Idaho on the verge of outlawing

[hughjorgan]

So does Idaho have data that supports an increase take of critters due to cell cameras or is everyone just hypothetically crying the sky is falling and we must do something? This whole issue seems to be trying to solve a problem that doesn’t seem to exist but there is a vocal minority that wants to be the ethics police for everyone.

There's some data out there I'd have to dig up again
Quite a few articles on the issue as well.
This isn't a new issue..it's just something that needs to be addressed before it gets out of control.
Is their a negative opinion of states that already have restrictions like Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Montana and Kansas just to name a few ...

Idahos data doesn’t bear out what all the hypothetical conjecture is saying this is giving hunters an unfair advantage. Harvest isn’t trending up at all with cell cams become mainstream over this time period.

[CarbonHunter]

Those harvest statics are mostly driven by population declines due to winter kill. Keep in mind as the numbers have been steadily decreasing (for deer) that Idaho has been reducing opportunity by cutting where second deer tags can be used and making non residents pick the unit they will hunt. This while overall hunting numbers have been increasing and the success rates have dropped. If Idaho doesn’t continue to take actions to moderate the harvest and opportunity they will surely cut the seasons or go to more units requiring special draws.

[NOCK NOCK]

@hughjorgan Dont try to bring facts and science/data into this.........Nonsense!

Feelings/Unproven hearsay rule the roost here..........and  I am now not only a bad/cheating hunter, evidently my mind is screwed up cause my Mother was a drunk when she was carrying me.   

[fishngamereaper]

Using a chart of ten year stats without overlaying the impact that wolves, Blue tongue, winter die offs and other major events have had on Idaho herds is not bringing in science and data for cell cam use.....

Are cell cams a huge issue right now. Probably not...do they have the propensity to be..ya .
The more and more technology advances the more favorable it is for hunter's success.
Personally I'd like to give a little edge back to the game we pursue...to each their own.

But hey...use your cell cams, drones , laser mounted weapon systems etc ..cause we surely don't want to infringe on your way of hunting....

I'm curious how many guys run cams in Idaho that this actually affects...
I get what Fred's saying...cams have a place...traps being a reasonable consideration..
As for use during hunting season....meh ...not fair chase ..


And still no response about the multiple States that have already passed law's about cams...and the fact that P&Y and BC don't recognize animals taken with use of cell cams...
Are they all anti hunting as well...

[CarbonHunter]

Heck we’re 8 pages in so far and the only legitimate reason that has been provided as to why they should be allowed is for watching traps. No one else has even provided a reason for the group to consider… 

I would love for the pro cell camera side to provide a reason why I should change my stance. I’m listening.

[NOCK NOCK]

Cell cams are FUN. Why do I need a reason to use them?  No one is going to change their stance on here.


PY & BC would only know if they were told. Guessing lots of critters in the books most likely do not meet some aspect of fair chase. (Is Bullwinkle in the books?)
Is having an entire crew (probably paid) searching for that 400"+ bull fair chase?, How about 1000 yard rifles, laser rangefinders, muzzy scopes, shooting it in someone's yard, etc.
We all can pick and choose what is fair/ethical.

Another not discussed issue on this thread is hunter recruitment.
Hunter #'s are on a steady decline. FACT!  Youth of today are 100% tech immersed. FACT!  Take all the tech away and good chance you'll lose many young hunters.

NO ONE can deny hunting is on the verge of becoming obsolete, why help hurry that along without solid supporting data?

I'm all for banning cell cams during season, IF, you can show me the PROOF they are increasing harvest that much........until then, its all just feelings.

[CarbonHunter]

Cell cams are FUN. Why do I need a reason to use them?  No one is going to change their stance on here.


PY & BC would only know if they were told. Guessing lots of critters in the books most likely do not meet some aspect of fair chase. (Is Bullwinkle in the books?)
Is having an entire crew (probably paid) searching for that 400"+ bull fair chase?, How about 1000 yard rifles, laser rangefinders, muzzy scopes, shooting it in someone's yard, etc.
We all can pick and choose what is fair/ethical.

Another not discussed issue on this thread is hunter recruitment.
Hunter #'s are on a steady decline. FACT!  Youth of today are 100% tech immersed. FACT!  Take all the tech away and good chance you'll lose many young hunters.

NO ONE can deny hunting is on the verge of becoming obsolete, why help hurry that along without solid supporting data?

I'm all for banning cell cams during season, IF, you can show me the PROOF they are increasing harvest that much........until then, its all just feelings.

I thought you said you were done commenting a couple pages ago?

Riddle me this… will any current hunters stop hunting if cell cameras are outlawed during hunting season?  I doubt it personally.

Riddle me this… will any non hunters take up hunting if cell cameras are allowed in states where they are currently outlawed during hunting season?  I doubt it personally but I’ve been wrong before.

Change my mind with some facts and logic if you have any…

[2MANY]

I feel and hope they are banned.
Electronically patterning wildlife while you're not even present is cheating in my book of ethics.
While it's legal if it meets your ethics then have at it, but it won't be for long.

