Same here.

I have never owned a cellular camera and never, ever will.

Why?

I'm too much of a tightwad to pay a monthly fee to look at a pine goat on my phone from a camera...

...ain't happening!

I don't want any more regulations or laws. I don't want a reduction in bucks per season. IMO three a year, with one with restrictions, and whatever restrictions the department wants to put on its state lands (WMAs, other), is fine. Cutting to two or one isn't going to stockpile bucks or make new age structures or anything else. It's just not. NOT with the current setup on tagging and check-in.

Mandatory tagging would not have to be "the state issues Tyvek tags" and the cost associated with that. You know they'd charge us more for that. But we can do it ourselves with a pen, slip of paper and GameCheck info written down and affixed to the antler (or ear, of a doe). It's that simple. I've done it in Ohio that way. Write down the required check-in info, put it in a Ziplock bag, tape it to the antler. Done. Also have done the state-issued tags in other states. The DIY method is easy and less costly.

The current honor system is admirable. We went 80 years or whatever with the honor system, from the days of "saw a track!" or dog hunters carving up 3-4 deer among a group. And yet in today's data-driven world of the state agencies, unless you have some kind of mandatory tagging and check-in AND enforcement with teeth, you're not going to get the desired results.

Again, I don't want that chit. I like the honor system and fewer regs and laws. I believe in the goodness of folks and outdoors people and ethics and doing the right thing. I damned sure am not paying for the "privilege" of hunting with bait, and so I don't do it. It would be easy to do so. But if I decide to hunt w/ bait I'll pay the deal, and then I'll create a yellow highway that Dorothy and Toto would love.

If they continue to want "reporting compliance" and hunters want a better age structure then something will have to change.

I guess I'm the odd one. Son and i run 5 or 6 cell cameras on 3 different pieces of property. We get pictures of 100's of bucks each year but in the last 3 years we have shot 5 bucks between us, him 2 and myself 3. We haven't shot any does but we have let a few be shot by others. Now we could have easily killed our 3 apiece each year(bucks) but we honestly get as much enjoyment looking at the pictures everyday as shooting the deer. We enjoy watching them grow, interact with others, trying to figure out where they are coming from etc. To be honest we used to would of shot most anything decent that came along. Now by knowing for the most part what might come along helps us pass on dozens of deer. Sometimes something surprising happens like it did to me this year and one you have forgot about and thought dead shows up while you are sitting there waiting. I had a buck we hadn't got a picture of for 2 years walk across the greenfield at 2:30 in the afternoon. I let him go to start with and he went in the woods for 10 minutes and I was kicking myself, well he came back out and I popped him. He was a 9 point that scored a little over 140". He appeared to be 6 years old and from watching him he was avoiding the camera and feed trough.

I second this !!

CNC so you are ok with the age structure the state wide herd has? I am not. I believe hunters would enjoy hunting more if the age structure was older. Just look at the SOA hunts and how excited the guys get about hunting those areas. Most, maybe all, of those areas have antler restrictions designed to let younger bucks live. Guys get excited about those areas because they know they have a good chance of seeing or killing a good quality buck. I know there are rules in these areas to limit pressure somewhat and that helps too but I think mainly it’s the antler restrictions that are keeping the younger deer from being killed that helps. If I were making decisions in the DCNR I think that is the first thing I would explore. That and limiting doe harvest. Some places need more does taken than others, but it would be a good start I think

Whatever works but if we’re not going to enforce a 3 buck limit then it’s really just a suggestion.

The National Forest website has posted that anything that is abandoned (unattended) more than 24 hours will not be allowed on forest land. Wildlife refuge nearby states for hunters with blinds, tree stands and trail cameras must be removed at the end of the hunt. I just happened to be looking into this issue and behold, this post was active.

Pwyse, I don't see how those seasons would help reduce buck harvest at all. I'd be willing to bet that the bulk of the buck harvest occurs in bow season, beginning of gun season and the rut. All that schedule would do is reduce hunting opportunities with negligible effect on bucks harvested. It probably would alter the doe harvest but there are other ways to do that without sacrificing opportunities.

