This is the way I see it. First of all, ask the question: What is the real reason for having Game Check? Is it some type of game harvest enforcement method placed upon the hunters, or is it some attempt to count dead deer and speculate on a population? If it's enforcement, is it working, can it work? If it's scientific methodology, is it working, can it work?
In my opinion, it isn't working, it cannot work, it is a flawed attempt to accomplish both enforcement and science. It is simply the wrong way to do either.
The State must find a way to do deer population surveys in order to set hunting seasons for a sustainable population. This ain't it.
Then, enforce the law with boots on the ground, not some voluntary method that requires hunter participation.
We need a fresh start from the top down and somehow get the politics out of hunting regulations and laws.
I have asked myself these same questions. What is the ultimate goal? Manage or improve quality? Total numbers/numbers per county or area/points of the bucks? Or maybe all of the above but what is it compared against? Total hunters? If the total numbers are the goal then stiff enforcement is the only thing that will help and even then there will always be “outlaws” of specific data for quality purposes is the goal then pick and percentage of the total and run with it. Data is data
Landowners who sell timber, in my area anyway, have to come up with a timber management plan for 20(?) years. Normally if a consultant is used, they do it. It just lays out a plan and steps that you plan to take in regenerating the timber. Maybe a timber person on here can explain it better. But this sounds like what y'all are asking for. A plan that details the goals of wildlife management over a set period.
