# Trail cam, treestand, ATV..Forest service restrictions



## goofy elk

Trail cams are actually illegal to use right now on forest service land...
Had an incident last week were trail cams came up missing and turned out
forest service personnel were the ones that took them............

Looks like this will be happening on a regular basis if there put out early now.
here are the latest quotes from a DWR news release from Ted Hendricks..
And trust me,,,,,Ted WILL enforce this law.

Trail cameras, tree stands and ATVs

If you want to learn more about the wildlife in your hunting area, placing a trail camera or two in the area is a great idea. But please remember that you may not place a camera on any national forest until one week before the hunt on that forest starts.

This law has been in effect for two or three years. Ted Hendricks, recreation manager for the Uinta National Forest, says you don't need to register your trail camera with the U.S. Forest Service at the present time. 
Tree stands are a popular tool for patient archery hunters. But please remember that you cannot build a permanent tree stand on a national forest.

(Permanent tree stands damage trees. Trees often have to be removed after permanent stands have been built on them. There's also the risk that someone who cuts into the tree with a chainsaw at a later time might be hurt by hidden nails and other hardware.)

Temporary tree stands—the type you climb up the tree with—are legal to use. 
Hendricks also reminds you that you may not take an all-terrain vehicle off-road to retrieve game.


----------



## Bears Butt

Thanks Goofy, I had no idea about the cams or permanent tree stands.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB

One week before the hunt huh... Pretty retarded. I always knew about treestands, but what was their rational behind this law? :? Nevermind, it's the forest "circus" we're talking about here... :roll: Never before in my life have I seen and run into a bigger bunch of johnny-law, Pinkerton wannabe stuffed shirt douchbags. Had one unsnap his gun on me for parking 6 feet too far off a dirt road once. I smiled and reminded him I wasn't armed and it was only a parking violation, and that he didn't need to be so uptight. I almost got arrested over that one. Lucky I didn't get shot... :| The only place I've seen bigger idiots in in Yellowstone Park...


----------



## sawsman

Thanks for the info goofy.

Trail cams are *GAY*! :mrgreen:


----------



## reaper

I knew abut the tree stands, thats been the law as long as I can remember and I agree with it. There is no law about hiring all the guides you can afford and turning them loose. I dont use trail cams but I would like to know why trail cams can not be used any other time, seems silly to me. I think the forest service should worry more about picking up all the chainsaw oil and gas cans they just leave lying around more than a guy using public land in a non-destructive way!!


----------



## BPturkeys

TEX-O-BOB said:


> One week before the hunt huh... Pretty retarded. I always knew about treestands, but what was their rational behind this law? :? Nevermind, it's the forest "circus" we're talking about here... :roll: Never before in my life have I seen and run into a bigger bunch of johnny-law, Pinkerton wannabe stuffed shirt douchbags. Had one unsnap his gun on me for parking 6 feet too far off a dirt road once. I smiled and reminded him I wasn't armed and it was only a parking violation, and that he didn't need to be so uptight. I almost got arrested over that one. Lucky I didn't get shot... :| The only place I've seen bigger idiots in in Yellowstone Park...


Tex, I didn't hear you say Jack Booted 

But yeah, what possibly could be the rational behind no trail cam policy?


----------



## TEX-O-BOB

-Ov- 

I just had me an idea... I'm going to make me a fake Forrest Circus Uniform and hike around looking for trail cameras... :O•-: 

I'll never have to buy another one as long as I live! :twisted:


----------



## Bears Butt

I would like to read the actual law, ruling or whatever it's called from the US Forest Service site. Does anyone have a link to the the written word?


----------



## gitterdone81

Echo Bears Butt - I saw the 'getting ready for Archery Season' post on the DWR website, and it caught me and numerous friends by surprise, yet no one can find the actual law besides Hendricks quote.


----------



## kailey29us

Isnt that theft to take something that doesnt belong to you? Like a trail cam on PUBLIC LAND!!! I'm a taxpayer and I promise only to attach my cameras to trees I am paying taxes on.


----------



## Guest

wow.... what a joke. i'd like to personally tell Ted what i think about him and his rules he plans on enforcing... if he wants to take MY camera off a tree on land that we all own and use as sportsmen and outdoorsmen, fine. but in my opinion, it takes a man with pretty big balls to take a camera or stand down that he doesnt own. Ted needs to remember he has no business touching or disturbing, AT ALL, personal property that doesnt belong to him. its considered theft if someone takes something that does not belong to them, no matter where they found it. its no different then if some one finds a tent or any other personal posessions in the woods that are unattended, and they take it down and pack it off. i'd like to see this "law" written somewhere. just because they have a badge, doesnt mean they get to make whatever rules they want, when they want to...


----------



## ktowncamo

I doubt Ted et al will find my trail cams, ever. Some rules are meant to be broken...just sayin


----------



## Bhuntin

What if the trail camera wasn't attached to a tree? What if I pound a 2x4 into the ground and attach it to that?


----------



## jimikinz

The king's forest....isn't that what it used to be called? Its getting the same around here....


----------



## JuddCT

jimikinz said:


> The king's forest....isn't that what it used to be called? Its getting the same around here....


Good thing we have a bunch of merry men running around the forest with bows and arrows. :lol:


----------



## PBH

Personally, I think these are GOOD rules. I like that you cannot leave your trail-cam up for months. I also hate temporary ground blinds that start popping up in the forest a week before the hunt "staking claim" to a hunting area. If you aren't in your blind, you better pack it up and take it with you! FWIW -- the state of Wisconsin requires hunters to attach their name and address to their blinds and tree-stands, and portable pop-up blinds must be removed each day. I'd like to see more regulation on blinds and cameras here in Utah.

One thing that I would like to emphasize from the reminder:
*Hendricks also reminds you that you may not take an all-terrain vehicle off-road to retrieve game.*

I don't know how many times I've heard hunters make the claim that it is legal to leave designated ATV trails to "retreive game". KEEP YOUR ATVs ON DESIGNATED TRAILS!! It is those irresponsible ATV riders that ruin it for all of us. Keep them on trails and roads that are open to ATV use.


----------



## PBH

kailey29us said:


> Isnt that theft to take something that doesnt belong to you? Like a trail cam on PUBLIC LAND!!!


Why are you leaving it on public land? It could also be considered abandonment and littering. Maybe you could leave your name/phone number along with the date that you attached it to the tree? I would like to see this requirement. Maybe have something so that you can also mark the last date you checked the camera?

This is certainly something that needs to be controlled. Having people placing cameras on trees and leaving blinds all over the mountain should be controlled -- or eventually we'll have a camera attached to each and every tree in the forest. Personally, I think it's already out of control, and I'm glad to see that the F.S. is finally doing something about it.


----------



## bwhntr

I agree with controlling the ATV use and abuse...however I can't see what the big deal about a camera is??? Not a chance you are going to see them popping up all over the mountain, most of them you don't even notice anyways. None of them are being left up permantly. 

So, I can leave my fifth wheel in one place for 2 weeks anytime of the year, but I cant leave a 8" camera on a tree??? I have to agree with Tex on this one.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB

I think all wheelers should be shoved into a hole and buried. But that's just my old crotchety opinion on the matter. But having more government control in hunting is not what we need. we've already got to much government/special interest/political control on hunting right now, and look where that's got us... Trail cams don't hurt anything and like bwhntr said, they're everywhere yet you never see them unless your looking for them.

Technology has turned hunting into a circus. Like it or not, that's just the way it is.

Play, or go home.


----------



## pheaz

ktowncamo said:


> I doubt Ted et al will find my trail cams, ever. Some rules are meant to be broken...just sayin


Wow and there is the mentality of a POACHER. Trail Cams are GAY scout like a man. :mrgreen:


----------



## PBH

bwhntr said:


> Not a chance you are going to see them popping up all over the mountain, most of them you don't even notice anyways.


I hear people complain all the time about their cameras getting stolen! This happens because people DO notice them. I notice them in the area that I hunt. Heck, half the time their are cute pieces of pink flagging marking the way to the camera! I typically like to wave and smile to the camera -- mostly just to make sure that the other hunter knows that he doesn't have that particular spot to himself. I don't condone "stealing" cameras, but I also don't feel sorry for people who have had their own cameras stolen -- what do you expect when you leave your camera tied to tree?

Cameras are NOT as big of an issue (to me) as blinds. I think blinds should be taken down and packed out if you aren't sitting in it. Further, if a blind is unoccupied; first-come-first-serve. If allowed to leave a blind or tree-stand up, it should be tagged with a name, address, phone, and date setup / last used.


