smarba
Active Member
- Messages
- 557
Just curious if you've seen AZ recently banned Game Cams for aid in the take of game. Enforcing that is going to be a whole other can of worms, but rules like these tend to spread to neighboring states.
While I personally think it's stupid to put your camera on a waterhole where there are already a dozen or more (never actually seen that myself) I believe the crux of the matter is it's just another way to divide hunters. Let's fight amongst ourselves and let cameras get banned. Fight and let dogs for lions or bears get banned. Fight and let lion hunting get banned. Fight and let spring bear season get banned. Fight fight fight. Cameras are so much lower of a concern on my radar than many other issues it's not even funny.
I don't think cams make much difference in the success of a hunt. I've used cams a fair amount so I do have a good feel for them. The MAIN reason I've heard for banning cams is it is unsightly for a dozen (or more) to be aimed at a water source. While I tend to agree, if that defines what to ban, people are going to say it's unsightly for hunters to camp at trailheads, it's unsightly to see a hunter walking along a public trail, etc. etc. At the end of the day I don't believe cams increase the success rate so why would Game & Fish care? I think the ban is mainly appeasing anti hunters and dividing hunters along the way.
Just tossing out for discussion to get ahead of this because at some point it's probably going to be proposed here in NM. Thoughts?
While I personally think it's stupid to put your camera on a waterhole where there are already a dozen or more (never actually seen that myself) I believe the crux of the matter is it's just another way to divide hunters. Let's fight amongst ourselves and let cameras get banned. Fight and let dogs for lions or bears get banned. Fight and let lion hunting get banned. Fight and let spring bear season get banned. Fight fight fight. Cameras are so much lower of a concern on my radar than many other issues it's not even funny.
I don't think cams make much difference in the success of a hunt. I've used cams a fair amount so I do have a good feel for them. The MAIN reason I've heard for banning cams is it is unsightly for a dozen (or more) to be aimed at a water source. While I tend to agree, if that defines what to ban, people are going to say it's unsightly for hunters to camp at trailheads, it's unsightly to see a hunter walking along a public trail, etc. etc. At the end of the day I don't believe cams increase the success rate so why would Game & Fish care? I think the ban is mainly appeasing anti hunters and dividing hunters along the way.
Just tossing out for discussion to get ahead of this because at some point it's probably going to be proposed here in NM. Thoughts?