Idaho F&G Proposal-Outlaw Trail Cameras

[Rainier10]

Here is an excerpt talking about the Montana law from the Outdoor Life article Bob33 posted.

"A Montana wildlife law enforcement official confirmed that the driving force behind the law was “for fair chase reasons, not game management reasons.” And, their regulations state the following:

“It is illegal for a person to possess or use in the field any electronic or camera device whose purpose is to scout the location of game animals or relay the information on a game animal’s location or movement during any Commission-adopted hunting season.”"

So they don't think that it has anything to game management, it's an ethics thing.

[lord grizzly]

Here is an excerpt talking about the Montana law from the Outdoor Life article Bob33 posted.

"A Montana wildlife law enforcement official confirmed that the driving force behind the law was “for fair chase reasons, not game management reasons.” And, their regulations state the following:

“It is illegal for a person to possess or use in the field any electronic or camera device whose purpose is to scout the location of game animals or relay the information on a game animal’s location or movement during any Commission-adopted hunting season.”"

So they don't think that it has anything to game management, it's an ethics thing.

I think that's what ive been saying....

[Rainier10]

And what I have been saying is if it affecting game populations I am open to discussions about limiting the use of these new technologies.  If it is a "I don't hunt that way and I don't think anyone should hunt different than I do" then I have an issue with taking away the ability to use these cameras.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

And what I have been saying is if it affecting game populations I am open to discussions about limiting the use of these new technologies.  If it is a "I don't hunt that way and I don't think anyone should hunt different than I do" then I have an issue with taking away the ability to use these cameras.

Exactly...that's what many of these restrictions come down to.... It's our own fellow hunters trying to define what the hunt is for another hunter.... it's the aesthetics... that's 99% of the issue over things like baiting.

[boneaddict]

Question to your point.  How could you ever monitor that one factor in its relationship to harvest or population trends.  How could you differentiate it with say the other 20 factors effecting populations......doesn't there have to be some sort of thought, discussion into its logic, or not.

Quick example......the muledeer population in the Methow.  What factor led to the demise of the herd....... prove it.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

Question to your point.  How could you ever monitor that one factor in its relationship to harvest or population trends.  How could you differentiate it with say the other 20 factors effecting populations......doesn't there have to be some sort of thought, discussion into its logic, or not.

Quick example......the muledeer population in the Methow.  What factor led to the demise of the herd....... prove it.

A well structured study could determine the impact.

[fishngamereaper]

How about range finder scopes, or use of NV or IR to follow game until legal shooting light. New technology, but ethical/ increased harvest opportunity.  Give people an inch they take a mile. Taking the " hunt" out of hunting.

[hunter399]

And what I have been saying is if it affecting game populations I am open to discussions about limiting the use of these new technologies.  If it is a "I don't hunt that way and I don't think anyone should hunt different than I do" then I have an issue with taking away the ability to use these cameras.

HUNTING ETHICS. ... FAIR CHASE, as defined by the Boone and Crockett Club, is the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit and taking of any free-ranging wild, native North American big game animal in a manner that does not give the hunter an improper advantage over such animals.

The Rules of Fair Chase

The term “Fair Chase” shall not include the taking of animals under the following conditions:

Helpless in a trap, deep snow or water, or on ice.
From any power vehicle or power boat.
By “jacklighting” or shining at night.
By the use of any tranquilizers or poisons.
While inside escape-proof fenced enclosures.
By the use of any power vehicle or power boats for herding or driving animals, including use of aircraft to land alongside or to communicate with or direct a hunter on the ground.
By the use of electronic devices for attracting, locating or pursuing game or guiding the hunter to such game, or by the use of a bow or arrow to which any electronic device is attached with the exception of lighted nocks and recording devices that cast no light towards the target and do not aid in rangefinding, sighting or shooting the bow.
Any other condition considered by the Board of Directors as unacceptable.
The fair chase concept does, however, extend beyond the hunt itself; it is an attitude and a way of life based in a deep-seated respect for wildlife, for the environment, and for other individuals who share the bounty of this vast continent’s natural resources.

Some people have more respect for wildlife than others I guess ,as for it effecting game populations ,it will over time when cell trail cams become more affordable for every sportsman.This attitude that it's not effecting game populations now so why worry about is not good , that is part of the problem with wildlife management.Cause we wait ,then the populations take a lot of years to rebound.

[boneaddict]

too many variables, sometimes common sense has to come into play. 

I think Montana handled it wisely.

[bobcat]

Studies won't and can't prove anything, in my opinion. At least not the kind of study that would be economically feasible to conduct.

Most hunting regulations are going to be based on what people in general feel is right or wrong, or fair chase, or not.

I bet if spotting game from the air and then communiticating the location to a hunter on the ground were legal, it would not have a significant impact on deer or elk populations, or even if it did, it would be difficult or impossible to prove.

