Would you support any of these camera bans?

[HUNTIN4SIX]

In general people are going to shoot the first legal animal they see...with of without knowledge of that trophy buck...not everyone has the time or resources to hold out for mature deer.


And I don't think lumping this conversation into other hunting restrictions is accurate.

I've never used cell cams, don't use bait.  Currently run cams on my Washington and Idaho properties. Didn't grow up using cams, and have only ran them a couple times in limited numbers for two quality tags.

In a nutshell for me personally.
I go into the woods to get away. Don't much care for crowd's so I make it a point when I'm in the woods to avoid people. I don't want to have my picture taken around every tree. Especially real time

Secondly cell cams aren't fair chase IMO. They have the ability to be abused. Real time data for a location your not at...but it gives you direction. It's like using drones or... flying. That type of abuse of real time Intel is the reason for restrictions on day of flight hunting.
If you where hiking into cam A to hunt but cam B alerts to a good buck. You change plans, right...

I'm not a purist...I'm a realist... other states banning cams during hunting season's and cell cams in general are able to justify it... record books recognize it as a disqualifier if used in a certain way..so there's an issue that at some point will need attention in WA.

I don't think its to much of an ask for people to just acknowledge technology breeds rules..
And if you don't want more rules be wary of overusing technology.

Very similar to shed hunting,.. people couldn't figure out how to manage themselves, it got to popular, became the new fad, people are using drones to locate sheds, and bingo...
 forced States to create rules, restrictions and seasons.
.

Well said! 
My son has trail cams, we use them minimally.  Hunting has been around for thousands of years.  Cameras have been around for 20yrs or so.  Some on here don't even remember life without them.  I do.  I believe it was simpler without cameras.  Does anyone think Cameras have made us better hunters?  In my opinion they have dumbed us down.  I would have no problem banning them during certain months.   

I would disagree, again, I think it depends on whose hands they are in. Some may become lazy, but for me, I think it has increased my knowledge of how deer use the mountains I hunt. With no way of glassing, I don’t get much time to actually watch big buck behavior, because there isn’t a whole lot of time to watch a big buck on his feet in the timber, especially when you cant see him until he’s less than 50yds from you. Having these cameras has increased my knowledge on how big bucks move, when they move, and where they go. I have learned also learned the mannerisms of how whitetails hit scrapes and approach areas. I get to see how often a deer walks with the wind in their face when approaching a salt, or hay pile, and that they don’t walk without the wind in their favor much at all, at least not the ones I have seen. Almost all of these things would be very difficult to figure out by just watching big bucks in heavy timber, especially without snow.

Like said, I can see where technology could go and getting worse than the already questionable ethics of cell cameras. But, I don’t think just doing a full ban on them is the answer. Maybe Washington can put a ban on companies selling plans for immediate sending, like they have to wait 24 hours? (that’s how mine are set)

Besides in the early 1900s like previously mentioned, do we have a single example of restrictions on hunting leading to better populations or higher success percentages?

I would agree with many that I don’t like having my picture taken on cameras, and I don’t think have real time images in the places you are hunting is fair chase. However, I think banning bucks harvested by using that technology from entering record books is enough. Why make it illegal? I don’t think personal etiquette and preference is enough to make something else illegal.

Bringing up that other states banned them so we can too doesnt make a whole lot of sense to me. Would anyone on this platform recommended wolves for Colorado? I’m sure someone brought up, “well, Washington, Oregon, and Idaho did it”. I think if the technology keeps advancing, we may need to draw a line somewhere, but I think we should sit back and wait for more data, at least for now.

There’s really no numbers to state that cameras are leading to higher success rates or total deer killed. I guess maybe the question isn’t whether people want to ban cell cams, but if they think everyone should have the same base on hunting ethics and fair chase? Might be another good thread. It seems to me that quite a few guys want them banned because they’re not “fair chase” and it leads to “grocery shopping”, and I personally just don’t see any issue with it. They’re still only killing 1 deer, if they even kill it, if cellular cameras were as simple, as described by some, more deer would be dying. But it’s not that easy, I find it ironic that most of the guys on here so far that are the most vocal about being against them also say that have very little interactions with them. It sounds easier than it is. I would love to see some of these guys who say “it’s so easy” go kill a buck even over 160” because of a cell camera. It’ll take years for a lot. We have low populations, short seasons, and already have it harder than just about anywhere else in the west. Why try to make it harder just because you personally don’t see it ethical?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not even assuming your baiting nor do i care, but if most people running cameras in mountains are running salt or bait how does that tell you how deer are using the mountains?  If they are just migrating to bait?  The idea that cameras don't cause success to go up is absolute BS.  The no brainer is.... if it wasn't easier or success didn't go up , most wouldn't be using them?  There are simple facts to camera use that most just don't want to admit.  I would be curious to know the percentage of folks using bait under cameras?  Or are most just randomly throwing them up on trails?

[Skyvalhunter]

I believe that if the WDFW i.e. game commission  proposes to ban trail cams especially at any time of the year it will use the spread of CWD as the reasoning. Weather it's justified or not. But this discussion/vote seems to be started on the ethical or non ethical use and time if any they should be used. Obviously each person has their own reasoning for usage or non usage of trail cams. Then cell cameras got put in the discussion. I like to see what's out there on my trail cams and even what's out there in areas I don't hunt. I like to get a feel for the number and what predators are also out there. Just my take and opinion.

[TimberMuleys]

In general people are going to shoot the first legal animal they see...with of without knowledge of that trophy buck...not everyone has the time or resources to hold out for mature deer.


And I don't think lumping this conversation into other hunting restrictions is accurate.

I've never used cell cams, don't use bait.  Currently run cams on my Washington and Idaho properties. Didn't grow up using cams, and have only ran them a couple times in limited numbers for two quality tags.

In a nutshell for me personally.
I go into the woods to get away. Don't much care for crowd's so I make it a point when I'm in the woods to avoid people. I don't want to have my picture taken around every tree. Especially real time

Secondly cell cams aren't fair chase IMO. They have the ability to be abused. Real time data for a location your not at...but it gives you direction. It's like using drones or... flying. That type of abuse of real time Intel is the reason for restrictions on day of flight hunting.
If you where hiking into cam A to hunt but cam B alerts to a good buck. You change plans, right...

I'm not a purist...I'm a realist... other states banning cams during hunting season's and cell cams in general are able to justify it... record books recognize it as a disqualifier if used in a certain way..so there's an issue that at some point will need attention in WA.

I don't think its to much of an ask for people to just acknowledge technology breeds rules..
And if you don't want more rules be wary of overusing technology.

Very similar to shed hunting,.. people couldn't figure out how to manage themselves, it got to popular, became the new fad, people are using drones to locate sheds, and bingo...
 forced States to create rules, restrictions and seasons.
.

Well said! 
My son has trail cams, we use them minimally.  Hunting has been around for thousands of years.  Cameras have been around for 20yrs or so.  Some on here don't even remember life without them.  I do.  I believe it was simpler without cameras.  Does anyone think Cameras have made us better hunters?  In my opinion they have dumbed us down.  I would have no problem banning them during certain months.   

I would disagree, again, I think it depends on whose hands they are in. Some may become lazy, but for me, I think it has increased my knowledge of how deer use the mountains I hunt. With no way of glassing, I don’t get much time to actually watch big buck behavior, because there isn’t a whole lot of time to watch a big buck on his feet in the timber, especially when you cant see him until he’s less than 50yds from you. Having these cameras has increased my knowledge on how big bucks move, when they move, and where they go. I have learned also learned the mannerisms of how whitetails hit scrapes and approach areas. I get to see how often a deer walks with the wind in their face when approaching a salt, or hay pile, and that they don’t walk without the wind in their favor much at all, at least not the ones I have seen. Almost all of these things would be very difficult to figure out by just watching big bucks in heavy timber, especially without snow.