[hughjorgan]

Heck we’re 8 pages in so far and the only legitimate reason that has been provided as to why they should be allowed is for watching traps. No one else has even provided a reason for the group to consider… 

I would love for the pro cell camera side to provide a reason why I should change my stance. I’m listening.

Really? Come on dude what data have you KARENs provided to show all your hypotheticals are actually factual. Nothing other than guys flapping their gums. Where’s the studies?

If you don’t like the technology don’t use it. Not hard to do. Don’t try to fix a problem that isn’t a problem.

[ganghis]

So does Idaho have data that supports an increase take of critters due to cell cameras or is everyone just hypothetically crying the sky is falling and we must do something? This whole issue seems to be trying to solve a problem that doesn’t seem to exist but there is a vocal minority that wants to be the ethics police for everyone.

I think this would be a difficult question to answer with data - agencies would probably need to do experiments with some units that allow cell cams and others that don't to really answer that question.  That would be super confusing and unpopular I'm sure.  But there has to be a reason guides/people use them.  When it comes down to it, there are only limited tools that game managers have to affect mortality rates and some of it is going to be a bit of a guessing game.  My personal experience is with card reader cams - I can put them up and eliminate areas that have low use or don't have the quality of animal I'm looking for.  Are you going to argue that this doesn't improve my success rate?  Or that someone sitting on their couch and seeing a nice buck walking through an area via a cell cam won't have an increased success rate by going and sitting on that spot the next day?

[ganghis]

So does Idaho have data that supports an increase take of critters due to cell cameras or is everyone just hypothetically crying the sky is falling and we must do something? This whole issue seems to be trying to solve a problem that doesn’t seem to exist but there is a vocal minority that wants to be the ethics police for everyone.

There's some data out there I'd have to dig up again
Quite a few articles on the issue as well.
This isn't a new issue..it's just something that needs to be addressed before it gets out of control.
Is their a negative opinion of states that already have restrictions like Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Montana and Kansas just to name a few ...

Idahos data doesn’t bear out what all the hypothetical conjecture is saying this is giving hunters an unfair advantage. Harvest isn’t trending up at all with cell cams become mainstream over this time period.

Honestly dude these data don't say anything other than the population is going down.  Harvest numbers are a confluence of a number of things, and with those alone you can't answer the question you want to answer.

[hughjorgan]

So does Idaho have data that supports an increase take of critters due to cell cameras or is everyone just hypothetically crying the sky is falling and we must do something? This whole issue seems to be trying to solve a problem that doesn’t seem to exist but there is a vocal minority that wants to be the ethics police for everyone.

There's some data out there I'd have to dig up again
Quite a few articles on the issue as well.
This isn't a new issue..it's just something that needs to be addressed before it gets out of control.
Is their a negative opinion of states that already have restrictions like Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Montana and Kansas just to name a few ...

Idahos data doesn’t bear out what all the hypothetical conjecture is saying this is giving hunters an unfair advantage. Harvest isn’t trending up at all with cell cams become mainstream over this time period.

Honestly dude these data don't say anything other than the population is going down.  Harvest numbers are a confluence of a number of things, and with those alone you can't answer the question you want to answer.

You’re just furthering my point because there is NO DATA just peoples opinions and that is good enough for guys to tell others they shouldn’t be able to hunt how they want.

There’s a number of people on here that don’t embrace tech and by doing so is self regulating. We don’t need the government stepping in every time a KAREN doesn’t like the way someone is hunting.

[CarbonHunter]

Heck we’re 8 pages in so far and the only legitimate reason that has been provided as to why they should be allowed is for watching traps. No one else has even provided a reason for the group to consider… 

I would love for the pro cell camera side to provide a reason why I should change my stance. I’m listening.

Really? Come on dude what data have you KARENs provided to show all your hypotheticals are actually factual. Nothing other than guys flapping their gums. Where’s the studies?

If you don’t like the technology don’t use it. Not hard to do. Don’t try to fix a problem that isn’t a problem.

So basically you have no reasons beyond you “want to and don’t tell us what we can do” so now you will just result to name calling?

I’m not trying to get these cell cameras banned but if Idaho wants to ban them I have no problem with them doing that and I do not see how it could possibly harm the sport of hunting. And for those of you who feel so strongly different from my point of view… please provide a reason why I should feel differently. So far the only legitimate reason I have seen is for trapping.

[ganghis]

How about mounted turrets next to your cell cam that are linked to a joystick next to your lounge chair?  That way, you can kill game without even leaving your couch.  Then we can debate how regular hunters shouldn't denigrate joystick hunters because it's "hunter against hunter"?  This the bull feces is getting old.  Let's just ban this crap and get back to hunting like we used to do.  Spending time in the woods after reading signs on the ground and putting meat on the table when we are lucky or put in the effort.   

That said, I'll probably put up some regular cams this weekend just to look at activity.  If banned, I'll abide by that.  So I'm a bit two-faced I guess.

[2MANY]

2 words.

Fair chase.
One of the basic foundations of hunting.