Trail cams on SGL. 
spoonchucker
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 8561
- Reward points: 0
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/20 23:10:43
(permalink)
RG,
Private property is one thing. The landowner along with agreement among those he permits to hunt can resolve that issue. We are talking state game lands though. And no-one can, or should be able to "reserve" a spot by any method. Other than actually being there, and being there first.
Get Informed, Get Involved, And Make A Difference. Step Up, or Step Aside The next time you say "Somebody should do something", remember that YOU are somebody. GL
|
Dr. Trout
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 4417
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2002/03/03 03:12:33
- Location: Jefferson County (2F)
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/20 23:15:16
(permalink)
Hey Doc anytime you would like to chime in on the archery or turkey threads jump right in. Can't see much sense in that, not much of interest there... I check them out about once a week .. it's a dead section for the most part IMHO... archery section has three topic since June .. one of them yours with 0 replies to one of them and little "hits" the other one "77"... I and other have replied to that one .... turkey section has three topics with a total of 54 replies.. not much action there either.......
post edited by Dr. Trout - 2011/07/20 23:31:45
|
retired guy
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 3107
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2010/08/26 15:49:55
- Location: ct-vacation place in Richland
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/20 23:16:38
(permalink)
The other stand was pretty well out of sight from my kids- other side of a hemlock. Kid was there one Am and the other guy walked by- waved and got into his stand. He was very tight with the landowner so we just moved elsewhere where the kid scored. For some odd reason the deer stopped using that first trail and Mr Sportsman stuck it out there for weeks. Hunt state land too and frankly if somebody beats me to a favored spot I move on to another location. always have and always will- its that 'early bird' thing-he did his scouting too and simply beat me- life goes on.
post edited by retired guy - 2011/07/20 23:20:30
|
Dr. Trout
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 4417
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2002/03/03 03:12:33
- Location: Jefferson County (2F)
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/20 23:27:09
(permalink)
I have permission for just a few private properties... with multiple users on a property I think it should be first there gets to stay others should move off to another location ...... even for tree stands in archery season ... two owners have it as first in.. first there... the other later arrival is to move off .... the other property .. the owner has a couple tree stands and a couple blinds set-up for hunters to use on his property .. it's controlled in the sense I or others have to tell him what days we plan on hunting there and he may say "NO". I have nothing against his policy but have not hunted there too much ... only two trips last year in one of the blinds and saw nothing... but will try again this fall with the crossbow a couple trips ... a nice 9 point was taken in rifle season and the owner's wife shot a great 8 point from one of the ground blinds.
post edited by Dr. Trout - 2011/07/20 23:28:02
|
spoonchucker
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 8561
- Reward points: 0
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/20 23:41:23
(permalink)
That's the control a private landowner can use to avoid conflict. He can either make it "early bird gets the worm" so to speak. Or he can require those he permits to hunt to agree on who hunts what areas, and no-one violates anothers space without that person's permission.
There's no practical way to do the latter on public lands. So the former must be the rule.
Get Informed, Get Involved, And Make A Difference. Step Up, or Step Aside The next time you say "Somebody should do something", remember that YOU are somebody. GL
|
spoonchucker
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 8561
- Reward points: 0
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/20 23:45:05
(permalink)
I guess the landowner can also say "I don't care what you do", "but if I get drawn into any conflicts, you're ALL out".
post edited by spoonchucker - 2011/07/20 23:46:01
Get Informed, Get Involved, And Make A Difference. Step Up, or Step Aside The next time you say "Somebody should do something", remember that YOU are somebody. GL
|
RE: Trail cams on SGML.
2011/07/21 00:54:33
(permalink)
Should be lots of room to hunt this year. As licenses sales continue to drop more areas with less hunters.
|
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 01:05:11
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: retired guy
  The other stand was pretty well out of sight from my kids- other side of a hemlock. Kid was there one Am and the other guy walked by- waved and got into his stand. He was very tight with the landowner so we just moved elsewhere where the kid scored. For some odd reason the deer stopped using that first trail and Mr Sportsman stuck it out there for weeks.
 Hunt state land too and frankly if somebody beats me to a favored spot I move on to another location. always have and always will- its that 'early bird' thing-he did his scouting too and simply beat me- life goes on.
Good attitude to have RG. A few times I walked quietly to my stand and found another person using it. I politely asked if he liked the stand. He said he did and I replied me too it's mine. He chuckled and said he'd move on. I told him to stay that I had many more.In my earlier years I never had a problem with anyone getting into my rifle sets. Nobody wanted to climb that high. Recently I had a guy tell a new property owner that a certain stand belonged to his buddy. Sad to say the stand is mine and not his buddies. Some will stop at nothing just to hunt a particular area.
|
DarDys
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 4939
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2009/11/13 08:46:21
- Location: Duncansville, PA
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 06:51:26
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: spoonchucker
"They obviously saw a need to write in the exception for stands. Would it not have been "common sense" during the kicking-the-idea-around phase to have asked "what the heck else would it make sense to exempt" and add that to the exception rather than be so myopic to only think of stands?'
Ever consider that at the time they made the exception for stands, trail cams were not available, or not common place?
Also as I pointed out there may have been a reason that they preferred to use policy, rather than a written exception as a guide concerning the use of trail cams.
Your reaching. The stand thing was just passed, I believe this year. Unless they or you have been living under a rock, trail cams have been around for over a decade. Again, as I stated in my very first post on this subject, I don't hunt SGL of deer nor do I use trail cams. I have no skin in this game other than to wonder why on earth something this simple, cut and dried, has to be so difficult when it coulkd be solved with one sentence in the game code. I am not a fan of legislating from the bench through law interpretation, although I am sure that you are.
The poster formally known as Duncsdad Everything I say can be fully substantiated by my own opinion.
|
DarDys
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 4939
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2009/11/13 08:46:21
- Location: Duncansville, PA
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 07:04:35
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: Dr. Trout
That would be true. If they really WERE concerned about it/them. For a couple of them though, their only interest is in having something to complain about, and an excuse to pick apart every word RSB posts here.
Which as you know --- is the reason those same 4-5 guys post here in the hunting section anyhow... to complain about something and put down the PGC and any employees or supporters...
If they did not do that we would not hear from them 90% on the time...
although Dars did just post about a balloon trip he recently took where they landed on some guys property..
would that be considered trespassing under the "black & white" letter of the law 
Doc, You are so defensive, you may need to look into that. I am not anti PGC. Never was, never will be. In fact, I looked very seriously into being on th eBOC for my district when we had an opening. Its too bad they already had someone hand picked that they needed to slimly pass the DMP. However, I can disagree with some of there policies, just as some, including YOU , have, and still be a supporter -- just not a blind one. No, I don't like their DMP. It had a very negative affect on my hunting that did not need to be. I cannot support that. As for the trail cam thing, I, in the very beginning, said I didn't care and my input to the discussion did not center around the actual law, rule, reg, per se, but rather the more ideological stance that such laws, rules, and regs should be as concrete, or in your words "black & white," as possible in order to avoid any confusion for those that it may affect. It doesn't matter if it is game code or everyday law, ambiguity is not good. As for the balloon thing, you, as usual, are trying to grasp at straws in order to make a point and the only thing you end up doing is making a fool of yourself. I was not piloting the balloon, so your personal attack is unwarranted, just as the several you have made of late. In addition, a balloon looking for a landing spot is deemed an aircraft in distress, just like when small planes land on a road, so no, it is not tresspassing. Of course, the pilot is responsible for any damages that he might cause and carries a rather hefty insurance policy. Of course, to you, crashing an aircraft and causing possible injury to the four people aboard is akin to strapping a trail camera to a tree. You might be old, but you really need to grow up.
The poster formally known as Duncsdad Everything I say can be fully substantiated by my own opinion.
|
DarDys
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 4939
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2009/11/13 08:46:21
- Location: Duncansville, PA
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 07:09:12
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: spoonchucker
RG,
Private property is one thing. The landowner along with agreement among those he permits to hunt can resolve that issue. We are talking state game lands though. And no-one can, or should be able to "reserve" a spot by any method. Other than actually being there, and being there first.
So are you stating that if someone were inclined to "spot claim" (which cannot be done on SGL), it would be more likely done throught the claim of "I had a camera in the area" (one that might very well be so camoed that it wasn't noticed) that a ladder stand that is in plain sight? If you and Doc grasp any more straw, you will need some binder twine to make a bale.
