Heard today that catoosa deer hunts are no longer a bonus deer but they did add a bear hunt during bow hunt anyone else heard or read this. Heard it was the new managers decision why would anyone wont to put in for a hunt that counts toward there state wide season.
Catoosa anyone heard
- Thread starter Mtncur76
- Start date
Buzzard Breath
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2006
- Messages
- 7,074
We should know by morning. The quota hunts open then.
Buzzard Breath
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2006
- Messages
- 7,074
Anyone know why the "new manager" changed this? I thought state regs were established by the commission.
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2014
- Messages
- 8,688
The following is from the TWRA Catoosa WMA manager.
There have been two major changes to the regulations for Catoosa WMA.
First, all bucks now count toward statewide bag limit. This change was made to reduce the amount of younger age class bucks in the harvest. Currently, around 60% of harvested bucks are 2.5yrs and younger. Allowing bonus bucks alters hunter selectivity and increases the number of younger age class bucks in the harvest. As a result of removing bonus bucks, we expect to see an increase in the number of older age class bucks in the harvest. By reducing the amount of younger age class bucks in the harvest, we will have more bucks grow to maturity and will provide a great opportunity to harvest a large, older age class buck. As always, data will be collected at the check stations to validate the change. We will use this data to revaluate prior to the next regulation change period.
Second, we have included a bear season to the open 9 day archery hunt. This will provide hunters the opportunity to harvest a bear, without the use of dogs, while participating in the open archery hunt on Catoosa WMA. Hunters will only be allowed 1 bear, and it may be taken with any weapon legal for the deer archery season. The harvest regulations are the same as the state harvest restrictions. No sows with Cubs. And no bears under 75lbs. As always, the harvested animal must be taken to the nearest check station to be checked out and have data collected.
We also added language clarifying the need for transportation tags. All hunters should use the paper transportation tags to physically tag their harvest prior to moving it. All harvested big game at Catoosa WMA must be checked out at one of the two physical check stations when they are in operation.
There have been two major changes to the regulations for Catoosa WMA.
First, all bucks now count toward statewide bag limit. This change was made to reduce the amount of younger age class bucks in the harvest. Currently, around 60% of harvested bucks are 2.5yrs and younger. Allowing bonus bucks alters hunter selectivity and increases the number of younger age class bucks in the harvest. As a result of removing bonus bucks, we expect to see an increase in the number of older age class bucks in the harvest. By reducing the amount of younger age class bucks in the harvest, we will have more bucks grow to maturity and will provide a great opportunity to harvest a large, older age class buck. As always, data will be collected at the check stations to validate the change. We will use this data to revaluate prior to the next regulation change period.
Second, we have included a bear season to the open 9 day archery hunt. This will provide hunters the opportunity to harvest a bear, without the use of dogs, while participating in the open archery hunt on Catoosa WMA. Hunters will only be allowed 1 bear, and it may be taken with any weapon legal for the deer archery season. The harvest regulations are the same as the state harvest restrictions. No sows with Cubs. And no bears under 75lbs. As always, the harvested animal must be taken to the nearest check station to be checked out and have data collected.
We also added language clarifying the need for transportation tags. All hunters should use the paper transportation tags to physically tag their harvest prior to moving it. All harvested big game at Catoosa WMA must be checked out at one of the two physical check stations when they are in operation.
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2014
- Messages
- 8,688
I know a lot or people won't like it, but as stated, it will protect a lot of the 2.5 year old bucks that are just barely legal.
I'm excited to see the changes over the next couple of years out there.
I'm excited to see the changes over the next couple of years out there.
If they wont bigger deer they should have cut back the tags drawed 2000 people per hunt with 3 hunts they could cut that in half and would still help with more and bigger deer and leave as a bonus. But they wont do that because it's all about the money not the wildlife.
Buzzard Breath
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2006
- Messages
- 7,074
Thanks for the info Carlos.
BigRod
Well-Known Member
Ditto
Shanman
Well-Known Member
X2
So glad they added bear to the archery hunt, finally someone listened. Only downside will be the increased number of hunters just for the chance at a bear, I personally hope they harvest many, they are really hard on the fawns.
The one problem I had with the antler restrictions for the area was that some of your better genetic bucks were being harvested at a young age, way to many in my opinion. I too would like for it to stay a bonus buck, but hopefully this new change will help. Maybe in a couple of years if the age class of bucks increases and the overall deer numbers increase because of bear harvest, they might go back to bonus status. Catoosa has great potential but it hasn't been what it could be.
