unfair advantage

luckylqh · Post by **luckylqh** » Tue Oct 30, 2012 8:57 pm

I just heard about the use of trail cameras that send a pic to emails within 10 seconds after its taken, one certain individual has 47 different of these on lion crossings in unit 21 in arizona.when will game and fish make these cameras illegal? Hopefully soon if we are to have any lion left for those of us that hunt the old fashioned way ,with good dogs and hard huntin.

Bearkiller · Post by **Bearkiller** » Tue Oct 30, 2012 9:09 pm

How is it any more unfair than guys who hunt 5 days a week? If someone is willing to invest the money and time, who are we to judge?

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk 2

lrscott1 · Post by **lrscott1** » Tue Oct 30, 2012 10:38 pm

Well said Bearkiller.

Grzyadms4x4 · Post by **Grzyadms4x4** » Tue Oct 30, 2012 11:26 pm

It's a lot different than a guy hunting 5 days a week especially if he's on foot! Depending on where they are placed, there is no way you could access that many spots in a week. That is some rough country and this kinda reminds me of canned hunting where a guide gets started trailing a lion or gets one treed and THEN calls the client except backwards. The lion walks down a trail and the camera "calls" the "hunter" to let him know where to drop his dogs. The more I type the more I realize this guy is no hunter at all or he used to be and is to lazy or greedy to continue to actually hunt for his clients. Wouldn't mind knowing who he is though, to steer clear of him.

super white hunter · Post by **super white hunter** » Tue Oct 30, 2012 11:36 pm

There are some people who think shock collars or GPS collars should be outlawed. Just because you don't agree doesn't mean they should be done away with. If that was the case we would be back to rocks and spears, because that black powder stuff is just evil.

Just for the record I don't agree with having 47 cameras monitoring game trails

AZDOGMAN · Post by **AZDOGMAN** » Wed Oct 31, 2012 1:15 am

I'm pretty sure there has to be phone service where the camera is. Plus they are freaking expensive and u have to have a cell phone plan for each one. Unless you have seen it first hand I doubt it's true. Hard to find 40 spots in 21 with cell service.
I will say I had thought about this myself but it's just not cost effective.

AZDOGMAN · Post by **AZDOGMAN** » Wed Oct 31, 2012 1:17 am

And I doubt one guy knows about 47 lion crossings. I'm calling bs

Cosmo · Post by **Cosmo** » Wed Oct 31, 2012 2:11 am

I highly doubt that someone has 47 camera's. That would be around $30 per month per camera just for the service, and then to buy 47 of the camera's? I have a friend who has one he uses for deer hunting, and they don't work very well at all. They aren't advanced enough yet, lots of problems.

Steve White · Post by **Steve White** » Wed Oct 31, 2012 9:08 am

Not knowing the area, or much about cat hunting period. I still have my doubts about it like others. Even so, SO WHAT! If the guy can afford it so be it. Folks whine about stuff like this all the time. From cameras, to treestands, baits, rifles, gps, etc.

Oh, and by all means dont forget! Hounds are not fair either!!

Cowboyvon · Post by **Cowboyvon** » Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:59 am

If he was using them for profit and actually catching a lot of lions for clients I could see where it could be an unfair advantage....and it's hard to believe he has that many...

Fitz · Post by **Fitz** » Wed Oct 31, 2012 11:56 am

Steve White wrote:Not knowing the area, or much about cat hunting period. I still have my doubts about it like others. Even so, SO WHAT! If the guy can afford it so be it. Folks whine about stuff like this all the time. From cameras, to treestands, baits, rifles, gps, etc.

Oh, and by all means dont forget! Hounds are not fair either!!

I agree!

R Severe · Post by **R Severe** » Wed Oct 31, 2012 12:00 pm

It's human nature to try to use every advantage to become better at what we do. We also shoot oursevles in the foot when we do so in the hunting world. The better we get the more we impact the population of what we hunt. The more we impact the population the more we impact our hunting opportunity.
Wildlife managers have four things they use to controll harvest. What we hunt, when we hunt, and the weapon we use. To a lesser degree where we hunt. By using technology we are just cutting our time in the feild down in the long run.
It takes time for most hunters to realize that it's all about the hunt, not the kill. When your starting out it's the other way around and some never find thier way out of that.

If a outfiter is using unfair technology he's basicly impacting our hunts in a negative way, and also his livelyhood.
Just my 2 cents.

007pennpal · Post by **007pennpal** » Wed Oct 31, 2012 6:58 pm

I've heard in Africa game ranches you can shoot an animal using a remote controlled gun over the internet and have the head sent back for your wall. Not overly challenging but why not? Not my cup of tea, but I could see a disabled person doing it. Here's the thing. If someone wants to make a bow out of a hickory tree and go kill a lion that is probably legal. I think you should be able to kill animals however you want, the animals do belong to us right? I understand control of what kind and how many to protect the future of hunting. I often think that spotlighting should be legal for deer. It is legal in some places. It would sure cut the cost of my deer meat per pound down. Why shouldn't we hunt the most effective way? And who should tell us how we can do it?

newdawg · Post by **newdawg** » Thu Nov 01, 2012 11:02 am

I'm sure Ben Lilly used them. I spend my hard earned money and time hunting that area also. What's the point if I can hunt it sitting on my couch at home.

GETTERDONE · Post by **GETTERDONE** » Thu Nov 01, 2012 11:47 am

BS,guys spend the time to find that many crossing and has the money and time to invest in hunting and running maintenace on that many cameras good for him.That show some real dedication.There are allways going to be people who are jealous of other successs.There are still many factors to being sucessful after you dump the hounds.