The poster formally known as Duncsdad Everything I say can be fully substantiated by my own opinion.
|
Dr. Trout
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 4417
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2002/03/03 03:12:33
- Location: Jefferson County (2F)
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 07:26:52
(permalink)
|
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 15:53:38
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: DarDys
ORIGINAL: Dr. Trout
That would be true. If they really WERE concerned about it/them. For a couple of them though, their only interest is in having something to complain about, and an excuse to pick apart every word RSB posts here.
Which as you know --- is the reason those same 4-5 guys post here in the hunting section anyhow... to complain about something and put down the PGC and any employees or supporters...
If they did not do that we would not hear from them 90% on the time...
although Dars did just post about a balloon trip he recently took where they landed on some guys property..
would that be considered trespassing under the "black & white" letter of the law
Doc,
You are so defensive, you may need to look into that.
I am not anti PGC. Never was, never will be. In fact, I looked very seriously into being on th eBOC for my district when we had an opening. Its too bad they already had someone hand picked that they needed to slimly pass the DMP.
However, I can disagree with some of there policies, just as some, including YOU , have, and still be a supporter -- just not a blind one.
No, I don't like their DMP. It had a very negative affect on my hunting that did not need to be. I cannot support that.
As for the trail cam thing, I, in the very beginning, said I didn't care and my input to the discussion did not center around the actual law, rule, reg, per se, but rather the more ideological stance that such laws, rules, and regs should be as concrete, or in your words "black & white," as possible in order to avoid any confusion for those that it may affect. It doesn't matter if it is game code or everyday law, ambiguity is not good.
As for the balloon thing, you, as usual, are trying to grasp at straws in order to make a point and the only thing you end up doing is making a fool of yourself. I was not piloting the balloon, so your personal attack is unwarranted, just as the several you have made of late. In addition, a balloon looking for a landing spot is deemed an aircraft in distress, just like when small planes land on a road, so no, it is not tresspassing. Of course, the pilot is responsible for any damages that he might cause and carries a rather hefty insurance policy.
Of course, to you, crashing an aircraft and causing possible injury to the four people aboard is akin to strapping a trail camera to a tree.
You might be old, but you really need to grow up.
[/quote
X10
|
spoonchucker
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 8561
- Reward points: 0
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 15:54:18
(permalink)
DarDY, You are the one "reaching", to find a problem that doesn't exist. I don't know why they didn't specifically exempt trai cams. I offered a couple of possibilities, but it's all irrelevant. NO-ONE is getting cited for placing trail cams. Unless they are placed in a destructive manner, which would be true also of a stand, which HAS an exclusion. NOW. If there were no law regarding tangible property, and the PGC cited folks for trail cams, but not stands. If the tangible property law was in place, but not the stand exclusion and the same thing happened. OR if WCO's in one area cite, but WCOs in another didn't. THEN there would/might be a problem. However folks are NOT being cited. Thus there's NOT a problem, outside the minds of yourself, and a couple others. "I am not a fan of legislating from the bench through law interpretation, although I am sure that you are." Interpreting the law, and how it applies to a specific case, is one of the main functions of the court. Appelate, and courts supreme in particular. Funny that when the court strkes down a law, or decision that the right doesn't like, it's never considered "legislating from the bench"
post edited by spoonchucker - 2011/07/21 15:55:59
Get Informed, Get Involved, And Make A Difference. Step Up, or Step Aside The next time you say "Somebody should do something", remember that YOU are somebody. GL
|
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 15:56:28
(permalink)
|
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 16:02:00
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: spoonchucker
DarDY,
You are the one "reaching", to find a problem that doesn't exist. I don't know why they didn't specifically exempt trai cams. I offered a couple of possibilities, but it's all irrelevant. NO-ONE is getting cited for placing trail cams. Unless they are placed in a destructive manner, which would be true also of a stand, which HAS an exclusion.
NOW. If there were no law regarding tangible property, and the PGC cited folks for trail cams, but not stands. If the tangible property law was in place, but not the stand exclusion and the same thing happened. OR if WCO's in one area cite, but WCOs in another didn't. THEN there would/might be a problem. However folks are NOT being cited. Thus there's NOT a problem, outside the minds of yourself, and a couple others.
"I am not a fan of legislating from the bench through law interpretation, although I am sure that you are."