Like said, I can see where technology could go and getting worse than the already questionable ethics of cell cameras. But, I don’t think just doing a full ban on them is the answer. Maybe Washington can put a ban on companies selling plans for immediate sending, like they have to wait 24 hours? (that’s how mine are set)

Besides in the early 1900s like previously mentioned, do we have a single example of restrictions on hunting leading to better populations or higher success percentages?

I would agree with many that I don’t like having my picture taken on cameras, and I don’t think have real time images in the places you are hunting is fair chase. However, I think banning bucks harvested by using that technology from entering record books is enough. Why make it illegal? I don’t think personal etiquette and preference is enough to make something else illegal.

Bringing up that other states banned them so we can too doesnt make a whole lot of sense to me. Would anyone on this platform recommended wolves for Colorado? I’m sure someone brought up, “well, Washington, Oregon, and Idaho did it”. I think if the technology keeps advancing, we may need to draw a line somewhere, but I think we should sit back and wait for more data, at least for now.

There’s really no numbers to state that cameras are leading to higher success rates or total deer killed. I guess maybe the question isn’t whether people want to ban cell cams, but if they think everyone should have the same base on hunting ethics and fair chase? Might be another good thread. It seems to me that quite a few guys want them banned because they’re not “fair chase” and it leads to “grocery shopping”, and I personally just don’t see any issue with it. They’re still only killing 1 deer, if they even kill it, if cellular cameras were as simple, as described by some, more deer would be dying. But it’s not that easy, I find it ironic that most of the guys on here so far that are the most vocal about being against them also say that have very little interactions with them. It sounds easier than it is. I would love to see some of these guys who say “it’s so easy” go kill a buck even over 160” because of a cell camera. It’ll take years for a lot. We have low populations, short seasons, and already have it harder than just about anywhere else in the west. Why try to make it harder just because you personally don’t see it ethical?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not even assuming your baiting nor do i care, but if most people running cameras in mountains are running salt or bait how does that tell you how deer are using the mountains?  If they are just migrating to bait?  The idea that cameras don't cause success to go up is absolute BS.  The no brainer is.... if it wasn't easier or success didn't go up , most wouldn't be using them?  There are simple facts to camera use that most just don't want to admit.  I would be curious to know the percentage of folks using bait under cameras?  Or are most just randomly throwing them up on trails?

I do both, but most run on baits, at least in my area. Good question, if you run normal cameras on video mode you can see how bucks are using an area, especially with windicators in the background. Setting up cams on a main trail near beds, you can see he got out of his bed on the southeast side at 11:26am and walked with the wind in his face to a bedding area somewhere else. You can see whether he was on a mission, or just feeding his way through. Another example, I got a picture of a nice, younger, 150s type buck on opening day of rifle season in the mountain I shot my buck on. It was on a mail trail that went from a main food source area towards a known bedding area, that buck fed in front of the camera for 2 minutes (8:39-8:40) with the thermals in his face and he walked up and bedded at the top of the ridge. My uncle jumped him a few hours later and we checked the camera afterwards and found out what buck it was.

I’m not saying cameras don’t make it easier, I would never say that. They do, but I don’t think they will ever make it easier enough to be seeing a noticeable increase in harvest numbers. I think what can be learned from cameras can make us better understand timber bucks and their mannerisms.

All of that is beside the point to me, I still don’t understand why we are hell bent on taking a tool out of the woods that kills a minuscule amount of deer every year. My cell cameras did not aid in me taking my buck this year, but the knowledge I have gained from them will help me be a more informed and better hunter. And I would argue I use cell cams more effectively than the vast majority of people. If cell cams were really having that much of an impact, it would show in harvest percentages and numbers. Which, over the last 3 years, it has been the opposite.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LDennis24]

In general people are going to shoot the first legal animal they see...with of without knowledge of that trophy buck...not everyone has the time or resources to hold out for mature deer.


And I don't think lumping this conversation into other hunting restrictions is accurate.

I've never used cell cams, don't use bait.  Currently run cams on my Washington and Idaho properties. Didn't grow up using cams, and have only ran them a couple times in limited numbers for two quality tags.

