Quote from: Silent footed on July 02, 2020, 09:24:59 PM
I don't know guys. There's been times I've hiked a legitimate quarter or half mile through the dark to a place I've only visited once in my life a few months before and marked it on my map. No trails or roads, through a forested track of the mountains. Wonderful tool for sure.


However, when I ask myself if I could possibly have found those places in the dark without using the guidance feature on my phone, the answer is no. Not even with a map and compass (and I'm pretty good with those). I think this counts as an unfair technological advantage by allowing me entry into a game animal's secure sanctuary at a time of day I could not possibly navigate otherwise unless I'd spent a LOT more time gaining familiarity with the area. How can I possibly consider this to be meeting the quarry on its own terms if it has spent its entire life learning that tract of land and I am merely using the guidance feature on a phone that I bought and paid for. Friend hit it on the money. How can deer possibly adapt a defense to that strategy?  They rely on this seclusion, nightfall, and inaccessibility of terrain for their safety. And now they are unsafe just about anywhere.

A hunter can now stumble over a funnel or bedding area once, mark it, come back the next day in the dark by using his phone to point him, and more or less arriving there through trial and error looking at the screen watching the distance shrink until he reaches the proper place.

I am really starting to rethink this.

Kinda answering the question for yourself. Look if someone wants to bend the rules just bend the rules. They can't say the club didn't mean it that way. If someone wants to chAnge it than try. Until than we can't just make up rules we think should be because of circumstance.

Quote from: Silent footed on July 02, 2020, 09:24:59 PM
I don't know guys. There's been times I've hiked a legitimate quarter or half mile through the dark to a place I've only visited once in my life a few months before and marked it on my map. No trails or roads, through a forested track of the mountains. Wonderful tool for sure.


However, when I ask myself if I could possibly have found those places in the dark without using the guidance feature on my phone, the answer is no. Not even with a map and compass (and I'm pretty good with those). I think this counts as an unfair technological advantage by allowing me entry into a game animal's secure sanctuary at a time of day I could not possibly navigate otherwise unless I'd spent a LOT more time gaining familiarity with the area. How can I possibly consider this to be meeting the quarry on its own terms if it has spent its entire life learning that tract of land and I am merely using the guidance feature on a phone that I bought and paid for. Friend hit it on the money. How can deer possibly adapt a defense to that strategy?  They rely on this seclusion, nightfall, and inaccessibility of terrain for their safety. And now they are unsafe just about anywhere.

A hunter can now stumble over a funnel or bedding area once, mark it, come back the next day in the dark by using his phone to point him, and more or less arriving there through trial and error looking at the screen watching the distance shrink until he reaches the proper place.

I am really starting to rethink this.

I hear what you're saying. I would counter with the fact that you're not navigating to an animal, but to a location that you identified via experience and woodsmanship as a likely spot to find an animal. You're right that the game cannot really adapt to that other than using their superior senses to counter your superior brain. You can bet that humans have been using some sort of navigation to re-find a likely ambush spot for thousands of years.

This is definitely a good discussion, and one that generally exposes our different levels of tolerance with technology!

I have some mixed feelings. Mostly, I disagree with electronic hunting, but I sometimes lose my way, even after having had a lot of map and compass training. Consequently, I don't mind using GPS for navigation. However, is a way point on a GPS less fair than an X marked on a map? I'm not sure. Hopefully, most of us will use common sense in the use of electronics. Those who disagree will not be changed by anything we say. The best we can do is to conduct ourselves according to what we believe. As John Wayne said, "A man ought to always do what he thinks is best".

I don't think not using a gps as a navigational tool is necessarily the intent of the P&Y statement; there are other more direct uses of electronics that it speaks to.  But, as Silent Footed points out, it does give the hunter another advantage. 

Well let's not limit this just to Pope and Young then. I was had actually been thinking of fair chase in general when I posted this and had just glanced at their guidelines to see what would be the minimum consensus among us bowhunters.

