Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Whisker Trout Slayer

Trail Camera question

5 posts in this topic

I got thinking the other day when I put my camera back out, with the fear of people stealing them and some people are concerned about spooking the deer, has anybody ever put one up in a tree? I am talking about using a climbing stick or ladder and putting it up in the tree a couple of feet and angle it toward where you want it to shoot the picture. You could also get a different and possibly better shot at the rack to drool over.

One concern is how close does the deer need to be to trigger the camera sensor might be too far. Also it still could get stolen but how many people look for them up in a tree.

Has anybody tried this? All of the trail camera pictures I have seen are from a couple of feet off the ground.

If not I will have to try it and get back to you on how well it worked. I won't be able to do it until a week or two from now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on the camera and the range of sensitity.

Is yours a dark IR?

If not, the person is going to know a camera is up there if they come through at night, because of the flash.

I realize it will be in a tree, but if someone now knows they had their picture taken, you can bet they will do whatever they can to take the evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's worth the trouble then go for it. I don't think you'd get very good pics for one and for practicality sake, that's a lot of monkeybusiness carrying sticks out with you to check the card/replace batt's, etc. I'd say if you're that worried about it getting ripped off, you might want to find a more remote location. I keep mine out of a lot good looking areas for the sake of getting stolen. One of these days, I'm sure I'll head out and one will be gone - just a matter of time unfortunately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing to remember is that your area that the camara will take pictures will be cut down greatly. The camara has a flat plane of view and you flat area will be shortened by it pointing at the ground with a angle.

Froggy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with others that I don't think you would get good results.

I think I'm going to try and build some protective boxes over the winter to put my cameras in. That was the only thing I loved about the Cuddeback, was the way it mounted to the tree made it much tougher to steal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Posts

    • You scale them, no?
    •   So, why bother with locks?  Honest people won't take your stuff even if the door is unlocked.   I am in the camp that I want to make it at least a little difficult for the crooks.   Especially since three people in our family have had their houses burgled and stuff taken.
    • The result right now is not good. One way or the other the toilet needs flushing
    • Mostly I talk about this with respect to the nonsense about multiple parties or no parties some on here seem so fond of.      It is all a fantasy.   Some new party could possibly take over an existing party, like Trumpism did, or even replace it like happened back in the day but in the end there will be two parties.     Perhaps a parlimentary system with multiple parties would be better than what we have, but, in my opinion, you can't get there from here.  It's like the calls for a Constitutional Convention.   Do you guys seriously think that could happen, and that the result would be good?  
    • I haven't gone up the old Grade, but do head to Outing via Emily and NE from there, and it is really nice. Hardly any roads to go across and little to no ditch riding. I have got to try the Old Grade, as I would think it is like that. We grouse and duck hunt up there now and then, but haven't lately. Great place with lots of public land and opportunity.
    •   But yet I countered with an actual study but you think your own speculative based opinion is better. OK then.     How very hypocritical.      I would end the discussion after that last statement too.
    •     I can guess it is not for humanitarian reasons.   Mexico has about had their fill of fighting the drug war for us, and are moving towards decriminalization.  If California legalizes weed, this would be enough to tip the scales in favor of decriminalization for Mexico.       For years now, Mexico has paid an extraordinarily high price in lives and social disruption for Washington’s insistence that North America’s drug problem be tackled south of the border, where the drugs are grown and transported, rather than primarily in clinics and halfway houses at home to treat the medical and psychological issues of users. Mexican President Pena Nieto.   Successive administrations, starting with President Nixon, have demanded ever-tougher border controls, aerial-spraying programs, and DEA-backed anti-“cartel” operations in Mexico. All those efforts and sacrifices have been for naught. U.S. residents currently export up to $29 billion in cash to Mexican traffickers each year to buy marijuana, cocaine, methamphetamines and heroin.   Forcing that trade underground has taken a terrible toll on Mexico in terms of violence, corruption and social upheaval. Since 2006, when President Felipe Calderón ordered his military to join the “war” on drug traffickers, Mexico has lost about 200,000 lives and 30,000 more have disappeared,dwarfing the civilian death toll in Afghanistan and Iraq over that period.   The majority of those killed and disappeared were victims of criminal organizations, but human rights organizations also report soaring rates of human rights violations, including torture and killing, committed by security forces.   The 2016 Global Peace Index, prepared by the Institute for Economics and Peace, estimates the total cost of violence in Mexico at $273 billion, or 14 percent of GDP, with no end in sight. Direct fiscal costs of fighting the war on crime were about $32 billion in 2015 alone. Yet the United States has contributed only about $2.5 billion since fiscal 2008 to Mexico’s drug war, under the so-called “Merida Initiative.” Mexico’s pain shows no signs of easing. The New York Times reported in December that Mexico suffered more than 17,000 homicides in the first 10 months of last year, the highest total since 2012. “The relapse in security has unnerved Mexico and led many to wonder whether the country is on the brink of a bloody, all-out war between criminal groups,” it said.    
    •   But In Del's defense, he only does this on things he would like to stay as is. When you are talking about legislation he is in favor of then it is the law of the land and can't be changed. When it is something that he dislikes, it can and should be changed.
    •  Yes.   Speculative based opinion.   Same type of shiat you brought to the table 12,632 times.      Yes. When he was plain ol' Trump. Now he governs. He cannot say that anymore.   No government will ever straight up legalize all drugs. You know it, I know it.   End of discussion.
  • Our Sponsors