Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New Trophy's
New trophy room comments
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Classifieds
Trophy Room
New items
New comments
Latest content
Latest updates
Latest reviews
Author list
Series list
Search showcase
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Tennessee Hunting Forums
Deer Hunting Forum
Catoosa anyone heard
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TheLBLman" data-source="post: 5369584" data-attributes="member: 1409"><p>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.</p><p></p><p>For example, