That's one way to look at it, but if they had that many confirmed 160 or better bucks killed I would like to know how many bucks were killed over 130, which to "most hunters" is the bottom tier of a trophy deer, anywhere except the Midwest, Texas or Canada. My guess is the percentage of bucks killed over 160 in the midwest or texas isn't much higher than .048. Probably is in Canada b/c I would think I high percentage of their hunters are out of state and looking for a 150+.

Everyone wants to or would love to kill a 160" buck but the biggest problem in Alabama is that the majority (90+%) of the hunters lack the trigger restraint, commitment, and patience (4-5yrs and preferably 6+) to grow a truely mature buck. Not all 6 yr olds will turn into 160's. It's a fact but I once had a very respected biologist tell me that "deer are like people, some are just bigger than others". It's hard to kill a 160" buck when 99.99% of the genetically superior 120-140" 2.5-4.5 yr olds that get seen during hunting season are dying from lead poisoning. Alabama has really good genetics statewide and has the potential and does grow some fine animals and probably more than a lot of people realize. Age and hunting pressure are more of a factor than anything else as to why other states produce more high scoring bucks. Have a budddy that lives in Hattiesburg, lived there all his life,hunts there locally and he's killing bucks he never dreamed he'd even see 15 years ago. He will sing the praises of MS game and fish til he dies. Says antler restrictions, split seasons, buck limits, etc. are the best thing that ever happened. He railed against it when it first came out and for the first 3-4 yrs but is now its biggest supporter. Key to MS is that they did not go with a one size fits all approach. They tailored it over several years adjusting seasons and harvest strategies based on actual results they were seeing in the fld. They got the best program in the south right now and it will just continue to get better. To each his own but I'd love to see AL use the same program or something similar.

I was just trying to poke fun at everybody myself included. It would be interesting to know what percentage of deer killed in AL scored over 120, 130, 140, etc

I know of several big deer killed this year in Alabama. Since we have no way of knowing exactly how many big bucks were killed in Alabama this year is it fair to say MS is better than AL? I know a guy that killed a 170 and has no plans of entering it in any contest or book. Since we don't report our kills to any organization I think it hard to compare our state to any other.

Example at your club-land you have actual pictures of deer harvested 120-200 inches but yet people see those pictures and see what the potential is but yet if a decent 2 1/2 walks out
they shoot it , gotta learn trigger patience , i know its hard to do and people say i had to make a quick decision , let it go if you dont know it will be back , proper nutrition from birth to 6-8 years old will grow you a large buck most of the time but its money and time along with timber companies allowing proper practice in the field and its hard to get that combination .
I think Alabama should learn from its neighbor and try incorporating the same practice and let our Biologist do the job there supposed to do and let them make the suggestions and put them into practice .

Mike35549, I'd be much more interested to know what percentage of the bucks killed in AL scored 120" or less. That is the more telling number. Bet it would be at least 90% and probably closer to 95 with the avg. age somewhere between 1.5 & 2.5 yrs. DS4AU, if we had a check system like most states that are serious about managing their wildlife we'd know the answer. It would eliminate all the BS of people saying "well we didnt have a rut or see any chasing because my neighbors and the rest of the state killed 100,576,321,499 does last season and the coyotes got the rest. The BS of, "yeah, we killed 45 bucks on our club, but all were fully mature and scored 125 or better." Before someone jumps on me about it, yes AL has a coyote problem. Dead bucks dont grow and dead does don't reproduce. We probably need to kill more does in some areas and less in others. Nobody can manage anything based on speculation and the harvest totals thrown around by the state are at best a wild a$$ guess. There are probably less does being killed than people think and more small bucks being killed than people will admit. MS knows more about what is going on with their herd and can better actively manage it because they monitor it and do the leg work. Alabama really has no clue how many does/bucks are killed statewide much less what they are scoring. Those numbers are best estimates based on limited info compiled from big processors and WMAs. I hold the leases for 2 clubs totaling 4500 acres and know several of the state biologists personally and they've never asked me for any harvest data. I've shot with them in the summer doing herd health checks and looking for CWD but they've never asked me for harvest or age data related to prior seasons. If we want big bucks, we gotta do something to quit killing all the young ones and it is evident that most Alabama hunters lack either the intelligence to age deer or the self restraint to layoff a young one without someone forcing them too. If everyone is happy about the way things are and what we're shooting then let's keep it the same but we shouldnt be throwing up the midwest and other states having better deer and bigger bucks and coveting what they have. Alabama can and will produce bucks to rival those if we'd let them get to maturity. Most want to kill huge bucks but want to shoot whatever buck walks out and then let the neighbor be responsible for growing the big bucks in hopes one will venture over onto their property. And when that same neighbor shoots at last light,"dang it, there they go blasting everything that walks again, no wonder we dont have any big bucks or see any chasing."

