Not saying I agree with the article (I don't), but there are some valid points. Especially for hunting on public land. Been close a couple times to pulling the trigger on a cellular game camera.

What are yalls thoughts?

Cellular-Linked Trail Camera Controversy

I have two Cell connected cams running. I went with Moltrie. I think cell cams are a great idea. With that said, two things to keep in mind. Batteries and theft.

the good thing about theft is will probably have a pic of some guy nobody knows stealing your cam. They do have cable locks but the cams are plastic and could be cut with a hack saw.

If I was doing public land. I would pack in one of those portable plastic ladders like the House inspectors carry with them and put it up high where it can't be reached off the ground.

Moultrie has a really good solar charged battery for 79 bucks that works pretty good. I have a third cam new in the box I plan to put out later in the year. I plan to buy one more and have a cell cam at each of my stands.

Its fun to check to see whats show up, just pick your cell phone up and look. I get updates twice a day on my cams

I agree with the article. No wireless on public land except for scouting pre-season. We have a few but don't use them deer hunting. Just for hogs to know when they are coming in at night. Luckily only 3 of our 8 feeders get a signal. Jmo...

I believe the times coming when we are going to have to say no to new technology as far as hunting is concerned.

Some guys are really, really into cell-linked cameras at all their feed stations. I've passed on one lease after seeing it, partly because of this.

I built my own "home brew" camera back before commercial units became available. I soon learned through my own experience and by watching the antics of fellow hunters that you can go crazy trying to get photos of deer you'll never lay eye on. Cellular cameras just seem to be something that allows you to take the level of passion much higher. Today, I would be more likely to use on for security purposes than trying to get a photo more quickly than I could with a far less expensive camera. I never run cameras during the season to avoid all the hunter chatter that goes with other hunters asking and telling what they caught on camera.

Today I use a couple of the less expensive cameras to see what shows up at feeders before and after the season, which includes seeing when hogs are showing up during daylight hours after the season. That's when I'll slip in one weekend morning or evening to give them a dose of lead poison.

Just my opinion, but the element of total surprise of what you might see adds more excitement to the sport.

Somebody needs to tell the high&mighties in that article that anything after buck-naked and bare-handed gives the hunter an 'unfair' advantage. Just because you've already been doing something for 200 years doesn't mean it also isn't an unfair advantage.

I didn't see it stated in the article, but perhaps they have noticed a more-than-incremental rise in harvest numbers with the permeation of cell linked cameras. It does give hunters an extra advantage beyond just convenience in the type of situation they are describing, and it could also cause hunters to trample rough shod into a sensitive area when they've just seen an animal that they want to harvest. I guarantee that they aren't going to make a controversial decision like this without, in their opinion, just cause to do so. Those states make a lot of money from recreation and wouldn't upset the apple cart unless they truly felt that they need to. I, personally, do not use them because I don't want to drop that kind of coinage on one, and the people I know who do use them, use them for convenience purposes. All things considered, I believe it to be folly to assume that they are making this decision for any reason other than to curtail damage being done to the overall hunting and recreational environment

I agree. If we really want to make hunting "fair" then ditch all weapons that you weren't born with. It's up to each hunter to decide on the experience they want. Personally, the idea of using a smart rifle is not something I would enjoy any more than paying someone to tie an animal to a stake in the ground so I could shoot it from 10 feet away. I only use game cams for scouting and cellular linked cameras are nice for those of us who can't easily drive out to our hunting spots on a regular basis. Are they "fair"? No they aren't. Neither is a rifle, or a bow. I have found my sweet spot and it's somewhere between the extremes.

But unless you are stripping down and trying to kill a hog with your bare hands, don't belittle someone else's choice as "unfair". After all, what your doing isn't "fair" either. And if you are killing wild hogs with your bare hands, then I want to buy you a drink!

I could not agree more.

There certainly may be some valid reasons that hunters should not use these on public lands, but fair chase as it applies to the animals is nothing but lip service. If anything, it offers an advantage to the hunters that have them over the hunters that do not have them. It isn't unfair so long as everyone has the option to use them. Sort of like scopes on rifles. They sure as heck is not fair chase to the animal and it does give the advantage to the hunter that has it over the hunter that doesn't (usually) so should we get rid of scopes? I think game cams, cellular or other wise, would be out of sync with how a lot of wildlife folks see how the sport should be progressing.

Ever notice that the animals don't have a say in what constitutes fair chase?

Anything above a flintlock, open sights, long bow and cedar shaft arrows is unfair advantage

Huh?

I'll bet those who hunted game with slingshots, rocks and sticks would disagree. I'm sure your list of "modern-day" weapons would have been seen as unfair advantage to them. Slippery slope.

