IADNR bans cell cam "scouting" during hunting season

[Q_Sertorius]

The distinction between different degrees of social media is valid, but also kind of silly. Whether you are hunting trophies for “likes”, “views”, posting on a forum, or bragging rights with your buddies, it’s all about finding that monster buck so you can claim some kind of status from it. And the “harder” the hunt, the more “credit” you can get for it.

This is not about fair chase. It’s about trying to level the playing field among hunters. It’s trying to make some advantages illegal.

I’ve always hunted the same piece of land. I know the approximate location of every deer killed there these past thirty years. I’ve never used a camera of any kind, because I gained that knowledge over decades of hunting. All the trail camera does is speed up that process immensely. For my little slice of heaven, I have as much knowledge of where the deer will probably be as the most experienced guide on the planet. The trail camera is like having a guide to provide you with knowledge of the area.

My dad always said there was “no substitute for time in the woods.” I get out in the woods as much as I can every rifle season. I estimate in a good year, I get out twice a day for 6/14 days. I hope that ratio improves as I get older. I have to pick my spots since I can only be in one place at any given time. Someone with a real time camera is essentially getting out all day, every day and to every spot they put a camera. The camera is a substitute for time in the woods. So is an experienced guide who spends all year scouting and year after year hunting the same area. In most cases, the guide has already identified multiple trophy animals before the “hunter” arrives. It’s the guide’s job to put the hunter into position to take a shot. Is using a guide a violation of fair chase?

To me, time in the woods is a good thing. Even if I don’t kill anything, I am hunting and in nature. Hunting implies the possibility of failure. I don’t use every advantage because they detract from my experience. I don’t use a spear because I don’t have the option to hunt over a spring or salt lick or something similar every day of the year. We all get to choose our level of difficulty for hunting.

I’ve never hunted for trophies, since antlers don’t taste good. And deer don’t respect property lines, so any deer I pass up is fair game for my neighbors. I shoot the first legal buck I see. Then I shoot the second legal buck I see. I eat the meat and enjoy the experience of re-exploring my land and hunting a wild animal.

The person using the live camera updates is gaining a huge advantage over his fellow hunters. That’s all. Just as the person who hires Phil Shoemaker is more likely to get a big bear than someone who goes to Alaska on a DIY hunt. Just as the person who runs a pack of hounds or a line of beaters through a patch of woods gains an advantage over his fellow hunters. In my opinion, these all detract from my enjoyment of the “hunting experience.” But they are all legal substitutes for the experience required to successfully take a trophy-class animal. But to say that it’s not fair to the animals or is otherwise unethical, is absurd.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Macintosh]

...You get to be there without ever being there...

Exactly. To me its more about presence than it is about chase.

This is happening in the bedding area in my backyard literally RIGHT NOW, ie this very minute. If I wanted to (and if it were in season) I could literally say “huh. I know with pretty good certainty exactly where this deer is at this very minute. I could sneak in there right now, or I could set up on the exit and catch him this afternoon when he comes out…”

It’s not that the chase isnt fair, as much as there IS no chase. In its place there is literal certainty in real-time, and Im not even in the woods. I am there, even though Im not there.

At the same time, the presence of my camera on public land is still there 24/7. It undeniably affects other people, with the stuff Ive left there causing perceived crowding, to at least a small degree influencing peoples decision to hunt there or not so in essence “claiming” a spot, and in so doing degrading the value of that public land for others, even if only a small amount. If I felt like running into cameras in the woods was a common occurrence around me I’d probably feel that way too, I dont like to be surveilled and I dont like hunting around others.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Putting up cameras on public land should be illegal. Or it should be legal for anyone to take them as abandoned property.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Macintosh]

I personally dont have a problem with that. I enjoy my cameras. I have a hard enough time filling my tags even with the cameras, even though they undeniably help. But if I wasnt able to use them on public it would not be a reduction of my hunting opportunity at all.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Apart from the public land issue, can someone please explain to me how putting up a network of cameras is any different than hiring a professional guide who knows where the animals are from his years of scouting and hunting?

Or how it is different than running dogs or beaters through a hunting area to scare all the game in front of a “hunting” stand?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Macintosh]

One is there 24/7, the other is transient.

One is real-time/all the time, the other requires actually being outside.

One hinges on insight earned through time in the field, the other doesnt.

Etc.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

One is there 24/7, the other is transient.

One is real-time/all the time, the other requires actually being outside.

One hinges on insight earned through time in the field, the other doesnt.

Etc.

Running beaters or dogs through a confined area puts all the game in that area in front of your chosen shooting position whenever you want it there. That’s also a substitute for being there 24/7.

The guide who tells me, “BigMonsterBuck walks this route every day and beds down here. I’m putting you here so we intercept him on the way” is no different than a camera. It’s still not a product of my time in the field. I’m just a shooter at that point, not a hunter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Macintosh]

Maybe. But assuming the guide has legit chops the ability to put a client on game came from time afield, and not only from leaving stuff in the woods on public. And, the guide would be subject to the same regs as anyone else. Really a guide is (or should be) no different than a mentor taking a mentee hunting, or a dad taking his kid hunting, or a local friend hunting with an out of state buddy—the insight and assistance they provide is earned via time in the field, not a technological fixture abandoned on a tree pinging a constant info stream into my phone.

Re: dogs, a few differences are that training a dog takes hundreds of hours, the presence of the dog is transient so its not affecting other people when they arent hunting, and its a traditional use that has been in place for hundreds of years—its part of the “baseline” condition.

Ive never hunted with “beaters” but I think thats basically a drive. It still requires being there, it doesnt affect others when youre not there, and it still requires knowledge of where to drive. In some terrain it may be possible to predict exactly where game will go and post someone there, but in most or all cases Im familiar with knowing those spots takes a lot of time to figure out, and unless you have a zillion drivers its still really easy for game to get behind you or out the side. Again, its an effective way to hunt, and to a degree its already controlled in some places by limiting remote communication (radios, etc) as well as outright limited (in my state drives are prohibited for moose hunting just as an example), but the constant is that everyone is in the woods not at home, the presence is transient, and its still up to someone to orchestrate based on their time in the field.

In all cases, a major concern these regulations have all specified is something ACTUALLY being there 24/7 and how that affects others’ enjoyment and use of the area, not the EFFICACY that results from it. So a “substitute” for being there 24/7 might be highly preferable in many cases.

 

[SuperDUECE22]

It's not Instagram or Facebook where people market themselves like prostitutes for likes. I'm not building a brand or creating some fake life online with pictures of my greatest moments like they happen every day. Hardly anyone here even uses their own name.

You are correct, it's not Instagram or Facebook but I never said it was. You said you didn't have social media and I just pointed out that rokslide is also a form social media. Hell, look at all the guys that post up photos of their ultralight gun or trophies that are just looking for likes.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

I will throw anything out on the basis of “we’ve been doing it a long time” if it is functionally no different than another prohibited method. Here in Virginia, I could run deer with dogs East of the Blue Ridge, but not West of the Blue Ridge. But I could run bears with dogs anywhere. I cannot use a .223 to kill deer in Virginia, because some Fudds didn’t like it in the 1960s. But I can use it in another state? That’s the sort of absurdity that I would purge from the game regulations. If it’s “fair chase,” then that should be a definition that applies regardless of jurisdiction.

As for the “mentoring” thing… the numbers of hunters falls every year. I definitely learned a lot about hunting from my dad. But for someone new to the sport, you are essentially insisting they start at ground zero, find a mentor, or pay someone to get to a level of knowledge of another hunter. I don’t have a personal dog in this fight, but it strikes me as the old, established hunters telling the new generation, you must be this tall to ride. And, “you are cheating us (and yourself) if you use this method.”

This is all just some hunters wanting to use the state to dictate how others hunt. Even if I will never use the technology, I hate that attitude. As long as people are hunting in a manner that results in reasonably successful chance of recovery of any animal they shoot, I literally don’t care. And I don’t want someone else dictating that because it involves the state more than it should.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Macintosh]

Suspect we’d agree on a lot of this over a beer. I dont think what youre saying is unreasonable. I do think that as far as public land goes, the affect cameras have on other people is real, and that’s a legit issue to address. I also see that regional customs are real and important so regulation has to balance that—Id hate to have my regional hunting culture and customs changed in the face of a legit problem, only because we’re trying to find a universal system that works everywhere. I think there has to be some room for differences between regions in order to arrive at the best solution as conditions and context changes (amount of usage, development, habitat, etc). But overall I cant say I disagree with you in principle, I just dont want quality or amount of opportunity to suffer simply because we want to avoid any regulations at all. Wildlife management absolutely did not work without regulation, so regulation has been an integral part of hunting for 120+ years, and its why we are able to continue to hunt today. Human nature being what it is, I dont see a way to avoid degrading the activity without regulating the activity.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

I definitely think we agree on more than we don’t. And a discussion over beer would be preferable.

