that could be pretty easy not true . it shows' trends not what is causeing the trends . lot of things play into trends not just one thing . as i stated before they spent alllllllll this time and money after they collect some data they will still make a guess about what to do . by then they are behind the curve again .

just like they did with collecting the hunter surveys but they rammed down out throat any way . what they did to the processors was just wrong as hell .

Not enough information is available to make any deductions from these numbers. Too much has to be assumed. We don’t know the actual number of hunters, the actual number of deer being killed, the actual number of total deer available to kill. So there is no way to know if we are killing more deer in these counties or not. And there is DEFINITELY not enough information available to know why. This is pointless. Anyone could take any of these numbers and bend them to fit their narrative. And it is dangerous to push any narrative without specific and accurate information.

If a county is consistently killing say 2100 does year after year then you can safely assume that the deer herd is healthy enough to sustain that type of harvest…..if not the numbers would go down……

Cnc how did Jackson county end up and what do the numbers tell us?

so in reality we are just jumping thru hoops to entertain Chuck????

The biggest problem we have in interpreting these numbers is that baiting was legalized at the same time they forced everyone to have a check in number at the processor......So we dont really have good GC numbers to look at pre-baiting.......We dont know how much each county actually jumped from what it used to be because our trend line starts just after legalization. The hunter survey numbers say that it was a good bit statewide. As far as Jackson Co I think the additional harvest has peaked and now its slowly trending downward....It should level off at some point but the population is likely going to be less than what is once was....That'll likely be true for a lot of areas.

Jackson Co

4 year buck harvest trend
2946....... 2626....... 3099....... 2463

4 year doe harvest trend
1875....... 1669....... 2359....... 1791

Montgomery keeps changing the rules/parameters of deer hunting negating any damn usefulness of all of the data. We are wasting time and money.

I agree……I don’t think they’ll ever actually use it except when there’s some change they want to pass…..then they’ll pull numbers out that justify whatever it is they want to do…….If we were going to use it the way its intended then they would acknowledge the change that’s occurring due to baiting…... If you’re not going to use GC to monitor and adjust due to the impacts of something as major as legalized baiting then when ARE you gonna use it??......If changes like we’re seeing occur in some counties don’t trigger it then what will?? Sure its fun to monitor and watch the numbers…..but if its never used to actually make decisions and make adjustments then its pointless. We’re just collecting data to look at

One of the biggest problems is that we have no ability to adapt in this state…..If you’re going to have a system like Game Check then you need to be able to use to data to make tweaks to the “rules” periodically…..things like adjusting doe days in specific areas, etc……We arent capable of that though without pulling teeth……Change anything, even if its for the good, and folks start jumping up and down……If we’re going to manage by set it and forget it and only change when it’s a last resort, then something like GC is not really much use to us……Like I said before, it’s cool to look at but folks shouldn’t have to jump through extra hoops for nothing

So what conditions may have contributed to the rise( year 3) that followed the drop ( year 2)? Was it bumper crop of acorns or weather related? I could see a drought and a following cold winter causing a drop off or a wet spring /summer and mild winter leading to a population increase and harvest.

A lot of these trend lines follow that pattern of up/down….up/down…..up/down…..from one year to the next because of other variables like you mentioned while still trending gradually upwards or downwards over the long term……Just like the red line is doing in the graph below.



I think you’re probably hitting close to the answer on year 2 for Jackson Co….Some other variable had an influence that year that’s keeping it from being a smooth line climbing upward on the graph. That total from last year will probably be the peak if I had to guess and now we’re on the downward slope on the other side. Keeping with our up/down pattern you may see a slight increase again next year but then followed by another tick downward the year after…..stair stepping further and futher down. I think if we had good data for the 4-5 years prior to baiting to go along with what we're looking at then the change would be much more easily seen right now. Again, the real question is…..How far down will it go before leveling back out?......How much impact will baiting have? Maybe it’s a little, maybe it’s a lot…….My guess is that it will vary from county to county……That’s why you have some folks kicking back and smiling while other folks bend over. I think the reality though is that more people are being impacted than they realize. No different than the 2 per day doe shooting…..it wasn’t until after the fact that folks looked back and saw it. Here we are again……We’re gonna ride it out, see how everything settles out, then MAYBE we adjust…….I get it but some things just arent that hard to see coming…..This is where I think Frankie nailed it by saying people have to learn the hard way…..About the only way you’re gonna get the hunting public to willingly change is for them to actually suffer first. Its not enough just to say “Hey, we’re running in the ditch.”……You actually have to run it in there.

