My point to the posts above was simple. If you control some or all of the major factors, then you can grow quality deer. It's not reasonable to assume that here in the Southeast, without the huge amounts of ag land in the Midwest, without the high mineral content of South Texas, and without the restrictive license policies in trophy areas, that we will ever see regular numbers of 150+ whitetail bucks.
Does anyone on here want to sign up for a deer program that requires you to apply for a tag to hunt? And maybe get drawn every other year?
What if the state were divided into zones, maybe as many as 60, and your tag was only good for your zone. No more hunting at home in Etowah County, running down to Sumter for a weekend with your buddy, or going to your brother's club in Opelika. That's what it's like for some of the states famous for monster deer. One tag, for one buck, in your area only. and you have to stop hunting when you fill your tag.
Alabama is where I started hunting deer, way back when a successful season might indicate that you actually SAW a deer, depending on where you lived. It is still my favorite place to hunt, because of the number of deer, and the ability to actually shoot some of them.
I think the zones really wouldn't be that bad but not 60. It's no secret that North Alabama doesn't have near the population that South Alabama does. I've seen South Alabama guys post about seeing 40 deer in the field at once. It would take years of strict management on a large piece of land to get those kind of numbers in North Alabama. The state is trying to get there with the doe day thing but personally I think there's still too many getting killed in North Alabama and way too many young bucks being killed. I understand most will disagree with me but that's just my opinion.
