Natural Hunting Skill vs Trail Cams
10-07-2014, 10:02 AM
#43
Typical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SW Montana
Posts: 550
I posted that the use of trail cameras for hunting purposes is illegal in Montana. Just a fact that is written in the Montana hunting regulations.
It was later posted that there is "A high-fence area has guns mounted [with cameras] within their property and one can point and shoot using their computer mouse [from ones home]."
Muley Hunter then posted that "these remote mounted guns with cameras so that a deer could be shot from a computer" are illegal in Colorado and he posted that they should be illegal in all states.
I agree with Muley Hunter's post 1000%.
We did not post that we were against using trail cameras for scouting.
Killing an animal from the comfort on your home using your computer connected to a remote camera mounted on a gun is not hunting and that practice gives all hunting a bad name.
10-07-2014, 10:05 AM
#44
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 9,557
Like I said many times. Hunt the way you want to hunt. For some hunters the kill is all that's important, and they'll use any aid available. For others the hunt is more important. It's not the kill, but how you got it that's important. Two different ways of doing it, and we'll never be in agreement.
Example;
One hunter uses a map and compass. Another uses a GPS. Which one is easier to learn? Is there a right, or wrong way in the two choices? Not at all. Would either of the hunters use the other method. Not likely. Would either hunter agree which way is best. Not likely.
So, threads like this will only become arguments. I think we can agree on that.
Last edited by Muley Hunter; 10-07-2014 at 10:07 AM.
10-07-2014, 10:07 AM
#45
Fork Horn
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Shepherd, TX
Posts: 247
Well I choose to hunt traditional all season. I use a longbow and my sons bowhunt too. I have used trail cams but all they really do is let you see the deer your never going to see. I tracked a big buck track through the woods and hung a stand on his trail. I finally hung a game camera just to see what he was. He was a big 9 point but was nocturnal. Cameras can not take the place of actual hunting skill. Just because you know what's coming and what time, it doesn't help put that animal there when you need him to be. I hunt to hunt and enjoy my time in the woods. It is rare to even see whitetail where I hunt. They move like ghosts in the forest.
10-07-2014, 10:20 AM
#46
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: south eastern PA
Posts: 15,427
Muley, The guy who learns to use a map and compass will be able to fnd his way back, even if the batteries in his GPS go dead. When I boated on the Chesapeake bay for a number of years and cruised to differet ports of call, I used GPS, however, I still used a chart and compass when the water got skinny. One should always learn the tried and true way before taking shortcuts.
10-07-2014, 10:36 AM
#47
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas
Posts: 3,902
I never said, in any terms, that I don't value woodsmanship. I do, however, stand by my experience that it's not that hard to develop woodsmanship skills sufficient to be supremely successful in the field, because if I can do it, it surely can't be that hard... I get tired of the "elitism" that has become so rampant these days.
When I read threads like this, it reminds me of the TV show joke when the "indian tracker" bends over and smells a leaf, then tells his army captain "8 men on painted horses, heavily armed, rode by here 3hrs ago in single file, wearing red sashes on their belts." The army captain, amazed, asks the tracker "how in the world did you read all of that from just a single leaf?" To which the tracker replies, "I didn't, I was sitting on that ridge 3hrs ago when they rode by."
My point was that hunting isn't voodoo. It doesn't take 50yrs of living in a tree to know how to recognize deer sign and movement patterns without any 'modern aides'.
I've done a lot of experimenting over the years. Rather than having NEVER tried something, then turning my nose up at it, I put my money where my mouth is and try many of these things before building my own opinion. I hunted for about 15yrs on a bare bones "weapon and boots" mentality before I had the disposable income to try other things.
I use cameras for herd management of 100% free chase, private property herds. While I have hunted, and continue to hunt public lands on a regular basis, the reality is that I don't need to, and would rather let folks that DON'T have access to private property have the public lands to themselves. I won't have a debate about the merits of hunting private property - and by private property, I am NOT, in any way talking about fenced hunting ranches, I'm talking about working farms and livestock ranches that happen to be privately owned. 98% of my state is privately owned, and again, 17,000acres of that are owned by my family, with less than 1.5% of public land in Kansas being huntable. Where would you prefer that I hunt? I HAVE, indeed taken deer from public grounds in different regions of the state, and have done a bit of public big game hunting in other states where I don't have access to private property. For what it's worth, I have not seen a difference in the experience, other than I know on private property I won't have a pair of high school kids that don't know a d@mn thing about the woods come walking under my stand at 7:30am.
Before I started taking my wife, or younger kids along with me, I hunted a very minimalist style. Considering that I spend much more of my time taking my cousin's kids hunting than I do hunting alone these days, I've found that feeders do help improve their odds, IF THEY'RE PLACED PROPERLY.
So while I use cameras, I typically hunt over food plots less than 10% of my time, and feeders less than 10%. My family might hang 30-40 stands in a season, so forgive me if we have a varied experience in the methods that we use.
