Post by: Machias on October 09, 2025, 11:51:52 AM
Post by: Feathernfurr on October 09, 2025, 11:53:39 AM
Post by: Mtnwalker on October 09, 2025, 12:20:15 PM
"which includes prohibition of thermal imaging, night vision technology, transmitting trail cameras, and any aircraft for big game scouting or hunting between Aug. 1 to Dec. 31"
Post by: trophyhunt on October 09, 2025, 12:25:08 PM
Post by: pickardjw on October 09, 2025, 12:55:29 PM
Post by: kodiak06 on October 09, 2025, 02:40:54 PM
Post by: Dhoey07 on October 09, 2025, 03:17:36 PM
Post by: High Climber on October 09, 2025, 03:34:05 PM
Cellular trail cameras from 01 Aug to 31 Dec. If you have time, please make your comments known on the Idaho Fish and Game site which is open for public comments.Fred where did you find it? Or can you post a link, I can’t find it on the website
Post by: 2MANY on October 09, 2025, 03:45:12 PM
Probably same guys using thermal.
Post by: Mtnwalker on October 09, 2025, 04:08:59 PM
Cellular trail cameras from 01 Aug to 31 Dec. If you have time, please make your comments known on the Idaho Fish and Game site which is open for public comments.Fred where did you find it? Or can you post a link, I can’t find it on the website
See Docket No. 13-0108-2401
Rules Governing Taking of Big Game Animals
https://idfg.idaho.gov/about/rulemaking
Post by: CarbonHunter on October 09, 2025, 07:19:05 PM
Post by: Broomd on October 09, 2025, 10:30:30 PM
Post by: spin05 on October 09, 2025, 11:15:21 PM
Post by: 2MANY on October 10, 2025, 05:18:57 AM
I know guys who literally sit on the couch and wait until the big bear hits their bait and then go in to kill it.
It's straight up lazy, cheating, and not hunting in their case.
Post by: trophyhunt on October 10, 2025, 05:45:19 AM
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 10, 2025, 05:59:02 AM
Hunters are 100% our own worst enemy. :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash:
Post by: Alan K on October 10, 2025, 06:02:21 AM
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 10, 2025, 06:03:47 AM
Some just want hunting to stay hunting... :dunno:
MANY want you not to hunt!!! THINK ABOUT IT
Post by: 2MANY on October 10, 2025, 06:12:40 AM
Take a look at what happened to hunting in Europe if you want to see the future.
Post by: CarbonHunter on October 10, 2025, 06:43:50 AM
To me this proposed rule is simply the law catching up with technology. Just like how rules were added to ban flying drones on the day you hunt (it was always illegal to fly a private plane or helicopter) this is just adding to the rules that banned the use of radio telemetry devices to locate animals.
And just because one hunter only gets images sent to him twice a day there are others that have these cameras setup with additional batteries and solar panels that have these pictures sent live. Some people will even have several cameras setup so that they are “hunting” multiple locations at once and move to the other location if something shows up.
Post by: fishngamereaper on October 10, 2025, 06:46:15 AM
If hunter's can't moderate themselves then unfortunately new rules need to be considered.
Post by: 2MANY on October 10, 2025, 07:30:03 AM
Everything needs moderation.
If hunter's can't moderate themselves then unfortunately new rules need to be considered.
BOOM!
Post by: Machias on October 10, 2025, 07:32:21 AM
It's ignorant... All the call-cams do is save a trip into the woods to check a regular camera and keep out some scent. If the guys smart enough to hang the camera in certain type spots, it's obvious he doesn't "need" it to be successful. If you're using hi-powered rifles with scopes, range finders, spotters etc and are for this passing you're simply turning on other hunters. Those things I mentioned are a type of "hunting aides" as well and that can't be argued lol. Hunters against hunters is the worst thing for the sport and falls in line with the liberals/antis way of thinking!
THIS!
Post by: Machias on October 10, 2025, 07:39:09 AM
That's bs.
I know guys who literally sit on the couch and wait until the big bear hits their bait and then go in to kill it.
It's straight up lazy, cheating, and not hunting in their case.
I've been running cellular trail cameras since 2014. I got my first one for hunting hogs in Virginia. My bait was 54 miles away. That camera paid for itself in three months in saved gas. I have NEVER gotten a photo and run out and killed an animal. Actually my cameras are set up to only transmit twice a day. Saves on battery. BUT even if they transmitted right away. It is dang near impossible get your so called lazy ass up off the couch and go and kill something on your trail camera. No disrespect meant, but every time I see someone say this, I know they've never actually used one. Guys that don't have or use cellular cameras sit around and fret that guys that do use them have some amazing advantage. Honestly is BS.
Post by: pickardjw on October 10, 2025, 07:41:11 AM
That's bs.
I know guys who literally sit on the couch and wait until the big bear hits their bait and then go in to kill it.
It's straight up lazy, cheating, and not hunting in their case.
Sounds like they should just regulate transmission time then.
Post by: Machias on October 10, 2025, 07:42:43 AM
And just because one hunter only gets images sent to him twice a day there are others that have these cameras setup with additional batteries and solar panels that have these pictures sent live. Some people will even have several cameras setup so that they are “hunting” multiple locations at once and move to the other location if something shows up.
Sorry, but this is BS. This is the argument guys who've never used one always bring up. But it's just not practical. It's fantasy.
Post by: fowl smacker on October 10, 2025, 08:03:16 AM
I don't care one way or the other but I have seen it done first hand. Guy got a live photo on his phone and a half hour later shot a bear because of it.And just because one hunter only gets images sent to him twice a day there are others that have these cameras setup with additional batteries and solar panels that have these pictures sent live. Some people will even have several cameras setup so that they are “hunting” multiple locations at once and move to the other location if something shows up.
Sorry, but this is BS. This is the argument guys who've never used one always bring up. But it's just not practical. It's fantasy.
Post by: trophyhunt on October 10, 2025, 08:22:17 AM
Thats good, one less fawn/calf killer out there, a bear bait is perfect for a cell camera.I don't care one way or the other but I have seen it done first hand. Guy got a live photo on his phone and a half hour later shot a bear because of it.And just because one hunter only gets images sent to him twice a day there are others that have these cameras setup with additional batteries and solar panels that have these pictures sent live. Some people will even have several cameras setup so that they are “hunting” multiple locations at once and move to the other location if something shows up.
Sorry, but this is BS. This is the argument guys who've never used one always bring up. But it's just not practical. It's fantasy.
Post by: Mtnwalker on October 10, 2025, 08:29:53 AM
And just because one hunter only gets images sent to him twice a day there are others that have these cameras setup with additional batteries and solar panels that have these pictures sent live. Some people will even have several cameras setup so that they are “hunting” multiple locations at once and move to the other location if something shows up.
Sorry, but this is BS. This is the argument guys who've never used one always bring up. But it's just not practical. It's fantasy.
Fred just because you're not doing it doesn't mean it isn't being done. I have first hand photos on my phone of a bear and a bull both killed in exactly this manner within the last 2 weeks alone. Hunter was at home at the time of notification on both.
I also find it interesting that so many guys view the self-regulation of technology as a threat to hunting, I see it quite the opposite. Cellular trail cams by themselves are not going to make or break herd numbers but there is an undeniable cumulative effect when you add up cell cams, long range thermal scanners, long range rifles, auto compensating bluetooth reticles, etc etc etc.
This proposal was brought forth by hunters, not by IDFG, who overwhelmingly support the self-regulation of tech in order to preserve opportunity because they know there is an inverse correlation between hunter over-efficiency and tag availability. I find it ironic that some of the people on this thread who complain about how hard it is to draw tags also simultaneously support a technology free-for-all as if one has no effect on the other
Post by: Reidus on October 10, 2025, 10:06:35 AM
Have a 1 day season with drones, cell cams etc or
a 3 month season with a stickbow.
The game population can't support long seasons with all the modern advancements and hunters. Something has to give.
Post by: CarbonHunter on October 10, 2025, 10:23:40 AM
And just because one hunter only gets images sent to him twice a day there are others that have these cameras setup with additional batteries and solar panels that have these pictures sent live. Some people will even have several cameras setup so that they are “hunting” multiple locations at once and move to the other location if something shows up.
Sorry, but this is BS. This is the argument guys who've never used one always bring up. But it's just not practical. It's fantasy.
Fred just because you're not doing it doesn't mean it isn't being done. I have first hand photos on my phone of a bear and a bull both killed in exactly this manner within the last 2 weeks alone. Hunter was at home at the time of notification on both.
I also find it interesting that so many guys view the self-regulation of technology as a threat to hunting, I see it quite the opposite. Cellular trail cams by themselves are not going to make or break herd numbers but there is an undeniable cumulative effect when you add up cell cams, long range thermal scanners, long range rifles, auto compensating bluetooth reticles, etc etc etc.
This proposal was brought forth by hunters, not by IDFG, who overwhelmingly support the self-regulation of tech in order to preserve opportunity because they know there is an inverse correlation between hunter over-efficiency and tag availability. I find it ironic that some of the people on this thread who complain about how hard it is to draw tags also simultaneously support a technology free-for-all as if one has no effect on the other
Just because you and your small group of friends haven’t seen something doesn’t mean it’s not happening. It appears you also only have experience with the simple cell cameras from the Walmart or Cabela’s. These rules are being developed to address much more complex cameras than what you are using.
I work in the security integration business and I have access to demo cell trailers all across the country that I can view live and have analytic events sent directly to my phone. The technology is there and it is very reliable.
About 5 years ago I asked one of the camera manufacturers if they could develop analytics to differentiate between animals and humans and possibly the type of animal. He said no and then came back a year later and said they had rich hunters with land in the south request these analytics to deploy on their property to manage and track herds.
We now manufacture a solar camera unit that has analytics out to about 100 yards with a PTZ and 360* view that can send instant images and video clips to the owner through either LTE cell or even Starlink if there is no cell service. These high quality professional setups start at $10k which is nothing for some of these hunters who spend six figures a year on hunting.
This is why laws are needed to battle technology. And just because you haven’t seen it in your small Idaho town doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist and that it’s not happening.
Post by: 2MANY on October 10, 2025, 11:08:00 AM
Wont be long and "hunters" will be shooting a chip into trophy animals before the season and then tracking it down during the season for the grip and grin.
I would 100% support moving to 100% traditional and having a longer season.
Quite pathetic how desperate the YouTube crowd is.
Post by: JWBINX on October 10, 2025, 11:41:49 AM
People think just because they have a camera set up that's their spot. :sry:
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 10, 2025, 12:20:33 PM
I’m a Rifle Hunter. I think Archery/muzzy wounds too many critters. Let’s ban it.
I’m a Muzzy Hunter. :yeah: Hell let’s ban muzzy too then.
End result…….
.NOBODY hunts.
Every single “takeaway” is just one step closer to the END of hunting period.
If you can’t understand that ….,….you are part of the problem.
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 10, 2025, 12:22:46 PM
BAN EM!
People think just because they have a camera set up that's their spot. :sry:
And people think if they are first at a gate, it’s their spot.
Let’s just ban parking at a gate now.
Problem sloved
Post by: Stein on October 10, 2025, 12:37:21 PM
Restricting ourselves in one area doesn't mean the end of hunting or we are selling each other out.
Post by: MR5x5 on October 10, 2025, 01:23:13 PM
Post by: mikey549 on October 10, 2025, 01:53:35 PM
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 10, 2025, 01:55:41 PM
My guess is the vast majority of hunters do not use cell cameras in a nefarious way. I use a lot of cameras, both Cell and non, and never once have any of them help me kill an animal.
How many of you who want to ban cell cameras also long range shooters? What kind of image does that portray taking out a critter at 800 to 1000 ?
Let’s ban long range guns.
How many own binos? Banned.
Are you riding a horse to your hunting or are you taking your Chevy or Ford? Banned
I totally get wanting to control some technologies, but again back to my first statement bad people will do bad things….. the average Joe hunter is not sitting at his computer looking at cameras waiting for it to tell him there’s a critter there to kill so he can run out and do it. That’s just silly to think that happens a lot.
It’s really simple, be a good hunter, follow the laws, do it right, and mind your own business.
Hunters bitching about hunters are far worse than the Anti’s ever will be
Post by: CarbonHunter on October 10, 2025, 03:10:05 PM
A long range hunter that holds the rifles and pulls the trigger is a manual process. Same as the hunter that holds his binos. These examples being given aren’t even comparable.
If the long range hunter mounts a scope on the rifle that automatically adjusts for the distance, that is illegal in many states, including Idaho. If the hunter flys a drone to look beyond the line of site of his binos, that is illegal. You cannot hunt from a motor vehicle unless you are disabled.
To call this a matter of hunters complaining is foolish. It’s a great example of hunters using the rule making process to self regulate the way hunting is conducted to ensure it is ethical and fair chase is being considered when deciding what equipment can be used.
Listening to the arguments for not banning these cameras sounds a lot like listening to democrats calling their opposition names instead of providing a logical reason why these cell cameras should be allowed during hunting season.
If someone has a reason why these should be allowed to be used during hunting season, let’s hear it! So far the only reason I see is because you want to use them and don’t want to be regulated.
Post by: Mtnwalker on October 10, 2025, 03:11:18 PM
Post by: mikey549 on October 10, 2025, 03:36:38 PM
Post by: storyteller on October 10, 2025, 04:57:26 PM
Post by: WoolyRunner on October 10, 2025, 06:28:15 PM
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 10, 2025, 07:01:13 PM
Every technology has to have a limit. I believe banning cell cameras is consistent with most other rules regulating electronic devices and other automated devices used for hunting.
A long range hunter that holds the rifles and pulls the trigger is a manual process. Same as the hunter that holds his binos. These examples being given aren’t even comparable. ( TO YOU)
If the long range hunter mounts a scope on the rifle that automatically adjusts for the distance, that is illegal in many states, including Idaho. If the hunter flys a drone to look beyond the line of site of his binos, that is illegal. You cannot hunt from a motor vehicle unless you are disabled.
To call this a matter of hunters complaining is foolish. It’s a great example of hunters using the rule making process to self regulate the way hunting is conducted to ensure it is ethical and fair chase is being considered when deciding what equipment can be used.
Listening to the arguments for not banning these cameras sounds a lot like listening to democrats calling their opposition names instead of providing a logical reason why these cell cameras should be allowed during hunting season.
If someone has a reason why these should be allowed to be used during hunting season, let’s hear it! So far the only reason I see is because you want to use them and don’t want to be regulated.
Ethics/morals vary by the individual. Is shooting a critter at 800 yards fair chase?
A logical reason....Its a camera, it does not shoot/kill an animal, it simply takes pictures. I use them every year, they are FUN!
Folks that dont like cams always go to the "hunters get a notification and then rush in to shoot the animal" scenario. In reality that probably RARELY ever happens. Has it happened, probably, but it is a drop in the ocean to what really happens by decent ethical hunters. Animals just dont lounge in front of cams all day long, even when salt/minerals was legal.
