DMAP v "game check"

[Eddie Maxwell]

If I was the commissioner of game and fish in Alabama:

I would repeal “game check” and use all those wasted resources to promote the Deer Management Assistance Program (DMAP) instead. I would eliminate the several “seasons” that are no more than unnecessary restrictions on what you can choose to use to hunt with. Dead deer are dead deer regardless of what you use to kill them, and the biological effect is exactly the same no matter if the deer is killed with a gun, a bow or a rock.

Under DMAP a state biologist inspects the property and makes recommendations for quotas based on the site-specific conditions for that piece of property. His recommendations are based on the condition of the habitat and the population density of the deer there to determine the carrying capacity. Recently, I’ve heard a state biologist say that other species of wildlife are going to be included in those recommendations.

A quota of does is set for the PROPERTY instead of for the individual hunters who hunt there under their statewide bag limits. When the quota of does has been killed on the property, then doe season ends then and there. Statewide bag limits currently allow every deer on the property to be killed legally, depending on the number of hunters filling their bag limits there.

I would include bucks in the quotas for the property as well as does instead of simply allowing statewide bag limits to result in too many bucks being killed on the property. When the quota of bucks is reached, buck season would end for the property just like for does. Hunters would then be free to hunt elsewhere to fill their statewide bag limit for bucks or does, and the deer on that DMAP property would be protected based on truly site-specific and scientific management.

Instead of setting bow season, gun season, youth season, primitive weapons season etc. etc. etc., I would allow the hunters who share the property, pay the bills and do all the work to decide how they want to hunt. The recommended quotas for the number of deer to be killed on the property, both bucks and does, would serve to protect the species and the management goals of those who share the property. Management goals and any restrictions to accomplish them would decided by the hunters themselves.

DMAP data is much more thorough and more valuable for making site-specific decisions that are based purely on science without all the politics we have now. The data collected from DMAP participants all across the state would serve not only the hunters on those properties, but the state’s biologists would be able to use that information to set more site-specific seasons and bag limits statewide for non-participating properties.

That’s the direction we were headed just a couple of decades ago when a few hot shot biologists decided the state should be made into one huge wildlife management area. Cooperation turned into dictation and over regulation. Conservation turned into mandated “qdm”.

Here’s a link to an article written by Claude Jenkins about DMAP with a map showing the widespread participation throughout the state back in 1997-98:

https://www.alabamawildlife.org/uploade ... ll2012.pdf

Cooperation is a much more efficient way to accomplish desired results than dictation and over regulation.


Good hunting,

Eddie Maxwell

[Tru-Talker]

I have no problem with this...if they could generate fact based statistics with the program.... I agree all properties are different and need to be treated as such... So would you want the state to pay for the biologists?

[Eddie Maxwell]

... So would you want the state to pay for the biologists?

Certainly. We're already paying them to do that. Have been since 1984. They can earn their salary doing that instead of running all over the state promoting worthless political agendas the Advisory Board dreams up. Have you ever questioned the biological qualifications of the members of the Advisory Board? It's ridiculous. Landscapers, taxidermists, morticians, lobbyists, etc. etc. etc.

I shared in DMAP properties for more than 20 years until they made "game check" mandatory a couple of years ago. A state biologist came to the property and made his recommendations for an antlerless quota. We set our own antler restrictions based on what the members of the lease wanted. I no longer participate. If they're going to make all the decisions, they can collect their own data.

[Tru-Talker]

Are there enuff of them to cover all the state? Or are saying being a part of it would be voluntary?

[bobwhite]

Are there enuff of them to cover all the state? Or are saying being a part of it would be voluntary?

This would be a big part of the equation right here.

[daniel white]

I have no problem with this...if they could generate fact based statistics with the program.... I agree all properties are different and need to be treated as such... So would you want the state to pay for the biologists?

X2

Eddie are you saying this would be X amount of deer of X amount of acres per county, or would it be a district thing?? Would be hard to cover every “hunting club” in the state I’m sure. Can you clarify how you would do this in means of per person hunter. I’m a little confused. But i do like where your going with it. We are raping out doe herds in Randolph county and I’m sure in other parts of the state. IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Eddie Maxwell]

Are there enuff of them to cover all the state? Or are saying being a part of it would be voluntary?

If they stick to their real jobs and cut out all the silly stuff they'll have plenty of time to handle the whole state. They're supposed to be doing it anyhow before they set seasons and bag limits statewide.

DMAP is voluntary. Has been since 1984. If the commissioner would comply with the law and furnish everybody a pamphlet with all the laws and rules together in it, you could read about it.

220-2-.73 The Alabama Cooperative Deer Management Assistance Program at the bottom of page 37 of last years Regulation Book:

https://www.outdooralabama.com/sites/de ... 0FINAL.pdf

[Eddie Maxwell]

Eddie are you saying this would be X amount of deer of X amount of acres per county, or would it be a district thing?? Would be hard to cover every “hunting club” in the state I’m sure. Can you clarify how you would do this in means of per person hunter. I’m a little confused. But i do like where your going with it. We are raping out doe herds in Randolph county and I’m sure in other parts of the state. IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm saying that the number of deer to be killed on any participating property [the quota or limit] would be set according to the carrying capacity of the property. Whether its 5000 acres or 500, the quota [limit of deer that could be killed] would depend on the conditions of that piece of property ... carrying capacity plus goals of the hunters who share that property. Statewide seasonal bag limits don't apply on DMAP property and even daily bag limits can be different if needed. The quota is the bag limit. When it's filled, it's over.


DMAP isn't new. It's been around a long time. It just hasn't been promoted like "game check". I'm just asking for it to be promoted along with a few changes I'd like to see.

[daniel white]

So let’s say I have 500 acres leased, with 5 members. If our “quota” is 20 does and 7 bucks, the. It won’t matter if we split it all even or if one person kills em all. That’s what needs killin and no more after certain number is reached?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Eddie Maxwell]

Daniel, that's how it could work if they would make some needed changes. We used to be able to kill three does a day if needed. They could make it fit the hunter's preferences though. If you and your buddies wanted it where it was first come first served, then it shouldn't matter as long as you stayed within the quota for the property. The state's interest would still be served … and it would be served a lot better than the way it's working now.

[Eddie Maxwell]

Notice that I said I would like to have bucks included. Bucks are not currently included.

It's silly to limit one hunter on 5000 acres to 3 bucks per season when an unlimited number of hunters could come in and kill every deer on that 5000 acres legally by filling their bag limits. There are thousands of acres of wildlife management areas, but if a hunter kills 3 bucks on his own 5000 acres, it counts against the whole state and he can't go to those wmas to continue to hunt. That doesn't make good sense. If he joins DMAP and kills the quota there, he should still be able to hunt other properties without it counting against his seasonal limit.

[daniel white]

Daniel, that's how it could work if they would make some needed changes. We used to be able to kill three does a day if needed. They could make it fit the hunter's preferences though. If you and your buddies wanted it where it was first come first served, then it shouldn't matter as long as you stayed within the quota for the property. The state's interest would still be served … and it would be served a lot better than the way it's working now.

I could see how that would work. And 10 fold on your last statement. Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk