At my house in Randolph County people are killing way to many does, even in Chambers County where I hunt the deer numbers where down the last two years. People need to use some common sense just because it's legal doesn't mean you have to do it. The biggest problem around my place is retards around here get a hunting magazine or see it on the web or T.V. Some big D.A. starts hollering management, and they start killing every doe they see and scrub bucks thinking that will grow a 150" buck through the deer season, when in reality around my house It just isn't gonna happen. About a 125 inch buck is as big as you gonna find on average and that is a mature 5 year old, it's been like this for the last 35 years. Matter of fact they was bigger deer killed back when they run dogs. Sure them big deer are still here like they have been, but you cant make them move.

WooHoo!!

Now maybe we can get one of those customized tags under our screenname.....

I don't believe any of us know whether the population is down or not, you can't base it on sightings. Once you start to hammer does, they become a lot harder to see. People freak out and think, Oh my god, we've killed too many. Think about it. On a 400 acre lease, if you have 20 doe's, and they have twin fawns, and half of those are bucks, then you will need to kill 10 to just keep the numbers the same. The reason they say you cant kill too many, is because they will become nocturnal just like bucks, once you start slaughtering them. People overhunt stands, and see diminished sightings. People shoot a bunch of does off of food plots, and all of a sudden nobody is seeing any deer on plots and freak out. Its all about pressure. Night time camera surveys are one of the only ways to do a population survey of your property. Sightings are the least reliable, because lets face it, some people have a hard time seeing deer at the zoo.

Other than some weak areas in the northern part of the state, I think you've hit the nail square on the head.

How is nighttime camera "surveys" anymore reliable when the majority of the time your getting pics of the same deer over & over & over?

Let's not forget natural predation in the form of the ever expanding COYOTE. New studies are proving what we've all suspected for years that they are major fawn killers. When they went to the open doe season, at least on the two places I hunt, the coyote population was no where near what it is now. Sure back then you'd see some tracks and occasional scat but you rarely heard them howling. Now, around dark thirty, you'd better put in earplugs so they dont rupture your eardrums. I think they have played a bigger role in this than they are given credit for.

[quote=james]How is nighttime camera "surveys" anymore reliable when the majority of the time your getting pics of the same deer over & over & over? [/quote
Some deer are nocturnal, thats the only time you'll get them on camera. I'm no expert on camera surveys, but there's plenty of info out there to properly conduct one.

You count the number of unique bucks that you get pictures of and compare that to the total number of buck pics you get. So lets say we get 10 unique bucks and there are a total of 100 pics of the bucks. That gives us a 1:10 ratio. You then use that ratio to estimate how many individual does came into the camera. Lets say we had a total of 200 doe pics. We use our 1:10 ratio to estimate that we had 20 individual does

Here is a good reference. It is old but the main points still stand true. The math is on page 4

Camera Survey Research

Here is a great book on the subject as well. I have this book myself and would recommend it to everyone who uses trail cams. Its loaded with lots of info and its very well illustrated too. It has a whole section of the book dedicated to properly conducting camera surveys.

http://www.qdma.com/shop/deer-cameras-the-science-of-scouting-by-qdma

I honestly have no idea how you came to 10. It's probably my lack in math skills.

Ha, you are correct - you would have to kill 20 does a year in that scenario to stay the same. However, it is unrealistic. Fawns die and are killed, surviving twin fawns are not the norm and dropping twins is also not the norm. Maybe one surviving fawn per 2 does in hunting season. Maybe 50-60% of the does with fawns and an average of 1 fawn would yield 10 fawns, 1/2 of which are bucks, therefore 5 does killed per year would keep same ##'s. It is still not that simple though!

TO: Commissioner Barnett Lawley
FROM: Buck Limit Committee
DATE: May 4, 2007
RE: Proposed Buck Limits in Alabama


On 4 April 2007, a committee comprised of Mickey Easley, Steve Ditchkoff, Bill Gray, Chris Cook, Steve Guy, Ted DeVos, Keith Causey, Brian Murphy, and Joe Hamilton convened to address issues relating to buck limits in Alabama, and to formulate recommendations for Commissioner Barnett Lawley and the Conservation Advisory Board. Specifically, the committee was asked to provide recommendations to the following questions:

(1) Is there a need to limit the number of adult male deer harvested for proper management of the Alabama deer herd?
(2) If there is a need to limit the harvest of adult male deer, what way would be recommended that would incur the least amount of inconvenience to the hunters of Alabama?
(3) What research is necessary to ensure proper management of the resource and to ensure its future health?

After receiving their directions from the Commissioner, the committee met with Mr. Corky Pugh and Mr. Gary Moody to incorporate their input into the decision making process. This meeting lasted approximately 2 hours and 15 minutes and enabled the committee to ask for opinions and input into the process. This also enabled Mr. Pugh and Mr. Moody to ask questions of the committee, and provided them an opportunity to express their opinions on buck limits, the state of deer management in Alabama, and alternatives to buck limits.

Following this, the committee met for approximately 5 hours, and addressed the issues outlined by the Commissioner. The following outlines the recommendations of the committee.

1. Need for Buck Limits

A buck limit would serve to reduce harvest pressure on the male segment of the herd, thereby reducing the number of young bucks (1.5 years old) harvested and increasing the number of bucks 2.5 years old or older in the population. In other southeastern states, buck limits have successfully reduced total buck harvest, reduced the proportion of 1.5-year-old bucks that are harvested, and increased the proportion of older bucks in the harvest. Because age is associated positively with antler size, this change in age structure of the harvest has translated into more large-antlered deer being harvested.

It was unanimously agreed by the committee that buck limits would be beneficial to the deer herd in Alabama for both social and biological reasons. From a social perspective, data suggest that a majority of deer hunters in Alabama are becoming more interested in deer quality than quantity. Additionally, the majority of respondents in the 2003 AWF survey indicated that they would be in favor of buck limits or antler restrictions.

Biologically, there are numerous potential benefits to a reduction in the buck bag limit. As fewer bucks are harvested, the proportion of mature bucks in the population increases, harvest pressure is shifted to the antlerless segment of the deer population, and a more balanced adult sex ratio results. This serves to compress breeding dates, which leads to a reduction in late-born fawns. This is particularly important in a state like Alabama with a late (January) breeding season. Additionally, the presence of mature bucks in a population serves to suppress breeding effort in younger bucks, thereby allowing them to conserve resources which can translate into healthier deer in succeeding years.

2. Recommended Limit

The committee felt that either a 2- or 3-buck limit would be beneficial to the deer herd in Alabama. It was unanimously agreed that buck limits less than 2 or more than 3 would not be appropriate for the state. The following is a list of three buck-limit scenarios that the committee felt would be beneficial, in order of preference:
(1) 2 bucks
(2) 3 bucks (one buck must have at least 4 antler points on one side)
(3) 3 bucks
Without question, the 2-buck limit would provide the greatest protection to bucks and have the greatest overall impact of reducing buck harvest. Because of its potential impact from a biological perspective, it was the preferred solution of the committee. However, the committee also felt that from a social and political perspective, it would also incur the greatest opposition by hunters in the state. In contrast, the 3-buck limit would have the least impact biologically, but would be the most palatable to the majority of deer hunters in Alabama. The 3-buck limit with one buck having an antler restriction was a compromise between the two scenarios that would have both intermediate biological benefits and intermediate hunter opposition.

All things considered, the 2-buck limit was preferred by the committee. In addition to reducing buck harvest, it was felt that a 2-buck limit would further increase antlerless harvest, thereby improving efforts at herd reduction; with obvious benefits regarding reduced crop damage and deer/vehicle collisions. The committee also felt that the majority of the hunting public would embrace the 2-buck limit and approval ratings would be high. However, it was felt that whichever scenario was incorporated into the Alabama deer management program would be a vast improvement over the current one-buck-a-day scenario.

3. Necessary Research

The committee unanimously agreed that it was critical to monitor the effects of buck limits on deer quality, hunter success, and hunter satisfaction. However, during the discussion it became readily apparent that any monitoring program would be much stronger if it was evaluated in terms of goals. As a result, the committee determined that the ultimate goal of the buck limit should be to reduce the harvest of 1.5-year-old males to the point where they are only one third of the total adult buck harvest. This number was determined after examining data from surrounding states that have successfully implemented buck limits.

