Trail Cameras

[Red Rabbit]

Trail Camera Ethics

 

With the usage of trail cameras becoming more common, perhaps we should be asking ourselves if their use is ethical by standards of fair chase. Is their use going against the spirit of hunting heritage and values? Are hunters using them to satiate the drive for success and overlooking the fair chase philosophy?

 

Under item 7 in Pope and young Club’s Fair Chase statement (see below), the use of electronic devices to locate game is forbidden. Certainly, a trail camera is used to locate game and does not involve the direct, concurrent presence of the hunter. Is there a difference between hanging trail cameras to locate the presence of game when the hunter is not around, and having a passel of hired guides scout for the hunter instead (an activity which many hunters object to on various website forums in discussing auction tag holders)? Perhaps one could rhetorically argue that scouting from a chute plane as more ethical than using a trail camera as the hunter is not using an electronic device to locate game for him and is actively involved in scouting at the moment.

 

In a similar vein, the common use of hand-held radios to guide hunters to an animal while stalking should be examined.

 

In summary, it seems that we hunters have allowed the use of electronic technology to supplant our hunting skills and ethical behaviors. Maybe we should step back and do a reality check upon ourselves and see where we stand in the deep-rooted philosophies of hunting values.

 

Fair Chase

Taken from http://www.pope-young.org/fairchase.asp

 

"From its beginnings, the Club has grown to epitomize fair chase and sportsmanship in hunting. This fair chase philosophy reaches to the very foundations of the hunting spirit; it remains 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. Simply defined, fair chase is the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit of free-ranging wild game animals in a manner which does not give the hunter an improper or unfair advantage over the animal. It does, however, extend beyond the hunt itself; it is an attitude and a way of life based in a deep-seated respect for wildlife, for the environment, and for other individuals who share the bounty of this vast continent's natural resources.

The term "Fair Chase" shall not include the taking of animals under the following conditions:

1. Helpless in a trap, deep snow or water, or on ice.

2. From any power vehicle or power boat.

3. By "jacklighting" or shining at night.

4. By the use of any tranquilizers or poisons.

5. While inside escape-proof fenced enclosures.

6. By the use of any power vehicles or power boats for herding or driving animals, including use of aircraft to land alongside or to communicate with or direct a hunter on the ground.

7. By the use of electronic devices for attracting, locating, or pursuing game or guiding the hunter to such game, or by the use of a bow or arrow to which any electronic device is attached.

8. Any other condition considered by the Board of Directors as unacceptable. "

[DesertBull]

A camera looks at a 50 sq ft area on the surface of the earth.

10 paid guides using planes, trains and automobiles to scour every square inch of land is quite different, in my opinion. At least the hunter using cams has to take his own time and money to purchase, hang and maintain them. It takes some effort on the hunters part, unlike sitting at home waiting on "the call".

[cramerhunts]

I couldn't have said it better D.B., I completely agree that the use of trail cameras take alot more work then most realize and it is completely different then waiting for someone to do your work for you. I don't have a problem with guides or anything of that sort but I also understand and know first hand how much work actually goes into the use of the trail cameras.

 

Just my 2 cents.

 

Phil

[DesertBull]

For the record, I do not have anything against guides or the hunters that use them either.

[TLH]

I think the main point is "are hunters bringing the animals in to the camera?" if the animals are there then the camera is only telling us if they are doe or buck--if, however, we use a supplement to draw the animals to the camera then there might be an argument.

 

Cameras by themselves will not change the animals behavior nor will it cause that animal to be killed easier--it just shows the picture of the animal and nothing else.

 

The second question i would ask is "does using cameras near waterholes cause an animal to be taken more readily?" and to that i say no, reason being is the hunter still has to do his or her part to take that animal. The animal comes and goes to the waterhole when he wants to not when the hunter wants him to so there is no way to know if that bull or buck will be there when you setup on the waterhole.

