Trail cams banned on Kansas public
Whitetail Deer
Just read an article saying they are now banned on public.
Thoughts?
I think we're going to see more and more states start to implement similar laws.
Didn't they do that a while ago? I'm all for it. No biggie to me. Would rather have privacy on public than to find myself wondering around in front of someone's camera.
Bann them make it hunting again. Not surveillance.
Definitely a step in the right direction.
How stupid.. why don't they tell the public land hunters to go F... yourselves...... let us private guys do what we want...
How stupid. Tell the Public Land Hunters to go F... yourselves, and us private land owners can do what ever we want.
In 20 years we will be Europe, and it will be supported by those who love greed.
I see it now. Lots of PH harassed, by local private owners. A bunch of assholes.
If a guy is hunting close and by my SD land. I usually wave. Most are good eggs.
What is happening to us?
Keep fighting to give our rights away boys.
Good! I HATE those F'n things.
They should be banned on public lands.
I have private land. I can do what I want, but some kid, getting into the hunting world, hey God help him, if he puts out a camera, or maybe some apples.
So many private land assholes on this site.
I started out, like many of you with nothing. Now in my 70s I am going to crush the young guy.... no way.
This happened months ago. I don’t have any issue with it. Will keep folks just going in to mess with cameras from fouling up ongoing hunts. Also lessens the intrusion on the wildlife to some extent.
I don’t know that they really discussed this in the meetings, but wirelessly transmitting the whereabouts of game is illegal in Kansas. I think by banning all cams they’re in a much less hypocritical position than when they allowed cell cameras on department managed lands.
Yes I open my land up to those who ask, when I am gone. I support hunting.......
If someone kills the world record. GREAT. I am no Walt Disney and name my deer. I don't have a hit list, I am not an assassin.
This year we are supporting new hunters on our land. Already pissed off the QDMA guys......
You see most lost the reason we hunt. Want to keep a score card, take up golf.
I want to get mentally challenged, into hunting, via xbows, oh no, crossbows, the herd will be gone.
Too many selfish people, into hunting. Let's turn it around.
That's great that you're "passing it on" to younger generations Groundhunter! Keep up the good work!
I'm with Jeff Durnell...8^)
Good. People need to get back to scouting not answering texts with deer pictures on them
As mentioned earlier, make it Hunting again, not surveillance .
Just curious, does this include private land that is in the WIH program?
Doesn't bother me in the least.
I have no problem with trail cams. I can maybe see an argument for no cell cams but even than I don't care much. Might as well ban tree stands too.
I don't like the idea of "banning" things. However, I am not following the rights trampling here. You have the "right" to use a legally defined piece of equipment for your hunt. At least everywhere I know. What is different about this?
I'm also not following the supposed selfishness. Personally, I think it is selfish that people think they should be able to stick 12 cameras out on public land, but that is just me. Telling someone they can't use a trail cam is telling them to go "f" themself? You literally can't hunt without a trail camera? Don't get that? Good on you Groundhounter, though, for seeing the selfishness in whatever form and doing something about it. I agree with your thoughts on many who want to "crush" the young guy or gal. However, you make a lot of assumptions about people.
I'd be in favor of zero cameras.
I'm with ya soccermom! They shouldn't allow tree stands to be left out on public. Non hunters shouldn't have to fool with them, and hunters shouldn't be allowed to "claim" a spot. Pack them out when ya leave.
In Pa. If you leave a trail camera on public land someone is going to steal it. I don’t mind trail cameras but they should be illegal during hunting season.
All tech aids should b banned for huntin. Go back to huntin not killin. Then we c who real hunters r.
I've hunted for over 50 years without needing trail cameras to find game, so this doesn't bother me at all. Hopefully other states follow KS's lead.
Matt
In KS the ban had nothing to do with hunting abilities or fair chase ethics. It had to do with privacy issues and public land use. The decision really had nothing to do with hunters.
I can see both sides. What will be banned next...may be something you support.
I quit hunting KS years ago, but applaud any state that adopts this policy. Taken all my best trophies without ‘em. As each Western states adopts this I feel it primarily benefits those of us DIYers that must compete with outfitters/bounty hunters who don’t even have tags in our units. Seen some elk water tanks with as many as a dozen cams on them. Once had two dudes come to check cams on a wallow pod prime time while I was sitting in my tree stand. Neither had a tag! Waited 15 years for this!? No thanks.
