There may be a few more stragglers get checked in but I don’t think anything is going to change too significantly……Here’s the final tally……Again, this is compared against the average of the previous 4 seasons so 100% represents the “average” line……Also the green * represents the highest harvest in the last 5 seasons and the red * represents the lowest harvest in the 5 seasons……

Bucks



Does

All of District 5 just went to pot didn't it? The snow really screwed us up down here, then it got hot.

Yeah that definitely didn’t help the southwest corner…….I don’t know if I’d completely chalk it up to that without looking more into it though…..Whatever is occurring in my area around Macon/Bullock/Montgomery/Russell wasn’t about the weather…….There’s a lot of counties seeing 5 year highs and 5 year lows……Some of the best areas, like where Matt hunts, are stable and not seeing any major change…..

Let me rephrase that……It wasn’t completely a weather related down turn…..Weather definitely still plays a factor……In my area it made a bad situation worse…..

I picked up a deer from my processor yesterday morning and he said they would finish at around 2600 deer today. That was up 400 over last year which was a record year. They stopped taking deer on at least 4 occasions for multiple days. He's located in Walker County

If we’re looking at it and trying to be as fair and unbiased as possible and not just being a cheerleader for one which a way or another…….then the next thing we have to do is ask “why” is there record numbers of deer being reported in these counties to determine whether it’s a good thing or not for the long term.....Is the record harvest because the deer population is growing allowing for more deer to be taken??......or is it just because more deer are being taken out of the same population base…… If it’s the latter then its going to catch up with you next year or the year after kinda thing……I think that’s where we are at now in my area after the “record” harvests of the last couple of seasons……especially the big increases in doe killing……I think my area will continue to be down for another couple years because we still have to cycle through that big dip we likely had in fawn births…..In other words, this last years “age class” is already starting off slim before they ever even make it to 2, 3, 4…..etc…..I think its gonna take a minute to recover…..Maybe some folks will rethink the doe killing strategy and how we go about it moving forward….

Can't have it both ways. Either short numbers or high numbers are bad. Gotta pick one.

That's one of the more retarded quotes anyone has come up with in a while......

Let's see.. Worse than Milroe will win a Heisman and a Natty ?

Point is that the numbers you were using to make your argument were short numbers , if I recall correctly. Well, the numbers aren't so short. What gives ? Now is the argument that the numbers are too high ? Just trying to wrap my head around it .

BPI, he's using a 5 year average

I'm not for sure what you're asking

I think north and south Alabama are slowing switching deer populations. I think this has been happening for the last 10 years. In the late the 90s northwest Alabama didn’t have as many deer but some true giants came from there (they still do) but the population of deer has increased. In the late 90s there was a lot more crops in south Alabama and the deer population reflected that. I’ve hunted from Camden to Hamilton the last 10 years and it seems the further north you go the better. Which is completely opposite of the past couple decades.

Here's what I predicted would happen and what we see occurring with the trend line in a lot of counties…..I’ll use Montgomery doe harvest numbers as one example to represent them….You can see that over the last five years we’ve trended upward in doe harvest and now we’re coming back down……

Montgomery…….1421…….1486……1706……2122…..1655

That creates a one of these peaks on the doe harvest trend line…..



Which looks just like the same kind of peaks and trends we had back during the two per day doe killing……And what we know about that situation looking back on it is that if doe killing goes up and there isnt an increase in population growth to support that…..then you end up with less deer on the backside of it……and that’s where we find ourselves in my area……



I think some of the other counties that are seeing big five year highs this year in the upper right quadrant may just be a little behind on the down turn....... I think counties like Covington Co in south Alabama may be as well…..Here is its doe trend line……Either their population has grown a bunch or they’re about to see a big down turn when folks get done killing them off…….although like I said, it is possible that some areas are seeing population increases.....

Covington……1392…….1634……..1730…….2219……2162

Just an average year imo.

This

I think there are unlimited reasons why deer kill numbers could fluctuate year to year. If they continue to only go down there may be a population issue, but I'm not seeing or hearing of one in my area and the percentage is down. Are people struggling to see/kill does in their area?

