|
|
|
|
Guns
by Bmyers142 - 05/09/25 05:23 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
75 members (paintrock, WMEC615, skoor, beerhunter, Bows4evr, Ruger7mag, SC53, Stoney, Chaser357, BhamFred, Ar-Humter, Young20, gman, Jstocks, kpswihart, Rolloverdave, scrubbuck, Ray_Coon, dustymac, brett.smith, Hunting15, MattIce, Pwyse, BamaGuitarDude, Catbird, Gunpowder, MS_Hunter, Ol’Tom, Sixpointholler, TDog93, 3Gs, CatfishJunkie, longshot, Brent, 4ssss, Okatuppa, Paint Rock 00, UA Hunter, RCHRR, jacannon, Fatalis1, Calvin, Rainbowstew, Possum Hunter, Dean, Showout, jeffhhub, akbejeepin, TD40, M48scout, geeb1, Bama Buck, UncleHuck, kodiak06, CutNPurr, Fattyfireplug, beetrapper, Livintohunt19, 10 POINT, GomerPyle, 1hunter, HOWTON21, Tree Dweller, AU338MAG, mdavis, Atoler, 9 invisible),
867
guests, and
0
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 6,129
(Can't Keep It Up...)
|
|
(Can't Keep It Up...)
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 6,129 |
Cold Springs hunting club. It's at the southern tip of Cullman. It's about 3000 acres. I hate you boys don't believe me but it's hard not to see deer on every hunt and it's usually multiple deer. The plots are always ate down to nothing I didn't say I didn't believe you. Just that I didn't know anyone with that experience. I'm about 20 miles from you. Every one of my plots need mowing. Probably not 20. More like 10 as the crow flies.
Last edited by CKyleC; 12/30/15 12:43 PM.
"In Alabama, we prefer to kill small bucks on big properties"-Turkey247
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,377
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,377 |
Doesn't the DMP already provide those exact type plans?
Doesn't it allow for site-specific Management if desired??
Why do the complainers not utilize it? Again Hogwild you are correct. There is a program and if doe limits or doe days were implemented they could utilize it and continue to manage their property by harvesting more does if needed. So that problem is actually a non issue.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,854
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,854 |
Cold Springs hunting club. It's at the southern tip of Cullman. It's about 3000 acres. I hate you boys don't believe me but it's hard not to see deer on every hunt and it's usually multiple deer. The plots are always ate down to nothing Then... You obviously need to kill 30+ does a year for the next 10 so you then won't see anything and you can complain with the rest of us. I'd probably do 50 minimum year 1. 
Last edited by Goatkiller; 12/30/15 12:46 PM.
No government employees were harmed in the making of this mess.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 5,254
12 point
|
|
12 point
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 5,254 |
Doesn't the DMP already provide those exact type plans?
Doesn't it allow for site-specific Management if desired??
Why do the complainers not utilize it? Point is they shouldn't have to be treated separately. The current regs allow them to manage their deer herd as they see fit as it does you! Why should they Have to be involved in a separate program? FORCE others to be involved in a government program!
Let's see leave it like it is because you help manage land that has limited hunters on it due to their wealth and financial means......I think not! As I have stated before if a property truly has the need the State can always issue more tags to that property as they did back in the days of limited doe harvest, but to leave the whole state as is just because the wealthy have access to better land and can keep the hunters on the property today a bare minimum is just plain unacceptable to the small landowners like myself who do not control large tracts of land with virtually unlimited resources.....
I say the State should go to the small, unmanaged properties you hunt and others that want more government restrictions, and make separate regs and limit YOUR harvest to their specs. Leave the guys who have enough land and do spend the money to manage alone! Right now everyone is treated with the same regs. You want regulations on OTHERS to fit your ideas.
Last edited by gobbler; 12/30/15 12:47 PM.
I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,854
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,854 |
How many does you killin Gobbler...
Fess up now!
No government employees were harmed in the making of this mess.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 5,254
12 point
|
|
12 point
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 5,254 |
I haven't killed one yet but usually 5-7 does for the freezer. Haven't killed a buck in probably 10 years. Used to kill 20-30 a year.
I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,377
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,377 |
Doesn't the DMP already provide those exact type plans?
Doesn't it allow for site-specific Management if desired??
Why do the complainers not utilize it? Point is they shouldn't have to be treated separately. The current regs allow them to manage their deer herd as they see fit as it does you! Why should they Have to be involved in a separate program? FORCE others to be involved in a government program!
Let's see leave it like it is because you help manage land that has limited hunters on it due to their wealth and financial means......I think not! As I have stated before if a property truly has the need the State can always issue more tags to that property as they did back in the days of limited doe harvest, but to leave the whole state as is just because the wealthy have access to better land and can keep the hunters on the property today a bare minimum is just plain unacceptable to the small landowners like myself who do not control large tracts of land with virtually unlimited resources.....
I say the State should go to the small, unmanaged properties you hunt and others that want more government restrictions, and make separate regs and limit YOUR harvest to their specs. Leave the guys who have enough land and do spend the money to manage alone! Right now everyone is treated with the same regs. You want regulations on OTHERS to fit your ideas. I don't blame you for looking out for your own interests and your rich clients because if they were to enroll in the above mentioned program they would have a State biologist help them in their management needs and where would that leave you......looking for a job with the State I guess . So I do understand your position and apparent disdain for us poor guys that can only afford to have a hundred or so acres to call our own....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 443
4 point
|
|
4 point
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 443 |
Cold Springs hunting club. It's at the southern tip of Cullman. It's about 3000 acres. I hate you boys don't believe me but it's hard not to see deer on every hunt and it's usually multiple deer. The plots are always ate down to nothing I didn't say I didn't believe you. Just that I didn't know anyone with that experience. I'm about 20 miles from you. Every one of my plots need mowing. Probably not 20. More like 10 as the crow flies. Wow that's unreal! I wonder what the difference is? The club borders a lot of Smith lake but I don't know if that would be it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 5,254
12 point
|
|
12 point
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 5,254 |
I don't blame you for looking out for your own interests and your rich clients because if they were to enroll in the above mentioned program they would have a State biologist help them in their management needs and where would that leave you......looking for a job with the State I guess . So I do understand your position and apparent disdain for us poor guys that can only afford to have a hundred or so acres to call our own....
Yea, cause the State guys can do all the burning, timber sales, mulching, mowing, planting, herbicide application, site preparation and tree planting we do. Oh Yea, that would work with your Big Government regulation, socialist concept of things. Go ahead and have the State take over, that way everything would be FREE... Whoopee! 
I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,788
Booner
|
|
Booner
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,788 |
I don't blame you for looking out for your own interests and your rich clients because if they were to enroll in the above mentioned program they would have a State biologist help them in their management needs and where would that leave you......looking for a job with the State I guess . So I do understand your position and apparent disdain for us poor guys that can only afford to have a hundred or so acres to call our own....
Yea, cause the State guys can do all the burning, timber sales, mulching, mowing, planting, herbicide application, site preparation and tree planting we do. Oh Yea, that would work with your Big Government regulation, socialist concept of things. Go ahead and have the State take over, that way everything would be FREE... Whoopee! I normally agree with most all of your posts. But, not this time! Your twist was quick and clever. But, without merit. The DMP is to allow the MANAGEMENT of Wildlife. The Rules, Regulations and Seasons were adopted to Conserve Wildlife.
Last edited by Hogwild; 12/30/15 01:02 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,377
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,377 |
I don't blame you for looking out for your own interests and your rich clients because if they were to enroll in the above mentioned program they would have a State biologist help them in their management needs and where would that leave you......looking for a job with the State I guess . So I do understand your position and apparent disdain for us poor guys that can only afford to have a hundred or so acres to call our own....
