Trail cams on public land: how is that ok?

[OntarioHunter]

Interesting…I bet the number of WTs that have been entered and accepted into PY in the last ten or twenty years that weren’t taken with intel from trail cams is a tiny fraction of those that were killed with intel from trail cams.

I don’t really care about PY trophy scores. I generally have no problem with trail cams until conditions get outta hand, like abandonment and having 100 cams on every water hole.

But it is interesting as I can guarantee very few people who enter into their record book are following their fair chase guidelines to the T.

They are big on hunting ethics. Several years ago on another forum I encountered a posted published story written by a crippled Texas big shot who killed what might have been the P&Y record bull elk on a NM reservation canned hunt. Keep in mind this incident took place at the end of August in one of the most temperate states. Anyway, a bull was bugled and walked into the party (the dude, his wife, and a couple of guides) right at dark and he stuck an arrow in it. Bull turns and steps out of sight. Doesn't run. Obvious that he hit it. Guides want to look for it but he demands they wait till morning. Won't even let them walk up to check for blood. I mean, he writes all this shit up like he's doing something smart. Next morning they return and his wife finds a huge pool of blood where he shot it. Thirty yards away they find the huge bull's carcass. At that time of year at that place there's little doubt the animal was soured thoroughly. According to the dude it green scored well ahead of the NM state record. I immediately wrote Pope and Young a scathing letter. How could they fill their website page with a huge pledge for inspiring hunting ethics and still consider letting this slob's trophy into the books? I linked them to the story and pointed out all the ethical issues: shooting something (especially with an arrow!) as darkness is setting in, refusing to follow the guides' advice, and failing to attempt to locate a hit animal when conditions dictate that it will spoil rapidly unless dressed out. I would go so far as to say the guides MUST have advised the dude if the animal wasn't at least quartered immediaty after death, the meat would all spoil. He simply didn't care. P&Y's response was interesting. They thanked me for my diligence in reporting this incident. Clearly there were some ethical concerns. The incident was going before the board of directors for adjudication. I never heard anything further. Hopefully P&Y stuck to their guns and refused to accept it. That's the only thing that means anything to these disgusting filthy rich don't give a shit bone collectors. I have a feeling they caved in to a high paid lawyer and let it slide. They shouldn't have. At that time their website preached ethics that went beyond just fair chase.

 

[gouch]

I know of one P&Y "trophy" that, according to reliable sources, actually died of sudden onset lead poisoning. The arrow, that appeared to have penetrated about 4 inches, was added later for the grip and gin photo. I am sure that was not the first nor the last.

 

[Benfromalbuquerque]

I put a half dozen trail cameras out for the summers the Lee Metcalf area south of town. 2013-2017. It was a 12+ hour day of hiking to swap the cards. I'd change the cards 2-3 times a summer, was always extra exciting to get home and take a peek. Only once snapped a pic of a person (had that one on a private public boundary) and I doubt anybody noticed them, as none were near a trailhead or trail. I really enjoyed it - have been too lazy to put them out, but I think i'm going to surround a bear den with cameras this spring. As soon as the snow hardens, I'm going to try and hike in and hang them up - provided @sptiz gets them back to me. Sorry if I ruin anybody's precious nature time.

Now that’d be wrong if you drove a SxS in the Metcalf to get to those cams. But no, you’re the kind of rarity who will hike six hours to collect cards. I think you’re doing more work than the biologists and fully support that!

 

[bulldawg10]

Come on dude, not even close to the same thing

View attachment 264851

View attachment 264852

And that sat map isn't the same as a paper map...not even close.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

And that sat map isn't the same as a paper map...not even close.

… I’d actually argue the opposite.

A good topo is far more useful than aerial in a lot of cases.

Honestly most of OnX has been available for 50+ years it just required some work to DIY put it together. They just streamlined it… nothing like having a cell cam, no comparison.

 

[1896]

Eyeballs good, cameras bad.

 

[FI460]

nothing like having a cell cam, no comparison.

I'm not sure you can convince me of this. And I'm one of your biggest fans.

Impact on the resource? I think onx takes the cake. It's certainly put more people in the woods.

I know a few folks locally that run cellular cams. One has about 20 regular cams and 2 cell cams. In 3 years he hasn't killed a buck or bull he got on his cellular cam. His home is about 45 minutes from one cam and the guy hunts 20x as much as I do so it's not an effort issue.

