Spin off from 3 buck limit thread....

What does everyone think the limit should be overall including season length . I think 2 buck and 2 doe. Season stays the same length but archery only untill January . What say you??

October 1 through Feb. 28

Use your discretion to hunt reasonably and legally

@ Surefire: I say QUIT F8CKING WITH IT. Manage your ground and I'll manage mine.

You and Clem are in agreement

2 bucks and 3ish does would be reasonable to me. Lets be honest. under most circumstances deer is way more expensive to eat, so called meat hunters, are really just hunters that like deer meat and like to hunt, but don't want to pass deer. nothing wrong with that, but they aren't feeding their starving family.

as far as season, I'd love to see it the same length, but bow only, and have a week rifle at thanksgiving and christmas, then maybe a 3 day rifle during january, with a muzzleloader early november.

of course that will never happen.

Pretty much how I feel about it...

Thanksgiving to Valentines day any weapon 3 bucks per season and 1 doe a day.

Bingo. If you feel like your neighbors are having a negative impact on your deer herd, then you're not doing something right.

And I even supported the 3-buck limit. In hindsight, I wish I'd known better.

I'd rather be able to make my own decisions about what I need or want without having someone who thinks "three bucks are enough for anyone" impose more regulations. Or even "one buck is enough for you" ... who are they are they to tell me what I need/want for my property?

I've yet to see a single biologically-proven benefit whatsoever to the population with a 1/2/3-buck limit in any state other than (a) more hunters spending money, (b) more giant bucks, which leads to the first thing. If there is a legitimate biological benefit to the wild free-range population by having more 4- and older-year-old bucks, let's see it. I'd love to see it.

Just let me hunt legally and within what I believe is needed for my property, and leave me the hell alone.

Let's be honest: YOU can already do that IF **you** want to! Leave everyone else alone.

Myself where I hunt I would say go back to "doe season" only shoot does with a rifle between Christmas and the first week of January. Cause where I hunt we don't have deer jumping over your truck when you are going out the gate now don't get me wrong I like to shoot and eat deer but I also like to see deer. Info that I get from Choctaw Monroe Clarke Mobile and Baldwin counties is less deer being seen cause all the does are being shot. And I like the season Oct-25/Feb10. But eventually the 2 does a day and now a doe a day is going to catch up to the Southern part of the state and have an impact on the population.

Deer aren't supposed to be jumping over your truck when you leave the gate, , but yeah, some probably many parts of the State went too crazy for too long with excessive doe harvest. I know I did. And it didn't do squat for the rut in terms of timing (impossible to change) or intensity/visibility. And now there is the coyote factor decimating the fawn crop each year.

So yeah, people have to manage their properties smarter. That means people restrict their doe harvest to less that the State allows where that is needed. At least the new rule of one doe a day vs. 2 a day is a step in the right direction.

Same here.

I din't need my hunting managed to a statewide average.

Dropping to 1 doe/day is hurting some folks.

How is that hurting them? Can't they get on the management program?

I managed my land within state laws but I do not rely on the state to tell me what i need to harvest and what i need to let go. I never agreed with 2 doe a day harvest. I try and manage for the carrying capacity of my land. That may be the reason we see plenty of deer. Big bucks come with age plain and simple.

They shouldn't have to join a state program to manage their property as they see fit.

I never would've guessed this....

yeap !!!!!i don't like it all

from what i've been told on here they'll be a lot that can't get in it . you got to have so many acres .

I would like the season to go back to 2 does a day. Where I hunt, I like to kill 3- 4 does per year. What does it matter if I kill 2 in two days or spread 4 out over four days? Since, the buck limit was enacted in 2007 ( I believe), I have killed four bucks. One in 2011, 2 in 2012, and one in 2014. All of only one of these bucks was 3.5, the rest were 4.5+. That said, I simply do not like the state telling me how I need to manage my herd.

Deer management is not a one size fits concept. If you hunt private land, and kill a whole lot of deer for several years, it is going to be harder to see them in the following years. You cannot blame the fact that you are not seeing/ killing deer on the state. The key word is accountability. A hunter's actions, good or bad, have consequence.

