Trailcam memories of fall

January 22, 2014 46d Comments

Ahhh, don’t you wish it was Fall again?

I know I do, especially after browsing through some of my favorite trail cam images from this past fall. I never get tired of photographing deer, I don’t know what it is.

All of the following Bushnell trophy-cam images were taken around my place – right here within City of Ottawa Limits from 4 different trail cam locations. Each camera is a slightly different model with somewhat different features.

Take note that most of these deer have never been hunted and end-up succumbing to predators, the elements, are hit by cars, or die of old age. (Vehicles and predators usually get them long before natural causes do)  

No, I may not get to hunt these beautiful animals, but observing and photographing them throughout the year is nearly as rewarding. (almost)

Here are a few images to kick-it off and I’ll be adding a bunch more this evening…

Enjoy…Fall is still  a long 9-months away !!

 

Fall

 

Fall1

 

Fall2

 

Fall3

 

Fall4

 

Fall5

 

Fall5

 

Fall6

 

Fall7

 

Fall8

 

Fall9

 

Fall10

 

Fall12

 

Fall13

 

Fall14

 

Fall15

 

Fall16

 

Fall17\

falla

 

fallb

fallc

 

falld

 

f

falle

fallf

 

fallg

 

fallh

falli

fallj

 

fallk

falll

fallm

falln

fallo

 

 

 

 

 

 

46 thoughts on “Trailcam memories of fall”

    1. Yep Garfield is king around my place…but I have pics of 3 more great bucks taken from Trailcam #4..will post those this evening.

      Outdoorsguy

      1. You may have noticed that one of the new Bushnell trail cams has a spot to enter your name(or location) on the camera display. That way, it will appear in every image you upload. Of course, as you can see I haven’t bothered to set it on that cam yet.

        I find it to be a neat feature though..

        Outdoorsguy

      1. Think you’ll all enjoy the 12-14 new pics I just added..mostly taken from trailcam #4 – about 1.5 miles from my house and adjacent to the whitetail wintering area.

        Enjoy!

        Outdoorsguy

  3. Great shots Jeff!

    I only have one trail cam. I usually use it in the video mode. I occasionally get some interesting videos of deer interacting. I thought I got some shots of some decent animals but none like some of yours. Wowzer!

    I don’t know how much animal traffic you actually get in front of your cameras, but with four of them on the go, there’s gotta be a pile of stuff to look through each time you change the cards….

    It’s neat to see bucks when on watch that you have videoed previously on the camera. I have a daytime video of the nine pointer I took this past fall. I find though that most of the bigger animals usually only pass the camera during the non-hunting hours. I guess that’s what makes them big…

    Game cameras are great, he only thing is, it makes the wait for Fall 2014 a bit long….

    1. Tks Herman. Yes, there are some terrific animals around here, but are not what you would typically find in a hunted herd. Much like the giants
      that hang out around the NRC in Barhaven. Lets just say the deer photographed around my hunting area are considerably less impressive. A lot more
      yearlings and a lot less mature bucks, but it stands to reason.

      I don’t actually keep all 4 cams around my house going all year. One monitors their wintering area and another one monitors a run-way they only use in the fall.
      I normally keep 2-3 going at any given time. And I keep another 4 cams around my hunt camp in QC near Mont Tremblant..but only from Sep -Nov.

      Outdoorsguy

  4. Jeff, we’ve been down this road before but let me tell you why you are seeing a lot of yearling bucks, it’s Quebec, and only bucks can be shot, other than a very rare doe tag, which I’ve seen people pass up shooting. All the mature bucks are targeted and either die when they get to two or three years of age, or become so cagy and nocturnal you’ll never see them. Quebec should thin out their doe population and encourage people to leave the bucks, at least for a couple years. The guys up near my cottage would rather shoot a deer with one spike than a 5 year old doe

    1. Iggy, you do bring up a very good point and I agree with you for the most part… however keep in mind that many areas of Quebec do not have a high density of deer and never will…for example, we could never thin out the does in our deer woods there simply aren’t enough of them around…even back in what we call our ‘hay day’ the population of mountain deer paled in comparison to that found in eastern ON – living in those mountains makes a tough go of it, compared to the agricultural deer… only the tough survive in the area I hunt, and as far as young first year bucks go you’re absolutely right… most QC’rs Iv seen will shoot first antlered deer that presents itself..even a 120 pound spike! Yeah yeah..I know they’r tasty..hehe

      I think up around your cottage has higher deer population…keep in mind that area (Zone 10) also offers a lot more antlerless tags than where we hunt. Used to be upwards of 5000, not sure these days what the # is..

      Outdoorsguy

  5. Great photos Outdoors Guy. We are going to check our trail cam this weekend. We put some cedar branches down two weeks ago. We can only dream of getting great photos of bucks like yours. Maybe we’ll be lucky this time.