I definitely have less does this year.

Is that due to you/neighbors killing them? Habitat changes in the area? More pressure? I'm not saying some areas aren't experiencing a decrease in population, but that's not the only thing that would affect harvest numbers.

At least part of those big decreases you see in Macon, Bullock, and Russell is due to many of the bigger players cutting off doe harvesting this year because their numbers are down that much……When you take that into consideration and then look at a similar county like Montgomery who’s running another 12-15% ahead in doe harvest it makes you think that maybe there wasnt those folks in that county to pull back the reigns……so they’re still whacking away even though they probably need to be woa’ing up themselves……Probably similar things going on in your county as well where there was a big spike in doe killing the last couple years…..It peaked and folks just havent pulled back the reigns yet.....

You guys are arguing Game Check numbers. How accurate are they?????

They aren't

On the property I own, numbers of does and bucks are sim to last few years which mean they are good. Deer and hog numbers are down significantly at the hunting club I’m in

Plenty accurate enough to look at trends moving up and down over time…..The numbers in my area match up with what the hunters in the field are reporting that I've talked to……Although I think Game Check IS most likely underestimating the amount of change that’s occurring……In other words we’re looking at the legal harvest that was reported and the numbers from those folks is showing us that they have been killing more in some areas…..We can pretty much assume then that the folks not reporting are shooting more as well…..But it highly likely that they are shooting an even greater percentage MORE than the increase game check shows from the legal folks…..That’s why I say its accurate in showing us the up and down but may be a little shy of showing us just how extreme the change actually is……Long story short....its likely even a little worse in reality.

You got him, twice.

We haven't been killing them. There was a 150 acre cut next door, but everybody claims that don't bother the deer.

We haven't been killing them. There was a 150 acre cut next door, but everybody claims that don't bother the deer.[/quote]

10-4. Some of my land was cut too and I think it did bother mine. It'll be interesting to see how it goes next year.

That's only because you dis count every person that disagrees with you!

I’m going with this was the best hunting weather we have had in Jackson county in a few years. The last two years we had quite a few weekends that the paint rock was flooded they created access issues for us. Not a single time this year. Good weather helps us a lot.

Jackson Co trend line for the last five years…..

Bucks…..2946………2626……..3104……..2471……..3301
Does……1875………1669……..2360……..1794……..2253

But what if folks are being more compliant and recording more and more in game check. So the uptick is more of a better compliance count than kill.

Whats the ratio of kills bucks to does. Is it 2 bucks per doe killed or at least more bucks than does killed. If so is that not skewing the buck to doe ratio.

Then that would mean the down swing in the counties down here like Macon and Bullock is even worse if the 5 year lows we see this season are being helped out by better reporting compliance…….And the counties like Fayette or Pickens that are showing stable numbers across this time period would actually be trending downward……As it is though I don’t think that’s the case…… I’d bet compliance is at a point now where pretty much those who do it do…..and those who don’t….don’t…….

Did the hunters of Alabama kill more bucks than dies this year and seasons past. Or is it the same or more does than bucks killed.
Is the sex ratio still being skewed since natural mortality is higher in bucks?

Total acorn failure offset with corn got a lot of deer killed in my neck of the woods. People that usually kill a couple of dinks every year killed 2 or 3 good bucks.

I still have a very good crop of young bucks left and some absolutely monster does, that should put off some healthy twins. My next year is looking good already. Deer my little girl wanted to shoot made it. Curious what he looks like next year, he’s huge but crappy horns.

I believe you are correct , Sir. If you didn't have other food sources , or didn't bait better than your neighbors , you probably didn't have a very enjoyable season.

This and some not so good food plots due to the drought had deer utilizing corn piles more. Our tried and true corn pile hunters saw a ton of deer this season at the corn piles. That is up until the great snow storm of ‘25 decided to show up and shut everything down right at our historical peak rut activity. Our total kill numbers are down this year simply because most of us hunt other places and already killed deer and had the meat we wanted, so there was way more deer watching this season then most. We saw lots of marginal bucks but not the bucks we were looking to shoot. I hope they stick around till next season. Should be a good season.

