Originally Posted by wmd
Originally Posted by buckhead
Originally Posted by wmd
Originally Posted by buckhead
I fail to see why a hunter would be aganist an oportunity to have a larger and healthier deer heard on public land.


Was the deer herd more healthy or less healthy prior to the 3 buck limit? Does larger deer herd = healthier herd?


I would say less healthy because the buck/doe ratio seemed to be way off. Extending the breeding season prolongs antler retention which shortens the antler growing season resulting in smaller antlers. I believe this is why Alabama hunting license sales are down. Some people have given up on killing a nice buck in Al. Lets face the fact that most people hunt to harvest a nice set of antlers.


Interesting ... I am not a biologist, but I had never heard some of those things. So, in all of the areas with low deer densities that is where we should be hunting if we want to kill monster bucks? Heck seems like folks would want to have the bare minimum of does on their land to allow for more antler growing time if that is true.


Low density is not as important as a good ratio in my opinion. Im no biologist either but i have been hunting and observing deer for 30 years.

"You can't handle the truth!"

Anything I post on this forum is simply my opinion and is not the implied opinion of Aldeer, any of it's members, or guests.