Camera law

[newfarmer]

I’ve been getting random state updates on laws, and saw this is out in NH. I assume it’s literally talking about cell camera only, but wow, that would be crazy hard to police- or really hard to avoid the possibility wouldn’t it? I mean- If you were in a stand and it went off, you’d have to leave? Or do they think it’s a way to get cell cams to go away?

 

[Sligh1]

I’ve been getting random state updates on laws, and saw this is out in NH. I assume it’s literally talking about cell camera only, but wow, that would be crazy hard to police- or really hard to avoid the possibility wouldn’t it? I mean- If you were in a stand and it went off, you’d have to leave? Or do they think it’s a way to get cell cams to go away?
View attachment 126680

So it reads as if cell cams are banned or similar to the law of Alaska where u can’t hunt the day u fly. Hmmmmm. Wouldn’t surprise me if more states banned cell cams. Not saying for/against them…. Just saying I hear more rumblings about them. KS public land & a western state have banned em. Not sure which others.

 

[hillrunner]

Interesting, I could get on board with this. It still allows for remote monitoring of property, just shut them down a day before you go hunt and keep them off while hunting.

 

[seven twenty]

It doesn’t specify “cell” cameras, just “remotely viewing”. How is remotely viewing defined? If I pull a card and send you a snapshot from that morning, can you hunt later that day? Sounds like a mess. I’m all for eliminating them but how could it be enforced.

 

[iowavf]

It doesn’t specify “cell” cameras, just “remotely viewing”. How is remotely viewing defined? If I pull a card and send you a snapshot from that morning, can you hunt later that day? Sounds like a mess. I’m all for eliminating them but how could it be enforced.

Ya sometimes I'll go look at the card before getting into the blind to see what's been moving. It's not a live update as to what's moving at that very minute, but as it reads I can't do that. I don't consider that being the same, but as the law reads it does.

 

[Windlooker]

I used cell cams this year for the first time. I’ll say they’re cool, it’s fun having the pics come in. I’ll also say it didn’t give me an advantage, but I can see how it could. I would not have an issue if they banned them in Iowa. This year I’m gonna scrap the cell plan and use the Cuddes to send pics to one home cam at my camp and check that card periodically.

 

[Hardwood11]

Interesting, I could get on board with this. It still allows for remote monitoring of property, just shut them down a day before you go hunt and keep them off while hunting.

Maybe they should just have cell plans that send pics at the of the day ?

I like them for surveillance, temp/weather, crop progress/harvest. Do they help your hunting ? Maybe, obviously not in my case in 2023… I’m a little over 3 hours from tag soup in Iowa.

 

[Bassattackr]

Wish more states would do this.

 

[newfarmer]

Maybe they should just have cell plans that send pics at the of the day ?

I like them for surveillance, temp/weather, crop progress/harvest. Do they help your hunting ? Maybe, obviously not in my case in 2023… I’m a little over 3 hours from tag soup in Iowa.

I was telling the wife- would be nice if the companies made it where they sent at midnight only. But hard for surveillance purpose then.

 

[hillrunner]

I was telling the wife- would be nice if the companies made it where they sent at midnight only. But hard for surveillance purpose then.

They have a setting for exactly that. I have mine set to send pics at midnight and noon. Midnight only is an option though. I do not see an option for a 24 hour delay which is what would be needed per this law. I would think that would be an easy option to add though.

 

[CurtisWalker]

They have a setting for exactly that. I have mine set to send pics at midnight and noon. Midnight only is an option though. I do not see an option for a 24 hour delay which is what would be needed per this law. I would think that would be an easy option to add though.

Yep I have mine delay send too. Less spooked deer from them when I changed to that setting as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[newfarmer]

They have a setting for exactly that. I have mine set to send pics at midnight and noon. Midnight only is an option though. I do not see an option for a 24 hour delay which is what would be needed per this law. I would think that would be an easy option to add though.

Correct- but I’m saying- the manufacturer should be the one that controls that, sets it up. My cams are set once a day, the ones that monitor driveways/buildings are timely

 

[jkratz5]

Yeah just set them up to send at random time middle of the night and you will be good. deer seem to notice them anyhow

 

[Obsessed]

I don't think you're truly understanding the wording of the OP.

If your camera has the ability to allow you to remotely view pics the same day they are taken, then the burden of proving your innocence lies upon you, any time a accusations are made.

 

[Windlooker]

I hear you, however, if charged with a crime associated with a cam pic the burden is always on the government to prove guilt. In fact I’ve seen defense attorneys put on no defense case as the govt failed to prove theirs.

