Trail Cameras....ethical or not?

[Looper]

Kevin, you've said a couple of times that trail cameras are unethical for you to use. What would owning and using one cause you to do that violates your ethical code? What line would they cause you to cross?

[xtrema312]

A couple cameras for me is just fun and doesn’t really change how I hunt.  Running 20 cameras and having to maintain, move, change cards, replace batteries, and analyze the data sounds like more work than just going hunting. With all that I wouldn’t have time to hunt.  It would really be a waste of time and money given I would still hang my stand on the best funnel between a bedding areas and food source. Then hunt when I can and kill the first grown deer that walks past and gives me a shot because I find it personally unethical to have an empty freezer because I am trying to fill the wall. Which brings me to the observation that some here are arguing about P&Y rules and in may cases the targeting of trophy animals.  Interesting it is trophies that some are concerned about.  I find trophy hunting personally unethical because I find it unethical to discriminate based on sex, age or genetics.    :D

[Shawn Leonard]

Lowebow(Mike) your point is well taken, but it is when that same deer continually shows up in that same 50sq. ft patch at a certain time as some deer do, ecsp. on a feeding pattern. A guy checks his trail cam and sees buck X on the food plot 6 out of 7 days between 6 and 7pm. The guys own 600 acres and has 20 cameras on his plots and leading to them. Without the trail cam he may hunt 5 different plots in a two week period, but with them he decides to hunt the plot buck X is visiting regularly, is that fair to the animal. It may be for some but for me it is not. I just eliminated several hundred acres of hunting ground because my trailcam told me that was the place to be!! See my point, it no doubt helps in locating and killing deer and even a specific deer. I have watched to many shows and read to many articles and viewed too much on the internet for anyone to tell me that they cannot or are not used specifically to help them kill deer. I should say not everyone using them is using them that way, but there are a lot of folks who do. Ethical, I could really care less, as I said I cannot answer Rogers question because what I think is right may not be whats right for someone else. People are using these to pattern deer and to help them locate deer, as far as actually helping make the kill, well no as the hunter still has to make the shot. As far as harming the sport, I cannot say it is or isn't but than where do we draw the line? Shawn

[mrjsl]

This thread is taking off in two sideways directions.

One is a debate over what ethics are, exactly.

Two is a debate over how much of an advantage trail cams are or could be.

The original question was "Trail Cameras - ethical or not?" In the U.S. it doesn't matter what your personal ethics are except to you and yours. If a thing is considered unethical by many, it could be outlawed. Spotlighting and shooting deer at night is against the law BECAUSE it's unethical. It's considered unethical by many people, including those who don't hunt.

We may not lose our hunting privileges in this country for a long time, but if we do it will come down to our ability to defend our right to hunt. It is easy to defend hunting as an art or a skill, and it is hard to defend hunting as killing animals primarily with the aid of 24-7 remote electronic surveillance, chemical scent elimination, baits and chemical attractants of all kinds, ultra high tech weaponry, and essentially so much science that the art of it is hard to see or gone, which is where all this is headed.

It doesn't matter what your personal ethics are - if enough people get together and say NO hunters shouldn't really be allowed to do all these things in this way they are now doing them, then your hunting privileges will be gone.

[Kevin Dill]

Originally posted by looper:
Kevin, you've said a couple of times that trail cameras are unethical for you to use. What would owning and using one cause you to do that violates your ethical code? What line would they cause you to cross?

The line for me is using anything out in the field which directly aids me in eventually killing an animal, AND involves the use of a circuit board or other electronics which can gather and compute information about the animals in my area.

I don't use a gps, phone, radio or other electronic device to help me locate and kill an animal. I absolutely believe that it is 100% wrong for me to rely on electronics as a shortcut...however slight...to gain an advantage on any animal. I have spent enough long hard and tough hours in the woods to know that I COULD take a game camera and use it to help me kill a given deer. I live with deer. I see them every day. I know they are very patternable. I've patterned and killed them for decades using my legs, eyes and brain. For me, the camera would absolutely present an advantage...one I think is unfair and unwarranted in the spirit of traditional hunting values.

One of the main reasons their use is unethical for me? I know I am contributing to a segment of the industry which has a goal of making it easier to kill animals through the ever-expanding use of electronic technology out in the field. I will not be part of relying on electronics out there to help me...in even the slightest way...harvest game.