Just cut the number of permits, 2000 people per hunt on that place is way too many . That would help quality of deer and quality of the hunt for people participating. Bonus buck or not a permit cut would help Catoosa on the gun hunts. I hope they reach their goal either way but just an opinion.
I have never hunted Catoosa, I have been wanting to give it a try. I would think there are better ways to protect the younger age class bucks from be killed than doing away with being a bonus buck. Those hunters wanting to kill a 2.5 yr old don't care if its their 1st or 2nd buck or a bonus buck. Most hunters don't have alot of days to spend in the woods to get their 2 bucks anyway. If they would make it 9pt or better and cut permits back to 100 per season that should do the trick. I might put in after a couple seasons of those changes. LOL.........
Where are you guys seeing that quota hunts are available tomorrow morning? I can't find anything online or on the TWRA app. Thx
Nevermind, I found it. For anyone else looking, here's a link to the online application:
https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/twra/documents/hunting/wma-big-game-application.pdf
https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/twra/documents/hunting/wma-big-game-application.pdf
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2020
- Messages
- 6,690
The rational behind the bonus buck is just stupid. When a legal buck comes by on Ca5oosa, you just take it. The place has has had quality regs for over 25 years.
Rakkin6
Well-Known Member
They could make it 4 points on one side or outside the ears also. That might help also. Haven't.hinted Catossa since I was 16 before I joined the Army. So around 1994 or 93.
They have been under a 4pt and outside the ear's rule for a long time, that still didn't satisfy trophy hunters, be glad when all deer hunting is by draw, then maybe a trophy will be behind every tree lol
Seeing it's a government decision, I expect nothing positive to come of it.
41Magnum
Well-Known Member
Yep
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
This may be a bit misleading.
I'm not going way back to look, but I do believe the quota hunts may have had 2000 permits per draw in times past.
This had already been reduced to 1,250.
It is now going to be 1,000.
Additionally, these bucks tags will not be "bonus" bucks.
I do not think these changes are about any money at all,
since most participating purchase a sportsman's license,
meaning no difference on the money.
But they might actually get more money with 2000 permits via non-resident license sales?
This move seems to be more about providing what more hunters are wanting there. It's just that many hunters still want the ability to kill higher numbers of bucks instead of larger antlered bucks. But there is no way everyone can ever be simultaneously pleased.
The Catoosa manager believes more young bucks will get saved by making these bucks "not" a bonus. I happen to agree with him. We could be wrong. But I suspect the reason some hunters are upset by this is they know this means one less buck they will kill in 2022, i.e. they'll kill 2 instead of 3.
Many other hunters would prefer to kill just 1 buck or 2 bucks, instead of 2 or 3, but want their 1 or 2 to be something more special (to them) than just another small-antlered buck. We are now at the point where maybe even a majority of TN's deer hunters would prefer 1 "good" buck over 3 "small" bucks. And, no, this is not a plug for a 1-buck statewide limit, something few would like.
TWRA is not in the business of producing living targets for deer hunters so much as they're in the business of finding the most ideal balance between managing the wildlife and managing the wishes of the majority of hunters (who mostly all pay the same). But all hunters do not want the same things. I'll give TWRA credit for trying to offer something for all, and realize, sometimes they do in fact screw up, just like the rest of us.
The Catoosa WMA is trying to be managed for a higher quality buck structure than is currently available on most other WMAs. Those who believe killing 3 bucks this year is greatly more important than being limited to 2, still have that opportunity for 3, as some other WMA's continue to offer "bonus" bucks with their quota hunts.
Last edited:
Well said!
Going by the kill numbers in the past there is a low kill rate per hunt. Proble average of around 40 out of that 2000 draw I know not everyone shows up but l have not hunted up there with out about at least 3 or more people walk in on me. So you have 80000 acres with about 150 deer killed per season the success rate is really low. So either people are already letting smaller deer walk or there just ain't any up there anymore . It may not be about money so I would be up for them to close it for 2 yrs so all them 2 1/2yr olds would be 4 1/2 then only have one hunt every other year.
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
Correct, the kill rate per hunt is very low.
This is also the case on most WMAs in TN, even the ones without any antler restrictions which mainly protect the yearling bucks and some 2 1/2's.
Yes, most yearling bucks get a pass, while most above average 2 1/2's are the ones getting killed.
The result is there are still not many 3 1/2 or older, or at least not many with "good" racks, since those with the better antler genetics have been getting killed at 2 1/2.
