There’s no substitute For skill

I’ve known my brother-in-law for almost 50 years. He and my sister live in Las Vegas. He is retired military and is still actively working in spite of being Social Security eligible. “Stormy” reads my column on the Internet and occasionally offers comments, questions or insights into the topic of the week. Every once in a while, he sends along news items he thinks are of interest to me.

This last week, he sent an article that grabbed my attention not only because of the timing (we’re in the middle of hunting season), but also for the topic — the impact of modern technology on fair chase hunting. I’ve touched on this before in this column, but from a safety perspective rather than using technology to help harvest an animal.

For those unfamiliar with the term, fair chase hunting means hunting in a manner where the animal has at least an even chance of escaping harvest; no “fish in a barrel” here. By that definition, I do a lot of fair-chase hunting.

If we blend personal hunting ethics into the discussion, things really become complicated. For example, hunting deer with dogs is considered an ethical technique in the thick, swampy areas of the American Southeast. However, start factoring in the use of radio communications between hunters, GPS tracking of the dogs, trail cameras to learn when and how the deer move, using feeders or food plots to attract the deer initially and you can see the blurring between an accepted and time-honored practice and one that puts all the emphasis on killing an animal by employing modern technology.

In Alaska, we are not immune to technology creeping into our hunting practices. Human voice-powered calling of bulls later in the moose season is a long established and ethical method. However, using commercially available rutting scents to further attract the bulls and electronic callers set to run for extended durations demonstrate how far some folks will go to exploit technology to fill their freezers and hang trophies on their walls. Thankfully, the Board of Game has outlawed these practices.

Technology properly applied can be a major benefit for hunting. The use of ATVs, boats or snowmachines allows many older and less able-bodied hunters to access hunting areas they would otherwise not be able to visit. GPS and cellphone or satellite technology offers a safety factor for single hunters or those venturing into remote areas. Modern technological improvements in outdoor clothing and materials allow us to hunt more comfortably and with greater protection from the unforgiving Alaskan environment.

The problem comes when folks start substituting this technology for the woodsmanship and hunting skills ordinarily developed through the experience of pursuing animals without all the modern aids available. Learning how to stalk within close range of an animal for a killing shot is often forsaken because the rifle, caliber and scope combinations available today involve simply turning a dial to accurately shoot out to nearly 1,000 yards, day or night. Why learn the animal’s habits and habitat requirements if you can draw them in using baits, scents, calls, food plots or salt licks? Why spend time scouting the woods if a few strategically placed trail cameras can tell you everything you want to know about animal movements in a given area?

Some uses of available technology are ethically wrong for hunting while others may be more of a personal decision. Give some thought to why you hunt and what you expect from the hunt: recreation, companionship, family time or simply a trophy. If you truly want a fair chase experience, you’ll know how to ethically use the technology currently available.

On a related note, I was recently talking with Rick Merizon, Fish and Game’s statewide small game biologist, and he mentioned he had been receiving several calls from hunters who are noticing smaller than average grouse and ptarmigan this year. These calls have come in about birds from the Kenai Peninsula and the Chugach and Talkeetna mountains. He said there are several possible explanations for the smaller size. A late start in nesting because of last year’s harsh winter was one. The most likely, however, is the birds had poor success in their first nesting attempts and the observed smaller birds resulted from a second and later nesting situation. Remember to send in your wings so a good population profile can be established for this year.

Howard Delo is a retired fisheries biologist with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. You can leave him a message by emailing sports@frontiersman.com.