Game Cameras- G&F Agenda

[UggRedBilly]

1 hour ago, ThomC said:

Paying someone to hunt for you is not fair chase.  It is no different than lion hunting where dog handlers tree the Lion and call the hunter to the spot and shoot the lion.  Guides are locating the game with cameras and then bringing the shooter to the spot.

The cunundrum for the Carefree Clowns is they get alot of money from guides and out of state rich guys.   And the state gets money from the other things that the guides and out of state guys buy.  The CC doesnt want to kill the golden egg but wants to keep it a little honest.  So they use the sheep theory and ban everybody not just the guides.  It will be interesting to see what they come up with this time?   😷

I see what you're saying and I see why it can be frustrating. The fact is that guides bring a lot of value to these animals. If these animals have no value they would not be here today. They need to have a form of value to put on the animal. That value goes to Game and Fish, then game and fish will regulate when and where to hunt. Without game and fish there would be extinct animals across the country. Look at where buffalo's once were. Now look at them today.  Same with turkey, elk and deer

[ShutYourLib]

I don’t post often, and usually side with the “we don’t need any more regulation” side of the house. That said, there are some problems with game cameras. If you have ever been on a hunt in a trophy unit, where there are multiple guide services representing clients, it really sucks. There are 15+ cameras on every water source, the guides then send in large groups of people to check all of the cameras early each morning, then they radio the team to head where the big bucks were last seen, then they post glassers on every hilltop for a couple of miles from that mornings pictures. It makes it very difficult for a do it yourself hunter.  I have no idea how to fix that, and don’t like regulation, but seeing that firsthand was the first time I thought that something needed to be done.  

[Swivelhead]

3 hours ago, ShutYourLib said:

I don’t post often, and usually side with the “we don’t need any more regulation” side of the house. That said, there are some problems with game cameras. If you have ever been on a hunt in a trophy unit, where there are multiple guide services representing clients, it really sucks. There are 15+ cameras on every water source, the guides then send in large groups of people to check all of the cameras early each morning, then they radio the team to head where the big bucks were last seen, then they post glassers on every hilltop for a couple of miles from that mornings pictures. It makes it very difficult for a do it yourself hunter.  I have no idea how to fix that, and don’t like regulation, but seeing that firsthand was the first time I thought that something needed to be done.  

^^^^ Best post on this thread.  Sums up the problem perfectly.  That being said, a trailcam ban is unenforceable. 

[ThomC]

The unenforcable is exactually right.  With only one under paid WM per unit there is no way they can control the camera ban.  As with all "rules" this will be a feel good, look good, waste of time.  😷

[Saguaro]

I like cameras.  It’s always a unique surprise to check the cameras and find something nice.  It could even be a good picture of a bird.  I think in some areas trail cam pictures of a big buck will doom him and I’m not sure that’s what hunting should be.  

I can’t help but to think about the future when these topics come up like game cameras, long range shooting, outfitting, and online egos with Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, websites etc..  None of these were talked about or considered problems 30 years ago.  I know there are more guides now than there were then.  What will it be like in another 30 years and 4,000,000 more people later?

[CatfishKev]

37 minutes ago, Swivelhead said:

^^^^ Best post on this thread.  Sums up the problem perfectly.  That being said, a trailcam ban is unenforceable. 

Agreed.  Thing is one has to wonder if game and fish is looking at this as a fair chase issue or a untapped cash cow issue.  If it's a money issue they will simply charge a fee per cam which in turn the guides will happily raise their prices to cover, and also therefore also make hunting even harder for the common man.   If it's truly a fair chase issue in their mind they will make a "season" for cams.  And ya know what? It's pretty hard IMO to say cams aren't a fair chase issue. I.E. cams everywhere on every trophy elk and mule deer hunt.  Patterning the big bull or buck, Armies of  guys on ridges and blocking roads etc.   I'm sorry but It's real hard to argue fair chase under those circumstances.  

Personally, I'd rather see a season for cams, or them go away completely before seeing a trail cam fee. A fee for cams will only give guides more advantage and regular shmoes even less in an already uneven playing field.  

[azbirdhunter88]

Anyone can go take a test and be a guide. Why is everyone so against guides? You can go buy 100 cams just like they do and put them up all over. 

[CatfishKev]

5 minutes ago, azbirdhunter88 said:

Anyone can go take a test and be a guide. Why is everyone so against guides? You can go buy 100 cams just like they do and put them up all over. 

Whos against guides? Just saying they wont brunt the force of the cost, they will simply transfer the cost to the client.  

And um.... 100 cams x let's say $60 per cam (for a decent cam) = $6000 Which amazingly probably cost more then a guided hunt.

Privileged guy that gets to go keep people off of his private Midwest farms so only his clan can hunt them.  Rollingmyfuckineyes. 

