Would hate to be a resident of Utah

[BlessedVeteran0305]

https://www-wideopenspaces-com.cdn.a...-ban-utah/amp/

[TX CHICKEN]

Did I read it right that they banned them on private land??? Screw that…I was trying to catch poachers….


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tps7742]

Originally Posted by TX CHICKEN

Did I read it right that they banned them on private land??? Screw that…I was trying to catch poachers….


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From the article
"This new rule does not apply to government or educational organizations gathering wildlife information, private landowners who are monitoring their property for trespass or active agricultural operations or cities involved in the urban deer program."

[asu-indian]

Good luck enforcing that.

[Ætheling]

Private land is unconstitutional imo. For public land Im torn. I agree with the promotion of fair chase principles but at the same time its the public’s land, not the governments.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Craw3773]

Originally Posted by Ætheling

Private land is unconstitutional imo. For public land Im torn. I agree with the promotion of fair chase principles but at the same time its the public’s land, not the governments.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Please elaborate. How would this be unconstitutional?

Also, if it's "the publics" land, wouldn't that be the exact place where representatives chosen by the public would have a responsibility to do what they see best for the public?

[Ætheling]

Originally Posted by Craw3773

Please elaborate. How would this be unconstitutional?

Also, if it's "the publics" land, wouldn't that be the exact place where representatives chosen by the public would have a responsibility to do what they see best for the public?

You serious? My points are very clear and require no further elaboration.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Craw3773]

Originally Posted by Ætheling

You serious? My points are very clear and require no further elaboration.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Try reading the constitution again..... I mean for the first time. Then explain what section utilizing a camera to assist in the taking of a natural resource would fall under.

Secondly, please explain how a properly elected government does not have the right to regulate a government owned resource.

This entire discussion to me is hilarious. I don't care about tree cams, hell I just checked one, because I like watching the deer when I can't hunt. That being said, this is a state purview, and the state decided they wanted to lower the efficacy of hunters.

That is 1 of 2 ways to limit harvest, and preserve resources. The other is to issue less tags. While some would argue that the state just wants more money, maybe they are trying to give more opportunity.

[Nicholson84]

Originally Posted by Craw3773

Try reading the constitution again..... I mean for the first time. Then explain what section utilizing a camera to assist in the taking of a natural resource would fall under.

Secondly, please explain how a properly elected government does not have the right to regulate a government owned resource.

This entire discussion to me is hilarious. I don't care about tree cams, hell I just checked one, because I like watching the deer when I can't hunt. That being said, this is a state purview, and the state decided they wanted to lower the efficacy of hunters.

That is 1 of 2 ways to limit harvest, and preserve resources. The other is to issue less tags. While some would argue that the state just wants more money, maybe they are trying to give more opportunity.

Hello, we are from the government and here to help! Wake up man!

[jt400]

Originally Posted by Craw3773

Try reading the constitution again..... I mean for the first time. Then explain what section utilizing a camera to assist in the taking of a natural resource would fall under.

Secondly, please explain how a properly elected government does not have the right to regulate a government owned resource.

This entire discussion to me is hilarious. I don't care about tree cams, hell I just checked one, because I like watching the deer when I can't hunt. That being said, this is a state purview, and the state decided they wanted to lower the efficacy of hunters.

That is 1 of 2 ways to limit harvest, and preserve resources. The other is to issue less tags. While some would argue that the state just wants more money, maybe they are trying to give more opportunity.

They don't care about how many animals are harvested. BUT if they can hurt the success ratio they sell twice as many tags to achieve the same harvest. Its absolutely all about the money. Which side are you gonna be on when it sets off?

[tvc184]

Originally Posted by Craw3773

Please elaborate. How would this be unconstitutional?

Also, if it's "the publics" land, wouldn't that be the exact place where representatives chosen by the public would have a responsibility to do what they see best for the public?

I think you are correct. This is a Tenth Amendment or state rights issue.

I don’t agree with it but unconstitutional? Under what amendment?

It could certainly be under a stste constitution.

[SmTx]

Of course the residents are going to want to ban things that can assist out of state hunters killing "their" animals.