As for state/ federal owned/ managed land, they can be manger the way they see fit. It is their land. If I have a piece of dirt, I should be able to manage as I see fit.

Only thing I'd like to see is the season extended till mid Feb.

Mirage, from a biological sense would it matter if it were extended statewide through the middle of February (or even the end, like Arkansas)?

For some I don't think it matters, for me it's huge, I rarely get to hunt a rut, at the most a few days, our rut here is not till the first or second week of February. I have seen does bred during turkey season before.

I'm with Clem except I wasn't for it to start with.

Im also with Wmhunter that the doe killing was overdone in some areas.

Teaching people to be better managers is the key....not one size fits all regulations.

Let's be honest: YOU can already do that IF **you** want to! Leave everyone else alone. [/quote

Mine was more of a "not a chance in hell, but what I would love to see happen for my personal benefit" type scenario. It also directly relates to the fact that I don't have large acreage do that with. I hunt mainly public land, with a few very small pieces thrown in. There is no such thing as managing a 50 or 100 acre tract. You can add food and that's it. No one in their right mind can tell me that a doe a day, or 2 a day makes any kind of sense from a biological or need based scenario. You want to make it 2 a day? fine, have special doe days. Or hell make it unlimited does a day, but only a certain amount a year. I'm simply advocating a greater deer density, as well as bigger bucks. Bigger bucks may not be everyones wish. Fine, if that's not your wish, then shoot a doe. or small buck, but There is no reason you need 20

Says who? You? How and why?

If I have 3,000 or 5,000 acres and believe I need to kill 20 bucks, and I don't want to bring in five other hunters to fill their 'tags,' then I damn sure shouldn't be told by anyone what I "need" to be doing on my land.


I currently hunt on some land on which my cameras have taken photos of bucks with truly messed-up antlers. I have photos of multiple bucks with screwed-up antlers. It's not just one or two. I've talked with hunters in the area who have seen similar bucks. I'd like to shoot every damned one of them but because of our "tag" and requirements, I cannot. Legally, of course. And I realize that buck genes are only half the equation so that means some does probably need to be whacked.

Yet with some folks saying "Oh, you don't need to shoot more than X-number of deer a season!" and getting that BS pushed through that affects private landowners, it can and does have an effect on people who might genuinely need to do something. Which means you can hunt legally and keep having problems or violate the laws/regs to get done what you need to get done.

2 bucks and 3 does a year isn't reasonable for 50 acres either...especially if more than one person might hunt there.

So what you're saying is the 1 in a million hunter who controls 3k-5k acres by himself and let's no one else hunt it, is more important than all the thousands of public land hunters and small acreage hunters?. Another point I'll bring up, you will not change the gene pool by shooting "culls". As you admitted, does carry the genes as well. So the only way to change it is to wipe out all the deer and start from scratch. If you really want 20 deer removed from your land, why not get some younger hunters in there and let them do it?

Is it not? Well in that case, I guess it's not reasonable on most clubs either, since 50-100 acres a member is a pretty common ratio

Not mine....how do you know what the limit should be for me? You don't know anything about what land I hunt, how many acres it is, how many people hunt it, the carrying capacity or anything else....so why would you make up 2 bucks and 3 does and think that's good for my situation?

Education is the key, because every situation is different. You can't make up any number that is going to be right for all situations.

So your the saying the State is wrong.... They seem to be convinced they're right....

Alabama is behind almost every state as far as quality of deer, and almost every other state has stricter harvest guidelines. The two go hand in hand. 3 of the 4 states that border us have better deer. Now I realize not everyone is interested in big bucks, but I think there should be a number that's a reasonable compromise between the 2

Mississippi produces more big bucks per capita because of the soil quality and agriculture in the delta...that's it. Georgia has good areas and bad areas...just like us. It is bigger though, so it inevitably produces more big deer...that's about the extent of it. Tennessee I'm not as knowledgeable of, but know there is a ton of agricultural land on the west end...probably more of a concentration than we have anywhere in Alabama.

Define quality. Big bucks? Giant antlers?

Or by quality do you mean a biologically sound, managed approach that landowers can make on their own property without the government -- and a segment of trophy deer hunters wanting big racked bucks -- telling them what they "need" to do?

Make those limits and regulations on public land the state owns or controls. But leave the private landowner to decide for himself.

And as to your other question, yeah ... if I have 5,000 or 3,000 or 848 acres and believe I need to kill more than three bucks then I may not want anyone else on my property, at all. I might invite the Wee Tots Youth Home FutureHunters to come help me. But I should be able to do what I think is best for my property and if that means killing 3 or 10 or 20 bucks by myself then I don't need a state agency telling me I cannot on MY land. Or I'll just do it and be quiet.

Glad to see all the different opinions on this thread. I'm with a lot of you on the whole " don't worry about me " mantra but this is just me thinking out loud when I say I think the midwest and all the other states that take big time deer is partly bc of the limitations they have in place . I fully understand they have better soil and miles of row crops but I have to think the mostly archery and limits you can kill have something to do for it. I also understand a lot of people dont care of big deer and just like to shoot for some reason. There isn't a one size fits all plan but I don't see an issue with having a 2 buck 2 doe limit. If you have that big of a problem with deer plant some corn and get a ag license to kill what ever you would like.

So your solution is to spend more money to plant corn in order to get a depredation permit to kill game animals during summer, when they have to be left in the field to rot and can't be used?

That's one reason hunting seasons are in place, and regs that allow landowners to do what they need to do then. Not by spending more money later.

You're correct about the Midwest. Nutrition and age, which comes from the one- and two-buck limits, helps them have big bucks. Are their deer populations far healthier than those in the Southeast thanks to those minimal limits and older bucks in the population? Is that comparison even possible to be made?

That is not necessarily a true statement.....

Damned if you do, damned if you don't for DCNR. They let it go wide open, then a few years later folks blame them for not seeing any deer or big bucks. They try and regulate and folks scream about that.........maybe even myself on the right day.

It boils down to what others have said.......education is the key for the landowner, manager, and individual hunter.

I would like it more open than now for bucks and does.....but I know that some would take advantage and have everyone but themselves to blame later.

Catch-22

In Illinois in 2013, 49% of the harvest was does. 29% yearlings and button bucks, 22% was 2.5 or older bucks.

Of the antlered deer kill, 43.6% was yearlings and 56.4% was 2.5 or older.

And you can bet most of the 2.5 or older bucks were 2.5 and I bet you would have a safe bet.

Hunterbuck wins!

It is not true for most people that hunt there own property.

I love these threads the I don't want any restrictions let me manage my deer the way I want, I wonder how many of those folks have a 10' fence around there property because if not they are not your deer. On the other end is the lets just kill 1 buck per person with 2 weeks of gun season there is no way you can kill enough deer in 2 weeks in AL to control the population.
As usual the people with a little common sense prevail and we are somewhere in the middle.

How can one persons opinion upset some of ya'll so bad?

There are as many MATURE bucks in AL's population as any other state. Having hunted a couple of Midwestern states several times, there are no more mature deer to see and hunt than there are here. I'd actually be willing to bet if you looked at the population as a whole in our state vs most Midwestern states we would have a higher number of mature bucks. They have lower populations, a much higher winter mortality, and their annual harvests, just like what jlcoffee posted, has an incredibly high number of immature deer killed. AL does not produce HUGE deer like the Midwest, and it never will, regardless of antler regs, or annual bag limits. It's just a FACT.

The three buck limit is doing what it was intended to do. It's allowing more bucks to enter the population, resulting in more mature bucks, lowering antlered deer harvests, and increasing antlerless harvests. It has been a great thing from the areas I am familiar with. Decreasing the antlered bag limit is not going to happen. Limiting people to 2 does is almost borderline absurd.

