Jump to content

Cell phone game cameras


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, C.J.L. said:

 

Where I'm at in MT has the Outdoor channel in TV.  They keep running an ad that Cudddeback will let you have up to 16 cameras on whatever system they run off of for $10 a month while that the competition is charging $10 a month per camera.  My guess is they have a data deal worked out with VZW and/or ATT and it's part of the package when you buy a camera.  You have to send the camera guys the money but I wouldn't be surprised if it's "6 month deal" or something like that. IoT modems (cameras in this case) are no different then your cellphone.  Someone has to pay the carrier and the camera manufactures won't take a loss for long on the data.  

 

Cuddebacks/Cuddelink cameras

 

I've seen that. They are called CuddIelink cameras. I have all Cuddback cameras. Like them a lot. Their cell units consist of one main camera and a bunch of others that all send captures to that central camera. Then the photos and videos are sent to a smart phone etc. Seems brilliant to this digital dunce.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • MAArcher

    12

  • garyRI

    8

  • WI Outdoor Nut

    7

  • Brad Eden

    6

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I think these cameras are great for certain things. However I have a big problem with people being able to use them during the hunting season. In many states two way communications devices are illegal

That's a big assumption.  You must have better staff at your local store than we do.  I couldn't get proper help on muzzle-loader info, much less any technology. 

I've already posted that Im not interested in cell cameras, but I never judge those who might choose to use them. Personal ethics are exactly that: personal and none of my business. Those cell cams ar

Posted Images

I think these cameras are great for certain things. However I have a big problem with people being able to use them during the hunting season. In many states two way communications devices are illegal to hunt with, as game commissions and the average sportsman have decided that is "not fair chase". In my mind these cameras should be considered the same as these as they can easily be used in what most would consider "not fair chase". The NH rule that says you cant use them the day you hunt is a great concept and a good start however it seems nearly impossible to patrol. "Yes Mr Warden Sir, I have a Cell game camera... and yes it does automatically send pics to my phone... but I never looked at those photos today... I swear... they were just easily accessible to me in my pocket all day but I did not look at them."

 

Anyway... Just my thoughts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Jakeismydog2 said:

I think these cameras are great for certain things. However I have a big problem with people being able to use them during the hunting season. In many states two way communications devices are illegal to hunt with, as game commissions and the average sportsman have decided that is "not fair chase". In my mind these cameras should be considered the same as these as they can easily be used in what most would consider "not fair chase". The NH rule that says you cant use them the day you hunt is a great concept and a good start however it seems nearly impossible to patrol. "Yes Mr Warden Sir, I have a Cell game camera... and yes it does automatically send pics to my phone... but I never looked at those photos today... I swear... they were just easily accessible to me in my pocket all day but I did not look at them."

 

Anyway... Just my thoughts.

 

What's fair chase and why is it important?  Man has been killing animals in the most efficient way available to him since the beginning of time.  Who started fair chase and how did he know we've been doing it all wrong for the last two hundred thousand years?

 

If the biologists afford me one deer a year, what difference does it make to anyone how I get it?   What if I only have one day a year where I can hunt, why shouldn't I use all available means?  Why, if I work 24/7, should I not have a realistic chance at my deer when the unemployed guy next to me gets to hunt 24/7 and has the "fair chase" rules working in his favor?

 

"Fair chase" is not the same as sound conservation practices.  Fair chase is just one man imposing his arbitrary ideologies onto another.  If someone wants to play games with their food before they kill it, that's their business; shouldn't mean I have to play by their rules though.     

 

My 2 cents.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Teddy Roosevelt is credited with starting fair chase, whether he created it it not I don't know, but he popularized it. He didn't say we had been doing it wrong for the last 2 thousand years, but he knew if things didn't change soon there was going to be no hunting left.

 

You can critique today what some think is fair chase and you won't bother me. That's simply what I did. However knocking the entire principle and history of fair chase is silly. It's like biting the hand that feeds you. The entire North American model for conservation started with this concept of fair chase. The reason you have animals to hunt today is fair chase and the game laws that came from that principal.

 

The start of the sound conservation practices you mentioned were fair chase. I think one could make pretty sound argument that most of our hunting laws are based more on fair chase than on conservation. The reality is that both are heavily involved, but the laws started with fair chase. Then when we were able to better understand the science of conversation we mixed that knowledge into the laws we already had.

