Depends on habitat, population dynamics and hunters expectations. There’s a few properties I help manage with balanced ratios that can support a lot of deer due to habitat, and they have a doe harvest that’s 4-5x the annual buck harvest. On a lot of hunts more bucks than does can be seen. The rut is intense, population recruitment is very high, herd health is second to none, and the hunters enjoy seeing and killing mature deer and does.

In poor habitat knocking back does on an annual basis can lead to low populations that have a harder time recovering due to low population recruitment and depredation from predators.

It basically all goes back to habitat quality.

in no way do i doubt that .

two question . how large and how many years did it take to get it that way ?

Most of these places are several hundred acres at minimum. Several thousand is better. With deer constantly freely moving between properties it takes a large landowner OR a group of cooperating landowners.

It can take several years. It’s not just about correcting ratios. It’s about habitat quality and hunting pressure too.

thanks Matt

If we ended hunting season tomorrow we would have a better buck/doe ratio... in fact it would be whatever mother nature determined was the correct ratio. That is 100% undeniable fact. I think in the absence of human intervention it has been determined that it will likely be 2-3:1. Does to bucks.

So in that scenario if the mature buck only breeds 1-3 does per rut cycle then they only breed 1-3 does per rut cycle.

What does that mean? Obviously not much as it relates to shooting "Too Many Does". You aren't accomplishing anything by shooting the does.


Why do you have "Too Many Does?" Either you or someone in your club or your neighbors shot the bucks. That's the real answer. 100% of the time.


Billy Trigger Finger trying to manage a deer herd with bullets to achieve some outcome is a complete joke.

I know one thing, I thought I had a good idea of what the carrying capacity for a decent property was but after hunting Portland Landing I was wrong.That place is stupid high and the deer are healthy.

It’s all about soil fertility and vegetation management.

And they do a pretty good bit of vegetation management. But not really much in the form of food plots. More native plant management. And there isn’t hardly any pressure there. That helps.

Gestation period for a deer is 200 days I believe

Real good dirt and state imposed, mandatory trigger and pressure control. Managing and growing deer is real simple, it's not rocket science. It's the people management portion of the equation, that is the problem for 98% of Alabama.

Frankie and Goatkiller get it……..Deer management is occurring on a much broader scale than a few hundred or even a few thousand acres……Doe killing only really needs to happen to manage populations when the habitat is suffering…..NOT to try and fix buck to doe ratios……On a broad scale it’s a pipe dream just like Frankie said without enforcing more strict buck regulations…..Under our current system we are just as well off to let the doe populations grow to what the land can support and let the rough side drag on the rest. All you’re doing in most areas by shooting does is lowering the population. Folks who are drinking the QDMA kool-aid have their thinking trapped inside of a box.

Nope , nature's way is boom and bust . It might balance for a while but it won't stay balanced

I think there is more to it. Math is simple. If you kill 15 doe's, you need 15 doe's to survive, and have twins. Then you need none of the fawns to die. If you don't do predator control, 55% survive, if you do, 85% survive, if I remember my numbers correctly from the GA study they did.

So no predator control, you need 30 doe's to survive and have twins. If you do control, its more like 20. You can talk about everything else, but the math is just simple. If you want to kill a bunch of doe's consistently, you have to have a population of at least double the amount you kill, to keep it level. If you want to grow it, then you need more, kill less, or you need to do predator control.


Personally I am focusing on makign sure I have ample food for the deer coming into spring green up, and then I am going to focus on a few bigger fields of a more diverse mix, since I can't do much about habitat.

One big thing that a lot of folks arent taking into consideration when it comes to buck to doe ratio is that bucks and does don’t exist evenly across the landscape……Just because you have 600 acres of prime fawning cover and you see a chit ton of does…..doesnt necessarily mean that your buck to doe ratio is badly skewed……What folks don’t see are all of the little isolated pockets out around them where bachelor groups of bucks are holed up. I’ve been to numerous places to track deer where you look around and say “Really!?!?”……”There were 5 racked bucks living in here??”……It helps open your eyes up to understanding how the chess board sets up on a landscape scale….Large doe groups don't exist in these same areas because the habitat isn't conducive for fawn production.

You cant take 600 or a 1000 acres and pretend it’s a stand alone property…..If you’re really seeing it for what it is then you are taking into consideration what’s occurring in the bigger area out around you. When the rut hits the chessboard starts reshuffling itself on a big scale…..One of the big reasons some areas have good hunting is that they have good isolated areas for bucks to hole up in until the rut. What you’re seeing now though is many of those little pockets having corn piles poured in them and these bucks being picked off at a higher clip…..Everybody is a part of the Seek 2 group hunting over a feeder in a backyard.

When you start looking at the bigger landscape in this way then you see that in many areas the landscape offers far more areas where bucks can exist than it offers for the does……Your properties where good fawning exists, they prop up the overall population and heavily impact the number of dispersing bucks being produced to fill up these hidey holes…..There’s a LOT of areas that just need to let the available doe habitat max itself out so that the max number of bucks possible are being produced. Once you get to that point if you want to manage for better buck to doe ratios then you do it through less buck harvesting....NOT by reducing doe numbers

booms and busts certainly occur naturally but as a rule of thumb they are typically isolated and identifiable causes are almost always present. So I would disagree that this would carry any weight when trying to manage a population.

Otherwise CNC is on the right track... you kill your deer and you will have less deer. And less deer means less chances for a buck to become mature and even less chances then for the mature buck to sport a nice set of horns. That's where you will find yourself.... shooting max about 3 year old deer never reaching maturity.

Should sound very familiar to a lot of people reading this.

So here’s what I’ve learned from talking to people here and a few large land managers in the last few years.

1. Don’t shoot does until you have reached your carrying capacity.

2. Don’t shoot does to balance your sex ratio.

3. You will likely never reach your carrying capacity

4. Don’t shoot does.

I ain't getting into picking hairs I pretty much agree.

As for as CNC and groups of bucks I got pictures of buck groups from different years . They seem to bust up around bow season or when the shed velvet.

Getting back on track. I once asked a State Biologist how many does a buck would breed , I think this is verbatim " as many as he can get to." Of course areas differ. I don't for a minute believe most mature , healthy bucks always breed 4 does or less. I believe he'll breed them as long as he is physically able to jump on them and can find one willing.

Someone up stream mentioned dominate bucks , I believe the fact he's dominate might give him an advantage early in the rut , when it just begins. Once things really get rocking, I believe the subordinate , mature ," satellite bucks" get just as much if not more action.