What percentage of hunters do you think need the ability to shoot more than 3 bucks per year?

Don't know. There are probably a lot more that don't need to shoot the 3 that the limit says is OK. That's why an arbitrary number is not useful.

Where in any of your post does it require governmental intervention? It would appear that the use of peer pressure is a good thing and elitism should be the course of the true hunter. I am fine with you having your opinion, but is governmental invention necessary if the momentum of peer pressure works? Or, should the elitist demad that everyone follow their path?

I believe if you will think about what is being said by 49er that it is the forced govermental requirements based on hunches, guesses (or lack thereof) that is the problem.

I understand to the true hunter that all paths should lead to massive antlers, body weights, a two day rut, and all hunters being happy, but then there is reality.

Wasn't, isn't and not arbitrary.

Really?? Looked on with respect? By whom? Other QDM elitists?

I am glad that I got my start killing deer in an era where the purpose during deer season was to kill deer and not admire my habitat improvements, when my dad did not have to wonder if folks were going to question his deer hunting ethics if he "let" me shoot a 2.5 year old 8 point.

May have reached some goal on a statewide basis, but how is 3 bucks per year not too many in some situations and too limiting in others?

Bucktrot I certainly respect your views,and I do have some of the same beliefs as you,this is not directed toward your views on QDM but what I percieve to be your views of the old timers. Where we differ is I certainly dont think all the hunters who killed 8 or 10 bucks a year in the past were idiots. My dad and grandfather would fit in that categorey in the past. Between those two men lies more knowledge about hunting than your average woodsmen. They were and still are DEER HUNTERS,out to kill the biggest buck they could. Killing big bucks is what deer hunting was about then and now.The difference is back then they told you they were after big bucks,now its "im enhancing habitat" with "to kill big bucks" left out.And yes we enhance habitat and practice trigger control. Times have changed and so have hunters,but the ones who were good enough to kill alot of good bucks were not idiots. If you know some old timers it might pay to spend a little time with them,you csn learn alot from them as I have and I continue to learn more every year.

Many who justified the 3 buck limit did so because in their mind allowing someone to kill 110 bucks a season was not biologically sound.
But with 200,000+ plus licensed hunters and maybe that many more unlicensed who can kill 3 a season,and following their same line of thinking, is this not also biologically unsound?

*************

Smokeandbones, you misread my post, sir. I did not nor never said what you just accused me of. With all due respect to you and any elderly hunter and my hat is always off to old timers. I was very specific with a time period and I did say "is now", as in "this day in time", not looked upon very favorably. I did not mean nor say, "yesteryear". There are things that were practiced years ago that were common and frankly, some (not all things) things were done simply because of "innocent" ignorance. I am SURE there is something I do today that will be looked upon in years to come as ignorant behavior but I do it because I simply don't know any better way. I hope this will always be the case for years to come because if it's not, then we are not learning as a society! I.E. Smoking, seatbelts, lead paint, asbestos, etc...

I can tell you that in any unpressured property, killing a lot of immature bucks (if they exists) is not hard. Killing a lot of mature bucks is much more of a challenge.

On January 12, 1976, my first buck was a spike and dogs were running him and I could not have been happier. My dad used to preach to me about how we need to let the does walk and only kill bucks. At that point, to a degree, he was right. Alabama's deer population was still coming on and letting all does walk and only killing bucks was the right thing to do. We certainly know a lot more about deer management than we used to.

Please don't paint QDM hunters as only interested in HUGE bucks. We preach maturity and trigger restraint. Kids' first buck can be a spike, that's fine. Mature hunters should demonstrate a desire to be educated and show some restraint.

HOWEVER, if your property can absorb the killing of an immature buck, kill it! That's fine. If that same property has approx 1 hunter for every 100 - 150 acres, I don't think the property could stand every hunter taking as many immature bucks as they want.

Just practice responsible deer mgmt. I think the deer herd deserves that.

And of course, I type that with my hat in my hand, sir.