All that said I wouldn't be burnt up about banning them.

 

[bulldawg10]

I'm not sure you can convince me of this. And I'm one of your biggest fans.

Impact on the resource? I think onx takes the cake. It's certainly put more people in the woods.

I know a few folks locally that run cellular cams. One has about 20 regular cams and 2 cell cams. In 3 years he hasn't killed a buck or bull he got on his cellular cam. His home is about 45 minutes from one cam and the guy hunts 20x as much as I do so it's not an effort issue.

All that said I wouldn't be burnt up about banning them.

My example...I want to put cell cams on water that's 11 hours from where I live. Sure I'll get pics of game, but I'll also be able to see my water holes and see when I need to go service or fill them. Cell cams are illegal in my state though.

The elk and general wildlife would benefit from my use of a cell cam.

I have no way to pull cards most of the year. A cell cam is my best option.

So many other things have advanced the effectiveness of a hunter, just as much, if not far more than a cell cam would.

It's just more regulation when it isn't necessary. More and more regulation isn't a good thing.

 

[Benfromalbuquerque]

I'm not sure you can convince me of this. And I'm one of your biggest fans.

Impact on the resource? I think onx takes the cake. It's certainly put more people in the woods.

I know a few folks locally that run cellular cams. One has about 20 regular cams and 2 cell cams. In 3 years he hasn't killed a buck or bull he got on his cellular cam. His home is about 45 minutes from one cam and the guy hunts 20x as much as I do so it's not an effort issue.

All that said I wouldn't be burnt up about banning them.

Rueben Soady was 43 before he got his first buck and weren’t for lack of trying. With some guys it’s just one a those.

 

[Straight Arrow]

So many other things have advanced the effectiveness of a hunter, just as much, if not far more than a cell cam would.

Death by a thousand cuts, Mr. Slicer.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I'm not sure you can convince me of this. And I'm one of your biggest fans.

Impact on the resource? I think onx takes the cake. It's certainly put more people in the woods.

I know a few folks locally that run cellular cams. One has about 20 regular cams and 2 cell cams. In 3 years he hasn't killed a buck or bull he got on his cellular cam. His home is about 45 minutes from one cam and the guy hunts 20x as much as I do so it's not an effort issue.

All that said I wouldn't be burnt up about banning them.

Your point is definitely valid in terms of resource usage, ie lots of people use OnX. All I’m saying is that that information was available at the plat office, aerial imagery has been available for a long time, topo maps, etc. it was way more effort, but you could get it and put it all together.

But having 30 cell cams out that ping your phone when something walks by and stream video, essentially virtual hunting.

OnX probably is more impactful via crowding with big game hunting on public land in the west, but hunting Whitetail back east I think Cams are more impactful.

No one is leaving OnX in the woods to rot though so there is that…

 

[Lawnboy]

I can respect other's opinions and disdain but here in Montana they are legal (non cellular). I just wish those that hate them would quit vandalizing other's property (cameras) when they find one. No different than stumbling onto someone's camp. Hopefully you'd not pilfer through their items just cause you're pissed to see it there.

 

[Benfromalbuquerque]

I can respect other's opinions and disdain but here in Montana they are legal (non cellular). I just wish those that hate them would quit vandalizing other's property (cameras) when they find one. No different than stumbling onto someone's camp. Hopefully you'd not pilfer through their items just cause you're pissed to see it there.

I fully support non-transmitting game cams on public land. We have the same deal here in NM.
Our morals differ on who can access public land cams. Sure, game cams are personal property, yet not same as camps. Those who mess with camps are potentially putting a stranger’s life at risk.
I think public land game cams and imagery therein are public domain upon placement. When I place well-hidden cams on public land it is my thinking that they should be there later. If the cams are removed or mutilated by a bear, that’s my fault.

 

[Moserkr]

I fully support non-transmitting game cams on public land. We have the same deal here in NM.
Our morals differ on who can access public land cams. Sure, game cams are personal property, yet not same as camps. Those who mess with camps are potentially putting a stranger’s life at risk.
I think public land game cams and imagery therein are public domain upon placement. When I place well-hidden cams on public land it is my thinking that they should be there later. If the cams are removed or mutilated by a bear, that’s my fault.

