Antler restriction question

[74MOPAR]

This is just a question I have, no feathers need to get ruffled. Are there any benefits to the 6pt or 3 on one side that some states have? What if they did this here but juvenile hunts could still kill whatever they wanted? We only kill a few deer a year anyway and like most sons mine are competitive so they don't kill the spikes or 4 pts( usually ) lol

 

[DntBrnDPig]

That would mean that roughly 53,713 of the deer killed during the 2012-13 year would get to see at least one more year of growth. That is roughly 55.4% of the bucks harvested during the 2012-13 season.

That does not include youth hunts like you mentioned. It does includes buttons that were killed (8,584 buttons killed)which you could argue would still get mistaken for does and killed.

So what would it do? Based on that it would give people more opportunities at slightly older bucks. Is that good for the population, I don't know. But based on the data - most hunters are already imposing that on themselves as the highest classification of bucks killed are 7-8 pointers. (32,365 or roughly 33% of the bucks killed)

(Stats based off https://www.tn.gov/twra/pdfs/deerandelkreport.pdf)

 

[Boll Weevil]

In my opinion, some state's ARs can result in high-grading with those bucks having the very best potential being removed early in life. Two 1.5 year old bucks wander into the field; one is a 4pt the other a basket-racked 8. With a 3-points to a side AR, the 8 point gets a ride in the back of the truck. Over time, continually removing the "best and brightest" before they reach their greatest potential may yield an unintended outcome.

Some states have gone to a combination AR; number of points AND beam length or points AND spread minimum.

 

[Prowler]

It can have benefits, such as protecting young bucks forcing people to shoot that doe for meat instead of the little bucks. There's a 4 point On a side or 15 inch spread rule on a wma I frequent. Been in place for about 6 years now. Lots of 1.5 and a few 2.5 are being saved. Lot more does being Killed because of it, too many IMO. That and high grading younger bucks are a few negatives I've noticed. Lot of high potential 1.5 and 2.5 yr old bucks being killed, more than previous. I feel like the good outweigh the bad tho, a few bucks saved is better than none. And none were getting saved beforehand.

 

[stik]

It can have benefits, such as protecting young bucks[size] forcing[/size] people to shoot that doe for meat instead of the little bucks. There's a 4 point On a side or 15 inch spread rule on a wma I frequent. Been in place for about 6 years now. Lots of 1.5 and a few 2.5 are being saved. Lot more does being Killed because of it, too many IMO. That and high grading younger bucks are a few negatives I've noticed. Lot of high potential 1.5 and 2.5 yr old bucks being killed, more than previous. I feel like the good outweigh the bad tho, a few bucks saved is better than none. And none were getting saved beforehand.

and therein lies the problem. forcing someone to hunt by your standards.

 

[Prowler]

Not my standards. Standards set in place by people that get paid To make those decisions. And if more does need to be taken, and at the time they did, there's no point in not shooting a doe over a small buck. Absolutely no reason to make
Things worse just because billy jack wants a bucket full of spike and 4 point racks. Not saying the long term effect is going to be better, but short term is from a biological standpoint anyway.

 

[stik]

Not my standards. Standards set in place by people that get paid To make those decisions.

the standards in place WERE set by professionals that are paid to make those decisions.

 

[74MOPAR]

That's why I like TnDeer, in just a few responses you can get good info and opinions to think about. And again - not trying to set off a urinating contest , lol

 

[MUP]

 

[Setterman]

I'm all for some kind of progressive deer management in this state. For me, I've quit hunting in TN for deer now, my time is better spent out of state where I can have the opportunity to hunt/kill the larger bucks which makes me happy.

With that said I don't like a blanket antler restriction. I really like the way Georgia does it down there, where your first buck can be anything, but your second must have four on one side. This allows people who don't care about mature bucks to shoot whatever they like, it allows for a mistake deer, it allows juvis the chance to shoot small bucks as well.

I also despise the one buck KY limit, even though it's been wildly successful. I think there's smarter ways to manage buck harvest than simply squashing the number of tags you're given.

I understand the common feeling that deer hunting here is as good as it is in other closer by states that manage differently, but from my perspective it just isn't even close. One trip through forums from other states provides plenty of evidence to prove this as well.

