I think that most people simply want to see a presence of DCNR in the field. Let's try enforcing the Rules already in place for a while. THEN have a platform that allows the Outdoor Men and Women a real voice in the direction that we want our Conservation Dept to go.

Who actually owns the property you live on? Don't pay taxes on it and it will be auctioned off at the court house. Sad but true.

Sometimes just getting people to talk about radical action can at least bring about a small amount of change.

Troy, no doubt the worst thing about using the sheriff to enforce the game laws too would be the quality variation from county to county. I've no doubt it would work fine in my county right now due to the character of our current sheriff. In some counties it might indeed be worse.

But the good thing about each sheriff is that all are elected and directly accountable to the people. As it is now, a GW is accountable to Montgomery. And if given 2 new deputies, there is nothing to prevent the sheriff using those new positions to employ the same people now serving. It would probably depend on the quality of their work.

Likely a moot point anyway; such a change could only be brought about by a determined governor to lead it, and I don't see such a person.

From what I get following posts on here it varies wildly now with state GWs. If some of the goofy stunts posted are true , there's some real winners out there. I'm glad we've always had good ones in Ol' Hi-Jackson. They can be traced all the way back to Rayford "Fuzz" Hamilton.

totally agree

Dog, the problem has always been lack of supervision by Montgomery, and by District Supervisors. There has historically been little info and direction passed from Montgomery to the local officers, so much is left to them to figger out. NOT a good way to enforce state wide laws/regs.

There are a LOT of dedicated, hard working, FAIR officers out there. There are also some idiots that need to do something else for a living.

Which is exactly why I got pissy with Matt Brock and Nighthunter taking up the reigns as unofficial DCNR spokespeople on here. I dont want them or somebody on here getting in trouble because of what they say which may or maynot be official DCNR policy.
I know they are not communicated well with Montgomery, and Montgomery for whatever reason refuses to come on here and attempt to communicate well with the public.

I agree 100% and I want to see game and fish going after the real bad actors ! Not a grandfather who forgot his pen while hunting with his grandson either !

FYI, the AFOA now has a link to this thread from their website.

http://afoa.org/news/news.htm

Guys, whether you agree with AFOA on this subject or not, it would be in hunters best interest to join this group. VERY pro-hunting, can provide club insurance, has a way to lease/ buy land or join a club. More importantly it can become a voice for the people (us) in mass unlike we have now on the local or state level.

The Serious Deer Hunting Forum already has a link and discussion of the latest column put out by the dcnr, but for the benefit of any AFOA members who came here just to read this thread, I'll include a link to it:

http://www.outdooralabama.com/game-checks-first-year-learning-process

I thought this sentence really tells a lot about our director's attitude toward private landowners:

>>>They may own the land, but the wildlife belongs to the citizens of Alabama, and we are the ones responsible for the management of this natural resource. <<<

This statement displays a much different attitude than the one the dcnr held during most of my life.

Charles Kelly would have never dreamed of writing or saying anything like this. He constantly pushed the idea that wildlife management had to be a partnership of the dcnr and private landowners. He believed, correctly, that wildlife could flourish only under such a partnership. It was this attitude that was responsible for AL having good populations of deer and turkey long before they were restored to other southeastern states.

It seems the current dcnr does not see landowners as partners, but as pests to be regulated.

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't many of the deer that the DCNR trapped to re-stock other areas come from private landowners?
Didn't the Stimpson family donate a part of their property where many of these deer were trapped to the State to be used as a Sanctuary? Isn't this land now denoted a 'Community Hunting Area' or WMA that allows hunting and the deer herd greatly reduced??

Who is gonna step up 'the next time'?

I've personally noticed that as the hunting regs increase, the compliance with the law has decreased, just going by the few conversations I've had with other hunters. Not a free-for-all anarchist style, but more of a civil disobedience type thing. Some of the hunters I know just manage their kills and reporting on the down-low, and use their own common sense to manage THEIR particular land and herd. Surprisingly, it's mainly the older hunters that refuse to be pushed around. They just aren't loud about it.

Well, the private landowner is on an entitlement program same as a welfare recipient and nothing more than drain on the DCNR without giving back. That's what I read anyway.

Yup, I know dozens who havent bought a license in the last several years and just keep things quite. They never brag about a good buck and just mind their own business.

Ironically, many of these gentlemen are older landowners who have always taken good care of their properties and have high-quality hunting.

You can buy your own land and pay the tax on it and be part of that same entitlement program.

I'll be danged if I'm gonna be the one to rat them out, either. DCNR is losing the confidence of most of us in my circle anyway. They can play whack-a-mole trying to bust these old farts or they can come up with some sensible management that is based on science, such as the jawbone studies I keep talking about. Same thing is happening with the recreational fishing sector down here. I know dads of 8 year olds that know how to prepare a ditch-bag for snappers.

Awight, put it in Southern redneck because I ain't following what you're saying.