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 10, 2025, 07:11:36 PM
Curious Nock Nock, as tech continues to advance and inevitably 5-10 years from now things will exist that we can't even fathom today, where do you see it acceptable to draw the line? Are you of the opinion that whatever comes along we just embrace it because anything less is an attack on hunting? This provision also addresses the use of thermal and night vision which is spreading like wildfire right now, especially in Idaho. Do you disagree with regulating that also?
Without knowing the extent of the future "advances", it is impossible to say where a line should/could be drawn.
Maybe I am wrong, but thermal/night vision techs are both for night time use. Pretty sure that is already illegal........which points right to what I'm saying ...... Bad folks do bad things.
Banning cell cams only affects the guy that uses them ethically (the bad apples will still do what they do with them) and just puts hunters one step closer to going the way of the dinosaurs. Regular T cams next, then long range, then laser range finders, etc. etc. etc.
Post by: Born2late on October 10, 2025, 07:15:38 PM
Does that qualify as a good reason?
Post by: EnglishSetter on October 10, 2025, 07:28:27 PM
That's bs.
I know guys who literally sit on the couch and wait until the big bear hits their bait and then go in to kill it.
It's straight up lazy, cheating, and not hunting in their case.
Sounds like they should just regulate transmission time then.
A law needs to be enforceable. How would you enforce transmission time?
Just my observation, but cell cams effectively made the number of cams infinite. I've read of outfitters who have hundreds of cams.
Post by: CarbonHunter on October 11, 2025, 08:06:34 PM
First good use that comes to mind for using cell cameras is for trappers to be able to see if they have had a animal caught.saves on time , gas and you can get to fur that is trapped quickly so another animal doesn’t chew on it.
Does that qualify as a good reason?
I would say this is a reason to have them. But under this example they could be limited to trapping only. Currently you still need to check your traps daily so they would have to modify that rule to allow the use of cell cameras to monitor traps.
Post by: 71Shovelhead on October 11, 2025, 08:20:21 PM
Just because you don't like it then don't do it but don't stop others from it.
Listen to @NOCK NOCK and other moderates.
Terry
Post by: Naches Sportsman on October 11, 2025, 08:28:35 PM
I texted my area game warden today about a guy who put 2 salt blocks out this last weekend and had a cell camera over it. He was sitting right over the salt this afternoon because he got a text that a bull was there. Don’t know this guy and his camera was put out last weekend along with the salt. Salt wasn’t there end of last week when the unit was being set up for planting and low and behold last Monday there it was set up.
Post by: pickardjw on October 11, 2025, 09:05:28 PM
That's bs.
I know guys who literally sit on the couch and wait until the big bear hits their bait and then go in to kill it.
It's straight up lazy, cheating, and not hunting in their case.
Sounds like they should just regulate transmission time then.
A law needs to be enforceable. How would you enforce transmission time?
Just my observation, but cell cams effectively made the number of cams infinite. I've read of outfitters who have hundreds of cams.
They found a way to require ID for “certain websites” in the state. Are you saying there is no way to enforce transmission times?
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 12, 2025, 06:07:12 AM
They need to be banned for the exception of lawful licensed trappers using them on their trap lines.
I texted my area game warden today about a guy who put 2 salt blocks out this last weekend and had a cell camera over it. He was sitting right over the salt this afternoon because he got a text that a bull was there. Don’t know this guy and his camera was put out last weekend along with the salt. Salt wasn’t there end of last week when the unit was being set up for planting and low and behold last Monday there it was set up.
My hunch is most all who want them banned just dont like cameras being in the woods, period, cell or not.
Ask anyone with experience about the above. (not saying it didnt happen, just how Naches processed it to fit his narrative)
Salt/Minerals is not some kind of "magic" that keeps critters locked to it for extended periods of time, especially this time of year. It takes time for them to find it, and seldom do they hit it on a regular basis. It is utilized by the ungulates early in the year while antler/body growth is going strong. Usually coinciding with mature antler formation (mid-late August) they stop hitting the salt/minerals altogether. They may pass by it but seldom stop for more than a minute or 2........Unless a "hunter" is sitting within a couple hundred yards of his cell cam the critter will be long gone before he could sneak in to kill it.....thats saying you ACTUALLY could sneak in.
Here is a point not mentioned yet...
Seeing as how salt/bait have been made illegal........I just want to know how/where a guy can put up a cell cam........with no attractant......and expect the scenario you all are referring to (hunter gets notification/shows up at cam/shoots animal)....... :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:
Again if this scenario is happening, its bad people doing bad things, no law is gonna change that......just another takeaway from the good hunters we'll never get back, and another step towards the END of hunting.
Post by: Crunchy on October 12, 2025, 06:21:36 AM
Post by: Feathernfurr on October 12, 2025, 06:35:53 AM
This whole “another thing we lose” argument is an excuse. We didn’t have cellular cameras just over a decade ago. This is a case of a new tech item, a privilege, we aren’t using them responsibly and therefore a course correction should be made. Want to run cell cameras in the off season, 100% support, want to run regular cameras during season, absolutely. But we shouldn’t have access to real time data in the woods, from our couch.
Post by: fishngamereaper on October 12, 2025, 06:36:44 AM
Then sits at camp and waits for notifications...
Is that reasonable. Fair chase?
Opinions on the scenario will differ...does it mean those of us that find it not representative of fair chase are falling into the divide and concur anti trap...or do we just view the ever advancing technology as just as much a threat to the thing we love to do.
There's hundreds of rules and regulations regarding hunting, fair chase and weapon systems.
Should those be removed...
And if your pro cell cam during hunting season then you wouldn't have a problem with drone use I assume.
And yes...I used to run cams...(not cell cams)..and yes I no longer do on public grounds.. personally...I'm getting tired of seeing them around every corner in some areas.
Falls into that self moderation or a law will make you category. :twocents:
Post by: fowl smacker on October 12, 2025, 07:42:23 AM
I’m going to hurt some feelings. If you don’t think cell cameras impact a persons odds of killing game, you’re a bad hunter. Cell cameras impact hunters decision making in real time. Guy wakes up to hunt, plans to head to property A, has photos at property B of animals moving in to bedding. He changes plans and heads to B and hunts a travel corridor between bedding and feed, kills target animal. 99% of people are running their cell cams with 1 check in a day. Minus update immediately and will last 6 months with lithium batteries.:yeah:
This whole “another thing we lose” argument is an excuse. We didn’t have cellular cameras just over a decade ago. This is a case of a new tech item, a privilege, we aren’t using them responsibly and therefore a course correction should be made. Want to run cell cameras in the off season, 100% support, want to run regular cameras during season, absolutely. But we shouldn’t have access to real time data in the woods, from our couch.
Post by: Seabass on October 12, 2025, 07:47:02 AM
I’m going to hurt some feelings. If you don’t think cell cameras impact a persons odds of killing game, you’re a bad hunter. Cell cameras impact hunters decision making in real time. Guy wakes up to hunt, plans to head to property A, has photos at property B of animals moving in to bedding. He changes plans and heads to B and hunts a travel corridor between bedding and feed, kills target animal. 99% of people are running their cell cams with 1 check in a day. Minus update immediately and will last 6 months with lithium batteries.
This whole “another thing we lose” argument is an excuse. We didn’t have cellular cameras just over a decade ago. This is a case of a new tech item, a privilege, we aren’t using them responsibly and therefore a course correction should be made. Want to run cell cameras in the off season, 100% support, want to run regular cameras during season, absolutely. But we shouldn’t have access to real time data in the woods, from our couch.
Exactly!
Post by: Seabass on October 12, 2025, 07:48:54 AM
If a guy rolls into elk camp ...sets up a perimeter of let's say a dozen cell cams within a quarter mile.
Then sits at camp and waits for notifications...
Is that reasonable. Fair chase?
Opinions on the scenario will differ...does it mean those of us that find it not representative of fair chase are falling into the divide and concur anti trap...or do we just view the ever advancing technology as just as much a threat to the thing we love to do.
There's hundreds of rules and regulations regarding hunting, fair chase and weapon systems.
Should those be removed...
And if your pro cell cam during hunting season then you wouldn't have a problem with drone use I assume.
And yes...I used to run cams...(not cell cams)..and yes I no longer do on public grounds.. personally...I'm getting tired of seeing them around every corner in some areas.
Falls into that self moderation or a law will make you category. :twocents:
Good points!
Post by: hughjorgan on October 12, 2025, 08:06:31 AM
Post by: Seabass on October 12, 2025, 08:19:09 AM
I’m in the middle of my 4th ID hunting season. Obviously, I haven’t used bait for deer but I haven’t used any of my 20+ trail cameras either. I decided when I got here that I wanted to “start over” with hunting. Personally, it had turned into something that I never intended it to. Idaho, Montana, Wyoming….they already have advantages to the hunter when compared to places like WA.
Long seasons, choice of weapon, and abundant game being managed by an agency that believes in hunting backed by the protection of a state constitution. Residents of ID can hunt deer from 8-30 until 12-24 with some sort of weapon. We can hunt elk for some period of time in that same frame. We can hunt bear somewhere in the state for 7 months AND hunt over bait in many units. Cats, wolves….same deal. We have ample opportunity in Idaho!
If we ban the use of cell cameras for some period of time during a season IT IS NOT the beginning of the end nor is it “taking something” from your fellow hunter. All technology is an advantage in every situation. I don’t know where the line should be drawn but there needs to be a line.
Post by: CarbonHunter on October 12, 2025, 08:21:18 AM
So progressive of Idaho.
I agree. If they create these kind of rules next thing you know they’ll be just another Montana with more restrictive hunting seasons. Shameful :chuckle:
Post by: goldenhtr on October 12, 2025, 08:41:41 AM
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.
:yeah:
Post by: goldenhtr on October 12, 2025, 08:44:08 AM
I’m a Bow Hunter. I think modern firearms/muzzy are to easy. Let’s ban them.:yeah:
I’m a Rifle Hunter. I think Archery/muzzy wounds too many critters. Let’s ban it.
I’m a Muzzy Hunter. :yeah: Hell let’s ban muzzy too then.
End result…….
.NOBODY hunts.
Every single “takeaway” is just one step closer to the END of hunting period.
If you can’t understand that ….,….you are part of the problem.
Post by: fishngamereaper on October 12, 2025, 08:59:00 AM
Would restrictions on those be deemed devisive.
Genuinely curious if people have a line in the sand for technology or not.
And this isn't a new mindset.
Several states have already banned cell cams, trail cams completely and a range of technology.
And if I recall P&Y and BC don't recognize animals taken by use of cell cams.
Post by: Humptulips on October 12, 2025, 09:59:36 AM
Post by: Machias on October 12, 2025, 10:22:47 AM
I am hoping they allow them for trapping. I know several wolf trappers that will be adversely affected if they cannot run them during trapping season.
Post by: EnglishSetter on October 12, 2025, 11:25:49 AM
That's bs.
I know guys who literally sit on the couch and wait until the big bear hits their bait and then go in to kill it.
It's straight up lazy, cheating, and not hunting in their case.
Sounds like they should just regulate transmission time then.
A law needs to be enforceable. How would you enforce transmission time?
Just my observation, but cell cams effectively made the number of cams infinite. I've read of outfitters who have hundreds of cams.
They found a way to require ID for “certain websites” in the state. Are you saying there is no way to enforce transmission times?
Yes
Post by: EnglishSetter on October 12, 2025, 11:27:56 AM
Heck I have 8 or so cell cameras and not one of them have help me kill a critter. You guys need to point me in the right direction of where a cell camera and a cell phone work and there are deer and elk around :chuckle:
Curious. If they haven't benefitted your success, why do you run them?
If I had a couple hundred cell cams, could I pattern a specific animal?
Post by: Crunchy on October 12, 2025, 11:47:30 AM
Today it is cell cameras tomorrow LIVE SCAN or LIVE SCOPE for fishing.
Post by: 2MANY on October 12, 2025, 12:25:21 PM
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 12, 2025, 02:58:25 PM
I’m going to hurt some feelings. If you don’t think cell cameras impact a persons odds of killing game, you’re a bad hunter. Cell cameras impact hunters decision making in real time. Guy wakes up to hunt, plans to head to property A, has photos at property B of animals moving in to bedding. He changes plans and heads to B and hunts a travel corridor between bedding and feed, kills target animal. 99% of people are running their cell cams with 1 check in a day. Minus update immediately and will last 6 months with lithium batteries.
This whole “another thing we lose” argument is an excuse. We didn’t have cellular cameras just over a decade ago. This is a case of a new tech item, a privilege, we aren’t using them responsibly and therefore a course correction should be made. Want to run cell cameras in the off season, 100% support, want to run regular cameras during season, absolutely. But we shouldn’t have access to real time data in the woods, from our couch.
Generalize and stereotype much?
The "wake up/ get notification/ travel too said spot/ get in to spot/ kill animal" is an excuse too. It just doesn't happen that easy, if ever.
Not sure, guess I'm a "bad" hunter. Do I think that cell cams impact a fellow's odds of killing game? Yup, but I would argue it hurts your odds........But what do I know....FWIW, I'm 60 years old, hunted since 12, have killed a deer in all but 1 year in WA ST, multiple deer some years in other states, plenty of elk, bears, cougar, moose, all variety of birds, countless yotes.......NONE of them aided by a cell cam.
I believe you're just not seeing/understanding my point. YES, tech needs to be regulated.....but based on science and likelihood of the tech ACTUALLY working in detriment to the critters.
One question FnF, do you have any experience with cell cams? (Have you used them)
Post by: HUNTIN4SIX on October 12, 2025, 03:33:49 PM
It’s profound to me you can be watching a football game get a bling on the ole phone during a season you had no intention hunting. Go down to the store buy a tag cause you know your about to go shoot an animal your cell phone just sent you a pic of. But hey, it’s legal I guess. Doesn’t always make it the coolest thing in the world to do, heck half my buddies are doing it. It would be hard to brag about it... :twocents:
Post by: kodiak06 on October 12, 2025, 03:44:14 PM
So what is everyone's favorite trail camera, that is not cellular. I enjoy running cameras for the photos and videos. I'll switch them out with regular, non-cellular, trail cameras once this ban goes into effect. I'm also hoping they allow them for bear baiting, but will abide by the rules if they do not.
I am hoping they allow them for trapping. I know several wolf trappers that will be adversely affected if they cannot run them during trapping season.
My favorite is any clearance cams or the tascos from wal mart. Not a huge loss if stolen. Half these guys complaining are more likely the same ones screwing with other peoples cams/stands lol
Post by: Feathernfurr on October 12, 2025, 03:53:07 PM
I’m going to hurt some feelings. If you don’t think cell cameras impact a persons odds of killing game, you’re a bad hunter. Cell cameras impact hunters decision making in real time. Guy wakes up to hunt, plans to head to property A, has photos at property B of animals moving in to bedding. He changes plans and heads to B and hunts a travel corridor between bedding and feed, kills target animal. 99% of people are running their cell cams with 1 check in a day. Minus update immediately and will last 6 months with lithium batteries.