[ShutYourLib]

22 minutes ago, azbirdhunter88 said:

Anyone can go take a test and be a guide. Why is everyone so against guides? You can go buy 100 cams just like they do and put them up all over. 

Not everyone wants to be a guide.  Personally, I just want equal fair chase opportunity and good times in the outdoors with my family. My problem is when you raise your kids with certain hunting ethics, wait 20 years to get a tag in a coveted unit, only for your kids to witness how the guides operate on their hunts.  I had always thought cameras had a place and have several myself; it’s cool to see what’s out there!  I never considered the extremes though, never even thought about every water source in a unit covered with game cameras by a guide. Now, I’m thinking about future extremes and can envision a time where a well financed investor sees how much money a trophy animal can bring, what stops them from having cameras blanketing an entire unit? Seems far fetched now, but the way guides hunt and run their business is something I would have never considered 30 or 40 years ago. 

[5guyshunting]

4 minutes ago, CatfishKev said:

Whos against guides? Just saying they wont brunt the force of the cost, they will simply transfer the cost to the client.  

And um.... 100 cams x let's say $60 per cam (for a decent cam) = $6000 Which amazingly probably cost more then a guided hunt.

Privileged guy that gets to go keep people off of his private Midwest farms so only his clan can hunt them.  Rollingmyfuckineyes. 

Who's against guys in the midwest that own their own property? Sounds like you? I am pro cam.

[Delw]

5 hours ago, UggRedBilly said:

I see what you're saying and I see why it can be frustrating. The fact is that guides bring a lot of value to these animals. If these animals have no value they would not be here today. They need to have a form of value to put on the animal. That value goes to Game and Fish, then game and fish will regulate when and where to hunt. Without game and fish there would be extinct animals across the country. Look at where buffalo's once were. Now look at them today.  Same with turkey, elk and deer

Guides to not bring any VALUE anymore than joe hunter does, infact guide probably bring in less money that joe hunter. They have a guide fee whopdido thats peanuts. that fee probably washes even with the cost of the test and paper/adminastartive  work that G&F.

 

 

[NMBPMAN]

On 12/3/2020 at 4:02 PM, azbirdhunter88 said:

Anyone can go take a test and be a guide. Why is everyone so against guides? You can go buy 100 cams just like they do and put them up all over. 

Let’s start with the armies of guides and helpers that flood an area for one client, sitting on every ridge top, parked at the end of every road, and all the camps for said clients/guides/helpers.  I’d have to say, and this is my own opinion, if a grown azz man cant go out and find himself an animal or even field dress his own animal after harvesting one, maybe he should find something else to do for posting about on Instagram or Facebook. 

[CatfishKev]

6 minutes ago, 5guyshunting said:

Who's against guys in the midwest that own their own property? Sounds like you? I am pro cam.

I'm not against that. But to say just go buy 100 cams like anyone can do it is stupid.   We don't all come from privelage.  I'm not for or against cams. 

[Saguaro]

18 minutes ago, ShutYourLib said:

what stops them from having cameras blanketing an entire unit? Seems far fetched now, but the way guides hunt and run their business is something I would have never considered 30 or 40 years ago. 

That’s the unknown I keep thinking about.  What I see now was unimaginable 30 years ago.  How weird it will be 30 years from now.  I know the future has not been good to a few of my hunting areas.  Some have been cut up into Windmills, potash exploration, juniper munching, and more 40 acre maggots.  Top that off with the areas not getting any good rain and the future looks depressing.

I honestly think it’s too late to do anything about cameras.  Too many will think this is a game law that doesn’t apply to them.  It should have been nipped in the butt 15 yeas ago.  We are too spoiled now and so full of our privilege.

[CouesFanatic]

56 minutes ago, CatfishKev said:

Agreed.  Thing is one has to wonder if game and fish is looking at this as a fair chase issue or a untapped cash cow issue.  If it's a money issue they will simply charge a fee per cam which in turn the guides will happily raise their prices to cover, and also therefore also make hunting even harder for the common man.   If it's truly a fair chase issue in their mind they will make a "season" for cams.  And ya know what? It's pretty hard IMO to say cams aren't a fair chase issue. I.E. cams everywhere on every trophy elk and mule deer hunt.  Patterning the big bull or buck, Armies of  guys on ridges and blocking roads etc.   I'm sorry but It's real hard to argue fair chase under those circumstances.  

 Personally, I'd rather see a season for cams, or them go away completely before seeing a trail cam fee. A fee for cams will only give guides more advantage and regular shmoes even less in an already uneven playing field.  

How does making a camera season eliminate the supposed fair chase issue? Legitimate question. They would have to create a camera season for every species. They would all overlap and cause a huge mess. It seems everyone just thinks about deer and elk but a camera season has an effect on all other animals we catch on cameras.