...go to Illinois and the public land is just as good a private property...why? cause the state has done a better job of managing... in other words there are way less variables in most other states.
I would tend to disagree with those statements. IL doesn't manage at all. Their hunting is great because they're lucky enough to have the best soils and habitat in the nation. You can get away with a lot of mismanagement when you're carrying capacity is unlimited and food sources the best anywhere.
Southeastern states HAVE to manage well to see any results at all. Midwestern states can have a vacant Game Agency building and still grow world record bucks.
True, but there are still major differences (historically) b/w Al. and even Illinois...In Illinois 1. they have tags and out of state hunters have to put their name in to be drawn for a tag (never heard of a hunter not getting drawn, but it requires planning, money and time) 2. they can't hunt with rifles 3. archery tackle only during the rut, etc., etc.
My point is if Illinois had previously allowed a buck per day for 30+ years I don't think their hunting would be as good as it is today in areas where the state or private land owners didn't enforce their own regs. Imagine where their public land would be if you could have shot a buck per day. A buck limit sets a trend and mind set to let bucks walk and to be more choosy about what you kill. A buck a day sets the opposite mind set...no need to be choosy and if you don't kill your neighbors will, etc., etc.
Since Al. established this mind set for so long there are properties that were and still are pretty much ruined. They can come back and I believe our limit is going to help A LOT, but it will take time, especially for those places where clubs were killing anything with horns. All this leads to having major differences between two similar properties with in the same county and area. If the land owner never got involved and let the club follow state regs. and the club never cared enough to manage the land then land owner A is going to get $8 per acre while land owner B who enforced QDM will get $12 per acre, or more.
Just my opinion based on what I've seen in our area and even on my family's over the past 20 years.
No arguments with your points above truedouble. But my view of "management" is ACTIVE choices in rules and regulations with the INTENT of producing a specific outcome. IL has the rules and regs they have out of tradition, not out of a choice to produce large, healthy deer. Even BAD management choices will still produce trophy deer in IL, IA, MO, etc. For example, who hasn't heard of the monster bucks Ohio produces? Yet Ohio has rules that still allow mass slaughter of yearling bucks--far higher than any Southeastern state. Ohio produces monster bucks despite their management, and because of their naturally superior soil/habitat conditions.
