Aldeer.com Forums Alabama Deer Talk Serious Deer Talk Forum Doe numbers

https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/alabama/counties

Attached Link above is to a color coded map of population, by county, in AL. According to your theory, counties of the same color should be seeing the same, or at least somewhat similar harvest trends, if fragmented properties and corn are really the route cause of all issues. At a quick first glance comparison, it doesn't appear that that is the case. Overlay the two maps and see what it looks like.

So how does population density for a county like say Jackson relate to hunter density??

I cant find anything regarding licensed hunters by county. Roughly 10% of Alabama residents have hunting licenses according to what I can find. A safe assumption is that that 10% is somewhat evenly distributed among the population and across huntable property. Sure it will vary by locale, but you cant just arbitrarily say that more people hunt in Jackson county than do in Mobile county.

Marengo, Dallas, Clarke, and Wilcox counties have low populations and larger tracts but what you have to take into account is that half of Pensacola, Tuscaloosa, Birmingham, and half of Mobile and Baldwin counties, along with a pile of Louisiana coon asses are driving to those counties to hunt every week. The actual hunter density in those counties when you add in all the transient hunters coming and going, to the existing resident landowners that hunt, is way higher than you are giving credit for looking only at individual property ownership.

Example: You've got a fragmented area in Jackson County. You have one landowner with 500 acres and 12 individual landowners with 2-40 acres each, totaling another 250 acres, and all hunt. So you have 13 people hunting that 750 acres in Jackson county. In Marengo county, you have one privately owned 750 acre tract. It is leased to a hunting club with 10-12 members. If the landowner and his son hunt the backyard around his house, you have 12-14 people hunting the 750 acres in Marengo too.

We don’t kill THAT many deer based on how many we have on our property, BUT multiply that times all the folks killing them around me and it does add up. If there’s any limits to be made, it’s gotta be acreage based. No other way to manage it. People/biologists talk about deer per acre with management.
And tags have to be implemented, and fined heavily or it’s basically voluntary.

If does are restricted, it will be tags per license based - i.e. # does per season.

I can already guarantee you it won't be acreage based. They wouldn't hand out extra does to a guy because he has 200 acres or whatever number.

A guy with 200 acres doesnt need any extra does period. It should definitely be acreage based. You got 2-20 acres, your max is 1 deer period. You got 2000 acres, XX does and XX bucks. You got 20,000 acres XXX does and XXX bucks. The real problem is the 2 acre guys with a corn pile out the back door with a light over it, killing any deer, day or night, that sticks his or her head out. It's what the problem has always been in Alabama, for as long as I have hunted.

People need to realize that if they want to own deer, they need a high fence. Owning a bunch of land gives someone just that... a bunch of land. That may allow the landowner more/better opportunities to harvest deer, but Alabama is never going to allocate deer based on acreage owned because owning land doesn't mean you own deer. Just not gonna happen unless you're a for profit farmer losing crops to deer.

I'd personally be happy to have an antler restriction on bucks + one doe per license. Areas with high doe pop, the state gives out DMPs for extra does to be harvested in those zones.

Honest question. How many of you are seeing less does on your lease / hunting ground / property than you did 3 years ago ?

I'm seeing way more, and I'm in northeast Alabama in an area that gets hunted hard.

They certainly used to hand out more doe permits to areas with large acreage and large populations.
Back when it was 5 days only.

You're saying a landowner would report his land ownership while buying a license and state "I have 2,000 acres so I deserve 10 doe permits"? So two hunters living next door to each other had different numbers of doe permits based on their personal acreage?

I have no doubt different areas would have different amounts of doe permits based on population dynamics.

Our doe tags were based on deer weights and jaw bones we sent to Montgomery.

No, you had to get a county biologist to come out to your land (with you) and they’d come up with a management plan.
It generally included doe permits beyond what the general public had. Try doing that on a house lot. See the difference.
Back then every county had a wildlife guy, I doubt they do now.

Lots of states issue permits based on population, different amout of does allowed to be killed by county or area. Alabama is a eff it state kill em all. State is not managing anything but money. And to cncs point wich would grow the population faster.
#1- no more baiting, cameras, or food plots, but you can kill a doe a day every day. Or....

#2- only 10 does are allowed to be killed in each county a year, doesn't matter how you do it, bait cameras, even night hunt them?


I'm not saying this is what I want, or what it should be, just that the low numbers are do to over harvest, you fix that by under harvesting , not by changing how you harvest!
Seems like this comes up about every six months, but it's simple, want more deer stop shooting them.

We've probably got double or almost triple the number of does that we had 4-5 yrs ago but it is by design. We control a lot of acreage, and we made the decision that the herd was well below carrying capacity, as a result of previous harvest strategies on both ours and surrounding properties, and we wanted to increase our deer density, so we simply have not shot them. At all. We've got a couple small piece neighbors that are shooting plenty does and small bucks too. They shoot enough for the entire area, so we simply dont shoot any does on ours.

No. The state had what was referred to as the DMAP Deer Management Assistance Program. Additional tags were issued on a property specific basis. Did away with it when they went to the "shoot all the does you want for the entire season" rule.

My numbers are up. Had mbrock come down and look at my place he said we weren't near capacity. Haven't shot a doe in 4 years, shot one 10 point this year, only buck in last three. Got the neighbor on board last year. Numbers moving up, age class moving up. I have 350 acres neighbor has about 300, my other neighbors may be stacking them up I really don't know. I don't think so though. But not shooting them has made a huge difference for me

Ah very interesting so it wasn't based on acreage it was a customized program specific to the parcel with biologist oversight - were these for controlling doe overpopulation?

I've hunted a bunch of states that more closely manage their does/seasons than Alabama - NJ, NY, CT, PA and usually with DMAPs biologist has to come out and make a determination that the deer are overpopulated and in bad shape and/or causing ecological damage.

I live in zone C. I hunt the land I live on there some. Seeing deer is not a problem we have plenty but we’ve killed 1 buck in 5 seasons.
Choosing not to shoot everything changes everything on smaller properties.
I also hunt in zone D and we have more deer there than we did 5 years ago because we’re being more selective in what we shoot and how many we shoot.

Hey CNC, I will agree there’s not an issue with over harvest of deer in those counties in north AL. At least the ones I’m
most familiar with. There’s PLENTY of deer. Some places there’s so many habitat is suffering.

I think there’s definitely a change in buck age structure and some serious high grading taking place.

Which ones are you referring to??.....We have a zone C for a reason don’t we??....I know I grew up in Marshall Co and there definitely isnt “plenty” of deer there….I’m pretty familiar with Blount and Dekalb and they have what I’d call “some” deer but not plenty.