This whole thing is forking stupid......

How did you factor in Summer die off from things like EHD? Would that no impact whatever statistical analysis we think we have going on here?

75% of the people I come across don't use Game Check.

I don't have any deer left my neighbors had to have shot at least 40+ this season. Guarantee not one kill made Game Check. How do you account for localized BS like that while at the same time looking at garbage numbers?

Here is the bottom line:

During the 2024-2025 season far too many 2.5 year old bucks got killed. That's reality. That's why the deer hunting is poor at best in this State. We don't have an overall deer numbers problem we've got a hunters shooting small bucks problem first and foremost.

I don't need 50 more does I need my neighbors to quit killing everything they see.

Persactly right to what happened in Jackson county. Looking at the trend line we will suffer a little for it next year. Both in size and numbers

Goatkiller if it is as bad as you say I believe i would involve Mr Green Jeans . I pretty well mine my own business but if somebody is wiping out the deer and especially turkeys next to me, I will act. I don't own any deer or turkeys but i spend a lot of money planting and feeding and making their habitat better. I know you aint bashful lol I am talking about land I own not a club or lease

I think that's probably a pretty safe bet.....

By sampling a portion of the hunters to see how their harvest has been effected……If there has been a big die off then you expect hunters to kill less as a result……You don’t have to have every deer reported to see how the ups and downs impact the rest of the hunters…..Kind of like if we had a bunch of guys illegally gill net fishing a lake……We would know the fish population is decreasing when the legal fishermen report catching a lot less……Same concept basically

As a total yes we killed more bucks than does but you really need to look at that on a county by county basis......There's a big difference between them

So here's a question for you now off of that assumption……Looking at the data and knowing this is likely to be the case…..Does that influence your doe harvesting strategy moving into next season if you're in Jackson Co??

Something going on with bucks in the Black Belt....

Some of the biggest bucks I've seen coming out of Marengo and surrounding counties this year.

Its an overall population decrease in many areas along with a decrease in buck age structure for many folks as well…..Not as many deer and not as many mature bucks

No.

Just admit you were wrong and end this madness

Can’t complain. Shot a good deer. Had some fun. Saw a bunch of deer.

Stop the posts

We are the party of common sense

The hunting in the black belt is starting to suck bigtime. I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that there are FAR less total deer here than just a couple years ago. It is insanely obvious to anyone who hunts here consistently like I do

I’ve noticed it too

Some properties with real good habitat have less than ideal populations and buck quality is not good either. I attribute that more to high grading by neighbors than a habitat issue though.

it's why Colorado had to go draw only statewide. massive amount of hunters and not enough resources. this 3 month rifle season in alabama has to go no need to rifle hunt for 3 straight months.

I think we should all buy really nice cameras and take pictures of the deer. Not like a trail camera pics, that's too easy . I'm talking about scouting, hanging stands, cutting picture lanes, etc. No kills for 2 yrs. We can post our pics on here and get our egos stroked.

What y'all think?

Oh no ! You've done it now !

This is a real thing and not photoshopped. There was a character on a TV show years ago that did this. He was supposed to be a hunter that got tired of killing deer but still enjoyed the "hunt". He did exactly what you are describing and used one of these cameras to get the "feel" of hunting.

There's such a huge swing in rut times here that it would be hard to do that right. I would prefer lowering the bag limits and / or antler restrictions while leaving the season as-is.

Know a guy that got tired of killing them and started hunting them with a high dollar paintball gun. He’d get a kick out using different colored paintballs to keep up with when he shot them. He eventually went back to killing them and then quit altogether

Oh lord, I wouldn't want that. I would actually like to be able to go hunting every year after buying a license

My dad had a buddy like that years ago. That's actually not a bad idea.