I got a few cams (8) I occasionally use for entertainment, but certainly would not miss them. I only use them in areas with major barrier-to-entry.
I’m all for it.
About the only up-side to them is that (at least occasionally, I suppose) trail-cam photos could help identify Persons of Interest when a poaching incident occurs in a given location.
I will say on public land it can be a problem. Some people look at it as a claim on the area..just like with treestands
I'm not in Kansas. Any more.
That’s what Dorothy said.
I love trail cameras. I hunt 200 miles away from where I live. I don't use them during the season for hunting at all. It just makes the anticipation of opening day more exciting by knowing whats in the area. I have hunted for over 40 years and can read deer sign as good as anyone. Once the acorns drop you can throw a lot scouting in the garbage because most of the deer follow the mast where I hunt. I scout oak trees and whats in them more then deer starting in August. Let the snide comments begin.
“It just makes the anticipation of opening day more exciting by knowing whats in the area.”
FAIR WARNING: IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS FOLLOWS….
The problem with “knowing whats in the area” is that you’re not the only one; and if there’s a really nice buck in the area, the place will get more traffic, and from people who aren’t likely to take the first legal deer they see, because they’re waiting for that big one. And they’ll keep after him. Meanwhile, ALL of the deer in the area are subject to that increased pressure — more visits by more people — and they can live to learn from their mistakes…
Just seems like intensive pressure from horn hunters is a bad deal for us Ordinary hunters and maybe the managers/resource as well.
So if banning trail-cams helps reduce and redistribute the hunting pressure, that seems like a good deal all around…
"So if banning trail-cams helps reduce and redistribute the hunting pressure, that seems like a good deal all around…"
It could also increase pressure from more boots on the ground scouting.
Just curious, how much public land is there in that state? Do they have any programs to open private land to the public?
98.1% private. WIHA varies from yr to yr.
I might would feel different if I hunted around other hunters. And, in Kansas on public, I’m sure that’s an issue. However, so much of hunting regulations are now written to prevent you from further enjoying the whole process. Versus allowing more involvement.
It’s the net result of horn porn. And, for the life of me, I can’t find a plus in selling bigger bucks. In any state. It causes all sorts of issues.
Just keep em legal, but make it NOT a crime to steal them on public. After all, its not a crime to use someones treestand on public. Wouldnt be many cams out there if the owners thought they would go missing in few days.
I don’t care one way or the other what Kansas does, but there’s nothing wrong about an inanimate object. I run cameras 365 days a year where I hunt. The biggest bucks I get on camera are usually at night, but it makes me feel good just knowing they are benefitting from my food plots. I keep them on my mineral blocks because I like seeing the antlers grow from month to month. I can’t say a camera has ever helped me kill a deer but I do like to know what’s on my place or at least passing through. I don’t see the harm in that, but for those of you who do, just say “no” to cameras and leave everyone else alone. Sheesh, we got some nosy old women on here ! ;-)
I have mixed feelings about this.
#1. I love trail cameras. I've been using them for years and can't imagine not being able to use them.
#2. I don't like wireless trail cameras. I think that is a level of technology that bumps up against the concept of fair chase. That said, I was involved with working out a policy between P&Y and B&C that allows for them to be used as long as they aren't being used in real time to guide you to an animal.
#3 and most important. We have to police ourselves on technology and fair chase issues. Many think trail cameras give us an unfair advantage. It's hard to argue against that.
If a state decides to regulate technology in hunting, they are not taking away access, licenses or opportunities. It could be said that they are preserving our rights by limiting the fall out from questionable technology. In everything that we do, there has to be standards and limits. We should make the concept of fair chase THE most important factor in what is allowed and what is not.
Not sure if it was made clear earlier in the thread or not... but the ban is only on public land and was decided upon for privacy issues, not hunting ethics. It's illegal to bait on public land in KS too.
I'm mixed on this, but trend to no, keep em out there.