As I said once before: I don't like the road that takes us down...and I refuse to help build it.

[mrjsl]

Originally posted by xtrema312:
I find trophy hunting personally unethical because I find it unethical to discriminate based on sex, age or genetics.     :D  

Which has no effect on anyone else, unless you also happen to be the owner of an NFL team and follow your code of ethics there as well.

Just about everyone on this thread is PC to the point of being relativist to avoid offending anyone by saying what they do is unethical, but it is nonetheless true that what some hunters do IS unethical and negatively affects us all.

[Jason R. Wesbrock]

Originally posted by Kevin Dill:
 

Originally posted by Bill Tell:
unethical - not conforming to approved standards of social or professional behavior

Pope and Young

 “Fair Chase” shall not include the taking of animals under the following conditions:

"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."

By the very definition it is completely unethical if you use these during the hunting season!

Great illustrative post. A very recognized and prominent organization believes as stated.

The rub is simply the numbers of people (not TG-rs) who couldn't care less about ethics or having any limits based on them. The new ethic seems to often relate to "can I do this legally", instead of "should I support this behavior"? [/b]

Pope and Young answered the trail camera question several years ago when they stated that their use did not violate the club's rules of fair chase. So I guess the "they're unethical because P&Y says so" dog doesn't hunt.

Expounding on that thought -- that if it violates P&Y's rules of fair chase than it's unethical -- I know a guy who attaches a digital watch head to his bow with Velcro so he knows exactly when legal light begins and ends. Technically, it's an electronic device attached to a bow. Technically, it would violate P&Y's rules of fair chase. So can anyone please explain to me (with a straight face) how sticking a watch to your bow is unethical?

If I had to look at all my hunting gear and point to which item makes killing deer the easiest, it sure wouldn't be my GPS or trail camera. It would be my portable tree stand.  

[LoweBow]

Point well comunicated and well taken Shawn!

Funny thing is I had a deer this season that visited the same bean field, in the same "general" area multiple times.  I set a stand on a wide 10, but after 3 nights this buck showed and actually came to the fence crossing and within 12 yards of me.  It wasn't the buck I was hunting, but I did know this deer to be in the area.  I didn't take the 1/4 too shot on this 135" velvet buck as I felt the shot to be unethical.  
I had/have no ethical problem myself in using trail cams, but have my own code that I follow on equipment, shooting of fawns, shot placement, etc.

[cahaba]

Many people have to work long hours and don't get as much time in the woods as some of us do. I say if it helps your hunting and doesn't become a crutch go for it. I have one my wife got me. I may use it this year due to time constraints.

[Looper]

Kevin, I understand where you're coming from. I do find it interesting to see what other folk's limits are for themselves.

[randy grider]

Good points from both sides. I can see how it would improve a hunters chances on a specific deer, can't argue that. All mine has done is confirm there is a bruiser in the area, i'll have to do my homework to pinpoint where, and when he will show, as I think my cams location has scared him off as I have gotten no more pics of him. Its an infrared cam, but it still lights up, and the couple of pics I had he was allways looking at the camera, so technology has probably ruined my chances ! LOL. Oh well, I'm still proud of a couple of coyote pics, and some turkeys (rare sightings on my property )Guys have fun!

[Kevin Dill]

Some additional thoughts, as I enjoy the perspectives of others' minds.

What I've noticed over time is a progressive invasion of technology...even into what some people adamantly call "traditional bowhunting". Tech is certainly the everyday norm for modern compound bows, firearms, etc. I figured something out for myself about 20 years ago, and I never forgot it...

Every time I employ a new device to help me find success afield, I give up a little of the skills I gained the hard way. The whole point of devices is to enable a given task. Tell me about the last time you shopped for and bought a device with the deliberate intent to make your hunting success less likely. Keep in mind I'm not anti-device, but electronics have no place in my hunting success. Devices and electronics are popularized by people touting them as the answer to my problems. "Get a (game camera, mechanical release, laser anything, remote-control feeder, draw lock, crossbow, or other item) and get in the game!" Picture a huge animal in some pose. The association is clear. "Buy this...be like us." Buying into this mentality (and therefore advocating for progressive technology) inevitably takes me farther down the road and away from what some proudly refer to as "traditional bowhunting." I have just a bit of difficulty accepting a very futuristic electronics-laden person...who happens to be carrying a recurve...referring to the joys of hunting the traditional way.

Ever silently (or vocally) speak out against the wheelbow loaded with every possible advancement? Fine with bow-mounted laser range-computing digital readouts? In truth, we may appear to be hypocrites. Hard to tell a guy he can't or shouldn't use one of those, while I log onto my iPad and begin surveying a network of cameras placed strategically throughout my woods.

[KentuckyTJ]

Electronics are here to stay. You can choose not to partake and that is your choice. The more the economy flourishes from the hunting industry the safer it is. If our economy didn't benefit from hunters financially it would be much easier for the anti's to crush us and our sport. The folks in government would have a very easy call to make at the urging of the anti's to ban hunting if not for the money coming in.

Do you really believe my state wildlife department has worked so diligently and effectively to bring back deer, turkey and elk just so they didn't go extinct or simply for our pleasure? Please, time to wake up...its for the money.

Money drives our sport like it or not and the more we spend the safer our sport becomes.

[Easykeeper]

I have one this fall for the first time.  I don't see how it will help me tag any of the bucks I have gotten pictures of.  I have had a blast checking the camera every couple of weeks though.  Just seems to broaden the whole game for me, I consider pics like this a bit of a trophy in itself.  One that will last as long as a head on the wall even though the significance is less...

 

[LUCKY MAN]

Nice Buck!

[jhg]

Originally posted by KentuckyTJ:



...Do you really believe my state wildlife department has worked so diligently and effectively to bring back deer, turkey and elk just so they didn't go extinct or simply for our pleasure? Please, time to wake up...its for the money...

 

I for one believe mostly they do manage for our pleasure and to keep the populations viable for that end.

 Going all the way back to the sportsmen and Teddy Roosevelt saving a chunk of land or lands to help save the game animals they loved from disappearing from the planet. And there is plenty of others who early on went against the "money" interests to save habitat and grow numbers of game.
However, the fact that our animal resources do bring in money to support in part the agencies that manage them is a good thing.
Also, I think a lot of people that work for those agencies do so out of commitment to better our wildlands and the animals found there, not to make it pay. Wholesale condemnation of all that work in that field is at least inaccurate.

[Landshark160]

Originally posted by Jason R. Wesbrock:
If I had to look at all my hunting gear and point to which item makes killing deer the easiest, it sure wouldn't be my GPS or trail camera. It would be my portable tree stand.      

That's exactly right.

[KentuckyTJ]

jhg,

One of my good friends is a KY state biologist and there is no doubt he loves wildlife and all it encompasses. So I agree the folks that do the work for our dnr's do it for the love and their interest in the wildlife and conservation.

But please visit this link

         http://www.nps.gov/thro/planyourvisit/feesandreservations.htm        

Part of Teddy Roosevelts business plan and what he used to sell the deal in the first place to achieve his conservation efforts was it would also produce income.

If you want to secure our hunting rights go buy a trail camera. If that isn't how you roll, send a big check to your wildlife dept and tell them this is from a hunter. That is the the way we will protect our passion.

[Cyclic-Rivers]

WOW,

This thread will Rival the Howard hill Bow thread.

who cares wether Trail Cam's are ethical.

Trail cameras are not ruining our national heritage.  Hunters who want to hate each other based on what they view as "Ethical" and divide are.  Pointing fingers doesnt fix anything, look at our government:rolleyes: .

I get it, Trail Cameras may create an unfair advantage, but so do guns and Bows      

I think there has been very good discussion on this thread which is great to see, instead of the constant fighting amongst firm beleifs.  I applaud those who have kept an open mind and stated their beliefs without forcing them onto others.

[Kevin Dill]

Originally posted by Landshark160:
 

Originally posted by Jason R. Wesbrock:
If I had to look at all my hunting gear and point to which item makes killing deer the easiest, it sure wouldn't be my GPS or trail camera. It would be my portable tree stand.        

That's exactly right. [/b]

I absolutely agree 100%. This conversation on the ethics of game cameras seems to get continually confused with things that make our success easier. It's not as simple as that for some. Someone once argued that a set of wheels wouldn't really make it any easier to kill animals, therefore no ethical consideration applied. Cut to 40 years later...think wheels changed the direction and future of bowhunting? Of course they did, as did treestands. Are we entering the age of the electronic bowhunter? Will future bowhunters rely as much on their software as they do true woodsmanship?

"Electronics are here to stay."

Most likely true. I think the lesson is well taught in The Odyssey.