A topic of discussion for a biologist or someone with factual data. Or just take a SWAG.

1-Why do some areas have greater deer density over other areas?

2-Why don’t the deer in the Lower density areas ever gain ground on population?

Habitat and lack of fragmentation

Lots to do with it.

Also, local harvest trends in light of habitat condition has a huge impact on population levels. Highly fertile soils with great habitat usually equals high deer densities.

One thing I’ve noticed from all parts of AL is that mountains with a heavy hardwood component in AL usually result in low to moderate deer densities. Rolling hills with scattered alluvial plains and mixed habitat types can sure enough pump out some high deer densities.

Being from Cullman, I have always noted the density there being low.

So would you agree that density is a function of soil and habitat??.......Meaning that poor soil and poor habitat equals low populations.... and good soils and good habitats equals high populations

I'd agree with that!

All things equal, absolutely. All things are not equal though. Harvest is a key player in density too. That varies locally.

This state has so many variants, anything can happen anywhere!

So assuming we’re not talking about a trapped population like Guntersville State Park…..How is possible to truly “exceed” carrying capacity if density is a function of soil and habitat?? In other words, an area with poor habitat/poor soil will have a population cap no matter if we shoot does or not….correct?

Lead poisoning has everything to do with deer density.

I think it’s mostly habitat. Farm country (black belt) has the highest density of deer from what I have seen. It’s the same in Mississippi. The delta region has an extremely high deer density even with a lot of hunting pressure. There are only so many deer that can live in a pine forest.

Many years ago I worked on a survey crew in the FL panhandle, we were working on a large tract being purchased by the state along Yellow River. Several thousand acres were on each side of the river, both sides were 99% timber land as best I can remember, but one side was all young pines super thick with nearly zero understory and no SMZs with mast bearing trees, the other side was older pines that had been thinned and had plenty of hardwoods. The difference in deer tracts from one to the other was extremely noticeable. I bet there wasn't 12 deer total in the thick young pines.

Something that you will likely not hear said from anyone else but I promise you it makes a difference is that carrying capacity and quality is also a function of soil organic matter %.........Most folks dont think anything about how their management is affecting such but it has a dramatic impact on plant species composition.....which in turn impacts the quality and quantity of available forage......Someone should take some measurements and see how our management is impacting it.......The problem here again is that someone will holler foul if it affects their money flow......

In north al an middle tn there wasn t many deer at all the 70s. When champion paper an pca papermill came here an there was a lot of logging resulting lots of cutover. Seems deer population exploded. Always blocks of land being cut not just company land but private land . Cutover is deer food heaven . The cuts always left smz in hollows full of acorn trees. An until recently Most hunters seen cutover as a wasteland . I have logged in this part of country for 40 years an now i know we have more deer than ever . I think food an cover is reason we have so many deer now in which cutovers is full off. Farmers are getting permits to slaughter deer that eating there crops we have so many .

I’ll bite. Oak Mountain State Park is a prime example. Heavy old growth timber, no crop land, probably not the best soils. Due to limited to no harvest the population exploded and created a true carrying capacity issue. Hunting/kills/harvest or what ever you want to call it plays a huge role….

Poor example to compare to the majority of the situations across the state and hence why I started off my post by saying.....Assuming we're not talking about a trapped population......


For years, the deer in the 9,000-acre Oak Mountain State Park have been protected from all hunting. With no natural predators, a range hemmed by urban development and a limited food supply, the result was predictable.

It’s not a poor example, maybe a little over the top. Happens with urban sprawl all the time. 3-5 miles north of Oak Mountain produces some exceptional bucks. The deer on Oak Mountain are not fenced…..

They might as well be……Habitat fragmentation and urbanization can create the same effect. I think the interstate may even have an actual fence along that stretch too…….Your example is just reaching and using an extreme that doesn’t represent the norm well at all. I would imagine that even the Oak Mt situation has likely changed over the years as there are very few places now where coyotes don’t exist.

I think when you talk about timber company land, you have challenges. They aren't going to let you set up fields and roads that are the best suited for hunting. Often you have to have fields on log decks, which are very compacted, and close to the main road. The loggers who thin these properties leave an absolute mess, and I honestly don't understand from looking at what was done on my property this year, how the trees they left really benefit. Perhaps those on the edges of all the lanes get to grow faster, but when you have trees with limbs touching there is no way they can grow well. And after all the skidder traffic plus stumps, nothing grows well there for a while. We will be lucky to get over about 1 to 2 % of the property planted in what we want.

The way they thin, its impossible to effectively manage the understory. If they cut the tree's in lanes, where you could bush hog in between, I think that would help alot. Then you have to contend with all the stumps, and it takes a couple years before you can bust them with a skid steer or run over with a bush hog.

I planted 2 of the log decks they left this fall. It was a PITA to plant them. My subsoiler wasn't dealing with it, I might as well have been trying to subsoil asphalt. I managed to get some cereal rye going, and the deer seem to like them. I am hoping this spring to be able to subsoil them again, add more lime, and plant some peas and sunn hemp to get the organic matter up so there is real dirt there. Not chert.

Our density is low. I will say, last year we encouraged no shooting doe's off green fields. This year its a rule. We have had more rack buck sightings, but that could also be to the thinning. I am not convinced we have a doe problem, I think we have a yote problem. It's clear to me to effectively manage predator control has to be part of your plan.

We have pine thickets we can't hunt. Oh we can hunt the edges, but if you shoot a deer and it goes in there, you are gonna suffer getting it out. This cold snap we had really messed things up too. My fields are coming back, but slowly. They don't look that nice deep rich green like they did before the freeze burnt them back.

I know driving the roads of west Alabama from Mobile county all the way up to Walker county I have seen the least amount of roadkill deer in my life. This is worrisome for sure.