Yes agreed have had quads and other ATV vehicles, just want something that will retrieve carcasses and do the larder work while I sit in front of the fire with my feet up dram in hand.
Deer stalking and the use of modern technology
- Thread starter teyhan1
- Start date
Yes agreed have had quads and other ATV vehicles, just want something that will retrieve carcasses and do the larder work while I sit in front of the fire with my feet up dram in hand.
Yes agreed have had quads and other ATV vehicles, just want something that will retrieve carcasses and do the larder work while I sit in front of the fire with my feet up dram in hand.
Just remembered I had one of them, but it was not very reliable it was called a GHILLIE.
That was attempted 11 years ago...
Although at the time I think that there was so much of an uproar that no-one got to 'click their mouse' except at paper.
Cootmeurer
Well-Known Member
Well, if we go with your opinion that there is no God, we are God, then quite a few things are no longer necessary.
of course, all of our hunting/stalking kit - if all we wish to do is kill then why use anything som primitive as a shoulder fired weapon? We can set up trail cam/sensors with small stun guns that immobilize when a creature that fits the parameters enters the kill zone.
but why kill? If we are God, then we don't need to waste time with random and inefficient foodstuffs. We can make perfectly nutritionally balanced pastes that can be ingested daily. No sense mucking about with aromas, tastes, textures.
But what is the point of eating if not to survive and procreate. We don't need to do that either, we have excellent in vigor fertilization systems. No sense worrying about STDs, sensory enjoyment, etc....
I guess what I am saying is that I reject your entire premise. We do what we do for primal, innate urges and sense of satisfaction. If our killing, or eating, or sex becomes so automatic that no longer derive satisfaction from it, then we intentionally place limits on ourselves to make it "fun" again. Look at people that have voluntarily chosen to make their weapons primitive (bow hunters, spear hunters, etc....)
of course, all of our hunting/stalking kit - if all we wish to do is kill then why use anything som primitive as a shoulder fired weapon? We can set up trail cam/sensors with small stun guns that immobilize when a creature that fits the parameters enters the kill zone.
but why kill? If we are God, then we don't need to waste time with random and inefficient foodstuffs. We can make perfectly nutritionally balanced pastes that can be ingested daily. No sense mucking about with aromas, tastes, textures.
But what is the point of eating if not to survive and procreate. We don't need to do that either, we have excellent in vigor fertilization systems. No sense worrying about STDs, sensory enjoyment, etc....
I guess what I am saying is that I reject your entire premise. We do what we do for primal, innate urges and sense of satisfaction. If our killing, or eating, or sex becomes so automatic that no longer derive satisfaction from it, then we intentionally place limits on ourselves to make it "fun" again. Look at people that have voluntarily chosen to make their weapons primitive (bow hunters, spear hunters, etc....)
teyhan1
Well-Known Member
I think we are talking about the same thing here?
If there is no 'God' then yes we are in effect 'God'. It is those very limits that we place on ourselves that I am talking about here.
It is, if we use ALL the technology available to us, not that difficult to shoot an animal. Our ONLY limitation is the money that something would cost, which then comes down to where we choose to place our financial priorities.
As the cost of TI comes down because it becomes more mass produced does that mean that we should use it?
We are currently discussing in another thread about building a coherant agrument for hunting. One point that has been raised is that how ethical we are as hunters. Another about how how much of a basic instinct hunting is for us.
Surely if we reduce hunting down to merely killing (which in my opinion TI does) then that will reduce our argument?
Now I have already stated that TI does have its place within deer management (population counts) but within the context of going in to an area with a gun and a TI, then that means that you have come to that are equipped with one thing in mind and that is to make a kill. The stalking has at that point been reduced to just killing. There is no hunt.
Scenario:
Traditional. You go to a high seat. You sit and watch with your bins, looking at the woodland edge. Sadly nothing comes.
TI: You go to your high seat. You scan the woodland edge. You can see deer in there, but they are moving away. You get down from your high seat and head for a different field that they were heading towards and manage to make a kill.
This scenario has reduced hunting to killing. Although the deer still had a chance to change their mind as to where they were going, you have tipped the balance of the outcome so much in your favour that you have pretty much thrown evolution out the window.
No, you're wrong there. If you spotted your quarry through TI then pressed a button and remotely controlled a means of herding them towards you, from which they had no reasonable means of escape, then that would be killing.
The fact you used all means available to spot then still had to get down and follow them (stalk them) means it's still stalking, just easier.