  6. Go look at the big buck contest boards next fall, it’s unbelievable how many 80-120 lbs bucks are shot. Og 120 squares on the board I looked at this past fall I’ll bet 110 were under that weight, and the biggest was 187 I think.
    These are farm animals and should be in the 175-250 range to be considered large

    1. Yes Iggs..I have noticed the average body size going down in our area as well…even in older 3 1/2 – 5 1/2 year old bucks. Our big buck contest back home would regularly see several bucks registered over 200 pounds field-dressed, and now they’re lucky to get one over 180! Back in our ‘hay day’ one of our gang himself shot 4 bucks in 5 years all over 200 pounds! Wont see that again for a long time..or him either, he’s passed on now.

      Outdoorsguy

  7. GLOBAL WARMING deer do not need to be big, they don’t need all that body fat on them so they don’t need to be big its getting so warm here our deer are going to be the same size as texas deer. did i mention texas is getting snow and freezing rain … and it is only minus 30 here in port hope with the wind chill ,thank god for global warming or our deer would be eating everything in site and being over 500 lb. When is a deer considered obese?
    I am glad i send all my extra money to david suzuki to help fight all this global warming stuff.

    1. Ha, good one Chessy, but you forgot to preface your comment with; “The following statement is 100% tongue-in-cheek.”

      David Suzuki…that’s funny.

      Outdoorsguy

  8. no i do not need that comment….. i have peer reviewed science to back my study up, and because i say its so lol

  9. Temperatures may be very cold in North America but there is a record heat wave in Australia and other regions in the southern hemisphere. When considering global warming it’s better to look at the average temperature of the planet as a whole.

    In a survey of over 12,000 peer reviewed scientific papers published over the past 20 years, 97 percent of climate scientists agreed that humans are causing global warming.

  10. Definitely some nice animals you have captured there. They are getting smaller here, at least on my cam but every year I see at least one of the big lads like the 15 pointer this year (field dress 237) the second week. He just made one mistake sneaking away, and that lucky young lad’s first deer may be hard for him to top. There is quite a bit of pressure on them here but then again there are a lot of places to hide too. I will be talking to the NRC to see about a relocation plan. I like the big lads for pictures and to pass on DNA, (big smart dads, big smart kids)while the little guys are meat. That’s my ‘science’.

    Speaking of Mr. Suzuki, scientists may actually have useable data to back up their research but my only concern is that there isn’t very much data considering the age of the earth so it’s a relatively small sampling. Do I think we are creating an environment that will drive us to extinction? Absolutely! But it’s not likely to change in our lifetime no matter how many light bulbs I turn off at night. We are looking to other planets to inhabit before making changes to correct this one. Why? If North America shuts down polluters they lose jobs, tax money and investors and the company will move and pollute from China instead. Drug companies spend millions to find cures while a fraction of that goes into prevention. Why? Simple, there is no money in prevention. As humans we have become highly reactive and have built a world of greed and gluttony and the more the little guy conserves, the more the big guy will burn. Because he can! There is enough food on this planet that no one has to die of starvation yet it happens every day while we face an obesity epidemic. The rich stockpile, the poor struggle to survive; it’s just the way it is. Sort of like the Toronto Maples Leafs….
    As for David Suzuki? He’s prime for a Senate position, no?

    1. johan, I agree with most you said cept the Toronto Maple Leafs part..that was low.

      Iggy, speaking of hypocrites like Suzuki…it would appear our old friend Neil Young has fallen into that category. Too bad he just couldn’t keep it
      zipped..or at least stick to the facts. He does bring up some points about the oil sands impact however most of his stats are somewhat flawed.

      Love him has a singer/songwriter and I still own 28 of his original albums on vinyl, but as an enviro activist..I’m not sure I’m picking up what old Neil is putting down?!

      Outdoorsguy

  11. Global warming and global cooling and bla bla bla, all to make money for David Suzuki so he can heat his three homes and two cottages all worth more than a million each. Con artist and CBC idolizes him.

    BTW was at the cottage today and saw three real nice deer up close. Although the snow is deep, there is no crust and they seem to be moving about without problem. They look fat and healthy

  12. There are many more scientists than just David Suzuki who think that global warming is real and is being caused by people. And they’re not all “just charlatans who are only in it for the money” as some right wingers in the media would want us to believe. Personally, I’ll listen to climate change experts rather than global warming deniers like Lowell Green or Rob Snow of our local CFRA radio – who have no training or expertise in that field.

    As for Suzuki becoming a Senator, it will never happen as long a Stephen Harper is Prime Minister. Better to appoint people like Mike Duffy or Pamela Wallin….

