Utah Trail Camera Ban
General Topic
Oddly enough, I agree on both sides here.
Some are going to have to put time in and boots on the ground and at the same time, the animal age structure may improve?
Not that I ever have seen it but I’ve read where they might be cameras all around a water source.
At the same time, one with limited time afield benefits from cams.
Maybe they should have banned just cellular.
Here we go, what say you?
UT is taking a page from TX: Go big or go home. Might as well go for broke and ban it all.
I get it with the mobile device ability. At least with the "dumb" cameras, you still have to go out and check them...
"It's not a fair hunt any longer," said House Majority Whip Mike Schultz, R-Hooper. "So we have a responsibility ourselves, as sportsmen that care about the wildlife, to make sure we're being ethical in the things that we do."
We will continue to see more and more evidence of nonhunters making decisions about how we conduct ourselves in the field. Not surprising that a good number of hunters were in favor of this ban.
We're doing this to ourselves (abusing and flaunting technology), and the House Majority Whip echoed what a majority of nonhunters oppose about what we do. They expect hunting to be "fair", even though most really don't understand what it is that we do.
Sounds like they have followed AZ's lead, which will turn into a house of cards with more and more states following suit. I agree with Jaq on this one, non-hunters will dictate how hunting can be conducted. How long until "fair hunt" or "fair chase" is defined as using a weapon? The non-hunting public generally doesn't know or care or even have a dog in the fight. It's the rabid anti-hunters who want to stop anything and everything related to hunting just one little chip at a time. And we fight amongst ourselves while they laugh their arses off.
Can anyone post the actual law or reg? Is it public land only? Only during hunting season?
I get the public land concerns. I don’t agree with private land at all.
It just seems to me that many of you guys want the government creating more laws. If you don’t want to use cameras don’t. If you like them then cool use them. We don’t need another law telling us what we can or can’t do.
Looks like HB 296 passed 4:3, all cameras illegal from July 31st - Dec 31st on public and private lands.
Passed what? the game commission? or the legislature? I can't imagine there are 7 people in the Utah legislature - but then again that state gave us Mit Romney so it may just be that F'd up there.
The problem in Utah and the reason I agreed when the legislature had to get involved with a baiting ban last year, is the blatant corruption in the state. For anything good to happen like that...they had to pass the wildlife board. In that case, it was driven by a legislative member...that happened to be a hunter. The outfitter/SFW/MDF/auction tag profiteers have a strong and unrelenting grasp within the wildlife board circles.
With that said, I am very, very surprised and happy to see the wildlife board voted for this ban. It was only by ONE vote though. I hike a good ways into the wilderness areas and it's crazy how many folks take the extreme effort to pack in bait and cameras. The efforts individuals take to profit has exponentially increased the last 3+ years. Couple individual efforts when outfitters and their teams of guides are involved and it's just laughable how many cameras are out there. The process disrupts natural patterns and is done primarily for profit. That profit could come in many forms...including "likes and subscriptions" or however they make money off Instagram.
Good for Utah. I hope CO is paying attention.
I agree with Pat, stick a camera on every tree on private, if you need them to kill animals. But get them the hell out of public land.
Matt
Far stretch to extend it to private land. That is not enforceable.
Pat--> Utah Wildlife laws are made by the Utah Wildlife Board which is made up of 7 stakeholders appointed by the Utah governor. They serve for a term and then are replaced. The Board is made up of hunters, farmers, ranchers, and nonhunters. There are also regional boards (North, South, Central) that take input regarding wildlife issues and they in turn vote on issues and present their recommendations to the main Wildlife Board. In Utah if you are an engaged sportsman you would attend the regional meeting, speak up, write your reps, and then also do the same for the main wildlife board. Overall a fairly democratic process albeit does have some flaws.
This trail cam ban was actually initiated by the state legislator that mandated the wildlife board take action on the issue. We have guides that are running hundreds of cameras on public lands and it is getting out of control. This was the reaction to that.
"Far stretch to extend it to private land. That is not enforceable."
You'd think it would violate some State constitutions too.
YZF, your argument is full Of holes. The legislature didn’t get involved because the big game board is corrupt. The big game board actually had SFW make the recommendations. SFW supported and pushed the baiting and trail cam ban. That’s a fact.