This habitat simply cannot healthily support as many deer as most private property habitats. TWRA is working diligently in improving & diversifying Catoosa's habitat, but it many never compare to areas with more agriculture. The deer population is lower at Catoosa than many other WMAs in both Middle & East TN. It's is not for everybody, but is one of the few WMA's large enough that more intensive buck management might work well. That is going to require a majority of the above averaged antlered 2 1/2's to survive.
Catoosa's antler restrictions have saved a majority of 1 1/2-yr-old "yearling" bucks, but they appear to have contributed to a higher hunter kill of the very best antlered 2 1/2's than would have been the case with no antler restrictions at all.
Fewer hunters per quota, and the bucks no longer being "bonus" will likely make a significant difference in top-end 2 1/2-yr-old buck survival this year. The goal is to make good steps towards trending better, not to take away the hunting in the process. Many Catoosa hunters have limited to no private land to hunt, so totally closing the WMA would not be fair to these hunters.
I've never stepped foot on catoosa so I have no opinion but… my family(uncle) owns a little over 200 acres that borders the WMA and it's littered with deer.
The property is pasture, fence rows and a nice sized pond surrounded by some overgrown fields.
Unfortunately he won't let me or anyone else hunt there. If someone were to hunt this property edge in the WMA, they'd have no problem killing some nice deer.
The property is pasture, fence rows and a nice sized pond surrounded by some overgrown fields.
Unfortunately he won't let me or anyone else hunt there. If someone were to hunt this property edge in the WMA, they'd have no problem killing some nice deer.
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
It's interesting to note, that back in the 1960's before deer management suffered from severe antler high-grading from hunters, the Catoosa WMA actually produced some bucks that were registered in the B&C Book. In fact, the Foster buck killed in 1959 right outside Catoosa's boundaries was TN's #1 Typical Buck for decades thereafter.
But over the decades, a big deer management mistake was made in focusing more on growing higher deer densities to make hunters happier with more living animal targets. The habitat could support these deer densities, but both the habitat and the herd health steadily deteriorated (somewhat under the radar) over the decades. Damage to the habitat may take decades of lower deer densities to recover.
What happened was that the plants highest in soluble protein were also the plant species most preferred by the deer. While there may have still been plenty of deer "food" (plants), the best plant species were eaten into near extinction, steadily becoming, year by year, less of the deer's annual diet.
Consequently, this has contributed to our same age bucks today having smaller average racks than they had in the 1960's in the same area. Of course their are outliers, but this loss of the best plant foods is real. It takes years of fewer deer and habitat work to restore this better deer "food" environment.
At Catoosa WMA, those "oak savannas" are transforming the native food supply back to what it once was and maybe even better, if the deer density can be prevented from getting too high over the next few years. Can be a delicate balancing act.
But over the decades, a big deer management mistake was made in focusing more on growing higher deer densities to make hunters happier with more living animal targets. The habitat could support these deer densities, but both the habitat and the herd health steadily deteriorated (somewhat under the radar) over the decades. Damage to the habitat may take decades of lower deer densities to recover.
What happened was that the plants highest in soluble protein were also the plant species most preferred by the deer. While there may have still been plenty of deer "food" (plants), the best plant species were eaten into near extinction, steadily becoming, year by year, less of the deer's annual diet.
Consequently, this has contributed to our same age bucks today having smaller average racks than they had in the 1960's in the same area. Of course their are outliers, but this loss of the best plant foods is real. It takes years of fewer deer and habitat work to restore this better deer "food" environment.
At Catoosa WMA, those "oak savannas" are transforming the native food supply back to what it once was and maybe even better, if the deer density can be prevented from getting too high over the next few years. Can be a delicate balancing act.
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
Which is far better, more diverse deer habitat than 200 acres of mature hardwoods, typically offering comparatively little for deer to eat outside a few months each fall when there "might" be a good acorn crop (or might not be).
Deer cannot thrive when 9 months of the year they're barely sustaining themselves on poor quality food sources such as green briars and rhododendron leaves. Your uncle's 200 acres is a smorgasbord of deer foods, which might more healthily support the same number of deer as the adjoining 2,000 acres on Catoosa.
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2010
- Messages
- 13,575
Well seeing how the antler restrictions have done nothing more than high grade out all the good 2.5 year old genetics, and givin there is basically no management done on the food side of things when you consider its 80 thousand acres, and they kill what less than 200 a season, i expect nothing less from them.
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
I honestly think good progress is being made at Catoosa towards a higher-quality hunting experience, along with more diverse habitat.
