Since mortality rates is naturally higher for bucks than does you'll never have a qdm herd naturally.


We hunters maybe kill the most bucks but we don't cause all the deaths . It ain't simple math to a 1to1

Take human death out of the equation, how do you figure buck rates are higher?

I'm going to make this real simple for some of y'all that demand to make this hard:

No need for a Biology Degree or to ask an alleged expert.......

If you have "Too Many Does" someone killed the bucks. You can't have 25 does and 1 buck unless someone KILLED THE BUCKS.

It simply does NOT work in any other way. IF everyone is claiming they aren't shooting anything but 8 pointers outside the ears.... then someone is lying.

A 1:1 Ratio is not realistic. That's never happening.


Again... if you aren't seeing bucks there are 3 reasons and ONLY 3:

1) You suck at hunting.

2) You killed all the young bucks

3) Your neighbors killed all the young bucks.


You could have an isolated disease or predation issue but this would solve itself mother nature has worked this way for millions of years. If you removed humans and deer rifles from the planet you'd get about 1:3 buck/doe ratio. That is a proven fact.



Thanks for playing.


Next Question,

Rut and dispersal related morality is considerably higher on the buck segment than the doe segment.

Some facts on deer management that can not be refuted because they are proven:

Does held below the actual carrying capacity of the habitat produce more fawns and recruit more fawns into the adult population. That’s not debatable. Opinions don’t matter on that one. It’s been proven everywhere.

Populations with a sex ratio that are between 1:1-1:2 bucks to does have shorter breeding seasons, healthier deer, higher recruitment and better antler development. Also proven facts.

So if those are facts why do they not seem to work in some areas? Misapplication of management strategies in POOR habitat.

Carrying capacity by MY definition is the amount of deer the habitat can support on moderate to high preference herbaceous material. What’s that number? It depends on habitat condition over a broad area, not just your acreage. Some places can support a lot of deer. Some not as many. There’s a lot of areas in AL that can not support many deer because of a lack of active and intentional management. You throw trigger happy hunters in the equation and deer populations are really just surviving, not thriving.

You can remove a LOT of deer in great habitat and keep recruiting more annually through healthy reproduction and ingress from neighboring populations. You can not remove a lot of deer from poor habitat, skewed sex ratios and areas with poor herd health. They can not recover as well.

There are two properties located 4 miles from each other with identical soil features, terrain, deer populations and hunter pressure. One produces bucks over 200 lbs with regularity, 130-150 deer are very common at maturity, recruitment rates are high and the sex ratio is close to even. There’s 40+ deer removed from this property annually and you can’t even tell it. The other only 4 miles away has an average mature body weight of 160 lbs, not once has a deer ever even been seen on camera over 130”, much less killed. Recruitment is far less. Total harvest is around 4-6 deer annually. What’s the variable that produces such different results only 4 miles apart? Habitat condition.

To answer the question, not many ppl truly want to go down the path to what it takes for true trophy management. It’s a lot of work. The first thing you have to do is improve habitat. It don’t matter how old deer get, if you’re not maximizing high quality browse they will not express their potential. Second order of business is getting the population to a level where they never exceed the carrying capacity of the habitat you’ve worked hard to provide. Given you’ll likely continually recruit deer, killing gets monotonous. Third, to achieve true trophy status you have to be willing to pass on the trigger until deer reach a minimum of 5 or 6 years old. 6-8 is actually ideal. You have to be willing to work harder, shoot more deer to keep numbers and ratios in check, while letting more bucks walk until they reach full maturity (and that is not 4 years old).

Does it work? Absolutely, if that’s your objective. You can’t enter it with false expectations and a lot of times, when reality hits, some give up on it entirely.

Matt, with long term commitment to that process, do you think you can trigger an epigenetic response in a free ranging herd?

We have timberland so we are very limited on habitat manipulation.

100%! I’ve seen it. It takes 5-7 years. You don’t start seeing the epigenetic switch flipped and noticeable until the fawns born to healthier mothers begin to develop. You have to start with superb habitat and a new generation of deer in that habitat. One property in particular has mostly produced 8 points at maturity for years until several years of major habitat changes. Now 10+ point 2-3 year olds are pretty common. They’ve very common in the 4+ age class. 8 point yearlings are becoming increasingly more common. But it took years to get there. AL does NOT have a genetics problem anywhere in this state. They have a suppression problem from poor habitat and high grading trigger fingers. After several generations of this deer are not expressing what they’re capable of. That’s why in the 80s and 90s so many bucks were killed well over 200 lbs. They were steadily expanding into unoccupied ranges and flourishing with giant bodies and large antlers because deer had been absent from the landscape for decades. They finally reached a plateau and leveled off, and in a lot of cases, increased to unhealthy levels. After decades of overpopulation and adjusting their genetic cues to the variables they had at hand, they’re not what they once were. But it can be corrected with a lot of work.

Several thousands of acres or 40 next to someone who has several thousands. 😝😂

I need some more money lol