 

 

There is some truth to the "if I can only shoot one, why does it matter how I take it" argument. Certainly the deer doesn't care at all what your methods are. Dead is dead, whether by bullet, arrow, poison, running it to exhaustion and knifing it, shooting it from a helicopter, snaring it, or spotlighting it. The end result is a dead animal. However I doubt many on this forum would condone spotlighting deer. Why? Because we don't think it's fair to a deer. Is watching a deer on your cameras while you hunt it, knowing exactly where it's at when you get to the field and as you stalk it fair?

 

I think our methods of take matters long term in keeping a viable population of hunters. I am thinking of people that have never hunted but are neutral about hunting. Are my decisions about how I take game going to turn them into anti's if they knew about? I think most neutral hunters would be upset to know that someone was watching a live video feed on their phone to keep track of exactly where a deer was so they could drive up real close to it, walk in and shoot it. Is it wrong, is it immoral? Whatever it is, it's going to leave a bad taste in their mouths.

 

You can say say that you don't care what those people think, and it's America so that's true. However I have a 6, 5, and 3 year old kids at home. I want them to have the opportunity to be hunting when they are 65. In order for that to happen a lot of things needed to go right. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
WI Outdoor Nut
15 hours ago, garyRI said:

A sales guy at BassPro/Cabelas can explain the cell service requirements

That's a big assumption.  You must have better staff at your local store than we do.  I couldn't get proper help on muzzle-loader info, much less any technology. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a shame we cannot use heat seeking missiles along with cell game cameras!!!!!  My wife could carry the libations, snacks and a grill.  The kids could be backup gunbearers and watch the video from the cell game cameras.  My brother in law could be the hunting advisor and my sister in law could just manage the whole affair.

 

In light of this, I would sit by the fire and take a nap.....at home.  Too much technology and too much confusion.  It's a good thing deer and other game animals don't understand and use technology against us.

 

Does hunting need to turn into a video game?  If so, stay home where there is a refrigerator and a bathroom.  Honey, are the snacks ready?

 

Anyone not understanding Fair Chase needs to do some reading. 

 

I guess I am just an old-fashioned sarcastic swamp yankee curmudgeon.  My conscience is intact.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jakeismydog2 said:

There is some truth to the "if I can only shoot one, why does it matter how I take it" argument. Certainly the deer doesn't care at all what your methods are. Dead is dead, whether by bullet, arrow, poison, running it to exhaustion and knifing it, shooting it from a helicopter, snaring it, or spotlighting it. The end result is a dead animal. However I doubt many on this forum would condone spotlighting deer. Why? Because we don't think it's fair to a deer. Is watching a deer on your cameras while you hunt it, knowing exactly where it's at when you get to the field and as you stalk it fair?

 

Ahhh the silly rationalizations of man.  Why does killing a deer have to be "fair"?  I'd say say that if the deer could speak it would say any scenario where it ends up dead isn't fair.  Just give some thought to how illogical it all is.  If I lure a deer to my back yard with bait and shoot it from my kitchen window its not fair, but if I chase it up and down a mountain for a week it is?  Fair to who?  Do we really think the deer has a sense of fairness, or it really matters if it did?    Is it immoral to use a chum bag when fishing?  Using a lantern to attract fish at night?  Night hunting coyotes?  Who decides?  Based on what criteria?  To who's benefit?  Why doesn't fair chase apply to all living things?  Is it wrong to squish a fly in your house if the windows and doors are closed, but OK if the door is open and there's an escape rout?  

 

While most will argue that laws promoting fair chase provide hunting opportunity to more people by limiting success rates, that doesn't necessarily make it right.  There are plenty of other ways to make sure only an affordable amount of animals are killed.  Some people place the meal ahead of the acquisition experience.  How can anyone find fault in that?  What about the young, old and weak?  Why are they less deserving of getting their venison stew just because they can't climb a mountain?  Fair chase is a shortsighted, arbitrary and illogical code of conduct that is actually immoral because it precludes many from participating in their natural place in the food chain.  