And for the record, I do not believe any pro hunting group should be pushing and passing anti hunting agendas. And that’s precisely what has been accomplished here. We handed the antis a free victory. Didn’t even make them spend a dime to do it. Now they can just fast track onto the next battle against us, with a little more cash in tow. Great job guys!!!! You’ve accomplished absolutely NOTHING. And spare me all the BS about the hard way, the fair way etc….because guess what? If you want it fair, give up the bugles. Give up the cow calls. Give up the scents. Give it all up.
I am not pleased with any of this what so ever. I find it funny when people Talk about “fair” And then use a GOD DAMN WEAPON.
DConcrete--> Every state has weapon/gear restrictions. This is not new to hunting and it's not anti-hunting. I can't use a spotlight and a machine gun, I have to use steel shot when hunting ducks, I have to have a plug in my shotgun, I can't use a crossbow during bow season in Utah unless I am disabled. Are all of these things anti hunting?
If humans didn't limit ourselves and the way we hunt there would be no animals left. This concept is not new. Do I think the trail cam ban will increase deer herds---nope, but it will be nice to walk around the woods without hundreds of guides' trail cameras everywhere trying to see my weiner when I take a leak!
Don't use the slippery slope fallacy or 'what about-ism' when you critique this law. Just say that you really love trail cams, they help you kill shit, and now you can't use em and that sucks for you. That's really the only argument here.
Of course no one, not one person spoke up to defend cams at the wildlife board meeting so maybe it's not that important to you after all.
And….adding to the argument about how Utah hunting is ruled by the wealthy…..well, you’re spot on. This was passed and pushed by the wealthy. Mike Shultz is incredibly wealthy and very well connected.
And airborne, no need to address you but I will.
I am Not for additional bans. Am not for additional laws. I am not for pot hunting groups doing the work for the antis. And that’s what has been done here. Period. Your deer in the state of Utah are in trouble and it isn’t baiting or trail cameras that caused this. You keep making the same arguments but you don’t get what the real problems are. Was I at the comment phase? Nope. I did it in person, To the persons and groups pushing this. This may have been voted on yesterday, but it was passed a long time ago. They just put on the dog and pony show asking for input.
This came about as a result of H.B. 295 passed by the State Legislature. The law directed the Wildlife Board to "make rules governing the use of trail cameras". Here's wording from the Bill:
Highlighted Provisions: 11 This bill: 12 ? defines terms; 13 ? authorizes and instructs the Wildlife Board to make rules governing the use of trail 14 cameras; 15 ? prohibits big game baiting; 16 ? prohibits the construction of permanent blinds or other structures used for hunting 17 within a waterfowl management area; 18 ? prohibits commercial hunting guides from transporting individuals across a 19 waterfowl management area; and 20 ? authorizes and instructs the Wildlife Board to make rules regarding the creation and 21 management of waterfowl management areas
I'm not a fan of SFW either, but cant6find anything that links them to this ruling. Why would SFW want to ban trail cameras?
I agree with Jeff. This stuff is done with very little if any input from sportsmen. Isn't just Utah its all states.
I read an article where there was concern among legislators about entrepreneurs selling the locations of trophy animals they were getting on trail cams. The survey showed that some guys were running 30 or more cameras on public land, which set off even more alarms.
We're doing this to ourselves. Legislators and their aides go on Facebook and Instagram too.
"Far stretch to extend it to private land. That is not enforceable."
It's not enforceable on public land unless you're hunting or intend to use the info for hunting. You can set cams all over the forest to watch birds.
Did anyone claim this was about improving the herd numbers? I seriously doubt it’ll make a statistically significant difference. I do know it will improve the quality of hunting.
Now if they could move on to more important things like mandating 100% Hunter surveys to get more accurate numbers, that would be great.
Did anyone claim this was about improving the herd numbers? I seriously doubt it’ll make a statistically significant difference. I do know it will improve the quality of hunting.
Now if they could move on to more important things like mandating 100% Hunter surveys to get more accurate numbers, that would be great.
I just installed cell cams a couple of weeks ago. Purpose mainly is to have a lower impact on our small farm by avoiding pulling SD cards. I can see how they might help a hunter if abused. Sure are fun though. This is just from today.