For example, I know a LOT of non hunters who are getting into using cams to observe wildlife. They think it's really fun to figure out how wildlife moves, and try to get cool pics/vids of animals doing their thing. They will put cam's up to catch all sorts of stuff on film, not just "game" species. On one hand, that's people in the woods... But big picture, I want people to enjoy open space - because they will become invested in it and want to protect it, which I really like. Those folks also seem to become more open to hunting in my discussions with them so far, because they learn allot about using the cams from hunters, and see that it's not "easy" as just slapping a camera on a tree and getting all sorts of cool things on film. That's a win.
I also think hunters have a lot of fun with them. Ive barely used em that last few years, but have friends with 60+ in the woods - how they manage all those cam's I have no clue. It's fun to see what's there, and I think it can be motivating for people too.
That said, it does get crazy when you see images like those from AZ water holes with multiple cam's on the same tree or what not... And Ill admit that I've seen enough in the woods that, should I need to take a leak, I look around for a minute first!
Based on guys becoming "spot hogs" when putting up stands on public, I could see the same thing with cams - "I put up my cam so this is my spot"... That would be lame.
So, while I can see some conflicts with it, and some challenges for sure... I also see good things. I'd like them to stay legal, unless there is clear evidence that they are creating issues for some reason.
I have no issue with cameras on private land but don't really enjoy having my photos taken when I'm hunting on public land. I feel like everything on public land should be take in take out, like treestands and ground blinds. Too often cameras and stands are used to "reserve" a spot.
I don't have an issue with trail camera-mostly. One place I hunt, a guy puts out 60 of them. We had this discussion in another thread. I not going to treat them as a placeholder unless there is a stand already placed in the area. Last year I went into an area and set up a stand. There was a trail camera there, and a guy met up with me to ask me to bring it out for him. We decided to leave it and monitor it. The camera didn't see any game and neither did I.
60s cameras. Where is that?
“ It could also increase pressure from more boots on the ground scouting.”
Well, there is that…. I think the thing with cameras is that they save a lot of trips to the woods which people just won’t make, so maybe net no change there?
I totally understand why non-consumptive users of public land would object to having all of their comings, goings and goings-on documented, though. I think we all have a right to a reasonable expectation of privacy when in a public space, though, don’t you?
And JMO (I know I’ve said this many times before here) there’s something that feels really quite wrong about subjecting game animals to a level of surveillance which none of us would ever tolerate ourselves.
I like trail cams, been fooling with them for over ten years, BUT like any other technology, some people over-rely on them. (I currently own two. Not '60' or some other silly number...)
Groundhunter, the area was Greenswamp West in Florida. The guy kills some nice deer, but for me that takes away from the skill, experience and excitement of hunting. Just not my thing nor has it been proven necessary for me. I enjoy putting the work into it. When I originally posted the topic, the pictures some posted showed multitudes of cameras surrounding a single water hole. The issue in my example was that no hunting equipment was to be there before 2 days preceding a hunt. This guy had them in for many months. IMO cameras are hunting equipment. I guy with the camera in my spot had 2 cameras and put them in 2 days before to comply with the regs.
I'm all for banning them on public ground. I can see where some might think it's an invasion of privacy to have their picture taken. Of course, we are on cameras so much in public places that we have no say about. I never used a camera until I bought my own ground and I still have mixed feelings about it. I like seeing what kind of deer I have staying there or passing through. I don't feel like it gives me an advantage, but it's only taken 4 years to prove that we have pictures of the bucks we kill.
I’d be in the “Everybody is allowed or nobody is allowed” camp. Same for baiting
You mean regardless of public/private, Rod?
JMO, while I still find that it rankles a bit, I can’t come up with a single compelling reason to limit trail-cam use on private property; nothing that should reasonably outweigh property owners’ rights to use, manage and protect their property as they see fit. I’m fundamentally opposed to baiting and Not A Fan of food plots when a similar but much broader benefit could be realized by managing the vegetation in a manner based on natural succession patterns, but cameras don’t intrinsically alter the movements or numbers of animals in an area, so (JMO) the property owner’s interest in being able to monitor for trespassing, for example, should rightly supersede any public interest - as long as it’s on their side of the property line.
