Arizona says bye-bye to trail cams

Andy S.

Andy S.

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 1999
Messages
24,421
Reaction score
9,308
Location
Atoka, TN
Looks like AZGFD is putting the kabash on trail cams for use while hunting, both on public and private lands, starting 01Jan22. Click link below to read article.

AZ Trail Cam Ban
 
Old school scouting. I've often wondered if trail cam use has actually hurt hunting if you think about the added pressure of placing and checking cameras. It sure is fun though.
 
Some of us are left wondering if this edict is more about a "show of authority" or a move for better wildlife/hunter management?

I'll reserve criticism for now, but am questioning what is actually behind this.
Somewhat a head scratcher to me. But then I'd typically say the same thing about a an agency disallowing an optical sight on a muzzleloader.
 
BSK said:
Agreed. This whole thing smells of politics.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but...
We are already told when we can hunt,
How we can hunt,
What we can hunt,
How we can hunt,
And that we must buy a license to hunt.

I'll withhold judgement since I don't understand western desert hunting and the issues. I know there's been concern over disturbance from shed hunting activities and the stress it puts on animals.
 
Over the past few years, there has been A LOT of concern, discussion and contention over guides putting numerous trail cameras on the few and far between watering holes and basically letting technology do all of the "real time" scouting and hunting as the animals are "holed up" on the water sources. Many have questioned this activity as a direct assault on "fair chase" hunting that so many out West cherish. I love cameras as much as anyone, but I agree they can and do help SOME folks continue to be successful at "hunting", when without real time cellular information, they would not have a clue.
 
Last edited:
MickThompson said:
Maybe, but...
We are already told when we can hunt,
How we can hunt,
What we can hunt,
How we can hunt,
And that we must buy a license to hunt.

I'll withhold judgement since I don't understand western desert hunting and the issues. I know there's been concern over disturbance from shed hunting activities and the stress it puts on animals.
Click to expand...
I agree with all that, we have seasons and limits to conserve game and while sometimes I may not agree with the limits or the seasons, I can at least somewhat understand.

But to tell me I can't hang a camera on my own land, that seems to go to far. I also don't understand western hunting, but if I want to hang a camera on one of MY trees the government shouldn't be able to tell me no.

I don't know but is the disturbance from checking cameras any more than if you put boots on the ground and do more scouting by foot?
 
huntinkev said:
I don't know but is the disturbance from checking cameras any more than if you put boots on the ground and do more scouting by foot?
Click to expand...
Or a rancher herding cattle or checking fences? That still spooks the hell out of game and they are just doing their normal, routine jobs. The government needs to quit putting their hands on every aspect of people's lives.
 
huntinkev said:
I agree with all that, we have seasons and limits to conserve game and while sometimes I may not agree with the limits or the seasons, I can at least somewhat understand.

But to tell me I can't hang a camera on my own land, that seems to go to far. I also don't understand western hunting, but if I want to hang a camera on one of MY trees the government shouldn't be able to tell me no.

I don't know but is the disturbance from checking cameras any more than if you put boots on the ground and do more scouting by foot?
Click to expand...
Scouting out west can be done at a greater distance with optics compared to how most of us scout around here in the eastern woods so I'd say yes, checking cards on water holes would be more of a disturbance.

While it may not always be the case, we should want our state agencies to put the resource first. And at what point is enough technology, enough; or too much?
 
I think this is the key wording: "voted to ban all use of trail cameras for use while hunting". From what I have read, which is limited and likely one-sided, the guides were getting greedy and monopolizing on limited water sources to benefit their client's success rate, and in turn line their pockets with funds, at the expense of the resource.
 
Andy S. said:
I think this is the key wording: "voted to ban all use of trail cameras for use while hunting". From what I have read, which is limited and likely one-sided, the guides were getting greedy and monopolizing on limited water sources to benefit their client's success rate, and in turn line their pockets with funds, at the expense of the resource.
Click to expand...
I can see that as being a big problem. And although I have a SERIOUS problem with the state agency banning cameras on private property, the private property out West can be very different than ours, with all the massive ranches which I'm sure are leased up by professional guide services.
 
Little bit of history for those who might want to read it.