    1. I suppose the evidence and scientific research is there to show Global warming is real, the concept is just hard to fathom after experiencing minus 20-something days in a row this winter. I don’t follow the rate at which the polar ice cap is melting, but it must be pretty damn slow! Perhaps Global warming might explain the unseasonably cold winter this year in Florida and Georgia? Record cold days being set in big cities like Chicago and record snowfalls in the Boston and Washington. At my kid’s school when wind chill drops below minus 25, they are forced into indoor recess and lunch hours. There have been more of those this winter than they’ve ever seen any year so far.

      Obviously these little observations mean diddly in the big scheme of things, but really you’d think after years of monitoring Global warming, we would be experiencing some ‘actual’ warming in this part of the world? I realize the overall world average temp is being tracked and appears to be on the rise….but I sure haven’t seen much of it around here..hehe.

      Outdoorsguy

  13. david suzuki specializes in fruit flies…. something that lives for days………. and he tells the world about how to cut global warming … one way that can be done is shut his mouth

  14. good day jeff, this winter will prove which deer are the chosen few with cold temperatures and little food i have been putting hay and corn and other various high in nutrient value foods near several feeders have yet to buy a new trail cam ,which one would you recommend in a fairly good price range ,i managed to take a picture of coyotes and 2 really well put together wolves near my house they appeared to be mouse hunting but didn’t look frail hope fully this will not prove that fall 2014 will be a poor deer season

    1. Hey Mike, I hear your concern over deer this winter. I was quite excited while on holidays to hear than nearly half our snow pack had melted. Of course, now we have a weak crust in some areas which is prob worse for deer getting around. Most deer yards would have a network of established trails by now, but as we know, not every deer joins an established yard.

      Mike, any of the Bushnell trophy cams available today are good quality, and I wouldn’t recommend one over another, especially since there are 3-4 new ones here I haven’t even tested yet. In recent years, they really have worked on added some great new features, increasing battery life, and making them fonctional in our Canadian weather year round! Even with the bitterly cold temps this winter, mine never failed to perform!

      http://www.bushnell.com/hunting/trail-cameras

      Outdoorsguy

  15. Careful how much food you put out for the deer, it can do as much harm as good, especially if you suddenly stop.
    I put out just a little, for a snack, a few deer get some but mostly it gets picked over by the birds.

    I don’t doubt that global warming is (was) a fact, although I don’t think Suzuki had anything to do with discovering it, but there are a lot of scientists who say global warming and cooling is normal, just like droughts and seasons of heavy rain. As a matter of fact, there are some in the scientific community that say we are now cooling off.
    Who knows, but to be told to worry about global warming buy a guy that owns 5 million dollar houses (Suzuki) or three mansions in the USA (Young) is like a person who says, do as I say, not as I do!
    BTW, Young’s million dollar electric car caught fire and burned down a $500,000.00 warehouse. Now that’s a global footprint!

  16. I don’t understand the fixation with David Suzuki. He is just one voice among many (most) scientists. I suppose it is because of his celebrity – or notoriety in the eyes of some. I agree that he should be practicing what he preaches.

  17. @ fishr we will agree to very strongly disagree

    The American Meteorological Society, working with experts at George Mason University and Yale University, emailed all AMS members for whom the AMS had a mailing address (excluding associate members and student members) and asked them to fill out an online survey on global warming. More than 1,800 AMS meteorologists filled out the survey, providing a highly representative view of scientists with meteorological, climatological, and atmospheric science expertise.
    The central question in the survey consisted of two parts: “Is global warming happening? If so, what is its cause?”

    Answer options were:
    Yes: Mostly human

    Yes: Equally human and natural

    Yes: Mostly natural

    Yes: Insufficient evidence [to determine cause]

    Yes: Don’t know cause

    Don’t know if global warming is happening

    Global warming is not happening

    Just 52 percent of survey respondents answered Yes: Mostly human. The other 48 percent either questioned whether global warming is happening or would not ascribe human activity as the primary cause.

    Importantly, the survey addressed merely one of the necessary components of a human-induced global warming crisis. The survey did not ask whether temperatures are warmer than those of the Medieval Warm Period or other recent warm periods, did not ask whether temperatures are warming at a rapid pace, did not ask whether recent warming has been harmful or beneficial and did not ask whether transforming our energy economy would stop global warming or pass a cost/benefit test. Certainly, many of the 52 percent of meteorologists who believe humans are primarily responsible for some warming would nevertheless question some of these other necessary components of a human-induced global warming crisis.

    In short, the news for global warming activists is far worse than the survey results showing barely half of meteorologists believe humans are primarily responsible for some global warming. The reality is when you factor in the other necessary components of a global warming crisis, clearly less than half of American Meteorological Society meteorologists believe in the frequently asserted global warming crisis.