Or bow hunt

Family , 4-6 guys ; brothers/ cousins/ sons ; 5-6 years back I overheard one of them say they needed like 2 more to get to 100 deer killed for the season. Don’t know if the new regs, old age or what has slowed them up . Think maybe one even died. We can’t go back to this .

it's why Colorado had to go draw only statewide. massive amount of hunters and not enough resources. this 3 month rifle season in alabama has to go no need to rifle hunt for 3 straight months.[/quote]

Or bow hunt
[/quote]



why don't any of the states like illinois and kansas gun hunt the rut? bow hunting is not like rifle hunting. I had a mid 160 class 13 point at 90 a high 160 class 12 point at 75 and a mid 150 class 10 point at 60 yards in illinois this year. with a rifle I could have killed all 3 but I had a bow and they are still alive. with a rifle that's all you do is kill them. but when you kill one with a bow you beat him and the energy it took to kill him come from your muscles pulling that string back storing the energy in the limbs and transferring that energy into the arrow and into the animal. everything about a bow kill is all about you and what you did to make that happen. when you kill him with a gun that's all you did was kill. it is 100 percent easier to kill one with a gun and that is why the best states to hunt have very limited gun hunting.there is NO REASON to gun hunt 3 straight months. if u need that much time to kill a deer with a gun I reccomend you take up golf.

I just hope that the state closes deer season down completely so that y'all can find something else to bitch and whine about....

Well, I didn't kill a single Spike this year. I must be slipping.

You’re such a disappointment!!

People wanting the season shortened must have poor self control. Don't go if you don't want to.

On the contrary, they care for the resource more than their lack of control to kill something for 3 months.

Who's killing anything for 3 months? The neighbors must be great hunters. They go in areas where there are no deer, and stack them up.

Let us pray... 😃

Or bow hunt
[/quote]



why don't any of the states like illinois and kansas gun hunt the rut? bow hunting is not like rifle hunting. I had a mid 160 class 13 point at 90 a high 160 class 12 point at 75 and a mid 150 class 10 point at 60 yards in illinois this year. with a rifle I could have killed all 3 but I had a bow and they are still alive. with a rifle that's all you do is kill them. but when you kill one with a bow you beat him and the energy it took to kill him come from your muscles pulling that string back storing the energy in the limbs and transferring that energy into the arrow and into the animal. everything about a bow kill is all about you and what you did to make that happen. when you kill him with a gun that's all you did was kill. it is 100 percent easier to kill one with a gun and that is why the best states to hunt have very limited gun hunting.there is NO REASON to gun hunt 3 straight months. if u need that much time to kill a deer with a gun I reccomend you take up golf.[/quote]

Get off your phuckin high horse there's nothing special about killing a deer with a modern compound bow

just make it up next year

beadlescomb.....the point went right over your head. and yes there is something special about killing a big buck with a modern compound bow. you have to get drawn when the deer is in your wheelhouse so you have to beat his eyes he's close so the chances getting winded is high and then you have to hold it still while executing a strong shot. everything about killing a big mature buck with a bow is waaaaay harder than it is with a rifle. even kids can kill deer with a rifle. can 8 yr olds kill a deer with a compound bow?

one again I had 3 bucks this year in illinois inside 100 yds but not on bow range. one was a high 160 or maybe 170 class 12 point a mid 160 class 13 point and a mid 150 class 10 point. could have easily killed all 3 with a rifle. i guarantee you if I could've got an arrow in one of those it would have been way more rewarding than blasting them with a gun.

why do so many folks down here go to the Midwest?

could it be that with the very limited gun hunting that they have more and bigger bucks?

Until you make your own osage bow, whittle your own arrow, make sinew for your string, and knap your own arrowhead- don't come telling us that a modern bow is not an advantage. My bow has an 80lb draw weight, will easily shoot 60yds, and the new cams make let off a dream. It's more challenging than a rifle but not by much. The key to killing a big deer is to have a property good enough to produce big deer. That's it. Truth be told, the guys killing the most big deer are spending the most $ and have the best places to hunt.

Yep!!! Hunters arguing amongst themselves!! Exactly what the activists want. Keep it up!!

Everyone spouts off because they want to kill big bodied, high scoring bucks. To do that takes discipline and that is severely lacking in Alabama. The first time I drove through South Dakota there were 150 inch bucks bedded in the corn off the interstate. No one was poking a gun barrel out the window and blasting away. Try putting a decoy that size in your front yard and you will have bullet holes in your windows in Alabama.

To raise deer of that size requires a huge amount of acreage or a high fence. I am not able to afford the first and have no desire to hunt in the second.

The guys championing bow hunting as the answer go against my personal experience. I was on a large lease with several individuals. 2 were avid hunters and hunted on the bow opener until the season ended. Those boys were killers. They would pattern and shoot the better bucks before gun season opened. Problem was they recovered only 25% of what they shot. Cannot tell you how many times I crawled through a briar patch 100's of yards following blood and not finding a deer. At the time, I had a decent blood trailing lab that found all my deer. She found very few for them. I was friends with the bow hunters and we eventually got kicked off the lease. Can't say that I blamed the other guys.

Those with political clout are going to win. Just look at the current baiting laws. They were pushed to satisfy those already breaking the law. Now those same guys are ticked off that the guy with 5 acres is doing the same thing now it is legal.

That’s on those individuals, not bow hunters as a whole. The bow hunters I know have incredible records on recovery. A less than ideal shot happens from time to time, but it shouldn’t be the norm. I know a lot of gun hunters who lose deer every year, but I don’t blame all gun hunters for lost deer.

I say it’s 3x as hard to kill a Mature buck on public ground in Alabama. I’m more impressed with a wall full of 120-140 deer off public in Alabama than a wall full of 140-170 from the Midwest. Totally different animal. I’m not knocking bow hunting the Midwest but killing grown deer in Alabama isn’t easy and the same goes for turkey.

point went right over your head too.

do you REALLY believe that your rifle ONLY has a slight advantage over my bow.you have got to be kidding. right?
go you guys think you would want to hunt the Midwest if they were rifle hunting for 3 months? I doubt it.there would not be much to hunt would it? except for some does and spikes where is the satisfaction in that?

kinda like hunting here huh?

^^^^This. Because a large percentage of hunters in this state have absolutely zero self control when it comes to killing deer. With Chuckie caring more about $$$$ and playing politics, than doing what is best for the resource, Its now becoming detrimental to the resource that is supposed to be protected for its health and future generations.

Lower the bag limits. Cut out doe harvesting. But shortening the season will affect how people are able to hunt the rut. Within 25 miles of my house the deer rut from late October to late January. How could you possibly zone that ? I remember in the 80's and 90's you could not shoot a doe in my county. Now it's open and hardly anyone takes any. Buck limits and antler restriction could be changed and would probably help more than anything.

No, they have Bergmans Law and better habitat is why they have bigger bucks (and usually small bag limits). In most cases they have much shorter seasons (bow and gun) is why they have more of them. Don't take this as a dis to bowhunting, I like to bowhunt or did til shoulder problems. But its used as an excuse to shoot smaller bucks (you know because its with a bow) and most (not all) bowhunters are not good enough woodsmen to keep from educating the old does and the bachelor groups while hunting close as you have to to kill with a bow. And frankly, until corn was legalized, there weren't many buck bowkills in our area.

Not going to argue at all. Just my personal experience.

You couldn't do that statewide. Around my place, they are thick as fleas at times.

Years ago they restricted by county, not zones. It might help to go back to that.

You could do that…..but you could just have a change in doe management mentality by “X” percent of the clubs and landowners in each county and it would fix any doe killing issues……If too many does are being shot then some folks just need to quit shooting them……Its really not too complex……I don’t really think it would be that hard to accomplish……A biologist and a DMAP program could easily do it but I don’t think the state has the same goals in mind……They hand out doe killing prescriptions like Oprah giving out birthday presents......

Nothing will happen if it's on a voluntary basis.

I volunteer to not shoot any does next year in Macon Co.........