Information on Arizona Game and Fish Commission proposal to amend rules to regulate the use of trail cameras for the take of wildlife

  • At its Dec. 4, 2020 meeting, the Arizona Game and Fish Commission voted unanimously (5-0) to open the proposed rule making and begin the public process for potential future regulation of passive trail/game cameras used for the take of wildlife. Live action cameras were previously banned for the take of wildlife in 2018. [R12-4-303(A)(5)]
  • The proposed language forwarded for comment by the Commission would simply treat both live action and passive trail/game cameras the same by banning trail/game cameras for the use of take.
  • The public process includes an opportunity for the public to comment. Comments are encouraged and will be accepted by email at rulemaking@azgfd.gov from Jan. 1, 2021 through Feb. 1, 2021.
  • The proposed language reads: "A person shall not use a trail camera, or images from a trail camera, for the purpose of taking or aiding in the take of wildlife, or locating wildlife for the purpose of taking or aiding in the take of wildlife."
  • If approved, trail cameras used for research, general photography, cattle operations or any other reason other than the take of wildlife would remain legal.
  • "Take" means pursuing, shooting, hunting, fishing, trapping, killing, capturing, snaring or netting wildlife or placing or using any net or other device or trap in a manner that may result in capturing or killing wildlife.
  • "Trail camera" means an unmanned device used to capture images, video, or location data of wildlife.
  • The Commission is considering regulating trail cameras as a result of public concerns:
    • Concerns over the use of trail cameras as it relates to Fair Chase. Commission Policy on Fair Chase includes: "…new or evolving technologies and practices that provide hunters or anglers with an improper or unfair advantage in the pursuit and taking of wildlife, or may create a public perception of an improper or unfair advantage…" This applies to areas where water is primarily point source water and game cannot escape detection.
    • Concerns that the use of trail cameras has become an increasing source of conflict between and amongst hunters, including the sense of ownership over a water source and hunting area.
    • Concerns that frequent visits to set/check trail cameras are creating a significant disturbance to wildlife during extended dry periods of the year.
    • Concerns among some livestock operators that frequent visits to set/check trail cameras are negatively affecting livestock operations.
    • Concerns over the potential biological effects of setting/checking trail cameras on point source waters, especially during the ongoing drought.
    • Concerns stemming from photos being taken of other people in the field by trail cameras.
    • Complaints about the high numbers of trail cameras on the landscape and water sources, and concerns over the high number of trail cameras that may be on the landscape in the future as the population in Arizona continues to grow rapidly, technology continues to improve, prices go down, and availability increases.
    • Complaints about damage to and theft of trail cameras.
  • There is now potential monetization of game cameras to include services to place, monitor, check and sell camera images. If those services increase, the numbers of cameras and their use for take could dramatically increase.
  • Public concerns about trail cameras have also been raised with the State Legislature. Legislation has previously been introduced that has so far not advanced because the Commission maintains the authority to examine this issue through rule making. At the request of the Commission, it was pulled.
  • The Commission and Department used the research and recommendations presented by the 2018 Article 3 Rule Review Team to develop the proposed language regulating the use of trail cameras. Alternatives considered in 2018 included:
    • No action or no restrictions on use.
    • Prohibit live-action cameras (currently in effect).
    • ¼ mile restriction around water sources.
    • Species specific (e.g. prohibit for take of deer and elk, big game).
    • Specific units or zones (North/South).
    • Camera registration and label system.
    • Camera season (open and close dates).
    • Complete ban on use (live-action and passive cameras)
  • The Commission will hear and vote on final rule making at the March 19, 2021 Commission meeting.
  • Any change to the current trail camera rule will not go into effect prior to January 1, 2022.
  • Once the Notice of Proposed Rule making is published, it will open a 30-day comment period that will run from Jan. 1, 2021 through Feb. 1, 2021. Comment can be submitted either through:
 
I guess I can see their point of isolated water holes in a desert environment being ringed with trail cameras. That could be a problem.

Thankfully, land-ownership patterns and uses are very different in the West compared to here.
 
And I have to admit, some of the new trail-cameras that can "live stream" are a bit disturbing. Now I strongly suspect the reality of how this could be abused is much lower than perception, but it sure sounds troubling.
 


Write your reply...
0 Words

Latest posts

Back
Top