    Mind you, this is a survey of scientists with targeted atmospheric science expertise and who have demonstrated the skills and experience to qualify for AMS membership. This isn’t a poll of chemists or engineers, nor is it a position statement put together by a dozen or so members of a scientific group’s bureaucracy; it…

  19. chessy,

    I noticed that what you copied above was from an article by James Taylor of Forbes magazine. He has a history of climate change denial and there are some who question his journalistic integrity. He fails to mention that the people in the survey are all members of the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta and are mostly employed by the petroleum industry.

    http://www.credomobilize.com/petitions/forbes-stop-promoting-climate-change-denial

    http://blogs.dw.de/globalideas/tag/climate-change-denial/

    Here’s a link to the American Meteorological Society’s own website regarding climate change.

    http://www.ametsoc.org/policy/2012climatechange.html

    It states that:
    “Warming of the climate system now is unequivocal, according to many different kinds of evidence. Observations show increases in globally averaged air and ocean temperatures, as well as widespread melting of snow and ice and rising globally averaged sea level.”
    “Climate is always changing. However, many of the observed changes noted above are beyond what can be explained by the natural variability of the climate. It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases…”

    NASA also has some interesting statistics on the subject:

    http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence

    1. Hey Trapper, nice to hear from you stranger!

      How are things out your way this winter? Think the fur prices will hold into the next big sale?

      Hope all is well…

      Outdoorsguy

  21. Fishr, what exactly does it mean when one has a “history of climate change denial”? Does that mean that someone has examined the evidence and come to a different conclusion?

    Is anybody here old enough to remember acid rain? That was the fashionable environmental issue of the 70s. My poor Father was afraid to let us eat the fish we caught for fear of acid rain contaminating the fish. Whatever happened to acid rain???

  22. Hunting mom,

    Forbes is a business magazine, not a scientific journal. The people who came to a “different conclusion” about global warming in the study cited by James Taylor can hardly be considered neutral or independent on the subject. There are some opposing views amongst climate experts but the overwhelming majority agree that anthropogenic global warming is real.

    Acid rain is not as much of an issue as it was several decades ago because governments in North America have enacted legislation that has led to a reduction of damaging sulfur and nitrogen emissions.

  23. There is considerable pressure on anyone in the scientific community who disagrees with the global warming, now climate change, orthodoxy. There is an almost cult-like quality to it. It’s not healthy to stifle debate. Dr Tim Ball, a highly accomplished Canadian climate expert, has written extensively about this phenomenon.

  24. Personally I don’t know what to believe but I find it very interesting that since more authoritative reports are coming out admitting that global warming is slowing or stopping altogether, the global warming gurus and other assorted antis have come up with a face saving device. They have now started to call it “climate change” instead.That way no matter what happens they can always continue to bemoan the fact that the climate IS changing, dig up an appropriate scapegoat for the new circumstance, and continue on in the new direction.

  26. It’s also easy to label the opinions you disagree with as having no merit because they may be connected to the petroleum industry. If there is room for alternative views, why were the climate scientists at the University of East Anglia conspiring to suppress information that did not support their theories? This was revealed in some leaked emails made public a couple of years ago. That is when I really started to get suspicious.

  27. Sorry folks. I have to say “who cares” about this so called global warming. It sure has made a lot of people rich who really don’t know any more than you or i. Even scientists have said that a thousand years from now the temperature may go up 10 or 20 degrees. Do you really think that we won’t have destroyed ourselves by then through other means anyway. Far to much money has gone into lining the pockets of the likes of Suzuki and Gore and all the special interest groups when it could have gone towards very present problems like feeding the world or destroying diseases. I’m really sure that 300 years from now temperature change will be the least of the problems facing humanity

  28. There is a clear consensus amongst scientists that gravity is factual based on the evidence. The same is true of evolution. Would you accuse them of being cult adherents as well?

    The petroleum industry is spending a fortune promoting the denial of global warming and those who are being paid by the industry can’t exactly be considered neutral on the subject. It’s a huge conflict of interest.

    Many of those e-mails from the University of East Anglia were quoted out of context by the media. Investigations into the matter by the British government and independent ethics committees didn’t find any evidence of fraud, the manipulation of data or a conspiracy.

  29. I don’t think the science around gravity is comparable. The existence of gravity is evident in our daily lives. As for evolution – it’s an interesting theory!

  30. Hunting mom,

    Those who question evolution denigrate it by referring to it “as just a theory,” but virtually all biologists agree that it is one of the most reliably established facts in science, backed up by the fossil record. Do you also believe the Earth is only 6000 years old?

    http://www.notjustatheory.com/

  31. Fishr, your source can hardly be considered neutral or independent. They have a long history of intelligent design denial.

  32. There’s a good reason why evolution is taught in schools and intelligent design is not. No point debating further if you believe in creationism.

Comments are closed.