Utah Wildlife Board votes 4-3 to ban trail cameras for most hunting purposes, shortens the seasonal timeframe of the ban to give more opportunity to mountain lion hunters, and removes some protections for collared lions.

For immediate release

Date: January 5, 2022

Contact:
Logan Christian, Conservation Advocate, Mountain Lion Foundation
Lchristian@mountainlion.org
916-442-2666 ext. 108

Utah Wildlife Board votes 4-3 to ban trail cameras for most hunting purposes, shortens the seasonal timeframe of the ban to give more opportunity to mountain lion hunters, and removes some protections for collared lions.

Utah – On Tuesday, January 4, the Utah Wildlife Board voted 4-3 to approve a proposed rule change that will ban the use of trail cameras for aiding in the take of wildlife (i.e. for hunting purposes). The new rule will go into effect from July 31 to December 31 of each year, covering most of Utah’s big game hunting seasons. The original proposed timeframe of the ban was July 31 to January 31, but an amendment shortened the timeframe to December 31 to give more opportunity to mountain lion hunters who use trail cameras. This new rule will apply to both internal storage cameras and transmitting trail cameras that display images to users in real time. The rule change also prohibits the use of night-vision devices during any big game hunt, including 48 hours before and after a big game hunt, and prohibits the sale or distribution of images from trail cameras used for aiding the take of wildlife.

Over the past year, the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (DWR) administered several surveys to inform their proposed rule change. These surveys found that the majority of Utah hunters do not support the use of trail cameras for hunting purposes, mostly due to concerns about fair chase. Utah’s consideration of the trail camera issue comes as many other states limit the use of trail cameras for hunting purposes, including Nevada in 2018 and Arizona in 2021.

Several Board and Regional Advisory Council (RAC) members voiced concerns about enforcement of the new trail camera ban. The RACs only approved the ban by a 3-2 margin, with the two opposing RACs requesting that Utah adopt something similar to Nevada’s ban that applies to all trail cameras instead of those used for hunting, which makes enforcement easier. Board Member Bryce Thurgood motioned to amend the rule change to apply to all trail cameras, but the DWR’s lawyer clarified that the agency does not have authority to limit trail camera use outside of hunting without authorization from the legislature. Utah State Representative Mike Schultz was present and agreed to take up the issue of a more all-encompassing seasonal trail camera ban in the legislature at a future time.

Board Member Wade Heaton also called for a future action item to explore limiting other emerging technologies that reduce fair chase hunting practices, such as scopes for muzzleloaders. The Division’s Big Game Coordinator, Covy Jones, supported this idea, saying the Division will help “look at technologies that impact harvest success, form a committee to address these issues, and then get some public sentiment and decide which ones to address.”

As originally proposed, the trail camera ban would have extended through January 31. Board Member Bryce Thurgood amended the rule during the meeting so that the trail camera ban would only extend through December 31 after some board members expressed a desire to give more opportunity to cougar hunters who use trail cameras. “Give the cougar hunters the month of January,” said Randy Dearth, Vice Chair of the Wildlife Board.

Mountain Lion Foundation supported the ban on trail cameras for hunting purposes, submitting comments in favor of the rule change and encouraging their statewide members to do so as well. However, the Foundation was not in support of the last minute change to give more opportunity to lion hunters who use trail cameras.

“This last minute change to promote mountain lion hunting is disappointing, but not surprising given the DWR’s recent move to allow unlimited lion hunting in over half of Utah’s hunting units,” said Logan Christian, Region 2 Conservation Advocate for Mountain Lion Foundation. “The DWR has the backing of the State Legislature to hunt lions at an unprecedented rate in the name of protecting elk and deer, despite the evidence that declining habitat quality and climate change play a far greater role in the decline of these species compared to predation. Mountain lions are just an easy scape-goat that allows the Division to sell more hunting permits.”

In line with this sentiment against cougars, later in the meeting, the Board voted to remove some limitations on killing cougars with radio collars. In 2021, the Board prohibited killing cougars with collars to help ensure quality data collection for active cougar studies. This rule included a sunset period after 3 years when hunters could resume killing collared cougars. However, on Tuesday, the Board decided to let hunters kill collared cougars as long as they are in a hunting unit that does not have an active study, despite concerns that cougars from active study areas may wander into inactive study areas.

Nevada Department of Wildlife votes 5-4 to not move forward with proposed language banning wildlife-killing contests.

For immediate release

Date: November 5, 2021

Contact:
Logan Christian, Conservation Advocate, Mountain Lion Foundation
Lchristian@mountainlion.org
916-442-2666 ext. 108

Nevada Department of Wildlife votes 5-4 to not move forward with proposed language banning wildlife-killing contests.

Nevada (remote meeting) – On Friday, November 5, 2021, the Nevada Board of Wildlife Commissioners workshopped language, proposed by Commissioner David McNinch, that would ban wildlife-killing contests in the state of Nevada. After considerable discussion and dozens of comments from members of the public and County Advisory Boards, the Commission voted 5-4 to not move forward with the proposed language.

The language, proposed for inclusion in Nevada Administrative Code 502, reads: “A person shall not by any means: a) Participate in, organize, promote, sponsor, or solicit participation in a contest where a participant uses or intends to use any device or implement to capture or kill predatory animals or fur-bearing animals. For the purposes of this subsection, “contest” means a competition among participants where participants must register or record entry and pay a fee, and prizes or cash are awarded to winning or successful participants.”

Tony Wasley, Director of the Nevada Department of Wildlife, provided a more direct stance on wildlife-killing contests than the Department has been willing to provide previously. Commenting in support of the proposed language, he stated, “My fear as a sportsman and Director of the Nevada Department of Wildlife is that an unwillingness to consider what society writ large feels about what we do will hasten the erosion of privileges that I hold near and dear.”

Commissioner David McNinch clarified that he does not view this as a biological issue for coyotes, but as an issue related to the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation and improving the relevancy of sportsmen. “The vast majority of the public are largely accepting of what sportsmen do, but how we [pursue wildlife] will change those opinions.”

Several commissioners commented against the proposed language, many highlighting how the commission should not weigh in on ethical issues. “Ethics are subjective”, stated Commissioner Tommy Caviglia. “What some of you agree to do, I might not agree to do.”

Logan Christian, a Conservation Advocate with Mountain Lion Foundation, commented in support of the proposed language. “These contests do not represent standards of fair chaise or science-based management of our native wildlife. Research finds that the indiscriminate killing of these species can lead to unintended consequences including disruption of family groups, increased rates of reproduction and increased conflicts with domestic animals.” Many other conservation organizations commented in support of the proposed language including Sierra Club, Project Coyote and the Humane Society of the United States.

Commissioner McNinch motioned to move the language forward for a vote at a future meeting, but the motion did not pass. Amid considerable public outcry against wildlife-killing contests, as well as pressure from a growing contingent of Western states that have banned the contests, the Nevada State Legislature will likely take up the issue next since the Commission could not reach an agreement.