Regulation is absolutely essential. Don’t get me wrong on that. I’m all in favor of localized bag limits, season lengths, humane methods, hunter education, banning poaching, etc. The “who, what, when, and where” questions are all in great need of regulation at the local level.

It’s the “how” you can hunt regulations that bother me. There are some “how” things upon which I think most people can agree (no spotlighting, for instance, or only hunting during legal light. Of course, if hunters 200 years ago had thermals or NVG’s, it would probably be legal to use them in at least some jurisdictions. But there is still the issue of recovering the animal and “know your target and what lies beyond it.”).

But I hate special seasons based around means and methods, especially where they encourage less humane means (like bow hunting), or where they encourage means that follow the letter, but not the spirit of the law (looking at inline scope-sighted muzzleloaders here).

And I really don’t like the idea that what I, or any other random hunter, consider “hunting” should become the legal way to hunt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[fatlander]

Running beaters or dogs through a confined area puts all the game in that area in front of your chosen shooting position whenever you want it there. That’s also a substitute for being there 24/7.

The guide who tells me, “BigMonsterBuck walks this route every day and beds down here. I’m putting you here so we intercept him on the way” is no different than a camera. It’s still not a product of my time in the field. I’m just a shooter at that point, not a hunter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You’ve clearly never hunted whitetails with dogs. If it was that easy I know plenty of rednecks that would have happily eradicated deer from the Deep South. I used to be one of them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Q_Sertorius]

True, I have never run deer with dogs. I’ve heard some of the outcomes though. It’s possible my informants were bragging or operating under ideal conditions.

I have seen plenty of hunts with beaters though and read about many more (not in this country).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[fatlander]

True, I have never run deer with dogs. I’ve heard some of the outcomes though. It’s possible my informants were bragging or operating under ideal conditions.

I have seen plenty of hunts with beaters though and read about many more (not in this country).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They’re full of ****.

I’ve hunted with some of the finest hounds in this country in some of the best places you can still run them for whitetails. It’s not easier, it’s not shooting fish in the barrel. It’s harder to kill any deer that is high alert and knows it’s being pursued than sitting in a tree. It’s exponentially more difficult to kill a buck that’s successfully navigated that gauntlet for 5+ years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cfdjay]

Iowa is the gold standard when it comes to management and all around just "getting it".

 

[knehrke]

I think there's a huge difference between public land cameras out west and back 40 cameras where I live in the NE. I do know of folks who target and kill huge deer, but the acreage they're surveying is relatively small, and there are generally other hunters who are aware of big bucks in the neighborhood. I just don't see laws that might apply out west being useful or necessary here.

 

[dtchhuntr]

Going to be interesting to see the details on this one. I have a couple cams on the home property a few hours away, both for general deer movement, to see if the neighbors out of state hunters continue to forget property lines, and to obsess if my clover is growing, lol. Doesn't bother me to not get real time photos during hunting season, although would still lime once a day middle of night pics if that complies.

But going back to another part mentioned...no stands left overnight on public? We all switching to climbers now here? I hunt a lot of public and while it's very crowded, physical stands that I can see have actually led to increased success for all of us. I've talked and walked in with numerous hunters and it's a loose understanding of where we all hunt and kind of respect not going into the other guys area. Not that I would get mad at someone that does walk in, I know I don't own a spot or anything. But if I see a tree stand that is not an old abandoned one, I'm crossing it off my potential spots.

 

[Macintosh]

Isnt that precisely the problem, ie stands have become de facto “claiming a spot”, preventing others from hunting a spot on public land? Fishermen dont anchor their boat in a good spot to “claim” it and take a dinghy to it when they fish…thats kind of a ridiculous parallel, but it makes the point—why should anyone be able to prevent even a few hunters from using a spot if they arent even there, let alone there first?

 

[dtchhuntr]

Isnt that precisely the problem, ie stands have become de facto “claiming a spot”, preventing others from hunting a spot on public land? Fishermen dont anchor their boat in a good spot to “claim” it and take a dinghy to it when they fish…thats kind of a ridiculous parallel, but it makes the point—why should anyone be able to prevent even a few hunters from using a spot if they arent even there, let alone there first?

Totally understand and agree with the sentiment. It just happens to work, collectively, for the hunters on public where I am.