TRAIL CAMS-ILLEGAL ???
West Virginia
Saw a video last night about some state’s making trail cams illegal. I just learned a few months ago in Missouri you can’t use them on public land. PUBLIC LAND is that technically our land. Just think it’s crazy
Saw a video last night about some state’s making trail cams illegal. I just learned a few months ago in Missouri you can’t use them on public land. PUBLIC LAND is that technically our land. Just think it’s crazy
Saw a video last night about some state’s making trail cams illegal. I just learned a few months ago in Missouri you can’t use them on public land. PUBLIC LAND is that technically our land. Just think it’s crazy
This has been boiling in AZ for several years. Lots of public land with waterholes in arid areas. Not uncommon for a single waterhole to have 20-30 cameras on it . Impossible to hunt as people checking cameras 24 hrs a day. Wild game getting run off their only water source. People waiting 15-30 years for a deer, elk, or sheep tag and outfitters and private hunters running dozens and dozens of cameras trying to find an animal. Physical fights over waterholes.
New form of paparazzi it sounds like!
Here it just seems like the cameras get stolen most of the time. There are always some who just have to ruin it for everyone.
Not much of a hunter if you can’t find animals at their only watering hole
Not much of a hunter if you can’t find animals at their only watering hole
Hmmm...a game commission that is willing to go against "popular opinion" and act in the best interest of the resource. What a novel idea.
Ed, who said it was against “popular opinion “ ?
Gobbler - the news article about the issue stated as much.
LB, what article? I didn’t see one above ? The most I’ve heard about it was from my outfitter buddy. He said he didn’t like them and most of his hunting friends didn’t like them because of the constant traffic around water holes. It made it tough to hunt and kept animals really spooky
Here's the article I read on the subject Greg. It wasn't hard to find with a simple Google search.
“It’s the end of a process the commission began months ago and received thousands of public comments about via letters, texts and emails”
Sounds like they did their due diligence in obtaining public opinion on the subject . I don’t see a breakdown of percent that were in favor or those that were against.
This issue definitely was causing a negative effect to the resource (affecting games ability to water in an arid environment) , unlike other issues that may come up in a states game and fish commission that has no negative effect to the resource.
Thanks for the google hint . I didn’t know that
"Of the 49 people who called in or voiced their opinion in person, 31 urged the commission not to ban trail cameras and only 18 supported the move."
I applaud the AZ commission for doing what was in the best interest of the wildlife resource.
I don’t know how many people called in , texted, letters, e-mails etc. I just copied what was in the article you posted that said the commission received thousands of public comments via letters, texts, and e-mails . When you’re actually representing the public it doesn’t matter if it’s voice, letter, text, or e-mails , all have to be taken in consideration. One voice doesn’t count more or less than an e-mail, letter, etc. They all count the same.
I think they did the right thing in this instance also. It was having a negative effect on the resource.
IDK this but I suspect there were other considerations as well. In AZ people are waiting 15-25 years for one deer tag or one elk tag in the better units. They probably considered the fact that after waiting that long hunters expected a quality hunting experience and didn’t want a truck coming by every hour to check a camera. That’s bad for the hunter and bad for business for AZ Fish and Game .
A game commission willing to go against popular opinion?
Does that analogy mean go against the popular opinion of keeping the cranberry catch and release? Or go against the popular opinion that sunshine laws are a necessary part of a fair and functional governing body?
Novel ideas indeed.