To monitor deer quality, it was suggested that adult male deer should be randomly examined at deer processors to evaluate the age structure of the harvested population. This will enable simple monitoring of progress toward the goal of 1.5-year-old males comprising less than 1/3 of the adult male harvest. Hunter success (e.g., number of bucks and does harvested in the state) and hunter satisfaction could be monitored through the existing survey that is conducted by the state, or more complex surveys could be administered to evaluate these aspects of the program. Specifically, it was recommended that the success of the program be evaluated after 3 years.

4. Implementation of the Program

The committee felt that a major issue associated with a buck limit would be enforcement. It was generally agreed that a license system where hunters were required to document (date, county, antler points, and signature) the harvest of a buck in designated space on their hunting license prior to leaving the field would be a simple, yet efficient means of ensuring that hunters abided by the limit. This system is currently being employed in other southeastern states.

Although it may be argued that this system is somewhat reliant upon the honor system of the hunter (the system operates under the assumption that the hunter will fill out his/her hunting license as required), it is the opinion of the committee that the current system of one buck per day is also dependent on the honor system, as is every wildlife bag/possession limit to a certain extent. As a result, neither the proposed bag limit nor license/tagging system would impose any additional challenges to law enforcement agents.[/u]

Another common argument against buck limits is the responsibility that is placed upon the hunter to properly identify deer prior to harvest. However, the responsibilities that a buck limit would place upon hunters would not exceed those that already exist under the current limit of one buck per day.

The committee felt that non resident hunters should also be allowed to harvest a season limit of bucks, regardless of duration of the license that they purchase. It was generally agreed that concerns regarding nonresidents purchasing duplicate licenses to obtain additional buck permits would be enforceable as a felony due to falsification of a state document.

While the committee was not convened to address issues concerning wild turkeys, the group felt that a similar license reporting system would be beneficial for turkeys in the state of Alabama.
--------------------------------
--------------------
***************
Steve Ditchkoff
School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences
Auburn University
***************

You are spot on according to a study I read a while back can't remember who conducted it but it was done in 2010 and it said that average fawn recruitment rate in the southeast was .60 To me this is one of the most important numbers to deer management. But most places won't take the time necessary to get a good estimate and just assume almost every doe will raise two fawns each year. Which is far from accurate most anywhere.

I've noticed the twinning rates fluctuate on our place. The more deer will kill, the more our twinning and triplet rates went up. Quit shooting deer a few years and the opposite is true. This is just what I've noticed, but it's basic carrying capacity logic.

kinda like how other states have a very short gun season and they kill as many deer in a week as we do in 2 1/2 months

Deer are a lot easier to kill in those states at least the ones I have hunted in. In 2 1/2 months with with a gun I think we could have killed them all. But I think some of that may be because there season is only cpl weeks. And the rest is because they just don't have as many places to hide.

Two words Coyote and blue tongue Down here in the lower part of ala we have seen the blue tongue to be a factor. Last season it really hit the mature bucks more so than does . I'm a taxidermist down here and have heard of several occurences last season. So far it does not seem to b a factor this year though. Maybe due to rainy summer . Anyway we r also eat up with coyotes . Rumor has it Fort Rucker Al conducted a survey last year I believe. They took 9 bread does inserted a micro chip into the fetus of the doe . When the fawns were born ; within 48 hours 7 of the 9 does had lost their fawns due to coyotes. Long and short coyotes are our bigest problem. That's the reason the numbers are down in our area in pike county. I can remember back 20 years ago we would see tons of deer. Wherever u went tons of deer. Now we still see plenty of deer but the fawns seem to b missing hmmm! What could b causing that . Coyotes that's what! Now I'm not saying we don't have plenty of deer . We r simply talking numbers. I believe our quality is improving over all state wide but we need to really consider the fact that coyotes r detrimental to the deer . When you factor that in and the fact you can kill two does per day of season then maybe we should re evaluate. Last thing ill say is for a fact our numbers in the taxidermy studio have been on a steady downhill fall for the last four years. Our numbers are presently about 50 percent off from where they allways have been for 16 years. May also b the economy as a factor as well

Not sure about "disease" but I have some friends with land close to gastonburg, & they've found some big deer dead in the past year & a half?

Yea I think every so often there seems to b an occurence of blue tongue . They say its caused from the midge knatt. Usually those deer will go to water to die.