This whole “another thing we lose” argument is an excuse. We didn’t have cellular cameras just over a decade ago. This is a case of a new tech item, a privilege, we aren’t using them responsibly and therefore a course correction should be made. Want to run cell cameras in the off season, 100% support, want to run regular cameras during season, absolutely. But we shouldn’t have access to real time data in the woods, from our couch.
Generalize and stereotype much?
The "wake up/ get notification/ travel too said spot/ get in to spot/ kill animal" is an excuse too. It just doesn't happen that easy, if ever.
Not sure, guess I'm a "bad" hunter. Do I think that cell cams impact a fellow's odds of killing game? Yup, but I would argue it hurts your odds........But what do I know....FWIW, I'm 60 years old, hunted since 12, have killed a deer in all but 1 year in WA ST, multiple deer some years in other states, plenty of elk, bears, cougar, moose, all variety of birds, countless yotes.......NONE of them aided by a cell cam.
I believe you're just not seeing/understanding my point. YES, tech needs to be regulated.....but based on science and likelihood of the tech ACTUALLY working in detriment to the critters.
One question FnF, do you have any experience with cell cams? (Have you used them)
It is literally that easy. I do, I’ve used cell cameras for 4 years and have put 4 deer on the wall because of them. They give you real time information that influences the way you hunt. On one of those bucks I was walking to a stand and got my target buck on camera on a travel corridor, I knew exactly where he was headed, changed plans and pushed to another stand and killed him 20 minutes later. I have multiple hunting buddies, as well as guys I’ve met hunting the same public land that are having similar experiences. If you have the level of success you say you do, which I believe, then you are not using your cellular cameras correctly.
Cell cameras, used well, in the hands of dedicated hunters that know how to scout and read sign, absolutely lead to increased success, and increased success on trophy class animals. I’ve suggested they be banned since the first year I used them. The only reason I haven’t stopped personally is because I hunt in competitive public land spots and I won’t put myself behind the 8 ball when there are others that have the advantage.
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 12, 2025, 04:59:15 PM
Post by: Feathernfurr on October 12, 2025, 05:27:02 PM
Post by: Machias on October 12, 2025, 10:11:25 PM
Sitting on the couch watching a football game and receive a notification on my phone. Pull my hand out of my crotch, get dressed, drive down and buy my tag cause I know I'm going to bag that buck. Walk out and shoot it. But hey, I've never used one cause I like to hunt. So full of crap. I know most of the guys against them have this wildly inflated idea of how they are used. I guess my deer and elk are way too smart for this old hillbilly. They literally NEVER pattern themselves on my cameras. They might come through a spot in the morning and then not come back by for literally days, if not weeks. Some of you guys crack me up. (In my rickety old man voice) I know its true cause I seen a feller use it that way. 😊
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 13, 2025, 06:36:58 AM
I too am curious where these guys are hunting that they can pattern deer that easy. :rolleyes:
@FnF east or west side?
Post by: BeerBugler on October 13, 2025, 07:15:52 AM
Post by: HUNTIN4SIX on October 13, 2025, 07:34:28 AM
:chuckle: Straight up cheating, too fricken funny. I guess I suck at cheating.
Sitting on the couch watching a football game and receive a notification on my phone. Pull my hand out of my crotch, get dressed, drive down and buy my tag cause I know I'm going to bag that buck. Walk out and shoot it. But hey, I've never used one cause I like to hunt. So full of crap. I know most of the guys against them have this wildly inflated idea of how they are used. I guess my deer and elk are way too smart for this old hillbilly. They literally NEVER pattern themselves on my cameras. They might come through a spot in the morning and then not come back by for literally days, if not weeks. Some of you guys crack me up. (In my rickety old man voice) I know its true cause I seen a feller use it that way. 😊
Laughing over here too.... folks that claim cameras do nothing for them and have no contributing factor to success but yet they spend chit loads of money on them and put them everywhere....hmmmm. Have another one :brew:
P.S. (with my 50 yr old man voice) Great Grandpa Machias, how did you do it all those years without all these cameras? :chuckle:
Post by: Feathernfurr on October 13, 2025, 08:46:17 AM
I think y’all are thinking of this too simply. This isn’t “oh my camera went off, let me cutoff the football game and go shoot an animal”. I’ll tell you now I hunt more than most people, like I’m in a stand almost everyday of the seasons I’m able to hunt whether it’s a morning or evening. When you take someone that hunts that much, the cell cameras make an impact. At any given time I have 5-6 tree stands in a number of different locations for different wind conditions, and different phases of the season. I can have all the plans in the world to hunt one of those, but when I wake up in the morning to put that plan in place, if I have photos of bucks at a different spot overnight, there is a high likelihood I change my plans. It’s not always about a “pattern”, sometimes(especially during the rut) it’s about is there a buck in the area.
Think about your non cell cam. Back in the day you’d toss one in your bag and go scout an area, you find some good runs, trails, bedding, etc and toss one up. You maybe leave it to soak for a week or two before you ever go back, or consider hunting that spot. With the cell camera, you get a great buck within 24 hours, I bet you’re hunting it the next day. It’s an undeniable advantage, otherwise they wouldn’t exist.
Post by: dreadi on October 13, 2025, 09:03:54 AM
Black Hammer Arms
www.blackhammerarms.com
The Guy On HuntWA Selling Suppressors
@blackhammerarms
Post by: bornhunter on October 13, 2025, 10:05:19 AM
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 13, 2025, 10:06:17 AM
FnF, from what I’m gathering it sounds like you’re the type of Hunter this law is targeting. To each their own I don’t care how you hunt but, there’s a lot of hunters like myself that still hunt and don’t rely on any type of camera to help us hunt. They’re just fun. Get to see a lot of cool, interactions and critters. If they’re not allowed that time of year, then I don’t get to see bulls battle on a camera. Etc etc.
All a few of us are saying is quit giving up our rights/privelages. It’s been proven over and over and over again that they’ll just keep taking.
Post by: Mtnwalker on October 13, 2025, 10:16:51 AM
Nothing on the website indicating open for public comment on this issue.
https://idfg.idaho.gov/about/rulemaking
Post by: Feathernfurr on October 13, 2025, 10:34:08 AM
One last reply to this and I’m done
FnF, from what I’m gathering it sounds like you’re the type of Hunter this law is targeting. To each their own I don’t care how you hunt but, there’s a lot of hunters like myself that still hunt and don’t rely on any type of camera to help us hunt. They’re just fun. Get to see a lot of cool, interactions and critters. If they’re not allowed that time of year, then I don’t get to see bulls battle on a camera. Etc etc.
All a few of us are saying is quit giving up our rights/privelages. It’s been proven over and over and over again that they’ll just keep taking.
I can understand that, but I assure you there are more using them like me, and I’d argue I’m on the low end. I have 6 cell cameras, I know guys running 40 plus cell cameras.
If it’s truly about the cool things you see, regular cameras can fulfill that desire.
I can understand your mentality of not giving anything up. I’d guess people made the same argument when they used to be allowed to rifle hunt elk and mule deer on the winter range in late December. There are certain things that need to be regulated or given up. Curbing the impacts of technology absolutely needs to be addressed. In the end this is an initiative in Idaho, brought up by Idahoans. This website so frequently has arguments about what is going on in Idaho. So many Washington residents arguing about what Idaho needs. Idaho isn’t Washington, and at the end of the day the residents of Idaho get to decide how that state is managed. I’ve lived in a number of other states and they’re making restrictive regulations, or have already made them, and it’s because they genuinely care about wildlife conservation and preservation of hunting traditions. Lifelong Washington residents have been burned by this state and have knee jerk reactions because of it, you just can’t apply Washington’s management downfalls on other states.
