Biology And Management Of White-tailed Deer In Alabama

stood, the management process can progress without an excessive number
of mistakes or lapses in judgment. To further expedite achievement
of deer management objectives, both doe harvest and buck restrictions
should be as aggressive as the participating hunters can tolerate.
Currently there are many more management options available
to correct shortcomings in deer habitat than exist for herd management
(see HABITAT MANAGEMENT, page 103). Very few areas in
Alabama lack cover or water suitable for whitetails, but most areas are
short on quality food. For this reason, most habitat management practices
should be directed at improving both the quantity and quality of
deer food. As with herd management, a more aggressive approach to
improving the deer habitat will bring quicker changes. Of course, the
amount of habitat improvement that can be achieved will be limited by
the available resources (money, equipment, etc.), location of the property,
current land use, and land ownership.
Once the management plan has been implemented, it will be
necessary to monitor the deer herd’s progress on a regular basis. To
ensure proper management decisions are made, accurate and complete
deer harvest and observational data must be collected (see DATA COL-
LECTION, page 89). By reviewing these data on an annual basis,
fine-tuning of the herd and/or habitat management practices can be
made to ensure continued progress.
The ultimate goal of most deer management plans is the satisfaction
of the people involved. If the people involved are not satisfied
with the program’s progress, the chances of them continuing to support
the management practices being used are small. Just as the deer data
may dictate a change in management strategies, hunter dissatisfaction
88