Yea, cause the State guys can do all the burning, timber sales, mulching, mowing, planting, herbicide application, site preparation and tree planting we do. Oh Yea, that would work with your Big Government regulation, socialist concept of things. Go ahead and have the State take over, that way everything would be FREE... Whoopee! They can handle the deer management aspect of it since the last I heard the deer in this state actually belong to the State and you can continue to manage the trees and habitat that actually belong to the landowner....how about that  it is funny how doe limits is considered big government / socialist when they have been in charge of limits and changed them accordingly in the past.....that just shows how illogical your form of logic is. You can respond however you see fit and I will let you have the final word because I refuse to hijack or disrupt a very helpful thread. Good day and I wish you no ill will and much success in your business as some of my close friends are in the forestry business 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,504
10 point
|
|
10 point
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,504 |
Thank you gobbler, well said. I already work with a biologists and my deer herd is healthy and we work with our neighbors. Why should I have to change what I'm doing? I started hunting a lease in Elmore county last year and we don't have enough does there to shoot any. I don't need a biologists to tell me not to shoot them I already know that. In five years we will have to start shooting them because we will have to many. Doesn't the DMP already provide those exact type plans?
Doesn't it allow for site-specific Management if desired??
Why do the complainers not utilize it? Point is they shouldn't have to be treated separately. The current regs allow them to manage their deer herd as they see fit as it does you! Why should they Have to be involved in a separate program? FORCE others to be involved in a government program!
Let's see leave it like it is because you help manage land that has limited hunters on it due to their wealth and financial means......I think not! As I have stated before if a property truly has the need the State can always issue more tags to that property as they did back in the days of limited doe harvest, but to leave the whole state as is just because the wealthy have access to better land and can keep the hunters on the property today a bare minimum is just plain unacceptable to the small landowners like myself who do not control large tracts of land with virtually unlimited resources.....
I say the State should go to the small, unmanaged properties you hunt and others that want more government restrictions, and make separate regs and limit YOUR harvest to their specs. Leave the guys who have enough land and do spend the money to manage alone! Right now everyone is treated with the same regs. You want regulations on OTHERS to fit your ideas.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,105
Old Mossy Horns
|
|
Old Mossy Horns
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,105 |
Thank you gobbler, well said. I already work with a biologists and my deer herd is healthy and we work with our neighbors. Why should I have to change what I'm doing? I started hunting a lease in Elmore county last year and we don't have enough does there to shoot any. I don't need a biologists to tell me not to shoot them I already know that. In five years we will have to start shooting them because we will have to many. Doesn't the DMP already provide those exact type plans?
Doesn't it allow for site-specific Management if desired??
Why do the complainers not utilize it? Point is they shouldn't have to be treated separately. The current regs allow them to manage their deer herd as they see fit as it does you! Why should they Have to be involved in a separate program? FORCE others to be involved in a government program!
Let's see leave it like it is because you help manage land that has limited hunters on it due to their wealth and financial means......I think not! As I have stated before if a property truly has the need the State can always issue more tags to that property as they did back in the days of limited doe harvest, but to leave the whole state as is just because the wealthy have access to better land and can keep the hunters on the property today a bare minimum is just plain unacceptable to the small landowners like myself who do not control large tracts of land with virtually unlimited resources.....
I say the State should go to the small, unmanaged properties you hunt and others that want more government restrictions, and make separate regs and limit YOUR harvest to their specs. Leave the guys who have enough land and do spend the money to manage alone! Right now everyone is treated with the same regs. You want regulations on OTHERS to fit your ideas. How do you determine that you have too many?
83% of all statistics are made up.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,788
Booner
|
|
Booner
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,788 |
Thank you gobbler, well said. I already work with a biologists and my deer herd is healthy and we work with our neighbors. Why should I have to change what I'm doing? I started hunting a lease in Elmore county last year and we don't have enough does there to shoot any. I don't need a biologists to tell me not to shoot them I already know that. In five years we will have to start shooting them because we will have to many. Doesn't the DMP already provide those exact type plans?