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 13, 2025, 10:38:42 AM
Stay tuned.
Post by: Machias on October 13, 2025, 10:57:38 AM
:chuckle: Straight up cheating, too fricken funny. I guess I suck at cheating.
Sitting on the couch watching a football game and receive a notification on my phone. Pull my hand out of my crotch, get dressed, drive down and buy my tag cause I know I'm going to bag that buck. Walk out and shoot it. But hey, I've never used one cause I like to hunt. So full of crap. I know most of the guys against them have this wildly inflated idea of how they are used. I guess my deer and elk are way too smart for this old hillbilly. They literally NEVER pattern themselves on my cameras. They might come through a spot in the morning and then not come back by for literally days, if not weeks. Some of you guys crack me up. (In my rickety old man voice) I know its true cause I seen a feller use it that way. 😊
Laughing over here too.... folks that claim cameras do nothing for them and have no contributing factor to success but yet they spend chit loads of money on them and put them everywhere....hmmmm. Have another one :brew:
P.S. (with my 50 yr old man voice) Great Grandpa Machias, how did you do it all those years without all these cameras? :chuckle:
:) I still do a LOT of scouting the old fashion way, because I love being out in the woods. I have 6 cellular cameras, generally three are on my bear baits. The other three are scattered around my property, one on my driveway for security reasons, one where I have a blind set up on my 20 acres and one down in a canyon a few miles from the house. Most of my hunting is in areas I don't run cameras, probably why I'm not so lethal with them. Why do I like running cameras. I get a huge kick out of the photos and videos.
Post by: mikey549 on October 13, 2025, 11:45:57 AM
Post by: 300rum on October 13, 2025, 12:55:11 PM
I am 70 years old and have been hunting for 60 years in this state. It is a sad state of affairs concerning big game populations from then to now. With the huge population growth and political climate this state is doomed for sportsman in the future. Who can blame Idaho for trying to slow down and protect what they have. For me it boils down to what hunting is supposed to be, two words. Fair chase is not knowing where a harvestable animal is while sitting in your living room. Then changing your hunting plans because of the pics you just received. Unfortunately, that is the reality that is now happening and is why this technology is facing more and more scrutiny. I am sure IDFG wishes not to be the next Cali-Wa
Post by: pickardjw on October 13, 2025, 01:07:00 PM
That's bs.
I know guys who literally sit on the couch and wait until the big bear hits their bait and then go in to kill it.
It's straight up lazy, cheating, and not hunting in their case.
Sounds like they should just regulate transmission time then.
A law needs to be enforceable. How would you enforce transmission time?
Just my observation, but cell cams effectively made the number of cams infinite. I've read of outfitters who have hundreds of cams.
They found a way to require ID for “certain websites” in the state. Are you saying there is no way to enforce transmission times?
Yes
Doubt it.
If it pings off an Idaho based cell tower there’s a minimum delay. 24 hours, 12 hours, whatever time constraint determined to be allowable.
Post by: 2MANY on October 13, 2025, 01:10:50 PM
Laughable if you ask me.
Post by: CarbonHunter on October 13, 2025, 01:43:51 PM
I understand the effort that many people put into be successful, which includes dropping cameras across the countryside to find and pattern game. But let’s be honest, how many people can do this with cell cameras given how much time it saves people from scouting the old fashioned way until the season is special draw only?
Yes some of you are using cell cameras and it’s not helping you kill more animals but others are using them and it’s helping them to kill considerably more animals through the years.
Post by: ganghis on October 13, 2025, 06:00:38 PM
Every state has a quota each year for how many animals can be harvested. If the number of hunters grows and technology makes it easier to kill animals the seasons will get shorter and shorter until it’s by special draw only.
I understand the effort that many people put into be successful, which includes dropping cameras across the countryside to find and pattern game. But let’s be honest, how many people can do this with cell cameras given how much time it saves people from scouting the old fashioned way until the season is special draw only?
Yes some of you are using cell cameras and it’s not helping you kill more animals but others are using them and it’s helping them to kill considerably more animals through the years.
I'm with you on this one. Maybe it's not the same as a strict quota system but there's no doubt that there's targets, and whether that's # killed or survival rate or whatever, it's hard to argue that technology doesn't increase hunter effectiveness / kill rate. Eventually somethings got to give - you either live with lower bull/buck quality or you have to implement tools to decrease hunter kill rate (like shortening seasons or putting in technology restrictions). Or I guess decrease natural/predator mortality but Idaho already does that. Doesn't effect me too much right now because a lot of places I hunt don't have good cell signal but I keep finding it in places that it didn't used to exist in. Pretty soon you'll be able to get a good cell signal right in the middle of the Frank Church. I've got no problem with this regulation change.
Post by: mikey549 on October 13, 2025, 08:43:48 PM
Post by: Seabass on October 13, 2025, 09:10:44 PM
Post by: mikey549 on October 13, 2025, 09:25:51 PM
Post by: EnglishSetter on October 13, 2025, 09:36:10 PM
That's bs.
I know guys who literally sit on the couch and wait until the big bear hits their bait and then go in to kill it.
It's straight up lazy, cheating, and not hunting in their case.
Sounds like they should just regulate transmission time then.
A law needs to be enforceable. How would you enforce transmission time?
Just my observation, but cell cams effectively made the number of cams infinite. I've read of outfitters who have hundreds of cams.
They found a way to require ID for “certain websites” in the state. Are you saying there is no way to enforce transmission times?
Yes
Doubt it.
If it pings off an Idaho based cell tower there’s a minimum delay. 24 hours, 12 hours, whatever time constraint determined to be allowable.
How does the carrier know it’s a cam?
Post by: CarbonHunter on October 14, 2025, 08:16:55 AM
How did we go from cell cams didn’t exist until recent, to banning them is the yielding of some inalienable right?
:yeah:
Post by: Doublelunger on October 14, 2025, 09:34:48 AM
Post by: HUNTIN4SIX on October 14, 2025, 09:38:31 AM
If you believe that cell cams and thermals don't give hunters an unfair advantage then its safe to say your mother took acetaminophen to help with her hangovers while she was pregnant with you.:chuckle: :chuckle:
Post by: hughjorgan on October 14, 2025, 09:41:43 AM
Post by: fishngamereaper on October 14, 2025, 10:02:32 AM
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 ...
Post by: pickardjw on October 14, 2025, 12:29:58 PM
That's bs.
I know guys who literally sit on the couch and wait until the big bear hits their bait and then go in to kill it.
It's straight up lazy, cheating, and not hunting in their case.
Sounds like they should just regulate transmission time then.
A law needs to be enforceable. How would you enforce transmission time?
Just my observation, but cell cams effectively made the number of cams infinite. I've read of outfitters who have hundreds of cams.
They found a way to require ID for “certain websites” in the state. Are you saying there is no way to enforce transmission times?
Yes
Doubt it.
If it pings off an Idaho based cell tower there’s a minimum delay. 24 hours, 12 hours, whatever time constraint determined to be allowable.
How does the carrier know it’s a cam?
The carrier doesn’t regulate, the manufacturer does.
If you want to sell your cameras in Idaho, transmission time must be whatever the minimum time is determined for cameras transmitting from Idaho. Otherwise your cameras are banned entirely.
Far higher chance of meeting the intent of the law that way and “compliance” rate would be way higher than relying on a game warden finding cameras while out and about. How many are they gonna find? 1%? 10%? How are they identifying the owner and charging them if on public land? Will manufacturers comply willingly or will a warrant for the customers information be needed for each case? Are they going to spend thousands in labor to enforce a $500 fine?
