Idaho on the verge of outlawing

[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.

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.

You don’t have a valid reason or evidence to support not using them. Why would anyone voluntarily give up anything when there is nothing to back the reason for it? Let people have the FREEDOM OF CHOICE! Nobody needs to justify their use. Why are so many people trying to be the ethics police on how some one hunts or scouts?

I’d be willing to bet the majority that are opposed to cell cams and commented on this thread don’t own any and are basing their opinion off something they read.

[pd]

WOW.

This thread really blew up.

Idaho will do what Idaho will do, I have no dog in the fight.  (Yes, I have used trail cameras in Idaho, but nowhere near a cell phone tower, so there.)

Let me say that I am happy to see so many new faces (handles).  This is a great result.

And I am happy to hear the passionate responses from a lot of old salts!  Hi F4F!

[2MANY]

Own em, used em, quit 5 years ago.
Feels like cheating to me.

[trophyhunt]

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.

You don’t have a valid reason or evidence to support not using them. Why would anyone voluntarily give up anything when there is nothing to back the reason for it? Let people have the FREEDOM OF CHOICE! Nobody needs to justify their use. Why are so many people trying to be the ethics police on how some one hunts or scouts?

I’d be willing to bet the majority that are opposed to cell cams and commented on this thread don’t own any and are basing their opinion off something they read.

[kodiak06]

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

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.

LMAO, cell cams have absolutely NOTHING to do with those stats and only a weak minded individual would try to make it so...

[kodiak06]

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.

That dude's clueless. We can't leave out blue tongue, EHD, and CWD as other reason for a decline.

[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.

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…

Yeah....I get suckered in by all the nonsense posted here, 

Change my mind if you have any facts and logic........Not just feelings or "lots of guys are using them and doing better"  That's hearsay

Here is something to chew on for you,
Hunter #'s are far outweighed by non-hunters. WE ARE LOSING the right/privilege to hunt.  FACT

How did losing baiting/hounds work out for pred./ungulate populations? (That takeaway sure didn't help hunting)  FACT




Not that I believe providing a reason to keep cell cams is needed, but I'll play along.

Guy gets a notification from cell cam, it's a cougar, he sets up at the spot and kills it.  How many critters is that saving?  (Hey if it works so well for ungulates, it should work just as well for predators).............

[NOCK NOCK]

ALSO,   attempting to have good conversations here......lets stop with the name calling/degrading before it gets shut down.

[Alan K]

Information improves chances of success.  Especially with limited time (seasons, time off work, etc.). Thats why we scout right?

Old information (e.g. old tracks, scat) is less useful than fresh information (crisp tracks in a downpour, steaming hot scat).

Non-cell cams produce old information.  Cell cams produce fresh information.

There are folks that understand how to use fresh information to improve their success, and apparently folks who see all information the same, fresh or old.  That is on the hunter and how they use the tool, not the tool itself. 

Regulations are put in place for what the potential of the tool is, not based on how many people are, or even know how to use it correctly or not.  Take drones for example. Not everyone has, or knows how to fly a drone, but use of a drone for hunting by someone who knows how to use one would be detrimental.  Or thermal... There is more and more consumer grade thermal out there, but it was outlawed for hunting long before it became widely available/popular.

And for what it's worth, I do have cell cams, and absolutely see them as a big advantage over non-cell. I will use them as long as they're legal, but it also wouldn't hurt my feelings to see them go away.

 

[2MANY]

Some may benefit by studying up on the North American wildlife model and ALL the related history from the discovery of America forward.

Many thanks to the intelligent men before us who knew man could not prevent ourselves from overharvest/market hunting and did something about it.
Our resources are not infinite.
Just ask your local steelhead fisherman.

[Threewolves]

You guys may recall not to long ago a guy posted about using cell phone intell to kill a cougar. Over in the Aberdeen area I believe. If I recall correctly he got a call from a buddy who's buddy seen a cougar on one of his cell cams that a cougar passed by a logging road intersection. So, the guy takes off from work, goes to the area, starts calling and kills the cougar. So, people do watch them and then go hunt.

Some folks might have a problem with that, but a few short years ago a person out riding their bike was killed by a cougar. Now, when the state ended hound hunting they (the state) failed to tell the cougars and bears to stop reproducing. And there is a reason in every cougar attack they bring in hounds, it is because predators learn how easy we are to attack or kill.

A cougar needs to make a kill every 10 to 12 days, you save a lot of deer when you kill a cougar. 

I am on the side of we don't need game cams at all for hunting, like someone said you might as well let people use drones, and we don't need that crap either. for thousands of years we have hunting without. Interesting, I think the cougar getting killed was good. Well, that just wasted 10 minutes of my day...dang   

[NOCK NOCK]

An example of why they should be allowed  :yeah:to  You want to help hunting, kill some predators!!

I understand the importance of regulating things (believe it or not).
But I also realize that any attack on our hunting without founded data is just another attack on hunting.
My guess is some don’t, but in the near future…….i would bet it all that hunting in anyway shape or form will become illegal.

This is just another nail in the coffin. 

[Feathernfurr]

I’d argue this is just more of a reason that hunting would get attacked by non hunters. Imagine explaining to someone that doesn’t hunt that you use remote cellular surveillance to track wildlife’s whereabouts so you can go shoot them. Hunting won’t be illegal in Idaho anytime soon, your views are washed from your experiences in Washington.

It’s funny really that this is a conversation at all. If someone posed the idea of cameras in the woods sending on the spot photos to your phone to their deer camp in the late 90’s everyone would be appalled. We’ve gotten lazy and greedy as hunters.

[Bigshooter]

Kodiak06 is right, it’s just another form of technology.  Hunters against hunters yet again.  Muzzloaders shoot 300+ yards with just 1x scope, much further w more power scopes. 1000 yard rifles now, and so on.  does a cell camera have a more negative effect or advantage on wildlife than any of the other tech?  When it comes to banning stuff w hunting, I’ll lean more on the side of the hunting and less the feelings.

 
If we want to start getting rid of technology cameras are at the bottom of my list.

[2MANY]

Today's hunters are addicted to sharing their digital hunting proof as the cover charge to the Man's Hunting Club.
A quick look at any of the shiny magazines will prove my point.

Ditch the digital.