Introduction
The use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs, commonly “drones”) in wildlife and game-management contexts is growing rapidly. One emergent application is the recovery of wounded game – i.e., locating an animal that has been legally harvested or mortally wounded, but cannot be found easily via traditional tracking methods. Recently, several states have explored legislative and regulatory opportunities designed to permit the use of drones during recovery efforts while prohibiting their use in the pursuit of live game. This distinction ensures that hunters can utilize every available tool to ensure that game is not wasted while protecting the fair chase ethic that is central to our shared hunting heritage.
Issue
Hunting of big game and other wild game in the United States is underpinned by a regulatory framework that largely is guided by the principle of fair chase. As defined by the Boone and Crockett Club, fair chase is “the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit and taking of any free-ranging wild game animal in a manner that does not give the hunter and improper or unfair advantage over the game animals.” The advent of drone technology presents both opportunity and risk for this fair chase principle, depending on how they are used afield.
Drones equipped with thermal imaging or high-resolution cameras have proven effective in locating wounded or mortally struck animals, thereby reducing loss, wasted effort, and potential for prolonged suffering. However, drones could also be used to locate live animals prior to harvest, drive or herd animals, or otherwise erode fair chase ethics. Thus, a clear distinction must be made between drone-assisted recovery (post-shot, locating game you have legally taken or wounded) and drone-aided pursuit/hunting (pre-shot locating, directing, or herding). The former, properly regulated, aligns with ethical and stewardship goals; the latter threatens fair chase and must remain prohibited.
In short, the key principle: drones may assist in recovery, but must not facilitate the hunt itself or locate game for harvest beyond what traditional ground tracking would allow. The policy challenge is to craft appropriate statutes and regulations that enable the former while strictly prohibiting the latter.
Points of Interest
- Currently, only two states, Missouri and West Virginia, have enacted laws or regulations that explicitly allow the use of drones to assist in the recovery of wounded game animals, though license requirements, permission, and timing still vary considerably.
- In contrast, other states have language that either clearly or implicitly prohibits the use of drones for both the pursuit and recovery of game. Implicit prohibitions are typically interpreted to have included drones in the term “vehicles” when referred to in the pursuit or recovery of game.
- Despite variations, all current policies allowing the use of drones to recover wounded game provide a clear distinction between “recovery” and “pursuit/hunting” to ensure that drones may only be employed after a lawful attempt at harvest and only to locate mortally wounded or expired game animals.
- Operator licensing, specific timing and spatial limits, and permission and reporting requirements should be designed in consultation with state fish and wildlife law enforcement to ensure consistency in approach and ease of compliance.
- No opportunities to utilize drones to assist in the recovery of wounded game should imply disregard for private property rights or permit trespassing.
Language
- Some specific examples of positive language include:
- West Virginia (HB 2043): “(a) Notwithstanding any provision of this chapter to the contrary, a person who is legally hunting and reasonably believes he or she has mortally wounded a deer, elk, turkey, wild boar, or bear may use aleashed dogs dog and/or a drone on his or her property or lease to track and locate the mortally wounded deer, elk, turkey, wild boar, or bear. The hunter is also permitted to use a dog handler of a leashed dogs dog and/or a licensed drone pilot to track and locate the mortally wounded deer, elk, turkey, wild boar, or bear.”
- “. . . Any drone operator not operating on property they own or lease must be licensed according to FAA Part 107.”
- Missouri (3 CSR 10-7.410: “(1)(A) Unmanned motor-driven air conveyances, commonly referred to as Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV), Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS), and drones, may be used to locate and recover wounded black bear, deer, elk, and turkey only in accordance with the following…”
- West Virginia (HB 2043): “(a) Notwithstanding any provision of this chapter to the contrary, a person who is legally hunting and reasonably believes he or she has mortally wounded a deer, elk, turkey, wild boar, or bear may use aleashed dogs dog and/or a drone on his or her property or lease to track and locate the mortally wounded deer, elk, turkey, wild boar, or bear. The hunter is also permitted to use a dog handler of a leashed dogs dog and/or a licensed drone pilot to track and locate the mortally wounded deer, elk, turkey, wild boar, or bear.”
Moving Forward
State legislators and fish and wildlife commissions should work closely with law enforcement and entities experienced in the use of drones to recover wounded game to explore additional opportunities for implementation while protecting the fair chase ethic. Drone technologies represent a tremendous advancement in the ongoing efforts of lawful hunters to minimize harvest loss and, when regulated properly and used in combination with other recovery methods, can increase recovery rates and improve public perception of hunters seeking to avoid any hunting-related waste.
