Trail Cameras....ethical or not?

[Kevin Dill]

From Webster, the definition of "ethics":

a set of moral principles : a theory or system of moral values

the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group

a guiding philosophy

a consciousness of moral importance

Bill...

You're then saying that it's not possible for a man to develop and have his own set of personal ethics...that he doesn't have ethics until they are part of a "social standard". (?)  I call that a matter of semantics and your individual interpretation of ethics.

You're entitled to that of course. It doesn't mean that your interpretation of ethics is how the entire world views them. I completely reject the idea or position that someone cannot have ethics unless a "social standard" agrees with them. Webster pretty well shows the individual nature of ethics...see above.

"Code Of Conduct" refers to behavior based on a principle, but not necessarily on ethics.

[jhg]

Originally posted by Jeff Strubberg:
Divided we fall only applies if we refuse to stand up for each other.  It has nothing to do with whether we tolerate the use of trail cameras or not.

I disagree.
 In this case trail cameras are part of a larger bellweather(sp?) of equipment that are forcing us, and everyone else who has an opinion on hunting, (as well as those who do not yet) to look anew at the merits of the sport.
 All I am advocating is we broaden our view when considering the ethical use of such devices to include the larger image of hunting. Again, I think they are linked. Thats all.

I will stand up for my brothers & sisters who hunt. But I do not want to see what we love eroded because in the end we could not agree on what is threatening it.

Joshua

[LeeBishop]

Originally posted by Bill Tell:

I am giving examples of where others have stated that the use of an electrical devise, encompassing trail cameras, are unethical in the field.  I agree with them so I am participating in supporting their examples. [/b]

Well, that's the stance of luddism. It's anti-technological and advancement.

People may resist all they want, but technology prevails over all and life changes. And with the advent of electronic devices, digital and electronic items become standard to average life.

It may be your choice to not use cameras, and that's fine, but don't say it's unethical.

Unethical is riding on a Union Pacific train through The Great Plains shooting buffalo on a flatbed car for entertainment.

Unethical is flying over a herd of caribou and shooting down upon them.

Unethical is restricting an animal's movement by chaining it down or keeping it in a restricted area. An archery "legend" comes to mind for that in a "hunting" film.

Having a battery-powered camera on a tree to monitor what's walking through the woods isn't unethical. Go back to my previous post on page 5 for an example as to why. It seems as though you have glanced over it.

[Bill Tell]

Originally posted by Kevin Dill:
Well Bill...

You're then saying that it's not possible for a man to develop and have his own set of personal ethics...that he doesn't have ethics until they are part of a "social standard". (?)  I call that a matter of semantics and your individual interpretation of ethics.

You're entitled to that of course. It doesn't mean that your interpretation of ethics is how the entire world views them. I completely reject the idea or position that someone cannot have ethics unless a "social standard" agrees with them.

"Code Of Conduct" refers to actionable behavior, and does not begin to describe the internal value system that makes each of us unique.

OK, I am just trying to support my opinion with actual examples.  I know you understand that.  I respect your tenacity for individual thoughts and ideals.

I still don't like trail cams being used during open season.

[gregg dudley]

Originally posted by Kevin Dill:
I'll throw this up for fun and discussion...

A camera that senses movement or heat and snaps a film picture...became a digital one that logged in data related to the date and time...became one with additional capabilities to sense and record climate variables...became one that integrates and communicates with your smart(?)phone via the cellular network. How much additional capabilities are awaiting development?

Forty miles from my home there is a company that manufactures trail cam systems. These systems use multiple cameras which relay their images and data to a main "server" camera. In essence, a web-work of cameras can be established around a given property, and real-time images are transmitted from the "server" camera. These images and related data are either transmitted to your phone or computer by radio signal (to a base station receiver) or by cellular network. Is there an app for that?

The upshot is that a hunter CAN be sitting on a deer stand while watching his smart(?)phone for instant data which tells him about deer movements at a different stand...or many of them.  Do you like the idea of guys having as many wireless communication devices as they can afford out there in the woods? You may not be using them at this advanced level, but the technology is now in place and being used.

I consider all this to be more about the slippery slope. How do you argue against 2 guys using cell phones to communicate deer movements, while allowing an expensive electronic device to communicate the same (or maybe better) information to a hunter? Splitting hairs? Are you ready for solar-charged real-time video surveillance while we hunt? How much circuitry in the woods is too much? How traditional is its use?

