Regarding the article about scouting for spring turkeys ("Know-How," February): The author states he has " ... dozens of Moultrie cellular cameras set ... " to monitor flock behavior. By my estimation, that is well over $2,000 worth of equipment, not including battery cost. I can think of some nice firearms or optics I'd rather spend that money on. Also, the author states " ... having more than a dozen cameras in a 100-square-yard span is not overkill." I have nine cameras spread over 100 acres that give me a pretty good idea of game activity when combined with some in-person scouting.
Ed Pfannkoch, Chatfield, Minn.
Mountain Lion Reintroductions
Thank you for "Be Wary of Push to Reintroduce Mountain Lions to Eastern U.S." ("First Light," January). The candid list of negative repercussions is only the tip of the iceberg. In Wisconsin they reintroduced the wolf and the results have been devastating on whitetail and small-game hunting. Many hunters I know have simply given up. I hope hunters in the East will band together to prevent the mountain lion reintroduction. And I hope somehow the wolf hunt can be reinstated in Wisconsin to keep the wolf population in check, after it was eliminated by a federal judge.
Roger Doak, West Bend, Wisc.
More on Poaching ...
In the February "Says You," I read some of the feedback AH got from its article on poaching ("Boone and Crockett Club Releases National Poaching Study," "First Light," December 2025). I can see where felony status for those convicted would be problematic, but I'd be in favor of adding misdemeanor-scale jail time and upping fines and seizures to a far more serious level. It's time we think of the victims of poaching: wildlife species that benefit from proper, legal management; the conservation agencies whose biologists monitor wildlife and develop prudent regulations; and those real hunters who follow the rules and spend time and money on our pastime. Poachers upset the wildlife management system, spoil the experience for hunters and—when they only get a slap on the wrist—send a demoralizing message for the youth. Taking a gun or two and suspending poachers' hunting rights is laughable, working about as well as "gun-free zones" to stop homicidal maniacs. If poachers cared about conservation, wildlife management, fairness and the law, they wouldn't be poachers. They'd be hunters.
Matt Pedigo, Scottsville, Ky.
Late-DOI.USFWS senior special agent David L. Hall (1938-2014) tried to get the Service to recognize the negative impact poaching had on our natural resources, especially waterfowl—to the extent that the under secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks moved Hall to N.C. and ordered him to perform routine office duties (a punishment of sorts for all the queries the department was getting about the illegal taking of our wildlife resources, which they blamed on Hall). Before his retirement in 1995, Hall continued to work undercover, to the extent that one of the major TV network news magazines did a segment on his work-generally working alone and unarmed. Poaching of every description has no doubt done more damage than can ever be reversed in our lifetimes. Sad to say that it took B&C to document the wanton waste, rather than our own federal government.
Charles S. Conner, Picayunee, Miss.
The comment in February's "Says You" about California only having antlered deer take is not true. California does have limited doe hunts. Some of those doe hunts are in counties where the board of supervisors has veto powers over such hunts. It would be helpful if the NRA did a little research before going to print with misleading information.
Kevin Kreyenhagen, Chair for the Monterey County Fish and Game Advisory Commission, via email
Says Me
Some degree of pushback is warranted here, in keeping with the spirit of the ombudsman this page represents.
Mr. Pfannkoch, Scott Haugen’s expenditures and reliance on trail cameras is his prerogative, yes? I don’t like to go to such trouble, either, but I have been known to use trail cams. On the other hand, I’m sure I own more guns than the average American: Does that mean I’ve spent more money on guns than is reasonable? Should I go to all the expense and trouble of acquiring and keeping them? That’s a silly question—of course I should! (As an aside, folks: Trail cams are here to stay; they can in fact help us hunt; we’re not cheating if we use them to time visits to the field.)
Mr. Kreyenhagen, AH did not “go to print” with misleading information. We gave a small platform in a closed forum to a member-reader in response to something we actually did “go to print with,” the B&C study regarding poaching. This is pretty much what we’ve done for you, too, by allowing you to respond in kind—and I have no way of corroborating your claim, either. This is what the letters page is all about, don’t you think?
Likewise, I can’t corroborate the claims of Mr. Doak, Mr. Cave or Mr. Conner. I publish such thoughts because this our magazine—it belongs to the hunters of the NRA. I am merely a shepherd. In that spirit, I’d like to think we all can listen to one another then go and learn what we wish of topics that interest us.
J. Scott Olmsted
Editor-in-Chief American Hunter
