Many have heard by now that Utah decided to ban hunters use of trail cameras in the weeks leading up to and during the big game seasons. This is similar to actions taken by Nevada and Arizona. In Utah this process began last year when a bill written by Rep. Casey Snider (of Paradise) required rules be written that defined how trail cameras could be used by hunters.
Initially the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources proposed banning only transmitting trail cameras. By a narrow vote, however, Utah’s Wildlife Board expanded this recommendation to include banning transmitting and internal storage cameras. Although this decision will infuriate some, I think it is a proper step towards reducing hunters’ reliance on technology.
Many may challenge this conclusion by asking how should society decide when there is too much technology? The simple answer for hunting is when these gadgets improve success to the point there are fewer overall hunting opportunities. This relationship can be seen in statewide trends, over the last five years for elk and the last 25 years for deer, where the number of available tags has declined but the number of deer and elk harvested each year has stayed approximately the same.
A large part of this decline can be blamed on the loss of habitat due to urban sprawl. This pattern is likely exacerbated by reduced hunter access to private lands, better off-road vehicles, improved rifle accuracy at long-range, and the ease of collecting and sharing digital information.
Improved technology has altered fishing but in a different way than hunting. Enhanced electronics, motors, lines and lures have made it easier to find and put a lure in a fish’s vision. This doesn’t mean the fish will eat. If it does, many caught fish are released. This is not true when hunting. If a hunter knows where an animal is (aided by trail cameras), has a high-tech rifle (e.g., a flat shooting caliber with a high magnification drop compensating scope), they can be harvested at a distance (400 to 600 yards) where the animal may not be concerned by human presence.
This wouldn’t be a concern if the number of hunters wasn’t declining. If we are going to increase or maintain the number of hunters, they must be able to consistently draw a tag and feel like they can be successful in the woods. In Utah it can take several years to draw a general deer tag. When a novice hunter heads to the woods, they often encounter several trail cameras in areas commonly used by game. Such conditions can dissuade continued participation as many hunters feel they have little chance of being successful in that setting.
Banning the use of trail cameras was surprising but applying the rule to private lands was even more shocking. I like this decision as it treats all hunters fairly. Mule deer and elk aren’t like eastern whitetails which may spend their entire life roaming across a few privately owned farms. Instead, western big game species are migratory and traverse public and private lands.
Even when elk aren’t migrating, research has shown they often use the arrival of hunting season to move from public to private lands. If private land hunters were allowed to use trail cameras, this would let them know when a mature animal that had spent much of its life on public land just happened to have jumped their fence.
One reoccurring statement in the debate on camera use was such rules weren’t enforceable. It is difficult to enforce most wildlife regulations as hunting takes place in remote areas with few people. Law should reflect what is right as long as hunters can easily follow the rule. Technology will be able to help enforce restrictions on digital photographs as their use leaves digital footprints across the internet and on social networks. An easy way to increase adherence to this rule is to make it clear that hunters and outfitters caught in violation will lose their right to hunt for a year or two.
In addition to making a final decision on cameras, there was a separate decision to review other technologies. Decisions on which technologies hunters are allowed to use should be made quickly before people purchase expensive equipment. This review should not only survey hunters, but collect and analyze data that helps us understand how technology alters hunter success. This information would help the Wildlife Board better understand the trade-offs between the adoption of new technologies and how many big game tags can be offered.