 

[Hunter0678]

I like the idea of it state wide, right now we mannage our land where we hunt for older deer but when you see your neighbor with 3 little bucks and doe on his hood it kinda pisses you off knowing those were some of the deer you were letting grow. That was opening weekend of ML this year.

 

[Boll Weevil]

Many states have ARs by county vs. statewide. Some counties just don't have the soil, habitat, or carrying capacity to consistently meet a given restriction.

MS has 3 zones: Southeast, Hill, and Delta. The first two zones require legal bucks to have either a 10" inside spread or a 13" main beam as a minimum. They Delta though, 12" spread or 15" main beam minimum.

MO, same thing. Counties in roughly the northern 2/3rds require at least 4 points on one side. The southern part of state however, has no restriction.

I'm blessed to hunt where I do, but totally understand and am sympathetic to those who's hunting experience might be greatly diminished by an AR.

 

[fairchaser]

The key question to any antler restriction is enforcement. How do you get the majority of people who accidentally or intentionally violated the rules to turn themselves in? In MS, they have restrictions but have no requirement to check deer, so the rules are violated continuously and intentionally. The only way it will work is to require that deer be checked in with stiff penalties for violations. I have personally seen the benefits of antler restrictions in the club I hunt. More bucks, more mature bucks and more mature buck behavior. Also, improved fawn recruitment and more early born fawns who have a full season to grow antlers their first year. But, with that said, I don't believe it will work on a state wide basis.

 

[easy45]

It could help protect some of the 1.5 year old deer even though a lot of them can have 6 points, in my opinion the only true way to manage a place is by placing an age limit on bucks.

 

[JeepKuntry]

It wouldn't hurt my feelings if the restriction was 3 on one side. I'd like more doe opportunities if that is the case.

 

[Donk]

Just curious,do your guys think all Bucks will grow to be a 160 class or better in Tenn.Look how Ft Cambell has manage deer for yrs.Just saying ,don't mess with a good thing and don't forget your out there to have a good time.

 

[Planking]

I would like to see a little something to help protect a few myself.

 

[ImThere]

I think there would be an increase of deer left in the field because most people are not going to turn themselves in and pay stiff penalties

 

[MMHunter]

I'd like to see some sort of 2 buck limit, with some sort of AR.

 

[benellivol]

2 bucks, no antler restrictions. I haven't shot a small buck in years because I don't want to. However, I don't think the the guy/girl down the road that's going on their first hunt should have to watch a 4 pointer all evening, either.

I think way too many people care about what people are shooting. If it's done legally and ethical, I don't really care if someone shoots a spike, 3 pointer or a booner.

 

[bowriter]

It depends on what the goal of the AR is. If you want larger racks, no, it does nothing. If you want to increase the buck population for a better sex ratio, then it is of some minor benefit. If you want to piss off a bunch of hunters, then it is highly effective.

Number of points, generally, is a terrible antler restriction since it is of so little value overall. This is especially true when you use three-points per side as the rule. Spread, coupled with eight points is far more effective. However, in most cases, neither should be used as a state-wide or large area restriction.

 

[ROUGH COUNTRY HUNTER]

It can have benefits, such as protecting young bucks[size] forcing[/size] people to shoot that doe for meat instead of the little bucks. There's a 4 point On a side or 15 inch spread rule on a wma I frequent. Been in place for about 6 years now. Lots of 1.5 and a few 2.5 are being saved. Lot more does being Killed because of it, too many IMO. That and high grading younger bucks are a few negatives I've noticed. Lot of high potential 1.5 and 2.5 yr old bucks being killed, more than previous. I feel like the good outweigh the bad tho, a few bucks saved is better than none. And none were getting saved beforehand.

and therein lies the problem. forcing someone to hunt by your standards.

exactly,let's leave tennessee alone

 

[Mike Belt]

If there was an antler restriction it would have to be one that protected something. A 3 points/side or 6 point restriction wouldn't. I DO believe AR's achieve 2 things. You add to the buck population and to the size of "some" of those bucks. As a side note there is the potential for high grading as well as dead under sized deer left in the field. Still more bucks surviving mean more advancing in age and generally age generates more antler growth. Not always but generally.

