bwoods11
5 year old buck +
You’ve lost respect for hunters using cameras? That would be almost every hunter in the US ?
No cam hunting
- Thread starter Howboutthemdawgs
- Start date
Howboutthemdawgs
5 year old buck +
No I wouldn’t think that it’s detrimental
As far as 200’s in the us…zero have not had their pic taken if I had to guess. Maybe some in Canada but I’d bet it’s a handful tops.
I wonder just how many folks have actually killed a big buck when a text picture showed up and they head out to that location, sneak in there, and kill the deer? I have received over 100 text pictures in the last 24 hours - not an unusual amount - and the thought has never occurred to me to go kill one of the deer. Now I have killed hundreds of hogs and coons when I receive a text. Everyone I know runs cell cams and none - that I know of - have ever even tried to kill a deer when they received a picture. Now, that being said, I am one of the few that lives on my hunting grounds. Kind of difficult to jump in the truck and drive and hour to kill a deer and hope he is still there. I am sure there are a few who do it. Wouldnt bother me at all if they banned the instant text cams during deer season - as long as I could use them when firearm season wasnt open.
Brian662
5 year old buck +
You don't think there are 200" deer in the swamps of WI, the mountains of PA, some massive 5,000 acre chunk of unhunted land in Iowa that have never had their picture taken? I find that hard to believe. Some of these areas don't even have cell reception, let alone hunter density enough to set and capture photos miles deep in public mountains or swamps. IMO.
Booner21
5 year old buck +
Not me but I have a good friend that did it twice in the same year both with a bow. Actually switched stands mid hunt and killed two mature deer very shortly after moving. I am way to conservative to do something like that
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah - I never even think about doing it. Now I have got up to pee at 3 am and seen a hog on a camera, quick pull my clothes on, grab the rifle and thermal, and head out on the ranger. Have killed hundreds of hogs doing that - also hundreds of coons.
In the same vein, I have seen dozens of big bucks while out with my thermal - and never thought about shooting one. I cant say I dont know a person or two who has done that.
hillrunner
5 year old buck +
I would guess it'd be extremely few 200 inch deer that aren't known about through cams, almost none. I'd be surprised if there was a single one in Iowa.
That's what I miss, I used to always think there was a chance one could be around that just hadn't been spotted. Cameras have lifted that veil for me. I don't even remember the last time I killed a buck without having multiple years of pictures of it. I suppose sometime in the early 2000s.
Brian662
5 year old buck +
I'm not saying they haven't been seen, I'm saying they haven't been on camera. Plenty of big bucks get spotted from the road in August in a bean field, but may not have to leave the several thousand acre farm they live on during the fall.
Maybe I'm way off on this, I've been wrong before, plenty of times. I just don't believe every giant buck that's out there has a category of pics on someone's laptop or cell phone app. It would be hard to convince me that's the case.
Hoytvectrix
5 year old buck +
I went all-in on Cuddebacks a few years ago on my parent's farm. I bought something like 16 cameras for the 160 acres, in addition to a few of the Zopu/Gardepros. My Dad is getting up there enough in age that any season could be his last. He gets way more enjoyment out of viewing the trail camera photos and videos than he does of hunting anymore, which is my main motivation for expanding or keeping cameras working pretty much 365 days.
SD51555
5 year old buck +
I take the third, fourth, second, fifth, and first side of this argument.
Third: I don't run cell cams because I don't want my pics being sold. The reality is, there is nobody with deep pockets or big buck aspirations trying to buy land within 60 miles of me. But if I actually had big deer in highly desirable country I wouldn't run cell cams. Read the terms and conditions. I wouldn't mind being able to geofence a 3 mile radius around my property and purchase all the pics from my neighbors transmitting cams. If the cam makers took the facebook model, they could make a lot of $$ selling that intel.
Four: Because I don't like transmitting cams, I run old SD card cams that need to be manually pulled. I am very picky about flawless entry/exit once I get within 30 days (60 is better) of my hunting season starting. Because i don't like to infiltrate, I don't run cams in the woods. I run all my cams close to the cabin.
Second: I just bought a cellular surveillance camera. I want the ability to live stream my plots on demand.
Fifth: I have hunted my area for 16 years now. Still haven't killed a deer. I'm almost apprehensive to break the drought now because it makes for a fun story. I want the pics to keep the guys in my camp interested. Without the cams right around the cabin, it'd be easy to assume there are no deer. I have a few. But I have no useful data to aid in harvesting a deer.
First: I also value the surprise factor.
Amazingly enough, I had it in my head I was gonna harvest the first adult doe that got within high percentage bow range this year, and it never happened. It was a tough season. Only had that one sit where I pardoned a group of does and fawns within 15 yards of my tower, and that was because rifle season was 4 days away, and I didn't want to risk needing to track into my no-go zone right before all the guys got there.
Third: I don't run cell cams because I don't want my pics being sold. The reality is, there is nobody with deep pockets or big buck aspirations trying to buy land within 60 miles of me. But if I actually had big deer in highly desirable country I wouldn't run cell cams. Read the terms and conditions. I wouldn't mind being able to geofence a 3 mile radius around my property and purchase all the pics from my neighbors transmitting cams. If the cam makers took the facebook model, they could make a lot of $$ selling that intel.