What can be killed, and what actually is killed are often two very different things. TN has 200,000+ hunters also, and a 3 buck limit, yet only 1 in 3 hunters kills even one buck, and only 2-3% kill 3 bucks.

Many TN hunters believe absolutely that everyone but themselves is slaughtering young bucks. But the reality is very different. Our harvested buck age structure keeps slowly improving year after year, and most of that improvement is due to education and voluntary restraint of the hunters, not the buck limit.

Been waiting on someone to make that point,took a guy from Tn. Several keep spouting about loosing the right to kill a buck a day (100+) in Alabama. I know some real killers that got in the twenties but never heard of anyone getting the limit. Some of those twenties guys grew up, a few are still killing them.
Charles Kelly built Alabamas herd on "a buck a day", does are sacred. Time to move on.

Exactly. Same thing is, was, and will continue to happen in Alabama. Exactly why I don't think the 3 buck limit was needed but it will be convenient for those who support it because they will now claim the success that was coming anyway.

eskimo270,


Does the QDMA support buck limits and antler restrictions? You bet they do:

The deer study committee consisted of:

- ALFA representative Steve Guy,

- Wildlife manager Mickey Easley,

- Auburn professor Dr. Steve Ditchkoff,

- Conservation Department deer biologists Bill Gray and Chris Cook,

- Ted DeVos, president, Alabama Wildlife Federation 2005-06

- Former Auburn professor Dr. Keith Causey,

- Quality Deer Management Association executive director Brian Murphy (nonresident of Alabama)

- QDMA founder Joe Hamilton (nonresident of Alabama)


From the minutes of the CAB meeting, May, 2007:
Page 50

Ditchkoff:



- continuing on page 52


The committee recommended buck limits and antler restrictions for Alabama's hunters. A review of earlier CAB meeting minutes will reveal that numerous QDMA members, including branch directors in Alabama were vocal in their support of buck limits and antler restrictions citing membership numbers in Alabama to claim widespread support in their organization.

WinMod70, a branch director of QDMA in Alabama, was an active member on these aldeer forums at the time and was very vocal in his support of the restrictions. He later posted that he wasn't hunting much, an we haven't heard from him in quite a while now.

Ted DeVos was not, is not and never has been an employee of AWF.

WinMod70/Steve miss him not posting on the forum anymore.

It was at my last QDMA meeting as a member in 2004 that I first heard about QDMA's interest in buck limits and antler restrictions. I left the QDMA that day and never returned.

I was not aware that the QDMA leaders were already actively involved in supporting the restrictions at the time of that meeting.

You don't think qdm was a factor in the current buck limit/antler restrictions? Keep reading and notice the terminology:

CAB meeting minutes, March, 2004

The entire QDMA and Board of Directors including its cleaning lady must have been a part of Kentucky's Fish and Game meeting! One buck?!? Of course, I'm being facetious.

9er, here's QDMA's stance:

The QDMA is encouraged by the increasing number of
states implementing strategies to protect yearling bucks. In general, the QDMA prefers the voluntary
passing of yearling bucks to mandatory antler regulations. However, we recognize that antler
restrictions may be justified in some situations to achieve specific deer management objectives. In
the long term, QDMA is optimistic that enough hunters will voluntarily pass young bucks that antler
restrictions will become unnecessary and even cumbersome to more sophisticated management.
Regarding our position on specific antler restriction proposals, QDMA examines each on a caseby-
case basis and applies a three-part test. First, is the restriction biologically sound? Second, is it
supported by a majority of affected hunters and landowners? Finally, will it be objectively monitored
to determine success or failure? Many restrictions fail one or more of these criteria. QDMA
has supported some antler restrictions, opposed others, and taken a neutral stance on still others.
Regardless of strategy used to protect yearling bucks, QDMA recommends that state wildlife agencies
conduct extensive education and outreach programs to inform hunters about the benefits of
protecting yearling bucks and to garner their support for sound deer management in general.

I'm going to put the whole damn bunch of ya'll on ignore....

so go educate them not to kill 3. Simple enough...