To have a meaningful argument, we first need to define the term "fair chase". I suspect that means something different to different folks. At the extremes, you could say that using anything other than what you were born with is not "fair chase". Another argument would be that since humans were born with the ability to make and use tools, then the use of such tools is "fair", and you can, in fact, "fairly" use more than just your bare hands to kill an animal. But if you go with that second argument, then why would you draw a line by saying that the use of some tools is "fair" and some others are "unfair"? There are a lot of tools that give the hunter a much bigger advantage than any game camera ever could. Rifles and bows come to mind there. But I'm guessing that few advocates of "fair chase" really go hunting with nothing more than a spear and a knife. By the way, anyone who does that can do whatever they want, I certainly don't want to mess with that man.

In reality, I suspect that its like the definition of "rich" when we are talking about raising taxes. Most people's definition of "fair chase" seems to be "using everything I personally use, but nothing else". That's understandable. But please stop trying to turn this into some kind of a moral argument by using terms like "fair chase". Just say "I don't like using XYZ because I enjoy hunting more without it."

I didn't read much of it but what sounds like the limiting factor of "fair chase" wasn't the trail camera but hunting water sources in a desert. Pretty sure hunters and predators alike have been doing so for as long as we have been hunting.

Apparently you missed it when you read the article about the topic we are discussing, but 'fair chase' is the moral argument at hand. Quoting Jendro from the article cited in the OP...



They don't want hunter to have an unfair advantage, but apparently just an advantage. Obviously, they are not trying to make it fair to the animal.

In reality, I suspect it is less about being an unfair advantage to the animal as much as it is competition among hunters to pursue the animal. Those with cellular game cameras will have a marked advantage over those hunters without and being without is the more traditional role.

I stopped using game cameras several years ago. Had several including one that was cellular and texted pics.

I just found it extremely frustrating that I was seeing monster bucks at random times on the camera, mostly at night, and when a really nice buck came out I tended to pass because there was a bigger one on cam. The hunt wasn't enjoyable because there was always that ghost buck out there somewhere. Unfortunately, the monsters never showed up while I was on the stand.

These days there are no cameras and what I see it more exciting to me.

As technology develops issues will be up for debate and discussion more frequently. These discussion NEED to happen. I would like to think that at some point EVERYONE would be able to draw the line SOMEWHERE. Would you consider other things mentioned in the article such as smart rifles as "fair chase? or just "preference?" Drones? Just curious.

I shoot culls and does, I would not pass on a great buck, but I am not going to wait around for a trophy.

I shot a 14 point non-typical in Wise County in 2001,so it's hard to get excited about horns anymore.

For the record, I only use game cameras to pattern pigs.

I run two cellular game cameras (Spartan Go Cams) on satellite feeders that are used primarily for hogs. I also have another feeder that has a pen, but it’s equipped with a regular game camera. I will likely add a cellular game camera to my feeder pen this year. I can tell you that even with the cellular cameras that I had no advantage when it came to deer hunting. I hunted for days and spent almost 100 hours in the blind, as well as on the ground rattling before I shot my buck. The cameras save me a lot of time sitting in the blind hunting hogs. Now I get a text while I’m at deer camp, jump in the truck and go shoot the pigs.

The one benefit is the cameras provided me insight to the amount of activity at any given time. With that said, I had scheduled my vacation time in advance and was committed to those days whether the cameras were showing activity or not.

The end result is the same, a dead deer.

To each there own as long as a quick kill is the goal.

I didn't miss the fact that the article presents this as a moral argument. I simply disagree with the article on that point. It should not be a moral issue, IMHO.

"Unfair" and even "more traditional role" are subjective terms. People have been hunting since there have been people. Firearms have only been around for a tiny fraction of that time. So hunting without firearms is surely the "more traditional role", right? Does that make it "unfair" to use firearms while hunting? It all depends on how we define a bunch of subjective terms. Personally, I'll use what I like to use, and everyone else can use whatever legal tools they want. I don't think I am any better or worse than anyone else who makes different choices.

Agreed. My blinds are in positions where even if I tried to make it to another blind after seeing a deer on a cellular cam - it'd be gone by the time I got there.

The nicest bucks rarely show up on my non-cellular cams. My largest buck that I have a picture of only showed up for one week during December. Out of 10,000 or so pictures from that came from August through December... he only shows up in 3. Out of the 3... 2 are within a few minutes of each other. Only spotted him once during the season but he was too far and was chasing does.

Still debating on getting a couple. More because it would make it easier than having to download the pics off each cam.



That is an interesting perspective. If I had zero hogs, this might not be a bad idea. My main advantage with the cams now is knowing which feeder the hogs are hitting and when. I have two feeders within 700 yards of each other - both without hog wire. It's a mystery... some weeks the hogs hit one and not the other. Having a cellular cam would be helpful knowing which to hunt when I'm only out there for hogs (which is most of the time).

I think you are right, we started using cell cams last year and have already had success because of them. They are an advantage, a BIG BIG advantage in certain situations when you figure those out. I am torn about it, but it wouldn't hurt my feelings if they outlawed them all together.

Lookin or killin. Have to decide. Motto. Be prepared