That's a fair question; our regulations are not yet nearly as onerous as those of many other states. I was so against the buck limit because it was obviously the first step to the end of the AL system of wildlife management. I would define that system as one in which the state allowed generous seasons and limits in the hope that landowners would have the incentive to truly manage their land for wildlife. It worked extremely well, and we had the largest turkey harvest of any state and a whole lot of deer. Voluntary qdm had already resulted in more does being killed than bucks. There was no good reason to change that system. I remember that BSK said he had some wealthy clients that wanted to buy land in AL because it was the one state that really allowed the landowner to manage the deer on their property.

But we got the limit anyway. One of the committee members said it was a good first step. Voluntary GC was the next step, then mandatory GC. I've never heard our current director even once acknowledge the role of landowners in wildlife management. He seems to see it as a zero sum game where wildlife populations will be the same regardless of the rules, and it's up to him to decide who does what.

We are now about a decade into this change in philosophy and the result is a much smaller deer harvest, and we are once again killing more bucks than does. Who would have favored buck limits if you knew this would be the result?

But as I said earlier, the director's comments concern me far more than his actions. My fear is that we ain't seen nothing yet. Who knows what new regulations he dreams of at night?