I'm really at a loss for words. Everybody wants the state to change something for them, yet you see from the voluntary gamecheck system that people are not participating in letting us biologist know what is going on. If you aren't calling in your deer, then you shouldn't have a say. Kind of like voting. If you don't vote, your opinion on the matter is invalid.

That is why I posted it. I have 96 acres that used to be great hunting until landowners changed around me. I have killed a grand total of one deer off of it in a decade.
The new neighbors took the liberal does limits to heart all the while shooting any legal buck also and ruined a good hunting place.

^^^^^ this

I like the 2 doe a day. "They" should have left Jackson Co. alone at 2 does a day! Couple of farmers have already told me, if the state don't want them killed in the fall, we'll do it in the summer. And I know several that will. Why can't DCNR leave US the hell alone?! They are supposed to be educated down in Montgomery they sure as hell don't act like it. They had NA set up in zones with areas that needed more killed with a larger bag limit, and areas with smaller herds less. Didn't even give it a chance. Painted the whole state with the same brush.

I called mine in last year and this year

Well it was probably more than one person, but some person or persons got the whole damn state changed. The area biologist told me there was no call from hunters for reducing the limit in Jackson Co. from 2 a day to 1. He also said he would not have recommended it. But it got changed anyway.

Hmmm

I voted....and lost... I'm against ObamaCare... I lost there too.... Problem is...people don't trust the process...so of course they dont wanna participate...

Don't jump to convulsions, they get depredation permits. Were getting them when the limit was 2 a day, just sayin'.

Yup for me Mike... I've seen more Giants killed in Bama the last couple of years than I have in what seems like forever...Its a step in the right direction for me...Roll Tide

don't be too hard on the youngster, remember this was cooks justification for the new limit because it was " biologically unsound to allow a hunter to harvest 120 bucks a year" and his remarks were defended by our resident buck limit committe member.

Those aren't guaranteed either... Some folks get them that don't need them IMO. Those guys may, I can't say. I know I get complaints about farmers shooting deer in areas where it isn't justified...

I am proud that the state is finally doing something in an attempt to manage our wildlife, instead of just sitting back and complaining about how under funded they are while using incomplete and outdated data.

With the exception of making doe harvest legal all season long, we have seen very little change in our season and bag limits until the last few years. Things may not be perfect, but at least we are seeing signs of life coming from Montgomery.

This thread is a perfect example of why the DMP could be successful if hunters/neighbors would work together instead of being their own worst enemy.

That is a wonderful solution. I am sure the timber company will understand me bulldozing up enough pine trees to make this happen

Can anybody loan me some money, I have equipment to buy?

Not anybody I know...can you explain...unless its processors that jumped in over their heads

People who have limited time to kill the deer they need to kill in order to properly manage the herd on the places they manage. Deer numbers are not down everywhere, and some folks need to kill more than 1 per hunt to make a darn difference.

Dang Matt...I would have never guessed that...People must be real tight lipped nowadays about their numbers then...You know more about it than I do...........Overpopulated is what your saying?

Just exactly where....

Not everyone....I was fine with the liberal regulations we had previously and only asked for more education within that system.

As for game check, I have never seen evidence of how the system gives statistically valid information. The survey we already have in place is according to AU statistically valid. If it is valid, what do we need more data points to tell us the same thing? If it isn't valid, expand the survey.

Matt I dream about having that problem....those people don't know how lucky they are....

That is for sure. And that is a big problem in Alabama. Small property and the owners/lessors want to kill as many deer as if they had 1000 acres or more.

Alabama is not, never has been and never will be a trophy State like the Midwest and Plains States. Different species of whitetail and totally different soils and habitat.

Alabama has made light years strides in improving the deer situation, rules, regs etc. Now it is enough. We are right were we need to be. Now it is a matter of folks properly managing their own ground and using encouragement, education and social pressure on surrounding properties to do the same.

If you are killing more than ONE buck and ONE doe off 50 acres (total for the acreage) YOU are guilty of POOR management yourself.