----------



## bwhntr

I have had SD cards stolen and cameras tampered with on public land. Really pisses you off. However I did learn that others were in this area therefore I wouldn't be interested in hunting it. For me, the most important issue next to knowing what animals are there is knowing what hunters will be there as well. I have run into cameras while out hiking, however it is the exception rather than the rule.

I don't care about treestands, however I can see why they wouldn't want them there year round. Take them down and pack them out on public lands. I have never left a pop up blind out on public. I am pretty sure if I did I would expect it to get stolen. I most likely would never sit in somebody elses blind. 

I can't stand government regulations...but a little common sense never hurts. If I am in an area with that much traffic, I just assume leave and find a new, steeper, nastier canyon to keep others out.


----------



## alpinebowman

I have to agree the camera law is ridiculous. a single week pre-season is useless for camera's, and this comes from only using a camera for the first time last year. I am not even sure I worry about treestands I just assume if I am the first there I will hunt the area. I have seen plenty of abandoned stands and trail cams and none have ever affected my hunting.


----------



## gitterdone81

I haven't seen where it is an actual law, and not just Ted's belief. Has anyone been able to find the actual law stating that cameras can't be utilized in the national forest for more than 1 week before the hunt begins?


----------



## ridgetop

Does anyone know what the rules/regs. are on BLM land?


----------



## Critter

I researched it last year when the subject came up as for BLM land. What the law says for BLM is that any personal item left after 72 hours can be picked up by the BLM. If I remember right it is in the same section that alows camping for 14 days in one spot.


----------



## JuddCT

I emailed the forest service asking about the actual law and how it pertains to "hunting" animals that do not have a season (coyotes). I'll let you know what they say (if they ever respond), but I might have to become more of a coyote hunter to stay within the rules.


----------



## elkfromabove

36 CFR II 261.10 (Title 36: Parks, Forests, and Public Property), (Code of Federal Regulations), (Chapter II: Forest Service, Dept of Agriculture), (Part 261: Prohibitions), (Subpart A: General prohibitions), (261.10 - Occupancy and use)

"The following are prohibited:

(a) Constructing, placing, or maintaining any kind of road, trail, structure, fence, enclosure, communications equipment, or other improvement on National Forest System lands or facilities without a special use authorization, contract, or approved operating plan, unless such authorization, contract, or operating plan is waived pursuant to ? 251.50(e) of this chapter.

(e) Abandoning any personal property."

I suppose you could go to court on the definitions of constructing, placing, maintaining, improvement, structure, communications equipment, and abandoning, but I'm guessing it would be a lost cause trying to argue the points. We should be happy to get what we got. I usually hunt ladder treestands (strapped to the tree, not nailed) over waterholes and I've never had an issue with the Forest Service even the time a few years ago when they thinned the conifers all around my treestand six weeks before the archery season, but left it alone.


----------



## Guest

illegal or not, its a ****ed system these days. what a joke things are turning into... does anyone know if its still legal to take a chit in the woods anymore?? :roll:


----------



## Finnegan

kill_'em_all said:


> illegal or not, its a ****ed system these days. what a joke things are turning into... does anyone know if its still legal to take a chit in the woods anymore?? :roll:


In Big & Little Cottonwood canyons, it is not. So don't forget a little plastic bag...or in some cases, maybe a BIG plastic bag.

Went fishing yesterday. I had a permit (permission) to use the roads to get there, and of course, permission to operate my vehicle. I paid $10 for permission to park and use the ramp and I signed that little magic paper that says my boat is mussel-free, without which I didn't have permission to put my boat on the water. I had permission in my wallet to catch the fish and another document that gave me permission to use two poles. And exercising my 2A rights as I was, I had permission to wear a loaded gun under my shirt.

This is what passes today for "The Land of the Free". Been that way for a long time. Why should hunters with trail cams be a special exception? Other photographers on public lands have been dealing with regulation for years.

5 years from now, everybody who needs cameras will be using live cameras that feed images directly to their pocket computers (cell phones). The cameras will be much smaller and cheaper. So eventually, the Wildlife Board will have no choice but to address the technology. When the time comes, I'll bet they'll be more restrictive than the USFS.


----------



## bwhntr

Exactly Finnegan...well sort of. This is the type of government I can't stand. A fee and regulation to EVERY little thing we do...Its the same with the tax and double tax and triple tax...PLEASE. We don't need another regulation or fee or permit tied to a camera.



> Why should hunters with trail cams be a special exception? Other photographers on public lands have been dealing with regulation for years.


Special exception?? Are hunters using trail cams for commercial reasons? If I go camping or hiking I don't need a permit or regulation to take pics of wildlife. Why would I just because I have a hunt coming up in the next few weeks? Nothing "special" about that. The only photographers that are regulated now are for commercial reasons (which is ridiculas as well).


----------



## PBH

bwhntr -- Why should it be regulated? Because if it isn't, people will abuse it. Unfortunately, we cannot control ourselves. Look at ATVs, speed limits, fireworks, etc. Without some kind of rules, humans cannot function. We're greedy, selfish, gluttonous people. We abuse every "right" we have. 

With each new day there are more and more and more people recreating and enjoying our limited resources. Our hunting areas continue to shrink as people expand their own outdoors activities. Technology further shrinks our areas -- ATVs, cameras, video cameras with wireless links (5 years? WRONG -- try TODAY!), bow mountable laser range finders, etc. Where does it end? At what point do we all say "enough is enough!"?

If you are an honest hunter / outdoorsman, one who actually cares about the resources we utilize, then you should have no problem following the rules and regulations that are set forth by our governing agencies in an effort to protect and maintain that resource we all love.


----------



## Fishrmn

PBH said:


> If you are an honest hunter / outdoorsman, one who actually cares about the resources we utilize, then you should have no problem following the rules and regulations that are set forth by our governing agencies in an effort to protect and maintain that resource we all love.


Provided, of course, that the rules and regulations are reasonable, prudent, and have a purpose. Limiting trail cameras to one week before a hunt doesn't fit any of those concepts.

Fishrmn


----------



## Critter

Wait until they pass a law such as the one that was passed in Montana, where you can't use them period.


----------



## Fishrmn

The Montana law was designed to stop the "live feed to a cell phone" type of camera being used during the hunt. I was under the impression that you could use them right up until the hunt started.

Again, what about someone who is using them to take pictures of wildlife, but who doesn't hunt, or doesn't have a tag?

Fishrmn


----------



## Huntoholic

Pretty intersesting topic........

Personally I believe a rule or law should be made to take care of a problem. The same for a tax or fee, it should be used for a single purpose and not to see how big the coughers can get. A law, rule, regulation, tax, and/or fee should not be used to just make it easier on the governing agency. 

I am pretty sick and tired of rules, regs and such that are not enforced. If you are going to make a regulation, enforce it. If you have no plan or way to enforce it, then don't make the regulation. I spent the weekend watching our forest service rep, hand out flyers, and right down trailer license plate numbers. Right on the flyer, it talked about kids with no helmets, speed, unsupervised kids, and a bunch of other regs. Yet I could sit in my chair and watch a portion of these regs being broken with out much effort. Where is our forest service rep? Sitting in the pay camp ground BSing with the site rep. The good people are good and the bad people are bad. Nothing changes except the occasional person gets a citation and more times then not its the honest guy just making a mistake.

As far as trail cams go, I just don't think that they are a problem. But I do believe they should be labeled with a name, phone number, and date placed. No name, then it must be just trash and should be cleaned up. Now the forest service rep can address any issue that might be caused by that camera. Problem solved.


----------



## PBH

Fishrmn said:


> Provided, of course, that the rules and regulations are reasonable, prudent, and have a purpose. Limiting trail cameras to one week before a hunt doesn't fit any of those concepts.
> 
> Fishrmn


I won't argue against this. Like many rules, regulations, etc., they often go through changes before becoming a "good" rule. I hope that this rule/regulation goes through a review process.



Huntoholic said:


> ...I do believe they [trail cameras] should be labeled with a name, phone number, and date placed. No name, then it must be just trash and should be cleaned up. Now the forest service rep can address any issue that might be caused by that camera. Problem solved.


I agree. Extend that to tree-stands and pop-up blinds. Further, limit the number of days these items (cameras, stands, blinds) can be in one place, just like camping. The issue that I see, and the issue that I believe needs to be taken care of, is that many times these "items" become a permanent part of the forest. They need to be "monitored" (like traps), and moved (like camps). No identification = no owner / salvage rights.


----------



## stablebuck

it's public land so deal with the public use rules...if you don't like them then write your congressman or buy your own land where you can put up a trail cam and/or treestand on every tree on the whole tract. Of course the best way around this rule is to actually hike off the trail where very few people go including the forest service folks. Anything else is out of our control as users of this public resource. I don't think it's a "constructive" rule for helping kill animals, but I also carry my trash (and others' trash) out of the woods as well. These rules are in place for the bums that hunt with us and do not respect the public resource.