Do you prefer the science of technology over the art of hunting?

And finally...ever think that there might come a day when you'll say, "Jeez...we should have controlled electronic technology before it became 'the new traditional'?

Fun to think about, isn't it?

Great point.  I really enjoy the trailcam thread and dabble with a cranky old stealth cam myself, but when you look at hunting videos and commercials where the hunters have enough gizmos to make a special forces team salivate you have to question the direction hunting is taking...

[Bill Tell]

Originally posted by LeeBishop:
 

Originally posted by Bill Tell:

I am giving examples of where others have stated that the use of an electrical devise, encompassing trail cameras, are unethical in the field.  I agree with them so I am participating in supporting their examples. [/b]

Well, that's the stance of luddism. It's anti-technological and advancement.

People may resist all they want, but technology prevails over all and life changes. And with the advent of electronic devices, digital and electronic items become standard to average life.

It may be your choice to not use cameras, and that's fine, but don't say it's unethical. [/b]

You are confirming this is labor saving technology by saying that I have a Luddism stance.

[Kevin Dill]

It's definitely unethical for me to use trail cameras. Quote me. Anyone.

I have never painted this with a broad brush, or said that my ethical viewpoint is how another should believe. I give plenty of room for others to have their own ethics. I'm usually surprised at how challenged some folks are when a person's beliefs don't match their own.

[LeeBishop]

Originally posted by Bill Tell:
 

Originally posted by LeeBishop:
 

Originally posted by Bill Tell:

I am giving examples of where others have stated that the use of an electrical devise, encompassing trail cameras, are unethical in the field.  I agree with them so I am participating in supporting their examples. [/b]

Well, that's the stance of luddism. It's anti-technological and advancement.

People may resist all they want, but technology prevails over all and life changes. And with the advent of electronic devices, digital and electronic items become standard to average life.

It may be your choice to not use cameras, and that's fine, but don't say it's unethical. [/b]

You are confirming this is labor saving technology by saying that I have a Luddism stance. [/b]

I expounded my point. Please browse it further.

But your bow is an example of technology that took labor out of hunting.

No longer do you have to throw a spear at wild game and hunt in a pack of your villagers.

[KentuckyTJ]

I imagine this debate was very similar with the "Old Schoolers" when the first recurves hit the market.

[Kevin Dill]

Originally posted by KentuckyTJ:
I imagine this debate was very similar with the "Old Schoolers" when the first recurves hit the market.

No it wasn't.

They didn't have Trad Gang!    

[Bill Tell]

Originally posted by LeeBishop:
 

Originally posted by Bill Tell:
 

Originally posted by LeeBishop:
   

quote:Originally posted by Bill Tell:

I am giving examples of where others have stated that the use of an electrical devise, encompassing trail cameras, are unethical in the field.  I agree with them so I am participating in supporting their examples. [/b]

Well, that's the stance of luddism. It's anti-technological and advancement.

People may resist all they want, but technology prevails over all and life changes. And with the advent of electronic devices, digital and electronic items become standard to average life.

It may be your choice to not use cameras, and that's fine, but don't say it's unethical. [/b]

You are confirming this is labor saving technology by saying that I have a Luddism stance. [/b]

I expounded my point. Please browse it further.

But your bow is an example of technology that took labor out of hunting.

No longer do you have to throw a spear at wild game and hunt in a pack of your villagers.

So by this line of reasoning we should all be hunting with predator drones.

[Bjorn]

These are pretty well accepted principles and not just by me        
Ethics is a personal code (could be a group code too if you choose) of behavior that you conduct yourself by whether you are alone or not-main thing is that it is personal and you may have arrived at norms for these socially.
Acceptable social behavior is what keeps people from farting in the theater-sometimes.
Laws are laws and are separate from ethics.

And game cameras or PCB's are not going to divide us they are just technology and techniques.

[LoweBow]

In my opinion the "locating" an animal is stretching it a little.  You have "located" the animal to a 50 square foot area at that moment.....and as my experience shows...you may or may not ever see that deer in that 50 sq foot area again.  Crap shoot.  Even with cellular or real time (which I don't know anyone personally that uses these) what good is it?  It's past history by the time the pic is taken.  