In a nutshell for me personally.
I go into the woods to get away. Don't much care for crowd's so I make it a point when I'm in the woods to avoid people. I don't want to have my picture taken around every tree. Especially real time

Secondly cell cams aren't fair chase IMO. They have the ability to be abused. Real time data for a location your not at...but it gives you direction. It's like using drones or... flying. That type of abuse of real time Intel is the reason for restrictions on day of flight hunting.
If you where hiking into cam A to hunt but cam B alerts to a good buck. You change plans, right...

I'm not a purist...I'm a realist... other states banning cams during hunting season's and cell cams in general are able to justify it... record books recognize it as a disqualifier if used in a certain way..so there's an issue that at some point will need attention in WA.

I don't think its to much of an ask for people to just acknowledge technology breeds rules..
And if you don't want more rules be wary of overusing technology.

Very similar to shed hunting,.. people couldn't figure out how to manage themselves, it got to popular, became the new fad, people are using drones to locate sheds, and bingo...
 forced States to create rules, restrictions and seasons.
.

Well said! 
My son has trail cams, we use them minimally.  Hunting has been around for thousands of years.  Cameras have been around for 20yrs or so.  Some on here don't even remember life without them.  I do.  I believe it was simpler without cameras.  Does anyone think Cameras have made us better hunters?  In my opinion they have dumbed us down.  I would have no problem banning them during certain months.   

I would disagree, again, I think it depends on whose hands they are in. Some may become lazy, but for me, I think it has increased my knowledge of how deer use the mountains I hunt. With no way of glassing, I don’t get much time to actually watch big buck behavior, because there isn’t a whole lot of time to watch a big buck on his feet in the timber, especially when you cant see him until he’s less than 50yds from you. Having these cameras has increased my knowledge on how big bucks move, when they move, and where they go. I have learned also learned the mannerisms of how whitetails hit scrapes and approach areas. I get to see how often a deer walks with the wind in their face when approaching a salt, or hay pile, and that they don’t walk without the wind in their favor much at all, at least not the ones I have seen. Almost all of these things would be very difficult to figure out by just watching big bucks in heavy timber, especially without snow.

Like said, I can see where technology could go and getting worse than the already questionable ethics of cell cameras. But, I don’t think just doing a full ban on them is the answer. Maybe Washington can put a ban on companies selling plans for immediate sending, like they have to wait 24 hours? (that’s how mine are set)

Besides in the early 1900s like previously mentioned, do we have a single example of restrictions on hunting leading to better populations or higher success percentages?

I would agree with many that I don’t like having my picture taken on cameras, and I don’t think have real time images in the places you are hunting is fair chase. However, I think banning bucks harvested by using that technology from entering record books is enough. Why make it illegal? I don’t think personal etiquette and preference is enough to make something else illegal.

Bringing up that other states banned them so we can too doesnt make a whole lot of sense to me. Would anyone on this platform recommended wolves for Colorado? I’m sure someone brought up, “well, Washington, Oregon, and Idaho did it”. I think if the technology keeps advancing, we may need to draw a line somewhere, but I think we should sit back and wait for more data, at least for now.

There’s really no numbers to state that cameras are leading to higher success rates or total deer killed. I guess maybe the question isn’t whether people want to ban cell cams, but if they think everyone should have the same base on hunting ethics and fair chase? Might be another good thread. It seems to me that quite a few guys want them banned because they’re not “fair chase” and it leads to “grocery shopping”, and I personally just don’t see any issue with it. They’re still only killing 1 deer, if they even kill it, if cellular cameras were as simple, as described by some, more deer would be dying. But it’s not that easy, I find it ironic that most of the guys on here so far that are the most vocal about being against them also say that have very little interactions with them. It sounds easier than it is. I would love to see some of these guys who say “it’s so easy” go kill a buck even over 160” because of a cell camera. It’ll take years for a lot. We have low populations, short seasons, and already have it harder than just about anywhere else in the west. Why try to make it harder just because you personally don’t see it ethical?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not even assuming your baiting nor do i care, but if most people running cameras in mountains are running salt or bait how does that tell you how deer are using the mountains?  If they are just migrating to bait?  The idea that cameras don't cause success to go up is absolute BS.  The no brainer is.... if it wasn't easier or success didn't go up , most wouldn't be using them?  There are simple facts to camera use that most just don't want to admit.  I would be curious to know the percentage of folks using bait under cameras?  Or are most just randomly throwing them up on trails?

 
You learn absolutely nothing about how the deer is using the mountain by putting salt out to habituate them to a certain area. You altered their pattern after you did that. If you were to put cameras on places like water, the ridge leading to water, the ridge that gets the most sun mid day, and the trail leading down through the dark ravine, etc. Then you would have a better idea of how they use the mountain. But putting salt out to attract them to a certain area tells you nothing. It just gives you an opportunity to bring the animals to one area and know because of the cameras which one of your bait piles the deer prefer most and go there.

[TimberMuleys]

I believe that if the WDFW i.e. game commission  proposes to ban trail cams especially at any time of the year it will use the spread of CWD as the reasoning. Weather it's justified or not. But this discussion/vote seems to be started on the ethical or non ethical use and time if any they should be used. Obviously each person has their own reasoning for usage or non usage of trail cams. Then cell cameras got put in the discussion. I like to see what's out there on my trail cams and even what's out there in areas I don't hunt. I like to get a feel for the number and what predators are also out there. Just my take and opinion.

Completely agree on the CWD. However, I think baiting will go first, that’s how Idaho is. If we lost baiting, and trail cams, harvest percentages would plummet. Still hunting is the only other game in town in thick areas, and we all know that it is a very difficult thing. I’ve killed a few bucks till hunting, but I’ve also had a lot of experience and mistakes made to get me there. I think people looking at the numbers know that cell cams aren’t killing enough deer to even get a noticeable %, because even with cell cams, our numbers are going down.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hunter399]

In general people are going to shoot the first legal animal they see...with of without knowledge of that trophy buck...not everyone has the time or resources to hold out for mature deer.


And I don't think lumping this conversation into other hunting restrictions is accurate.

I've never used cell cams, don't use bait.  Currently run cams on my Washington and Idaho properties. Didn't grow up using cams, and have only ran them a couple times in limited numbers for two quality tags.

In a nutshell for me personally.
I go into the woods to get away. Don't much care for crowd's so I make it a point when I'm in the woods to avoid people. I don't want to have my picture taken around every tree. Especially real time

Secondly cell cams aren't fair chase IMO. They have the ability to be abused. Real time data for a location your not at...but it gives you direction. It's like using drones or... flying. That type of abuse of real time Intel is the reason for restrictions on day of flight hunting.
If you where hiking into cam A to hunt but cam B alerts to a good buck. You change plans, right...

I'm not a purist...I'm a realist... other states banning cams during hunting season's and cell cams in general are able to justify it... record books recognize it as a disqualifier if used in a certain way..so there's an issue that at some point will need attention in WA.

I don't think its to much of an ask for people to just acknowledge technology breeds rules..
And if you don't want more rules be wary of overusing technology.

Very similar to shed hunting,.. people couldn't figure out how to manage themselves, it got to popular, became the new fad, people are using drones to locate sheds, and bingo...
 forced States to create rules, restrictions and seasons.
.

Well said! 
My son has trail cams, we use them minimally.  Hunting has been around for thousands of years.  Cameras have been around for 20yrs or so.  Some on here don't even remember life without them.  I do.  I believe it was simpler without cameras.  Does anyone think Cameras have made us better hunters?  In my opinion they have dumbed us down.  I would have no problem banning them during certain months.   

I would disagree, again, I think it depends on whose hands they are in. Some may become lazy, but for me, I think it has increased my knowledge of how deer use the mountains I hunt. With no way of glassing, I don’t get much time to actually watch big buck behavior, because there isn’t a whole lot of time to watch a big buck on his feet in the timber, especially when you cant see him until he’s less than 50yds from you. Having these cameras has increased my knowledge on how big bucks move, when they move, and where they go. I have learned also learned the mannerisms of how whitetails hit scrapes and approach areas. I get to see how often a deer walks with the wind in their face when approaching a salt, or hay pile, and that they don’t walk without the wind in their favor much at all, at least not the ones I have seen. Almost all of these things would be very difficult to figure out by just watching big bucks in heavy timber, especially without snow.