I believe the totality of all the things I’ve mentioned would put us on a different long term projectory compared to the one we’re currently on. The change in doe harvesting is a big part of that. It’s all purposely meant to be minor in the amount of short term “change” being implemented. People don’t like change. It’s nudging the back of the barge around to help correct course long term without having to lower bag limits down further or ban cameras. It also simplifies things a little when it comes to start and end dates and gives everyone equal opportunity concerning bow season and the rut.

same here , soon as dove season started they were only on came after dark mostly . i never had a pattern of day time feeding , always hit and miss on them showing up . lol

it dont matter what the topic is , if theres gonna be more bucks ever body gotta want the same out come and that aint gonna happen . some guys want big trophy buck , some want the meat , some just want peace and quiet .


course trigger control helps a lot in cases .

I don’t think they will reduce buck harvest either. Those are CNC’s proposed seasons not mine. I am not sure we even need to reduce buck harvest, but I do think we need to stop the harvest of 1-2 year old bucks. If we stop killing those you bucks I guess it would automatically reduce buck harvest. 3+ year old bucks, even though there would be more of them, are harder to kill of course.

But like it was mentioned earlier, unless the DCNR increases GW numbers, there is no way to enforce what rules we already have. The club I’m in has been established for 23 years. They have seen a GW one time. And he just stopped by the camp 10 years ago. Never seen him out on the property.

Why not place antler restrictions on bucks in order to cut down on the number of young bucks killed?

Mississippi has antler restrictions and has (I would think) similar populations and demographics as AL. I’m certainly not a fan of more regs, but I believe these have worked in MS.

Have these been tried in AL?

^^^
Seems like arky had antler restrictions too when i was there

Point restrictions typically lead to high grading. That’s exactly what happened in MS. About the only way to successfully implement ARs on a large scale is main beam or inside spread minimums. I don’t see that being done statewide.

Currently, one of the three bucks Alabama hunters are privileged to be able to take in a season has restrictions on antlers. It must have at least four antler points 1 inch or longer on one side. The other two bucks are the hunter's personal choice.

Some WMAs and SOAs have restrictions. Barbour County chose 20+ years ago to impose antler restrictions within the county, similar to the county in Georgia did years earlier.

Bucks in Barbour County have not turned into Bullwinkles and 12-pointers are not roaming around every tree or plot. Perhaps CNC or someone else has legit information about whether the age structure, "health of the herd" and size have improved in the county.



Mississippi has minimums for inside spread and main beam -- https://www.eregulations.com/mississippi/hunting/white-tailed-deer-hunting

Arkansas has different restrictions and minimums for different WMAs or zones - https://www.agfc.com/en/hunting/big-game/deer/deerregs/


To the OP, game cameras help with identifying bucks, older bucks and so on. Cell cameras are fun and addictive, although they defintely can be costly.

There’s too many people shooting their “limits” on small properties, I’ll agree with Matt. I’ve said that every since the buck limits came out. Same limit for a guy hunting in his backyard vs someone hunting 1000 acres? Bull crap, way to set THAT up. BUT I’d argue that cameras have helped save a lot of younger bucks because a hunter is waiting on “the big one” he has on camera. I can’t imagine cameras are leading to the decline of the deer #’s as a whole. No

That’s why at Martin we implemented meeting one of three criteria. The criteria as our norm by age class at 3.5.
Bucks had to meet one of these
3.5 yr or older
15 inch spread
20 inch main beam

It’s not perfect and did probably hurt some above average 2.5 yr olds but not everyone is willing or able to determine age class alone. It was the best we could come up with.

There’s an up oh buck now I here
A few of us wanted had to mount it criteria but the reality is the masses do not. They want horn
And if you don’t think size matters have a spike and a 10 point at the skinning shed and see where the crowd gathers.

We are trying to manage “total buck harvest”………If we were to implement some kind of basic AR like 3 pts on one side it would basically just shift the harvest from the 1 ½ to 2 ½ age group but not change the total very much. We need to bring total harvest down to “X” % of the buck population and age structure will take care of itself……It seems like it may be 30-35% but don’t hold me to that. That’s accomplished in our case by bringing supply up and trigger pulls down……Those ideas I posted focus on doing a little bit of both

Mississippi has straight up 2 MILLION fewer people than Alabammer. Under 3 million vs 5+ million. And the Mississippi delta is a different world in terms of antlers and body mass. It's closer to Kansas than Alabama.

You're going to have better more hunt able populations of deer with a good bit fewer people.