Post by: hughjorgan on October 14, 2025, 12:30:23 PM
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.
Post by: CarbonHunter on October 14, 2025, 02:02:52 PM
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 14, 2025, 05:33:43 PM
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. :rolleyes:
Post by: fishngamereaper on October 14, 2025, 05:48:50 PM
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...
Post by: CarbonHunter on October 14, 2025, 06:26:00 PM
I would love for the pro cell camera side to provide a reason why I should change my stance. I’m listening.
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 14, 2025, 06:30:58 PM
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.
Post by: CarbonHunter on October 14, 2025, 07:16:33 PM
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…
Post by: 2MANY on October 14, 2025, 07:18:15 PM
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.
Post by: hughjorgan on October 14, 2025, 07:20:16 PM
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.
Post by: ganghis on October 14, 2025, 07:24:29 PM
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?
Post by: ganghis on October 14, 2025, 07:28:09 PM
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.
Post by: hughjorgan on October 14, 2025, 08:01:41 PM
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.
Post by: CarbonHunter on October 14, 2025, 08:33:47 PM
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.
Post by: ganghis on October 14, 2025, 09:13:05 PM
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.
Post by: 2MANY on October 14, 2025, 09:50:48 PM
Fair chase.
One of the basic foundations of hunting.
Post by: hughjorgan on October 14, 2025, 10:06:52 PM
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.
Post by: pd on October 14, 2025, 10:08:58 PM
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!
Post by: 2MANY on October 14, 2025, 10:41:45 PM
Feels like cheating to me.
Post by: trophyhunt on October 15, 2025, 05:46:31 AM
:yeah: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.
Post by: kodiak06 on October 15, 2025, 05:57:47 AM
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...
Post by: kodiak06 on October 15, 2025, 06:03:15 AM
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.
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 15, 2025, 06:17:12 AM
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, :chuckle: :chuckle:
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).............
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 15, 2025, 06:21:07 AM
Post by: Alan K on October 15, 2025, 06:44:07 AM
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.
:twocents:
Post by: 2MANY on October 15, 2025, 07:50:47 AM
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.
Post by: Threewolves on October 15, 2025, 08:38:58 AM
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
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 15, 2025, 09:13:15 AM
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. :twocents:
Post by: Feathernfurr on October 15, 2025, 09:37:31 AM
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.
Post by: Bigshooter on October 15, 2025, 10:03:47 AM
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.
:yeah:
If we want to start getting rid of technology cameras are at the bottom of my list.
Post by: 2MANY on October 15, 2025, 10:57:47 AM
A quick look at any of the shiny magazines will prove my point.
Ditch the digital.
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 15, 2025, 11:24:54 AM
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.
I may be influenced by my views from Washington experiences. But that doesn’t change anything.
Look how many members alone from Washington are bailing ship and moving to Idaho….. which is fast becoming another Washington.
Time changes everything. do you think way back in the old days those people ever thought of thousand yard rifles , laser rangefinders, scopes, getting into your hunting spot in a four-wheel-drive air-conditioned vehicle instead of a horse, etc?
Again, it’s just not as easy as you folks try to make it sound, just get a picture and go out there and shoot it, easy peasy. (but let’s also not forget that I’m a bad hunter with a drug addicted mother who was drunk, so what do I know as a 60 year hunter. )
Carry On. I’m out for good this time. :chuckle: :chuckle:
Post by: BeerBugler on October 15, 2025, 11:38:11 AM
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 15, 2025, 01:41:35 PM
Post by: 2MANY on October 15, 2025, 02:04:21 PM
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 15, 2025, 03:25:28 PM
Sorry to hear about your mom Nock.
My Mother was a great woman. Who has passed…….and I miss her every day.
Usually I find your posts kinda funny. Not on this one FWIW. :bash:
Post by: CarbonHunter on October 15, 2025, 07:11:21 PM
It is already illegal to hunt animals with the aid of radio telemetry equipment.
It is already illegal to use radios to relay the location of game animals.
It is already illegal to fly a drone in the same day you hunt because it relays pictures of animals to a hunter.
Omg could you imagine if there was one piece of technology that did all 3 of those without a human operator and you get it in real time? I wonder what that piece of technology would be called? Sounds a lot like what a cell or satellite transmitting camera would do. 🤯
This isn’t about taking hunter rights. It’s about legal definitions catching up with technology. Currently it is legal to use them and have fun while it lasts but at the end of the day this concept has always been banned in most states… during hunting seasons on a day you hunt and that is what is being proposed. Don’t make this into something it isn’t and just look at it for what it is.
Post by: Moose Master on October 15, 2025, 09:04:51 PM
Post by: 2MANY on October 16, 2025, 09:29:37 AM
Sorry to hear about your mom Nock.
My Mother was a great woman. Who has passed…….and I miss her every day.
Usually I find your posts kinda funny. Not on this one FWIW. :bash:
Guess you forgot your previous post.
(but let’s also not forget that I’m a bad hunter with a drug addicted mother who was drunk, so what do I know as a 60 year hunter. )
Post by: Machias on October 16, 2025, 04:03:18 PM
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 16, 2025, 06:08:38 PM
Sorry to hear about your mom Nock.
My Mother was a great woman. Who has passed…….and I miss her every day.
Usually I find your posts kinda funny. Not on this one FWIW. :bash:
Guess you forgot your previous post.
(but let’s also not forget that I’m a bad hunter with a drug addicted mother who was drunk, so what do I know as a 60 year hunter. )
Guess you didn't read entire thread......I referenced others posts......(I don't use cell cams "correctly" so Im a bad hunter, & referenced derogatory things about ones mother.)
Post by: 2MANY on October 16, 2025, 06:42:13 PM
You were joking and so did I.
Good luck with your healing Fred.
Post by: Machias on October 16, 2025, 07:07:02 PM
I read the whole thing.Thanks!!
You were joking and so did I.
Good luck with your healing Fred.
Post by: kodiak06 on October 16, 2025, 08:00:32 PM
This isn’t about taking hunter rights. It’s about legal definitions catching up with technology. Currently it is legal to use them and have fun while it lasts but at the end of the day this concept has always been banned in most states… during hunting seasons on a day you hunt and that is what is being proposed. Don’t make this into something it isn’t and just look at it for what it is.
I wouldn't call SEVEN or Eight states "most" states lol
Post by: kodiak06 on October 16, 2025, 08:08:45 PM
Post by: mikey549 on October 16, 2025, 09:17:05 PM
. Many of these people have purchased live scopes and whatever else is the latest and greatest. They stare at their screen and moving two cranks up or down on their reels .Technology is the death of fishing and hunting in this country. For those that keep embracing technology because it is fun, you are excellerating the demise of it all .
Post by: EnglishSetter on October 17, 2025, 07:05:54 AM
Of course there is a difference between west side black tails and Rosie’s compared to the east side.They are both very subject to figuring out where they live and their small pattern of normal of travel is. The mention of technology with the fishing is real. Watch the utube videos of the guides fishing the B10 fishery.I watched this year at the mouth of the Cowlitz and Lewis where I fish.
. Many of these people have purchased live scopes and whatever else is the latest and greatest. They stare at their screen and moving two cranks up or down on their reels .Technology is the death of fishing and hunting in this country. For those that keep embracing technology because it is fun, you are excellerating the demise of it all .
Not the demise of it all, but more likely reduced opportunity with shorter seasons, smaller limits and lottery access.
