For hunters, the concept of “fair chase” used to be far less complicated than it is today. The fast-paced march of technology is blurring the lines of ethical hunting as never before.
Thirty years ago, respected hunting ethicist Jim Posewitz noted that a hunter’s conscience comes into play when weighing what constitutes an ethical hunt or fair chase.
He wrote, “Beyond the hunter’s own conscience, there is always public opinion that must be included in the fair chase equation. The question must be asked: Does the hunter behave in a way that will satisfy what society expects of him or her as a hunter?”
For me, the increasing use of highly sophisticated electronic devices such as wireless cell phone trail cameras and the recent advent of aerial drones fitted with thermal imaging devices present difficult new ethical questions. These technologies test both the limits of fair chase and the ability of law enforcement to keep pace.
In Maine, it is not legal to hunt with drones or drones equipped with thermal imaging devices. Under state law, drones are treated much like aircraft. It is, however, legal to use wireless cellular trail cameras to locate and pattern game behavior, even during the legal hunting season.
Every state handles these issues differently. In neighboring New Hampshire, wireless cellular trail cameras are illegal during the hunting season — acceptable for scouting beforehand, but not while actively hunting. At least seven other states have either restricted or banned outright the use of wireless trail cameras and drones, with or without thermal imaging.
What about using a drone with thermal imaging to locate and recover a wounded animal in Maine?
This remains a gray area. Hunters considering using a drone for scouting or recovery would be wise to check directly with the Maine Warden Service or consult a lawyer familiar with Maine wildlife law, as enforcement interpretations can vary in borderline cases.
If you are a hunter, what do you think? My guess is that much of the non-hunting public would oppose this type of high-tech assistance. In an era of intense mass communication and growing anti-hunting sentiment, hunters ignore public opinion at their peril.
What’s my take?
With a half-century of avid deer hunting under my belt, I draw the line. Posewitz summed it up best:
“The fair chase concept addresses the balance that allows hunters to occasionally succeed while animals generally avoid being taken.”
Too much technology is cheating, isn’t it?
The point of the hunt is that it is difficult, challenging and uncertain. For some trophy-driven hunters, the desire to secure that jaw-dropping buck can lead them to rely on sophisticated technology, letting ego overshadow the spirit of fair chase.
Anecdotal evidence suggests there is already too much ambiguity when it comes to enforcing fish and game laws related to these technologies.
How, for example, does a game warden determine whether a hunter with a thermal-imaging drone in his truck is using it strictly for game recovery — or to locate animals during the hunt?
Ethics, of course, are subjective, so who am I to tell another hunter what is right or wrong?
The sanctity of the hunt may differ from person to person. For me, it has always been the challenge that drew me to deer hunting. When modern technology gives me an unfair advantage over my prey, the hunt simply stops being fun.
