Idaho F&G Proposal-Outlaw Trail Cameras

[Wacenturion]

For what it's worth, this is the real enjoyment I get from my cellular cams. First fawn on the property that I've seen.  Mama looks sleek and healthy from all the feed available the last two months.  I 've seen what the local deer look like in comparison.

Picture taken about an hour ago.  Didn't see it until now, as I was too busy playing here .

You have planted food plots to attract wildlife and now they are visiting your property, I know that as soon as you see a big buck on your cell phone you are going to drop what you are doing and drive as fast as you can to get there and shoot that buck. By golly you are cheating me out of opportunity plus that's not fair chase in my eyes, I want to ban your food plots and your trail cam because I think you are destroying the image of hunting. Shame on you! 

Yep, for sure.  I was actually considering jumping in my car and driving 6 hrs so I could get a better look at that fawn.

[lord grizzly]

It's just very entertaining that you guys sit there and say "don't you tell me what fair chase is" When the very organization that created the concept holds the same view on the issue. A stance with integrity would be to just come out with it and say I don't believe in fair chase hunting, as I'm convinced  by many comments on here that is the case for a few of you. Not cherry pick what makes you sound good on the internet

[Machias]

I'll save you the trouble, you can borrow my wireless trail camera, that way you don't have to spend your money.  Heck I'll tell you what.  I will show you exactly where my bear bait is.  I'll add your e-mail address to the system so you are alerted the instant a bear walks in.  You can go try and kill it.  $100 bucks you can't kill a bear off of my bait!

I'll take that bet, no I won't win that $100 bucks but by golly I'll kill the next bear that walks in 

 

[KFhunter]

It's just very entertaining that you guys sit there and say "don't you tell me what fair chase is" When the very organization that created the concept holds the same view on the issue. A stance with integrity would be to just come out with it and say I don't believe in fair chase hunting, as I'm convinced  by many comments on here that is the case for a few of you. Not cherry pick what makes you sound good on the internet

B&C uses the term "Conservationist" over and over in their fair chase statement.  wireless cams effect conservation because it eases traffic in the woods, less people checking cams less often give the animals more breathing room.

[Machias]

More environmentally friendly as well, less green house gases....if you believe in that sort of thing.

[lord grizzly]

It's just very entertaining that you guys sit there and say "don't you tell me what fair chase is" When the very organization that created the concept holds the same view on the issue. A stance with integrity would be to just come out with it and say I don't believe in fair chase hunting, as I'm convinced  by many comments on here that is the case for a few of you. Not cherry pick what makes you sound good on the internet

B&C uses the term "Conservationist" over and over in their fair chase statement.  wireless cams effect conservation because it eases traffic in the woods, less people checking cams less often give the animals more breathing room.

No it's very clearly outlined. I have a cut and paste from there web site a couple pages back.

[lord grizzly]

If you've submitted a trophy for the book recently you e actually read and agreed that you didn't use any devices such as we're discussing to harvest it

[Machias]

How about instead of a time problem since most guys are hung up about the real time photo, we stipulate that the camera cannot be set up and used within a certain distance...say 45 miles from the receiver?  Would that make you feel better?  Take at least an hour to get there....or would 100 miles be suitable?

[Machias]

If you've submitted a trophy for the book recently you e actually read and agreed that you didn't use any devices such as we're discussing to harvest it

And if I kill a bear tonight on my bait I can sign that and NOT be falsifying the records.  No different than if I had a cell phone or a 2 way radio in my possession.   Just because I have this camera at this site and took a photo of a B&C bear last week, does not disqualify this bear.

[KFhunter]

If you've submitted a trophy for the book recently you e actually read and agreed that you didn't use any devices such as we're discussing to harvest it

Thanks for that, I found it.  It is pretty clear cut.  If someone is a trophy hunter seeking to have an animal submitted to B&C a wireless trail cam would invalidate it.
Not all hunters are trophy hunters, a lot just hunt for meat.  Should a trophy hunters self imposed rules/ethics via B&C become the law for all hunters?


I think not.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

It's just very entertaining that you guys sit there and say "don't you tell me what fair chase is" When the very organization that created the concept holds the same view on the issue. A stance with integrity would be to just come out with it and say I don't believe in fair chase hunting, as I'm convinced  by many comments on here that is the case for a few of you. Not cherry pick what makes you sound good on the internet

If we go by their original definition of fair chase: "the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit and taking of any free-ranging wild, native north American big game animals in a manner that does not give the hunter an improper advantage over such animals." I think all points previously discussed remain valid within that definition. If you want us to admit that these devices do not qualify as "fair chase" for entering into the record book then I don't think anyone disagrees with that being a fact...... However, if you want to argue that these devices provide an improper advantage as compared to other ones that are called fair chase under that same definition then it's really hard for you to logically defend it.

