Utah Trail Cam Ban

I have.

Wyoming allows baiting only with special Division permission for landowners on private property for the purpose of depredation, and the animals cannot be shot under commercial circumstances.

Every state that touches Utah's borders bans it. Washington and California ban hunting big game over bait, I'm not sure on Oregon. Montana bans it.

Basically it's down to every state west of Colorado bans shooting over bait except Utah and maybe Oregon. Unless I'm mistaken. Feel free to post up the regs if I missed something somewhere.

Dang. Talk about a mic drop!
 
ATTENTION MMer’s:

We interrupt this thread to remind you that if you do not appreciate the noise created by “better than thou’s,” you can click on self proclaimed geniuses username and click ignore to save what remaining sanity you have!

Now let’s continue the debate in a civilized and constructive manner!
 
"Wyoming allows baiting only with special Division permission for landowners on private property for the purpose of depredation, and the animals cannot be shot under commercial circumstances."

Actually Wyoming allows more baiting than that. Idaho does too. So does Alaska.

I find it humorous how people pick and choose for an argument. You don't say anything when SureShot is using eastern states for his support against baiting OR THAT ALMOST HALF OF HIS POLLING SUPPORT COMES FROM ANTI-HUNTERS. Then When I start showing people how there is actually a buttload of support for baiting you narrow the scope in your popularity contest all the way down to "states that touch Utah".

Face it Grizz, the popularity contest isn't the way to go on this issue. You were making more sense when you wanted to use science than when you decided to win homecoming queen.
 

This is the people who choose to deal with arguments as popularity contests and ignore people just because they disagree with them. Social media has created 100's of millions of these folks.
 
“States touching Utah” sounds an awful lot like the western United States for big game hunting. He also mentioned everyone else but Oregon. But don’t let facts all the sudden start getting in the way of your arguments now!
 
Not western states. Any intelligent person can see the difference in western big game hunting and the plywood box jockeys in the Midwest and Texas.
Actually Vanilla this was HIS ENTIRE FIRST POST regarding this. Nothing about just states that touch Utah. And he left out a lot more than Oregon. Geography ain't your strong suit.

Go back and read slick.
 
Actually Vanilla this was HIS ENTIRE FIRST POST regarding this. Nothing about just states that touch Utah. And he left out a lot more than Oregon. Geography ain't your strong suit.

Go back and read slick.

Yet, the post 8 minutes later had exactly what @Vanilla said it had. And you know it which is why you qualified your post above with "first post." I believe you're an inherently dishonest person.

Actually Wyoming allows more baiting than that. Idaho does too.
Haha. Why even say something that is so easy to prove wrong. We all have Google, slick. You're going back on Ignore where you belong. BLAAAAM

In Wyoming:
(d) No person shall place any bait for the purpose of taking a big game animal nor shall any person knowingly take a big game animal by the use of any bait that has been deposited, placed, distributed or scattered in a manner to constitute a lure, attraction or enticement to, on or over the area where any hunter is taking big game animals.


In Idaho, it is unlawful to:
To hunt any game animal/bird by means of baiting with the exception of applicable rules for the black bear baiting permit and gray wolf trapping (see black bear and wolf sections). Bait
is defined as any substance including grain, salt in any form
(liquid or solid), or any other substance placed to attract game
animals/birds, except synthetic liquid scent for deer and elk.
 
Actually Vanilla this was HIS ENTIRE FIRST POST regarding this. Nothing about just states that touch Utah. And he left out a lot more than Oregon. Geography ain't your strong suit.

Go back and read slick.

But I didn’t quote his first post and say mic drop, which you replied to. So not sure why you’re trying to go backward to something irrelevant to what I’m talking about? Chase that tail, dog. Chase it good!
 
But I didn’t quote his first post and say mic drop, which you replied to. So not sure why you’re trying to go backward to something irrelevant to what I’m talking about? Chase that tail, dog. Chase it good!
I know you didn't quote it. Because it didn't fit your narrative you were typing. THAT WAS MY POINT.

See Grizz this is dishonesty.
 
The bill was supposed to be heard today by Senate Natural Resources Committee. It doesn't appear that happened. Does anybody have the scoop on what's going on?
 
It looks like Box Elder Sen. Scott Sandall may have killed the anti-baiting bill (this did not have trail camera restrictions).

Screenshot_20210303-213003_Drive.jpg
 
Last edited:
The Senate Sponsor - Senator Derrin Owens - can still call up HB295 1st sub to be heard on the Senate Floor. They can ask to suspend the Rules to hear, debate and pass it. I don't know if Senator Owens wants to use his political bullets on the Bill.

