B&C label cell cams unethical

[NMSbowhunter]

Legal and ethical are two very different constructs. I use cell cams and they haven’t helped me a bit this season. Last year was the first year I ever used them and the only thing I can honestly say they did to help me was keeping
Me out there when I was ready to cave. The two giants that walked past the cams within an hour of each other (only 85 yards upwind of me) I never saw once. The buck I shot was totally different and although I did have him on both my standard and cell cams last year, he wasn’t on any of my cell cams the day In arrowed him.

Which leads me to my next ancillary question. There are some guys around here where I hunt who seem to get hammers every year. I don’t understand how they do it or what they’re doing but I think that really cracking that code involves some level of ethical and legal malaise. It’s always on private and I just can’t think these people are hat much better hunters than me and my buddy are. We’ve gotten our fair share of nice bucks over the years but I just don’t get it sometimes. I’m done whining now LOL!

On private you can set everything up in your favor like entry, exits and strand sites. You can put a 500 pound spin cast feeder set to fed anytime you want it to go off and you can set a half dozen cell cameras around to keep track of the bucks movements without having to go in and pressure the area. They can keep everyone else out. Zero hunting pressure. They can pattern the bucks and only go in under optimal conditions. Its no guarantee but it sure stacks the deck in their favor.

Hunting public land has none of that. Killing a good buck on public land is worth 100 hot house bucks, in my opinion.

 

[Plebe]

I can’t know all the reasons for BandC’s rules, but I can surmise that one of the reasons behind cell cam prohibition, and many others is:

B and C is trying to keep a consistent metric over the accomplishment of successfully hunting a giant mature buck. They do so by applying a collection of parameters into the process. It’s kind of like athletics not giving records to athletes who achieved new record statistics while using performance enhancing drugs. Perhaps B and C means less to hunters now than it once did. But will these likes and reposts and views on social media and YouTube mean anything, be remembered or even be searchable content in 10 years?

I rather wonder if it’s not really about legitimizing “hunter” accomplishments.

I prefer to think it’s simply about fair chase, as a function of conservation and respect for game. Fair chase is the elemental principle of the B&C club since it’s inception, which is best understood in the historical context surrounding the clubs charter, when game were being decimated en masse. (basic summary of B&C history in link below).

As it is presented, “the Club created the first big game scoring and data collection system to objectively measure and evaluate the health and habitat quality of North American big game populations, while improving state and federal management of those animals” and “maintains the records of native North American big game as a vital conservation record, and uses that information to assess wildlife management programs”

On paper at least, B&C records are intended as a measure of conservation achievement rather than hunter achievement.

History of the Boone and Crockett Club

The Boone and Crockett Club’s history is a 134-year long tale of measured and thoughtful commitment to wild land and wildlife conservation. This commitment balances human and wildlife needs and sees deep value in preserving the hunting tradition. It’s a commitment shaped by visionaries and a...

www.boone-crockett.org

 

[GCTerpfan]

I rather wonder if it’s not really about legitimizing “hunter” accomplishments.

I prefer to think it’s simply about fair chase, as a function of conservation and respect for game. Fair chase is the elemental principle of the B&C club since it’s inception, which is best understood in the historical context surrounding the clubs charter, when game were being decimated en masse. (basic summary of B&C history in link below).

As it is presented, “the Club created the first big game scoring and data collection system to objectively measure and evaluate the health and habitat quality of North American big game populations, while improving state and federal management of those animals” and “maintains the records of native North American big game as a vital conservation record, and uses that information to assess wildlife management programs”

On paper at least, B&C records are intended as a measure of conservation achievement rather than hunter achievement.

History of the Boone and Crockett Club

The Boone and Crockett Club’s history is a 134-year long tale of measured and thoughtful commitment to wild land and wildlife conservation. This commitment balances human and wildlife needs and sees deep value in preserving the hunting tradition. It’s a commitment shaped by visionaries and a...

www.boone-crockett.org

These were my thoughts as I was reading through this thread. B&C is supposed to be a measure of conservation achievement, not hunter achievement like you stated. Regardless of the method of take that buck grew that set of antlers. Seems like the simplest solution is to remove all hunter names from the record books and just list deer, with area and dates taken.

 

[DelaWhere_Arrow]

These were my thoughts as I was reading through this thread. B&C is supposed to be a measure of conservation achievement, not hunter achievement like you stated. Regardless of the method of take that buck grew that set of antlers. Seems like the simplest solution is to remove all hunter names from the record books and just list deer, with area and dates taken.

I’m all for this

 

[woodsdog2]

I’m all for this

Absolutely!

 

[Jammintree]

I rather wonder if it’s not really about legitimizing “hunter” accomplishments.

I prefer to think it’s simply about fair chase, as a function of conservation and respect for game. Fair chase is the elemental principle of the B&C club since it’s inception, which is best understood in the historical context surrounding the clubs charter, when game were being decimated en masse. (basic summary of B&C history in link below).

