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

[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

[SmTx]

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

[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

[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.

[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.

[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.

[Tyrex750]

Spotlighting has always been ok

[tps7742]

Originally Posted by M16

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

This,

[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

[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."

[Landrover]

Works for me also.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

[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.

[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

[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?

[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

[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

[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.

[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

[Speedgoat]

I don't see how that is constitutional

Sent from my SM-G991U 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!

[Craw3773]

Originally Posted by Nicholson84

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

Bwahaha!

Trust us... it's going to be ok... for us...

[ACbob]

Originally Posted by 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.

Why is about the outfitters? Not trying to be snarky at all.

[Encinal]

I say we ban looking at tracks next.

This does nothing to limit harvest and everything to limit selective harvest for people with less money.

It's laughable. It's going to put more people on the ground scouting for governors tag bucks on public land and make criminals out of private landowners who are managing for wildlife and want to be more selective.

Western states may vote red, but "public landowners" are socialist as hell.

[TexasTrophyBowhunter]

It’s crazy how many people think that cameras make you “less of a hunter”. I run cameras 365 days on my place, but that doesn’t mean I kill more deer them anyone around me. We use them to keep records of animals and just to see what’s around.

[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.

[Longue Carabine]

Utah WAS one of the most free states policy wise regarding hunting until the last 10 years.

Every single hunter should be a member of an organization fighting to maintain our rights. The lack of involvement is why we're losing

[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.

[trophy8]

I do agree on public land. Pressures animals off of a resource they need. Water. Private land is a massive over reach.

[trophy8]

Originally Posted by Longue Carabine

Utah WAS one of the most free states policy wise regarding hunting until the last 10 years.

Every single hunter should be a member of an organization fighting to maintain our rights. The lack of involvement is why we're losing

False. I’ll use the NRA as an example. Lining their pockets and they care less and less about their original purpose. Politics and money. THAT is why we are losing

[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.

[Big pig]

Originally Posted by trophy8

I do agree on public land. Pressures animals off of a resource they need. Water. Private land is a massive over reach.

I agree with this. The pressure around water holes is enough to ban them IMHO.

BP

[Hogmauler]

Don’t forget that federal and state game wardens are putting their own cameras on your land as well. Without your knowledge. Just to keep honest people honest.

[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.

[jt400]

Pretty amazed at the amount of people that are ok with the Government taking things away. This should scare you. Just because you think it makes it too easy shouldn't mean its ok for the Government to step in. If you think hunting with a a certain rifle makes it too easy, should the government come in and ban them?

Also no one is calling out the greasy bait and switch they did with the survey. From what I read they surveyed for cell cameras but used that data to ban ALL cameras.

[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.

[Buff]

i have a feeder set up behind my house. I enjoy getting the pictures on my phone. I would be fairly unhappy if the state told me I couldn’t have a camera set up on land i own and pay taxes on.

[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.

[Kong]

The government’s done such a great job making the best secessions for us over the years,why should anyone question it,,, said nobody with an IQ over 3 ever……