Actually, yes. Troy justensen with SFW told me last year that something has to be done or you won’t have a tag to hunt because numbers will have to be cut. And that banning cameras and baiting was going to be a huge step in fixing Utah’s herds. So the bottom line is this, they aren’t sending out the same messages. And their reasonings are all over the place.
Quick recap:
SFW pushed the trail cam ban to the state legislators. The same with baiting.
SFW has wanted to get rid of these cameras for awhile.
Now, here’s the part I want to get down to as well. A lot of people are always referencing the wealthy hunters. They pay for this, they do that, their guides, their team of men sitting on these animals….etc….etc….and all the talk about Utah being owned (which is true). I’d like to casually point out that, notice it wasn’t finders fees on animals that was attacked. It wasn’t 20 plus guys scouring the country side looking for a specific animal. They didn’t attack the fact that if you want to bid on one of Utah’s coveted auction tags, you don’t need to do so in person. The trail cam and baiting ban was totally sold as a bill of goods to IMPROVE UTAHS STRUGGLING DEER HERDS. and now….people are saying, they never said that….baloney. They did too. Everyone who supports this move, needs to thank SFW. Again, look into who and what Mike Shultz is. He is a wealthy businessman. Funny thing about businessmen that also hold a political position is, they seem To always do things that benefit them. It’s no surprise, and it’s not uncommon. Rules for thee but not for me type stuff. Mike Shultz isn’t your average guy. He’s smart, he’s successful and he now wields a lot of power. However, I am seeing a lot of people unaware of the simple Fact that this is who pushed this through. Everyone wants to blame all things Utah on SFW. They weren’t fighting to keep the cameras. If they were, then the cameras would’ve stayed. That, you can take to the bank.
I've never used bait nor trail cams-------->
Doesn't affect me so I'll just move on.
Good luck, Robb
""" Funny thing about businessmen that also hold a political position is, they seem To always do things that benefit them. """
I have no issue with banning trail cameras on public lands.
As implied by multiple posts above, many sportsman support the ban because of real and perceived effects on their hunts (increased waterhole visits and frustrations from the intrusions), and ease of targeting more mature animals through patterning perhaps reducing the likelihood of non-camera users tagging a more mature animal, etc... These are real issues that impact the quality of one's hunt. The argument to ban their use reminds me of when MA banned trapping or when other states ban hound hunting (all on public land). Because it impacts people's hunts "negatively", sportsmen become fragmented. The effects on our sport are hence erosive and incremental. Giving any inch to any anti-hunting effort simply moves the goalposts for the other side. I hated seeing 15 cameras on my AZ elk hunt some years ago. With that said, I loved using the tool...all because I/we are inherently selfish. Be careful what you wish for...give an inch...
It will impact the diy guy that run 2-3 cameras per year and the enjoyment that comes from it. It won’t impact the big outfitter machines that will just hire more guys to camp out on big mature animals. I don’t like this ban a bit. When it comes to Oregon, and it will, we will change tactics but it’s unfortunate it has to come to this. Hunting is big business for many these days, the more it goes this way, the more pinched out the diy guy will be.
"I've never used bait nor trail cams--------> Doesn't affect me so I'll just move on."
That's how hound hunting, lion hunting, bear hunting, trapping, numerous others have met their demise. The logical steps are "I don't rifle hunt, so it doesn't affect me"; "I don't hunt coyotes so it doesn't affect me"...and so forth.
DC is spot on.
I can see a ban on public ground. I don't see how they can ban use on private ground. Seems like that would be infringing on landowner rights is some way. I would not be a happy camper if I lived in Utah.
Great info, DC. Thanks for enlightening.
"That's how hound hunting, lion hunting, bear hunting, trapping, numerous others have met their demise. The logical steps are "I don't rifle hunt, so it doesn't affect me"; "I don't hunt coyotes so it doesn't affect me"...and so forth."
That is 100% a false equivalency. The trail cam ban does not stop any form of hunting. It is a gear limitation. What you listed were fundamental ways of hunting and hunts themselves. Tell me what opportunity will be lost with banning trail cams? We have had cams for about 20 years in common use now, it's not like our ancestors were using this technology. This is a new shiny tool and now we said it's a no-go and ya'll make it seem like someone took a tag away from you--nope you can still hunt, just gotta lose the camera crutch.