If the law reads one cant possess a cell cam and someone does that’s a no brainer. However if the violation is harvest via pic the govt would have to prove the use was tied to a harvest ie pic time, stand location, time between pic and harvest etc. That would be tough to put together. The burden of proof is never on the accused.

 

[newfarmer]

I hear you, however, if charged with a crime associated with a cam pic the burden is always on the government to prove guilt. In fact as a defendant I’ve seen defense attorneys put on no defense case as the govt failed to prove theirs.

If the law reads one cant possess a cell cam and someone does that’s a no brainer. However if the violation is harvest via pic the govt would have to prove the use was tied to a harvest ie pic time, stand location, time between pic and harvest etc. That would be tough to put together. The burden of proof is never on the accused.

the thing with how this law is stated- if you get a picture in the same calendar day, you can’t shoot it. Doesn’t matter if you used it to help or not- that’s the way I read it. I think more states will adapt to this personally

 

[Windlooker]

Proving day of harvest would be as difficult. It’s either they’re legal or not thing. During the season especially the rut these cams can dump pics hourly, and I do know hunters who have received a day light pic, hunted, and killed the deer. Although I do think the tech is cool using the cam in that way violates fair chase imo. Again, I’d be fine with them being outlawed. As far as monitoring a property, a real time pic vs a pic viewed a week later via sd card proves trespassing for a CO just the same.

 

[StucknAz]

I hunt my farms in Southern Ohio and run a ton of cams. Love them!!!

For what it’s worth, I live on the Mexico border with Arizona. We have had a trail cam ban for two years now. It’s kind of refreshing, I’d obviously run them if I could but it feels like 25 years ago before I started using them. Everything is a surprise. The stud coues I shot last January came in on a string and at the time I didn’t recognize him. Looking thru old photos I recognized him as a buck I had stalked the previous year about two miles from my kill tree. I’ve been on a giant coues buck with a big sticker for three years, unless a cat got him or he decided he’s had enough with the migrants coming thru his bedroom, he should be there., I just haven’t laid eyes on him since last spring. It really adds to the excitement. Also I think it deters the public land guys to dive deep where these bucks are because they don’t know they are there without their cameras. Guess my point is without cams, it’s like going back in time and you gotta work to find the right spots based on woodsmanship. I’m enjoying it, although getting pics of cats, bears, coati, and migrants were cool to get.

But I still love my cells in Ohio!!!!

 

[Obsessed]

I hear you, however, if charged with a crime associated with a cam pic the burden is always on the government to prove guilt. In fact I’ve seen defense attorneys put on no defense case as the govt failed to prove theirs.

If the law reads one cant possess a cell cam and someone does that’s a no brainer. However if the violation is harvest via pic the govt would have to prove the use was tied to a harvest ie pic time, stand location, time between pic and harvest etc. That would be tough to put together. The burden of proof is never on the accused.

The govt often has deeper pockets than you do. Charges are frequently filed where cases would have been won by the defendant if only they had enough $ to fight their case, and an attorney worth their salt. For this reason, a majority of these types of cases are won by the govt.

I see it as being similar to seatbelt laws.

LEO pulls you over. You weren't wearing your seatbelt. Yes I was. No you weren't, and now you're being argumentative. Mind if I search your vehicle? No, I don't give you permission to search my car. Now you're acting awful suspicious. Hold tight, I'm ordering a K9 unit to come scent check your vehicle...

Again, the burden of proof is on you my friend. Once an accusation is made, you're guilty until proven innocent.

 

[Windlooker]

I did it for a living for 25 years. You’re comparing apples and oranges. Traffic stops where an officer is assessing and building , or not establishing, reasonable suspicion or probable cause is good police work and very different from the rules of criminal procedure that are followed in a court room if criminal charges are challenged.

Yes, an accusation can be filed wrongly or with little evidence. When charges are filed there are fail safes in place which are review by a line prosecutor and usually a supervisor who is also a prosecutor. This is where charges are dropped many times. In the state system charges are often fiiled unilaterally, an officer, with check and balance occurring after. It’s not perfect unfortunately.

In the federal system no charges are filed unless a prosecutor, and supervision, agree with the investigating agency that enough evidence exists to do so. The check and balance is done before hand. That’s why the Fed system has a 95% conviction rate.

The training, guidelines , and protocol of state and federal LE are complex with many variables. I used to teach it at FLETC and at a university. I don’t want to bore you with it. I will say the officers and procedures in place attempt to ensure the right thing is done, however, at times officers do over step and wrong accusations occur.

On a side note regarding K 9 sniffs. Dont blame the officers. This technique has been decided valid by your state legislature and/or state courts. Law enforcement agencies do not make law, they only enforce what law makers decide they are.