So why not change the laws regarding spotting game from the air so that is no longer illegal?

[Rainier10]

Question to your point.  How could you ever monitor that one factor in its relationship to harvest or population trends.  How could you differentiate it with say the other 20 factors effecting populations......doesn't there have to be some sort of thought, discussion into its logic, or not.

Quick example......the muledeer population in the Methow.  What factor led to the demise of the herd....... prove it.

I agree there are a ton of factors.  The WDFW is supposed to be monitoring the herd health and adjusting season dates, permit allotment, weapon restrictions and rule changes in an effort to maintain healthy numbers while maintaining the habitat for the animals and opportunity for the hunting community.

If they say that the population is down, like in the Methow and they say the way to fix it is to eliminate doe permits, go to permit only for bucks during the modern firearm season, eliminate any late season archery hunts and eliminate the use of trail cameras during the hunting season I would be willing to listen to that argument.

If it is a conversation of ethics and "I don't hunt like that and I don't want anyone to hunt different than I do", then you are getting onto a slippery slope.

[lord grizzly]

too many variables, sometimes common sense has to come into play. 

I think Montana handled it wisely.

one of the most intelligible replies in this thread yet.

[Rainier10]

And what I have been saying is if it affecting game populations I am open to discussions about limiting the use of these new technologies.  If it is a "I don't hunt that way and I don't think anyone should hunt different than I do" then I have an issue with taking away the ability to use these cameras.

HUNTING ETHICS. ... FAIR CHASE, as defined by the Boone and Crockett Club, is the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit and taking of any free-ranging wild, native North American big game animal in a manner that does not give the hunter an improper advantage over such animals.

The Rules of Fair Chase

The term “Fair Chase” shall not include the taking of animals under the following conditions:

Helpless in a trap, deep snow or water, or on ice.
From any power vehicle or power boat.
By “jacklighting” or shining at night.
By the use of any tranquilizers or poisons.
While inside escape-proof fenced enclosures.
By the use of any power vehicle or power boats for herding or driving animals, including use of aircraft to land alongside or to communicate with or direct a hunter on the ground.
By the use of electronic devices for attracting, locating or pursuing game or guiding the hunter to such game, or by the use of a bow or arrow to which any electronic device is attached with the exception of lighted nocks and recording devices that cast no light towards the target and do not aid in rangefinding, sighting or shooting the bow.
Any other condition considered by the Board of Directors as unacceptable.
The fair chase concept does, however, extend beyond the hunt itself; it is an attitude and a way of life based in a deep-seated respect for wildlife, for the environment, and for other individuals who share the bounty of this vast continent’s natural resources.

Some people have more respect for wildlife than others I guess ,as for it effecting game populations ,it will over time when cell trail cams become more affordable for every sportsman.This attitude that it's not effecting game populations now so why worry about is not good , that is part of the problem with wildlife management.Cause we wait ,then the populations take a lot of years to rebound.

You do realize that hunting effects game populations correct?  Guns, muzzleloaders and archery equipment are all used to take animals thus effecting game populations.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

Studies won't and can't prove anything, in my opinion. At least not the kind of study that would be economically feasible to conduct.

Most hunting regulations are going to be based on what people in general feel is right or wrong, or fair chase, or not.

I bet if spotting game from the air and then communiticating the location to a hunter on the ground were legal, it would not have a significant impact on deer or elk populations, or even if it did, it would be difficult or impossible to prove.

So why not change the laws regarding spotting game from the air so that is no longer illegal?

I agree with you... it probably wouldn't have a significant impact because it simply wouldn't be within the financial reach of most people. If anything it shouldn't be allowed because of the impact it would have on the experience of other hunters.

The problem with leaving it up to people's feelings is that the majority will always define the aesthetics of  the hunt/experience for everyone else. The average whitetail bowhunter hunting in the mountains of NE WA is likely to get after things much differently than the guy who does spot and stalk in open country or calls in elk with a bugle, or walks around in the woods looking for deer during the rifle season. However, those other groups are more than happy to place restrictions on things they don't use because it doesn't meet their own personal definition of "hunting".......... Meanwhile that bowhunter may think plinking animals at several hundred yards with a rifle and optics doesn't require all that much skill.... who gets to decide... if we go off feelings I guess it's good to be in the majority.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

I will say this.. there are certain laws you guys could pass that can guarantee someone like me will move out of the state. A Montana type game cam law would be one of them. You might think that is great...and perhaps it would be in your lifetime... but eventually you too will lose the support for the things you enjoy and someone like me who would be that additional voice supporting your rights won't be there...... hopefully for your own interests it won't be in your generation (I feel sorry for the next generations though)...If there is going to be a state where we see big restrictions on hunting in the future then I'd have to think WA would be near the top of the list... aside from the crazy politics on the west side we seem to have so many hunters more than willing to join the side of those who want to restrict opportunity.