Let's start by getting one thing straight, if you want to put forward an ETHICAL case for killing deer, that will be acceptable to the populous, then deer are either killed because they are recognized as a source of food, be it farmed, or wild, and, or they are killed because they are destroying the crops required to feed the population !
Anything else is just killing for fun, or sport, and rightly, or wrongly, will always be considered unacceptable by the majority !
Then we have technology. Rock to spear, spear to bow, bow to flintlock, flintlock to modern rifle, and it goes on. All been said a million times before, but regardless, all MASSIVE leaps in the ability for man to kill, and provide food more efficiently.
So if you're in the "I kill for fun/sport" camp, I understand why some of you would want to make it harder, and more challenging than it needs to be, but don't then try, and justify using scopes, or binoculars to see deer you wouldn't otherwise see, and tell the rest of us that the use of a TI is "unethical" !
Yes, I use a TI. It has been the best education I have ever had. Most paid "stalking", is in fact sitting in a high seat, and hoping a deer comes along. I've not been taken out, and taught how to "stalk", I've had to try, and learn myself, and to be honest I'm not very good at it. I "thought" I was doing the right things, walking slowly, quietly, glassing often, but I struggled.
I then bought a TI, and WOW, was I in for a shock. Walking to a seat in the dark, seeing just how many deer were actually around in the woods, and when it was light, realizing that whilst I thought I was doing all the right things, in reality, I was doing it all wrong, bumping deer, because I just didn't/couldn't see them, even with my bino's.
The TI slowed me right down, if I spotted a deer, I'd swap to my bino's, and, try to see it, sometimes needing several attempts, because what was visible with the TI, was really difficult through the bino's. Then I tried to get as close as I could to the deer, and started to learn how to "stalk".
TI doesn't stalk, or shoot the deer for you, nor does it identify gender, unless you are so close, you can see anyway. It's just another tool, helping us be more efficient, just like the modern rifle, scope, bino's, & range finder ! If you don't like them, fine, don't use one. If you can't justify the cost, why have a go at those people who can ? But trying to suggest they are unethical, is in my opinion, just misplaced !
So if you're a professional deer controller, you should welcome anything that makes you more efficient, and better able to do your job, and a TI should be considered just another tool to help you achieve that, even if it's something you don't want, or feel the need to use.
For the more experienced part timer, or recreational stalker, it will do the same, and for the novice it will give you an education no book can give you.
Anything else is just killing for fun, or sport, and rightly, or wrongly, will always be considered unacceptable by the majority !
Then we have technology. Rock to spear, spear to bow, bow to flintlock, flintlock to modern rifle, and it goes on. All been said a million times before, but regardless, all MASSIVE leaps in the ability for man to kill, and provide food more efficiently.
So if you're in the "I kill for fun/sport" camp, I understand why some of you would want to make it harder, and more challenging than it needs to be, but don't then try, and justify using scopes, or binoculars to see deer you wouldn't otherwise see, and tell the rest of us that the use of a TI is "unethical" !
Yes, I use a TI. It has been the best education I have ever had. Most paid "stalking", is in fact sitting in a high seat, and hoping a deer comes along. I've not been taken out, and taught how to "stalk", I've had to try, and learn myself, and to be honest I'm not very good at it. I "thought" I was doing the right things, walking slowly, quietly, glassing often, but I struggled.
I then bought a TI, and WOW, was I in for a shock. Walking to a seat in the dark, seeing just how many deer were actually around in the woods, and when it was light, realizing that whilst I thought I was doing all the right things, in reality, I was doing it all wrong, bumping deer, because I just didn't/couldn't see them, even with my bino's.
The TI slowed me right down, if I spotted a deer, I'd swap to my bino's, and, try to see it, sometimes needing several attempts, because what was visible with the TI, was really difficult through the bino's. Then I tried to get as close as I could to the deer, and started to learn how to "stalk".
TI doesn't stalk, or shoot the deer for you, nor does it identify gender, unless you are so close, you can see anyway. It's just another tool, helping us be more efficient, just like the modern rifle, scope, bino's, & range finder ! If you don't like them, fine, don't use one. If you can't justify the cost, why have a go at those people who can ? But trying to suggest they are unethical, is in my opinion, just misplaced !
So if you're a professional deer controller, you should welcome anything that makes you more efficient, and better able to do your job, and a TI should be considered just another tool to help you achieve that, even if it's something you don't want, or feel the need to use.
For the more experienced part timer, or recreational stalker, it will do the same, and for the novice it will give you an education no book can give you.
^^^ good post.
Well said
shakey jake
Well-Known Member
I hunt because I want to eat what I shoot I'm not a great shot so I try to limit my distance but I don't see anything wrong with using ti too find the deer first and it certainly helps find dead animals in cover
ChesterP
Well-Known Member
+1
Even if the reasons for TI and all the other modern paraphernalia etc is for culling and not recreational stalking/food reasons, then it's use doesn't seem to necessarily make for a better stalker, perhaps just a more efficient one, circumstances permitting.
Whilst relatively new to deer stalking, I'm not new to other forms of stalking and have always thought that sportsmanship should be part of shooting, respect for quarry, and respect for hard earned experience and knowledge built up over years. Also, tech can, and often does fail in the field, so experience and good old fashioned fieldcraft are all you have. There's more satisfaction to me in a hard earned stalk for quarry than quick 'n easy and I don't care how long it takes as being out there is what matters for me. It's as much about learning from the environment and tech somehow insulates one against that in a similar way that say a satnav detracts from knowing an area or being able to use a map. Just my opinion, no right or wrong insinuated or claimed.
Marketing tends to sell lifestyles and not reality, and shooting seems to now be one of those areas where the marketing people are trying to subconsciously or otherwise push us to be aspirational about their products and more importantly, for the need for their products. I could happily hunt with open sights, a basic rifle and basic gear and get just as much satisfaction (probably more) than with all the gear, and probably learn a good deal more as well in the long run. My reasons for adopting a certain level of technology are more to do with ensuring a decent standard of precision in shooting, protection against the elements (and other health or safety related kit such as electronic ear defenders) and in improved comms, and that's about it.
Also, what puts me off is that all around the permissions that I currently enjoy, animals such as fox are being persecuted to the point where I hardly see one on my land at all these days. It seems that NV/TI has allowed indiscriminate slaughter without any thoughts towards the balance and conservation in the countryside for some species, vermin or otherwise. With a growing number of recreational shooters, I can only see this being a bad thing for the future as the ecosystem is a lot finer balanced perhaps than we sometimes might credit. Commercial pheasant shoots have a lot to answer for I think in some respects here but that's a different argument for another day.
For efficient culling of larger herds of say Fallow, I can't really see TI being as much as an advantage as if after species such as munties or Roe, but I do know that many years back, what few Roe we used to have on our land were wiped out by the people shooting it at the time and it took perhaps 6 or 7 years for any to make a return. Part of the problem now is that TI makes it much easier to spot these animals with the net result that recreational stalking could knock back their numbers too far again. I guess it comes down to whether the landowner takes a lead in approving cull plans or allows shooting without constraint, I don't know.
Perhaps these are an old fashioned set of views, but they're ones I'm happy to abide by.
Jagare
Well-Known Member
I hunt because i like hunting. Did have a nice bit of moose for dinner this evening. If your not a good shot then money spent on ammo for practise would be better spent than on TI. Never had a problem finding dead deer in thick cover but then again I've got a trained dog. dogs are more fun than TI as is practise with the rifle.
shakey jake
Well-Known Member
Fair point you can't practice too much I don't have a thermal but used a mates for lamping rabbits and fox found the bodies in grass in no time, on a slight deviation aren't dogs an unfair advantage if you can't smell the deer should you rely on a dog to wind them before you see them
Jagare
Well-Known Member
My dog is a tracking dog not a stalking companion. He stays in his kennel till needed. Rabbits and foxes i would have one of my spaniels with me.
2130martin
Well-Known Member
thats very true......
Vipa
Well-Known Member
You are confusing physical evolution with intellectual evolutiuon... medical science has pretty much stopped natural selection in it's tracks with the human species, from here on in (which has been the case since the stone age... just a bit quicker now) our evolution has not been physical.. we are the only species, for better or for worse, who alter the environment to suit them rather than altering themselves to suit the environment... so, rather than developing eyes on stalks, we instead, altered and circumvented our environment by developing periscopes... etc.. etc..
The other assumption you make is that this is all a game.... As far as I'm concerned I want deer on the ground and I will use whatever technology is available to help me do that... If I want to play games I will go for a game of squash! Hunting isn't a game!
That would appear to be true for most of the general population these days. After that, how they are found, then killed and prepared simply comes down to 'being humane'. The ethical case would be far more clinical than one we'd feel comfortable making because it would have very little skill, tradition or emotional attachment to any aspect of the 'process' attached to it.
Great post re the experience of using TI, by the way.
Of late I find I need both and if only to find my way to the bar as the sun dips delightfully in the West:
Will try not to contaminate with deer guts!
K
Similar threads
