Nothing, they will study the information for 5 or so years and then determine that further changes in the Game Check is necessary for further study. Another 5 or so year study, repeat.

This is the answer..........but I say it won't take 5 years before the data gathered is deemed less valid than the hunter surveys. Then the tags will be pushed harder. It's kind of like making a push for single payer healthcare..........it can't be done all at once.........it has to be incrementally.

There's all kinds of data you can draw from. Total kill numbers yes, sex of kills, yes, but also date of kill, hunter success by license, hunter success by sex, etc

I believe that year to year your avg hunter success will be just as telling as total harvest in a county. To simplify, if the avg entry by hunter, in Winston county is 1 buck, 3 does the first year, then 5 years later that has steadily decreased to .5 buck, 1 doe, it would be obvious there's a significant decrease in quantity, unless regulations changed.

That could also be very telling, when the season was broken down into sections, bow season, early gun, mid, late, whenever the rut is, etc. this would tell you whether the deer were there, and just being over pressured, disappearing later in the season.

Combine several years of total harvest, Buck/doe harvest ratio, avg success per participant, and when the deer were killed. If you can't paint a pretty accurate picture off that, then you aren't trying.

Clem, do we want our deer population to go up or down?

I think you'd get 575 duzen answers with that question, to be honest.

Personally, I don't have to see or want to see 30 or 40 deer every time I go out "like the good ol' days" because I think those numbers were too high. I don't go out to watch deer. If I want to watch deer then I'll go to Cades Cove and have a Red Bull while cruising with Maw-Maw to enjoy wildlife. During hunting season I want to kill what I want and think we need, period, and it does not have to have rack-monster antlers or even any antlers at all.

As a state we went from virtually no deer, to "don't shoot does or you'll go to hell" and growing populations, to probably over-populated situations in many areas, to "kill more does" and 2-a-day for maybe too long with predation and disease also affecting mortality, to where we are today ... which is some areas probably OK and some are hurting badly.

IF this check-in system is accepted and IF it works with Matt and the other deer biologists obtaining good usable information and IF the lever-pullers and political shitstirrers in Mungumry and elsewhere allow them to make biological-based decisions then it could possibly help. Those are big "if" situations, though I think they're starting to be accepted.

Ohio has, as in that earlier post on this thread, a rigid check system and has drilled down to specific counties/zones. Their hunters STILL complain about their deer population. Wisconsin does the same and they have county-by-county groups that meet to discuss deer numbers and suggest things to the state.

Yes, but the testing sample needs to remain as close as possible for the entire 5 years. In other words as an example, on a five year sample, in year 3 hunting directly over bait becomes legal. This will affect the numbers one way or the other. Laws and rules could remain the same for a 5 year test but there a lot of uncontrollable factors from weather to the economy that can effect harvest numbers. Let me say again, I'm on the fence on the matter and can see valid points from both sides.

Went to the Jasper meeting tonight and thought it went great I feel like if everyone will do their part and report the info the State can finally move forward with some good data .
I feel like the State and our Biologist want what's best for us the hunters of our State so if you see these upcoming meetings please spread the word and attend these meetings so you can hear how it will all work if this indeed does pass in mid July.
Sykes went thru the slide show with info and did a great job explaining things as well as hearing from the hunters in attendance and Matt Brock , Nighthunter , Chris Cook and others were very professional in answering questions as well ....great to have guys like them representing our State , thanks guys for all you do .

Serious question on the data. Here is what I report (from what I am gathering at this point): 8 pt. killed, XYZ county, 1/1/17.

What data can be gathered from this? Once again, not being a smart@$$, just looking for answers, explanations, and expectations.

We are 1 of only 3 States left that doesn't have a tagging or gamecheck system ,

this year some counties didnt even have a Warden