I agree that we hunters need to stick together regarding all forms of hunting but this is new hunting equipment being limited and that is the difference. Bowhunters love to limit crossbows during the bowhunt, that seems to be ok but a trail cam ban is different? Ya'll are funny
Can't imagine that this is enforceable on private ground. What about use of trail cameras for security? If it is a blanket prohibition on the use of trail cameras during a specified time period on private ground, I suspect that the regulation may be challenged on the grounds that it is overly broad. I would have to see the specific language of the regulation. I am surprised that the trail camera industry is not lobbying against this.
Nobody showed up to lobby against it, that's why all this internet chat room vitriol is so entertaining. Utah is small potatoes in the big picture of trail cam sales. There is language in the law that states the ban is specific for the taking of big game. Folks can still run a cam for security and such. Yes, this law is going to be hard to enforce but a lot of laws are hard to enforce, doesn't mean we do away with them. I do think this law will be self enforced by many outdoorsmen either by folks now using cams as rifle target practice or picking them up and turning them into the DNR as litter/lost and found. Ebay could see an uptick in used cam sales, either original owner getting rid of theirs or newly found forest litter going up for sale.
" either by folks now using cams as rifle target practice or picking them up and turning them into the DNR as litter"
How would the "shooter" know that the cam was for big game hunting? Sounds like you're encouraging indiscriminate vigilantism.
“ I do not believe any pro hunting group should be pushing and passing anti hunting agendas. And that’s precisely what has been accomplished here.“
What’s anti hunting about a trail cam ban? Is not allowing night scopes anti hunting? Is not allowing drone scouting anti hunting?
Texas passed a law to allow crossbows during archery season. I was against that. Doe that make me anti hunting? For awhile a guy had a business where you could sit at your computer at home and actually shoot a game animal here in Texas. I helped get a law banning that passed. Does that make me anti-hunting?
As you can prob guess, I favor the ban
What % of cams on public ground are used for big game hunting purposes--common sense would say the VAST majority. Is it illegal to shoot litter on public lands? Personally I don't shoot litter when I see it, but I do pick it up and throw it away. I hope that all responsible hunters pick up litter when they see it. Scuzzy people leave litter laying around, why are you encouraging folks to be indiscriminate scuzzy litter bugs?
Trail cameras on public ground are likely not there for security purposes. Seems to me that is where the prohibition should end. I suspect that all trail cameras now being used on private ground are now being used for security purposes.
Airborne, leg hold traps and hounds are tools that better enabled success. Emotion drove the bans based loosely on science.
traps and hounds have been used by humans to hunt for millennia. I stand with houndsmen and trappers as those practices are part of our hunting heritage, are fair chase and are well regulated activities.
Throwing unfettered fancy new gadgets into same augment is dishonest
txhunter58 brings up a good point. For those who disagree with this camera ban, do you feel the same way about using drones to locate wild game? I don't recall much complaining about the drone bans. Was that because you didn't own one, so the bans didn't affect you? Or, was it because you recognized that using a drone wasn't fair chase?
Matt
Is there a manner in which trails cams could be used and it be considered fair chase?
The argument about drones as I remember was as much about harassing game as it was other things. Do trails cameras harass game anymore than folks scouting on foot?
As with any law, there will be those that agree and those that don’t. How can it be regulated to ensure fair chase? How can the law be enforced?
Many on here are for the use of motorized bikes but not trail cams, while some are opposed to motorized bikes but not trail cams. Fixed vs expandable? On and on it goes.
We are all predisposed to be in favor or against based on style, preference, desire, personal gain. It seems if this decision was lacking “science” in relation to game management then the law was created based on opinion and not fact. Not sure I can support laws made based on this type of decision making.
It takes away from the hunting experience to sit at a waterhole or wallow with 15 cameras pointed at it. But the most annoying thing is the increased foot traffic to check on the cameras. 15 cameras in multiple spots checked on weekly is a LOT of disturbance to game.
Tx- I agree. It’s a lot of disturbance, but before cameras, it could have been happening and no one was any the wiser? And now without cameras, guys will try other means to gain the same result. Game cameras have changed the hunt for sure. Banning them will just change the means. I totally agree that cell cams are not fair chase for a variety of reason.
As for the hunting experience, though I agree, 15 cams on a spot is not a desirable place for me to hunt, but again that is my opinion based on my method of choice.
