Or those 1.5 yr and some 2.5yr don't get checked in .
2 buck limit question from WV
- Thread starter jaydell
- Start date
Maybe the degradation may come because WV has less agriculture land than Tennessee ????
Exactly you use them for whats best in your situation , either horn porn or management. Any 5 year old plus should be a trophy.
deerhunter10
Well-Known Member
But some of those aren't trophies. Maybe for some people but not all. Just because a 5 year old 100 or 110 inch 8 point is to you doesn't mean that it is to me. Just a suggestion. Doesn't bother me that much one way or the other. Just sucks tagging out in October or November.
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
If you're regularly doing that, consider raising your shooter buck standards a tad?
You might just raise the gross target score only 5 to 10 inches, then struggle to kill a single buck every other year. Ask me how I know.
deerhunter10
Well-Known Member
We consistently kill upper 30s and lower 40s deer. While we have good dirt we dont have alot better than that walking around. We have killed a few in the 50s. We are blessed with a lot of different farms in 3 counties. With only 6 tags really 5 my wife usually only kills 1 if any. We target our best deer every year.
But thats management, and your correct, i dont care if he is 100 or 150 if he is 5+ he is most definitely a trophy for me
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
To me, that 5 1/2-plus scoring 100 is a better "trophy" than the 3 1/2-yr-old 130 that most are quicker to shoot.
Have a question for you on this - looking at TN anterless harvest records - when you compare the antlerless harvest of the 8 years before the buck limit reduction to the 8 years after the reduction - TN antler less harvest is down by like 8,000 per year. Shouldn't it be the opposite? And again why are the trophy entrees into your deer registry down after the reduction - shouldn't it be going up?
BSK
Well-Known Member
When very liberal doe limits were first introduced in the early 2000s, hunters went crazy over them. They shot the snot out of does. However, the "newness" eventually wore off. Hunters realized what a pain it was to process that many does. In addition, the high doe harvests made an impact on the deer density. Many areas no longer have the over-population and skewed sex ratio problems they once had (thanks to the doe harvest). Hunters also found out that once you pound the does, they stop travelling as much during daylight which reduces the sightings of following bucks. I also think more and more hunters have become highly selective about what they harvest and are not relying as much on hunting for meat for the table. So you have hunters focused on killing one or two really good bucks each year, but not focused on filling the freezer with does. And add in not as much of an over-population problem and some hunters feeling the doe harvests went too far (aren't seeing many does - which is probably true).
What all of this leads to is less does being harvested now as in the past. In some areas, that is warranted. The doe harvests DID knock the deer density down significantly. In other areas, it's just the slow shift in focus to only one or two good bucks a year and not as much interest in "whacking and stacking" deer.
I think it did make one difference that many may not see. On high pressure public land I have progressively seen bigger bucks there. I know they were there, but they were fewer and far between. Keep in mind under the 3 buck limit, I would shoot the first deer by my stand on opening day of bow, buck or doe. I was more interested in getting a deer than worrying about burning a buck tag. When that limit went to 2, I stopped shooting small bucks and waited specifically for a doe, because I had larger bucks on my land and go to LBL from time to time, so 2 bucks was a possibility, but 3 would have been s a stretch no matter what I did. So my thinking was I could burn a tag and still get on one or two at my land or other places.
Now hunting has declined some on my land (working to improve it) and bigger bucks do not come around as prevalently. So I could go back to burning a tag, but it is tougher to do that with 2 as I may see a bigger buck on the WMA now and you never know what shows up at home. Plus my nephew is the luckiest kid a live and gets people to let him hunt and I may go with him there...
BSK
Well-Known Member
That's a good point about public land. But a very high percentage of deer killed each year come from private land. Of course, if a 2 buck limit helps on public land, then it helps.
No not really. Everybody wants to shoot a big buck, but that isn't easy. Does are pretty easy to kill, but the question is how many do you need/want. Some people (usually newer hunters) always seem to "need" one more doe. In their mind it makes them look like a better hunter if they can say the shot X# of deer. Some people just like shooting deer, so they "need/want" one more. I process my own. It is work. I try to kill 3-4 does per year. If I get a large antlered buck (I hardly do) then I look at it as a bonus and we will have a lot more summer sausage, and jerky to eat and share with friends.
I could shoot 10 does per year pretty easily, but I pass does from November through early December. By the time I go back to shooting them, I may shoot 1 or 2 and be done with it.
Because the limit went down a buck it doesnt magically but a big buck on every acre, very few were killing 3 before the change. It may be a surprise but there are very few that get killed that are worthy of the registry that ever get entered , because not everyone cares about trying to be the next waddy.
BSK
Well-Known Member
I think this is important. Early on, it was a real feather in one's cap to get a buck in the Registry. Now, few care enough to do it. I put my first one in the Registry, but not my second, and would not put any further qualifying bucks there.
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
Jaydell, there's already been many good answers to your questions, so I'll try not to repeat, but may be able to expand on them a bit.
Over many decades, TN hunters were conditioned to "protect" (not shoot) female deer because that's from where more deer come. That's what we were told, and in many hunting circles, it was simply taboo to kill a doe. Many will tell you most TN gun deer hunting had been mostly "buck only" until the creation of Unit L.
The creation of Unit L (with essentially no limit on doe) worked in convincing most deer hunters that it was not only ok to shoot a doe, but that hunters needed to kill lots of them! Prior to this, does were mainly only allowed (with a gun) or a single weekend or two, initially by quota draw. But also, since 1999, there had been a 3-buck limit with lots of opportunity to take bonus bucks on public lands.
Then suddenly, the flood gates were opened to shoot female deer. Hunters were killing & processing lots of does for friends & family. A growing number of non-hunters were enjoying eating venison.
But then, many hunters, like myself, simply got tired of dragging out & processing deer. Many decided they'd rather spend more time just hunting than dragging & processing. Many more simply decided to hunt a lot less, progressively less (for a variety of reasons, not just being tired of processing deer).
Then CWD hit, and the fear-mongering regarding eating "diseased deer" caused many people to simply stop eating venison. Suddenly, if you killed more than a doe or two a year, there might be no friend or relative wanting it. So you just cut back on how many you "harvest". I "need" one or two a year for the table. Taking any more than that can just be too much trouble.
The age of the average TN deer hunter is old. Many just aren't as willing to drive from East TN to Middle or West TN for better deer hunting. Instead of going about every weekend (when they had fulltime careers), they now deer hunt a weekend or two annually, despite being "retired" and having more "free" time. They kill a deer or two annually, and that's "enough".
The main reason the doe harvest is as relatively low as it is currently may be because the average hunter is simply hunting less, and less willing to drag & process a deer than ever before. We may have about as many deer hunters as ever, but on average, they hunt fewer days annually than in times past, and simply watch deer more than they shoot deer.
Generally speaking, it would be easy to think it "should be" the "opposite", and this could have been the case on a level playing field of consistent ongoing circumstances. But the circumstances have been unprecedented, highly variable, and unpredicted.
Over many decades, TN hunters were conditioned to "protect" (not shoot) female deer because that's from where more deer come. That's what we were told, and in many hunting circles, it was simply taboo to kill a doe. Many will tell you most TN gun deer hunting had been mostly "buck only" until the creation of Unit L.
The creation of Unit L (with essentially no limit on doe) worked in convincing most deer hunters that it was not only ok to shoot a doe, but that hunters needed to kill lots of them! Prior to this, does were mainly only allowed (with a gun) or a single weekend or two, initially by quota draw. But also, since 1999, there had been a 3-buck limit with lots of opportunity to take bonus bucks on public lands.
Then suddenly, the flood gates were opened to shoot female deer. Hunters were killing & processing lots of does for friends & family. A growing number of non-hunters were enjoying eating venison.
But then, many hunters, like myself, simply got tired of dragging out & processing deer. Many decided they'd rather spend more time just hunting than dragging & processing. Many more simply decided to hunt a lot less, progressively less (for a variety of reasons, not just being tired of processing deer).
Then CWD hit, and the fear-mongering regarding eating "diseased deer" caused many people to simply stop eating venison. Suddenly, if you killed more than a doe or two a year, there might be no friend or relative wanting it. So you just cut back on how many you "harvest". I "need" one or two a year for the table. Taking any more than that can just be too much trouble.
The age of the average TN deer hunter is old. Many just aren't as willing to drive from East TN to Middle or West TN for better deer hunting. Instead of going about every weekend (when they had fulltime careers), they now deer hunt a weekend or two annually, despite being "retired" and having more "free" time. They kill a deer or two annually, and that's "enough".
The main reason the doe harvest is as relatively low as it is currently may be because the average hunter is simply hunting less, and less willing to drag & process a deer than ever before. We may have about as many deer hunters as ever, but on average, they hunt fewer days annually than in times past, and simply watch deer more than they shoot deer.
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
No.
Many reasons have already been given.
I'll add that most are being killed by older hunters who really could care less about those deer being entered in some "registry".
But there is another reason, and it may actually be the biggest reason more bucks "scoring" above 140-150 simply don't exist. That reason is antler high-grading by a huge segment of TN deer hunters. The very bucks with the very best antler genetics are mostly killed when those bucks are only 2 1/2 to 3 1/2 yrs of age. These bucks are "top end" and often scoring in the 110 to 130 range.
Quite simply, those bucks with the antler genetics capable of scoring over 150 by age 5 1/2, well, those bucks seldom live past 3 1/2. Never mind that 4 1/2 & older bucks are well represented in the herd statewide, but those "survivors" tend to be the bucks with below average antlers, typically passed up by multiple hunters annually. I do believe hunters end up killing most of these mature bucks, but they would rarely have antlers scoring beyond the 120 - 130 range.
And last, but not least, TN simply is not capable of producing bucks scoring as high (per age class) as many other states. There is a night & day difference between the potential of a buck born in TN vs a buck born in KY, even if both those bucks had the exact same antler genetics. Compared to KY, TN generally has poorer soils, less productive agricultural crops, less quality deer food.
Of course, one state vs. another, there can be significant differences in outcomes based as much on top-down statewide herd management as soil. KY's gun season is open approximately half as many days as TN's. KY has a 1-buck limit while TN has a 2-buck limit. IMO, this allows for less antler high-grading in KY (vs TN), along with more KY being able to survive to 4 1/2 & older.
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
Perhaps a bigger question is why are so few younger people getting into "sport" deer hunting?
There is no one answer to this question,
but there are many which have occurred in cahoots.
The end result is that . . . . . .
As the older generations (more of which are hunters) die out,
the younger generations are not replacing either the number of hunters
or the amount of annual hunting per hunter.
"Sport" deer hunting would be more for the purpose of seeking antlers than venison, albeit perhaps a majority of "sport" deer hunters eat their venison.
There now may be more hunter recruitment for the primary purpose of obtaining free-range, organic meat than for the camaraderie of hunting camps and seeking large antlered bucks. Most of these "hunters" can get what they want from their back porches, or simply "hunting" on a nearby friend's property. They don't need and are not willing to pay for a hunting "lease", especially one a long drive away.
The sky hasn't fallen yet on "sport" deer hunting, but this is how I see things "trending".
There is no one answer to this question,
but there are many which have occurred in cahoots.
The end result is that . . . . . .
As the older generations (more of which are hunters) die out,
the younger generations are not replacing either the number of hunters
or the amount of annual hunting per hunter.
"Sport" deer hunting would be more for the purpose of seeking antlers than venison, albeit perhaps a majority of "sport" deer hunters eat their venison.
There now may be more hunter recruitment for the primary purpose of obtaining free-range, organic meat than for the camaraderie of hunting camps and seeking large antlered bucks. Most of these "hunters" can get what they want from their back porches, or simply "hunting" on a nearby friend's property. They don't need and are not willing to pay for a hunting "lease", especially one a long drive away.
The sky hasn't fallen yet on "sport" deer hunting, but this is how I see things "trending".
Last edited:
Bell3wv
Well-Known Member
I'm from WV too and would take leave the military to come back and bow hunt. The absolute best thing they did was the opportunity to take does during the 2 weeks of rifle season. This saved a lot of smaller bucks. I have wished that they would inact antler restrictions but hunting I'm WV is too much of a money-machine for the state with all of the out of state hunters. I don't see lowering the limit helping much. Hopefully they bump up the number of does you can take.
townhall
New Member
nothing to worry about The 2 buck limit will help by saving a few deer