As it is presented, “the Club created the first big game scoring and data collection system to objectively measure and evaluate the health and habitat quality of North American big game populations, while improving state and federal management of those animals” and “maintains the records of native North American big game as a vital conservation record, and uses that information to assess wildlife management programs”

On paper at least, B&C records are intended as a measure of conservation achievement rather than hunter achievement.

History of the Boone and Crockett Club

The Boone and Crockett Club’s history is a 134-year long tale of measured and thoughtful commitment to wild land and wildlife conservation. This commitment balances human and wildlife needs and sees deep value in preserving the hunting tradition. It’s a commitment shaped by visionaries and a...

www.boone-crockett.org

Great point. Now all we need to do is convince modern people that the health of whole ecosystems is more important than self aggrandizement on social media.

 

[woodsdog2]

I do think it is also more than that though too. I think it’s the furtherance and promotion of hunting as an appropriate and necessarily critical wildlife management and conservation tool. Although there are many reasons detrimental to associating a hunting person or “personality” with the taking of an extraordinary animal…. we also have to remember that overall hunting numbers are declining and that the success of the achievement is an important motivation for many to stay included and involved. In other words, but for the fact that regulated hunting is a necessary wildlife management and conservation tool, we would not have the healthy game and wildlife populations we all enjoy today. Although not the only factor and certainly not the most important, the names and faces of hunters ie “conservationists” associated with the taking of a record book animal represents the pinnacle of achievement for both the North American Wildlife Conservation model and the efforts of the hunters conservationists who’s license fees and excise taxes on hunting equipment support this effective policy and program. I think of someone like Chuck Adams who has over 200 entries in the P&Y Club and his overall career and his writings over the years….. his vicarious mentorship of so many….. he deserves his name with those trophies he took.

 

[raisins]

I do think it is also more than that though too. I think it’s the furtherance and promotion of hunting as an appropriate and necessarily critical wildlife management and conservation tool. Although there are many reasons detrimental to associating a hunting person or “personality” with the taking of an extraordinary animal…. we also have to remember that overall hunting numbers are declining and that the success of the achievement is an important motivation for many to stay included and involved. In other words, but for the fact that regulated hunting is a necessary wildlife management and conservation tool, we would not have the healthy game and wildlife populations we all enjoy today. Although not the only factor and certainly not the most important, the names and faces of hunters ie “conservationists” associated with the taking of a record book animal represents the pinnacle of achievement for both the North American Wildlife Conservation model and the efforts of the hunters conservationists who’s license fees and excise taxes on hunting equipment support this effective policy and program. I think of someone like Chuck Adams who has over 200 entries in the P&Y Club and his overall career and his writings over the years….. his vicarious mentorship of so many….. he deserves his name with those trophies he took.

There's no great solution here.

 

[Jammintree]

Over the past 20 years there has been a lot of research on deer, their habitats, their positive and negative impacts on ecosystems, and the proliferation of deer in urban and suburban environments. My hope is that the research is continually presented to the public in such a way that there is an increased awareness about the significance of population management (Aka Hunting). While BandC was initiated to promote conservation issues its public image has drifted. While its mission may remain intact, it’s perceived by the general public as a trophy hunting organization. As in all facets of modernity, it’s nearly impossible to educate a public that is devoted to ignorance.

 

[raisins]

Over the past 20 years there has been a lot of research on deer, their habitats, their positive and negative impacts on ecosystems, and the proliferation of deer in urban and suburban environments. My hope is that the research is continually presented to the public in such a way that there is an increased awareness about the significance of population management (Aka Hunting). While BandC was initiated to promote conservation issues its public image has drifted. While its mission may remain intact, it’s perceived by the general public as a trophy hunting organization. As in all facets of modernity, it’s nearly impossible to educate a public that is devoted to ignorance.

Agreed, and I think it is useful for hunters to continually point out that the people in favor of expanding wolf population and other measures related to the environment are almost always folks that do not live in the area to be affected or even the state.

 

[Jammintree]

Agreed, and I think it is useful for hunters to continually point out that the people in favor of expanding wolf population and other measures related to the environment are almost always folks that do not live in the area to be affected or even the state.

Agreed. And I have long figured that if hunters don’t adequately manage numbers of “game” animals, government will experiment with low cost population control. They figured out quick that various forms of birth control were not effective and cost alot. Snipers aren’t cost effective. If they laced corn with biological agents that made deer sterile all they’d do is creat a subspecies of deer that don’t like to eat corn. Silently repopulating predatory animals is low cost and will be very effective.

 

[raisins]

Agreed. And I have long figured that if hunters don’t adequately manage numbers of “game” animals, government will experiment with low cost population control. They figured out quick that various forms of birth control were not effective and cost alot. Snipers aren’t cost effective. If they laced corn with biological agents that made deer sterile all they’d do is creat a subspecies of deer that don’t like to eat corn. Silently repopulating predatory animals is low cost and will be very effective.

A lot of folks want this just for emotional reasons. Some hippy in Washington would love to know that 2,000 miles away a new wolf population is taking root. They feel that it must be right, and they are willing to explore any train of words to support that.