Who all here thanks that Tennessee has the right stuff to grow bucks like Kentucky does, if only we would manage our herd better?

These guys here want to go back to if its brown its down, shoot every buck you see. How do you get them to give up their deer numbers for quality.

I actually think that they are already here, just maybe not as abundant and accessible(ag fields).

We can't grow the quantity of racks to compete on a B&C level, but we can match them in age.

Then Captain, why don't you buy some land and prove it.

We could close the gap with ky but never match them by reducing our limit and shortening the season. There soil is better especially in the river bottoms of the miss., ohio and greene river bottoms. Also colder climates favor larger mammals.

Then Captain, why don't you buy some land and prove it.

SCN the problem is that TN is the only state I have seen which considers 2.5 year old deer "older" bucks. Also, the data is not available from other states to accurately compare two different states. It is in Miss, but that is not what we are discussing.

The best comparison is numbers of P&Y/B&C entries. KY ranks way higher then TN, which in reality all of our bordering states rank much higher. In fact we are near the bottom of the list in terms of rankings.

Are you serious?? Do you not comprehend what people other then yourself post?

Think I went down that path already. Worked great for 6 seasons, then the brown its down crowd moved in on 3 sides, and all is lost. Hate to rehash the past for those which already know why I turned to the darkside, but it seems bowriter wasn't informed.

What if a Buck lives on the state line and from time to time, he crosses that line. Would he be a TN buck or KY buck?

My guess if he is a "good" buck he would be considered a KY buck, and if scrawny a TN buck?

Keep misquoting and misrepresenting people captain hook and you're going to go bye-bye.

Keep misquoting and misrepresenting people captain hook and you're going to go bye-bye.

Was there or was there not an article written just a month or two ago about soils and genetics in this state?

Yes, the role of soils has been written about at great length. But those articles do not say "...because our soils and our genetics would keep him from existing. At least that is what a TWRA person wrote an article about not 2 months ago." You are seriously and knowingly misrepresenting what was written.

I doubt seriously that genetics were ever mentioned as a limiting factor.

BTW I am a long time and heavy poster on that forum, bet you $100 you can't figure out who I am and what my username is

I don't remember the article. It may have been said that genetics were one of the "legs" of the "three leg stool" that determine deer antler growth (with age and nutrition being the other two "legs"). But, I have never heard/read anyone in TWRA that questioned the genetic makeup of TN's deer herd and indicated it was a limiting factor for TN deer. Since we received deer from so many different souces during restoration, our genetics are pretty much a hodge-podge of deer from all over the country. I think you may have misread.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I do believe I remember reading in that article and other snipits from TWRA officials that because of our soils and our genetics we could not expect to results like KY or other states.

Absolutely the role of TN soils and habitat have been discussed ad naseum by BGG, myself and others as a limiting factor in antler development. This is a well-documented scientific fact. But none of us have EVER said TN can't grow large-antlered bucks, which is what you keep implying.

Keep misrepresenting what we have said, and you're done.

wow 3 drop tines,that is cool,where is Nelson county?

First of all I think Kentucky probably has better soil quality than Tennessee. I also think Kentucky and Tennessee have habitat condusive to whitetail deer. I also think TWRA is doing an outstanding job of managing Tennessee's deer herd. If I want to hunt Tennessee deer I will hunt in Tennessee. If I want to hunt Kentucky deer then I will go to Kentucky. To answer your question, Kentucky's "stuff" might be a little better but there is nothing wrong with the way TWRA is managing Tennessee's deer herd. JMO

I have a simple solution and I don't understand why people can't figure it out. If you want to hunt deer like they have in <insert state here>, then go to that state and hunt them. If you want to hunt deer in Tennessee then stay here and hunt them. If you want to hunt both then by all means do so. It's really simple. Your choice.

...most of the original deer transplanted into TN... came from North Carolina. After those deer suffered health problems, they were restocked with those from Oklahoma.

Everyone has their own opinion, and unfortunately some share theirs on this site. This site is a hunting site, but some anti-hunters want to sell the hunters on this site that we would be better off hunting fewer days and taking fewer bucks? What they really want in ‘my opinion’ is to restrict the hunters that hunt on the land bordering their property from hunting. This would allow them to take their 1 week vacation and kill a big buck, and then the world would know what great hunters they are. However, this isn’t what they are asking for. They are asking that EVERY hunter in Tennessee reduce your hunting days, and only take one buck a year??? Why? These anti-hunters, if they hunt at all, will NEVER hunt within 50 miles of the farms most of us hunt? Why do they care what we kill, or how many days we hunt? Forget Kentucky and the type of soil it has, this is about a few anti-hunters wanting EVERY Tennessee hunter from enjoying the great opportunity we have each fall in this state. I’m surprised none of them have suggested closing the season for 2 years to let them grow? After all, wouldn’t this be better than Kentucky’s short gun season and one buck limit? Like I stated, just MY opinion, others might not agree.

Actually, two of the early stockings were North Carolina deer, stocked at Chuck Swan, and Texas deer, stocked at Ft. Campbell. Those two places provided a lot of the deer which were scattered across the state as years went by. Yes, there were deer from other states, but a heck of a lot of the stockings came from Ft. Campbell and Chuck Swan.

Careful with the bickering fellas. Say something that one of these major posters doesn't like and they'll find the first excuse they can to toss you. I found out the hard way.

accordind to the deer restoration section from the home page of this site,most of the deer came from Maryland,Michigan and Wisconsin.I assume thats right.

Actually, two of the early stockings were North Carolina deer, stocked at Chuck Swan, and Texas deer, stocked at Ft. Campbell. Those two places provided a lot of the deer which were scattered across the state as years went by. Yes, there were deer from other states, but a heck of a lot of the stockings came from Ft. Campbell and Chuck Swan.

Truth be known however, at the outset of this restoration project, the majority of the deer came from out of state sources. Most came from the states of Maryland, Michigan, and Wisconsin, while there were also a few deer imported from Texas, Virginia, Oklahoma and North Carolina that were released into what has become our present day Tennessee deer population. These early releases of out of state deer were onto several Wildlife Management Areas where they were bred, trapped, and relocated to other areas of the state.


Tennessee has Texas AND Wisconsin buck genetics mixed in with the suurviving deer we had left in Tennessee at the restoration and those are good genetics. BSK knows what he is talking about so leave him alone he is a good guy.

Locksley


http://tndeer.com/where_did_all_these_deer_come_from.shtml
_________________________

So Football Hunter what is wrong with Wisconsin , Michigan and Maryland deer. I know that Cheatham WMA was an early stocking pointt to as my grandfathers farm was near there.
Locksley

Then Captain, why don't you buy some land and prove it.