You will also notice that the definition is very subjective to whoever happens to be in control of making the rules for the club at any one time. In other words.. it's subject to individual/group agendas not honoring the spirit and intent of the definition.....However, regardless of the influence individuals have played over the years we clearly see the original definition...we know what type of technology fell under that definition at that time....and we know that even that antiquated technology (by todays standards)...provides a far greater advantage in the actual taking of these animals than the piece of technology we are discussing.

[KFhunter]

How about instead of a time problem since most guys are hung up about the real time photo, we stipulate that the camera cannot be set up and used within a certain distance...say 45 miles from the receiver?  Would that make you feel better?  Take at least an hour to get there....or would 100 miles be suitable?

I liked my idea better, program a time delay on the camera so it doesn't transmit the photo's for 24 hours.  I say 24 hours because that's the airplane time frame.  It still saves people from having to physically pull SD cards all the time, and they get to see that their camera isn't pointing at the dirt or sky.

[Wacenturion]

It's just very entertaining that you guys sit there and say "don't you tell me what fair chase is" When the very organization that created the concept holds the same view on the issue. A stance with integrity would be to just come out with it and say I don't believe in fair chase hunting, as I'm convinced  by many comments on here that is the case for a few of you. Not cherry pick what makes you sound good on the internet

Boy for someone who doesn't personally know any of us, you sure are certain we are something you have pictured us to be because we hold a different opinion than you.  Boone and Crockett....good organization I guess.  Personally not interested in shaping my hunting activites to perhaps land in their books.  Not me, with the exception of when I was a young man back in the 70's.  I shot a Longrifle (ML) book mule deer which I submitted.  I rather doubt that you will meet people with more personal integrity and as you put it "fair chase" in mind than many of the people in this discussion.

Funny when pressed for your ways of doing things, you deflect with some comment questioning other's integrity.  Just because you and your highly regarded B&B see it a certain way, doesn't necessarily means it meets the muster with everyone in the hunting arena.  We all have opinions about what we like and don't like in the realm of hunting, but for the most part we are willing to enjoy things our way while accepting the way others do it within the legal limits.

As I previously mentioned, I have watched hunters canabalize each other over my 30 year career with WDFW.  As BP stated so well, some are just thrilled to restrict your opportunity to enhance theirs because of their views on how the hunting world should operate.  That is until their opportunity is impacted.

If a proposed regulation or law is scientifically based and necessary for the proper management of species, so be it.  If it's based in factless opinion then it's not a valid way to regulate.  Too much of that alteady, don't need any more.   

Oh and for the record you must be phychic....I do live in western Washington.  Sounds like you are you inferring something negative.  How cute.

[lord grizzly]

It's just very entertaining that you guys sit there and say "don't you tell me what fair chase is" When the very organization that created the concept holds the same view on the issue. A stance with integrity would be to just come out with it and say I don't believe in fair chase hunting, as I'm convinced  by many comments on here that is the case for a few of you. Not cherry pick what makes you sound good on the internet

If we go by their original definition of fair chase: "the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit and taking of any free-ranging wild, native north American big game animals in a manner that does not give the hunter an improper advantage over such animals." I think all points previously discussed remain valid within that definition. If you want us to admit that these devices do not qualify as "fair chase" for entering into the record book then I don't think anyone disagrees with that being a fact...... However, if you want to argue that these devices provide an improper advantage as compared to other ones that are called fair chase under that same definition then it's really hard for you to logically defend it.

You will also notice that the definition is very subjective to whoever happens to be in control of making the rules for the club at any one time. In other words.. it's subject to individual/group agendas not honoring the spirit and intent of the definition.....However, regardless of the influence individuals have played over the years we clearly see the original definition...we know what type of technology fell under that definition at that time....and we know that even that antiquated technology (by todays standards)...provides a far greater advantage in the actual taking of these animals than the piece of technology we are discussing.

Of course 2017 is different than 1917 and the organization has evolved with times as all need to. I was really pointing out how funny it was bearpaw using the term in a sarcastic manner as if it was just my elitist idea and not realizing he doesn't even line up with the creators of the concept.

[lord grizzly]

Doesn't surprise me though. Its obvious that fair chase is t a top priority for that guide by his comments here