Trail cams on SGL.

RSB can you use trail cams on SGL's ? Is this what our license money pays for, guys worrying about cameras instead of doing their job ?

There is currently no set policy concerning cameras on game lands and we know a lot of people do use them on game lands. Most try to conceal them so they are not highly visible and most people don’t even know they are there.
 
It appears obvious that the guys in the picture are part of the Food and Cover Crew. It also appears obvious that they have spaying equipment on their truck so I suspect the camera was in an area they were planning to spray.
 
I don’t think any of us have enough information to know just what actually occurred there. I don’t see anything in the pictures that convinces me the crew tried to remove the camera. If fact I would bet they didn’t try to remove it or it would have been gone. I can see for almost a certainty that they had the equipment to remove the camera if they had really wanted to do so. I have never seen a crew truck that didn’t have a tow chain in it and I would beat a tow chain hooked to the lock and the tow hooks on the truck would have removed the lock system.
 
In any event it sounds like the camera owner has started the correct procedures to get to the bottom of it. I am sure it isn’t going to be hard to find out who the workers were and what they were doing. If they were don’t something wrong they will be appropriately disciplined.
 
But, to answer the question concerning cameras on game lands. At the present time there is no regulation that specifically prohibits or allows them. In theory though any agent of the landowner can remove anything not natural they find on the game lands unless there is a policy that allows there use, such as the time period in which tree stands can be left on the game lands. Perhaps there will be a policy and perhaps even a regulation on the use of trail cameras on game lands in the future.
 R.S. Bodenhorn        

I do not put my cameras on SGL very often or for a long period of time.. maybe 24 hours at best ...... In fact most of the time I put my cameras out in the evening and go get them the next morning .. I'd never leave them out any longer around here .. they are always getting stolen...

Since I don't hunt SGL's or use trail cameras, I don't really have a dog in this fight, but one would think that it it would be simple enough to have a BLACK and WHITE law -- either trail cams on SGL's are legal or they aren't -- and remove the discretion of the WCO from the whole situation.

Hopefully, for those that hunt SGL's and use trail cameras this is cleared up in an easy to understand, definitive manner soon.  I mean trail cams have been around for at least ten years, one would tend ot think that this would have been taken care of, oh, I don't know, nine of those ten years ago.

Take a look at the new hunting digest. More confusing than ever.

I dont put cams on gamelands, but if i lived closer to a large tract that was worth hunting, i probably would. This doesnt effect me, but would like to see it addressed. The legality of it. Imho it should be legal. I do not like to see hunter rights on our supposed own lands diminished while other interests on those lands increase regularly.

Will be very interested to see the outcome. Not just what was the mens intent, but moreso hopefully pgc does the right thing in addressing the legality issue of trailcams on GL's by making it clearly legal.

Always label my cams with name and phone number so the f-n thieves that take them are reminded everytime who they screwed when they take it and use it.

I see no need for any type of time frame that they should be illegal.
They are a very valuable scouting tool all year long.

Anyone know what the DCNR policy is on game cams ?
Can they take them off of state ground ?

    We have too many rules and regulations cause people are always asking Govt to make decisions for them. See it every day. This is a perfect example.
   Somebodys gonna ultimately have to decide something and then there will be SIDES on the position that gets taken- whatever it is.
     Might help a few -might inconvenience a few. But when you ask for a decision thats what your gonna get.

   Your right -its a techy world now even for our outdoor sports- makes the decisions tougher than ever for those who gotta makem.
EX-    Did ya ever think you would see a day where an ice fisherman could drag a bucket of water with a gizmo in it across the ice and locate where to dig his hole for the fish?
  Even got a thingie  to locate  "hit deer' that picks up body heat some distance away so you can find the one you hit-Hmmmmm. A still hunters new buddy ?

ORIGINAL: RSB

ORIGINAL: DarDys

Since I don't hunt SGL's or use trail cameras, I don't really have a dog in this fight, but one would think that it it would be simple enough to have a BLACK and WHITE law -- either trail cams on SGL's are legal or they aren't -- and remove the discretion of the WCO from the whole situation.

Hopefully, for those that hunt SGL's and use trail cameras this is cleared up in an easy to understand, definitive manner soon.  I mean trail cams have been around for at least ten years, one would tend ot think that this would have been taken care of, oh, I don't know, nine of those ten years ago.

In the normal progressions of life solutions don’t come about until after a problem has been identified. When people start trying to solve problems before there is a problem they are usually creating a bigger problem where no SERIOUS problem previously existed.
 
It has always been illegal for anyone to steal another person’s property; it is still that way and most likely always will be. It has always been legal for a property owner, or their agent, to remove tangible property they find left on their property, though they may have to return it to the legal owner if they can be identified; that is not likely to change, and for darn good reason, in the future either.
 
This incident could result in a couple of things though. It could result in a Game Commission policy concerning the removal of tangible property and it could result in a regulation that sets a time period when trail cameras can be left out or it could result in a need for identification on the camera. Sometimes people demanding regulations on everything end up with regulations they don’t really want and then they cry about not being allowed to do the things they feel they should be allowed to do.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn

 
Either I wasn't clear or you missed my point.  I'll try again.
 