Interpreting the law, and how it applies to a specific case, is one of the main functions of the court. Appelate, and courts supreme in particular. Funny that when the court strkes down a law, or decision that the right doesn't like, it's never considered "legislating from the bench"
The question here is not "IF" people are being cited, it's that people "Could" be sited. Once again a vague law.
|
spoonchucker
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 8561
- Reward points: 0
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 16:20:17
(permalink)
There is nothing "vague" about the law at all. So in theory, yes they could be ( perhaps if there were some other problem/issue connected to the situation ), but they won't be. If you place a trail cam on PGC lands, in a non-destructive manner, you will NOT be cited. Again, the "problem" rests solely in your mind. Now, if you had put in one tenth the effort writing to the PGC ( who could actually DO something about it ), and local sportsmans clubs to lobby for a rule change. That you have put in arguing about it on here. The law might be changed for next season. But you'd rather beech, and argue over everything, than actually DO anything.
post edited by spoonchucker - 2011/07/21 16:27:39
Get Informed, Get Involved, And Make A Difference. Step Up, or Step Aside The next time you say "Somebody should do something", remember that YOU are somebody. GL
|
spoonchucker
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 8561
- Reward points: 0
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 16:40:19
(permalink)
"So are you stating that if someone were inclined to "spot claim" (which cannot be done on SGL), it would be more likely done throught the claim of "I had a camera in the area" (one that might very well be so camoed that it wasn't noticed) that a ladder stand that is in plain sight?"
If the guy doesn't own/use a stand, yes. If you think it's that far fetched, you need to get out more. I've seen "territorial" conflict arise over less. Just this summer ( on a public lake ), I had a guy pull into where I was fishing, and claim I was in "his" spot. Because he had fished there the previous 4-5 weekends. The guy was quite arguementive, but I held my ground and he evetually backed of. Sad to say though, there are alot of whacko's out there that wouldn't, and that would escalate the situation.
Get Informed, Get Involved, And Make A Difference. Step Up, or Step Aside The next time you say "Somebody should do something", remember that YOU are somebody. GL
|
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 16:48:44
(permalink)
in a non-destructive manner, you will NOT be cited. Again, the "problem" rests solely in your mind. If 2 two hunters became engaged in an argument or worse about who's spot a trail camera was put in and got so out of hand that L/E had to step in, the owner of the cam could be cited for placing the cam on SGL not necessarily for damage just for placing it there. It's law and written that way in the books plain and simple. You can ramble on if you want but it isn't rocket science to understand that. Now, if you had put in one tenth the effort writing to the PGC ( who could actually DO something about it ), and local sportsmans clubs to lobby for a rule change. That you have put in arguing about it on here. The law might be changed for next season. But you'd rather beech, and argue over everything, than actually DO anything.[quote/]
You have no idea who I am or what organizations I support or what communication I have with the PGC. Like I said before, ask 10 WCO's get 10 different answers.I'm not arguing about anything just stating FACTS. Think what you want but I'm not buying what you are selling. Feel free to flap your lips some more, the thread is all yours.
|
spoonchucker
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 8561
- Reward points: 0
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 17:01:52
(permalink)
"If 2 two hunters became engaged in an argument or worse about who's spot a trail camera was put in and got so out of hand that L/E had to step in, the owner of the cam could be cited for placing the cam on SGL not necessarily for damage just for placing it there." Probably what I meant by this- ( perhaps if there were some other problem/issue connected to the situation ) And perhaps ( as I stated earlier ), why the PGC didn't write in an exclusion for trail cams. "It's law and written that way in the books plain and simple. You can ramble on if you want but it isn't rocket science to understand that." "Plain and simple"? I thought it was "vague". Guess you can't even comprehend your OWN words. "It's not rocket science"
Get Informed, Get Involved, And Make A Difference. Step Up, or Step Aside The next time you say "Somebody should do something", remember that YOU are somebody. GL
|
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 17:09:42
(permalink)
Like I said before, ask 10 WCO's get 10 different answers. Not even the WCO's can agree on whats written in the books. That why it's vague. Your up...