Maybe this is what you gotta do to keep people happy, keep votes and keep your job…..but it would be a whole lot easier just to say screw what the hunters bitch about and do what needs to be done…… Heck, as a whole the hunting public is all over the place with opinions anyways

I honestly don’t think people in our area are shooting does as much as they once were. The novelty has worn off I think. That is just my observation no scientific proof

You’re correct…..a lot of folks HAVE wised up to the doe blasting but you’re still getting an increase in kill numbers none the less due to baiting opening up so many new “opportunities” through small properties and feeders. Big hunting club “X” might not be shooting as many does as they used to……but now they’re suddenly surrounded by a LOT more small properties that are taking up their slack on a landscape level.

Getting a deer home or to camp without checking it would not be difficult. I can think of several easy ways to achieve it and never get caught.

Until the fines hurt, it won't matter. Here are minimum fines for wildlife violations -- https://judicial.alabama.gov/docs/library/rules/JA20_appxB.pdf

Violating the "harvest record" regulation -- $50

That's it? Failing to check a deer or turkey is only $50? That's a laugher. Zero deterrent.



$75 for hunting without a license? $50 for fishing without one? Pffttt.

Hell, TRAPPING without a license is $250. The trapping fines are stiffer.

Hunting at night is $2,000 minimum. That's a start.

Hunting deer or turkey with the aid of bait, but without The Man's Privilege License is $250. Meh. They screamed about disease and corn for years, now allow corn and bait thanks to the almighty dollar, and the fine isn't anything significant.


Next time I ever face-shovel a deer, I'll check it. I want them to have as much data as possible and I follow the laws-regs, even if I don't like them.

But these fines are a laugher. They may not be able to make them higher due to the judicial system or something else, but those are laughable.

Clem’s all over it. Instead of changing seasons or laws stop the illegal killing. Just stop half of it and numbers won’t matter anymore

This ! If the minimum fines have 3 or more zeros and loss of privileges for a few years , and each subsequent violation doubles, then they will have the desired results. Use those funds and the bait fees to hire more green jeans.

Hunting without a license or failing to game check deer should be big fines - $1,500+. Poaching should be similar. All should come with potential to lose everything you're using while doing it - i.e. gun and scope seized.

I can't get on board with a big fine for baiting/not baiting as I think it's crazy that it's even a "privilege". Either it should just be legal because it's not a problem, or it should be illegal because it is...

What's next?

2nd doe privilege? Third buck privilege? Shooting house privilege? Green field privilege? Night hunting deer privilege?

I don’t disagree with any of that but I doubt there’s a huge amount of does being shot illegally…….If we whittle down the base population then you’re starting out with whole lot less to work with when talking about enforcement and such……In another five years we might be looking at having 50% of the deer we had in 2004. The less deer we have…..the less you can let the rough side drag with all of this other stuff. It requires tighter regs and enforcement to keep having decent hunting. This is why I say if you want to keep lax rules then you need to fight for having the deer population be as high as the hunters can make it. There’s an opposing force that’s steadily trying to push it as low as they can get it for their own interests. There isnt the real threat of overpopulation like folks make it out to be…..That’s mostly propaganda to keep the hunter misinformed and pulling the trigger.

A few years ago our neighbor got a ticket for not filling out the paper tag thing before transporting his deer to his house. The game warden saw the deer in his truck because he left his tailgate down. He only hunts a couple miles from his house. The neighbor told me the total cost of the ticket was around $350 if I remember correctly. Now that is court costs also.

Correct ... I forgot about the Court Costs, which adds more to a fine.

But the fines still are too low for almost all of those.

We don't need GWs acting like a Parris Island DI or penalties like William Wallace on the table in Braveheart. But if you're going to fine someone for not having The Man's Privilege Permit for corn, or no license, or not checking a deer or turkey, then make those bite the wallet a little.