 

This year financial circumstances and dwindling hunting grounds are resulting in me having only a small fraction of the time I historically needed to fill the freezer.  I'm going to Dick's after work in hopes a couple of cell camera's give me the edge I need to still be successful.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would seem the kill is the only desire and the experience (aside from watching an animal die) matters not. Each to their own and that is your right to choose but a full freezer is only a rationalization. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've already posted that Im not interested in cell cameras, but I never judge those who might choose to use them. Personal ethics are exactly that: personal and none of my business. Those cell cams are probably fun to have, and not a heck of a lot different than the 4 cams I have soaking right now. I don't feel dirty about those. They might make sense for someone who owns thousands of acres who is managing a herd of big game, maybe even guides hunters out if a lodge  etc....like in many states.  Some of the comments here sound the same as what is said whenever anything new hits the hunting scene. The sky is falling, animals will be persecuted. From compound bows to crossbows to regular trail cams, to scents, to electronic calls, to ozone eliminating gadgets. None of those including a cell phone cam pulls the trigger or the release and kills an animal. Just because your phone got dinged and a photo of a buck was loaded, there is no guarantee that deer will be there when you get the 1/2 mile, mile or miles to that area. There are a load of 'raise an eyebrow' stuff that goes in across the hunting spectrum including Upland bird hunting. Should we really be using dogs to find the birds and dogs with GPS collars telling us exactly where the dog has a bird pinned down that we might get a chance at killing...is that really Fair Chase?...ask an anti, or even a non hunter and some eyebrows might get raised...stones, thrown, glass houses and all that. Devils advocate etc....

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Brad Eden said:

I've already posted that Im not interested in cell cameras, but I never judge those who might choose to use them. Personal ethics are exactly that: personal and none of my business. Those cell cams are probably fun to have, and not a heck of a lot different than the 4 cams I have soaking right now. I don't feel dirty about those. They might make sense for someone who owns thousands of acres who is managing a herd of big game, maybe even guides hunters out if a lodge  etc....like in many states.  Some of the comments here sound the same as what is said whenever anything new hits the hunting scene. The sky is falling, animals will be persecuted. From compound bows to crossbows to regular trail cams, to scents, to electronic calls, to ozone eliminating gadgets. None of those including a cell phone cam pulls the trigger or the release and kills an animal. Just because your phone got dinged and a photo of a buck was loaded, there is no guarantee that deer will be there when you get the 1/2 mile, mile or miles to that area. There are a load of 'raise an eyebrow' stuff that goes in across the hunting spectrum including Upland bird hunting. Should we really be using dogs to find the birds and dogs with GPS collars telling us exactly where the dog has a bird pinned down that we might get a chance at killing...is that really Fair Chase?...ask an anti, or even a non hunter and some eyebrows might get raised...stones, thrown, glass houses and all that. Devils advocate etc....

Wouldn't the equivalent be a Go-Pro on the dog?

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, salmontogue said:

Wouldn't the equivalent be a Go-Pro on the dog?

Not sure, I've never owned an electronic GPS Dog Collar nor a Go Pro video camera. But have seen them in action. I suppose if the Go Pro also had GPS capabilities. 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Brad Eden said:

Not sure, I've never owned an electronic GPS Dog Collar nor a Go Pro video camera. But have seen them in action. I suppose if the Go Pro also had GPS capabilities. 

 

 

 

Most current DSLR cameras have GPS capability and can wi-fi communicate with cellphones, tablets and laptops.  I have little knowledge of the Go-Pro but would expect the capabilities to follow along with handheld digital cameras.  It took me a year to learn the core features on my new Nikon D750.  This comes slowly for an older non-tech user.  If you think about it, many digital cameras are really computers with attached lenses.  I remember loading 35mm film into developing tanks.....back in the stone age.

Link to post
Share on other sites
WI Outdoor Nut

While I don't own any cell phone cameras, even if you do, you still need to beat the deer in their environment at the given time.  I have many cameras out and for me, it helps me set up where I want to hunt, pending the bucks I have in the area.  It also helps me set up for when I am taking kids out.  When they 1st start out, just seeing deer is huge and that alone often equates to a successful hunt (even though nothing was harvested).  As mentioned earlier, my brother bought the cell camera due to theft and trespassing, but now does use it to monitor deer movement.  I have a few friends that are many hours away from where they hunt.  The cell cameras save them a lot of road time back and forth just to check cameras. 

 

Attached is deer from this past morning, camera is the same as the 1st photo I posted.  Looks like 2 different decent bucks.  So now we need to set up a stand there, and this information is helping us make that decision. 

2019-9-5 big d finger.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Marc Ret said:

It would seem the kill is the only desire and the experience (aside from watching an animal die) matters not. Each to their own and that is your right to choose but a full freezer is only a rationalization. 

 

If that's directed at me, its just silly.  Nothing I wrote could be interpreted as filling a freezer is just a means to rationalize bloodlust?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...