Domain: tiger-web1.srvr.media3.us Arizona bans trail cams….. | Page 4 | Outdoor Board
Started By
Message

re: Arizona bans trail cams…..

Posted on 7/13/21 at 12:41 pm to
Posted by JDPndahizzy
JDP
Member since Nov 2013
6922 posts
Posted on 7/13/21 at 12:41 pm to
quote:

Battery powered autocorrecting, get prone with a heavy gun and one of these scopes and you are ringing at 1000 all day long.


Where can I get one?
Posted by JDPndahizzy
JDP
Member since Nov 2013
6922 posts
Posted on 7/13/21 at 12:48 pm to
I hunt on private land and yes we have cell cams.. We also feed thousands of $$ of protein a year and have cams on each of those feeders among other places.
We primarily use them at this time of year to get deer counts and later on to identify bucks on the "shoot" and "do not shoot" list, both equally important. It also helps to age deer when you get different angles on your cam and sometimes prevents you from shooting a young buck with a killer rack..
Yes we leave them on during the season but don't depend on them. Last time I tried to "sneak up" on a deer I remember it being pretty hard..
Posted by Ron Cheramie
The Cajun Hedgehog
Member since Aug 2016
5605 posts
Posted on 7/13/21 at 1:07 pm to
quote:

But what's the difference, you could still just put a trail cameras up, citing security, and use them as a game camera. Its unenforceable on private land, unless you think more intrusive entries by LEO and GJ are a good thing.


Still would be against the law. Lots of things are illegal but still happen. Our jails are full of lawbreakers
Posted by bbvdd
Memphis, TN
Member since Jun 2009
28403 posts
Posted on 7/13/21 at 1:11 pm to
quote:

Where can I get one?


Sig Sauer makes a range finder and scope that work together to set the scope elevation.

There's a little more to it than that to hit a target (unless you're looking at a 10'x10' target) but it does make it easier.

This post was edited on 7/13/21 at 1:12 pm
Posted by 257WBY
Member since Feb 2014
7358 posts
Posted on 7/13/21 at 1:14 pm to
Major difference between the Deep South and Arizona is that Arizona has a bunch of outfitters operating on public land. They are running a bunch of cameras.
Posted by 257WBY
Member since Feb 2014
7358 posts
Posted on 7/13/21 at 1:19 pm to
This is why Arizonans want to run cameras.

LINK

LINK
Posted by Ol boy
Member since Oct 2018
4100 posts
Posted on 7/13/21 at 1:28 pm to
quote:

Where can I get one?

Burris makes one with a built in range finder. Buddy of mine bought one when he saw an old man in his late 60s 70s use one to shoot a five gallon bucket at 650-700 yards.
He claims there’s nothing to it!!!
Posted by Loup
Ferriday
Member since Apr 2019
16155 posts
Posted on 7/13/21 at 1:57 pm to
quote:

Buddy of mine bought one when he saw an old man in his late 60s 70s use one to shoot a five gallon bucket at 650-700 yards.


was it this feller?
Posted by BorrisMart
La
Member since Jul 2020
9026 posts
Posted on 7/13/21 at 9:11 pm to
quote:

Still would be against the law. Lots of things are illegal but still happen. Our jails are full of lawbreakers


You're missing the point, It would never be against the law on private land here, as others have stated that cameras have proven instrumental in conservation and tracking programs. Not to mention they serve to protect human life, property (both immovable and movable) of significant proportions for the land owners. You must really hate private property rights Mr. Green Jean.
Posted by bbvdd
Memphis, TN
Member since Jun 2009
28403 posts
Posted on 7/13/21 at 10:03 pm to
quote:

He claims there’s nothing to it!!!


That’s really not that bad as long as you have a good rest. I’ve shot in a few F-class matches (600 yds). The x ring is 4”. If your ammo is consistent and your dope good most any could hit that with a hood scope.
This post was edited on 7/13/21 at 10:24 pm
Posted by saray
Member since May 2014
521 posts
Posted on 7/13/21 at 11:01 pm to
no way much case law about your own property
Posted by Ron Cheramie
The Cajun Hedgehog
Member since Aug 2016
5605 posts
Posted on 7/14/21 at 6:02 am to
quote:

It would never be against the law on private land here, as others have stated that cameras have proven instrumental in conservation and tracking programs. Not to mention they serve to protect human life, property (both immovable and movable) of significant proportions for the land owners. You must really hate private property rights Mr. Green Jean.


None of that would change. Cameras would still be legal. They would be illegal for the purpose of taking game

Posted by DownshiftAndFloorIt
Here
Member since Jan 2011
71606 posts
Posted on 7/14/21 at 8:13 am to
Friend of mine has one. Can confirm, its as easy as clicking a button to ring hits anywhere from 25 to 600 yards with a 7 mag.
Posted by baldona
Florida
Member since Feb 2016
23806 posts
Posted on 7/14/21 at 8:39 am to
quote:

You're missing the point, It would never be against the law on private land here, as others have stated that cameras have proven instrumental in conservation and tracking programs. Not to mention they serve to protect human life, property (both immovable and movable) of significant proportions for the land owners. You must really hate private property rights Mr. Green Jean.


With all due respect, no you are missing the point. It’s a simple law, trail cameras are legal. Trail cameras are not legal to use to help in harvesting game.

You can put a trail camera on your gate or elsewhere on your property for security. You can’t put a trail camera on the middle of your property on a game trail or watering hole and then post the pictures on FB after your booner you harvest.

There’s some gray area sure, quite a bit, but most laws have some. It’s really a matter of not being an idiot.
Posted by Lonnie Utah
Utah!
Member since Jul 2012
33747 posts
Posted on 7/14/21 at 8:52 am to
As a photographer who keeps up on 1st amendment issues, this one is going to be interesting from a constitutional point of view. The 9th circuit (which includes Arizona) has already ruled that the public is allowed to photograph and record "matters of public interest" on public property. So if one makes the nexus that game animals are of "public interest" (and the fact that they are regulated by a state agency helps that cause) AND that they are on public property the the chance of this law surviving a course case, in my eyes, are slim.

Posted by baldona
Florida
Member since Feb 2016
23806 posts
Posted on 7/14/21 at 9:05 am to
quote:

As a photographer wh


Goodness, did you guys read the OP. Trail cameras aren’t illegal. Use a trail camera to assist in harvesting game is illegal.

If you aren’t hunting, you can put trail cameras up. If you are hunting, you aren’t supposed to use them to help you track and harvest.
Posted by JDPndahizzy
JDP
Member since Nov 2013
6922 posts
Posted on 7/14/21 at 9:32 am to
Just like with most laws, it will have a negative impact on everyone instead of just those it is targeted against. Which in this case I believe to be Arizona outfitters....No way this passes in a state like LA.. Or even it it did, private land owners wouldn't give 2 fricks about it. IMHO
Posted by White Bear
Deer-Thirty
Member since Jul 2014
17395 posts
Posted on 7/14/21 at 11:06 am to
quote:

Major difference between the Deep South and Arizona is that Arizona has a bunch of outfitters operating on public land. They are running a bunch of cameras.
As usual the root issue is “outfitters”.

With whom are you OB baws booking trips this year?
Posted by Lonnie Utah
Utah!
Member since Jul 2012
33747 posts
Posted on 7/14/21 at 1:44 pm to
quote:

Goodness, did you guys read the OP. Trail cameras aren’t illegal. Use a trail camera to assist in harvesting game is illegal.


I 100% understand the issue, which is why I made the post I did. I'm just looking at it through a different lens than most folks here.

The courts have already said public photography in public spaces is legal. So if logic from the court case holds, they can't ban you from taking pictures of animals, which are a public resource, on public land. Your intention on how you use the photos should not matter. It's protected speech, and the law should be struck.

I don't nessicalarly like it, but I value my 1st Amendment rights more.
This post was edited on 7/14/21 at 1:46 pm
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 4Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram