Frankie,
Why do you think giving biologists more info to manage a resource is a bad thing?

I personally think it would have been a pretty great system had the check-in been mandatory. Now its too easy to for outlaws to fill-up one card and go print another & start over. Hey I get it, theres not a lot of enforcement.. outlaws gunna outlaw... I got it. But it would have been a step in the right direction.

Spot on Nighthunter.

Remember 50% of the people are of below average intelligence... Its not their fault.

I once worked for a facility that was building a nature museum of sorts. We used a professional that had built exhibits for National Parks and Museums all across America. I'll never forget his statement of "when building exhibits for the general public, you generally build them on a 5th grade level". He wasn't kidding. These are the people we deal with everyday.

Speaking of data - are deer killed on nuisance/depredation permits accounted for in the annual "harvest" numbers? Are the kill numbers tracked at all?

They are tracked but.... we rely on the permit holder to give us accurate #'s and follow the permit. There has been an effort to streamline and better this process for us and the permit holders.

This is the one I adore.

As usual, Alabama hunters/anglers have it made when it comes to the simplicity of paying a minimal amount for a year's worth of hunting/fishing compared to other states where the fee structure is x-amount for the license and then x-amount for every kind of weapon, critter stamp, fish stamp, stream wading stamp, looking at birds stamp, gut a critter stamp, you're on state forest land stamp, Bob ate Twinkies stamps, and so on.

When I'm in other states and they ask how much a resident license costs, they think I'm lying.

This whole subject gives me a headache. I have a hard time believing the above figures. I hunt in a very sparsely populated part of the state (and I would guess one of the poorest). There are people in Sumter county who kill many more than 3 bucks in a year. There is a man up the road a few miles who last year on 2 separate occasions (that I know of) killed 2 bucks and 1 doe and then the next weekend killed 2 more bucks. They were not trophys, but this man is providing for his family and eats everything he kills. He even eats parts of the deer I would not eat. (Eyeballs, brain, intestines, liver)

So it is very hard for me to assume that only 4% are killing more than legal. That number was probably pulled out of mid air, or used to get the result the government wants.

My main problem is the limits set across the state. We have a pretty good deer population in my area and could probably kill more without damaging the population, but in other parts of the state you can hunt all day (or weekend) and not see a deer. Our herd is larger because of the crops in our area and the plantings we and a few other clubs plant. Other areas where there isnt as much cropland will probably have fewer deer. But that can change from year to year. If the farmers in my area stopped planting soybeans and started planting cotton I assume that some of our deer would go somewhere there was more food.

However if they tried to adjust limits based on the constantly changing conditions it would be a nightmare. I dont know of a better solution.

So he killed 4 bucks and 2 does in two sits. Makes perfect sense since he eats them Why couldn't he shoot 5 does and 1 buck? That guy has the desire to shoot more bucks than is legal plain and simple, eat them or not.

Don't forget about how many days one can hunt in Alabama versus those other states .

BS if they aint gonna fill out one thing what makes you thing they would fill out some thing else .


i was against it because it would do nothing but count DEAD DEER . IF the folks that moaned about having the check in mandatory would file all thier kills there would be enough stats to go by .

i don't see where i done any griping but i have my disagreements .

so , if some do not agree with you they are dumb ????

I don't think that's what he meant Frankie. I can tell you from having several public service jobs that the majority of people in this country still have to have some one explain a simple three step process after reading it on paper.

I certainly hope that wasn't meant for you or anyone on here. I disagree with you on this but I don't think your dumb for that. Just difference of opinion. Name calling and personal attacks are usually done by the ones who can't follow along in a discussion.

Didn't necessarily mean you griping here. Just pointing out how it goes in general. Obviously I wasn't calling you dumb either...

yeah , when i work at a rec area for the air force i had people fail the boat safty course with the book in their hand .

no problems here with what you said . i understand you , y'all , they have a tough row to hoe at times .

There is no need for a buck limit or a tagging system if does are limited. Limiting does is the least restrictive way to manage the herd. Don't shoot the does and there will be plenty of bucks to go around

Please explain.

Hawdog, it doesn't work that way. If you limit does and don't limit bucks there would almost certainly be way more bucks killed than does. Bucks have a higher natural mortality. They need more protection.