Would you support any of these camera bans?

[kentrek]

I don’t think cameras are the end all. They are something we can control. 600 yard shots we can’t control. We can control drones.   We can control spotlights, we can control thermal imaging. We can’t control binos. Hopefully you see what I mean.  Yes, there is a list. Predator management, tribal hunting, again some we can control, some we can’t.   Season are easily controlled. That’s why they get shorter. Antler restrictions can be controlled. Those that don’t care about if it’s a spike versus a three point care about that.  The goal, a healthy herd that we can hunt for generations to come.  The better we manage things the longer it will last and the more opportunity there will be.

The #1 way to better management of lands is with cameras and having a hunting culture that is fine not filling a tag...changing hunting culture from its brown its down to wanting mature male animal is a must or we will self regulate until there is only low nunber special permit hunts....the winter grounds will continue to fill up with homes and the summer grounds will continue to get pound by hikers...that land can only produce so many animals and i dont see that increasing over my lifetime...if hunters self regulate our culture we might just be able to let that young kid shoot a spiker while the old buck killer still has a chance at somthing special...and simple put i believe trail cameras are a great way to induce this type of hunting culture...i get my butt kicked year in and out hunting deer that potentialy might not even be killable...if i wasnt chaising ghosts would i be popping forkers when i hit random areas with no scouting my expectations instantly drop..look at whats going on in PA....they are getting some slammer bucks these days...20 years ago ? Spiker bucks....thats not becasue of any rules...its because the hunting culture changed


#1 threat to hunting is hunter regulating hunters

[kentrek]

A very real reality is we will have AI electonic binos very soon....the birders all ready have them...id think efforts to curb game finding binos would be a much better cause

Along with thermals....the night crew in every state was noticably higher this year along with chatter of using thermals while hunting...much much more common then people admitt and more detrimental then cameras ever thought of being

If you want to ban somthing ban these

[fishngamereaper]

Maybe they'll make the cams capable of shooting the deer for you
Or at least gps darting it so you can find it easier...at least for the guys that don't have time to "hunt"....

Everyone gets a trophy right...
It all started going downhill with millennials 

What is your point? Are you just trying to belittle people that don’t make hunting a priority in their life but still want to eat wild game? Maybe just bashing millennials because you can’t refute the argument put forth? Not trying to accuse you, I’m just confused?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lighten up Francis...I was hunting before you where even a thought.. ...
Your response proved my point... hunting can't always be a priority obviously..been there done that...but that doesn't mean people deserve anything out of the hunting time they get... simplifying it with cams giving you minute by minute updates is not hunting....it's grocery shopping..
My scenarios you reacted to are real life possibilities actually in action on some private ranches...so where do you draw the line.. genuine question...

At least I didn't bash Gen Z...those kids ...man I tell ya...btw anyone got a spare room for a 21 year old 

And for the record..I'm not anti trail cams...I'm pro self regulation... otherwise someone will regulate for you...it seems pretty simple to me...

[CarbonHunter]

The argument that you don’t have time to hunt as much as the other hunter and that you are entitled to use technology to ensure you get your “kill” is ludicrous. I am all for people who scout all year and I have no problem with cameras that you walk to and check the photos. My issue is with the killer (no hunting to this) that decides where they hunt in the morning by reviewing the photos that were sent to their smart phone while they slept to determine which of the dozens of killing sites they will go to so they can pull the trigger.

I also do not see how using a cell camera to notify you that something is in your trap is in anyway the same as a person sitting by a fire waiting for a notification on their phone to go to the field to kill an animal. There is a difference between the sport of hunting and the art of trapping.

[hughjorgan]

A very real reality is we will have AI electonic binos very soon....the birders all ready have them...id think efforts to curb game finding binos would be a much better cause

Along with thermals....the night crew in every state was noticably higher this year along with chatter of using thermals while hunting...much much more common then people admitt and more detrimental then cameras ever thought of being

If you want to ban somthing ban these

You realize hunting with thermals is illegal right?

RCW 77.15.450

Spotlighting big game—Penalty.

(1) A person is guilty of spotlighting big game in the second degree if the person hunts big game with the aid of a spotlight, other artificial light, or night vision equipment while in possession or control of a firearm, bow and arrow, or cross bow. For purposes of this section, "night vision equipment" includes electronic light amplification devices, thermal imaging devices, and other comparable equipment used to enhance night vision

[LDennis24]

It’s interesting you arguing taking away cameras is taking away hunting rights, yet I am arguing there won’t be h7nting period if folks don’t wake up and curb technology.    If cameras are so important for your harvest then I’d think they must be contributing to more harvest. 

 

[Feathernfurr]

Kenetrek, I feel like you’re not reading these posts very closely. No one suggested those states suddenly exploded with game. All of these states with the exception of New Hampshire have a lot of trophy opportunities. They’re not trying to make things better per se, rather they’re trying to maintain what they have and keep it from getting worse.

Timber, populations were not necessarily better in the “good ol days”, many were actually lower. The difference was the hunters per capita were far lower, and hunters often harvested the first opportunity they got. Some of the management techniques of the past that took away hunting rights are far more consequential than taking away cameras. Like I mentioned, taking away the most effective way to manage predators, and a spring predator season is far more detrimental than removing cameras during the season.
The idea behind limiting cell cameras gives animal a better chance at survival, less animals pulled off the landscape = higher populations. There’s a reason most states B&C books have 10x the entries in the 40-70’s vs 2000’s. It’s because bucks made it to maturity, which has been proven to be more negatively impacted by guys harvesting 4.5-5.5yo deer than 1.5-2.5yo deer. Elk age class is slightly different and less impactful. Cameras and technology allow a lot more mature and near mature game animals to be removed from the population, it’s undeniable. Hunting is not meant to be easy, and the idea that the “little guy that has responsibilities” deserves an easy harvest is not how it should work. Anyone with a 2-3 days to scout a year can get out and kill a doe or young buck during general season with a gun, it’s just not that hard, regardless of area. As more hunters with better equipment and gear hit the woods with higher success rates you have to find ways to mitigate their impacts on game populations. There’s a reason guys don’t get to hunt elk with rifles in September, mule deer on winter range in late October, ducks with punt guns. If we still had those things in place there wouldn’t be any animals left to hunt.

You said it in your own success post, you had given up on the 180” and had plenty of pictures of 160’s that you decided to chase. Had you stuck to that plan you would’ve killed a 160” that may have been a 180” next year.

Thanks for the response, I’m glad to have some productive discussion. However, I would encourage you took look at deer populations and hunter numbers. Because there are plenty of numbers that show hunter numbers have gone down since 1980. Also, where are you getting that the populations aren’t down from where they used to be? It’s blatantly obvious that they are, not just in WA, but across the west. And any study will show you that. (Except for elk, elk are doing great as a whole)

Also, where are you seeing data that shows that cameras are negatively affecting ungulate populations? Because if we want to go down the populations route, let’s start using cell cams to knock down the predator populations. I did a big write up in the “Would you check someone else’s trail camera” thread and the numbers of how many deer people are killing versus predators. If you are worried about age class and populations, cameras are not the problem. And if you still don’t believe me, I will send you some studies to prove it to you.

You also said “Anyone with a 2-3 days to scout a year can get out and kill a doe or young buck during general season with a gun, it’s just not that hard, regardless of area.”         Which is completely not true, at least not for mule deer in my area. I ran 20ish cameras this summer and wasn’t within range a buck, let alone legal, until the last day of rifle. I had a multi-season tag, hunted at least a couple days in each season, and scouted more than 99.999% of people. You can say “well that is because you’re not a good hunter” or whatever. However, the fact is there isn’t a lot of deer, and not near what there was even 5 years ago.

You also mentioned success rates?!? In WA?!? Let’s compare success rates to any other state in the west and compare. Let me know what you come back with.

Also side note, about shooting 160 bucks, the vast majority of bucks don’t even ever get past the 160-170 mark. You could be shooting a 10 year old 160 buck that never made it over 160.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You’re looking at too small of a data sample my friend. You are aware of the impacts of market hunting, the implementation of conservation/management in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s, and the fact that deer and elk populations in many western states were on the brink of extrpation, right?

The argument of hunter number going down has been discussed to death here and in every state agency across the country. The numbers that suggest there are less hunters are generally not accurate or are “per capita” as in there was 10% of the population that were hunters and now it’s 8%, except it’s 8% of 4 million vs. 1 million. Obviously these are not accurate numbers, but you get the jest, and I will gladly swap from my phone to my laptop to argue studies with you. Ask any R3 coordinator in any of the states, Hunter numbers are not lower.