Doesn't it allow for site-specific Management if desired??
Why do the complainers not utilize it? Point is they shouldn't have to be treated separately. The current regs allow them to manage their deer herd as they see fit as it does you! Why should they Have to be involved in a separate program? FORCE others to be involved in a government program!
Let's see leave it like it is because you help manage land that has limited hunters on it due to their wealth and financial means......I think not! As I have stated before if a property truly has the need the State can always issue more tags to that property as they did back in the days of limited doe harvest, but to leave the whole state as is just because the wealthy have access to better land and can keep the hunters on the property today a bare minimum is just plain unacceptable to the small landowners like myself who do not control large tracts of land with virtually unlimited resources.....
I say the State should go to the small, unmanaged properties you hunt and others that want more government restrictions, and make separate regs and limit YOUR harvest to their specs. Leave the guys who have enough land and do spend the money to manage alone! Right now everyone is treated with the same regs. You want regulations on OTHERS to fit your ideas. How do you determine that you have too many? Come on, man.....keep up! You have to hire a biologist to tell you!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,788
Booner
|
|
Booner
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,788 |
Thank you gobbler, well said. I already work with a biologists and my deer herd is healthy and we work with our neighbors. Why should I have to change what I'm doing? I started hunting a lease in Elmore county last year and we don't have enough does there to shoot any. I don't need a biologists to tell me not to shoot them I already know that. In five years we will have to start shooting them because we will have to many. Doesn't the DMP already provide those exact type plans?
Doesn't it allow for site-specific Management if desired??
Why do the complainers not utilize it? Point is they shouldn't have to be treated separately. The current regs allow them to manage their deer herd as they see fit as it does you! Why should they Have to be involved in a separate program? FORCE others to be involved in a government program!
Let's see leave it like it is because you help manage land that has limited hunters on it due to their wealth and financial means......I think not! As I have stated before if a property truly has the need the State can always issue more tags to that property as they did back in the days of limited doe harvest, but to leave the whole state as is just because the wealthy have access to better land and can keep the hunters on the property today a bare minimum is just plain unacceptable to the small landowners like myself who do not control large tracts of land with virtually unlimited resources.....
I say the State should go to the small, unmanaged properties you hunt and others that want more government restrictions, and make separate regs and limit YOUR harvest to their specs. Leave the guys who have enough land and do spend the money to manage alone! Right now everyone is treated with the same regs. You want regulations on OTHERS to fit your ideas. How do you determine that you have too many? Come on, man.....keep up! You have to hire a biologist to tell you! Of course, now we arrive back at my question. Why are people opposed to DMP, yet willing to pay a private biologist??
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 5,254
12 point
|
|
12 point
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 5,254 |
I normally agree with most all of your posts.
But, not this time!
Your twist was quick and clever. But, without merit. The DMP is to allow the MANAGEMENT of Wildlife. The Rules, Regulations and Seasons were adopted to Conserve Wildlife.
As I normally agree with yours! However the DMP route should not be the only route available for people to manage their land as they see fit. The Rules and Regs should be used to conserve wildlife where they need conservation. Landowners shouldn't be forced to be on a government program so they can manage their wildlife under the supervision of a government employee. Don't get me wrong. Night hunter and Matt are great guys and do a great job. I am friends with a few other wildlife biologists with the State as well and think the world of them. Also, many of the landowners I work with DO participate in DMP, some for decades and I encourage it. However, I don't want them to HAVE to be on it to get doe tags when they need to kill does. If I have a landowner, who manages strictly for quail for instance, will the State issue unlimited doe tags for this landowner to reduce their deer herd down to a MINIMAL population? Deer compete with quail for food plants and he may not want deer jumping in front of his dogs. For whatever reason he may not want deer! He should have a right to manage that way, but I would bet that some State biologists would go along with it but some would NOT and that is the problem with another government program.
