HB2740 amends Section 2.33 of the Illinois Wildlife Code to create a narrow exception to the general prohibition on using unmanned aircraft in hunting. Under the bill, drones or other unmanned aerial vehicles would be allowed for tracking wounded animals during the course of hunting. The bill also preserves existing exceptions for waterfowl hunting under federal rules and for certain utility inspections, while leaving the rest of the Wildlife Code’s restrictions on taking, pursuing, or harassing wildlife by vehicle or aircraft in place.
In practical terms, the measure would authorize hunters to use drone technology as a recovery tool after an animal has been wounded, rather than as a means of taking game. It does not broadly legalize drone-assisted hunting, and it does not alter the many other prohibitions in the section governing firearms, lighting, distances from dwellings, property access, or other hunting methods. The bill would therefore modify the Wildlife Code in a limited way by carving out a specific lawful use for unmanned aerial vehicles.
Impact
The bill would amend 520 ILCS 5/2.33 of the Illinois Wildlife Code, which lists hunting and wildlife-taking prohibitions, by adding an explicit exception for the use of unmanned aerial vehicles to track wounded animals during hunting. This would change current law that generally bars taking, pursuing, or intentionally harassing wildlife by means of a vehicle or unmanned aircraft, while keeping the broader ban intact for other uses. Hunters, landowners, and wildlife enforcement officials would be the primary parties affected, as the bill clarifies when drone use is permitted in the field.
Sentiment
The available record shows the bill as introduced, with no committee transcript, vote tally, or recorded floor debate provided. Based on the caption and text, the measure appears to be a targeted modernization proposal aimed at allowing a limited, practical use of drone technology in hunting. Because there is no voting history or discussion excerpt, the overall sentiment cannot be measured directly from the record, but the bill’s narrow scope suggests it is framed as a technical or efficiency-related change rather than a broad policy shift.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely to be whether allowing drones to track wounded animals is a reasonable recovery aid or an opening to broader drone use in hunting. Supporters would likely emphasize humane recovery of wounded game and improved efficiency, while opponents may worry about enforcement difficulties, privacy, fair-chase hunting principles, or unintended expansion of aerial surveillance in the field. The bill text itself limits the exception to wounded-animal tracking, which appears designed to address those concerns by keeping the general prohibition on unmanned aircraft in place.