This should be simple.  I am not addressing this particular incident.  This should apply to ALL incidents of trail cams on state game lands.  Laws, where possible, should be unambiguous and not dictated by the situation.
 
Are trail cams legal to use on SGL or not is the question. 
 
Not any undefined, nebulous "tangible property."  A well defined device -- a trail cam. 
 
And it is a problem when the law is not clear.  So a problem exists.  People who want to know, clearly don't. 
 
In the normal progression, accountable entities anticpate problems and mitigate them before they become an issue -- they are proactive, not reactive. 
 
It also has nothing to do with stealing anything.  Again, it is simple, are trail cams legal on SGL.  It has nothing to do with "another person's property," it has to do with state owned , well defined property.
 
You see, here is the problem.  Something that should be really simple to clear up, in fact something that should have been cleared up as soon as the technology became available and still not in question a decade or so after the introduction of the issue, is danced around by using undefined terms in a wishy washy manner rather than being confronted head-on.
 
It should be simple -- the state (PGC) owns game lands.  That is clearly defined.  Trail cams are a specific item.  That is clearly defined.  The PGC sets rules on SGL.  That is clearly defined.  What is the clearly defined rule for a clearly defined device on a clearly defined property as deemed by the clearly defined rule making entity?
 
So why is is so difficult to to say that a clearly defined item, a trail cam, is either A) legal or B) illegal, a clearly defined rule, on SGL's, a clearly defined property, by rule of the PGC, the clearly defined rule maker for that property?
 
Why do ambiguous terms and unrelated theft and a broad definition of property need to be included thereby creating a situation where it is up to the opinion, interpretation, and discretion of a human being to decide that in "this" particular situation something is or is not illegal?
 
It should be simple.
 

Very well put DarDys. I am also waiting for a yes or no answer,plain and simple.Could it be the ones that make up or enforce these laws don't know ?

A hunter should not have to guess if something is legal or not ! Just like the use of FOBs on a arrow shaft.I know a few guys that quite hunting because of all the BS. The Pa hunter is more frustrated than ever.

ORIGINAL: Outdoor Adventures

A hunter should not have to guess if something is legal or not ! Just like the use of FOBs on a arrow shaft.I know a few guys that quite hunting because of all the BS. The Pa hunter is more frustrated than ever.

Really?  Hunters are quitting because of the way the regs were written? 

I would agree that many are vague and/or poorly written, but a 5 minute call to your local WCO will provide all the clarification you need.  I can't imagine someone quitting before taking that route.

ORIGINAL: Outdoor Adventures

Very well put DarDys. I am also waiting for a yes or no answer,plain and simple.Could it be the ones that make up or enforce these laws don't know ?

Most of us have always allowed hunters some leeway on some things though, But now that it has been brought to the forefront and some people are demanding a yes or no answer. The legal answer is already very clear. It is illegal to leave a trail camera on game lands.   
 
§ 135.41. State game lands.
a)      Restrictions limited. The following exceptions to §  135.2 (relating to unlawful actions) pertain to lands and waters designated as State game lands:
 
(c)   Additional prohibitions. In addition to the prohibitions contained in the act pertaining to State game lands and §  135.2, except with the written permission of the Director, it is unlawful to:
 
(11)    Construct, place, maintain, occupy, use, leave or abandon any structures or other tangible property, except that portable hunting blinds or stands may be used subject to the following restrictions:
 
 
Tangible property in law is, literally, anything which can be touched, and includes both real property and personal property (or moveable property), and stands in distinction to intangible property.
In [color=#0000ff size=3]English law and some [color=#0000ff size=3]Commonwealth legal systems, items of tangible property are referred to as choses in possession (or a chose in possession in the singular).
However, some property, despite being physical in nature, is classified in many legal systems as intangible property rather than tangible property because the rights associated with the physical item are of far greater significance than the physical properties. Principally, these are documentary intangibles. For example, a [color=#0000ff size=3]promissory note is a piece of paper that can be touched, but the real significance is not the physical paper, but the legal rights which the paper confers, and hence the promissory note is defined by the legal debt rather than the physical attributes.
Source for definition:  [color=#800080 size=3]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tangible_property
 
Therefore based on the law and definition of Tangible Property and since you insist on a yes or no answer the law really is and always was already clear. You CAN NOT legally leave tangible property on game lands.
 
There is everyone happier now?
 
R.S. Bodenhorn

post edited by RSB - 2011/06/22 21:55:22

ORIGINAL: Esox_Hunter

ORIGINAL: Outdoor Adventures

A hunter should not have to guess if something is legal or not ! Just like the use of FOBs on a arrow shaft.I know a few guys that quite hunting because of all the BS. The Pa hunter is more frustrated than ever.

Really?  Hunters are quitting because of the way the regs were written? 

I would agree that many are vague and/or poorly written, but a 5 minute call to your local WCO will provide all the clarification you need.  I can't imagine someone quitting before taking that route.

Absolutely esox hunter. I know a few that are sick of all the BS and a few have claimed that the PGC seem to view the law differently than the digest states. It only takes one AH deputy to give guys a hard time, make them travel and miss work to prove to a judge that the digest we must all go by is very vague. 5 minute call ? Have you ever tried to get a hold of a local WCO and get clarification in writing ? The ones I know that quite now hunt in OHIO.