I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,788
Booner
|
|
Booner
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,788 |
I see your point.
However, I feel that those cases are isolated and extreme.
The Seasons and Bag Limits should benefit the Wildlife AND the majority of Outdoorsmen.
I managed a large hunting operation. Doe tags are NOT hard to come by for those type people.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,377
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,377 |
I normally agree with most all of your posts.
But, not this time!
Your twist was quick and clever. But, without merit. The DMP is to allow the MANAGEMENT of Wildlife. The Rules, Regulations and Seasons were adopted to Conserve Wildlife.
As I normally agree with yours! However the DMP route should not be the only route available for people to manage their land as they see fit. The Rules and Regs should be used to conserve wildlife where they need conservation. Landowners shouldn't be forced to be on a government program so they can manage their wildlife under the supervision of a government employee. Don't get me wrong. Night hunter and Matt are great guys and do a great job. I am friends with a few other wildlife biologists with the State as well and think the world of them. Also, many of the landowners I work with DO participate in DMP, some for decades and I encourage it. However, I don't want them to HAVE to be on it to get doe tags when they need to kill does. If I have a landowner, who manages strictly for quail for instance, will the State issue unlimited doe tags for this landowner to reduce their deer herd down to a MINIMAL population? Deer compete with quail for food plants and he may not want deer jumping in front of his dogs. For whatever reason he may not want deer! He should have a right to manage that way, but I would bet that some State biologists would go along with it but some would NOT and that is the problem with another government program. I am sure the State could easily write in there somewhere that if a property is managed by a private wildlife biologist that biologist could make the doe harvest recommendations and issue said tags for that property. The State would probably need a letter or email sent in requesting the tags for the property by the biologist but that shouldn't be a problem. There are ways around these issues that can work for the good of all and just not a select few here and there. It will just take some cooperation with all parties involved.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,105
Old Mossy Horns
|
|
Old Mossy Horns
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,105 |
I normally agree with most all of your posts.
But, not this time!
Your twist was quick and clever. But, without merit. The DMP is to allow the MANAGEMENT of Wildlife. The Rules, Regulations and Seasons were adopted to Conserve Wildlife.
As I normally agree with yours! However the DMP route should not be the only route available for people to manage their land as they see fit. The Rules and Regs should be used to conserve wildlife where they need conservation. Landowners shouldn't be forced to be on a government program so they can manage their wildlife under the supervision of a government employee. Don't get me wrong. Night hunter and Matt are great guys and do a great job. I am friends with a few other wildlife biologists with the State as well and think the world of them. Also, many of the landowners I work with DO participate in DMP, some for decades and I encourage it. However, I don't want them to HAVE to be on it to get doe tags when they need to kill does. If I have a landowner, who manages strictly for quail for instance, will the State issue unlimited doe tags for this landowner to reduce their deer herd down to a MINIMAL population? Deer compete with quail for food plants and he may not want deer jumping in front of his dogs. For whatever reason he may not want deer! He should have a right to manage that way, but I would bet that some State biologists would go along with it but some would NOT and that is the problem with another government program. Are any of your landowners on cost share with the State?
83% of all statistics are made up.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,504
10 point
|
|
10 point
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,504 |
We went from seeing 40 does on a green field with a 5-6' browse line and killing a few 110" bucks to seeing 20 does and killing 120-140" bucks. The body weight went from 70-90lbs to 100-120lbs. I see deer 90% of times I hunt. I own 40 acres and manage some family land and lease 300 acres for a total of 750 acres. I talk with my neighbors so we all know what we are all doing and that bring the total to around 3000 acres. We have triplets on our property every year and all the biologists I have talked to say that is a sign of a healthy herd. We don't kill 20 does each year but that is our goal, last year we only killed 16 because of the 1 doe per day. I am not a rich land owner but I do put in lots of work to manage the property.
'
|
|
|
|
|
(Custom).JPG)
