

 

[IDMONK]

It’s no use these guys refuse to admit that thermals give you any advantage.
Does make a guy wonder why they are using it if it doesn’t give an edge?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BINGO if thermals are no advantage people wouldn’t spend thousands on them. But now they have a dog in this fight and will defend the use of their spendy gadget. I just wish they would be honest about it, but I think they even know it’s unethical and are hesitant to admit using them here. You 1000% can remove the night and all mammals glow in the dark and cooler daytime hours. To say otherwise is blatant lies. I am confident these common sense laws would make hunting better in Idaho for everyone.

 

[OrangeMan73]

BINGO if thermals are no advantage people wouldn’t spend thousands on them. But now they have a dog in this fight and will defend the use of their spendy gadget. I just wish they would be honest about it, but I think they even know it’s unethical and are hesitant to admit using them here. You 1000% can remove the night and all mammals glow in the dark and cooler daytime hours. To say otherwise is blatant lies. I am confident these common sense laws would make hunting better in Idaho for everyone.

Common sense? Thats honestly laughable. I define common sense bound by logic and truth, this entire proposal is based on feelings and perception and anecdotes. Reminds me of "common sense" gun laws, those will fix all the problems too I'm sure. I guess those that are willing to give up freedoms don't deserve them.

I'm not arguing there's not an advantage. I'm arguing that the advantage isn't a cheat code that ensures 100% success, and rather nowhere even near surety--satellite comms and mapping, with guns capable of putting an elk down at 1000+ yards are way bigger game changers. I think the hunting technology proposed to be banned could also be a tool to allow those of us truly chasing the most mature of animals to be much more selective--and less disruptive. And can be a recruitment tool for a younger generation of hunters that obviously views the world from a different lens than ours. But most importantly, I'm arguing that irrelevant and frivolous regulation will accomplish nothing except for more paper in the reg book and limit the freedoms of the honest person.

 

[IDMONK]

Common sense? Thats honestly laughable. I define common sense bound by logic and truth, this entire proposal is based on feelings and perception and anecdotes. Reminds me of "common sense" gun laws, those will fix all the problems too I'm sure. I guess those that are willing to give up freedoms don't deserve them.

I'm not arguing there's not an advantage. I'm arguing that the advantage isn't a cheat code that ensures 100% success, and rather nowhere even near surety--satellite comms and mapping, with guns capable of putting an elk down at 1000+ yards are way bigger game changers. I think the hunting technology proposed to be banned could also be a tool to allow those of us truly chasing the most mature of animals to be much more selective--and less disruptive. And can be a recruitment tool for a younger generation of hunters that obviously views the world from a different lens than ours. But most importantly, I'm arguing that irrelevant and frivolous regulation will accomplish nothing except for more paper in the reg book and limit the freedoms of the honest person.

Nothing will “guarantee”100% success, but increase success? Absolutely. I’m glad you are using it to cherry pick the most mature animals, that’s irrelevant. Lots of hunters are seeking the most mature buck or bull, frustrating when guys can cheat and locate them when they can’t hide.

As for long range hunting,Maybe if we as a hunting community would have come together and made some standards on long range hunting before that tech\equipment was common place we could have that conversation. I’m all for restrictions here as well, it will be a much tougher sale now that such a large portion of hunters utilize it to some degree. Let’s get ahead of the emerging tech that is thermals, drones, night vision, AI, ect. While it’s still in its relative infancy and not common place.

It’s easy to see these advances in technology shrink the available habitat for the animals we all love and respect. The success story of American conservation is sportsman came together and limited ourselves to save the resource. I believe this is what sportsman are trying to do here is come together to make a better experience for everyone in the field. I’m sure in the days of Teddy Rosevelt guys were bitching about limits, the use of there tech (punt guns, ect) but it was ultimately a huge win for them and future generations. Let’s protect the resource, for everyone.

 

[35WhelenAI]

It is common sense to be upfront and admit that it cannot be argued with respect to technology providing anything but an advantage. It plays squarely into the hands of people who don't want hunters to hunt. The more Hunters talk about the latest gadgetry and how it helped them to get the biggest animal, the more it's going to hurt the cause. There is no wiggle room in that.

 

[omicron1792]

It is common sense to be upfront and admit that it cannot be argued with respect to technology providing anything but an advantage. It plays squarely into the hands of people who don't want hunters to hunt. The more Hunters talk about the latest gadgetry and how it helped them to get the biggest animal, the more it's going to hurt the cause. There is no wiggle room in that.

Totally disagree.

The more you point fingers at other hunters the more it’s going to hurt the cause.

 

[35WhelenAI]

Hunters asking for other Hunters to police their ranks and think about what hill they're willing to die on and subsequent argument in favor of technology pushes the envelope that people against hunting use as low-hanging fruit for their argument.

 

[omicron1792]

Hunters asking for other Hunters to police their ranks and think about what hill they're willing to die on and subsequent argument in favor of technology pushes the envelope that people against hunting use as low-hanging fruit for their argument.

The anti hunters I know don’t care if you use a drone or a heat seeking missile. They don’t want you to kill the animal. Period.

You killing it with a rifle and scope doesn’t make them any happier.

This boils down to some hunters not wanting to have a disadvantage in harvesting the game they want to harvest.

 

[35WhelenAI]

By that logic we should employ every piece of technology. Is that where you're coming from? May as well use it since it doesn't matter? Do you really believe that?

 

[omicron1792]

By that logic we should employ every piece of technology. Is that where you're coming from? May as well use it since it doesn't matter? Do you really believe

I think there are limits for sure. Based on data of outsized advantage…not gut feelings.

My turn.

What makes you think the level of tech you use now is ok? Great data to show we already use the tech that has drastically increased our advantage.

 

[IDMONK]

The anti hunters I know don’t care if you use a drone or a heat seeking missile. They don’t want you to kill the animal. Period.

You killing it with a rifle and scope doesn’t make them any happier.

This boils down to some hunters not wanting to have a disadvantage in harvesting the game they want to harvest.

I’m thinking more about the non-hunters, not necessarily anti. ~90% of the population. A lot of this tech would really not sit well there. Even to many hunters it gives them the ick.

 

[omicron1792]

I’m thinking more about the non-hunters, not necessarily anti. ~90% of the population. A lot of this tech would really not sit well there. Even to many hunters it gives them the ick.

I don’t know one non hunter that would care.

Most of my non hunter friends love it when I show them a video of my night hunting with thermals.

The ick comes from hunters that are worried their odds go down. IMO of course.

 

[35WhelenAI]

I think there are limits for sure. Based on data of outsized advantage…not gut feelings.

My turn.

What makes you think the level of tech you use now is ok? Great data to show we already use the tech that has drastically increased our advantage.

That's a fair question. My level of technology, rifle not withstanding, is a sling, a scope, shooting sticks and a pair of binoculars. I don't need anything more in legal hours for the game that I'm hunting.

I have plenty of non-hunting friends as well, however they are not anti-hunting friends. I don't expect you would hang out with many that are anti-hunting either. Do you see the difference in what we're talking about here? About ammunition for the groups that are anti-hunting not the ones that simply choose to not hunt and aren't going to get their dog in the fight?