Idaho F&G Proposal-Outlaw Trail Cameras

[lord grizzly]

Since I live a block away from a regional f&g office I'm going to go talk with them and not be very supportive of losing the use of my trail camera's but am going to be very supportive of the no electronic communications law.

Aren't the trail cameras in question electronic communications?

[luvmystang67]

I'm in support of no more rifles, you know to get back to the good ol days.

Muzzleloader and archery only would be a great proposal.

 

[Stein]

It's an interesting conversation and in my mind it is about what is historical and accepted.  Game cams have been used for many years now and hunters are used to them and generally accept their use.

Drones aren't used much and hunters I believe generally would agree that they would provide a new benefit and most probably would agree with them being banned.  But, if you let them be used for 10-20 years, then the new generation would likely flip out if you tried to pull them.

I believe the current rules have more to do with history than a defensible, logical argument.  An example I would use is that I can march in a 10 string pack train into a wilderness area, but if I take a two wheel game cart, that is a no-no.  It would be hard to argue that 10 horses are treading lighter than a game cart, but horses have been in the wilderness for a couple hundred years and are accepted as part of the American wilderness.

Thus, I am in support of having a prompt discussion on new technology before it gets embedded into the hunting culture.

[lord grizzly]

Be careful stien, sound to reasonable about addressing technology and you'll be labeled a right snatching ,jealous ,elitist

[Machias]

Guess everyone will just have to move to Idaho then and become residents. 

nah you don't want to come here. cant even use trail cams. stay in Washington its way better

 

I had an Idaho resident let me know what they thought about trail cameras.  Had a bear take my camera down, which wasn't the bad part, somehow it was able to remove, and chew into tiny pieces, my SD card.  Seriously bummed me out.  3 hour drive one way and it was out for 2 months.  I was so excited to get the photos....

That sucks.....I'm hoping it wasn't one of your Spartan cameras.  Sounds like it may have been from your description....sorry to hear that.

Nope, cheap $30 camera...which is still working.  No cell service in that area.

[Machias]

Be careful stien, sound to reasonable about addressing technology and you'll be labeled a right snatching ,jealous ,elitist

Or voice support for them and you'll be labeled a unethical slob hunter who doesn't care about fair chase or the sport of hunting or the animals we pursue.

[bearpaw]

Generally there are two primary reasons for new restrictions, biological management or hunter image/ethics.

1. Regarding biological reasoning, I don't know of any studies proving cameras that send photos result in increased harvest or the need to prohibit use due to over harvest? Are there any studies showing a biological need to prohibit use?

2. Regarding hunter image/ethics, I don't get it, how is a camera sending a photo any more unfair than spotting the same animal from miles away with a 60x spotter or using a camera with high powered telephoto lens? Either way you know the animal is there but you still have to stalk within shooting range without spooking the animal and successfully make the shot, provided the animal is still where the photo was taken or where it was spotted. As any seasoned hunter knows, many times an animal will simply not be where is was seen only 30 minutes ago by the time you get the spot where it was seen, unless you were lucky enough for the animal to bed down. So I would suggest that a spotting scope or good binoculars are actually more unfair than a camera which sends photos from only one small location. With a spotter or binos you can scan across the countryside, you can scan entire hillsides, you can watch animals move along, and you can see where an animal beds down and then go after a bedded down animal! Additionally almost all modern rifles are capable of shooting accurately from 300 to 500 or more yards. Many hunters shoot across canyons and take other long distance shots. In summary for those who feel a camera sending a photo from one small location is an unfair advantage or unethical I seriously urge them to reconsider the use of high powered optics and modern rifles in hunting. It's quite obvious these other items provide hunters a much greater advantage in hunting.

I do not own a trail cam that sends photos but I might like to own one some day in the future!

[White Pass Outfitters]

I would be careful on what you say about Whats unethical to use, they don't need anymore Dumb ass ideas. We are already dealing with a lot of non hunters in our game department and as the years go on it just going to get worse.   

[bearpaw]

I would be careful on what you say about Whats unethical to use, they don't need anymore Dumb ass ideas. We are already dealing with a lot of non hunters in our game department and as the years go on it just going to get worse.

I'm not opposed to any of the items mentioned, I am simply pointing out the hypocrisy! I would think all the commissioners have had thoughts regarding long range optics and guns, the weight of hunting rifles is already restricted in idaho, this has been an issue in the past.

[White Pass Outfitters]

Bearpaw doesnt wa have the same weight restriction on your rifles ?

[White Pass Outfitters]

I have been waiting for the game departments to say no cameras in the wilderness due to being a mechanical device. Not sure of  how they determine whats mechanical or not. I do know the FS told me no coma-longs in the wilderness a few yrs back. I had to laugh about that one.       

[lord grizzly]

I'm pretty sure fish and game will do the right thing here just as Montana and other states have done. The precedent is there and I fully support limiting this surveillance equipment on our public lands. Private property I say go nuts.

I still find it interesting the guys that can get behind the communications regulations but not the camera one. What's the difference if I text you a pic of a deer while we're hunting or a camera does. It's all electronic communication isn't it?

[lord grizzly]

I have been waiting for the game departments to say no cameras in the wilderness due to being a mechanical device. Not sure of  how they determine whats mechanical or not. I do know the FS told me no coma-longs in the wilderness a few yrs back. I had to laugh about that one.       

You already need a permit to film in the wilderness. I imagine it would be a pretty easy thing to add trail cams to that law

[bearpaw]

I have been waiting for the game departments to say no cameras in the wilderness due to being a mechanical device. Not sure of  how they determine whats mechanical or not. I do know the FS told me no coma-longs in the wilderness a few yrs back. I had to laugh about that one.       

You already need a permit to film in the wilderness. I imagine it would be a pretty easy thing to add trail cams to that law

only to commercially film 

[bearpaw]

I have been waiting for the game departments to say no cameras in the wilderness due to being a mechanical device. Not sure of  how they determine whats mechanical or not. I do know the FS told me no coma-longs in the wilderness a few yrs back. I had to laugh about that one.       

You already need a permit to film in the wilderness. I imagine it would be a pretty easy thing to add trail cams to that law

It's really no different than your position, you are not opposed to the things you use but want to ban the things other hunters use!