We Alabamians always thank Mississippi for being last in every survey taken so we wont be. Well y'all Mississippi has this QDM thing figured out well past us.I have family in Grenada County that own around 350 acres and the numbers don't lie. They are harvesting bigger bucks since this plan has come into affect a few years ago. They tell me it was a slow process but well worth the wait. We have to have a better plan in Alabama. I believe with the right resources and knowledge of each section of this state it can be acomplished sooner than later. My opinion thats all.

Statistics make everyone guidy these days, but it's the story behind the numbers that really tells the tale. Mississippi has scored a coup by getting hunters and landowners to by in on a new philosophy in deer hunting. They are changing the culture of deer hunting, by encouraging restraint and allowing young bucks to live atleast another 1-2 years. That's HUGE from my perspective and IMHO!
Now do the numbers presented really show a significant difference over what is happening here in Alabama? Well we really don't know do we, because the DCNR here doesn't publish or provide any numbers like those presented in this post.
I personally believe that managed restraint by hunters can be achieved without a mandated antler restriction like Mississippi is using, but to me the antler limitation was a menial part of the campaign that they used to get hunters to buy in on this change. They provided data, invested in the campaigns success and are sucessfully updating and speering on the troops towards continued prosperity.
I say all of that to say this: Mississippi is managing their resources and yes even their hunters. They have almost everyone on the same sheet of music. A difficult task to achieve, especially in hunting situations. If you have ever manged a hunting club you know exactly what I mean. They are providing meaningful information to the states hunters and providing/receiving feedback to substantiate their programs. If Alabama wants to move forward in their hunting resource management then the spark to unite change has to come from somewhere. If Alabama were to impose hunting restrictions similar to those of Mississippi's, I personally would not be opposed. However, if they would simply look at providing something like the numbers campaign Mississippi exhibits, it might be the spark that encourages hunters to take a chance on change.

I'm all for it how do we get our CAB to start this in our State ?
These other states make millions off out of state people wanting to kill big deer when Alabama could be doing the same .

quote[Mike35549, I'd be much more interested to know what percentage of the bucks killed in AL scored 120" or less. That is the more telling number. Bet it would be at least 90% and probably closer to 95 with the avg. age somewhere between 1.5 & 2.5 yrs.]

I would not be surprized if that were not true for MS as well.
Also, many of MSs largest deer come from the Noxubee Co. area which is on the AL line not far from Pickens co. if not adjoining Pickens.

Outback nailed it an no one seems to see what he said...

Allow your deer to have more than one or possibly two birthdays.. why our leaders would allow the legal buck harvest we have here in bama simply behooves me.

Then pple want to complain.....keep your finger off the trigger.

All this talk about how the other states manage game has me thinking. Do people in Mississippi agree the plan is working to grow bigger bucks? If you logged onto a blog/talk forum in that state are they happy or griping like we all do here in Alabama. Are there a 1,000 better ideas flying around those forums of how to grow even better bucks? Are they praising the next states way of doing things?

I can't speak for everyone in MS, but I hunt there and I'm happy with the rules. I'm also happy that Alabama has at least taken some steps in the right direction limiting bucks...baby steps are better than no steps to me.

For sure baby steps will lead into bigger and better results. I myself would love to shoot a 160 deer but have the same trouble most on here have. I see a deer, I shoot the deer! I eat the deer....and repeat!

The fact is 95% of bucks in Alabama dont have the genetics to grow into 160" deer. It's just a fact. It doesnt matter how good the food is, or how long you let them grow. Only about 3-5% born would ever have the potential to grow that big. Then you have to look at the fact that you lose approx. 30% of those fawns to predation and other natural cause. If you want to be realistic, just concentrate on growing MATURE deer on your property and stop worrying about what they score.

You have a refference for that data??

^^^^^^^This^^^^^^^

NOT A FACT.......your opinion and in my opinion it's wrong. I would say that MOST bucks if they reach 5 1/2 or 6 1/2 will be that good with perfect nutrition. I know perfect nutrition is most likely not gonna happen outside of a pen but WAAAAYYY more than 3-5% would be over 160 with just really good nutrition. I see many many deer killed here that score over 130 that are 3 1/2 to 4 1/2 year olds and they have what I would consider poor nutrition as far as growing antlers goes.Add 2 years and some good food to the mix and you will have lots of 160's.

Edit.........And corn ain't good food for growing bone.

Edit #2 Maybe I overstated one thing ....I don't think MOST bucks have that kinda genes but much more than 5% do. I would say that even if it is 5% if there were 100,000 bucks killed that would be 5000 bucks at 160. Even if it was 3% that is 3000, take away half for depredation ,roadkills and disease and thats still 1500 good bucks per year. Do I think thats likely ? NO but even 1% of the bucks here at 160+ would be far far higher that what we have now.

95% of the bucks anywhere in the country dont have the genetics to reach 160. Alabama's genetics are the same genetics that are running around over in MS. LA and GA. So you are incorrect in inferring that AL has sub-standard genetics. I know several guys that have fenced their properties (native stock only) fed them the best foods and dont kill them til they are 6+ and it is like jurrasic park for deer. One guys place in in Washington Cty just north of Mobile 2500/acres, one is in south Covington 800/acres and one just south of T-town on the river 2800/acres. Heck, I know a guy in Crestview, FL with a 1000 acre fence and you can drive by and see 140-160" bucks from the hwy. I dont hunt in them and this type of hunting may not be for everyone but I have assisted them with health checks and doe thinning and I've never set foot on any of them without seeing a buck better than 160". Point is AL doesnt have a genetic problem. If killing big bucks is our goal, we have a problem with people killing young bucks and not letting them get old enough to express their genetic potential. The question is, is this a problem or not? Some people like to shoot bucks and that is their perogotive. I personally only want to shoot mature bucks and would love to see my neighbors forced into having to do the same thing but they have the same rights as I do to kill what they want. This makes is very hard for me to be able to grow the deer I want to shoot because I will pass a 2-3 yr old 90-125" and my neighbors on 3 sides will shoot him as soon as he walks across the line, saw the horns off and throw it in the box with the others. My neighbors shoot any 6 or 8 pt buck they see regardless of age. Once again this is their choice and I respect that but in inhibits what I want to do with my property so I would prefer the state to implement something to force them to let the young bucks go. I've read all the posts on here and unless I am incorrect, we've looked at this from only one perspective and that is that hunters should have the right to shoot what they want. IMO their right to shoot young bucks is infringing on my right to be able to grow and kill the older age class bucks that I want to hunt. Who is right and who is wrong? Neither, just like running a club, there has to be a happy median that satisfys the majority. The age and antler restrictions imposed by MS seem to do that. People can still shoot plenty of bucks but they also protect a good portion of the youger bucks. Let me restate the biggest point once again and I think that Matt, Bham Fred, Goobler and all the biologists on this thread will back me on this. There is nothing wrong with AL genetics.

The fact is true, that only 3-5% of all bucks even have the potential for 160" of antler. Anybody thinking otherwise has ignored all the facts and lives in fantasy land.