Interesting discussion with Don Higgins on the Land Podcast
- Thread starter Hoytvectrix
- Start date
Wind Gypsy
5 year old buck +
Bumping this old thread. Just watched a video of Dons buck this year. Don was open that the last two years he killed his target buck by getting a cell cam pic of it entering a bedding area and then setting up on said bedding area for the evening. This years buck he rattled the first week in oct because he said he didn’t think the buck would walk by his stand from the bedding area it was in without rattling. I was surprised to hear him be so open about it. Would be admitting to poaching in MN if he did that!
Does IL have no laws against electronic communication in the take of game?
Howboutthemdawgs
5 year old buck +
100% discredits the kill in my eyes.
Brian662
5 year old buck +
Regardless, cell cams will continue to be controversial. They are an undeniable advantage to the hunter that wasn't available even a decade ago.
Where the deer/habitat management game has gone IMO is toward folks with big dreams and big pockets who are wiling to exhaust every option for a leg up. We are rapidly approaching the European "conservation" model. Another take on this is that quality properties, and likely quality neighbors, no longer exist, Without a good shot, you have to put spin on the pool ball.
Wind Gypsy
5 year old buck +
They are legal in MN too. But if you kill an animal based on your knowledge of its current presence from a cell cam, it could be considered illegal based upon electronic communication regs that were initially intended to ban using radios to take animals. Very gray and hard to enforce, unless of course you released a youtube video stating exactly how you used the cell cam to know a buck's location and kill it.
What is illegal and what's not for hunters using cell cameras in Minnesota? - Outdoor News
Minnesota DNR Enforcement Operations Manager Maj. Robert Gorecki says two state statutes apply to the scenario of hunters taking game with the help of cellular trail cameras. Combined with the growing use of drones, the DNR is crafting new language – which might see action this 2023 legislative...
www.outdoornews.com
bwoods11
5 year old buck +
They tried to ban them on public land in Iowa. The DNR got so many calls they delayed their decision.They are legal in MN too. But if you kill an animal based on your knowledge of its current presence from a cell cam, it could be considered illegal based upon electronic communication regs that were initially intended to ban using radios to take animals. Very gray and hard to enforce, unless of course you released a youtube video stating exactly how you used the cell cam to know a buck's location and kill it.
What is illegal and what's not for hunters using cell cameras in Minnesota? - Outdoor News
Minnesota DNR Enforcement Operations Manager Maj. Robert Gorecki says two state statutes apply to the scenario of hunters taking game with the help of cellular trail cameras. Combined with the growing use of drones, the DNR is crafting new language – which might see action this 2023 legislative...
I’m not sure how a warden would treat cell cams in Minnesota. They are legal ? The county CO lives a mile from my house, I could ask him ?
Howboutthemdawgs
5 year old buck +
To each their own…personally I can judge someone doing something even if it’s legal. Legality doesn’t equal morality. Not Germaine to hunting but it’s legal to cheat on your wife or drink yourself into an oblivion every night, I will judge someone who does that. Not picking on you, just never been understood using an ever evolving legal doctrine to determine ethics.
Last edited:
Howboutthemdawgs
5 year old buck +
I’ve always felt you should be able to take anything left on public land. That goes from cameras to tree stands to blinds. Leaving that stuff opens up the mindset to claim ownership areas number 1 and number 2 it absolutely invades someone’s privacy.
Wind Gypsy
5 year old buck +
I really doubt any wardens go looking to nail people who used cell cams to kill deer unless people are advertising it publicly (like Don did).
Edit: the last bullet murkys the waters even more - an SD card cam could be considered an "unattended electronic device".
BenA
5 year old buck +
Catscratch
5 year old buck +
All game cams are banned on public land in KS (both traditional and cell). It's justified through the State not due to anything hunting related, but due to a person's expectation to some sort of privacy on public lands. A family on a walk shouldn't have to deal with someone surveilling them on camera. Might be a decent proposal to anyone lobbying their lawmakers in your states.
Hoytvectrix
5 year old buck +
MN is kind of weird about their public lands. In general, trail cameras aren't allowed on public unless you are up north on federal land. WMA's are a no go for any trail cameras.
You technically can't leave stands up over night on WMAs but I find them on pretty much every public piece I scout, so if these rules are not enforced for larger more obvious items like tree stands, I would doubt they will be for trail cameras. I probably come across 4-5 trail cameras a year in WMAs, but they are almost always before the season starts.
Brian662
5 year old buck +
I have cell cameras, I've learned a lot about deer activity from cell cameras. There is no doubt they are much more effective tools for harvesting trophy deer than just about anything else (maybe bait?).
Having cell cameras hasn't changed the way I hunt in any way. I still hunt the wind, fronts, rut, food, etc.
Having cell cameras hasn't changed the way I hunt in any way. I still hunt the wind, fronts, rut, food, etc.
Same here, I thought cell cams would almost guarantee an easy kill. I do not claim to be a hunter, it is purely a management thing for me. But what I have found is that the cameras in my case have been very little advantage for hunting directly, more so just learning their patterns better. They have saved me a couple tanks of gas, but have not resulted in a harvest. Although I am dealing with elk, which are far different than deer.
chucker66
5 year old buck +
I hate to tell you but you do not have any expectation of privacy on public land. Look at all the cameras around in just about every major city. I'm not saying I disagree with it but the basis is on very shaky legal ground and if someone wanted to they could challenge it and probably win.
Wind Gypsy
5 year old buck +
Agree that "privacy" and "public" dont really go together but if one were trying to get people to support a position it's certainly a talking point that folks could get behind and push on their elected officials or state agencies.
Similar threads
