Bambistew
Well-known member
How is looking at a picture enjoying nature?
Me finding a trail camera on public land ruins my nature experience. So who's experience is more valid?
IMO they're nothing more than trash in the woods.
Trail cams on public land: how is that ok?
- Thread starter DouglasR
- Start date
Me finding a trail camera on public land ruins my nature experience. So who's experience is more valid?
IMO they're nothing more than trash in the woods.
Many of us enjoy looking at pictures. My favorite thread here on HT is the "Suday pic of the day" thread. For me personally I get enjoyment out of seeing what animals I am so close to but don't get to actually see. That's just me though.
I am sorry that seeing a trail cam ruins your experience. If the word "ruins" is not an exaggeration than I assume you have never had a good experience in nature. I know I never been anywhere in nature where I didn't encounter some sort of sign that other people were enjoying themselves incorrectly on my public land. I do get where you're coming from however, for me it's jet contrails. It really bugs me that a couple of hundred people can just fly by me, leaving a big white streak across and otherwise pristine blue sky. Ruins everything.
But whutchagunnado? I know, outlaw everything other people do that I don't like to do. I mean, if you can't use big government to suppress other people's enjoyment, what the hell is it good for?
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
I see. However, "Why are people against trail cams and not spotting scopes?" does not seem even pertinent to a logical answer to Bambistew's question.
Last edited:
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
Sarcasm is not lost in the argument. Actually emphasizes the point. But the argument seems to oppose restrictions on anything anyone wants to do on public lands. Examples of the "big government" suppression are no ATV or UTV in the Bob Marshall Wilderness, no low level flights over Yellowstone Park, no whitewater rafting in the Yellowstone River in YNP, and on and on.
Macro is too many special interests imposing their self-serving desires; micro is individuals with the "me-me" attitude of "I like to do it, so I will do it, and I don't care if you are offended!"
Stone_Ice_1
Well-known member
I set out several trail cameras every year, some in areas I don't even hunt. I enjoy the pictures, enjoy seeing the animals and what is out there. It is fascinating some of the things you can capture. Last year alone I had bobcat, mountain lion, grouse, wolverine, bear, elk, deer, moose, fox, coyote, badger, skunk, hawk, squirrel and probably some others I am missing. The camera allows me to capture things I don't get to see when I'm out there. For example, I have never seen a wolverine in Montana, but last year I had a picture of one. In the Montana mountains the cameras don't really help that much. Just because an animal was there at one time doesn't mean he is coming back. It means he was there at that point in time and that's all you know. As most people here know, elk move, a LOT. They can cover some miles in a hurry. Every year I see nice bulls on my camera, but most of them I only see once all year.
Now if you set up a camera on some white tail country in a river bottom somewhere, it might help you know what quality of bucks is somewhere nearby. But once again it only tells you that animal was there at that specific time not where he is when you are hunting.
My guess is most of the "trash" cameras you find in the woods are in popular spots that people frequent a lot, near or maybe even on a trail. I have found cameras placed in ridiculously bad spots. I average about 1 human sighting a year on all my cameras combined. They are not easily found and I have never left one in the mountains as "trash" even though some have been broken by bears. I think my use of cameras is how 90% of people use them. Its the other 10% you seem to have an issue with.
FWP and researchers also use cameras. This is because they are beneficial in finding out what animals used the area. The key word there is USED. It doesn't tell you what is there right now (the cell cameras can do this, but they are illegal during the hunting season in Montana).
Now if you set up a camera on some white tail country in a river bottom somewhere, it might help you know what quality of bucks is somewhere nearby. But once again it only tells you that animal was there at that specific time not where he is when you are hunting.
My guess is most of the "trash" cameras you find in the woods are in popular spots that people frequent a lot, near or maybe even on a trail. I have found cameras placed in ridiculously bad spots. I average about 1 human sighting a year on all my cameras combined. They are not easily found and I have never left one in the mountains as "trash" even though some have been broken by bears. I think my use of cameras is how 90% of people use them. Its the other 10% you seem to have an issue with.
FWP and researchers also use cameras. This is because they are beneficial in finding out what animals used the area. The key word there is USED. It doesn't tell you what is there right now (the cell cameras can do this, but they are illegal during the hunting season in Montana).
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
Full disclosure: My opposition is over-the-top, as illustrated by the incident between my wife and me on the remote Thorofare Trail in YNP. Even though realizing that the camera on a tree off the trail was emplaced by a Park Ranger, I wanted to rip that "litter" from the pristine wilderness. It was only with my wife's adamant insistence that I left it be and stomped off!
Bambistew's question implied that the cameras give the hunter some sort of advantage. I was arguing that all the tools hunters use give the hunter an advantage. So why pick one of those tools to outlaw and not outlaw others that are far more effective. My example was spotting scopes.
This is true and we do ban many activities in the macro to some extent but, for instance, we don't ban ATVs from all public land. The call here seems to be to ban trail cams from all public land. I am fine with selective bans in selected areas for selective reasons. For instance, I don't fly fish anymore, but I do not begrudge the me-me fly fishermen that got me banned from drowning worms on the upper Rouge River, their victory (Actually I am still a little pissed about that) I am fine with any ban established in National Parks which were never meant to be managed the same as other public lands.