Not everyone agrees with me but that's alright. It all depends on what your goals are. I like them but I think you have to have enough land involved to make much of a difference.

 

[Jcalder]

These posts are somewhat comical. I get it. We all want bigger bucks. The most common response you'll see is if you want to eat one kill does. But not everyone hunts where you can kill 3 a day. I was allowed one doe in unit b. along with all the others in unit b. Now you got people that want the antler restrictions or buck limit changed. What about the people that are dependent on deer to get by. You wanna force your opinion on those people that are in need of the meat. We are allowed three bucks throughout the state. If you don't want little deer killed don't shoot them. You want antler restrictions on your place. Go by that. But don't force your opinion on others. Not everyone has the same opportunities across the state

 

[MUP]

I'm all for letting hunters grow at their own pace, and mature to the point that they choose, whether they continue getting enjoyment out of deer hunting, or only enjoy shooting 170 class bucks.

 

[Mark71211]

Just this year maryland started a AR. The rule is you can take one buck with a bow, ML, and gun then you get a bonus buck which can be used for any weapon but you got to take two does first with any weapon. Now the AR is that two of the buck have to meet a three point on one side. Does not matter what order you take them in just as long as two are over the AR. Now there is one public land area here that also has a inside spread AR that got to meet 15"or 16" (I forget which). If you don't meet that AR you get a fine and the deer is taken from you but I have heard of them giving you a choice of you get a fine and keep the deer or no fine and they take the deer. And I must say that they pull a lot of big deer off of there. So I'm all for AR cause it works!

 

[Mike Belt]

I'm not advocating a statewide AR restriction. I have one where I hunt and I'm perfectly happy with it. For those that can discuss it without jumping to the conclusion that just by mentioning it the sky is falling...

If the goal was to advance buck age structure would those regs be the same regs used to advance antler size? For the sake of argument let's say you wanted more bucks reaching 120". What regs would net the fastest results? What regs would be the easiest for hunters to recognize and follow?

 

[bowriter]

I'm not advocating a statewide AR restriction. I have one where I hunt and I'm perfectly happy with it. For those that can discuss it without jumping to the conclusion that just by mentioning it the sky is falling...

If the goal was to advance buck age structure would those regs be the same regs used to advance antler size? For the sake of argument let's say you wanted more bucks reaching 120". What regs would net the fastest results? What regs would be the easiest for hunters to recognize and follow?

If you think about it, of course they would. Because as you increase age, you are going to, to some degree, increase antler size. But first of all, can you expect 120-inch racks on the majority of your bucks at a reasonable age.

What is a reasonable age? You should have in many areas of TN, 120-inch buck at least by 3.5. But in some areas, that is not going to happen. That is why ar's are so faulty. They are thought to accomplish a goal that is unreasonable. No matter what the ar, TN is not going to produce Iowa bucks. But it certainly can produce the optimum buck for the area. And that optimum may well be a 110-inch eight point at 3.5.

 

[Mike Belt]

Agreed. Let's go with the goal of 110". What regs would you use to get there? A spread limit? A points per side limit? A total points limit? B&C score? An age limit?

At Ames our minimum score is 125". We also have the "or" factor being "or at least 4.5 years old". Personally, I think our system is the best working system even if that minimum score was 110". It seems easier to guesstimate a quick overall score than it is to count points per side and I don't really think a spread system denotes much on potential score either. Given that the majority of bucks probably aren't going to score that minimum at any age removing them by 4.5 seems reasonable. Aging on the hoof has a margin of error but you get better at judging with experience.

 

[MUP]

What is a reasonable age? You should have in many areas of TN, 120-inch buck at least by 3.5. But in some areas, that is not going to happen. That is why ar's are so faulty. They are thought to accomplish a goal that is unreasonable. No matter what the ar, TN is not going to produce Iowa bucks. But it certainly can produce the optimum buck for the area. And that optimum may well be a 110-inch eight point at 3.5.

Nail on the head BW. I've taken a few 100-105 8 pts on my place, jaw aged at 3.5. And they are "good bucks" antler wise for the area. Uncommonly good bucks come at between 3.5 and older tho. I think age is the most important factor in reaching the antler potential in our area, and it's tough, I mean really tough, for them to get to that age around there too tho.