I honestly wish there was a nationwide ban on trail cams. But I'm old school
Guys controlling big sections of private land, are going to do what they want. Right or wrong, thats a reality.....
No part about hunting in the 21st century is really "fair chase".
The very definition of "Fair Chase" needs to be re-defined for the 21st century. I do support of regulation on the use of game cameras on public lands, it has gotten out of control the last 10yrs. And, Colorado I believe was the first state to start regulating game camera use about 6-8yrs ago, no cellular game cameras during any biggame season on public land is the regulation. Last year while scouting for moose I came upon a wallow that had 3 cameras, all were cellular, and this was 3 1/2 miles into a wilderness area. Fair Chase? something we need to evaluate as hunters, as mention if we don't the non-hunting public will do it for us.
Damn Fisherman can use any electronic device they want to their advantage to catch and kill poor defenseless fish that are just swimming around looking for a bite to eat. Oh, that's right, I am sorry, they are not cute and cuddly.
Joe,
Good point! When I fished in Canada, we would take a break from the walleye about mid-day and fish for some lake trout. We were up there the first week in June usually, fly-ins, and the water was still very cold. We used electronic fish finders to get on the lakers and read their depth. Then we used reels that counted line out and we usually could get on them in 1-2 passes. Looking back, it seems a little unfair, but I never thought about it until your post. I am a terrible fisherman, so I would probably still do it if it was still legal, I need all the help I can get!
I think that cameras can be banned on both public and private ground if the goal is fair chase. We can use a non-straight walled rifle cartridge to hunt deer in Ohio period. I believe that most hunters will follow the rules. In most states game wardens can access private land for enforcement purposes and although the odds of getting caught may be low, the regs are enforceable. If a citation is issued for using game cameras the hunter now has to hire an attorney and try to make the case the camera was not being used for hunting purposes. Good luck with that! Unfortunately, citations do not necessarily mean that you are guilty but now you have to plead innocent and go to court. The officer does not have to prove that you are guilty to issue a citation. I would bet the regulations will say that having a camera in the field during an open season amounts to hunting with one, the same as carrying a gun is a violation if you are not permitted to hunt that season. Outfitters can lose their license and hunters can lose their hunting rights in multiple states. Anyone who ignores the ban may regret it.
Anything battery operated that gives a hunter an advantage ought be banned based on the logic of this decision. The example above about fish finders, they should go. Not fair chase. Water fowl hunting, moving deeks of any kind should be banned. Flash lights shouldn’t be carried by hunters as they could be used to spot light game or find game in the dark, ban em. Electric bikes for sure need banned, public and private. On and on we could go with this. Hilarious all the “hunters” on here saying game cams shouldn’t be allow and yet let’s dump your pack and see what’s in it that could be used to give advantage more or less than a game camera.
So string, can we keep hunting after dark? Use night scopes? Scout for game with a drone or plane?
If not, then you are ok with setting limits. We just disagree on those limits. When people disagree, the majority rules. That’s a democracy.
Which way we vote doesn’t make you or me any more or less a hunter
Txh- I agree. Limits are needed or it leads to exactly why these laws are now being passed. But…there many on this forum and others that will disparage fellow hunters who use trial cams. So there’s that.
Second- the limit on trail cams (non cellular cams) makes zero sense when guys are using just as much “technology” to their advantage to harvest game. There has not yet been a science based nor “strong” argument IMO made on this thread alone against non cell cams that makes sense when the same guys are using other technologies for the same outcomes.
That’s the point I was trying to make.
This thread reminds me of the, NY trying to ban heating with firewood. Good luck trying to enforce banning trail cams on private land. Politicians will not be happy until they make us all into criminals, the upside is, then we will be immune from prosecution.
"In most states game wardens can access private land for enforcement purposes..."
They still need probable cause, they can't just take a stroll because they feel like it.
"The officer does not have to prove that you are guilty to issue a citation. I would bet the regulations will say that having a camera in the field during an open season amounts to hunting with one, the same as carrying a gun is a violation if you are not permitted to hunt that season."
They still need a reason to issue a citation. Otherwise, they can just sit at a road and issue them to any random person because they feel like it. And, what statute reads you cannot carry a firearm in the hills if you don't have a hunting permit. The 2A has nothing to do with hunting...
