Relating to use of dog and/or drones for tracking or locating mortally wounded deer, elk, turkey, wild boar or bear
HB2043 amends West Virginia’s wildlife code to allow a hunter who reasonably believes they have mortally wounded a deer, elk, turkey, wild boar, or bear to use a leashed dog, an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV/drone), or both to track and locate the animal. The bill also allows the hunter to use a dog handler and/or a licensed UAV operator to assist in the tracking process, while requiring the handler to maintain physical control of the leashed dog and limiting use to one leashed dog per handler.
The bill treats the act of tracking a mortally wounded animal with a dog or UAV as hunting, meaning the hunter, handler, and UAV operator are subject to applicable hunting laws and licensing requirements. The hunter must generally accompany the dog handler, and only the hunter may kill the animal once located, unless the hunter is physically unable to accompany the handler, in which case the handler may be designated to make the kill. The animal counts toward the bag limit of the hunter who fired the initial shot. If tracking services are provided for profit, the dog handler or UAV operator must be licensed as an outfitter or guide; UAV operators tracking on property they do not own or lease must also hold FAA Part 107 certification. The Director of the Division of Natural Resources must publish a public list of licensed providers each year.
HB2043 changes state wildlife law by expressly authorizing the use of leashed dogs and drones to recover mortally wounded game animals and by defining that recovery activity as hunting for regulatory purposes. It creates new compliance requirements for paid tracking services, ties drone use to federal FAA certification when operating off the operator’s own or leased property, and updates the outfitter/guide licensing framework to cover these services. The bill affects hunters, dog handlers, UAV operators, outfitters, guides, and the Division of Natural Resources.
The bill appears to have received broad support overall, passing the House 88-10 and the Senate 31-1 after an amendment was rejected in the House. The vote pattern suggests the core proposal was generally well received, with only limited opposition. No committee transcript is available, so the record reflects support primarily through the strong final votes rather than detailed debate.
The main points of contention appear to have involved the scope of the authorization and related regulatory requirements, as shown by the rejected House amendment. Likely areas of concern included whether drones should be allowed in hunting-related recovery, how much control a handler must maintain over a dog, who may legally kill the animal once found, and whether paid tracking services should require outfitter/guide licensing and FAA certification. The narrow Senate opposition suggests some lingering concern, but not enough to block passage.