...
1. In areas with a high population of deer, how many does are not bred each year? ...

if you can convince me and others that there is a valid biological reason that will improve the health of the total herd we may get on your side.

Remember that a Bucks primary purpose is to breed does, not to become a decoration in someone’s home.

3 Buck limit is fine with me since most hunters in TN never tag out their limit... So in the end... it really doesn't matter...

Personally, you TN hunters that want a 1 buck limit, you really don't want this. I've hunted KY all my life, I'm 28 now. I am a trophy hunter. A 1 buck limit has made me one and I love being one.

Some seasons I kill a trophy buck. Others I don't kill a buck. The years that I've killed my 1 buck, I wished that I could kill another one. Knowing that my buck season is over early in the year sucks! Yes, I can shoot does and I do, but when you have another trophy buck under you and you can't shoot, you will be wishing for a higher limit.

I wished I had a place to hunt in TN just so I can have another chance at a trophy. This is the reason I hunt at Fort Campbell. Just remember, a 1 buck limit is not the reason KY has big bucks. Iowa has a 3 buck limit and they have bigger bucks than KY. If you want bigger bucks, pass on the younger ones.

I've had the opportunity to take bucks every year and haven't killed one in 5 years. I'm waiting on the buck I want. I understand that everyone is not like this but it still seems to me that a move to a 2 buck limit is a fair move for all hunters. I think there are enough hunters out there that restrict their kills to older and bigger age class bucks and probably only get a crack at one a season. If they can forfeit taking bucks year in and year out that benefits those that aren't so selective and it has for years now. Turn about is fair play. Those that only want to shoot bucks shoot away. Take one any size. Take two if that's your cup of tea. It usually makes hunters a little more selective on that second buck though. The selective hunter allows more bucks to walk giving those that aren't a better chance to fill their tags. The non-selective hunters reap those benefits but by only being allowed to take 2 bucks they help to keep a few walking that might eventually benefit the more selective hunters. Seems like a fair move.

Your assume that fawn recruitment alone is an indicator of an adequate herd density and herd health, which is just a part of the picture. We could remove EVERY SINGLE buck in the state, and we'd still have does bred (from button bucks). We could remove EVERY BUCK 2.5 yrs old and older, and still run a recruitment rate of above 80%.

For BIOLOGICAL health, however (not just maintaining or increasing the deer population), the bulk of breeding needs to be done by older deer, just the way nature intended. When yearling bucks participate in the rut, many never recover for the rest of thier lives from the undue stresses the rut places on them at such a young age.

If you've ever hunted a property with an excellent age struture, you will notice that the yearling bucks hardly chase does at all. The older bucks (whether it's through phermones, or simply whipping the butts of the younger bucks) become so dominant, that the younger bucks would rather eat than attempt to breed. That extra year of growth gained from not participating in the rut as a 1.5 yr old allows them to be much healthier.

So there you have it... that is the valid biological reason for improving age structure. Now would a 1 or 2 buck limit do that? Absolutely. But it might not be enough to make a real or even statistical difference statewide.