Idaho F&G Proposal-Outlaw Trail Cameras

[JimmyHoffa]

I'd guess if WDFW did allow aerial, then a different group would oppose.
It would only take something like 2 or 3 planes in the same drainage to make the FAA pretty nervous and recommend shutting down aerial help.  Plus, given the season dates, people would be trying to go up in light fog further bugging the FAA.
If you want to use aircraft just look around for WDFW planes and helicopters that seem to like to push animals around during modern.

[lord grizzly]

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.

how is restricting technology in the spirit of fair chase restrict opportunity? I don't se anything about taking cams out of the woods eliminating seasons or there durations? in fact I've seen some on here state that perhaps a answer would be allowing these cameras and shortening seasons to accommodate (makes zero sense to me where that's coming from) but that would indeed be restricting opportunity. last I checked Montana has some pretty liberal hunting seasons and this rule didn't change that.

[Wacenturion]

 

[singleshot12]

There has to be some limits set in place for the use of the growing electronic tech in the hunting world. Kinda like auto-matic bait feeders and heat sensors.  Will it really help our cause if this up coming generation relies on hi-tech equipment to aid in the hunt? IMO anything electronic is worlds apart from fair chase hunting. I think lord grizzy has a good point by looking at the big picture.

[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.

how is restricting technology in the spirit of fair chase restrict opportunity? I don't se anything about taking cams out of the woods eliminating seasons or there durations? in fact I've seen some on here state that perhaps a answer would be allowing these cameras and shortening seasons to accommodate (makes zero sense to me where that's coming from) but that would indeed be restricting opportunity. last I checked Montana has some pretty liberal hunting seasons and this rule didn't change that.

Opportunity: a set of circumstances that makes it possible to do something.

On one hand you argue the use of this tech is not fair chase, substitutes for skill and gives an advantage and then you ask how restricting this tech would restrict opportunity. Obviously if those who use it gain an advantage then opportunity increases. It follows, that by restricting its you restrict opportunity.

And if it doesn't increase advantage in the chase by any measurable amount...and certainly much less than technology you personally are probably already using.... (which is my position) then restricting it still restricts opportunity..that opportunity being...."the set of circumstances that make it possible" to use and enjoy these devices.

You bring up the point about some mentioning shortening seasons so we could use this tech. If this tech gave such an "unfair" chase advantage that it had that kind of impact on the resource then I wouldn't support its use. But in all honesty.. if we wanted to get down to nut cutting about restricting technology that truly impacts those populations....things like rifle deer seasons (especially if there are seasons during the rut/pre-rut) should technically go long before something like those cameras because no hunter needs a study to know the kind of impact that has on the deer herd.... but again.. I would support getting rid of this electronic tech if it would save a weapon/season length... why... because taking those things away would  "restrict" opportunity on a much larger scale.... You see... even though I could care less about hunting with a rifle (and espcially during the rut)...and would absolutely love to have no rifle season during the rut or pre-rut... and would much rather personally use trail cameras during the season.... I would never want to take those wonderful opportunities away from rifle hunters even though it doesn't really do it for me personally.

[lord grizzly]

I did not bring up shortening seasons another member on here did in this thread. i repeated it and said it didn't make sense to me. and "opportunity" is not the same as "advantage" those dots aren't connecting. your opportunity does not decrease with the lack of tech, yes your advantage does. very circular discussion now since that's right back to my fair chase stance. you obviously cant see the forest for the trees on this one and that's ok. im talking about my game department not yours so im pretty happy there looking into getting this on the right track.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

There has to be some limits set in place for the use of the growing electronic tech in the hunting world. Kinda like auto-matic bait feeders and heat sensors.  Will it really help our cause if this up coming generation relies on hi-tech equipment to aid in the hunt? IMO anything electronic is worlds apart from fair chase hunting. I think lord grizzy has a good point by looking at the big picture.