My position is that if we use electronic devices the same way that any outdoorsman/backpacker would use them, i.e. to locate geographical features, take photographs of nature, rescue in the event of emergency, etc., then I'm fine with it.  Beyond that, using geographical mapping to make sure you're hunting in a legal area only makes sense, and takes nothing away from fair chase.

I don't use an electronic range finder for ranging game, although I do use one to range geographical features, rocks, bushes, etc, if I'm in a blind or tree stand.  I don't have any occasion to use trail cameras, and am undecided about that, although there would certainly come a point where numerous trail cameras would violate fair chase.  I think we would all agree that remote spotting by drones, or communicating game information by text or phone would violate fair chase.

I think you are worrying too much.

Needs to be some kind of limit on the  technology in the field, at least that is my take on it.
Personally I think we tipped the scales to far.

I see nothing wrong with that at all, and I've used my phone multiple times to get to different spots. The way I interpret that statement would be it is unethical to use some sort of tracking device that is attached to the animal, whether it be a radio collar, microschip, etc. to locate the animal. A map on the phone is still just a map, and last time I checked, Google maps didn't have any deer marked on it.

I only read part of this.  Truly, I am not concerned with what Pope & Young think is fair chase, since I don't see myself every trying to get something in the books.  I use cameras during the year to see where deer are, but never use them for hunting purposes.  I consistently use cellular trail cameras to locate and stalk hogs.  I really don't care whether someone thinks this is fair chase or not.  It surely isn't a slam dunk.  I have had several people come to my place to hunt using this method.  So far, no one has been succesful.  That is mostly an experience thing, but worrying about what someone else's criteria for fair chase is takes more energy than I have.

Quote from: pdk25 on July 04, 2020, 01:23:02 PM
I only read part of this.  Truly, I am not concerned with what Pope & Young think is fair chase, since I don't see myself every trying to get something in the books.  I use cameras during the year to see where deer are, but never use them for hunting purposes.  I consistently use cellular trail cameras to locate and stalk hogs.  I really don't care whether someone thinks this is fair chase or not.  It surely isn't a slam dunk.  I have had several people come to my place to hunt using this method.  So far, no one has been succesful.  That is mostly an experience thing, but worrying about what someone else's criteria for fair chase is takes more energy than I have.

I agree with this. We've gotten way to hung up on this ethical stuff. You still have to make the shot on wild animals. It's not like they are in a pen.

I've never used any form of electronics to guide or assist me toward locating an animal or a particular hunting spot. It's not that I'm disavowed from their use, but their use would take something important out of my hunt. I like to rely only on my total self and no electronics of any type in my actual pursuit of game. I don't spend a moment judging or evaluating others for their choices. Neither do I or will I ever let my hunting decisions (and ethics) be motivated or decided by any type of club or organization. I do it my way....very conservatively....and only to satisfy myself. It's probably most accurate for me to say; the last thing I want out of hunting is to be distracted by concerns of meeting someone else's standards.

I tend to agree with you Kevin and feel and behave in pretty much the same way.  However, I didn't develop "my way" in a vacuum.  It's only through the exchange of ideas, opinions, even behaviors,  with others, that we can develop our own ethical underpinnings and positions. That's why these kinds of discussions are important, and why I can't keep my nose out of them. 

And I absolutely agree with you Orion. Most of us get to where we are at least partially through the influence of others. That includes clubs of course, which can be valuable avenues for learning/acquiring values as deemed important by that group. I just never felt that I wanted or needed to conform to a club's rules to determine whether my hunting methods were acceptable. That's mostly because I tend toward being independent and very much into hunting for my own personal satisfaction. Not to be construed as negativity, but I don't give consideration to what others might think about my hunting approach. I've been that way a long time. I hunt hard and clean. Sometimes I even kill. But always I'm independent minded. Happy Fourth!