[kyle1974]

Originally Posted by SmTx

Of course the residents are going to want to ban things that can assist out of state hunters killing "their" animals.

Yes. Their animals, especially on federal lands. Drives me nuts how state residents get massive preference on federal lands.

[flywise]

I don’t guess I have a problem with cellular cams on public land. Regular cams on public, well honestly don’t care but private lands not leased to the gov. No way they should be able to do that

[tdwinklr]

Originally Posted by flywise

I don’t guess I have a problem with cellular cams on public land. Regular cams on public, well honestly don’t care but private lands not leased to the gov. No way they should be able to do that

yep.

[Gclyde28]

Originally Posted by flywise

I don’t guess I have a problem with cellular cams on public land. Regular cams on public, well honestly don’t care but private lands not leased to the gov. No way they should be able to do that

The state of Texas tells you that you can't kill a deer from February-August. How dare they overstep your right to kill the food you want to eat.

[flywise]

Originally Posted by gclyde28

the state of texas tells you that you can't kill a deer from february-august. How dare they overstep your right to kill the food you want to eat.

smh

[Big Lee]

AZ did the same.


I will say from 1st hand experience. This improved public land hunting.

[M16]

I see it as a good move. Game cameras take the hunt out of hunting.

[MetalMan2004]

Originally Posted by M16

I see it as a good move. Game cameras take the hunt out of hunting.

I don’t necessarily have a problem with them but I fully agree with that statement.

[tps7742]

Originally Posted by M16

I see it as a good move. Game cameras take the hunt out of hunting.

This,

[Jon Stewart]

Originally Posted by M16

I see it as a good move. Game cameras take the hunt out of hunting.

They (cameras) take the hunt out of hunting yet it is legal to use bait in Utah. That kind of takes the hunt out of hunting doesn't it?

All cameras do is take pictures.

[M16]

Originally Posted by Jon Stewart

They (cameras) take the hunt out of hunting yet it is legal to use bait in Utah. That kind of takes the hunt out of hunting doesn't it?

All cameras do is take pictures.

Try to keep up!

https://wildlife.utah.gov/bait-big-game.html

[Jon Stewart]

Originally Posted by M16

Try to keep up!

https://wildlife.utah.gov/bait-big-game.html

I did and the answer I got when googled it was an older answer. It is legal to bait except for hunting purposes.

[wytex]

Originally Posted by Jon Stewart

I did and the answer I got when googled it was an older answer. It is legal to bait except for hunting purposes.

https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title23/Ch...21050520210505

Only legal to lure game animals away from crops and you must have a permission to do that.

[wytex]

Originally Posted by Jon Stewart

They (cameras) take the hunt out of hunting yet it is legal to use bait in Utah. That kind of takes the hunt out of hunting doesn't it?

All cameras do is take pictures.

Baiting is illegal in Utah now, the good folks there got that passed along with the trail cam ban base on the actions of some well known outfitters.

[critter69]

Originally Posted by M16

I see it as a good move. Game cameras take the hunt out of hunting.

Feeders, take much more of the hunt out of it then cameras though.

[M16]

Originally Posted by critter69

Feeders, take much more of the hunt out of it then cameras though.

Do feeders tell you what’s coming in and what time? Do feeders send you cell phone pictures?


But I agree with the ones saying banning cameras on private property is bs.

[critter69]

Originally Posted by M16

Do feeders tell you what’s coming in and what time? Do feeders send you cell phone pictures?


But I agree with the ones saying banning cameras on private property is bs.

You know what time they are set to go off, so time is somewhat known. Not eveey animal will show up at the exact time every time either. Alot use feeder lights and know when the animals are at the feeder also. Isee the reason not to use them, I don't here anyways. But I don't rifle hunt either, as that is pretty much putting the odds in your favor in a huge way. But to each there own. I don't give to sheets if they out law them really.

[Graysonhogs]

Originally Posted by M16

I see it as a good move. Game cameras take the hunt out of hunting.

You can use that argument at literally any rung of the hunting "ladder". Seems most people's convictions/opinions stop when it reaches a method they use. That's my $.02 anyway.

[M16]

Originally Posted by Graysonhogs

You can use that argument at literally any rung of the hunting "ladder". Seems most people's convictions/opinions stop when it reaches a method they use. That's my $.02 anyway.

