The field dressing is done and your quarry is loaded. The endorphins your body released are fading and your nerves are finally calming. You pack away your gear and your rifle, drop your truck into drive and head to the tagging station. Along the way, the film reel of your hunt plays in your mind. The moment the trigger breaks, the exhilaration of success and the realization of knowing the work has just begun. As you pull into the game tagging station and back up to the game pole, folks are already looking your way. The congratulations begin. Where did you get it? What rifle did you use? An eclectic group of fellow hunters, passers-by, station staff and tourists filling their tank at the pump all mingle, striking up conversations with topics ranging from the best weeks of any given season, personal experiences and stories about what they saw here and there throughout the season; all gathered around your truck as the scale tells its tale. It is a communal moment and it feels great.
Electronic Registration
A bill introduced to the Maine legislature last year, LD 1213 “An Act To Provide the Option of Online or Telephonic Tagging of Harvested Big Game Animals” made its way through the Committee on Inland Fisheries and Wildlife resulting in a divided report. The Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife were tasked with providing a study of the impacts of electronic tagging of harvested big game animals. Cost, effects on biological data collection, veracity of self-reported harvests and compliance were all key issues. The full MDIFW report was issued in January.
In Maine, hunters are very fortunate to have wildlife biologists so deeply embedded in the decisions that determine bag limits and seasons, wildlife and herd health and carrying capacity. In some states, game commissions are appointed officials with little or no scientific wildlife background. Wildlife management decisions are made without the benefit of solid, verifiable data – the data our wildlife biologists count on collecting at Maine game tagging stations. When decisions are made using information solely gleaned from electronic tagging, it usually results in a more conservative approach to game management (short seasons, restrictive bag limits, and curtailment of hunting methods).
MDIFW’s report notes that in New York State, where self-reported electronic tagging is fully implemented, the compliance rate is 45 – 50%. Can you imagine the repercussions on Maine’s deer, moose and black bear populations if only half of successful hunters reported their harvest? I can and I don’t think it paints a rosy picture.
Tooth collection for aging, reproductive tract collection, antler measurements, weight, sex and location of harvest are vital to effective game management. Electronic tagging of big game animals not only opens the door to non-reporting (poaching), loss of vital tools MDIFW biologists need, it strips away another layer of Maine hunting tradition. Electronic tagging may have some benefits – ease of reporting for hunters and meat care being top in my eyes but do we really need everything to be easy? Should we not have to have skin in the game and work hard to earn our game? Isn’t that part of what makes us who we are?
Is Change Good?
A lot of times, the old statement holds true. Innovations in the firearm and ammunition industry increase our ability to shoot straighter, farther and bolster confidence in our shot. Climbing a well-made and sturdy commercial tree stand in the snow beats ascending slick wooden cleats nailed to tree. Better clothing and footwear keeps us warmer and makes our long sit in the hunting woods more comfortable. But we shouldn’t be so eager to change long-steeped traditions; especially when those traditions define the very heart and soul of who we are as sportsmen, our culture and why we hunt in the first place.