post edited by Outdoor Adventures - 2011/07/21 17:10:31
|
Dr. Trout
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 4417
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2002/03/03 03:12:33
- Location: Jefferson County (2F)
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 17:18:51
(permalink)
What type of hunters do you guys hang out with ????  GHEEEZ........ I'd laugh my arse off at someone who claims a spot just because of a camera being fasten there or even a tree stand is there and they have arrived after I was there... In my book first come first served means physically present ... If my tree stand and/or me is stationed and I have begun my hunt.. I am not moving for anybody....( the actual owner or his immediate family would be the ONLY exception). In the past I have already posted how I sat, made noise, and puffed away because a guy did not move after arriving, saw me(flashlight on him,) and he still PUT UP his ladder stand... He was not going to harvest anything that day from that location and I always have another day to hunt.... takes all kinds I guess when I get to a spot and someone else is there I always whistle/wave, make sure they see me, then move off in the other direction, many times that means leaving the area completely... no big deal in my book... that is going to happen when hunting an area that has other hunters allowed to be there... a trail camera holding a spot.. that's just ridiculous.... I guess if I tie a ribbon around a tree that would hold my spot too ?????? It's unbelievable how far you guys stretch to make a "point" , it's actually quit funny to me.... just like the it's the same as landing a plane on a highway.. that one is hilarious !!!!
|
Dr. Trout
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 4417
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2002/03/03 03:12:33
- Location: Jefferson County (2F)
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 17:31:09
(permalink)
Not even the WCO's can agree on whats written in the books. That why it's vague. OA.. you keep saying WCOs disagree on the law.. WHO, which ones, why don't you report them so the PGC can straighten them out if you feel they are so wrong.. In the past I have posted about conflicts (FIELD TIPS WITH A CROSSBOW COMES TO MIND IMMEDIATELY) but I also have mentioned from which area the conflicts were from and what I finally heard from the PGC... posting it all... and in the case of field tips is was agreed upon what the WCO should/would do.... so no conflict now,., anyone can sit back an beech --- and do nothing --- you just keep throwing out all you "CLAIMS" about these things being true, or what someone has told you... throw in a couple FACTS every now and then to make us believe 1/2 of what you claim the PGC and WCOs are doing that is so wrong... and life has taught me not to believe the folks saying they got arrested for this or that, that usually is not the WHOLE STORY.... If you sense something is wrong and do not report it.. what is your point... you beech but do nothing which leads me to believe you really could give a rat's butt .. just like to complain... 
post edited by Dr. Trout - 2011/07/21 17:33:59
|
retired guy
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 3107
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2010/08/26 15:49:55
- Location: ct-vacation place in Richland
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 17:34:16
(permalink)
Some guys simply are NOT Sportsmen. Gotta deal with it cause it comes with the territory. Personally I get away from em cause they are NOT gonna ruin my day. They can sit in the best spot and probably foul their own hunt up- they aint gonna ruin mine. I will go elsewhere and have a nice time- probably do better too. If they are in my stand it wont be there the next time they show up either. Try taking the bottom section off your ladder stands and hiding it someplace nearby- I do-and chain lock it to a tree when ya hide it too.. It fits right back into place more or less quietly and up ya go.
post edited by retired guy - 2011/07/21 17:37:41
|
Dr. Trout
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 4417
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2002/03/03 03:12:33
- Location: Jefferson County (2F)
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 17:39:03
(permalink)
One last point on this before moving on... It's not always about the conflict between LEO or the "law" .. some times it is the legal department verus the enforcement departments... I must confess... I pointed out one conflict last year about hunting coyotes while small game hunting when the season over laps with/into archery deer season ... that conflict, to my knowledge with E-mails, phone calls, etc.. has still not be settled... so I continue to do what the WCO in the area I am hunting has told me to do and what he will enforce ... if I was "loaded with "cash" I might challege the one and take it to court.. but that ain't gonna happen .. 
post edited by Dr. Trout - 2011/07/21 17:41:20
|
Dr. Trout
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 4417
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2002/03/03 03:12:33
- Location: Jefferson County (2F)
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 17:44:01
(permalink)
RG .. I find it easier to just carry the climber in with me or leave it there AFTER DARK the night before I plan on using it there.. I'd NEVER leave it on public land -- period. I'm off to check my trail camera that I left 1/4 mile away on SGL behind the house three days ago (1st time leaving it this long anywhere)and am concerned it might be gone... folks steal them around here like a kid in a candy store... they walk the crop fields in the dark hoping to set off the flash on the less expensive models.. which naturally mine is later
post edited by Dr. Trout - 2011/07/21 17:47:14
|
retired guy
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 3107
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2010/08/26 15:49:55
- Location: ct-vacation place in Richland
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 17:50:08
(permalink)
Have lost 2 climbers hidden at the base of trees- one was chain locked and the crook must have seen it another day and brought in a cutter or saw to get it.
