I love when someone uses the Paintbrush example. We aren't rich, but have large acreage, just under 4998 acres. I know that what somebody does 50 miles from me affects the number of deer on my place, so the '' let me manage my land '' , deal doesn't hold water.
ALL WILDLIFE and LAND IS CONNECTED UNLESS IT IS FENCED. That's like saying if a nuke goes off in Atlanta, We're good because it happened in Atlanta??
On almost 5000 acres, I am lucky now to get more than 12 deer per 4 camera sets any time of the year. The only constant in that compared to years ago is the removal of female deer at an accelerated pace!!!

No, none of my landowners are forced to participate in cost-share programs with the State or Feds. They are free to plant what they want, and manage how they want.







Ah, the butterfly effect! I doubt what anyone does (excepting set off a Nuke) 50 miles away from your place effects what happens on your place. If you have 5,000 acres with only 12 deer you have overshot them. Time to call a Biologist! The State has some Great ones that would be happy to help! How would you account for neighboring 5,000 acre properties that have differing deer populations and harvest goals, with one being overpopulated and one under-populated?

agreed

How about if you have, own, or manage less that 500 acres you MUST have a State biologist come out and make management recommendations and issue your doe tag(s) for the property? Would that satisfy yall?

Not if I have to pay for extra staffing!

The premise of your original question is all messed up - whoever decided it is "okay" to have a season honor system limit on turkeys? There's less than 10 of us in the state who ever pay any attention to it.

Just had to throw that in.

Who cares about a stinking deer?

Yea, but wouldn't that address the problem yall seem to be having - rouge hunters decimating the deer herd in the State because of high pressure on small tracts of land? According to some on here we shouldn't have any problem with paying more on license fees to staff more biologists and government programs? I, for one, wouldn't have a problem paying more for a license.



Who invited you in here to cause trouble. Look what happens when it rains and I get forced indoors!

OMG!! So now the state is going to make law from judging what has been about a half dozen people bitching on the internet about not seeing any deer. SMDH!!!

If we want more mature "trophy" bucks in the state, shouldn't we quit shooting mature bucks? Or any bucks?

I grew up in Mississippi and back in the early 80's there were big money clubs on the river that only killed spikes and does. They had tons of mature bucks and always killed a barge load of spikes the next year. Then every third year a member could kill a non-spike buck.

Nobody is saying anyone must have them come out but if they were to impose a doe limit and season and I needed to take more does and it was free like the current program is then by all means yes.

Actually they are not rogue hunters per say they are law abiding hunters killing what the State allows and actually push for a long time.

Yep sure is genius

Ever thought we just like to have opinions from varying sources???

And it's comments like that that make biologists not take hunters seriously.

I would think the State would have to come out to verify how many does need to be taken (or not taken) in the area. Hard to make good reccs without seeing the place!? And, yea, it should be free (or paid for by the other hunters of the State, I should say). While I think it actually is a reasonable idea, recon how much bitching there would be about the State picking on the little guy on here?

It is free...

May not have followed clearly... DMP is free as is all our other services. The topic above is different from current programs.

Why do you think they would have to be forced to join? Who do you think is forced to join?

That's easy... they don't want us in their "business" or they are smarter than we are.

I'm not the one complaining. If I want to shoot a doe whenever I please during the already established limits. My place is less than 80 acres, reckon someone would come out for that to be in DMP?

It's farm land so I could shoot them in the summer with depravation permits. They eat the heck out of the beans my farmer is trying to grow. Which is better, make use of them or leave them laying?

When I see my area with these low doe numbers I hear of but see no evidence of. I might would want to concede, but probably not. I've made 2 deer hunts this year and only 1 duck hunt. Seen 3 Does on the WMA and 9 Does and 2 bucks at the farm.

Limits per person does nothing to address the balance of the deer population, or lack thereof. I know you and several others on this thread are at least able to give input on bag limits and such.

Our deer herd and deer bag limits can't be fixed by a tag system or a liberal season.

We need biologically sound ZONES in the state. Not 2 or 3. Maybe 20, maybe 50.

Lower AL gets and extended February season to hunt the rut. The deer on our farm, and in my area, rut at the same time the deer in lower AL do. I have never seen a buck chase a doe here before January 30th and I have never seen a fawn here before August 15th and most come a week or so later.

We have a pitifully small deer herd, and need a closed antlerless season for X number of years, but the Jackson county folks who hunt areas where crop fields are hammered or the population is at or near carrying capacity need to be able to kill however many they need to kill.

I'm sure it would be a pain in the rear to sit down as a group of biologists and DCNR decision makers and draw up 45 deer management zones, but if the state ever really wants to balance the deer herd, and has a genuine interest in all hunters being able to hunt at least part of the rut, then that's what it's going to take, IMO.

So, you think that because you have not personally seen decimated herds in areas that you have never been, you do not think that situation exists?

You readily admit that you have hunted twice this year, on your own place. But, you think that your opinion on the deer populations on properties that you have never even been NEAR. much less ON, matters more than the people in that area.

The fact that you represent the rabid QDM'er (yeah, I know....you used to run a 'big' lease over 5000 acres) is a problem. You guys really think that you know more than the people who actually own/lease/hunt other properties that you have never seen. SMH

I haven't cared for or been a member of QDMA for probably 9 years or more. I do see where they are misrepresented about killing all the does and being trophy buck oriented. None of which is true. They always advocated shoot as many as you need to. They advocated to make sound decisions and get management help if unsure of what to do.

Years ago I did advocate killing as many does as possible, because I seen how well it helped our club. We didn't reach 1 doe per hundred acres as I've often seen mentioned, closer to 1 doe per every 200 acres.

I agree overall numbers are down from when I started hunting in the mid 80's. Back then it was nothing to see 20-30 does in a group running thru the woods and rarely that elusive 1.5 yr old spike.

I can only relate to my experiences. I hear some guys saying there are no deer in the same areas I personally see deer and deer sign in.

I admitted from day 1 that I joined this site to advocate for buck limits. I was over at the QDMA site and some guys here invited me to join.

You are doing exactly as I did but for a different cause, there is no difference. I wish you godspeed in your endeavor.