I really enjoy using trail cameras as part of my deer hunting and what follows relates to deer hunting, though it could relate to other species. For the non-hunting readers let me explain how hunters use trail cameras.
Trail cameras are exactly what their name implies. Hunters place them at strategic places where they hunt and when anything walks by, the camera takes a picture. They work day or night and can take thousands of pictures before being checked. I have friends that put cameras on their hunting areas located hours from their homes. Checking those cameras often would be difficult because of distance, so they just leave them running, and then look at the photos taken when they visit the area. Sometimes they are out there for 6-9 months at a time. For most hunters, they are checked every few days or just once a week.
Let me present a few scenarios of how hunters use them. Some hunters will scatter tail cameras around their hunting area. These cameras can get expensive, so ten cameras over 200 acres would be a lot. This gives the hunter a rough idea of how many deer are in the area, though there are better ways to do that using cameras that I don’t have space to detail. They also show the hunter what bucks might be there.
Here is another way they are used. Let’s say the hunter puts a camera along a field, close to the hunter’s tree stand. Hunters don’t want to check the camera every day because doing so puts human odor in the area. So, they check the camera less often, let’s say once a week. They’ll probably get some deer photos on there, and let’s assume they get a photo of a good buck that they will want to hunt. Hunters can check the photos in the field by opening the camera and looking at a small screen that some cameras have. I use another method and simply put the “chip” (something put in the camera that stores the photos, like an SD card) into a small device that you can attach to your cell phone. Each photo gives the time and the date so you know when the deer (or whatever) walked by.
Let’s assume you get a photo of a buck you want to hunt, but the month before the season you only get photos of him after dark. Let’s further assume that he comes by about every third night, but then in late October he starts to come by before dark, and he is now coming more often. The hunter now has an advantage that he did not have without the trail camera. He has a better idea of what stand to hunt and when.
Every state controls most of the regulations for deer hunting. Relative to the use of trail cameras, the rules vary. What triggered me to write about trail camera use was the fact that Arizona is now considering a trail camera rule change. Why would they do that? They are concerned about the technology advancing to the point that it may affect “fair chase.” Hunters have always lived by the written and unwritten rules of fair chase (at least most hunters). When the “hunt” becomes a guaranteed “kill”, then it is no longer hunting. It is killing. The states have the responsibility to manage the resource in such a way that the hunter does not have an improper advantage over the deer. Relative to fair chase, there is no clear-cut black and white. Each hunter decides what is fair chase, within the bounds of regulations and laws.
One problem Arizona considered was newer “live action” trail cameras that can instantly send a photo to your cell phone. Theoretically if you are hunting at point A, and you get a photo of the buck you are after at point B, you can go there. Of course the buck will be gone when you get there, but if you get in the tree stand at point B, he could come back. Either way, you probably have enhanced your chance of shooting that buck by moving.
I don’t use the cameras that can do that simply because they are a bit more expensive, and I don’t move around at all when I hunt. But Arizona’s proposed rule would outlaw use of all trail cameras. Some states have ruled against the live-action cameras. Some states allow trail camera use up until the season starts, then no use allowed. Some states allow trail cameras, but only a certain distance from your hunting location.
Other concerns in Arizona are that they can be a source of conflict between hunters. For example, putting a trail camera at a water source. Elk and antelope come to ponds to drink. Does the trail camera at a pond give that hunter a sense of ownership of that pond to hunt? Apparently it can for some hunters.
If there is a drought (making ponds important, especially in the west), does checking trail cameras negatively affect wildlife, or negatively affect livestock using that water source? Apparently there have been problems.
How about this concern mentioned by Arizona officials? What if someone puts a bunch of trail cameras on federal land (and in some western states, there is a lot of federal land. Nevada for example is 90 percent federal land, open to hikers, hunters, etc.). Then that person sells camera images and locations to hunters. Sounds far-fetched, but down the road, who knows?
Non-hunting readers should not get the impression that the use of trail cameras is threatening deer populations. That doesn’t happen. Sure it sometimes gives the hunter more information on a particular buck they are after, but increased hunter success isn’t an issue. The real issue for state agencies centers on “fair chase.” The more advanced the trail camera technology advances the more the perception that the hunt is unfair to the animal occurs to the public.
Someone has to draw a line in the sand. Some hunters do that. Some state agencies have done that and others are doing it now.