Heat sensing technology is great for hogs. I have personally used automatic bait feeders down in Texas. You should have seen how those big bucks came running in. Every year I'd bag out with the biggest buck on the property in the first five minutes of shooting light... just as soon as the feeder went off.... Of course.. that's not true... I never killed a single big buck in TX.... and I hunted high fence (military base), on private land, on public lands, with feeders, without feeders, using rattling horns, using mock scrapes, hunting funnels, hunted fields, hunted water, hunted with high powered rifles and optics, hunting during the rut etc.... Now.. I did have a lot of big buck pictures.. but none of it ever equated to a big buck.... With smaller bucks and does I had opportunities on those under any/all the above scenarios......perhaps if I hunted an area that was so low pressure that I was the only hunter for several square miles (like I experience bowhunting in the west) some of those tactics might have been ever so slightly more effective... but even then...almost any advantage I have seen from technology is marginal at best..

[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.

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

Ya I realize that hunting effects game populations other wise there would be no seasons at all,Let's say cell connected trail cams are 20 dollars a piece, and every Hunter has one ,You don't think for one minute that it's not gonna effect game harvest or population numbers .Here you better add cell trail cams to this chart , so you can see the big picture.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

I did not bring up shortening seasons another member on here did in this thread. i repeated it and said it didn't make sense to me. and "opportunity" is not the same as "advantage" those dots aren't connecting. your opportunity does not decrease with the lack of tech, yes your advantage does. very circular discussion now since that's right back to my fair chase stance. you obviously cant see the forest for the trees on this one and that's ok. im talking about my game department not yours so im pretty happy there looking into getting this on the right track.

I'm tracking that you didn't personally suggest shortening the season. Read that part again and you will see I mentioned "some"...as in... the people that you were talking about that brought it up. I would agree with you.. it wouldn't make sense to me either.... If these tech devices were having that kind of impact on game that we were looking at reduction in seasons then I'd be in favor of pulling back on the tech as much as required before shortening seasons.

I can see the forest and the trees.... The reality is we are apparently using two different operating definitions for "opportunity"... I'm not sure what your definition is but mine came directly from the dictionary. I'm not saying that to be sarcastic.. I really have no idea how you are defining opportunity and feel that I clearly gave you logical explanation to support that definition.

I can't argue with you that this tech during the season provides some advantage... but I can say from personal experience... if we are talking about the kill... the advantage is marginal...but admittedly...existent (on that note...all technology..especially the stuff that has been around for years... gives me an advantage in killing an animal)....With a camera in the season the biggest advantages I get is knowing that a certain animal I am after is still hanging out in an area... that a certain animal is still alive...that daylight activity has picked up in the area I hunt.... which is hours away from home .....and it helps me know when I should consider taking some time off work (all of which gives some degree of advantage that I wouldn't have otherwise).......This advantage allows me to pursue other opportunities when that animal is no longer there....(those cameras often help me find other opportunities I might be interested in). Honestly, if I was simply trying to kill any legal deer... or even a nice respectable 4x4 each season.... then I wouldn't gain much advantage by having a camera in the season. However, since my hunting time is extremely valuable and I want to maximize it by being in an area that holds the specific type of animal I am looking for... it' is very valuable...and advantageous in that endeavor..... and even with all that help..... I still manage to eat my tag more seasons than not because I lack the type of skill that some of you apparently have....it sounds like for some of you guys taking big bucks with that kind of tech would be as easy as shooting fish in a barrel.

You know.. if I didn't have those cameras in the season... I'd  hunt much closer to home most of the time.. much closer to the city... where I could scout in person more frequently.... I'm sure those rural communities don't really need the large amount of revenue myself and others who use this technology to hunt further from home bring to the area during those seasons....... yes... this is reality..... A law as simple as this would have an undeniable, felt impact on those rural communities.... and that... is yet again... opportunity lost.

[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.

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.

Ya I realize that hunting effects game populations other wise there would be no seasons at all,Let's say cell connected trail cams are 20 dollars a piece, and every Hunter has one ,You don't think for one minute that it's not gonna effect game harvest or population numbers .Here you better add cell trail cams to this chart , so you can see the big picture.

It's so marginal it wouldn't make that chart.

[lord grizzly]

examples pertaining to this discussion from my prospective.

opportunity- hunting season is X day to Y day. I wouldn't propose changing that based on a camera on a tree. your opportunity to peruse game has not decreased.

advantage - remotely tracking an animal via electronic device with the intention to harvest. your advantage over that game animal has increased significantly . again I end up back at my fair chase stance.

if your stance is you believe tech should be made available to make hunting easier your barking up the wrong tree with a guy like me and I doubt you would get much public support with that as a basis of your argument.

[bearpaw]

I simply don't get the unethical advantage of seeing an animal on a cell phone that "results in a lack of fair chase"... 

The simple fact remains, no matter how you spot or find out about an animal, while driving a mountain road, while glassing from a mile away, from talking to other hunters, or while viewing photos coming to your phone from a trail cam miles away, you cannot shoot the animal until you get withing shooting range of that animal. Trail cam photos, even real time photos, do not kill an animal, you must hunt/stalk to within shooting distance. If the hunter fails to get within range quick enough the animal may be gone without even having been spooked, if the hunter fails to be stealthy enough while hunting to get within range the animal may be gone, and then once within range the hunter still has to make the shot count.

Please explain how viewing an animal on a cell phone replaces the hunt, the act of successfully stalking/getting within range to kill the animal. I would think autos, high power optics, horses, long range rifles, gun powder, quality bullets, etc, etc, all have more influence on a hunter actually successfully hunting and killing an animal. It would seem all those items would result in a hunt being less fair chase? 

[hunter399]

For example, consider a hypothetical hunting scenario during firearm season, with a wireless camera set over a food plot. To use real-time data, lets say a photo or video of a buck on that food plot right now, and then stalk over and shoot that buck because I knew he was there right now – that would be an over-reach of technology and crossing of the fair-chase line, in my opinion.

So this example from page 4 is fair chase c'mon .

[DBHAWTHORNE]

examples pertaining to this discussion from my prospective.

opportunity- hunting season is X day to Y day. I wouldn't propose changing that based on a camera on a tree. your opportunity to peruse game has not decreased.

advantage - remotely tracking an animal via electronic device with the intention to harvest. your advantage over that game animal has increased significantly . again I end up back at my fair chase stance.

if your stance is you believe tech should be made available to make hunting easier your barking up the wrong tree with a guy like me and I doubt you would get much public support with that as a basis of your argument.

Tech should be made available for people's enjoyment and the tech we are talking about should be made available because it provides a marginal advantage at best and will have no negative impact on the game.... The hypocrisy of your statement about tech is stupefying. I 100% know you use all kinds of tech to make your hunts easier...to make your hunts possible... but then you speak as if your above using tech to make hunting easier....you want to argue about how some certain type of tech (which does not provide near the advantage of technology you already use) should not be allowed because it's not fair chase.... all the while using technology that gives you a much, much, much greater advantage over the animal than the tech we are discussing ever would.

[KFhunter]

I simply don't get the unethical advantage of seeing an animal on a cell phone that "results in a lack of fair chase"... 

The simple fact remains, no matter how you spot or find out about an animal, while driving a mountain road, while glassing from a mile away, from talking to other hunters, or while viewing photos coming to your phone from a trail cam miles away, you cannot shoot the animal until you get withing shooting range of that animal. Trail cam photos, even real time photos, do not kill an animal, you must hunt/stalk to within shooting distance. If the hunter fails to get within range quick enough the animal may be gone without even having been spooked, if the hunter fails to be stealthy enough while hunting to get within range the animal may be gone, and then once within range the hunter still has to make the shot count.

Please explain how viewing an animal on a cell phone replaces the hunt, the act of successfully stalking/getting within range to kill the animal. I would think autos, high power optics, horses, long range rifles, gun powder, quality bullets, etc, etc, all have more influence on a hunter actually successfully hunting and killing an animal. It would seem all those items would result in a hunt being less fair chase? 

If I get a text on my phone at 3 am I groan, roll out of bed, grab the .223, flip on the light, blast the coyote off the bait pile, climb back in bed and wait for another text.






I don't actually do this, but it would be a dang good idea if only I had cellular coverage in my hay field