David PetersenMemberJanuary 13, 2014 at 5:38 pmPost count: 2749
The fate of most conservation activism is to try and stop bad legislation and tougher yet, to try and undo or minimize bad laws, bad agency decisions, etc.
In a successful effort to get ahead of the action, CO BHA decided recently to lead the charge to have the use of drones outlawed for hunting or hunting-related (scouting) uses in CO. Our SW rep in Denver, Timothy Brass, led the charge and members backed him with a barrage of letters to the CO Parks and Wildlife commissioners encouraging them to totally outlaw drones for anything hunting-related, and last week they did. Had we not taken the initiative promptly, a pro-drone coalition would have formed and our fight would have been far more difficult, as money always speaks loudest to politicians (recall the Xgun and ATV lobbies).
As is sickeningly evident, there is NO technology so inappropriate and disgusting that business entrepreneurs in company with amoral cheaters, will not try and use to take the hunt out of hunting, if not outlawed. As times goes on and drones no doubt will get a foothold as “legitimate hunting tools” in many states, CO BHA will not gloat but rather wish those states too had sportsmen’s groups that look out for the dignity and honor of hunting and the habitat that is the very oxygen of future hunting in Amereica, rather than simply looking out for themselves re season structure, etc., as most all now limit themselves to.
BHA is not perfect and in its current rapid growth stage is vulnerable to becoming top-heavy and just another NGO playing with OPM (other people’s money). Yet so far, so good, as our muscle remains heavily with volunteerism, bolstered by a superb and appropriately minimal paid staff. Something like 90% of all income goes to projects, giving BHA among the lowest overhead costs of any NGO I know of. Thanks to all of you who are members and I look forward to ever more states having active chapters.
Makes me proud. ❗
Bruce SmithhammerJanuary 13, 2014 at 5:54 pmPost count: 2514
This is a topic that continues to amaze (and disgust) me that it is even worthy of conversation, let alone an issue requiring action. But as Dave points out, it is also a very real and growing threat right now and it’s critical that we get ahead of it, rather than trying to do something about it after it has already been authorized.
I even heard on good authority that representatives from a group called “Hunters for Drones” turned out to testify in CO in favor of making them legal for hunting and scouting… 🙄
BHA is working hard in a number of states right now to get the use of drones (UAVs) for hunting/scouting banned, to get regulatory language surrounding this issue clarified in state regs, and more. If you feel the same way, and you don’t want to see a bunch of UAV’s flying over and around you during hunting season, and harassing game, please help support these efforts.
jpdJanuary 13, 2014 at 7:28 pmPost count: 22
Dave, you are correct about how money speaks. It really upsets me how even some so-called large sportsmans groups have changed their tune about todays hunting. I agree that there are groups that are really trying to better hunting but the majority of todays hunters and sportsman have been brain washed by all the advertizing to increase their take and how to make hunting easy. I am one who really doesen’t care if I harvest a animal,I just enjoy being in the field. It has gotten to the point that I really pick to whom I will donate my money too these days due to what I see as poor real support from todays large sportsmans groups.—jim
1shotJanuary 14, 2014 at 1:38 amPost count: 252
Outfitters/Guides are doing WHATEVER they can to grab the money…Helo drops into land-locked property, multi-Guides scattered over the Mt’s with radio contact for one big money “hunter”, blocking public roads in National forests to keep-out “Joe-Hunter”, etc….
Glad to see at least one State has gotten in front of the drone issue…
(A few years ago I was getting my Hunting Guide licence in Arizona, and after talking to a few outfitters/guides, and seeing the “Get the game at ALL costs” mentality, I stopped the process, My goal was never to get rich or “famous”, just share my love of the Arizona Mt’s with others… One outfitter/guide is so fed-up with the maddness he doesnt advertise anymore, and just does hunts for Wounded Warrior and Make-A-Wish group and his repeat hunters… I have done the same and the reward for me helping others is something money could never buy…)
Ut Oh, sorry Robin if this went off Traditional Topics…
James HarveyMemberJanuary 16, 2014 at 8:15 pmPost count: 1130
Do you guys know if there is a legislative difference between a ‘UAV’ and ‘Remote Control Aircraft’ in the US? I only ask as I recently discovered that our equivalent of FAA had made such a distinction here and it appears to be based entirely upon the use of the aircraft rather than any technical aspect of it. I wonder if such a distinction would have to be taken into account to ensure effective legislative controls of these kinds of things in hunting?
Bruce SmithhammerJanuary 16, 2014 at 8:27 pmPost count: 2514
I think you hit on a really important point. I think it’s going to be essential going forward that wildlife agency language surrounding regulation of this issue mirrors FAA language to the letter. And that we make sure that FAA language is appropriate and inclusive, and not drawing arbitrary/obscure distinctions based merely on usage, as you mention.
As we all know and have seen time and time again, language with room for interpretation is opportunity for any special-interest group and a savvy lawyer.
That said, I think the FAA has an absolute nightmare on their hands right now, with trying to figure out how they are going to oversee and regulate the myriad proposed and future applications for UAV’s within US airspace. The potential for accidents, the privacy issues, the ethical issues (such as the one discussed here) and more, are nothing short of massive, and without serious foresight and restraint, it isn’t hard to imagine a not-too-distant future where UAV’s are literally everywhere.
David PetersenMemberMemberJanuary 16, 2014 at 11:55 pmPost count: 2749
I’m with Duncan and his Snaro sentiments, or better. With unmanned drones we can morally object to their rude misuse in a way we cannot morally object to ORVs in the wrong places … we can shoot the bastahds down. No matter the price, I guarantee that should I ever be on public lands or private that I own or oversee and one of those jaybirds scars my sky within range, and I have the 12-bore in hand, it’s going down in flames, its remains then recovered and run through a crematorium bone grinder. It’s an essential statement that must be made. 😈
Col MikeMemberJanuary 17, 2014 at 1:06 amPost count: 911
Well as usual my lengthy response with insightful thoughts gets logged out before I can finish–so try again.
Jim the distinction from Uav and drone is in the realm of lawyers.
They are very useful in military ops and save pilots from the danger zone,cheaper then those multi billion dollar airplanes and when did we shoot down someone in aerial combat? Of course if your in the target zone that is a somewhat different view–but they beat the heck out of B-52 arc strikes or the 8th army air force in Europe.
Sorry for the rant–so i did shoot my long bow today–just to keep this trad.8)
However they have no use IMHO over our nation for any reason.
That is a battle you young folks Clay, Bruce and the rest of you returning vets are going to have to fight.
James HarveyMemberJanuary 17, 2014 at 1:47 amPost count: 1130
Mike, the distinction I was thinking of was between the controversial ‘UAV/Drone’ and the uncontroversial and already widely used ‘radio controlled aircraft’.
I shot my longbow and my recurve today. Waxed my strings too.
Dave and Duncan, if it ever happens, you’ll have to submit a photo to TBM for the ‘traditional harvest’ page 😉
AnonymousJanuary 17, 2014 at 2:50 pmPost count: 124
CO was the first win. It won’t be the last. Stay tuned, y’all. 😉
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.