You are exactly right. I’m just opining where my line is drawn.

[Graysonhogs]

Originally Posted by M16

You are exactly right. I’m just opining where my line is drawn.

Yeah, we all do.

[Jon Stewart]

Originally Posted by M16

I see it as a good move. Game cameras take the hunt out of hunting.

And baiting doesn't take the hunt out of hunting.

I suppose some are upset that you send a text on your phone to a buddy that a big one is coming his way.

I don't get the argument about having a trail cam out. I use them on my property all the time.

[SmTx]

Originally Posted by Jon Stewart

And baiting doesn't take the hunt out of hunting.

I suppose some are upset that you send a text on your phone to a buddy that a big one is coming his way.

I don't get the argument about having a trail cam out. I use them on my property all the time.

That exact scenario played out on another forum a few years ago after a TBH'r shot a nice elk.

[meltingfeather]

Good move.

The government can and should regulate means and methods for harvesting wildlife resources of the state (people), no matter where they are taken.
Y’all think spotlighting on private property is OK?

[Benno]

Originally Posted by meltingfeather

Good move.

The government can and should regulate means and methods for harvesting wildlife resources of the state (people), no matter where they are taken.
Y’all think spotlighting on private property is OK?

Shining a light at night for surveys? Yes.

[Low Fence]

Originally Posted by meltingfeather

Good move.

The government can and should regulate means and methods for harvesting wildlife resources of the state (people), no matter where they are taken.
Y’all think spotlighting on private property is OK?

But I work days and only have nights off to hunt. The guberment wants everyone to have equal opportunity… that was the reasoning behind arrow guns. It’s such a joke now with equipment, technology and fences they should just say

“Here ya go, you get 2 tags. Kill them however you want so long as not trespassing”

People that follow rules follow rules…. Those that don’t, don’t

[Longue Carabine]

Originally Posted by meltingfeather

Good move.

The government can and should regulate means and methods for harvesting wildlife resources of the state (people), no matter where they are taken.
Y’all think spotlighting on private property is OK?

Why wouldn't I? It's private property. It should be managed as the owner wishes.

[BlessedVeteran0305]

Originally Posted by Longue Carabine

Why wouldn't I? It's private property. It should be managed as the owner wishes.

Spotlighting on your property is fine as long as your not killing game animals.

[Tyrex750]

Spotlighting has always been ok

[sasqy]

That’s why I live in Texas !
Game cams
Corn piles
Thermals
Suppressors
Spotlights
God bless Texas !

[Uncle_Milty]

Maybe they will ban live scan for fishing then!?!?!?

[TexasTrophyBowhunter]

Originally Posted by Uncle_Milty

Maybe they will ban live scan for fishing then!?!?!?

I agree with this! It’s not really fishing anymore!

On another note im going to start looking into the Utah classified sections for some good deals on game cameras lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jfk47]

Originally Posted by TexasTrophyBowhunter

On another note im going to start looking into the Utah classified sections for some good deals on game cameras lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'll bet there will be a few lease openings show up also !!

[Hogmauler]

Originally Posted by Uncle_Milty

Maybe they will ban live scan for fishing then!?!?!?

Boom! Uh oh! That’s coming. I’ve never used a game camera to hunt a pati ulnar animal. Primarily because I’ve never hunted on a place with trophy animals. I simply enjoy watching animals be animals. Have any of y’all ever had an animal show up on time? Right when you expected? If so it’s due to the feeder and the conditioning it creates.

[Landrover]

Works for me also.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

[BTLowry]

If you have to have a game cam to kill an animal then you are probably not much of a hunter

Now the private land thing I don't agree with

[WyoBull]

Oh, the drama, the drama! What did we do before all this technology?
We actually hunted and killed big animals.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[glen]

I’m not a camera guy but my opinion. On public land I don’t have an issue with rules (laws). No motorized vehicles, no cameras, etc. but as far as private lands this is wrong and should not even be in question

[wytex]

Great move on their part. The outfitters were going crazy with cams on waterholes etc..
Wish all states would ban them for hunting, especially cell cams, they have been banned in many states.