I’ve never complained about a hunter taking a picture with 10 friends and family, nor about camps that have 15 buddies spread out across a unit spotting for their once in a lifetime LE hunt.
We created the mess with the management model, deal with the consequences. I know it’s not the same with regard to outfitted hunts but the sentiment behind both scenarios is the driving force.
More than anything else, I refuse to criticize hunters for engaging legally. There’s as much argument for LR hunting as there is against. My ethics aren’t yours, I respect that. Keep yours to yourself and those looking to you for direction.
If Adam says it was legit, it means to his knowledge it was legit. Don’t inject your version of what’s ok. Congratulate the hunter and move on.
You can't just graze past the outfitted part.
A lot of us in here are licensed by the same agency you are, and as such we have to play by the rules that agency, or others lay out. Everyone of us has things we find stupid, meaningless, or useless, yet, we endorse the check, that's the way it is.
Adam openly admitting here says HE didn't do diligence on paid spotters. And like it or not, he filmed it, he published it, it's on him.
You want the paycheck, or fame, the price is knowing the law.
You want to film a hunt, then you also own it if it goes badly. The high fives, fame, IG pics, forum ?, etc, etc, etc that come with that bull, carry the negative when you gut shut it on camera.
The hunter said he wasn't an elk hunter, thus a novice. The guide, nor frankly Adam can make that claim. It wasn't an of shoulder shot. Elk was laying, they had time to tripod up, you even here Adam(or cameraman) as "you on him"?
The professionals failed their client. They deserve the heat. They maximized the chances of what happened, happening.
I'm not questioning ethics of the hunter.
I am challenging the professionals.
You hire an electrician, if he burns down a house, it's on him, not the client