The question is why the Natural Resources Committee allowed it to languish for a week in committee.... Rep Snyder presented to the Committee on other bills, yet wasn't asked to present HB295.
 
It looks like he did just that. The status of the bill now shows that the 3rd substitute passed the 2nd and 3rd readings in the Senate and has been sent back to the House for final approval (if I understand correctly, it goes back to the House because the 3rd substitute was introduced in the Senate and wasn't what the House previously approved).
 
And, 4 of the 5 votes against it on the Senate floor were from members of the Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee, including Senator Sandall. So, they must not have been happy with the end around. I'd love to know what has been going on behind the scenes in all of this.
 
Most States already have that you CAN'T hunt Birds over baited fields don't they.

Now if you shoot a deer eating your hay bale that you put out for that cow you want to butcher and put UP a Sign that says no deer allow eat your cow hay bale or you will be shot, can you Then shoot said deer for not reading the sign and eating that cow hay bale.
 
The bill doesn't apply to "the use of salt, mineral blocks, or other commonly used types of livestock supplements placed in the field by agricultural producers for normal agricultural purposes."
 
It passed the House tonight, so, assuming the Governor doesn't veto it, you can add Utah to the list of states that prohibit baiting for big game.
It shows "House/to Senate - Senate President".

Is that what that means? I'm not familiar with these procedures.

I sure hope Cox doesn't veto it. The support was overwhelming and bipartisan by the Senate and the House
 
The voting is finished in both the House and Senate, now it needs to be signed by the heads of both bodies, pass through a couple of administrative steps and then it will be sent to the governor for his signature. The governor has the option of vetoing it, but that is highly unlikely, especially since it passed both legislative bodies with overwhelming (veto-proof) support.
 
Last edited:
Hey Blood you get to many to haul out, you can build a fire and melt them into a little ball, a lot easier to haul. Trash in the forest.Glad to see the apple piles leaving.
 
So in the passed version, is there still a mandate to formulate trail cam restrictions, or was that dropped entirely?
 
Hey Blood you get to many to haul out, you can build a fire and melt them into a little ball, a lot easier to haul. Trash in the forest.Glad to see the apple piles leaving.
I’ll make a few trips if needed. These trash heaps will still sell good on Craig’s List. It’ll pay for my gas and food for my upcoming hunts. I’ll start collecting in June so that our forests are clean for our fellow hunters to use this fall. It’s the least that I can do for mother nature and the animals.
 
So in the passed version, is there still a mandate to formulate trail cam restrictions, or was that dropped entirely?

It says, "the Wildlife Board shall make rules regulating the use of trail cameras. The division shall provide an annual report to the Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Interim Committee regarding rules made or changed in accordance with this Subsection"

In the debate on the House floor, they made it pretty clear they wanted this to go through the RAC process, but they expected it to end in some regulations. If the legislature isn't satisfied that they go far enough, they can take it up again.
 
It looks like the Senate President signed it and sent it to the Speaker of the House for signatures. I'm assuming it then goes to Cox?
 
Pretty much. There are a couple of administrative steps (enrolling and printing), but that's the next significant stop.
 
Sureshot has explained it well. I'm grateful Sen Owens stood up and brought it forth. There was pushback against the ban on baiting big game. A group of wealthy and politically connected people put up a fight and lost. Do they have the Governor's ear? I doubt it, but one never knows.

If the Board does not act on some type of trail cam regulations then it seems the Legislature will.

As a side note, I hear there are some good deals on large containers of apples. Sub grade apples, but they'd make a good cider.....
 
And Remember!

You're Screwin with Someones Livelihood!

Apple Growers Rely On Making a Living by Selling TARDS Apples!

And As Soon as the Deer Find out where the Apples Are Still being Piled You'll Play Hell Harvesting Them on Public Ground!








Sureshot has explained it well. I'm grateful Sen Owens stood up and brought it forth. There was pushback against the ban on baiting big game. A group of wealthy and politically connected people put up a fight and lost. Do they have the Governor's ear? I doubt it, but one never knows.

If the Board does not act on some type of trail cam regulations then it seems the Legislature will.

As a side note, I hear there are some good deals on large containers of apples. Sub grade apples, but they'd make a good cider.....
 
I just don’t get it, if there is no problem with baiting or trail cams why is the Governor, the wildlife board,the House, the Senate, Natural Resourses Committe,Agriculture and Environment Interim Commitee involved in such a petty issue. Trash in the Forest!
 
Are we aware what is officially a done deal here? Do people know this bill was amended from its original version and do they know what the law will be now?

My interactions elsewhere suggest quite a few people who are pretty vocal on this one really don't have a clue what the law says.
 
If you read through this thread, the changes have been well documented and explained. Anybody who's been following this should be aware.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom