Goes back to the point I was trying to make originally. 160" deer are genetic freaks of nature just like 7ft basketball players and 250lb quaterbacks that can run and throw. These bucks will express substantially better antler characteristics than their peers in the same age class. If we want to have bigger bucks in AL. We need to learn to start shooting based on age and not rack size. AL bucks have less potential to reach 160 because the majority of the ones that have the genetic makeup to get there get shot as 2 or 3 yr olds scoring 110-130. Texas and other states do a much better job of shooting based on age rather than score. You gotta be willing to pass some really fine bucks to allow one to reach his full potential. That is why there are more big bucks in the fenced properties in Al that everyone rails about. Most are managed by biologists and most provide a "hit list" and pictures each year from camera censuses showing which bucks to kill and which specific genetically superior bucks need to be left alone to achieve more age. There's no magic to it, they let the deer get older before shooting them. I dont hunt in one but I make this point, the fence is not to keep people out, it is to keep their deer in so that that genetically superior 2 yr old that scores 110-115", or in some cases a whole lot better, doesnt walk off the property and get shot by the neighbor with 6 sawed off racks in the back of his truck. Age, Age, Age. Nutrition, then genetics. Gotta have all 3 but without age, no deer makes it to 160.

^^^ good post abolt, if you want that freak 150+, you gotta pass that buck at 3.5 when he's prolly in the 130s. Lota people talk about it, few do it.

Your are confusing your point with a misunderstanding of how to apply percentages. I think your point is the total number of bucks that are capable of reaching 160 class are reduced by predation, car accidents etc. But you are making a mess of it by trying to apply percentages of the effect of predation, car accidents etc., to only one class of deer and not across the whole heard. The effect will impact the whole herd at the same rate so the percentages won't change.

Help me I may be wrong or missed it, but wouldn't the % slide on how many survive to 160 as those bucks get older, regardless of % when they are born. Meaning from birth to say 1.5 an equal amount are lost across the range. Then as they get older less of the smart old bucks are lost because they are too big to be easy prey, don't cross roads as much , don't move as much, more smart in general. So it's really hard to plug a % to free range bucks in Alabama after 1.5 whether it be a 160 or less. Am I wrong? Maybe someone already posted this,just in different terms.

Lets do it like this. For every 100 deer born there are 3 to 5 that would make it to 160 if there were no mortality. Since we know that up to 40% are lost to predation you will lose 40% of the potential 160's but you also lose 40% of all the non 160 bucks. The percentages don't change and neither do the final numbers. Using his made up numbers you would still have 3-5 bucks scoring 160 or better for every 100 that made it to full maturity. Example ; if 100 deer are born and we use the top numbers of 40% a 5% then you will lose about 2 potential 160's and 38 non 160's. In the end the numbers or percentages of non 160 and plus 160 deer remain unchanged. In the perfect setting on kings ranch they only have 2% of all bucks that reach maturity that will score over 160. They aren't talking 2% of the deer born. They are citing numbers based off deer that make it to 5.5 years old.

I follow.

The older a buck becomes the longer the replacement becomes, I've been trying to find the replacement rates for bucks, basically as the age class increases, due to mortality rates increasing, it will take longer to replace that same age buck. It's like exponential numbers having an increasing value but in reverse.

I read this in QDMA a few years back, unless they have changed their position, I'm assuming this still applies.

By hunters killing older class bucks and fewer young bucks, you are reducing a prime factor to mortality of young bucks, this will reduce the replacement rates of older age class bucks.

I'm guessing that what Bill is kinda saying

Since we keep talking in percentages........ What percent of the total bucks killed in this state are 1 1/2 to 3 1/2 years old? I would venture to say it 90% or better. ZERO percent of those will ever see 160 inches.

As Abolt said "Age, Age, Age. Nutrition, then genetics. Gotta have all 3 but without age, no deer makes it to 160."

Take the very best(natural) genetic freak and feed him up with perfect nutrition and kill him at 2 1/2 and he wont be at 160.Take a buck with just good genetics and add the nutrition and let him live till he is 6 1/2 and he at least has a chance to get that big. There should be no doubt that age is the most important of the three factors and it is by far the easiest to manage in a wild herd. Quit killing 80,000 bucks every year that are less than 3 years old and there will be almost that many more every year that are over 3.

We have significantly reduced 1.5 yr bucks being killed simply by instating a 3 buck limit with only 1 being an AR added in.

Guess I was making it more complicated than it is. The odds are long to get one of those freaks to reach 150+ free range in Alabama. Odds are even longer to kill them. I do understand that!

What is your source of information that you base that opinion on?

The QDMA report you posted doesn't say where it got it's information from in Alabama.

Who keeps up with the ages of bucks killed statewide in Alabama?

[BTW: your QDMA report doesn't even show figures for pre-buck limit compared to post-buck limit.]

I've grown tired of this conversation. Have fun finishing it boys.

Even if you are correct, you have proven my original point! Alabama hunters should have the goal of killing mature deer, and stop worrying about score.

Actually, I think everyone should hunt according to their own standards and quit worrying so much about how the next guy does it. Personally, I won't pull the trigger unless its going on the wall but I'm not asking everyone else to abide by that. Some have higher standards than I do and some lower but which one is right and who says so?

the state WMA biologist have kept records of age, beam length weight and spread as well as condition of bucks for quiet some time now

by the way, yesterday I had a lengthy talk with a friend/biologist about this whole discussion on here

But you are assuming that the 1% that make it to 160 are killed by a hunter. The discussion is about the number or percentage of deer that make it to 160, not that make it to 160 and are killed by a hunter. The ones that do make it to 160 are 95% of the time 4 years old or older and much harder to kill. To go back to your math you would need to figure out how many 4.5 year old bucks are killed and then multiply that times 2% and that would be approximately the number of 160's killed. So if 100,000 bucks are killed, probably only 5% are mature, which is 5000 bucks, then times 2% (the percentage that reach 160) which is 100 bucks over 160 per year. I would say there are easily 100 bucks per year killed that exceed 160 in Alabama.

May be but I would think it far fewer than that.Not even close to that number entered into the state record books each year , and I know some folks don't enter for one reason or another but I think most would. Do you realize how few bucks in B&C are from this state? Historically Alabama ranks #41 out of all states and provinces with at least 1 typical whitetail entry with 19 total. For non-typical Alabama ranks #39 with 10 entries.(as of 2009)
We only had 5 entries between 2005 and 2010. Surely of these 100 over 160 inches at least 5 or 10 per year get over 170 inches?
I doubt we have much over 20-30 per year in the 160 range.No way we have more than MS.

I agree, but can you honestly say there arent fewer deer now than there were 10 years ago? ... Shoot whatever kind of buck you want, I just think the year long doe season needs to be done away with. But thats my .02$

it has become evident that it depends on who you ask


I know I have never ever seen so many dead deer along HWY 72 from Uncle Joes to MS line as this year. Been driving that route for the last 30 years of my life during hunting season.