Aldeer.com Forums Alabama Deer Talk Serious Deer Talk Forum How long before you get your three tags in the mail?

I doubt if I could think like that even if I tried.

How about if we just manage the deer ourselves and let the game wardens catch the poachers, night hunters and road hunters instead of checking our tags and making sure we have 144 instead of 143 inches of orange on and seeing if we filled our little qdm record out??

Who's doing the damage to the species here anyhow??

My main point is to help with the enforcement of the current Laws.

Why are you so against that?

Because it takes attention away from enforcing current laws and puts it on enforcing petty rules that serve no good purpose for the protection of the species. Well intentioned hunters are getting the tickets instead of the outlaws in far too many cases. That hurts both ways.

I'll just agree to disagree.

So, carry on with your crusade against the Buck Limits.
I already knew that you didn't like them and what your agenda is.

Sorry that you cannot garner the support that you need.....NOT!

I don't think we do disagree.

I think we both know this is all about enforcing qdm (buck) limits, not about enforcing bag limits set for conservation of the species.

And the "tag system" is different than the "Antlered Buck Harvest Record" that is in place now? I would imagine that if a GW saw a set of fresh antlers in the back of a truck that he would ask to see the State required "Antlered Buck Harvest Record" for verification that it was recorded as required "Before Dressing Or Moving The Carcass". Both systems require that the GW see the antlers and check paperwork. I would submit that if a person is not doing that now, then they probably will not do that with a tag system either. With that being the case "fear" does not lend more weight to one system or the other. However, if you want to talk about "fear" becoming an issue the the State should implement significant fines or prison time, but you know we are just talking about deer. The same deer that some people (farmers, insurance and paper/lumber companies) might consider pest and some people (self proclaimed "trophy hunters") might consider protected (until of course it meets their standards to kill). I would venture to say that the vast majority of hunters are between these two extremes.

If a person wants to manage the property that they hunt on by shooting any State defined legal deer that they want or by only managing for what they consider "trophy" (or for political correctness "Mature") deer then I say enjoy managing your land locally!

Sorry, but I rambled onto a different discussion that doesn't need to be hashed out on a tag system thread!

Out Back ,,,,, you are forgetting that land owners , people that live on the land and people over 65 do not have to have license.

what about them ?????

I am personally for a tag system. Reasons... The local village idiot that lives next to my 800 acre lease. He comes in when we are not there, rides the roads day and night, shoots all moving deer. And what can we do?? Nothing. We do manage our place and so do the neighboring clubs. GW's are non existent where we hunt. The Hrvest record we currently use... even IF he did fill out a record, after he shoots three small bucks, he can just go print another.. who will ever know? Some might argue that the Meat hunter has to shoot spikes because it is all he may see.. well it dang sure will be if he shoots the first thing that walks. If there are spikes in the area, there are does, and most likely there are bigger bucks. Nothing wrong with being a meat hunter, but it doesnt mean you cant hunt to promote a better quality of wildlife. It is known that an old doe will only birth one fawn, whereas a young doe is more likely to birth two. Kill the old doe when possible. Now with all that said, I am not saying it is just wrong for someone to shoot a spike. If it is just all you see and just have to... fine. BUT.. it is the guy that shoots multiple spikes in a season. That hurts your deer population waaaaay more than what a doe will. We would all see more deer and better deer if everyone atleast attempted to practice a little qdm. If you havent, I urge all of you to watch the show, "Wild Justice" on NatGeo. You can see some insight into the lives of the california GW's and maybe appreciate some of us that have a genuine love for the outdoors and a passion for protecting our wildlife.

It's not just you, it's just common sense.

They would still be required to obtain the appropriate tags, at no cost.

Thats ridiculous. A tag system will have no more effect on reducing illegal kills than the 3 buck limit did in forcing those who killed a bunch of bucks each year to stop at three.

Why not?

I think it is ridiculous to say that it would not help the GW's to do their job.

Don't have a license.....no tag!
Killed more than 3 bucks (WHICH MOST POACHERS DO).... no more tags!
GW called out to investigate a notorious bunch and finds fresh untagged antlers.....a ticket!

How could it NOT help?

Heck, it is no more 'inconvience' to the hunter than the system now if you are a law-abiding hunter and do as you should! So, why be against it?

If I were to open my wallet right now you would find licenses for three different states, and I live in Alabama, if i broke the law and was not caught in the act, but later, I would simply say that I killed it in a different state. If I was concerned about getting caught leaving the property I would simply use the skinning rack at the barn behind a locked gate and keep the horns and meat there or just say the horns were given to me by someone else or that they came off of a deer that had been shot from the road or get some tags for my minor children and use them myself or any number of excuses.

You have heard over and over that you can not legislate morality. Agree with this or not, if a person chooses to not abide by your tag system, the reality of being caught is very small. In fact, because of Alabama's limited resources, almost non existent.

No, that's not ridiculous. But it will trim down a level of those who don't want to take the chance. The man said isn't wasn't a cure-all.

Louisiana started there tag system in 07, before you were allowed 6 deer per season, all bucks or all does or any 6 deer, then in 07 when you got your license you got your 6 tags 3 does and 3 bucks, your license is a water proof and tear proof recipt type and is great, your tags are removable, when you harvest your animal tag must be placed and you have 72 hours to call in your tag. and record on license to. I was fortunate to still be there when they started it and its a good thing for the honest hunters, Alabama needs to lookat other states and get some ideas for our state.

Key phrase "its a good thing for the HONEST hunters".

That statement makes me wonder............

If it is a good thing for honest hunters,

WHO would be against it?????

The premise that was discussed earlier was that a tag systerm would help the GWs catch illegal hunters (i.e. poachers). Therefore, if it only works for the "honest hunters" then how will it help the GWs?

There is a system already in place that apparently only the "honest hunters" abide by, so why create another system to keep the "honest hunters" honest? More regulation, hoops to jump through, etc does nothing except burden the "honest hunters" and create more inefficient bureaucratic waste. If the goal is to reduce the illegal harvest, then that should be handled by very stiff penalties against the "DIShonest hunter (i.e. poacher)".

However, if the goal of a tagging system is to micro-manage the resource down to the local level then that is a different discussion altogether.

The other thing a tag system with telecheck would be good for is collecting more accurate data on our deer. The current system is voluntary and im sure even all the honest hunters don't submit their data

WOW!!! Uncureable problems