The biggest single problem is that we hunters have been "sold" unrealistic expectations by too many hunting shows and "celebrity" hunters trying to get us to buy some magic product. Even TWRA has been guilty of this with their "advertising" for non-resident hunters. But most free-range deer hunts remain in fact LOW success, especially when the target is an above averaged antlered older buck.
Some days are better than others.
Most of us are only "lucky" to actually make a kill on a small percentage of our deer hunts.
Doesn't mean we don't have lots of good hunting experiences most days we hunt.
Few of us want exactly the same things.
To me, at Catoosa, the number 1 "distraction" taking away from a quality hunting experience (again, for me) has been the manager allow ATVs to freely roam the WMA during the hunts.
Nothing ruins my hunting mentality more than hearing an approaching ATV after I've just spent the past half-hour slipping into what might otherwise have been a remote spot around a mile or so from where I parked. This happened to me repeatedly at Catoosa and is the main reason I never have any desire to hunt there again. But for those who seem to like riding their ATVs more than hunting, Catoosa should be your "go-to" place.
IMO, ATVs are just another item that has been "over-sold" by celebrity hunter endorsement and advertising. I do realize some hunters are physically handicapped & special carveouts should be available for them. But teaching youth hunters an ATV would normally be a requirement for a good hunting experience is just part of what's more wrong than right.
Opinions vary greatly.
The biggest single problem is that we hunters have been "sold" unrealistic expectations by too many hunting shows and "celebrity" hunters trying to get us to buy some magic product. Even TWRA has been guilty of this with their "advertising" for non-resident hunters. But most free-range deer hunts remain in fact LOW success, especially when the target is an above averaged antlered older buck.
Some days are better than others.
Most of us are only "lucky" to actually make a kill on a small percentage of our deer hunts.
Doesn't mean we don't have lots of good hunting experiences most days we hunt.
Few of us want exactly the same things.
To me, at Catoosa, the number 1 "distraction" taking away from a quality hunting experience (again, for me) has been the manager allow ATVs to freely roam the WMA during the hunts.
Nothing ruins my hunting mentality more than hearing an approaching ATV after I've just spent the past half-hour slipping into what might otherwise have been a remote spot around a mile or so from where I parked. This happened to me repeatedly at Catoosa and is the main reason I never have any desire to hunt there again. But for those who seem to like riding their ATVs more than hunting, Catoosa should be your "go-to" place.
IMO, ATVs are just another item that has been "over-sold" by celebrity hunter endorsement and advertising. I do realize some hunters are physically handicapped & special carveouts should be available for them. But teaching youth hunters an ATV would normally be a requirement for a good hunting experience is just part of what's more wrong than right.
Opinions vary greatly.
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
IMO, antler restrictions are often counter-productive, but are also often very good if the initial goal is to greatly reduce the hunter harvest of yearling (1 1/2-yr-old) bucks. A better outcome is often more achievable simply by finding other ways to decrease the total buck kill, without using any antler restrictions.
For example, Catoosa just decreased the quota buck permits from 1250 to 1000,
and made those buck permits NOT "bonus", meaning those kills now count
"same as statewide" applying towards the statewide 2-buck limit.
IMO, this will now accomplish far more than the antler restrictions in terms of
saving more of the above averaged antlered 2 1/2's & 3 1/2's.
Keep in mind decreasing the number of hunters by 20%
does not equate to decreasing the number of bucks killed by that.
Realistically, 20% fewer hunters may kill only 5% fewer bucks.
But hunter success per hunter should be improved.
Making the bucks "not bonus" may reduce the buck kill a lot more
than 20% fewer hunters, but it will each hunter's choice.
Many hunters will just raise their personal shooter buck standards
when they now have a 2-buck rather than a 3-buck annual limit.
For example, Catoosa just decreased the quota buck permits from 1250 to 1000,
and made those buck permits NOT "bonus", meaning those kills now count
"same as statewide" applying towards the statewide 2-buck limit.
IMO, this will now accomplish far more than the antler restrictions in terms of
saving more of the above averaged antlered 2 1/2's & 3 1/2's.
Keep in mind decreasing the number of hunters by 20%
does not equate to decreasing the number of bucks killed by that.
Realistically, 20% fewer hunters may kill only 5% fewer bucks.
But hunter success per hunter should be improved.
Making the bucks "not bonus" may reduce the buck kill a lot more
than 20% fewer hunters, but it will each hunter's choice.
Many hunters will just raise their personal shooter buck standards
when they now have a 2-buck rather than a 3-buck annual limit.