Banning things in the micro because someone is offended, especially when the offence is in the mind of the offended rather than the intent of the offender, is the exact that same "me-me" attitude. I'll not let you do what you like to do, because I don't like it. You know you can always just walk by the camera and never think of it again, if you wish.
When it comes to banning things that we don't like we should always remember that there is one activity that takes place on public land that offends and ruins the enjoyment of the wilderness experience for tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of people. By "ruin" I mean that it is to the point that they cannot even venture into the forest in the fall without literally, fearing for their lives. I am somewhat of a recluse and don't know very many people, but I personally know two of these people and just like the people who oppose trail cams, no amount of logic seems to sway them from their opinion.
And yes, they all would dearly love to see a ban on that activity on all public land.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
Where's your line on litter? No one is in fact leaving a plane in the sky perpetually. A contrail is a boot print, which isn't the issue.
The old stands I found on a small piece of public..
Most are mangled, rusted, and have no ladder but were locked to the tree so they can't be removed.
I've also found dozens of defunct cams on public land.
It's all trash in my book.
If you want to take pictures of critters with cams on your property go for it.
If you want to use them on public and it's legal, that's your prerogative.
You leave stuff on public land and it gets "stolen"... no sympathy here.
First time caller, long time user ......
I run trail cams nearly all year round in a couple states that I hunt, including a couple cellular type cams that send me the pics.
Have six cams running now and season has been wrapped up for a month or more.
Anyone that says they don't give you a serious advantage, is either not using them correctly or is being untruthful.
I'd have no problem with banning them altogether during hunting season, all types.
Most state game laws are pretty clear about restricting pursuit of game by use of electronics, walki talki's, etc. I don't really understand how trail cams slide under this rule and aren't illegal?
I run trail cams nearly all year round in a couple states that I hunt, including a couple cellular type cams that send me the pics.
Have six cams running now and season has been wrapped up for a month or more.
Anyone that says they don't give you a serious advantage, is either not using them correctly or is being untruthful.
I'd have no problem with banning them altogether during hunting season, all types.
Most state game laws are pretty clear about restricting pursuit of game by use of electronics, walki talki's, etc. I don't really understand how trail cams slide under this rule and aren't illegal?
Are you sure about that?
Edit: I missed the “cellular” part. They are illegal during season, which I think is a good thing.
Last edited:
I’ll think of a second one if you give me some time.
Last edited:
It's hard to draw a line, I guess. If the camera, or tee stand, is no longer serviceable I would probably consider it trash. You must hunt around a lot of slobs, I personally have never run across a trail camera that didn't look like it was still serviceable. I have only come across one tree stand that was abandoned but it was 20 ft off the property line onto private timber company property. I'm pretty sure it didn't belong to the timber company, but I didn't want to mess with anything on private property.
I have seen more abandoned camps than I have trail cams or tree stands. Where do you draw the line on camping gear? If no one is in a camp for two weeks, is it trash? How about two days? Two hours? The trouble with drawing arbitrary lines is that they are just that, arbitrary.
I don't get upset when people get their cameras stolen, it unfortunately, is to be expected. I don't like it, I generally have a low opinion of thieves, but I have come to the realization that dishonesty has become the new "American way" and I just decided to live with that rather than stress out about it. I personally use cheap cameras and put them where I am confident no one will ever see them. I have lost several to bears but never had on stolen. If I want one where I suspect someone might see it, I have an old one that has been chewed on three times by bears. If anyone found it, they might take it because they thought it was abandoned junk, but certainly not because they wanted a trail cam. If it were to disappear, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.
I don't have any issues with trail cameras on public land, but I don't think cellular cameras should be legal during hunting season. As long as they aren't left there to rot away then I don't see the problem. I have more of an issue with all of the old tree stands I find in the woods that are no longer being used.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
Totally agree with you on camps... lots of camp trash out there.
USFS and BLM have set days for occupancy of a camp, that's my line.
The Forest Service or BLM can remove the camp 14 days after they first notice it, but a private citizen could be arrested for doing the same. I maintain that I am occupying the area around the tree that my trail cam is on. You will be obliged to notify the authorities and they my remove my camera 14 days later.
Actually, a camp must be occupied the first night it is established. I am unclear as to how much it must be occupied after that.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
I'm not Ed Abbey... but I see his point.
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
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.
Huntin' Fool
Well-known member
NOOOOOOOOOO.....
pope-young.org
Not fair chase.
Fair Chase | Pope and Young Club | Preserve, Promote, and Protect Bowhunting
The fair chase philosophy reaches to the very foundations of the hunting spirit; it should be a dominant factor in the personal hunting ethic of every responsible individual; it is key to bowhunting’s future with deep roots in America’s hunting heritage.
pope-young.org
Not fair chase.
bullbugle307
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2018
- Messages
- 934
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.NOOOOOOOOOO.....
Fair Chase | Pope and Young Club | Preserve, Promote, and Protect Bowhunting
The fair chase philosophy reaches to the very foundations of the hunting spirit; it should be a dominant factor in the personal hunting ethic of every responsible individual; it is key to bowhunting’s future with deep roots in America’s hunting heritage.
Not fair chase.
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.
Similar threads