Its a PI TA to carry em in and out with a bow and stuff but it makes sense to do so.
Darn --would like to catch somebody doin that stuff- might buy my first trail cam and point it at my stand- the heck with the Deer - got bigger game in mind.
On the other hand have 2 ladder stands been out for 3 years up on my place in NY - no problems - no deer there either but have had nice days getting a tan.
|
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 18:19:04
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: Dr. Trout
Not even the WCO's can agree on whats written in the books. That why it's vague.
OA.. you keep saying WCOs disagree on the law.. WHO, which ones, why don't you report them so the PGC can straighten them out if you feel they are so wrong..
In the past I have posted about conflicts (FIELD TIPS WITH A CROSSBOW COMES TO MIND IMMEDIATELY) but I also have mentioned from which area the conflicts were from and what I finally heard from the PGC... posting it all...
and in the case of field tips is was agreed upon what the WCO should/would do.... so no conflict now,.,
anyone can sit back an beech --- and do nothing ---
you just keep throwing out all you "CLAIMS" about these things being true, or what someone has told you...
throw in a couple FACTS every now and then to make us believe 1/2 of what you claim the PGC and WCOs are doing that is so wrong...
and life has taught me not to believe the folks saying they got arrested for this or that, that usually is not the WHOLE STORY....
If you sense something is wrong and do not report it.. what is your point... you beech but do nothing which leads me to believe you really could give a rat's butt .. just like to complain...
You have no idea who I am or what organizations I support or what communication I have with the PGC. You have no idea who I am or what organizations I support or what communication I have with the PGC.You also have no idea what contacts I have made or was discussed. You assume way too much !!! I think it was pretty clear that the director gave the ok to use trail cams but RSB stated by "Law" they are illegal to use on SGL. Fact or fiction Dr ? I don't agree that the PGC does everything wrong as you like to ASSUME.
|
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 18:20:24
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: retired guy
Have lost 2 climbers hidden at the base of trees- one was chain locked and the crook must have seen it another day and brought in a cutter or saw to get it.
Its a PI TA to carry em in and out with a bow and stuff but it makes sense to do so.
Darn --would like to catch somebody doin that stuff- might buy my first trail cam and point it at my stand- the heck with the Deer - got bigger game in mind.
On the other hand have 2 ladder stands been out for 3 years up on my place in NY - no problems - no deer there either but have had nice days getting a tan.
PM sent
|
Dr. Trout
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 4417
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2002/03/03 03:12:33
- Location: Jefferson County (2F)
- Status: offline
RE: Trail cams on SGL.
2011/07/21 18:41:14
(permalink)
You have no idea who I am or what organizations I support or what communication I have with the PGC.You also have no idea what contacts I have made or was discussed. AND I COULD CARE LESS !!!! My point was your "examples" are mostly negative and vague with little to support them, mainly the "hear-say" type stuff and we do not know from whom. here's the perfect example.. If 2 two hunters became engaged in an argument or worse about who's spot a trail camera was put in and got so out of hand that L/E had to step in, the owner of the cam could be cited for placing the cam on SGL not necessarily for damage just for placing it there. It's law and written that way in the books plain and simple. That's totally an opinion... remember RSB stated he has never heard of anyone getting cited over a trail camera, but you made up a situation based on your opinion on the law.. my opinion in your example = based on common sense = PGC would not even get involved in the dispute in the first place... You assume way too much !!! I think it was pretty clear that the director gave the ok to use trail cams but RSB stated by "Law" they are illegal to use on SGL. Fact or fiction Dr ? I appreciate RSB stating his beliefs and thoughts ... and explaining the PGC "laws" and you are right he said it was illegal by law but I think he also said he knows of no one ever being cited for it either ... having him reply here is a benefit to many of us who may not post a reply, but I am sure you aware there are thank yous posted many times... so just because some want to pick his every post apart means NOTHING to most readers and members here... with out him and other PGC supporters here many would be getting info on laws, wildlife, etc that is not 100% correct... It does not matter if you like or even agree with him, he does state the facts as they are to balance out most of the conversation in these topics....
|
|
|