----------



## bullsnot

I don't have much of a dog in this fight since I scout with binos and boot leather and hunt the same way but after reading the rule that Critter posted I can't help but wonder if the rule that governs the use of trail cams was really meant for them. The rule seems like it was meant for more "invasive" technology and structures. Trail cams are small and really not very noticeable. Usually the people that notice them the most are folks that use them. 

But on the flip side maybe the point of it all is that the forests should just be kept as wild as possible. I suppose there are lots of scenarios where cameras could be left for long periods of time equating to litter and garbage to everyone but that actual user. I don't know, I kind of see both sides on this one.


----------



## Huntoholic

PBH said:


> I agree. Extend that to tree-stands and pop-up blinds. Further, limit the number of days these items (cameras, stands, blinds) can be in one place, just like camping. The issue that I see, and the issue that I believe needs to be taken care of, is that many times these "items" become a permanent part of the forest. They need to be "monitored" (like traps), and moved (like camps). No identification = no owner / salvage rights.


At this point in time, I just don't see that camera's are an issue, hence the only reg that would be needed would be to know whom it belongs too. There are already regs in place concerning destruction of public property and whole bunch more. Nothing is being killed, so to me the only reason for additonal regs would be if the area does be come more heavily used. But none of these regs mean anything if there is no one there to enforce them.

I do like the idea of having a name and info on the stands and blinds. This could help in solving who may own the hardware if two people show up. Having a date that it was installed will help in knowing if someone is abusing (making permenate) and then the forest service can address.


----------



## gitterdone81

Still no law has been found - even the regulation posted earlier (that could maybe stretch a definition of communication device to trail cam) had no mention of 1 week before the hunt started, length of duration, etc. I think many laws are stupid, however it is our responsibility to abide by that law until we can get it changed. Right now I have seen no law that would prohibit the placement of a trail cam on a tree. With no law being furnished, and it not making sense, any 'officially removed' trail cam is an overzealous suit wishing he was on a drug bust, nabbing the bad guys.


----------



## bwhntr

PBH said:


> bwhntr -- Why should it be regulated? Because if it isn't, people will abuse it. Unfortunately, we cannot control ourselves. Look at ATVs, speed limits, fireworks, etc. Without some kind of rules, humans cannot function. We're greedy, selfish, gluttonous people. We abuse every "right" we have.
> ...If you are an honest hunter / outdoorsman, one who actually cares about the resources we utilize, then you should have no problem following the rules and regulations that are set forth by our governing agencies in an effort to protect and maintain that resource we all love.


I don't have a problem with some regulations and laws. I believe the government oversteps and creates laws to enforce other laws...and so on.

I don't see the point in regulating it because I don't see the harm. There is a difference with ATV's, speed limits, fireworks, etc compared to a camera. I just don't see it.

I have used cameras quite a bit. Mostly on private land. The only time I have used them on public was on my LE elk hunt last year. To be quite honest, they helped, but not that much. It was more for the entertainment value of seeing bulls and whatever else visited a wallow. I scouted the area every weekend from the middle of June till the hunt started in August. I hunted for 22 days. I had 3 cameras. I hardly think using a camera makes a hunter lazy. I hiked my butt off (for real) and came home 159 lbs! :mrgreen: The bull I killed was one I never got on film..

The argument isn't because I care if I use them or not...its because I don't see the point in regulating them.


----------



## Guest

against the law or not, i dont plan on following this one. its a dumb law. i dont see a problem with cameras attached to trees that we pay taxes on, taking pictures of animals we all own, in the mountains we all use. i dont abuse the use of cameras. i have ONE out right now, and its in a remote location. i dont think im hurting anything or effecting anyone with where my camera is. if someone from the forest circus wants to hike their *** up there and take it down, fine. but they better not let me catch them doing it.....


----------



## elkfromabove

kill_'em_all said:
 

> against the law or not, i dont plan on following this one. its a dumb law. i dont see a problem with cameras attached to trees that we pay taxes on, taking pictures of animals we all own, in the mountains we all use. i dont abuse the use of cameras. i have ONE out right now, and its in a remote location. i dont think im hurting anything or effecting anyone with where my camera is. if someone from the forest circus wants to hike their *** up there and take it down, fine. but they better not let me catch them doing it.....


I'm sure you won't be the only one, and I'm also sure this isn't the only law, regulation, or rule you're (we're) not following, knowingly or unknowingly!! Every government agency wants a piece of the action in order to justify their existence and making rules and regulations to control us, stupid or otherwise, is the easiest way to do it.

As a side note, in order to place an animal in the record books of P&Y, B&C, etc., aren't we supposed to verify in the fair chase statement that we've obeyed all the laws, regulations, rules pertaining to the taking of that animal? Unless you're a lawyer specializing in wildlife law, I guess it can get real tricky and complicated if you're inclined go that route!


----------



## ARROWHNTR

Update on this I have a friend at the forest service who called this release to the attention of Ted Henricks. He stated that he was mis-quoted in this press release and that he would contact the DWR about fixing it, but there is no laws requarding trail cameras on national forest land.


----------



## bullsnot

ARROWHNTR said:


> Update on this I have a friend at the forest service who called this release to the attention of Ted Henricks. He stated that he was mis-quoted in this press release and that he would contact the DWR about fixing it, but there is no laws requarding trail cameras on national forest land.


Very interesting. Thanks for following up on this.


----------



## JuddCT

bullsnot said:



> ARROWHNTR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update on this I have a friend at the forest service who called this release to the attention of Ted Henricks. He stated that he was mis-quoted in this press release and that he would contact the DWR about fixing it, but there is no laws requarding trail cameras on national forest land.
> 
> 
> 
> Very interesting. Thanks for following up on this.
Click to expand...

SWEET! -~|- I have sent multiple emails to the US Forest Service and heard nothing back.


----------



## stablebuck

Ted Hendricks = GENIUS


----------



## ridgetop

I guess I'll go put my out again. :|


----------



## kailey29us

ARROWHNTR said:


> Update on this I have a friend at the forest service who called this release to the attention of Ted Henricks. He stated that he was mis-quoted in this press release and that he would contact the DWR about fixing it, but there is no laws requarding trail cameras on national forest land.


I hope this is true but I'll believe it when I see excactly what changes the DWR makes on the article. :O•-:


----------



## stillhuntin

Stopped in Heber at the Circus office yesterday. They (certaionaly not all of they; but in a uniform shirt) said they haven't heard of said "law". Charged me $10 for a travel map!!! and away I went. It is my good fortune to remember when the "rangers" were foresters and woodsmen worthy of the name.


----------



## sroot

Good News! I am Scott Root, Conservation Outreach Mgr. for the DWR and I wrote the article on preparing for the archery hunt and the new law about only being able to put cameras out "the week before the hunt". I had your forum comments forwarded to me. I am also an avid trail camera user and have written several articles about this topic (my favorite hobby). The information given to me, regarding "one week before the hunt" was very disturbing as well. So as to not hurt agency relations, I won't comment on the "misquoted" issue. However, I called the USFS to re-check into the information and law about "When trail cameras can be put out" and it was stated to me that there is indeed no law out there limiting when trail cameras can be put up in the forest. I apologize for the confusion (and probably loss of sleep by many of us) over this incorrect statement! Go get your cameras set up!!! P.S. I will try and write and release an article today about the joy of using trail cameras and insert the correct information into the article and state that there has been some confusion over when cameras can be put out.


----------



## alpinebowman

Scott let me be the first to say thanks for coming on here and correcting your article. That is great news for many on this site.


----------



## PBH

Thanks for the update Scott.


Could you please highlight and BOLD the following lines in your corrected article:
"...you may not take an all-terrain vehicle off-road to retrieve game."

Thank you.


----------



## bullsnot

Thanks for checking in and updating us Scott. It is much appreciated.


----------



## Bears Butt

Thank you Scott. My only wish was that you would have made this posting earlier.


----------



## JuddCT

Thanks Scott! Good news!


----------



## svmoose

Verification prior to publication release would have been best - but thanks for letting us know now. I was thinking about putting some cameras out this year, but didn't. Not because of that article necessarily - but it was a contributor to my decision.


----------



## fishawk

Good on ya Scott! Thanks for the correction. Now I can continue my quest to find sasquatch!


----------



## goofy elk

WOW,,Scott Root in on the forum OOO°)OO


----------



## kailey29us

Still waiting on the retraction on the DWR website!!!!


----------

