I don’t think I’ve ever seen ppl who can take things out of context any better than the folks on ALdeer. 😂

The point I was making is that sex ratios heavily favoring females leads to lower reproductive success and physical fitness than herds with a more balanced ratio. Those are facts. Not academic opinions. Facts backed up by every study ever conducted on deer breeding behaviors. Correcting the sex ratio by whatever means needed will begin to correct the problem. My recommendation would be a three sided approach including improving habitat condition, lowering doe numbers and NOT shooting any bucks for a couple of seasons. I did not say shoot all the does. I did not say shoot most of the does. I said shoot some. If 30 deer are piling into one food plot in the evenings that is a sign of poor habitat condition around them. They need more options. They need more browse. Improve the habitat. Make it attractive to male deer. If it’s occupied and dominated by social units of antlerless deer with limited cover and food availability it’s not going to attract bucks at all, except during estrous. Then they’ll leave and go back from where they came. Leaving that unantlered population on the landscape with piss poor habitat is not going to fix a thing. That’s not academics. That’s not schooling. That’s deer management.

🤣🤣🤣
This is interesting

Piss poor habitat due to over population would lead to disease and starvation! Both huge problems in alabama! I would also like to see pictures.

Deer can survive and get by in poor habitat. That doesn’t mean they thrive and live up to their reproductive potential. They’re not going to die of disease until it reaches critical levels. They do however, lose physical fitness, body weights decrease, reproductive success decreases, antler expression decreases, etc and I’ve seen this happen in several areas over the years. Mostly in parts of the state that experienced population increases due to restocking, or populations naturally expanding into habitats with few deer for several generations. People get used to the population boom and high antler scores, think that’s sustainable over time, and do not correct population numbers with habitat condition. Then when the population levels off with what the habitat can support people start grumbling about no more big bucks, too many does, and lower body weights. Hmmmmm. 🤔

Nailed it!

Mbrock, I don't want to offend anyone, but this is a topic that really (to me) is the cause of alot of management problems in the southeast. And it just doesn't make sense, so to put it in perspective I'll say this then quit. My personal management program has been an attempt to get larger bucks and as many deer as my property can hold. I think this is what most people want. I don't think anyone atrts hunting with the thought I wish I had less deer on my place. I have done this by not shooting does and trying to only shoot 4-5 year old bucks and not killing more than two bucks on my property a year. Usually don't kill two. Last three years killed one each year. But according to what your saying I should shoot every deer on my property until I get to one buck and one doe.then 100% of my does will get bred every year, and all my bucks will make there full potential every year. I'm sorry but this theory and every step in this direction sounds ridiculous to me. But the results would be 100% correct. And one more question for real, has there really been any restock anywhere in the state in the last 20 years?

Good info

I just love watching people argue with a 100% certified, real, wildlife biologist. Don't you Matt?

That’s not what I’m saying at all Backwoods. Deer management should always be geared towards meeting a landowners objectives. I never make true recommendations without first getting the top 2 objectives, clearly defined, from the landowner. Then we spend a day looking at habitat condition, seeing what improvements are needed (all within the financial and resource limitations of the landowner) , reviewing photos, hopefully harvest data, and then I’ll recommend harvest strategies and targets. You won’t have happy deer hunters if you screw this process up. If you screw it up, then they won’t work with you. I’m not in the business of screwing things up. If you’re happy with what you are doing then keep doing it.

For THIS particular situation, based off the info given in this thread, the info I’ve provided is sound. Make habitat improvements, shoot a few does and lay off buck harvest. That’s not crazy. It’s not counterproductive. It’s exactly what he needs. And if I saw the place in person and sat down with him I might change my mind. It depends on what I see and the info he gave me.

Have unqualified biologists made bad decisions in the past? Yes. Have they done so in AL? Yes. Also, have people who have limited knowledge on deer management applied good principles in the wrong way and decreased populations to levels that were lower than desired? YES! There are properties that need doe harvest. There are others that don’t. One of the primary properties I’ve managed for 15 years has taken 35-45 does every year on 2200 acres and it’s sustainable. The habitat is great. Body weights are above average. The population is above average. Antler scores are average to slightly above average most years, reproductive success is good, coyote numbers are through the roof, and yet this harvest is sustainable and will be indefinitely unless habitat condition degrades. And it won’t because they work dang hard at it. 20 miles away I helped a member here, gave him some recommendations. He has followed through with them and has an exceptional place. His population has increased to where he’s seeing more deer, has a hood age structure and we started by removing 0-2 does a year on 700 acres. That’s right. Hardly any doe harvest just 20 miles from the other property. It’s site specific. Doe harvest will always be a tool. Always.

