Actually, the numbers went down in the part of Illinois that I hunted. They weren't interested in acknowledging it either. Doing so would hurt their license sales, so couldn't do that.

You think they went down because the kills were reported?

Yep. I agree.

Bring their soil down here and then we can talk on an even scale. Until then, it's useless.

What does soil have to do with reporting kill data?

Numbers and more numbers. Those states will always have the numbers due to the lack of gun season. They could not report chit ever and never see a decline in quality or quantity cuz they will never kill what can be killed in Bama cuz of the mighty gun. Other than Texas, but Texas numbers are out the roof. Wanna see a change? Turn Bama into bow hunting 90% of the year. You think numbers and quality will in increase or decrease? It has all to do about soil and what type of hunting is allowed. Game check didn't get those states where they are because of reporting dead deer.

Do you think the regs changed for that area because kills were reported? Spoiler alert, the answer is no.

I don't know the answer to this, but, what are the reporting requirements for MS and GA?

As I recall Mr. Sykes was not happy with the results he got with the "voluntary" system AFTER he tried ramming the MANDATORY version through that backfired in a big way. Kind of got his panties in a wad, so to speak and now he politiced enough with the career pathetics in Montgomery so he could get his way. Now he's trying to sale the wonders of game check because all of the other States have it. Isn't that how it goes.

By the way, I have no problem with them getting whatever information they want for their experiment. The problem is the way in which they are going about getting it through mandate and punishment when there are many other options to get more information that has not been explored or probably considered because mandate and punishment is just much easier.

That is a slightly different variation from the one I heard last week straight from Mr. Sykes. I will not speak for the man, but, look up one of the local meetings and attend if you want to hear his version. Just ask him, he will tell you. Again, all they are asking me to do is make a phone call or log on a website. How hard is that? And, how hard is that concept to grasp?

Most folks don't need his version to know that the person pissing on your back like to tell you it's rain. But not everyone can grasp that.

True. "All we want is a 1 mil tax." "All we want is 1 mil tax." "All we want is a 1 mil tax." Yea, and before you know it they've got 12-15 mil. But all they wanted was a 1 mil tax. You people don't look at the long term of this. Yea it's only this today and then that tomorrow, until it's completely outta control. This country is where it's at now cuz of this inch by inch process.

To me it isn't the idea of calling in a deer harvest, it is that the very limited kill information doesn't seem to be worth anything in the grand scheme of deer herd management.

Apparently the majority of people on this thread don't pull jawbones and record kill data. My club has been doing this for over 20 years. And will always do so. And yes it means everything to our clubs management goals. And the state gets our info , and have never forced any changes on us or our county. I don't trust government any more than the next guy, probably less! But I don't see why folks feel like the dcnr will do anything to hurt the hunting industry, it's a freakin cash cow for them as it is now.

We keep up with kill numbers but nothing beyond that other than an occasional doe weight check. Most everyone puts their bucks on the scale because they want to. I used to feel like all that jawbone pullin and intense data keepin was necessary to run a hunting club but I’ve changed my mind over the last few years. If you know what you’re looking at….and you’re there enough to see kills on the pole….just eyeballing things is good enough.

I look at the habitat and assess the impact the herd is having there and I look at the deer hanging on the pole and assess the health of the individual there. If you can assess a healthy cow in the pasture, then you can assess a healthy deer on the pole. At least well enough for the precision we need. No need to measure with a microscope when the population is being cut with the precision of an ax. A calibrated eyeball is good enough. On top of that I ask members in casual conversation about the numbers of fawns they see while hunting. I feel like that’s about all the info I really need to for me to be able to make informed decisions that are perfectly adequate. Not saying that’s for everyone but there’s really no need in placing all of that mandatory burden on the club members . Not everyone is into “data” gathering like the rest of us.

Well said. The Pelosi parallel was great!
Game check mandates are not going to solve the problem. Game check is not going to give them any new useful info that they don't already have access to (if they did a little work). We need to embrace Alabama hunting for what it is and quit trying to be like Illinois. We are never going to have the same results and that's fine. There is no silver bullet and if there was-- it wouldn't be game check.

I have no problem with Game Check as long as I can call the info in on my cell phone.

Embrace Alabama for what is?????? Crap on that I will embrace Alabama for what it once was and for what it can be again, but not what is right now.......You are right about one thing it has never and never will be like Illinois as far as the average antler score of a buck, but the hunting experience as far as seeing deer and chances to kill a few good bucks by local standards can be as good if not better than Illinois........it has been in my lifetime and can be again with better management of the resource. Now will Gamecheck do this......I really don't know but I refuse to accept this new normal of rare to infrequent deer sighting which is causing problems with keeping young kids and new hunters interested in the sport ( the declining hunter numbers has very little to do with so too many regulations).