Im with you on that statement. I use cameras year round and cant access them for 1/2 the year or more due to gates being closed for winter weather. Then I have to hike miles to check them. If someone wants to download my pictures, if they even find my cams, I have no issues with that. But to remove or destroy it is destruction of my property.

Now, if people want recognition of ownership for liability of abandoned property, having to write my info on the camera or something wouldnt bother me either.

Wouldnt be a bad thing if biologists want to have a copy of pics either to help study the ecosystem better. The amount of intel that could be available to them is incredible, and they use the same tools just on a much smaller scale.

 

[Straight Arrow]

But to remove or destroy it is destruction of my property.

Agreed; I would not remove, adjust, destroy or in any way mess with your possessions which you have scattered on my public land. HOWEVER, let me repeat, "I am opposed to any kind of plastic or electronics scattered on public land. IMO, it fits the definition of human litter."

If you own private property which is wildlife habitat, it is certainly your right to emplace electronic devices. On our public lands already being incrementally sullied everyday ... NO!

 

[Benfromalbuquerque]

Im with you on that statement. I use cameras year round and cant access them for 1/2 the year or more due to gates being closed for winter weather. Then I have to hike miles to check them. If someone wants to download my pictures, if they even find my cams, I have no issues with that. But to remove or destroy it is destruction of my property.

Now, if people want recognition of ownership for liability of abandoned property, having to write my info on the camera or something wouldnt bother me either.

Wouldnt be a bad thing if biologists want to have a copy of pics either to help study the ecosystem better. The amount of intel that could be available to them is incredible, and they use the same tools just on a much smaller scale.

Right on! I too would enjoy partnership with science people. I also agree that tagging cams just like traps on public land would be appropriate.

 

[bigsky2]

I've had as many as 30 trail cameras out on public land at one time. As someone who doesn't go to the gym, I do it as a reason to go hiking and as a hobby more than anything. I actually put most of my cameras in a unit that I don't even hunt anymore. I will put them out in May and early June in specific locations for bears, and I'm lucky to make it out one day a year to hunt bears. I've learned some interesting things about bears like how they will use a certain tree for marking their scent during the breeding season. Luckily their use isn't nearly as prevalent in Montana as it is in other states, at least it doesn't seem that way to me. I've only found two cameras while hiking around in Montana. When I drew a Kaibab archery tag in Arizona, there were multiple cameras on every water hole and I'll admit that bugged me a little bit. I also don't like when people leave them out and forget about them. When I found the first camera in Montana, it was barely hanging on the tree. I went back a year later and the strap had rotted so much that the camera was laying on the ground. I ended up taking it because it seemed more like trash to me at that point.

 

[Lawnboy]

Agreed; I would not remove, adjust, destroy or in any way mess with your possessions which you have scattered on my public land. HOWEVER, let me repeat, "I am opposed to any kind of plastic or electronics scattered on public land. IMO, it fits the definition of human litter."

If you own private property which is wildlife habitat, it is certainly your right to emplace electronic devices. On our public lands already being incrementally sullied everyday ... NO!

So in your mind what constitutes litter? Them being up a day,a week, a month?At what point are they litter? Trail cameras are legal

 

[The Hedgehog]

Twice I’ve walked with others to retrieve a trail cam to find it was stolen.

I’ve use inexpensive cameras and every time I’ve hung one, fully realized that if anybody were to spot it, it would likely get stolen or busted.

Regardless of everybody’s preach of ethics morals or whatever other bullshit reason they claim, there’s no shortage of douchbags out there.

 

[Straight Arrow]

So in your mind what constitutes litter? Them being up a day,a week, a month?At what point are they litter? Trail cameras are legal

As you likely realize, my position is radically slanted with respect to trail cams. To answer your questions, my opinion is that if left unattended while one leaves the public land and goes home for whatever length of time, then they have left electronic litter.
I completely understand their legality ... but I have the right to be opposed to that.
As attested to by some here, the numbers and the abuse are rampant in many areas and will be everywhere soon, IMO. As someone who spends quality time outdoors on Montana's landscape and has for decades, it sickens me to see the continuous creep of intrusion of unnatural impacts on the public lands special places and selfish implementation of practices which are contrary to the public good ... and are based on the ever increasing, ever overwhelming "me, me, me" dynamic of "I want to, so I'm gonna do it!"