AZGFC'S Concideration of Fair Chase Terms

[elkaholic]

this was just published in WESTERN OUTDOORS TIMES

 

***The G&F Commission has an agenda for the future of hunting in Arizona***

 

 

" The Commission recognizes that development of new improved technology and practices can provide benefits to hunters and anglers by improving or increasing participation. However, it believes that the pursuit of wildlife should be managed to conform with the ethical standards of Fair Chase.

The Commission will monitor and give careful consideration to the Fair Chase implications of an emerging and evolving technology and practice.

 

.

 

The following criteria will be used to evaluate whether or not a new technology or practice is a Fair Chase issue :

 

1-- A technology or practice that allows a hunter or angler to locate or take wildlife without acquiring necessary hunting and angling skills or competency.

 

2- A technology or practice that allows a hunter or angler to purse or take wildlife without being physically present and pursuing wildlife in the field .

 

3 - A technology or practice that makes harvesting wildlife almost certain , and or the technology or practice prevents wildlife from eluding detection and or take.

 

Commission consideration of whether a given technology or practice should be limited or prohibited in the interests of preserving Fair Chase will be carefully weighed in an open public progress.

 

the article talks about drones - the smart rifle with its laser supported sighting system - the exploding arrows .

the line will be drawn when an advancement becomes unlawful or provides sportsmen with an improper or unfair advantage .

 

they want to pay respect to the traditions of hunting and angling by emphasizing the development of an individuals skills rather than reliance on practices or technology that overwhelms the quarry's ability to elude detection or take."

 

*** I think they will be discussing other issues more commonly used by hunters in the field ***

this is not the complete article but you get the general idea

[mattys281]

Number 3 is interesting. What implications does "a practice that makes taking wildlife almost certain" have towards guides who boast a 100% success rate? Doesnt get any more certain than that.

[AverageJoe]

Ethical hunting and fair chase is always a good thing to revisit from time to time, especially with the technology available these days. Some will be offended I am sure, but someone is always offended anymore so who cares.

[hoghntr]

#3 could ban game cams i bet..

[JACK]

I'd say #1 #2 are game cam related as well...

[DesertBull]

Number 3 is interesting. What implications does "a practice that makes taking wildlife almost certain" have towards guides who boast a 100% success rate? Doesnt get any more certain than that.

 

 

I think they are talking about High fence operations

 

And defining fair chase is not the role of the game and fish dept. Their job is to manage wildlife.

[.270]

Why don't they come right out say what the hel l they mean instead of all this vague crap? Good night, this can cover anything and everything. Leaves to much to the opinion of the warden. Lark

[elkaholic]

^^^ my thoughts exactly - lets make the wording so open -- we can interpret it any way we like!

 

that way if we don't like trail cameras or quads in the field or the use of pop up tents we can say hey it gives you an unfair advantage - no rangefinding optics at all - how can shooting a gun 900 yards not be an advantage or a bow 100 yrds.

 

they are not limiting it to technology - practice is the key word here

 

what are you doing now that we can stop

 

they want to " manage the pursuit of wildlife to conform to ethical standards"

[ThomC]

Well people, that is why you all should be going to or at least watching the commission meetings. Sitting on your duff and complaining after the fact will not work. The people who go to the commission and bend their ears get noticed, people who complain on the internet, not so much.

[Guest 300ultramag.]

I think infrared

[Coues79]

#3.... A practice. So, hunting on a salt lick in which a trail camera has been used to determine a buck is coming in at a specific time on a specific day.

 

So where is the line going to be drawn if they do take trail cameras into consideration? Would they go after these big outfits that have hundreds of cameras set out and leave the DIY hunter alone? Specifics on removing them by a certain time prior to hunts?

 

Lots of things to iron out.

[Chris]

I guess #3 can apply to a guide, and his 6 or 7 little helpers/scouts.

 

What a cluster-puck of statements from G&F

[HuntHarder]

Getting rid of cameras is a step in the right direction..... ( dodges bottles from the masses)

[DesertBull]

Getting rid of cameras is a step in the right direction..... ( dodges bottles from the masses)

Why stop there? Let's go to open sights on all firearms. Longbow or recurve only. Single, fixed blade broadheads. No GPS, no cell phones, no radios. If we are gonna let 5 politicians determine what is fair chase then let's go big or go home.

[pwrguy]

Yes, I think fair chase should be re visited frequently. If you are going to pass a law though it should be black and white. I love trail camera's. I only have one out now, but if I had the time and money I would put a ton of them out. Could some traditionalist have a problem with that, of course, if they passed a law that said you couldn't use them would I stop hunting because a tool I liked was taken away, no I wouldn't. Stupid laws are going to come, just don't make them vague so everyone knows where they stand.