Should hunters get to track wounded deer with drones?
What’s the difference between using a blood-tracking dog or a drone to help a hunter locate a downed deer?
The answer: The dog is allowed under Pennsylvania Game Commission law and the drone is not.
But state Sen. Jarrett Coleman sees little difference between the two methods for recovery of game and has decided to pursue amending the law to make drone use permissible.
The Republican senator from Lehigh and Bucks counties said he became convinced this change was needed after learning of a pilot who had his drone seized by the game commission in Lancaster County last month and who was issued four citations for aiding a hunter in locating a downed deer.
The game commission stands firm in its position that the use of drones in hunting, which includes recovering the carcass, violates current law that seeks to preserve the idea of a fair chase, said its spokesman Travis Lau.
Wingenroth, 35, of Downingtown, Chester County, was issued citations charging him with two counts of unlawful devices and methods and one count each of disturbance of game and wildlife and restrictions on recreational spotlighting. Combined, he could face hundreds of dollars in fines and up to three months in jail.
Wingenroth declined comment for this story. He referred calls to his attorney Michael Alan Siddons who did not return messages left at his Media law office.
Wingenroth’s business, Wingy Drone Services’ website advertises deer finding services. It states that the business seeks to help hunters recover deer carcasses using technology which it states “is ethical and responsible.”
Lau said the game commission has told Wingenroth that using drones for downed deer recovery was illegal and despite that, “he continued to operate and advertise.”
Coleman said he learned of Wingenroth’s citations a day after watching a YouTube video about a similar situation that happened in another state. In that video, the drone operator told the hunter he located the deer carcass but was not legally permitted to tell him where it was.
“I’m like what? What? It
was so crazy to me,” Coleman said. “I remember saying to myself at the time, that’s amazing. That can’t be. That’s not Pennsylvania. It’s a shame but surely you can do that in Pennsylvania. Come on, this isn’t an
issue here.”
The next day, after reading a news account about Wingenroth’s situation and finding out the same law does exist in Pennsylvania although anecdotally he has heard it is not enforced uniformly across the state, Coleman decided it was time to address this issue.
The co-sponsorship memo he is circulating says, “the advancement of unmanned drones has created an opportunity to use technology to aid in that recovery process. The state of Ohio permits the use of drones in the recovery of downed game. Unfortunately, the Pennsylvania Game Commission appears to be taking a hostile view of the use of drones in game recovery. … Pennsylvanians deserve better.”
Coleman said hunters he has spoken with see the use of drones as another tool in hunter’s toolbox for locating game injured deer after other means are exhausted.
“If you have a tool available to help you locate a
game that would otherwise be wasted, why would we not use that to prevent wasting an animal,” he said.
The game commission, however, is very deliberate about which electronic devices it permits for hunting.
Exceptions made
The commission has made about a dozen exceptions to its prohibition on electronic devices, Lau said. Among the examples he offered, allowing GPS collars for hunting dogs or night vision scopes for furbearer hunting.
But the issue with drones comes down to potentially violating the assurance that game is taken through fair chase principles upon which game laws and hunting regulations are based, he said.
“You wouldn’t have any game laws or hunting regulations that would compromise wildlife health or work against your objectives for maintaining the wildlife population,” Lau said.
The Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen and Conservationists, which represents over 200 clubs and 80,000 members, has not taken a position on the use of drones although a membership survey taken a few years ago showed strong sentiment against it, said its government affairs director, Mike Kriner.
“Part of it is you are taking someone on their word that they are using it for recovery of a downed deer,” he said. “It makes sense but the concern is would it be used for other purposes and how can you police it. Our biggest issue is fair chance for the taking of game in Pennsylvania.”
David Heath of the Pennsylvania Drone Association said as a hunter, he respects the fair chase principle but he also said hunters hold to a wanton waste pledge.
“Drones are absolutely a valuable tool in drone deer recovery. When done appropriately, they can be invaluable to hunters to allow them to find game they previously wouldn’t have been able to,” he said.
Heath is working with Coleman’s office on drafting legislation that includes some guard rails in the technology’s use. He said he believes a solution can be found to ensure drones are only used for recovery and not scouting or disturbing game. After all, he said a solution was found one in 2018 when Pennsylvania decided to allow blood-tracking dogs to be used for recovering downed deer.
“This is just another example of that,” Heath said.