To find a mature buck on cam, initiate a game plan, hang a stand, plot and successfully stalk an entry route, sit 12-1/2 hrs on stand without coming down, make the shot (which will happen 1% of the time you set up like this)

I speak from years and thousands of scenarios that I have described above and can tell you....trail cams do not "locate" deer to a certain spot.  I have pics of literally 100's if  not thousands of bucks that I've personally never laid eyes on.  Lord knows I've tried and I'd consider myself an "above average" hunter when it comes to mature whitetails.

To my knowlege P&Y hasn't made an official stance on this....anyone know for sure?

Mike

[Kevin Dill]

http://www.buckeyecam.com/index.php/product-line/overview

Look closely. Think about the next step which is live video of 30 different settings.

The really hard part is using your brain to recognize the trend...and envision where this leads in ten years.

[jhg]

Originally posted by KentuckyTJ:
I imagine this debate was very similar with the "Old Schoolers" when the first recurves hit the market.

I don't know. In terms of is it trad or not maybe but recurves were never devices that had the potential to turn the uninformed against the sport. Personally, my whole issue with trail cams, as my understanding of ethics is broadened by this discussion, is what they seem to be to the uninformed. I don't like them for that reason. I realize this is my issue, but in the end, it will be one for all of us who hunt.

[ishoot4thrills]

I would love to have a good trail cam, but it's just not in my budget right now. I hear you get what you pay for when it comes to trail cams.

The main reason I want one is just to see if there might be a huge buck frequenting the farm in which I hunt on. If I were to see a big'un on a trail cam then it just might cause me to pass up on smaller bucks (which is what I plan on doing this year anyway, but it would be much easier to pass on smaller ones if I knew ol' mossy horns was in my area!).

Also, I think it would be much fun seeing just what kind of wildlife I could get pictures of. I would like to put one on a gut pile or a dead deer found in the bush and see what all kind of animals come to it.

I really can't see anything unethical about using a couple of them here and there. Sorry, but I also just can't see how they give a hunter any unfair advantage either.

[LoweBow]

Originally posted by Kevin Dill:
 http://www.buckeyecam.com/index.php/product-line/overview  

Look closely. Think about the next step which is live video of 30 different settings.

The really hard part is using your brain to recognize the trend...and envision where this leads in ten years.

I know where it doesn't lead in Kentucky and most other states that I know of....
It doesn't lead to enternet control of a remote control gun....or using while in a stand....or killing the animal for you......as most states banned these uses years ago when the outfit in Tx tried selling this kind of electronic enternet shooting gallery 7 years ago or so. (note I don't use the word hunt)
I believe some states allow electronic calls, phones, radios, etc, but KY does not.

[LoweBow]

Doug,
Carcass cams are Amazing!  You never know what you're gonna get!

[Kevin Dill]

Originally posted by LoweBow:
 

Originally posted by Kevin Dill:
  http://www.buckeyecam.com/index.php/product-line/overview  

Look closely. Think about the next step which is live video of 30 different settings.

The really hard part is using your brain to recognize the trend...and envision where this leads in ten years.

I know where it doesn't lead in Kentucky and most other states that I know of....
It doesn't lead to enternet control of a remote control gun....or using while in a stand....or killing the animal for you......as most states banned these uses years ago when the outfit in Tx tried selling this kind of electronic enternet shooting gallery 7 years ago or so. (note I don't use the word hunt)
I believe some states allow electronic calls, phones, radios, etc, but KY does not. [/b]

Your point is well taken. It also shows that there ARE people out there who have a much more liberal set of ethics than you or me. These are the people who would not hesitate to use every conceivable tech advantage they can access, just to get the dead animal they desire. Their ethics say "It's okay to use remote weapons and other devices to help me kill an animal. I don't like being told I can't do something that I enjoy. Show me how I'm harming the sport of hunting".

Thank god for those with the guts to say..."NO".

[randy grider]

Trail Cams are a hobby i theirself. I got pics on mine this fall of a large buck,one that i've yet to see, and probably never will unless he gets careless during the rut. Most big buck pics i've gotten are in the middle of the night, so its not going to help me get that buck any way. I run my cam all year, and have hundreds of pics, its just a fun hobby. What I cant stand is seeing the bait piles, and feeders in the photos, that takes the thrill out of it for me. JMO