Again, read closer. I suggested cell camera are a bigger threat to mature and near mature bucks and bulls. I’m not suggesting they are the sole cause of population decline. To suggest such a thing would be silly, seeing as cell cameras haven’t even been in the hunting space long enough to have a sample size to determine any sort of causation. However, one could easily argue that if cell camera, and camera technology lead to hunter being even 5% more effective at harvesting animals, over time you would absolutely see an impact. Imagine if every single unit in the state had a 10% increase in harvest odds. The math for tag alottment doesn’t mean the state can afford to remove the amount of game animals as they sell tags. It relys on the fact that people will generally be as successful as they historically have been, and accounting for new hunters impact on efficiency as well as the removal of older more efficient hunters. I never said predators didn’t have a greater impact than hunters, but imagine if the impact of predators and hunters continues to increase. Game populations don’t just spring up out of no where.

I stand by what I said, even with struggling populations, people that put in 2-3 days of scouting and have a decent knowledge of what to look for can harvest does/young bucks with ease. There’s a reason the orange army in trucks shoot a bunch of does and forkies, it’s easy. You may not have been within range, but you hunted somewhere hard with low pressure, which probably has a smaller population density, and often times has higher quality bucks because it gets less pressure, because of the low density.

The unit I hunted this year in Washington had deer and elk success rates that were far higher than the two units I’ve hunted in Idaho for the last decade.

In some areas that’s absolutely true about 160” deer. Guess what though, if you shoot a 160” every year there is a 100% chance you don’t shoot a 180” 😂 the score more obviously changes vastly by species and location. But you can very realistically argue that 3.5-4.5yo bucks and satellite bulls are far more susceptible to harvest than 5.5 and herd bulls, you throw in extreme tech and you wipe out that age class and eventually down the line there are no 5.5+ and herd bulls left.

I hate all of you for making me type this all out on my phone 😂

[kentrek]

In some areas that’s absolutely true about 160” deer. Guess what though, if you shoot a 160” every year there is a 100% chance you don’t shoot a 180” 😂 the score more obviously changes vastly by species and location. But you can very realistically argue that 3.5-4.5yo bucks and satellite bulls are far more susceptible to harvest than 5.5 and herd bulls, you throw in extreme tech and you wipe out that age class and eventually down the line there are no 5.5+ and herd bulls left.

I hate all of you for making me type this all out on my phone 😂

Take it one step further amd how do you encourage the hunting public to hold out for those 5.5 year old animals when they dont even think they exist...you show them a freaking trail cam photo 

The score is just an example of a healthy moma deer that had lots of fat and wasnt preasured and then 4-8 years of great conditions for the buck she gave birth to grow into a great animal....it takes 7 generations to optimize this growth

Age is whats important, score just shows the environment is in check...in my opinion

I also hate typing these things out

[kentrek]

And as a side note....look at the bulls washington produced this year...after 30 years of trail cams records are still being beat

[LDennis24]

Maybe they'll make the cams capable of shooting the deer for you
Or at least gps darting it so you can find it easier...at least for the guys that don't have time to "hunt"....

Everyone gets a trophy right...
It all started going downhill with millennials 

What is your point? Are you just trying to belittle people that don’t make hunting a priority in their life but still want to eat wild game? Maybe just bashing millennials because you can’t refute the argument put forth? Not trying to accuse you, I’m just confused?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If your goal is to eat wild game why do you care what size antlers the deer has?

[furbearer365]

It's not the ban I don't trust, it's the state enforcing it. And I mean that whole heartedly. Washington banning cameras and Wyoming banning them would be different. Wyoming still wants you to be successful, they want you to continue your rights, they manage their game for the right reasons. Nothing about any of that applies to Washington, and if they banned them, it would solely be done to effect hunters and their success

[Feathernfurr]

And as a side note....look at the bulls washington produced this year...after 30 years of trail cams records are still being beat

Agreed, but I think Washington bulls has a lot more to do with the fact that you can’t kill branch antler bulls in a lot of the states units lol, or even hunt them otc and not cameras.