Four: Because I don't like transmitting cams, I run old SD card cams that need to be manually pulled. I am very picky about flawless entry/exit once I get within 30 days (60 is better) of my hunting season starting. Because i don't like to infiltrate, I don't run cams in the woods. I run all my cams close to the cabin.
Second: I just bought a cellular surveillance camera. I want the ability to live stream my plots on demand.
Fifth: I have hunted my area for 16 years now. Still haven't killed a deer. I'm almost apprehensive to break the drought now because it makes for a fun story. I want the pics to keep the guys in my camp interested. Without the cams right around the cabin, it'd be easy to assume there are no deer. I have a few. But I have no useful data to aid in harvesting a deer.
First: I also value the surprise factor.
Amazingly enough, I had it in my head I was gonna harvest the first adult doe that got within high percentage bow range this year, and it never happened. It was a tough season. Only had that one sit where I pardoned a group of does and fawns within 15 yards of my tower, and that was because rifle season was 4 days away, and I didn't want to risk needing to track into my no-go zone right before all the guys got there.
Howboutthemdawgs
5 year old buck +
Obviously this is pretty much an unknown, but correct I don’t think there’s a 200, let alone any buck that hasn’t had their pic taken. Now obviously there are some deer, I’d wager and extremely small (single digit) percentage of deer that haven’t been on camera in the US this year. Like you mentioned maybe some swamp deer in south ga or northern wi or Maine or some outlier like that. As far as a 200, I think if a place can grow a 200 it has hunters. Hunters have cameras. I would be shocked if there is a single 200 not on camera in 2023.
Is there a 5000 acre contiguous chunk in Iowa that is vast enough that even if they didn’t run cameras one of their 800 neighbors doesn’t have cams all up and down their line? On my onx tours of the Midwest I don’t see any land vast enough where a deer could hide from cameras.
356
5 year old buck +
Here is Missouri we are blessed to have the Mark Twain National Forest— 1.5 million acres of public land in 29 counties in Missouri. Cell cams are not allowed (legally) and each year a 200” is harvested that catches everyone by surprise. I can not help but think there are 200” deer living in Mark Twain and other large tracks of public and private that have eluded camera detection. During an off-season deer podcast focusing on hunting large bucks, the gentleman being interviewed commented on encountering huge deer he had never seen on camera.
Brian662
5 year old buck +
What about a 2,000 acre contiguous private land tract with no hunting, surrounded by two more 1,000 acre tracts where they hunt but don't use cameras.
I know it's all hypothetical, but I believe there is way more of that out there than you think, IMO.
Howboutthemdawgs
5 year old buck +
TRUST ME I want to believe! But I would personally be shocked that’s all.
S.T.Fanatic
5 year old buck +
Never having a picture taken of it would be a stretch in areas of high hunter density with income levels to support many trail cams. There are some areas in this country that are rugged enough to hold good amounts of big bucks with below poverty average incomes. Monthly cell cam bills and batteries alone are not in everyone's budget these days. Just by being a part of this forum for as long as I have it is fairly obvious that most of the people on here have an income level considerably higher than the national average.
Deer know where the cameras are and usually look at them when getting their picture taken. With some deer it only takes once and they will slightly shift their patterns to avoid the cameras. We run a bunch of cameras and the neighbor runs even more. It's not like we are all getting pictures of mature bucks multiple times a day. ( There are a good amount of mature bucks in my area ) I'd say about once a week is a good guess.
Deer know where the cameras are and usually look at them when getting their picture taken. With some deer it only takes once and they will slightly shift their patterns to avoid the cameras. We run a bunch of cameras and the neighbor runs even more. It's not like we are all getting pictures of mature bucks multiple times a day. ( There are a good amount of mature bucks in my area ) I'd say about once a week is a good guess.
S.T.Fanatic
5 year old buck +
Your property your rules. I don't think anyone on here disputes that. There is nothing about a camera that isn't fair chase. How some people choose to use them on the other hand... It's the same argument the libs make for gun control. A gun has never shot anyone, period!
Hoytvectrix
5 year old buck +
I think if you consume hunting related materials like youtube videos, participate in forums, or use apps like OnX, your view of what the typical hunter is like shifts over time. There are people who own land around us that do not use trail cameras and hunt only the first 3-4 days of the firearm season. They own a few thousand acres of farmed bottom ground and some deep draws of timber. I can pretty much guarantee no human has seen some of the deer on their place and I wouldn't be surprised if there are deer that haven't had their picture taken yet.
Pretty rare, but they happen.
With that said, there was a 200" living a few years ago on the farm I just bought and I couldn't believe the amount of people that didn't know the older landowner or even any of the neighbors, but somehow knew about that buck. You can bet if I ever get a buck on camera with that kind of potential, I am not telling a soul.
Pretty rare, but they happen.
With that said, there was a 200" living a few years ago on the farm I just bought and I couldn't believe the amount of people that didn't know the older landowner or even any of the neighbors, but somehow knew about that buck. You can bet if I ever get a buck on camera with that kind of potential, I am not telling a soul.
