Thread: Thermal Optics under scrutiny?

Originally Posted by woods223

Initially I thought ‘fuck you Dave Benfell’ but then again he’s allowed his opinion. Personally, when when culling animals I’ll use whatever equipment I can if it helps to get numbers. But when hunting recreationally the use of thermals is a no go for me. Using a thermal makes it ‘spot and shoot’, removes the hunting challenge. Hunting presently has never been easier compared to 80-90’s, handheld thermals aren’t needed. Just my opinion, others will probably disagree. Lastly, I no longer regularly buy Rod and Rifle and probably won’t while Benfell is the editor.

I guess if social media was around when rifle scopes first arrived on the hunting scene there would have been a similar discussion about the ethical use of scopes?

Thermals, just another tool that can be used to great effect or missued depending on the context and operator.
From seeing videos captured from mates thermal scope used for culling it's pretty easy to identify a deer at 400 yards.
The same people who spotlight on doc land will thermal on doc land, a small portion of the hunting community giving everyone a bad name, same across any hobby.

Originally Posted by Tahr

Im not so lacking in independence and judgement that I will allow my hunting ethical decisions to be led by a collection of edicts from people I neither know or who's judgement I might not respect. Your friend Duxbury would have agreed with me.

And yet, if everyone did that in society, we end up living in a Mad Max movie. We elders must lead by example.

Originally Posted by Finnwolf

I guess if social media was around when rifle scopes first arrived on the hunting scene there would have been a similar discussion about the ethical use of scopes?

I assume you aware just how long ago rifle scopes came into being??? Before our grandparents were born....

I recently took borrowed a friend's monocular to hunt on the public land. Aside from the safety and ethics debate, I found the act of looking through a little electric screen horrible compared with the meditative hours you can spend behind glass. Binoculars connect you more intimately with the landscape; the thermal separates you from the landscape.

Also, I didn't see any animals.

Originally Posted by Finnwolf

I guess if social media was around when rifle scopes first arrived on the hunting scene there would have been a similar discussion about the ethical use of scopes?

Yes there was: In the first part of the 20th century, it was considered by many English stalkers that using a scope was not sporting. A chap just wouldn't. That changed over time, but was in complete contrast to the United States where hunters who could afford them embraced them immediately.

Originally Posted by Trout

DOC have made their decisions on the use of thermal monoculars.To help reducing the pest numbers down damaging our forests.In the last ten years more people have been accidentally shot out hunting without thermal gear being involved than with thermal gear involved.If he thinks it not safe out hunting or fair chase,he should stay at home.His big loud opinions will fall on deaf ears.

@Trout, If the reason and goal is simply pest reduction by any means. Then why not just use 1080 and be done with it?

While we're at it, we should debate the use of anything bigger than 308, suppressors, binoculars and spotting scopes, dogs, quads, compound bows, topo maps and smokeless powder. Hell, why do we even need black powder?

The constant march of innovation can't be stopped, so we shouldn't be having this debate. What we should debate is how to ensure that the technology is used in a way that the resource (in this case, public hunting land) is maintained and people are kept safe. Unfortunately the loose cannons will provide all the ammunition necessary to have thermals banned or at least controlled.

And anyone who believes Pandora's box can't be closed need just look at semi-auto centrefire rifles and see what can be done by an overzealous government.

Originally Posted by whanahuia

@Trout, If the reason and goal is simply pest reduction by any means. Then why not just use 1080 and be done with it?

1080 just hasn't been enough to bring down the pest numbers.Pest numbers increasing over the yrs has proven that.

Originally Posted by John Duxbury

And yet, if everyone did that in society, we end up living in a Mad Max movie. We elders must lead by example.

I’m over the tyranny of the collective trying to control my recreation. They can but out. If something is legal then it falls to my individual choices on how I proceed.
And I will worry about what elders do when I become one.
The collective conscience of society doesn’t seem to be doing too well at present.

I’m going to advance into the future taking advantage of what ever technology I choose to use. Including if required, a pace maker.

Originally Posted by Trout

1080 just hasn't been enough to bring down the pest numbers.Pest numbers increasing over the yrs has proven that.

But its not used to target deer. So if the reason for allowing thermal use is deer are a pest, then should the 1080 rules be changed?

Originally Posted by Bol Tackshin

While we're at it, we should debate the use of anything bigger than 308, suppressors, binoculars and spotting scopes, dogs, quads, compound bows, topo maps and smokeless powder. Hell, why do we even need black powder?

The constant march of innovation can't be stopped, so we shouldn't be having this debate. What we should debate is how to ensure that the technology is used in a way that the resource (in this case, public hunting land) is maintained and people are kept safe. Unfortunately the loose cannons will provide all the ammunition necessary to have thermals banned or at least controlled.

And anyone who believes Pandora's box can't be closed need just look at semi-auto centrefire rifles and see what can be done by an overzealous government.

So I see a theme developing. Ive seen it before too. It never happens in time though. Should we not be able to come up with sensible limitations on new tech if we can foreshadow its Mis-use and know that such will lead to an impingement of freedoms on us all?

10 shot mag anyone?

Originally Posted by whanahuia

But its not used to target deer. So if the reason for allowing thermal use is deer are a pest, then should the 1080 rules be changed?

That’s a rhetoric question. You know the answer to that.

Originally Posted by Tahr

That’s a rhetoric question. You know the answer to that.

I want people to give the real reason they want to use thermals.

Originally Posted by whanahuia

I want people to give the real reason they want to use thermals.

I want to use a thermal because I'm a shit hunter who hasn't shot a deer in his last 5 outings. They are great for giving you a direction to point your binos and give you an idea if it is worth moving on from a spot.
The freezer is empty all too often and I enjoy playing around making small goods and sharing them with friends family and workmates.
I can't afford one yet but when I can I'll get one and use it every time I really want to get something to butcher.