Post by: Threewolves on October 17, 2025, 02:52:20 PM
So I brought it up pages ago and never got the pro cell cameras banned folks to comment on these reasons so let’s post them again for consideration.Are you saying it's illegal to use radios to give the location of game animals in Washington State or Idaho?
It is already illegal to hunt animals with the aid of radio telemetry equipment.
It is already illegal to use radios to relay the location of game animals.
It is already illegal to fly a drone in the same day you hunt because it relays pictures of animals to a hunter.
Omg could you imagine if there was one piece of technology that did all 3 of those without a human operator and you get it in real time? I wonder what that piece of technology would be called? Sounds a lot like what a cell or satellite transmitting camera would do.
This isn’t about taking hunter rights. It’s about legal definitions catching up with technology. Currently it is legal to use them and have fun while it lasts but at the end of the day this concept has always been banned in most states… during hunting seasons on a day you hunt and that is what is being proposed. Don’t make this into something it isn’t and just look at it for what it is.
Sent from my SM-A426U using Tapatalk
Post by: bearpaw on October 17, 2025, 06:21:52 PM
Post by: HUNTIN4SIX on October 17, 2025, 10:26:14 PM
Of course there is a difference between west side black tails and Rosie’s compared to the east side.They are both very subject to figuring out where they live and their small pattern of normal of travel is. The mention of technology with the fishing is real. Watch the utube videos of the guides fishing the B10 fishery.I watched this year at the mouth of the Cowlitz and Lewis where I fish.
. Many of these people have purchased live scopes and whatever else is the latest and greatest. They stare at their screen and moving two cranks up or down on their reels .Technology is the death of fishing and hunting in this country. For those that keep embracing technology because it is fun, you are excellerating the demise of it all .
Yup it’s pretty much screwed up the bass tournament world....
Post by: NOCK NOCK on October 18, 2025, 05:21:38 AM
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.
Read Bearpaws post.
Damn good reason to change your mind......
(Not saying BP stance is Pro, or con BTW)
Post by: Crunchy on October 18, 2025, 08:54:20 AM
Post by: 2MANY on October 18, 2025, 09:00:29 AM
Post by: Webfoot on October 18, 2025, 11:43:54 AM
Post by: boneaddict on October 18, 2025, 11:53:54 AM
Post by: trophyhunt on October 18, 2025, 12:46:30 PM
Post by: goldenhtr on October 18, 2025, 02:39:15 PM
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. :twocents:
:yeah:
Post by: trophyhunt on October 18, 2025, 05:45:46 PM
:yeah: :yeah: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. :twocents:
:yeah:
Post by: blackveltbowhunter on October 18, 2025, 09:40:22 PM
I won't lobby to get them gone because my annoyance is not enough to take away someone's good time. However, I think its reasonable in this conversation to assume that because one person just likes to watch animals frollick in real time for entertainment. Another is likely covering multiple game trails into known bedding areas with hot does waiting for a target buck to arrive at 5am so they can be in the area at first light. Maybe a stand or adjacent clearcut or bench. If that isn't the definition of increasing your odds, then Casey Brooks only bought a solo raffle ticket as well.
They are a huge advantage in predator control. And regardless of my feelings, For that reason I do hope they stay in Washington. The best cougar killers I know run multiple cell cams and it heavily tilts the odds of success in their favor for calling setups.
Post by: 2MANY on October 19, 2025, 05:42:17 AM
Pretty gross over here in the Rockies.
Post by: mikey549 on October 19, 2025, 10:23:03 AM
Post by: Machias on October 19, 2025, 03:01:09 PM
I just got this cell cam video. I live in W WA this is in eastern Oregon. I keep it there year round just for stuff like this
One of the coolest videos I've seen!! Thanks for sharing!
I'm guessing you were able to drive down and kill both animals, correct? (Sarcasm) :)
Post by: Crunchy on October 19, 2025, 03:09:17 PM
I just got this cell cam video. I live in W WA this is in eastern Oregon. I keep it there year round just for stuff like this
One of the coolest videos I've seen!! Thanks for sharing!
I'm guessing you were able to drive down and kill both animals, correct? (Sarcasm) :)
Good one. This is one of those spots where you get barely enough signal in about a 50 foot by 50 foot opening. The next nearest signal is about 4 miles away. 1/2 mile of that by foot lol.
Post by: Pegasus on October 19, 2025, 08:26:39 PM
Post by: Seabass on October 19, 2025, 09:46:33 PM
I’m tired of being filmed everywhere I go in public. The woods used to be the one place a guy could get away from the constant surveillance.
Post by: Machias on December 06, 2025, 02:22:50 PM
Post by: vandeman17 on December 06, 2025, 04:59:24 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on December 06, 2025, 05:07:05 PM
Well, quick update. After overwhelming support to KEEP cellular trail cameras legal the Idaho Fish and Game Commission decided to say FU, we know better and has sent the prohibitions forward for the leguslation to approve. The comment period was 75% to allow the continued use and they decided they know better. They even admitted in the meeting that the cameras have no significant impact on harvest numbers.I was delusional thinking moving to Idaho id be in a more free state and not have to deal w anti hunters on a hunting commission. Watched the video of the meeting, those folks are just like wa commissioners! The one guy who didn’t like the new law voted for it anyway, WTF.
Post by: EnglishSetter on December 06, 2025, 10:00:14 PM
I just got this cell cam video. I live in W WA this is in eastern Oregon. I keep it there year round just for stuff like this
Did the kitty have lunch?
Post by: CarbonHunter on December 07, 2025, 08:53:37 AM
They will cherry pick out a survey that aligns with their votes 100% of the time and say they are doing what the public wants but they just don’t care on the other 90% of the votes they cast against their vote.
Post by: trophyhunt on December 07, 2025, 11:49:42 AM
Post by: Machias on December 07, 2025, 03:52:33 PM
Well, quick update. After overwhelming support to KEEP cellular trail cameras legal the Idaho Fish and Game Commission decided to say FU, we know better and has sent the prohibitions forward for the legislation to approve. The comment period was 75% to allow the continued use and they decided they know better. They even admitted in the meeting that the cameras have no significant impact on harvest numbers.I was delusional thinking moving to Idaho id be in a more free state and not have to deal w anti hunters on a hunting commission. Watched the video of the meeting, those folks are just like wa commissioners! The one guy who didn’t like the new law voted for it anyway, WTF.
:yeah:
I was disappointed, but figured it was already going that way and had accepted it. But then I watched the meeting and got seriously ticked off. Listening to the "Commisioners" and the ladies testifying just made my blood boil. :bash:
Post by: kentrek on December 07, 2025, 04:07:01 PM
What’s next for Idaho if the commission is ignoring sportsmen, what’s on their mind next, hound hunting, baiting???
Never underestimate little california
Post by: NOCK NOCK on December 07, 2025, 04:53:15 PM
What’s next for Idaho if the commission is ignoring sportsmen, what’s on their mind next, hound hunting, baiting???
Pretty sure these types of scenarios got brought up earlier in the thread by several of us........more banning to come IMHO.
Post by: trophyhunt on December 07, 2025, 04:54:47 PM
Post by: hughjorgan on December 07, 2025, 06:09:02 PM
Makes me hate demoRats even more, all they do is spread their disease. How can a dem that hunts be proud of what’s going on?
It isn’t democrats, it’s republicans from California. A republican from California isn’t the same as a republican from Idaho. All Californians love them big government.
Post by: trophyhunt on December 07, 2025, 07:55:51 PM
Post by: HUNTINCOUPLE on December 07, 2025, 08:03:41 PM
That’s what you call a Rino
:yeah: This country has a whole lot of these RHINO things around everyone........Not good folks!