 

I use the cameras to see what the animals look like--nothing more. I have rarely seen a pattern of an animal on my cameras--and sometimes i may see one bull only once in 3 months on a camera--same goes for mule deer bucks. Whitetails are easier to pattern but it is not a gimme by any means.

 

Good thread Doug.

[Ron G.]

7. By the use of electronic devices for attracting, locating, or pursuing game or guiding the hunter to such game, or by the use of a bow or arrow to which any electronic device is attached.

8. Any other condition considered by the Board of Directors as unacceptable. "

 

I guess by stretching #7, trail cameras could fall under #7. Hopefully the lawyers will never have to argue it, although all of us armchair lawyers have and probably will for a long time.

 

I personally don't feel that trail cameras fall under #7 above. Trail cameras allow me to see what is in the area, usually day or night. I still have to decide where to put a camera, and where and how to hunt the area. Seeing animals on a camera only really allows you to know what is in the area and what your quarry looks like. I personally don't have time (due to work, family, and other obligations) to sit and either glass an area or sit and observe a water hole or salt* for days on end to see what animals are in the area. Believe me, I wish I did!

 

Trail cameras are actually a lot more work than I originally expected. I find myself going up and scouting the area and checking the cameras a lot more than I ever did before I had cameras. The anticipation of seeing what is on the camera is almost as exciting as the hunt itself.

 

Do trail cameras give someone an advantage by being able to put several in different areas and monitor them vs one person only being able to glass or sit a single area? Maybe, but when it comes down to it, the single person can only hunt a single area. They are effective in helping decide where a person will hunt and determining the 'trophy' quality of the area.

 

I personally don't feel using cameras doesn't violate fair chase as described by Pope and Young. That is my interpretation. In reading #7 above, using a range finder or bino/range finder combo seems to violate fair chase chase 'rule' #7. Baiting or hunting over water seems (to me) less fair chase than trail cams, but I didn't see that listed unless it falls under #8. I think if legal in an area, it is solely personal preference, and nothing wrong with it.

 

I'm still up in the air with radios, so I won't really touch on that. I can see it both ways in regards to fair chase.

 

That is my 2 cents, and is solely personal opinion. I reserve the right to change my opinion at any time...

[DesertBull]

As far as using attractants go, I think that is way overblown.

As an example, assume a mountain you hunt is in prime Coues habitat. On that mountain, there might be 3-5 places all the deer on that mountain can get water year around. Yet, they can get food just about anywhere on the mountain. So, is it more ethical to hunt a pile of corn, which the deer do not need to survive, or the water hole(s), which every deer on the mountain will visit on a regular basis?

 

Just a point to consider.

[dds]

Doug,

 

In my opinion the use of trail cameras is completely ethical for several reasons.

 

1. "Simply defined, fair chase is the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit of free-ranging wild game animals in a manner which does not give the hunter an improper or unfair advantage over the animal. "

 

The placement of a camera strictly for scouting purposes does not "give the hunter an improper advantage over the animal." As one example, I had a camera in an area and it took several pictures of bucks over the course of the summer. However, I have sat that stand for 20+ hours and have yet to see a buck. In fact, I have only seen 2 does to date. Even if the trail camera guaranteed that a buck would be there everyday, it does not supplant our hunting skills. I still have to get into the area without being seen, heard, or smelled; and remain unrecognized in order to even have a shot opportunity. Again, as an example, the 2 does that came in this past Monday recognized immediately that something was wrong and left hurriedly, just as soon as they were there. As an interesting note, they were never in direct line of the camera sensor and the camera did not capture their presence.

 

2. "By the use of electronic devices for attracting, locating, or pursuing game or guiding the hunter to such game, or by the use of a bow or arrow to which any electronic device is attached."

 

I believe this is in regard to an immediate solution as opposed to a camera that takes pictures long before the taking of an animal. As you mentioned, the radio is an immediate solution for the taking of an animal.