Like said, I can see where technology could go and getting worse than the already questionable ethics of cell cameras. But, I don’t think just doing a full ban on them is the answer. Maybe Washington can put a ban on companies selling plans for immediate sending, like they have to wait 24 hours? (that’s how mine are set)

Besides in the early 1900s like previously mentioned, do we have a single example of restrictions on hunting leading to better populations or higher success percentages?

I would agree with many that I don’t like having my picture taken on cameras, and I don’t think have real time images in the places you are hunting is fair chase. However, I think banning bucks harvested by using that technology from entering record books is enough. Why make it illegal? I don’t think personal etiquette and preference is enough to make something else illegal.

Bringing up that other states banned them so we can too doesnt make a whole lot of sense to me. Would anyone on this platform recommended wolves for Colorado? I’m sure someone brought up, “well, Washington, Oregon, and Idaho did it”. I think if the technology keeps advancing, we may need to draw a line somewhere, but I think we should sit back and wait for more data, at least for now.

There’s really no numbers to state that cameras are leading to higher success rates or total deer killed. I guess maybe the question isn’t whether people want to ban cell cams, but if they think everyone should have the same base on hunting ethics and fair chase? Might be another good thread. It seems to me that quite a few guys want them banned because they’re not “fair chase” and it leads to “grocery shopping”, and I personally just don’t see any issue with it. They’re still only killing 1 deer, if they even kill it, if cellular cameras were as simple, as described by some, more deer would be dying. But it’s not that easy, I find it ironic that most of the guys on here so far that are the most vocal about being against them also say that have very little interactions with them. It sounds easier than it is. I would love to see some of these guys who say “it’s so easy” go kill a buck even over 160” because of a cell camera. It’ll take years for a lot. We have low populations, short seasons, and already have it harder than just about anywhere else in the west. Why try to make it harder just because you personally don’t see it ethical?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not even assuming your baiting nor do i care, but if most people running cameras in mountains are running salt or bait how does that tell you how deer are using the mountains?  If they are just migrating to bait?  The idea that cameras don't cause success to go up is absolute BS.  The no brainer is.... if it wasn't easier or success didn't go up , most wouldn't be using them?  There are simple facts to camera use that most just don't want to admit.  I would be curious to know the percentage of folks using bait under cameras?  Or are most just randomly throwing them up on trails?

It really depends on the area,on if a camera or bait will give any advantage. Heavy hunted public land will have a very low advantage. Deer/elk will change pattern regardless.
Private or public land that has low hunting pressure,it may give a tiny advantage. That's my honest opinion.

Now I can tell ya without a doubt,heavy hunted public land .
Which is where I'm at most times. Picture count will go from thousands a month to a handful of pics for the month.
During the fall season. I have spots the elk will disappear for 3 months exactly,you could set your watch or calendar to it.
Advantage of knowing a buck/elk was there mid-summer.
Getting a game animal from trail cam to the back of a pickup is harder than most think. It takes some luck. Years of work,to figure the fall season pattern.

[LDennis24]

I believe that if the WDFW i.e. game commission  proposes to ban trail cams especially at any time of the year it will use the spread of CWD as the reasoning. Weather it's justified or not. But this discussion/vote seems to be started on the ethical or non ethical use and time if any they should be used. Obviously each person has their own reasoning for usage or non usage of trail cams. Then cell cameras got put in the discussion. I like to see what's out there on my trail cams and even what's out there in areas I don't hunt. I like to get a feel for the number and what predators are also out there. Just my take and opinion.

So question for you, if every hunter on public land started using game cameras and had 15-30 of them in the woods, how many cameras would you be seeing on land such as a single school land dnr parcel? Would you think it was cool to walk into the woods and every 20 feet see a game camera? Some folks who put game cameras out get the attitude that if they put the camera there it's somehow their spot. It's been discussed on here before. And sometimes there will be 6+ cameras looking at the same wallow! Doesn't sound very appealing and it's not if you have seen it. It's irritating and takes away from the person who wants to be out in nature and not be walking up on "surveillance" every time they come around a tree.

