I know a lot of guys want to debate buck limits in the quest to try to improve the age structure (antlers). What if TWRA is correct and that TN has met it's maximum potential.

I think it will always be debated forever, unless the regs are actually changed and people will see what a lower limit will actually do for TN deer herd.

We don't have many older class bucks because TWRA doesn't manage for that.

I think it will always be debated forever, unless the regs are actually changed and people will see what a lower limit will actually do for TN deer herd.

If they wanted a an even buck to doe ratio, they would reduce the buck limit.

TN isn't even close to reaching its potential. We don't have many older class bucks because TWRA doesn't manage for that.

What if TWRA is correct and that TN has met it's maximum potential.

I don't think the TWRA has said that.

Now unquestionably the best ares of the state have probably topped-out age-structure-wise. But that leaves much of the state to continue improving.

Now how far will it go? Very hard to say. And are we talking actually age structure of the pre-hunt herd or what hunters are killing?

Then they will want a higher one! A lower buck limit will just decrease the number of older bucks killed, just like it does in KY!

What if TWRA is correct and that TN has met it's maximum potential.

I meant correct with there regs on buck limits.... and TN has met its maximum potential under these regs.....

Then they will want a higher one! A lower buck limit will just decrease the number of older bucks killed, just like it does in KY!

I meant correct with there regs on buck limits.... and TN has met its maximum potential under these regs.....

the only thing i disagree with you is that it is only by choice that KY kills what they kill the lower buck limit...

IMO has put more older age class bucks in that state but i think the short firearms season doesn't allow KY to show what it is capable of

If you are implying that hunters are holding out for older bucks because of the lower limits hence decreasing the buck harvest? If so, the data does not support that idea.




Now THAT I agree with, and why I said RAISING the limit (or lengthening the gun season) would allow KY to show what it is really capable of.

i was implying that the data shows that KY does not kill as many mature deer as we do and the reason IMO is because of the short gun season

as an example- the guy i hunt on lets other people hunt also and one guy i have become good friends with, he does not bow hunt nor does he muzzleloader hunt and because of work he only gets to hunt 4 to 5 days per year so he shoots the first thing he buck that walks out

me on the other hand, i hunt with all 3 weapons and go alot and will only shoot a mature buck

another point is that the data IMO from both states is not comparable because KY collection process is nowhere close to ours and TN is headed in that direction also

What if TWRA is correct and that TN has met it's maximum potential.

I have read a lot of TN magazines and a lot of post on here over the yrs... I know a lot of guys want to debate buck limits in the quest to try to improve the age structure (antlers). What if TWRA is correct and that TN has met it's maximum potential. I know some guys don't want to hear this since they have put in a lot of sweat and hours into improving their chances... What if, it is, what it is... can you live with that or will we be debating this for years to come?

i say tn has huge bucks


the problem is most folks cant kill em so they get pissy

or understand it but refuse to accept truths they don't like

Some hunters really do understand science and data.

Apparently you don't. How could anyone in the science community compare TN's data to Ky's data when they are collected so differently.

How can you compare TN's check station data, that they advertise they are going to be collecting age date, to Ky's data that is collected from processors and deer that are checked for CWD?

Very good points. Its hard to say that KY this and Ky that when they (KY) don't have a good data collection as we do. I will say this though If you have never hunted KY, give it a try and you will see what a 1 buck limit does for the amount and quality of bucks in a state, honestly "THE PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING"!

I'm talking about the way they manage the herd and by this process the herd has met its maximum potential.

Apparently you don't. How could anyone in the science community compare TN's data to Ky's data when they are collected so differently.

How can you compare TN's check station data, that they advertise they are going to be collecting age date, to Ky's data that is collected from processors and deer that are checked for CWD?

Because TN has begun collecting data from processors and found it very close to the data collected at check stations. It appears the two ARE comparable.

Lets see the TN's processors data your talking about.

BGG or one of the TWRA guys will have to provide it. I don't have it.

Classic.

So you don't have the information to back up what you've been saying?

Is this what you are looking for?



What I'm not sure of is why anyone would think BSK is the keeper of all this data. It is collected by TWRA biologists. If anything, he simply pays attention to what has been said on here in the past.

Classic.

So you don't have the information to back up what you've been saying?

I can live with what Tennessee has to offer

there are big bucks in tn PERIOD

if ya dont like it here ky is just north

Actually, a near 50/50 harvest ratio of males and females like is occurring in many Unit L counties will produce a balanced sex ratio (and already has in some areas).

Is one year of processor information all you have?

Seems like I seen TWRA collecting information at a processor a couple years ago.

I know I'm nitpicking, but you sort of made my point. We're not at 50/50 statewide. I may be wrong, but I don't think we're at 50/50 in one single county. They could manage for that if they wanted. I don't care either way.

Holy Cow! Whats the deal with the low numbers in Perry county?!!??!!!

thats a fact,not far either

Was this one years worth of information cherry picked. Have you not been collection processor information more than one year?

what about pass years how does the data from both compare?

We only have two years data. Unfortunately last year's data showed a difference between the two sites. That means we won't know the answer for another few years after we collect more data.

It's never been put in Unit L.

One of the things that is very disappointing about processor information is that we lose county information on about half of the deer.

The exact county it's killed in. Often times at a processor we have a barrel of heads to sift through and age, at that point tags are no longer attached, so we can't assign that deer to a particular county. When we work check stations we are present when the deer arrives, so there is no question where it is killed. So just you know, with budget cuts at the agency we have to cut down on personnel time so instead of sitting at one processor all day, we'll try to hit three or more to increase our sample size.