Remember game check is not the ONLY data source the department is going to be pulling from. DMAP, reproductive surveys, Gamecheck, mail survey, ect can all be used together to form a somewhat more complete puzzle. Gamecheck is a puzzle piece folks and this puzzle takes years and lots of data to complete...

For instance, areas in North Alabama may have a rut that goes into February. If we have mandatory Gamecheck and a February season this year in Cullman and Marshall Counties the department can look at the data and decide "hey there was a very low number of deer killed in Feb. in Cullman, but looks like Marshall Co. had a significantly higher number of deer killed in Feb. Let's look at the reproduction survey results and see when the rut occurs, oh and we have a couple DMAP properties in this area to let's look at that data. Okay, after compiling all this information we need to take a closer look at possibly moving the season dates back in Cullman Co and maybe move season dates forward in at least part of Marshall County. However, we know from DMAP and reproduction surveys that the deer rut and hunters hunt more in December in North Marshall Co, so let's look into gathering more data in specific areas of Marshall and see if we need to delineate a line in Marshall co. where the seasons differ."
(Extremely simplified example, but hopefully understandable)

*disclaimer: Properties and locations provided in this example are simply examples pulled off the top of my head and do not in any way represent how those counties need to be managed...

Everyone here knows or should know that Gamecheck is just an extra tool in the toolbox. If you have a property that differs from the norm in your county maybe you should consider enrolling in DMAP or having a deer reproductive survey done on the property, so that the biologists can include that data.

.....and below is what results from that. This is why it’s not just a question of “Do you want game check?”…Is this where we are headed?

http://www.agfc.com/hunting/Pages/HuntingDeerZones.aspx#anchor

I don't see how checking in a deer deters you from managing your property?


At one time hunters did their own management. It resulted in some of the lowest populations of wild game in recent history. Then through regulation many game species made a huge comeback. Fast forward to today...we have type A people adamant that almost all the deer have been killed off and we also have type B people right next door to type A people who say they won't be able to kill enough deer if we restrict doe days. As a Department we have to see what is really going on and adjust to that.

Many folks believe education is the answer and it is to an extent, but as a former biologist there are some people I could say "hey don't kill any more does. Your population is kinda low, you need to build it back up" and I would come back a year later, they have the same "no deer" complaint and they have continued to kill every doe they saw(which was 5). We have tried education, providing FREE technical assistance, and some vastly liberal seasons, but we continue to hear the same complaints... So what do we do, implement a Gamecheck system to help us figure out what is going on and help with conservation in Alabama.

But I really don't see the point in discussing or arguing these point with you. You have made up your mind regardless of my explanations . Good day Sir.

Thanks for adding more clarity, yote.

I don't think anyone can answer that question. However, I do recall Cullman County having 2 different Hunter choice seasons for years and years. I never heard complaints about the different dates back then.

Here is a question for you. Pretend you hunt an area in Cullman Co where the deer always rut in early February, but yet your season always ends on Jan. 31st. Your neighbor's are in Morgan County and have a season going to Feb. 10th. and thus get to hunt the rut. Do you want to have the season in your area of Cullman County extended to Feb. 10th or not?

Don't know if it's aldeer or the heat from raking grass, but my head is beginning to hurt...

Actually, I think it’s pretty easy question to answer.....because it if we don’t move toward a system like the one linked then all of this chit is for nothing more than making a few fancy charts and graphs. If nothing changes then why do it?

I’m fine with the entire state ending on Feb 10…..I think we probably need to include some areas of southwest AL in the doe days zone but besides that I don’t believe the state needs to be trying to micro-manage further. The reason why is because the state can’t manage on a small enough scale to be truly effective. You can cut it down to an individual county basis and still find so much variation amongst an area that size that the prescription written by the state is really no better suited for the individuals in the area than a broad scale management plan would be. The individual landowners are really the only ones who can whittle it down any further.

The state needs to do a better job of “marketing” the changes that they want to see happen through education instead of resorting to forcing them upon us.

It's not the raking. As I said before we as hunters are more concerned with our hunting area, MYSELF INCLUDED. But what I see and my goals are different from hunter X in Lamar county which is both different from what hunter Y sees an his goals in Mobile. Now, YOU (the Conservation Dept) has to make everyone happy. AIN'T HAPPENING!!! But I will say the average Alabama hunter put his gun up the last day of season. Not really concerned about the deer herd or health. Won't go back to their hunting property until shortly before season. Will shoot their rifle only the weekend before opening weekend.

This group on Aldeer is not the average Alabama hunters. All think about it through the summer and at least visit their hunting property through the summer. They know their properties better than anyone. And they are very opinionated and passionate on what they have observed, even though it varies by site. WE...WE stand behind what we have seen for years and years on the same property.

THIS WILL BE THE TOUGHEST GROUP YOU FACE BUT ALSO THE MOST CONCERNED FOR THE DEER!! THIS AIN'T YOUR AVERAGE HUNTERS.

Totally agree. But what's the solution? Dmp?

I agree with you.

How can the department do a better job of marketing these changes?

I agree with what you are saying. Aldeer definitely has some above average hunters.

Contact every possible news media outlet in the state and offer to meet with them. Not just send a link to the website, but go meet with them. Get on the air or do interviews. Push that this is significant and explain why with some details, and not just "this'll be better and we say so."

You have folks in Montgomery and, probably, the district offices who know these people. Finding out the news sites and people to contact isn't difficult. And not just the big ones, either. Weekly papers always need items in summer. The Alabama Press Association has a big state membership list. The Associated Press is located in Montgomery (as is the APA).

This can be done in-house and without paying Luckie or some other PR firm a shitload of money the department doesn't have. It's a public relations campaign by the department. News media doesn't want to hear from PR hacks on something like this. They want to talk with folks who have the knowledge.

Go make it happen. For once, this is easier done than said.


As for hunters, have more public meetings like y'all are having now. You got 35 in one spot or 32 in another? Some folks may have been on vacation or didn't know about it. Some may have heard from Joe Bob. Have more meetings. If only six new folks show up, that's six new folks who may have learned something.

Honestly, I think you guys should have some open public "come shoot the bull" meetings more often. State agencies often are only reactive -- New regs, have a meeting! Crisis problem, have a meeting! CWD is found, have a meeting! -- instead of proactive. Could be done with fisheries, parks, marine police, game wardens and/or the brass.

Several folks have posted on this site that they heard Chuck speak on this check system, were able to ask questions and get answers, and left with a favorable impression. Shooting the $#(# with the big guy and leaving with a favorable impression ain't a bad thing.

I believe you are only seeing the tip of the iceberg with public relations. If it passes the legislative review you will see more.

I try to shoot the $/(- with folks in Cullman a good bit...seems hunters don't like talking to a game warden much...especially during deer season. They just wanna know about the dumbest things I've ever seen anyone do... And before anyone asks it was a guy stuffing a rainbow trout in his pocket because he was over the limit and didn't think I saw him do it. Also didn't help that the tail was sticking out and waving around...lol

Bahahahaha. That's a good one.

"Sir, Conservation officer! Is that a trout in your pants or are you just happy to see me?"

What are we trying to find a solution to?......Shooting too many does?.....Then go back to some broad scale doe days in certain areas. They seemed to work just fine the first time around and didn’t require all kinds of specific data to be gathered. I don’t think we were doing nearly as bad as it was made out to be when someone hollered snake and said we were all over populated. Now because of that bad decision, it’s being made out to be that we need to completely re-invent the wheel to fix it. We have swung the pendulum back and forth to either extreme and now are trying to say that we need a new way. Maybe we just didn’t need to swing the pendulum back so far the first time. Opening up a 2 a day free for all may have been the problem. Maybe we should have tried a more moderate approach first.

High end deer management on everyone’s property through intense hunter management on the government’s part is not a goal that the state should be trying to provide us. Every single hunter might not have top notch deer hunting on their properties due to numerous factors but it just is what it is....More intense management should be a function of individual co-ops.

The solution to breaking it down to site specific management. Even then the hunters have different goals requiring different techniques. What I believe happened when they swung the pendulum to 2 does a day they didn't know and couldn't know the affects predators(coyotes) would have in the equation. The coyote population was and is still growing the best I can tell. Just look at the coyote kill thread from this last season. That was some good data for them and all of us. And as always, they have to gather info and that sets it back years where we the hunters want instant correction. ONCE AGAIN, I CAN ONLY SPEAK FOR MY AREA AND THE WAY ITS BEEN. To the East, West, and South of Chief Dodds house there is a big farmer who doesn't allow coyotes to be shot. Says they will kill more deer than the hunters ever will and he would rather have coyotes than deer around his crops. He has hunters (non-lessors, just his son and friends) but about 2 times a season they bring a large group for a doe killing. No bucks allowed. Says if you let this group shoot bucks they will pass on the does hoping for a buck and end up killing nothing.

Hey yotetrapper, you show me the data first! We have 49 other states. Show me one that has done what you propose and show me how things are better. I'll wait.

Do you seriously think that the data collected would not be used? Do you think we just "want to write tickets"? Other states have used tags, quotas and check in stations as a type of "Gamecheck" for years so they can get a grasp of what their hunters are killing and to help manage wildlife. It may not be called "Gamecheck", but ultimately that is what those states are using to gauge harvest and the need for changes. Also it's not Gamecheck that makes hunting "better" it's the management decisions that are made from Gamecheck data. You can look up your own research on how tags, quotas, and deer harvest numbers have helped manage wildlife populations over the years.

I don't know what will happen, yotetrapper. But I want a good track record and results from a system like GameCheck before it gets shoved down our throats. While you don't see it as an infringement of liberties or a hassle, I do.

All I'm wanting is another state's experience and the results if I'm going to sign on, is it really that hard to provide another state with tangible results? If so, why?

We've talked about the state making a difference and what not. I've also read about how all the outlaws in Alabama won't use the gamecheck etc..... What the hell, so we assume most hunters in Alabama don't give a shucks and/or are outlaws. Maybe,we, as AL hunters need to clean up our act or something for god's sake because we apparently point the blame at each other and that does not make progress.