I volunteer to only kill the 2 I need for sausage unless I kill a buck here at home. If I kill 2 bucks here at home then I won’t kill any does. Just like I’ve done for the past 10years or so. But I will try to kill at least 2 deer.

But if I had to bet, you haven't been taking out many does anyhow ? Most people who will volunteer have already been managing that way. I know I have.

Just like marsh here.

Like I’ve said before there are already some big properties voluntarily doing it……One told me they had killed 90 does last year and 60 the year before that…….and this year they weren’t gonna kill any……..Another one that had been killing 60+ was only killing 5-10……..Another property where I had the caretaker tell me about 9 years ago that the biologist was recommending for them to take out 150…..they shot 4……So yeah, there are folks out there who are volunteering to do it…..You just need a little bit of organization to it so that everyone is on the same page with what's occurring

I really hope that will happen but it's probably only a pipe dream.

Having an individual cooperative for every county in the state would definitely take some doing but just to form a single cooperative for a single county like Macon or Bullock wouldn’t really be all that hard……All you need is one or two of the big players in the game to get the ball rolling and then someone like me who travels around and talks to hunters to “recruit” properties……. ……

Again, with something like “not shooting does” you dont need a majority to participate…..It only takes a small percentage of folks to be able to push the pendulum between…….. growth……stable…….decline…….one whicha way or another if everyone is on the same page……..For example, if we go with our Bullock Co model where <1700…….1800-2200……>2300…….was our harvest numbers to plug into that pendulum……you really only need control of about 400 does to start influencing the swing which is 20% of the total……Just the few plantations I mentioned already have a good bit of that accounted for already…..If they continue to NOT shoot those 400 does and maybe get a few more folks on board where that total doe harvest dips below a certain threshold……then at some point population growth will begin to occur……Eventually that same group of folks could decide to start shooting a few again one day and shut growth off and maybe be a little more conservative about doe killing moving forward knowing that they are tipping the scales.

My number ranges just represent a concept……the actual numbers and range of where growth, stable, decline occur would have to be tested out a little to figure it out more precisely……I think it would be something along those lines though…..

Youre absolutely correct. Now let's discuss why that is. Maybe because in Alabama, there are 90% less mature bucks, as a percentage of total buck population for the state, as there are in many of those midwest states. The more mature bucks you have in a population, the easier it is to run into one. And why is that? Because Alabama kills most of them before they get past 3 yrs old and has been doing it forever. Age structure, and the regulations and trigger restraint that are all necessary to achieve and maintain that age structure, are real factors. You cant kill what is not there and the fact is that in most of Alabama, most bucks are shot long before their 4th birthday. There are small areas in Alabama where you would not believe the number and quality of bucks youre able to see, but they are few and far between and most possess unicorn factors like large land holdings, surrounded by great neighbors with additional large land holdings all around them, and most importantly, they have very low pressure and are ultra selective about what bucks get taken each year. They dont attempt to kill every mature buck they have and they damn sure dont shoot every 6 and 8 point that walks out. They might have 5000 acres and only take 5-7 bucks a year off of it. There are 500 acre clubs all over Alabama that kill 15-20 bucks a year. Basically, every rack deer that is seen from the stand or on ride in, gets shot at or killed. It's not rocket science why the buck hunting and buck quality in Alabama is the way it is.

The biggest plantation I know of in bullock county is roughly 7500 acres. If they were killing 150 does then it's no wonder they aren't seeing as many deer. That place also does not care about deer hunting because of quail and field trials. They do not sell any hunts either- it is completely for friends, family, and business associates.