People held out for big bucks long before cameras were around. Although I’ll still point back to the argument I’ve made in some of the posts. I’m all for off season cameras for inventory, just not during active hunting seasons. Rub em from January 1 to August 30, so you know what’s around. I’m aware in lots of areas you have different bucks in season than summer. But people for decades have managed to keep track of big bucks on summer and winter ranges without use of tech.

[kentrek]

And as a side note....look at the bulls washington produced this year...after 30 years of trail cams records are still being beat

Agreed, but I think Washington bulls has a lot more to do with the fact that you can’t kill branch antler bulls in a lot of the states units lol, or even hunt them otc and not cameras.

People held out for big bucks long before cameras were around. Although I’ll still point back to the argument I’ve made in some of the posts. I’m all for off season cameras for inventory, just not during active hunting seasons. Rub em from January 1 to August 30, so you know what’s around. I’m aware in lots of areas you have different bucks in season than summer. But people for decades have managed to keep track of big bucks on summer and winter ranges without use of tech.

Unless your hunting velvet animals i dont think a summer camera season does much for hunters..its fun but honestly boots on the ground is extremely effective june-august..the real information is the transition periods.

I have zero doubt they will do a trail camera ban in washington, just like lead ammo and anything an everyrhing they can possible ban they are going to....but with 100% i can tell you the hunting will not get better and the same people will move to ban other things that they deem is why they arnt having success..we are killing ourselves 

[Gooseassassin]

https://www.outdoorlife.com/hunting/idaho-hunting-technology/.     Same deal there and Utah and Arizona

[TimberMuleys]

Maybe they'll make the cams capable of shooting the deer for you
Or at least gps darting it so you can find it easier...at least for the guys that don't have time to "hunt"....

Everyone gets a trophy right...
It all started going downhill with millennials 

What is your point? Are you just trying to belittle people that don’t make hunting a priority in their life but still want to eat wild game? Maybe just bashing millennials because you can’t refute the argument put forth? Not trying to accuse you, I’m just confused?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lighten up Francis...I was hunting before you where even a thought.. ...
Your response proved my point... hunting can't always be a priority obviously..been there done that...but that doesn't mean people deserve anything out of the hunting time they get... simplifying it with cams giving you minute by minute updates is not hunting....it's grocery shopping..
My scenarios you reacted to are real life possibilities actually in action on some private ranches...so where do you draw the line.. genuine question...

At least I didn't bash Gen Z...those kids ...man I tell ya...btw anyone got a spare room for a 21 year old 

And for the record..I'm not anti trail cams...I'm pro self regulation... otherwise someone will regulate for you...it seems pretty simple to me...

Yeah, I may have been a little harsh in my last response, and I apologize for that. Just out of curiosity, have you ever used a cell camera? I completely do not believe it is “grocery shopping”. Most of the time, batteries don’t last worth Jack if you have cameras on immediate sending when taking pictures. And even if you do, how many mature deer are you getting staying at a bait pile in daylight more than 15 minutes? The rare time where someone can go shoot a buck directly from a cellular camera is if they are hunting right next to their house or already close enough to that area, that they most likely would’ve gotten a chance anyways. The cell cam I had out for my buck this year only had him 1 time of the 2 months before I shot him. And not one time in the last 5 weeks before I shot him. God doesn’t just give you the key to killing every deer because you bought a cell cam. It is a very useful tool in the right hands, but to many, it doesn’t really do too much for killing the deer. More just helping busy people still be able to target specific animals, or people with 0 time to still get a decent chance.

I guess we just differ on the “grocery shopping”. I would rather there be people “grocery shopping” with their cell cameras than those deer just getting ate by predators anyways. I mean, wouldn’t you? If more people are in tune with eating wild game and the benefits of hunting, and our culture as a whole was back to the way it used to be, I think we will be much closer to the “good old days” than taking away 1 tool that may be unfit for hunting purists to use.

I think there can be something to the other arguments brought forth, but anyone worried about populations and wanting to ban cell cams makes no sense. Banning cell cams with our current predator issues is like plucking a leaf off a weed and expecting for it to stop growing. We have been tip toeing and trying our best to work around it for so long now. The few deer that may get saved from cell cams will be diminished the the deer being hemorrhaged away by predators.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk