Idaho F&G Proposal-Outlaw Trail Cameras

[Machias]

Looks like the Idaho Fish and Game is proposing to outlaw trail cameras (especially, but not limited to wireless or live stream cameras), for Big Game animals. 

[elkinrutdrivemenuts]

Any link, I'm interested in reading more. 

[JimmyHoffa]

must be a family of squatch migrating through Idaho.

Is the main complaint coming from hunters?

[Bob33]

From last year: http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2016/nov/18/idaho-fish-and-game-board-dumps-proposed-rule-chan/

Commissioners agreed to work on a future rule that could restrict the use of trail cameras that can transmit live footage to devices like cellphones or computers. Similar to rules restricting the use of aircraft to locate game, the intent of the rule would be to make sure people aren’t using remote cameras as same-day hunting aids.

Deputy Director Sharon Kiefer told commissioners that Colorado and Montana have adopted such rules. New commissioner Jerry Meyers of Salmon, a retired judge, warned enforcing such a rule will be difficult. He said conservation officers would need search warrants to seize cameras and the devises they send images to and predicted that prosecutors would be reluctant to take cases based on the rule.

“If officers can’t put a clear case together, the prosecutor is not going to want to take it,” he said. ”I think we need to have something fairly tight.”

Despite the difficulty, commissioners said they must do something to combat the increasing use of technology in hunting.

“This has to be addressed,” Corkill said. “I’m not sure how to do it.”

They hope to work on the rule beginning next spring to have it ready for consideration by the 2018 Legislature.

[hunter399]

I'm sure the main reason is the fact that you can see what's there in real time ,and show up there in 15 minutes and shoot animals ,doesn't seem like fair chase to me.

[Wacenturion]

Yeah, penalize the majority for a few that might abuse something.  Pretty typical way to approach things.

[Wacenturion]

I'm sure the main reason is the fact that you can see what's there in real time ,and show up there in 15 minutes and shoot animals ,doesn't seem like fair chase to me.

That's probably their thinking, however one could argue trail cams and patterning isn't fair chase as well.  In my mind pretty hard to prove one is using it for the perceived illegal whatever activity.  I use mine for several reasons, monitoring for trespass, wildlife usage on mineral and feed sites, condition of wildlife, food plot monitoring, etc.  Hunting advantage isn't really on the list.

[Machias]

I'm sure the main reason is the fact that you can see what's there in real time ,and show up there in 15 minutes and shoot animals ,doesn't seem like fair chase to me.

I realize this is what people think can happen, but it is not reality.  You're not going to receive a photo and then go harvest an animal it just doesn't work that way.  I have wireless cameras on my bear baits.  I get a photo within 10 seconds of it triggering, I'd have to jump in my truck and drive 45 miles, get out and sneak in undetected.  It's not realistic.  The animal is long gone or will hear you coming into the camera location.  Deer and elk are even more mobile.  What it does do is save tremendous amounts of gas.  That should make the environmental Nazis happy.  I don't have to drive an hour to see if my bait has been hit, I know one way or the other....it saves a LOT of gas.

[elkinrutdrivemenuts]

I haven't found a spot that live feed would even be possible, except maybe behind my house. 

[hunter399]

I use trail cams too ,but I'm not useing cell connected cams though ,mainly cause I'm not gonna have it stolen.But if your in the area,or camping near by,or live close to your cams,and can be there in short time,this doesn't sound like fair Chase to me.

[hunter399]

I'm sure the main reason is the fact that you can see what's there in real time ,and show up there in 15 minutes and shoot animals ,doesn't seem like fair chase to me.

I realize this is what people think can happen, but it is not reality.  You're not going to receive a photo and then go harvest an animal it just doesn't work that way.  I have wireless cameras on my bear baits.  I get a photo within 10 seconds of it triggering, I'd have to jump in my truck and drive 45 miles, get out and sneak in undetected.  It's not realistic.  The animal is long gone or will hear you coming into the camera location.  Deer and elk are even more mobile.  What it does do is save tremendous amounts of gas.  That should make the environmental Nazis happy.  I don't have to drive an hour to see if my bait has been hit, I know one way or the other....it saves a LOT of gas.

If you have a cam next to a clear cut,or open area ,and you show up 20 mins after animal has been there ,it's gonna be pretty easy to spot said animal.

[Machias]

That's unlikely to happen, but even if it did, certainly not enough frequency to ban them from use.

[Stein]

That's unlikely to happen, but even if it did, certainly not enough frequency to ban them from use.

It doesn't sound like they are trying to ban the use of all game cams:

Commissioners agreed to work on a future rule that could restrict the use of trail cameras that can transmit live footage to devices like cellphones or computers.

[lord grizzly]

technology certainly isn't going to get worse on these. I'm all for maintaining fair chase. I think Idaho F&G is on the right track here. keep these remote surveillance cameras out of the woods. knock yourself out on private property with um

[Magnum_Willys]

Call me old school but not a big fan of people taking my pic when Im out scouting public land or pseudo staking out "their" waterhole with bunch of cams.  On the otherhand its a fun outdoor activity that encourages wildlife enjoyment year round so thats a good thing.  Overall I don't like cams out there but don't want to stop using em.