I'm confused. Are we killing too many deer or not enough deer? The original plot that was shown implies that number of deer is killed is declining monotonically; is that good? bad? what does the number of dead deer imply about the number of live deer?

Also, shouldn't we have an abundance of bucks of just about every age class given it has been 15 years since folks went from a 117 buck season limit to a 3 buck season limit? How would dropping it lower or making it more difficult to kill bucks help? Seems like if you really don't want bucks killed don't allow hunting during the rut, which is the exact opposite of most of the proposals in this thread.

Where is this happening Matt? Where I hunt (Jackson County/PRV) we have always had deer carrying antlers into the early part of turkey season (and that was also true when I hunted in Madison County with their 1 April start of turkey season).

Yes and there will be some that do that here too. With the increase in buck harvests, resulting in an even more unbalanced ratio, bucks work harder for longer, causing more stress, and even earlier antler casting. You ask where. It’s happening everywhere all over north AL. There’s not a population issue. There’s a sex ratio issue that’s getting worse with every 10 days of opportunity.

Baiting is throwing a monkey wrench in the mix where there really isnt just a simple fix for it. You have what Crocker was describing with people baiting and hunting every 5, 10, 15 acre parcel that they can draw a deer into and they're over harvesting the buck population. The solution needs to involve both some protection of bucks and does…….We need to have as many females on the landscape as what the habitat will support to maximize baby buck “production” and then figure out a way to protect a significant enough portion of those bucks so that there’s enough left over to efficiently breed that female population. Protecting the bucks is either gonna mean reducing bag limits or reducing “opportunities” to kill them. Making baiting illegal again would be the simplest solution but again, that's probably not an option

And what is the root cause of the sex ratio issue? Is it the number of days in a season or is it baiting? Is an extension of 10 days really causing all this ? Doubtful. It’s all about baiting IMO. More people are hunting and killing bucks off bait piles when most of these people couldn’t kill one without the bait pile. So why keep arguing a decrease in days when you should be arguing about banning baiting.

If I shoot any deer it’s during Christmas timeframe and that’s bout it for me. I’ve never really hunted past middle of January on. Feb to me is extreme but I understand some counties in Alabama may see normal activity in Feb. so I guess it would be best to have discipline where it’s needed instead of changing rules or game laws. We got what we have and don’t need the ones in charge monkeying with it more since they don’t really know what they are doing. So for those that have no reason to kill don’t.

If any of you think that DNR is going to do anything beyond a one size fits all approach to hunting seasons then youve lost your mind
Doing any kind of actual game management would mean theyd have to think and work for their paycheck and that AINT gonna happen
Now if they can implement some sort of scheme to scam you out of more money then theyll think long and on that one
Get used to this system because Granny is in charge and nothing will change

I never had an opportunity to hunt NA until February. Hunted only one other day down in Chambers county when I stopped at a friend's place on the wat back home from a work trip.

I think they should allow either sex for the first 10 days of bow season. Based on road kills I see we could obviously stand the extra harvest. Bucks only dampens my enthusiasm for hunting those first ten days.

Do you think its a realistic option that baiting is going to get banned?

Realistic? Probably not. But it’s also not realistic to think they will shorten the season. The lengthy season brings in a lot of money also. These are both cash cows for the state.

But to get to what you and some others are looking for the best option is to ban baiting.

Has anyone looked at how other states handled this problem? It’s not like Alabama is the first state to legalize baiting. Surely the other states had the same problem and figured it out.

Also CNC maybe this was covered earlier and I missed it. If the percentages on your last map are the final numbers, what is the reason for the difference in the top of the state vs the bottom? I know the rut is earlier on the northern half so is it that they are hunting the post rut longer than the bottom half? I wouldn’t think it would create such a distinct line.

Habitat fragmentation and hunter density

I’d also argue that the average rut date is earlier in the top half of the state, and corn is most effective post rut. Deer are run down and browse is pretty sparse.

I can agree with that……..When it comes to the fragmentation issue I think you can look further than just north Alabama though to see it happening. You can also look to extreme south Alabama in counties like Geneva, Coffee, Houston, and even Montgomery to see it happening as well. Something that I think is hidden within some of these county numbers is that you have a little bit of both happening within a single county. Take Lee County for example…..some areas are very fragmented while others not so much. I think the important thing to recognize is that the concept of, baiting has more impact in the fragmented areas, is still likely playing out even though the "numbers" for that county may not show it as blatantly as your north Alabama counties…….. Your small fragmented properties around the outskirts of Auburn are going to be more impacted than your Circle N Plantations


BTW.....I noticed I skipped Houston and Henry on the last map......They were 106% and 99% respectively

What timber company was it that banned baiting on their properties??......Was this the first year??.......Do they own significant amounts of land in any one county??

I think it was Westervelt.


Y'all still haven't come up with new season dates yet? Damn. Maybe just let it ride since they ain't going to listen to y'all anyway.

Ain't no way that's gonna happen.

CNC can get another 10 pages just responding to his own questions.

I need a chart comparing the questions and responses.

CNC do you ever feel like you are wasting your time? Because you should. You can't quantify that baiting makes it easier to kill a deer OR that this means more deer are killed. Someone sitting around blasting deer off a feeder is the same guy that's going to be running around blasting everything he sees in a food plot, riding down the road, etc.

"Easier" is no something you can not quantify. Feeders don't kill does. Just like guns don't kill people. All the feeder does for Mr. Doe Blaster is help him wrap it up quickly so he get back to the camp house and get a beer in his hand. He's going to shoot 1-40 deer either way. The role the feeder plays and the impact of the total number of deer killed is a study in and of itself. I've never seen that data. And probably for good reason it would be very hard to accurately prove. Just like you can't prove that overall numbers of guns in circulation or possession makes someone more likely to use a gun in a crime. That is a complete rabbit hole.

This is your rabbit hole.

Next step is number of deer killed is also a single data point that is meaningless beyond a single value. When you compare it to last year ..... this is real simple now.... all that tells you is more, less or the same number. Also a meaningless data point with respect to what is being discussed above with this Fragmented theory. Which I think is also not accurate.

My advise.... give up and move on..