If you want to kill a Booner go to Iowa or Illinois. Or become a successful business man, buy a chitoload of land in the right place and high fence it and import Iowa deer for it.

Agree, and some of the problem is, they're more vocal than the guys with larger acreage...therefore you get changes like the move back to one doe a day. Seems that most (not all) of the whining about lower deer numbers is coming from the guys with 40 acres...80 acres...100 acres to hunt.



If the deer on your property are willing to go from your property to a war zone next door, then you're not doing something right that your neighbors are. Figure out what they're doing right that you aren't, and correct the problem. We have a war zone on both sides of our club, and we have a great deer population. I have an 80 acre piece of property in south Monroe County that I hunt that has brown-it's-down shooters on all 4 sides of it, and that little piece of property holds a lot of deer. Why? Because it's not pressured, and I've managed it to have ample bedding and food, with low pressure. I have two food plots on the property, and it's common to see 10-15 deer on a plot in an afternoon. I'm not an expert by any means, just use common sense.

The greatest control is self control. Trigger management works both ways. The problem is not the rules set forth. The problem is no communication, no self control, ignorance, and immaturity. Before you can reach goals you have to set them and abide by the means to reach them. If we had more involvement and communication across property lines. We would all have a more mindset. We need as hunters to position collectively and develop co-ops that meet like minded needs. Just my 2 cents.

Excellent post . . . . . . . I let a 3-1/2 year old 8 point walk today, best feeling in the world. I've been huntin' almost 40 years now, it ain't always about the killin', took me a little while to realize that. I encourage all our good aldeer members to try.

Work together..... nonsens!

i don't need to work with any one , i'm doing fine on my own

Yea, that's the attitude to have

have you looked at my cam pictures on my home page

And ?????

point is i don't need the state .

i mean having more deer aint that hard of a thing . it just takes a little work and trigger control . why do some have to have a nanny holding their hand ????

I'd like to see it go to one buck a year or at least a size limit and mandatory game check with all of the processors on board.

Frankie how about trying to tell that to my neighbors....I would appreciate it

Smart post from a smart poster!

I believe it was my first year on here back in 2002 that Mr. Coffee posted some of the best advice I've gotten related to deer management - Never buy a bag of seed with a picture of a deer on it.

So I guess I've been involved in these same arguments for at least 13 years now. Many of the posters from those days have given up and moved on, but some of us keep at it.

I was also happy with the status quo imposed during the days of Charles Kelley, but thought if we just had to do something, then the Barbour Co AR had already been proven to work well and could just be extended to other counties. Alas, it wasn't to be. Too many people wanted AL to be like other states, and so we are. Well, except for FL; they still allow 2 bucks a day. I have family that hunts near Paxton, and they used to come up and hunt with me in AL to have a chance at a decent buck. Now their hunting is vastly superior to mine, despite the liberal buck rules. Maybe the attitude of hunters is far more important than state rules? I dunno.

But I would really like to hear an answer to Mr. Coffee's question regarding the hunter survey vs. game check. I've never found out what Mr. Coffee's profession is, but I've always suspected he did something that required an advanced degree, and that means he's had at least one graduate level class in statistics. He would understand that the hunter survey using a random sample is gonna be far more accurate than a voluntary game check can ever hope to be. Anyone with any knowledge of statistics would understand this. I'd love to see somebody make a science-based defense of a voluntary game check. Any takers?

Happy New Year to all!

what can i say i let deer go all the time that only get killed next door . i don't see my rights being more important than thiers .

I have killed a total of one deer in over a decade off my personal property so I know a lot about letting deer walk and others kill them too. I just don't not see rules and regulations as a nanny state. There always have been and always will be rules and regulations and there needs to be. The limits in this state has changed numerous times over the years and just because someone doesn't like them definitely does not mean their rights have been violated.

it does when it restricts me from doing what i need to do. why didn't they just restrict doe harvest where it was needed.

(Where's the clapping emoji??)

That's a good question....

I haven't read all of the replies but answering the original question from the OP.....I think at some point our regulations need to take into consideration the steady decrease in the number of hunters. If the trend continues then there is really no need in having strict regulations on the remaining hunters. If we go from having 250,000 hunters down to 130,000-140,000 maybe eventually down to 110,000.....then why impose more regulations on the ones who are left?

Do you have any stats that show the decrease in deer hunters in Alabama over the last 10 years of so. I looked and could not find any official stats from the state on number deer hunting liscence sold.

Here are the stats for all states from the Federal Fish and Wildlife Service. Not sure where they got their last 3 years' numbers from, because they're skewed way high compared to the previous 7 years. Gotta be a mistake. Those previous 7 years do show a slight decline in license sales...

http://wsfrprograms.fws.gov/Subpages/LicenseInfo/HuntingLicCertHistory20042013.pdf

Something seems way off with that chart. I could be wrong but I thought I read something showing that we had dropped from around 250,000 to 150,000 ish.

Here's the previous 50+ years before 2004....

http://wsfrprograms.fws.gov/Subpages/LicenseInfo/HuntingLicCertHistory.pdf

Those are some screwed up stats..and obviously full of mistakes.

The state has to keep track of liscence sales Maybe some of our state guys GW or Biologist can get those numbers last 10 years and let us know.

the stats can not be compared with the stats before 97 . to get the full understanding of them you got to dig into them not just copy and paste this and that

last i look at the stats deer hunters numbers in Al stayed pretty much the same . small game hunters lost pretty good . but over all license sales did fall

So there is the answer on that I guess. Deer hunter numbers in AL are not decreasing each year. So that is not the reason for fewer deer being killed. Next.

i belive this is the link

http://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/fhw11-al.pdf

nother link

http://www.census.gov/prod/www/fishing.html

Serious question: How does the State REALLY know what my land needs? I mean, we have a general idea of what "territories/counties" supposedly have high or low deer densities, but I've never seen a biologist on my land. Just for example, I used to lease 650 acres that had a moderate deer density and "average" buck representation. A 1200 acre block literally just across the county road would have 50+ does in a food plot every evening, while I may not see 50 does on a food plot combined all hunts for the season.

The hardwood mountains of Northeast Alabama CAN NOT support high deer population numbers. Food is very cyclical. They have soooooo much cover up here. Down in the river valleys the farmers don't want them eating their wallet. Ya gotta shoot them.

What's good for LA is not always good for NA and vice versa, DCNR screwed up plain and simple.

They don't...... They don't claim to either. They try to set up the rules and regulations for what they think is best for the masses. If you do need to kill more does there is a program available for that, but if you want to kill more bucks you are out of luck

You have any that farm lands joining a WMA, wildlife/waterfowl refuge or nuclear plant?

First all you doe killers need to realize their not your deer.If you don't have them fenced in THEY DO NOT BELONG TO YOU! THEY BELONG TO EVERYONE! they are free ranging,and unless you have several thousand acres you have deer coming and going all the time,so your not just killing deer that stay on your property. Hell how many times have I seen someone complain because the people on the adjoining property were feeding and pulling all the deer over on them. You can't manage a few hundred acres, all you can control is what you pull the trigger on. The deer are still going on other peoples property and vice versa. So if you think you are just shooting your does your killing mine too!

For now

Not sure. I am just getting into that program but finding out it needs some work. It works but could be better and we want it to improve. Like everything else, it'll take time.

I wish I could hunt them all year long but the state won't let me do it legally. These hunting regulations are messing up my deer hunting.

if you have enough land !!!!!!!!

I hate to admit it but I broke my own rule this year. One of the seed types I needed was actually cheaper in the bag with the deer on it. Knowing my seed dealer, he probably found a bargain on it somewhere.

i've had the same rule for a longggggggggggg time
i had to break it a couple years back buying iron clay peas . was in a camo bag with a buck on it aint broke it since though.

Or if you work with neighbors. Co-ops work well for those that can get along with others. Unfortunately many can't...

Don't care what you do on your property, as long as you're doing it legally. Why do you worry yourself about what others do legally on their property?