How to Catch a Wily Poacher in a Sting: A Thermal Robotic Deer(wsj.com)
wsj.com
How to Catch a Wily Poacher in a Sting: A Thermal Robotic Deer
https://www.wsj.com/us-news/how-to-catch-a-wily-poacher-in-a-sting-a-thermal-robotic-deer-ffef0fa8
33 comments
https://archive.ph/ED3Ya
The idea that deer need to be protected is hilarious. All around the Midwest (USA) you can see obvious signs of deer overpopulation. Every doe gives birth to twins. The understory in the forest is bare.
This guy is selling 60 deer decoys a year? The DNR is just playing a power game.
If the focus of the article were about poaching an animal that isn’t as common as mice, I would be more sympathetic.
Instead it seems like the focus is on the easiest poaching to catch (because of the massive numbers of infractions), not the greatest impact.
This guy is selling 60 deer decoys a year? The DNR is just playing a power game.
If the focus of the article were about poaching an animal that isn’t as common as mice, I would be more sympathetic.
Instead it seems like the focus is on the easiest poaching to catch (because of the massive numbers of infractions), not the greatest impact.
I don't know, I'm not there, not my world.
But I would think the goal is to reduce the number of poachers. Poaching being a mind set, a criminal behavior, regardless of that actual animal they're harvesting. If someone is willing to poach deer, perhaps it's a gateway to poaching something more vulnerable. Learning how to avoid the game wardens, building an "underground" community.
Similarly, if the deer are that plentiful (and they no doubt are, there are all sorts of stories about deer populations expanding), then it would seem good policy to encourage hunting. Lower the fees, increase the bag limit, do some outreach with safety training, etc. "No out of state fees to come hunt in Minnesota!" The goal to get poachers out of the fold and into legal hunting.
And, of course, there's "dual use" concepts, as deer can be considered pests in some scenarios (which fall under different guidelines than game animals). That can always blur the lines. So, maybe not everyone running around at night with thermal imagers is, actually, a poacher. Perhaps they're doing pest control. But that's someone who shouldn't mind encounters with game enforcement.
But I would think the goal is to reduce the number of poachers. Poaching being a mind set, a criminal behavior, regardless of that actual animal they're harvesting. If someone is willing to poach deer, perhaps it's a gateway to poaching something more vulnerable. Learning how to avoid the game wardens, building an "underground" community.
Similarly, if the deer are that plentiful (and they no doubt are, there are all sorts of stories about deer populations expanding), then it would seem good policy to encourage hunting. Lower the fees, increase the bag limit, do some outreach with safety training, etc. "No out of state fees to come hunt in Minnesota!" The goal to get poachers out of the fold and into legal hunting.
And, of course, there's "dual use" concepts, as deer can be considered pests in some scenarios (which fall under different guidelines than game animals). That can always blur the lines. So, maybe not everyone running around at night with thermal imagers is, actually, a poacher. Perhaps they're doing pest control. But that's someone who shouldn't mind encounters with game enforcement.
>But I would think the goal is to reduce the number of poachers. Poaching being a mind set, a criminal behavior, regardless of that actual animal they're harvesting. If someone is willing to poach deer, perhaps it's a gateway to poaching something more vulnerable. Learning how to avoid the game wardens, building an "underground" community.
This is the exact same argument that caused a lot of teenagers to get locked up over a plant in the 90s.
I am less than un-moved by it.
If people want to blast a doe out of season off their porch with no tags I have no problem with it so long as they are doing so in places where the population can support that behavior.
This is the exact same argument that caused a lot of teenagers to get locked up over a plant in the 90s.
I am less than un-moved by it.
If people want to blast a doe out of season off their porch with no tags I have no problem with it so long as they are doing so in places where the population can support that behavior.
There are so many of these damn deer in the Texas hill country due to people overfeeding them on their lawns. My parents live out there and it's not abnormal to see literally dozens of them on people's lawns. I'd be happy to see them come down here and cull a bit.
This is very sensible. Unfortunately, I'm not aware of any states incentivizing demand. I suppose you could argue that license fees have not gone up at the CPI rate, so this is a discount of sorts. There are small attempts at encouraging kids to signup, but it's surprising how little dynamic control (doe tags, lotteries, etc) there is especially as most states have made the license process fully electronic.
Echoing my own comment below, it's important, given the pointlesness of fighting poaching while deer are everywhere, to note that in the US, agencies like DNR (some states have different names for them) have extraordinary police powers that allow them to enter property if they suspect a violation. In similar situations, police officers would be required to get a warrant from a judge, but the DNR can just go in. So, often they use the pretense of poaching to go see what someone is up to on their own land. They even have the right to install hidden cameras on private property without telling the landowner to try to detect violations.
I am not familiar with poaching issues in the USA, but in Canada, one isn't allowed to hunt too close to roads; doing otherwise is poaching. It seems reasonable to not discharge firearms next to public roads, so stopping poachers who do so is a great use case here.
usually these kind of stings are not about poaching in the classic sense, its about basic safety, like not shooting; on; along; or across a road, so they set it up somewhere in that zone considered "along" the road, and wait for someone to start setting up for a shot.
There was an old farmer in my town that had a steel deer decoy on a hill up the road from his house, poachers would shoot it, not knowing he would hear the sound, shut his gate then call law enforcement on them as there was no other way out.
I always appreciated the cleverness of this.
I always appreciated the cleverness of this.
Seems pretty bold to drive through someone's gate to poach.
The road was technically public and crossed his land, but was a dead end.
Now lets do a robotic rhinos and elephants. Upon detection of a shot and a specific place it came from (using radar and sound sensor) the robot turns and starts to run in in that direction unleashing a salvo from a range of weapons - from non-lethal 96GHz direct energy and infra-red sound to water cannon to rubber bullets to RPG shots with sound and light grenades ... That is for the first time offenders. If face recognition detects second-time offender - lethal weapons applied, automatic rifle, RPG with real grenades, fire throwers. Also the robot can launch drones and there is a gamut of opportunities here...
>Barring a direct shot to the circuitry, the decoys can last five to 10 years.
simple [body] armor plates should do here.
>Barring a direct shot to the circuitry, the decoys can last five to 10 years.
simple [body] armor plates should do here.
Hate to say it but poaching deer is a long tradition in Wisconsin. I had a relative on the u of mn Duluth football team and they'd get protein from poached deer. But yes, in the last decades the dnr has been nore and more effective.
FWIW, not saying it's right (as a hunter I wouldn't ever do this myself), but most of the biologists that build the population models, inc. the ones that they use to set the amount of hunting licenses or tags sold, build a certain amount of poaching into their models.
It's a particularly hard problem to solve - the hobby is usually spread through traditional means (you do it if your parents did it), and going all the way back in certain communities this was the main way to get meat, even before it became regulated. It's difficult to stop something that not only puts food on the table for your family, but has been done that way for generations.
This was one of the main contributors to the decline of the turkey population in the lower 48. In the early 1900's, a lot of folks thought turkey's were extinct because of over hunting and poaching, and the National Wild Turkey Foundation took efforts to restore the population for hunting.
It's a particularly hard problem to solve - the hobby is usually spread through traditional means (you do it if your parents did it), and going all the way back in certain communities this was the main way to get meat, even before it became regulated. It's difficult to stop something that not only puts food on the table for your family, but has been done that way for generations.
This was one of the main contributors to the decline of the turkey population in the lower 48. In the early 1900's, a lot of folks thought turkey's were extinct because of over hunting and poaching, and the National Wild Turkey Foundation took efforts to restore the population for hunting.
> In the early 1900's, a lot of folks thought turkey's were extinct because of over hunting and poaching, and the National Wild Turkey Foundation took efforts to restore the population for hunting.
Well they've definitely recovered in NW Wisconsin. Theyre everywhere and the males won't even move out of the way of cars.
Well they've definitely recovered in NW Wisconsin. Theyre everywhere and the males won't even move out of the way of cars.
yeah - it's one of the best success stories of wildlife conservation in the modern era.
If you live in the right area, hunters will give you as much venison as you can freeze. No poaching required.
I have property in NW Wisconsin and this is true. Also bear, which are hunted with dogs in this area. It's hard to understand - it seems a lot of middle-class and higher income people that hunt don't particularly like venison/bear/goose/etc and so they give it away. They just like to kill. (But I like to eat all of those and I have hunted but no longer do because everyone gives me their meat)
But the lower-income people I talk to do hunt for food and get enough meat to last the year.
But the lower-income people I talk to do hunt for food and get enough meat to last the year.
tried both, (not bear of course) thought they tasted nice.
Not sure why people wouldn't eat it if its there.
>the dnr has been nore and more effective
What is "dnr"? I tried googling, but I just get "do not resuscitate".
What is "dnr"? I tried googling, but I just get "do not resuscitate".
It's also important to note that in the US, agencies like DNR (some states have different names for them) have extraordinary police powers that allow them to enter property if they suspect a violation. In similar situations, police officers would be required to get a warrant from a judge, but the DNR can just go in.
Department of natural resources. They monitor hunters, fishing, etc. They've been using deer mannequins for decades to catch poachers and they're getting more sophisticated now with internal heat sources in order to handle poachers with night vision.
Interesting. I am under the impression that regular hunting with night vision is banned. I can understand that it's no longer a sport if yo do enough stuff like that. Next would be armed drones.
Thanks! I figured it was something along those lines, but couldn't find the actual words to go with the acronym.
Minnesota's Department of Natural Resources: https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/
Ah, makes sense, thanks!
In this case Wisconsin.
I read this as Willy Poacher and it gave me a chuckle.
Is this not "entrapment"? I thought this was illegal, like setting up a unsecured bike to catch bike thieves.
Why would leaving an unsecured bike to catch thieves be illegal? Entrapment is when law enforcement gets people to commit crimes they wouldn't have considered committing otherwise.
Plus your lawyer needs to make a convincing case that you only took the bike because the cops left it unsecured to trick you, and not because just you're a thief who stole some shit and got caught. Tough row to hoe.
Plus your lawyer needs to make a convincing case that you only took the bike because the cops left it unsecured to trick you, and not because just you're a thief who stole some shit and got caught. Tough row to hoe.
No, and the general rule is that it’s never entrapment. I don’t know how people get the idea that either of those scenarios would be entrapment.
It’s still not your bike, why would you be permitted to steal it just because a cop left it somewhere?
(I say this as someone who seriously disagrees with the outrageous powers that wildlife cops and regular cops have)
It’s still not your bike, why would you be permitted to steal it just because a cop left it somewhere?
(I say this as someone who seriously disagrees with the outrageous powers that wildlife cops and regular cops have)