 

In conclusion, I would say that the trail camera as a tool can make a person a better hunter by allowing the individual to become more familiar with their quarry. Unlike the radio, the quad, and the guide, the camera collects data that can be used to learn the habits of the animal, a way to understand the environment that the animal inhabits, and how the animals interact with each other, with other species, and with regard to environmental conditions like the weather, moon phase, and time of day. Furthermore, the hunter that has a camera or several cameras is more likely to spend more hours in the field checking their cameras, than their counterparts. Personally, I have 5 cameras and use them most of the year. To me, capturing an image of a good buck, bull, or other animal is just as rewarding as finding a huge shed antler, or even the harvesting of an animal.

 

My thoughts on the topic, anyway,

[peloncillo]

I really don't see any ethical issue with taking a photograph of an animal.

 

Keven

[bowcrazy]

I believe the use of treecams are up to the hunter to decide, i have used them oa few times only to see the activity around the area, that still doesn't tell you when and where the animal will return.

[AZcoues_addict]

Great topic. Trail cams are a lot of work and for many of the same reasons already stated, I personally prefer using trail cams to flying planes, 10 guides, and the waiting for the call scenario. As far as ethics are concerned, in my mind all are legal forms and therefore perfectly ethical, so I don't feel we should bad talk another person who has more resources to take wildlife. As far as the auction tags go, as long as they don't break the law, so be it. I want to find the game on my own, but if another person wants to pay someone to do their hard work, that is the society in which we live and I accept it as long as they obey the law. I prefer my method, but they can have their legal forms too.

 

In my mind, trail cams don't aid in the taking of wildlife, but only provide information through a picture. Even though it is electronic, it does not assist in the kill. They do help to locate, but I interpret this rule as meaning locate while hunting, as in for locating in real time, right now. Heat sensing devices would be such a device, where one could locate and take game. For this reason I don't think those trail cams that send you pictures through your cell phone should be allowed. They can possibly help you know exactly where game is, at an exact moment in real time, for you to take. Normal trail cams are pics of the past, which one might argue is predictable, but definitely is not guaranteed as in the previous examples.

 

The rangefinder example was one I was thinking of as well, it directly aids. Not to mention those electronic ignitions in your car and for those of you who use quads? If we want consider trail cams a violation under this rule, then I think you better rule out all of these toys as well and any other that help you to "locate". As far as radios are concerned, I always thought that guiding a person directly to an animal through radios was definitely against the fair chase rule. That is why you can use them to communicate and for safety, but not to directly guide a person to game. Hand signals only!

[m77]

So, if there are three waterholes in an area you would like to hunt and you put a trailcam on each one. Only one of the waterholes has a 115 inch whitetail coming into it, the other two have much smaller buck. Which waterhole are you going to hunt. And, didn't that trailcam help you locate and take that buck.

 

Take away all three trailcams, which waterhole do you sit on. Do you shot the 89 inch buck when he comes into the hole you choose without the aid of the trailcam. The bigger buck lives another year.

 

Who do you think your fouling when you say the trailcam didn't aid in the taking of the bigger buck????

 

Salt is even worse, it changes the feeding habits of the deer and you are training them to come into a specific spot. Then hang a trailcam there and you might as well be hunting in TEXAS.

[azpackhorse]

I personally don't care who endorses the use, if big brother Arizona says it's legal then there's no argument. More than not Ethics are a personal choice or opinion. If it's legal and you're ok with it then do it, if it's legal and you deem it unethical then that's your opinion and nothing else, it doesn't matter to anyone but you so why voice it? If you are serious about it then attempt to do something about it legally............a good place to start would be going to AZGF meetings with a well planned out solution to your "opinion".

 

And that my friends is my opinion .............oh ya.........and the law

[Buckhorn]

What if the Trail Camera sends instant pics to your phone which many people have talked about with all the cameras being stolen lately?

 

Buckhorn

[azpackhorse]

Buckhorn,

they make them and if I had the extra $ laying around I'd have one, I don't think they are illegal ........yet.