I guess it boils down to the fact that a landowner can have many reasons to put up cameras which have nothing to do with Hunting, but there is no compelling public interest served by being allowed to put them up and honestly, they do seem to pose a lot of problems for everyone but those who are using them, and one person’s right to take pictures of wildlife does not trump the next person’s right to be able to pee in the woods without having that caught on film.
Opinions will vary; that’s mine.
So you think it's fair or helps hunter recruitment (that everyone says they want) that Mr. Landowner can put up cams over his food plot and have a bait pile seventy five yards from the public land where Small Town Joe wants to get his kids interested in hunting?
Mr. L. has all the advantages and Joe might as well buy the kids another video game.
All I'm saying is level the playing field. Everybody baits or nobody baits. Everybody can cam or nobody can cam. The law simply has to state "For the purpose of hunting..." and after that cheaters will cheat and honest people will honor the law and intent. As far as the sacred private property rights, you already have restrictions. You can't shoot whatever and whenever you want. You can't use a rifle in bow season. You can't set a booby trap to catch trespassers.
I just find it hypocritical that the guy who sits in the funnel between ag fields on family property after checking cam pics can then be all indignant about others situations. And, no, not everybody can just "..sacrifice and buy land...". Hunting will continue to die the slow death of attrition as we block out the potential future recruits.
Sounds like groundhunter is walking the talk.
After seeing and experiencing the behavior of some people at several water sites out west, in their use of cams on public lands, the general lack of consideration Ect….I can totally see where this comes from. It’s a shame we need a law to force a hunter to act sensible and considerate of other land users.
I started listening to a hunting podcast on my commute to work that has different hunters on and everyone of these guys are running over 50 cameras with most running from 75 to 100. I was shocked, the most I ever had out was three and each was miles away from each other. I think it has been abused and I'm all for the ban during the season on public land.
I'm all for banning them on public. I ran a few on public about 8 or 9 years ago and took great precautions not to have them stolen. I'd camo them in camo tape and bark, set way back in a cedar. Got a guy rattling from the ground 3 feet away once and he never knew it was there. Also got my biggest buck pic ever on that same camera. I did notice much more traffic in the areas that had cameras chained to trees. It almost seemed like a way to claim one's territory on public.
Death by a thousand cuts, just leave people alone. On aside not, I quit using cameras a couple and it’s been kinda fun going to the stand not knowing what will show up.
"I think we all have a right to a reasonable expectation of privacy when in a public space, though, don’t you?"
not really. if i am walking on a public sidewalk...i have no reasonable expectation of privacy. if that were the case...all surveillance cameras would be illegal in public spaces. pretty sure the only time that would be the case is if the public space was specifically set aside to be private like bathrooms etc.
If the state is banning trail cams on public land due to privacy issues (exactly what this particular ban is), isn't that the same as setting it aside to be private like a bathroom?
"If the state is banning trail cams on public land due to privacy issues (exactly what this particular ban is), isn't that the same as setting it aside to be private like a bathroom?"
that would be a question of "reasonable expectation." id be willing to bet that if someone actually challenged it on a constitutional basis...the state would lose.
Constitutionally the state would very likely lose. Lots of regulations aren't Constitutionally based. I bet it would be difficult to justify privacy in a public bathroom based on the constitution.
And you’re ok with lots of regulations not being constitutional?
"And you’re ok with lots of regulations not being constitutional?"
And here lies the big question, and it is a great question DConcrete! Yes and no. I'm typically very much against big government and against government overreach. I even struggled with the idea that we are on camera so much while in town why should it matter if someone wants to video us in the woods? Doesn't seem to be ok and fine with one but not the other. Yet I am ok with banning trailcams on public and at the same time don't like added regulations to so much of our life. But since someone brought constitutionality into the equation I think it's important to remember that many regulations aren't constitutional. Speed limits, hunting seasons, fishing regs, etc. Almost our entire life is regulated by principles not addressed in the constitution. So, while the constition doesn't guarantee privacy in public bathrooms or public woods, I might be ok with the principle of having privacy in certain places.
"I bet it would be difficult to justify privacy in a public bathroom based on the constitution."
not really...the scotus has already dealt with that. pretty sure"reasonable expectation" is key.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt4-3-3/ALDE_00013717/
