Please...

I don't see anyone saying "Thou shalt Not Question the TWRA." However, what I do see is the same group of people beating the same dead horse over and over and over again, even when it has been shown over and over again why their ideas don't hold water and why the TWRA does the things they do (seasons, bag limits, etc.).

Wildlife Management is a science, and science is based on data. I see no data from the dead-horse-beaters. All I see is personal opinion-driven dead-horse-beating, and when that doesn't work, silly attacks on the data that generally come down to "But I've never received a survey," or "I've never had a deer checked by a biologist at a check station."

No one is saying not to question the TWRA, but MANY are saying GIVE IT A REST. THE HORSE REALLY IS DEAD.

Please....what is the "science" for extending gun,and all three deer units having the same limit?

Please....what is the "science" for extending gun,and all three deer units having the same limit?

No one ever said these changes were intended to change the deer herd or benefit the deer herd. They were done to please hunters and make regulations more even across the state.

Most importantly, after the first year of these changes, no harm appears to have been done. In fact, harvested buck age structure climbed to an all-time high, and harvest of yearling bucks fell to a decade low. Doe harvests continue to be adequate.

If you can provide more hunting and harvest opportunity without doing harm to the herd, why wouldn't you?

The data that was there suggested that the regulations could be liberalized with no harm to the herd. There had been consistent recommendations from Unit B hunters to expand their season to equal the rest of the state at least in days of hunting. Traditonally TWRA has attempted to provide as much hunter oportunity as the resource will allow. In this regulation change the data from year one shows the agency very likely made the right choice. If the data begins to show otherwise at some point, then changes can be made.

scn,no offense meant,but "hunter reccomendation"?We are constantly told on here to show the data,the science,once again I ask,how can Cocke,and Haywood have the same buck regs?

Im not mad about it,just doesnt make sense to me.