I've read through the comments on here and think it's a very interesting, yet political topic. I commend those that are suggesting that whatever decisions are made should be based on scientific data. Along these lines, much of this discussion has focused on the reproductive surveys that the state has been conducting since 1995. They have a decent data set, and are working hard to make it even stronger. Hopefully, science will play a role in this decision.
But, the one thing that very few people have mentioned is....the biological effects that a season change may cause. I feel that we should be doing two things: (1) Making decisions based on data, and (2) Considering the biological, social, economic, etc. implications for whatever change is proposed. In my opinion, number 2 doesn't seem to be getting much attention.
Does a potential increase in buck harvest concern anyone? Does a potential decrease in the proportion of mature bucks in the herd cause concern? Does a potential shift in sex ratios have implications? These are just a few of the biological effects that could occur. Would they devastating to our deer herd? No. Might they take the deer herd in a direction that is not what we would prefer? Maybe.
I don't know if any of these three (and there are more) would happen, but, I would like to think that the potential for biological effects such as these would be considered during such a debate...in this venue as well as in those where the decision is actually made. I have refrained from discussing the social, economic, and other types of effects that such a change could lead to, because my training is in biology.
I understand the desire of deer hunters in Alabama to hunt the entire pre-rut, rut, and post-rut. I have no problem with opinions that are either for or against such a proposal. I just hope that we all consider the effects that any changes might cause.
I guess I would ask all to just take a few moments to consider both the positive and negative aspects of any proposed changes, and try to consider them from both sides of the argument. I think such an approach would help to generate additional thought-provoking discussions.
(1) decisions should be based on scientific data - i agree 100% - 16 years of reproductive data should be more than sufficient to make a 2 week season change - we adopted an open doe season and 3 buck limit with less data than that (2) biological implications - many areas in alabama have a december rut - they've hunted all 3 phases of the rut for years - does our data show that they have taken the deer herd in those areas in an undesireable direction? i have friends that hunt next to the chattahoochee river in barbour, henry and houston counties - their rut peaks in dec - it's still difficult to kill a mature buck, even during the peak - they get to enjoy all phases of the rut and their hunting quality seems unaffected - can't we use the biological data that's been collected in these areas over the years and have a general idea about what would occur given the same senario elsewhere - (3) social implications - if we had a split season - in 7 days at thanksgiving - out until dec 20 - in until feb 15 - more small game hunting would occur in dec, especially duck and dove - more family time before christmas - the quality of hunting would be better during the holiday season because of less pressure and more animals available - this would be a plus for the kids who are out of school during this time - (4) economic impact - increased small game hunting should offset deer hunting revenue during the first 3 weeks of dec - this is typically a lull period in most areas of al for deer hunting anyway - more hunting would occur during 2 weeks in feb than 3 in dec - this in itself should be more than enough to offset any revenue lost in dec - it's time to use the scientific data we have on hand, incorporate public opinion and common sense and start tweeking our regulations to optimize the use of our wildlife resources while still preserving them for future generations - any successful organization, public or private, is constantly changing - adcnr is no exception