Ultimately, I meant to convey two points: 1) hunting isn't as hard as many of us try to make it sound, and 2) I think a lot of folks claim certain technology is a "shortcut," that my experience with them really just doesn't support - specifically in this case, HAVING ACTUALLY HUNTED BOTH WAYS, I cannot say that I believe that game cameras make your odds of taking deer significantly higher than hunting without, and I do not agree that a game camera can successfully displace, even at a marginal level, any form of scouting or woodsmanship.
When I read threads like this, it reminds me of the TV show joke when the "indian tracker" bends over and smells a leaf, then tells his army captain "8 men on painted horses, heavily armed, rode by here 3hrs ago in single file, wearing red sashes on their belts." The army captain, amazed, asks the tracker "how in the world did you read all of that from just a single leaf?" To which the tracker replies, "I didn't, I was sitting on that ridge 3hrs ago when they rode by."
My point was that hunting isn't voodoo. It doesn't take 50yrs of living in a tree to know how to recognize deer sign and movement patterns without any 'modern aides'.
I use cameras for herd management of 100% free chase, private property herds. While I have hunted, and continue to hunt public lands on a regular basis, the reality is that I don't need to, and would rather let folks that DON'T have access to private property have the public lands to themselves. I won't have a debate about the merits of hunting private property - and by private property, I am NOT, in any way talking about fenced hunting ranches, I'm talking about working farms and livestock ranches that happen to be privately owned. 98% of my state is privately owned, and again, 17,000acres of that are owned by my family, with less than 1.5% of public land in Kansas being huntable. Where would you prefer that I hunt? I HAVE, indeed taken deer from public grounds in different regions of the state, and have done a bit of public big game hunting in other states where I don't have access to private property. For what it's worth, I have not seen a difference in the experience, other than I know on private property I won't have a pair of high school kids that don't know a d@mn thing about the woods come walking under my stand at 7:30am.
Before I started taking my wife, or younger kids along with me, I hunted a very minimalist style. Considering that I spend much more of my time taking my cousin's kids hunting than I do hunting alone these days, I've found that feeders do help improve their odds, IF THEY'RE PLACED PROPERLY.
So while I use cameras, I typically hunt over food plots less than 10% of my time, and feeders less than 10%. My family might hang 30-40 stands in a season, so forgive me if we have a varied experience in the methods that we use.
Ultimately, I meant to convey two points: 1) hunting isn't as hard as many of us try to make it sound, and 2) I think a lot of folks claim certain technology is a "shortcut," that my experience with them really just doesn't support - specifically in this case, HAVING ACTUALLY HUNTED BOTH WAYS, I cannot say that I believe that game cameras make your odds of taking deer significantly higher than hunting without, and I do not agree that a game camera can successfully displace, even at a marginal level, any form of scouting or woodsmanship.
Last edited by Nomercy448; 10-07-2014 at 10:47 AM.
10-07-2014, 10:49 AM
#49
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,359
You won't learn if you don't try? I think TV hunting shows are to blame a lot for how hunting is done today.
Like I said many times. Hunt the way you want to hunt. For some hunters the kill is all that's important, and they'll use any aid available. For others the hunt is more important. It's not the kill, but how you got it that's important. Two different ways of doing it, and we'll never be in agreement.
Example;
One hunter uses a map and compass. Another uses a GPS. Which one is easier to learn? Is there a right, or wrong way in the two choices? Not at all. Would either of the hunters use the other method. Not likely. Would either hunter agree which way is best. Not likely.
So, threads like this will only become arguments. I think we can agree on that.
Like I said many times. Hunt the way you want to hunt. For some hunters the kill is all that's important, and they'll use any aid available. For others the hunt is more important. It's not the kill, but how you got it that's important. Two different ways of doing it, and we'll never be in agreement.
Example;
One hunter uses a map and compass. Another uses a GPS. Which one is easier to learn? Is there a right, or wrong way in the two choices? Not at all. Would either of the hunters use the other method. Not likely. Would either hunter agree which way is best. Not likely.
So, threads like this will only become arguments. I think we can agree on that.
I could see how trail cameras could almost be a hobby of its own and one could become very skilled at getting photos of giant bucks.
I would agree that TV shows have a lot to do with how hunting is done today.
To me using trail cams, feeders etc. is a lot more honorable than simply paying someone to sit you down in the right place at the right time.
10-07-2014, 11:42 AM
#50
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 9,557
As I said. These kind of threads will just become arguments.
For the record in my case. Trail cams are a very small part of what i'm talking about. If I bring up the whole list some of you will blow a cork. So, I won't.
You do it your way, and i'll do it mine.
However, please don't make assumptions that someone else hasn't tried everything before forming an opinion.
For the record in my case. Trail cams are a very small part of what i'm talking about. If I bring up the whole list some of you will blow a cork. So, I won't.
You do it your way, and i'll do it mine.
However, please don't make assumptions that someone else hasn't tried everything before forming an opinion.