[Feathernfurr]

That’s just not enough time to see that kind of impact. Wildlife and fisheries studies are often conducted for 20 plus years to quantify the impacts of changes in an ecosystem of management technique. I’m not sure what your job field is or your educational background is but I would suggest looking into biostatistics. With a small enough data sample, such as 3 years, I could easily suggest that the consumption of Coca Cola has a direct correlation to the decline in deer harvest. Causation vs correlation.

Your cell cameras didn’t help you harvest your buck this year except they absolutely did. They showed you a buck to target, they drove you to scour the entire mountain for clues, they did because of the things they taught you.

Using cameras on bait is the lowest hanging fruit. Start getting cameras in bedding areas and funnels and they’re 100x more effective. I have run cameras in the past that have been on beds and gotten photos of bucks in the bed for 14 hours a day.

I’m really not trying to be critical but I think you’re just too close to the problem to see the big picture. I used to be in the same place. I have 10 cell cams and run them with a groups of hunting buddies that totally close to 40 cell cams. We harvest a ton of mature bucks and elk because of them and have all openly admitted that it’s unfair.  Half the places we hunt require a 30m-2h drive followed by launching a boat and 30 minute boat ride before we even walk in. At the end of the day, we’ll keep using them, because everyone else is and we won’t put ourselves behind the 8 ball. We won’t self regulate when it puts us at a disadvantage, which is why it needs to be addressed by the community as a whole.

[hunter399]

I believe that if the WDFW i.e. game commission  proposes to ban trail cams especially at any time of the year it will use the spread of CWD as the reasoning. Weather it's justified or not. But this discussion/vote seems to be started on the ethical or non ethical use and time if any they should be used. Obviously each person has their own reasoning for usage or non usage of trail cams. Then cell cameras got put in the discussion. I like to see what's out there on my trail cams and even what's out there in areas I don't hunt. I like to get a feel for the number and what predators are also out there. Just my take and opinion.

So question for you, if every hunter on public land started using game cameras and had 15-30 of them in the woods, how many cameras would you be seeing on land such as a single school land dnr parcel? Would you think it was cool to walk into the woods and every 20 feet see a game camera? Some folks who put game cameras out get the attitude that if they put the camera there it's somehow their spot. It's been discussed on here before. And sometimes there will be 6+ cameras looking at the same wallow! Doesn't sound very appealing and it's not if you have seen it. It's irritating and takes away from the person who wants to be out in nature and not be walking up on "surveillance" every time they come around a tree.

I know a few parcels right now,trail cam or not.
People are there recreational activities every day.
You can show up any day of week ,your never alone.

[TimberMuleys]

That’s just not enough time to see that kind of impact. Wildlife and fisheries studies are often conducted for 20 plus year to quantify the impacts of changes in an ecosystem oof management technique. I’m not sure what your job field is or your educational background is but I would suggest looking into biostatistics. With a small enough data sample, such as 3 years, I could easily suggest that the consumption of Coca Cola has a direct correlation to the decline in deer harvest. Causation vs correlation.

Your cell cameras didn’t help you harvest your buck this year except they absolutely did. They showed you a buck to target, they drove you to scour the entire mountain for clues, they did because of the things they taught you.

Using cameras on bait is the lowest hanging fruit. Start getting cameras in bedding areas and funnels and they’re 100x more effective. I have run cameras in the past that have been on beds and gotten photos of bucks in the bed for 14 hours a day.

I’m really not trying to be critical but I think you’re just too close to the problem to see the big picture. I used to be in the same place. I have 10 cell cams and run them with a groups of hunting buddies that totally close to 40 cell cams. We harvest a ton of mature bucks and elk because of them and have all openly admitted that it’s unfair.  Half the places we hunt require a 30m-2h drive followed by launching a boat and 30 minute boat ride before we even walk in. At the end of the day, we’ll keep using them, because everyone else is and we won’t put ourselves behind the 8 ball. We won’t self regulate when it puts us at a disadvantage, which is why it needs to be addressed by the community as a whole.

Coca Cola, really? Ok, well then by that logic we cannot ban any cell cameras for the next 20 years because we don’t know what the implications are yet. Let’s also just open unlimited tags for ungulates and not fix it for 20 years because we don’t have enough numbers to support that our populations are dangerously low. I know those are outlandish, but do you not see the flaw in waiting 20 years to make an adjustment to management strategies? If the numbers are already showing you something? A 30% drop being maintained over three years should at least be alarming! I understand 3 years isn’t a lot, I have been speaking with our local biologist regularly. I am an electrician right now, but my buddy is studying to be a wildlife biologist and I study biology in my free time on occasion. However, the WDFW numbers are very clear. Populations are down, and so are harvest numbers, despite there being more hunters.

My argument is that I didn’t kill my buck because of cell cameras. I would’ve done the same thing if I had normal cameras. It was my #1 spot this year. If anything, if I didn’t have cell cameras, I wouldn’t have been able to know what was living on other mountains and wouldn’t have hunted a few 160 type bucks for a few days. I know that trail cameras 100% aided in me killing my buck, however, I still had to obey the wind, and still hunt through nasty terrain and make it count at 32yds. Cell cam or not, most people aren’t making it happen. That’s not to toot my own horn at all, I’m just saying, cell cams don’t just all of a sudden make it easy to kill big deer.

I have put cameras on funnels and beds, once again, that is why I think some of my salts and cameras are more effective than others. I try putting my salts along where I think bucks would feel safe traveling between feed and bedding. I also put cameras on beds. In fact, I have pictures of a tagged bull moose in a bed. When I spoke to the biologist about it, she said they didn’t have any tagged bulls in the whole unit. So, after digging a little deeper, she found that the bull had been relocated in 2020. He then had traveled 65 miles as a crow flies and been living where I had him on cam for much of the summer! I thought that was pretty cool! Bull number 246 if anyone is curious.

Completely agree with having the cell cameras a long distance away. My cell cams are over 3 hours of driving and 1-5 miles of hiking to  get back to. That is why I argue that it doesn’t mean anything if I get a buck to come in to the cell cam. Because, most people use cell cams where they don’t have time to go check cards enough or don’t want to spend the gas money.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[EnglishSetter]

Guess I'm in the 2nd largest group of voters.

If you want a cam during hunting season, then you need to attend it manually.  i.e. no cell cams during hunting season.

[hunter399]

I'll give a example here.
Of course I only run traditional cameras.

This buck showed during the summer months.
I pulled the camera before fall season starts. Over the course of modern. Most days 2-6 pickups at gate,I was only able to hunt at that spot twice , with nobody there.
I put camera back up in December,he hasn't shown.
Did I really get some great advantage.
His pattern most likely changed during fall, always a chance he is still alive. Here I'm running cams, can't even tell if he is alive.
All I got was some pics to drool over

[TimberMuleys]

I'll give a example here.
Of course I only run traditional cameras.

This buck showed during the summer months.
I pulled the camera before fall season starts. Over the course of modern. Most days 2-6 pickups,I was only able to hunt at that spot twice , with nobody there.
I put camera back up in December,he hasn't shown.
Did I really get some great advantage.
His pattern most likely changed during fall, always a chance he is still alive.

Dandy buck, great example.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Feathernfurr]

I'll give a example here.
Of course I only run traditional cameras.

This buck showed during the summer months.
I pulled the camera before fall season starts. Over the course of modern. Most days 2-6 pickups at gate,I was only able to hunt at that spot twice , with nobody there.
I put camera back up in December,he hasn't shown.
Did I really get some great advantage.
His pattern most likely changed during fall, always a chance he is still alive. Here I'm running cams, can't even tell if he is alive.
All I got was some pics to drool over

I mean I think you’re making some of our points. You know the buck was there from running cameras in the off season, but they weren’t there in the season and therefore didn’t assist in you harvesting said buck.