You can not offend me. So don’t worry about that.

Look. I will never fault anyone for questioning professionals. It happens in all fields. But Dadgum every biologist who’s ever joined this site and tried to share information either left cause they couldn’t handle it or left because they didn’t want to be bothered by it. Guess I’m a glutton for punishment. 🤷🏼‍♂️

It’s ok to hold people accountable I guess. No harm no foul. But yeah it’s entertaining.

Mbrock pm me or tell me how to pm you.

I don’t know much about it and thankful for Matt chiming in since he’s got good knowledge of the why and how. We can all agree to disagree on what may or may not work. Actually I’ve learned a few things from this thread. It’s a pretty good thing to have a person with wildlife experience at least offer his opinion on what he does or did for a living. Pretty much everything I’ve ever been told from camp talk is completely wrong so I’ll take some good advice. I think there’s so many factors from big tracts to little tracks in Alabama with so much pressure it’s probably pretty hard to almost impossible to control a perfect outcome.

I sent you a PM. Click on the blinky envelope in the top right of your screen.

I made mention of this kind of scenario today

In the early days of digital photography there was a site out of Canada called Rob Galbraith (sp) and consisted of the leading pros in digital. Matter of fact some actually involved in the creation of adobe photoshop and color management in digital world.

The newbies arrived within a few years and was telling the Gurus that actually wrote the software they didn’t know squat. It was kinda entertaining at first but the real gurus all left eventually and the site was sold. I learned so much from those guys and sad to say it’s an internet phenomena

I'm just waiting on Goatkiller to show back up.........this is liable to be epic.

I'm offended! And maybe a pot stirrer.

If you don’t want to kill does in the first place, why would you want more does? Wouldn’t you want more bucks? Is the goal to have a bunch of deer on your property or is the goal to kill bigger bucks? Everyone who manages property for bigger bucks knows that a 1:1 ratio is ideal. If we know this is true, why would we manage our property for anything different? I think clubs and land owners in the past have just sat on green fields and shot their doe quota. Well of course the deer are going to avoid them in the daylight pretty quick. Then when they quit seeing deer on green fields they say oh no we killed all the deer. They are still there. Just staying in the woods and avoiding you until after dark. I for one want as close to a 1:1 ratio as we can get. Make the older bucks more active and compete for the does so we can shoot them. If your goal is to sit on a green field and see 50 deer then don’t shoot any of them. And when that young 3.5 year old 15” wide 8 point walks out shoot the piss out of him and skull mount him. Everyone has different goals.

The biologist who came out on my lease said kill 15 doe's to start. She was a state biologist. Personally I don't see how you make that sort of assessment by simply driving around the property.

1050 acre's. To sustain that, I have to have at least 15 doe's remaining who have twins, and none of the doe fawns get eaten by a yote or die from something else. Nature is not going to skew the births of the male or female sex beyond 48 to 52 per Dr Grant Woods.

So the bottom line is you can only kill a certain number of doe'on an ongoing basis before you negatively impact the population. And that requires more data than an hour on my lease.

Heck, I was just wondering why all our does were dry. 🤣

Member killed one above average today. Haven’t heard of it was wet or dry. He also saw a doe with twin fawns.

Maybe Matt’s advice is already paying off after only 2 days.

I agree no one can make that assessment in an hour. She probably just applied the state average ratio to your property. I’m guessing she assumed it was 3:1 or 4:1. If you use that ratio at 45 deer a square mile then 15 does a year is sustainable. Especially if you make an effort to only shoot 4.5+ year old bucks.

1050 acres= 1.6 sq miles
1.6 x 45 deer = 72 deer
72 @ 3:1 ratio = 54 does
54 - 15 shot = 39 does left

By the time they have fawns at 50% females you are right back where you started. Of course there are other factors in there but that’s the jest of it.