That was on 4500 ish acres nearly a decade ago now……He also said that they would probably only make it to about 70 or so though that year……The 150 was the biologist recommendation...... Seeing bunches of deer just riding in and out wasn’t an issue back then either……….It used to not be a problem because there wasn’t as many other folks killing them in the surrounding area……It was only when doe harvest shot up 40-50% county wide that suddenly those plantation quotas just added to the “too much”………

Its getting a little farther into the weeds of it but technically you’re gonna need to somewhat monitor things on the ground to see how the county quota that you choose matches up to whats occurring on the ground……Continuing to use Bullock Co as our example……If you drop the doe harvest down below 1700 then eventually you may need to slide your whole number pendulum up a little as populations begin to grow where “stable” moves from 1800-2200 to something maybe like 2000-2400…….and vice versa…….With what just happened with a spike of 2900 killed last year and a population decline……you probably need to slide it back down to where your population increase threshold drops from 1700 to 1500……Again, these arent exact numbers or anything but they really don’t have to be……If you just wanted to let the rough side drag then you can assume that if we keep decreasing doe harvest then population growth is gonna kick in at some point……assuming the land has the potential for the growth…..which lots of places currently do

This is why all of that stuff about not knowing the number everyone else is killing and this and that…..yada yada….. doesn’t really matter……You don’t have to know all of that…..All we need to know is how many does we need to get folks “NOT to kill” where we go from stable or decline to population growth and control the flip of that switch……..That’s your buffer against the doe slayers and freezer fillers so that the overall population stays where you want it…..The over harvesting of bucks is another story though…..At least if you fix the doe issue then you know you’re starting with a buck population base that matches the potential of the habitat instead of populations that are way in under what prime habitat should be supporting……

I volunteer to come to come to Macon county and shoot every doe I see. Might even get a few off the highway along the way

Or bow hunt
[/quote]



why don't any of the states like illinois and kansas gun hunt the rut? bow hunting is not like rifle hunting. I had a mid 160 class 13 point at 90 a high 160 class 12 point at 75 and a mid 150 class 10 point at 60 yards in illinois this year. with a rifle I could have killed all 3 but I had a bow and they are still alive. with a rifle that's all you do is kill them. but when you kill one with a bow you beat him and the energy it took to kill him come from your muscles pulling that string back storing the energy in the limbs and transferring that energy into the arrow and into the animal. everything about a bow kill is all about you and what you did to make that happen. when you kill him with a gun that's all you did was kill. it is 100 percent easier to kill one with a gun and that is why the best states to hunt have very limited gun hunting.there is NO REASON to gun hunt 3 straight months. if u need that much time to kill a deer with a gun I reccomend you take up golf.[/quote]
Only a fucking pussy would hunt them with a bow out of a stationary stand.The deer should know they are being hunted. If it ain’t killed in front of a hound. Your just killing, not hunting.

Knock yourself out……Deez Nutz Plantation just cut off the doe killing to another 4500 acres just to make sure you get compensated for……Its just addition and subtraction.....It aint that complex

Or bow hunt
[/quote]



why don't any of the states like illinois and kansas gun hunt the rut? bow hunting is not like rifle hunting. I had a mid 160 class 13 point at 90 a high 160 class 12 point at 75 and a mid 150 class 10 point at 60 yards in illinois this year. with a rifle I could have killed all 3 but I had a bow and they are still alive. with a rifle that's all you do is kill them. but when you kill one with a bow you beat him and the energy it took to kill him come from your muscles pulling that string back storing the energy in the limbs and transferring that energy into the arrow and into the animal. everything about a bow kill is all about you and what you did to make that happen. when you kill him with a gun that's all you did was kill. it is 100 percent easier to kill one with a gun and that is why the best states to hunt have very limited gun hunting.there is NO REASON to gun hunt 3 straight months. if u need that much time to kill a deer with a gun I reccomend you take up golf.[/quote]

Only a fucking pussy would hunt them with a bow from a stationary stand.The deer should know they are being hunted. If it ain’t killed in front of a hound. Your just killing, not hunting. If you cannot kill them on your feet you should take up golf

This would work well for most all of your southern counties…….As you move into some of the northern counties though like Marshall for example…..there would likely need to be a little more site specific considerations occurring because the whole county isnt one big connected deer herd like a county such as Bullock or Macon…..This is one of the reasons why I originally said that the ¼ county scale would be more optimal but we gotta go with what we have the data for on a county level……The majority of counties would work out just fine though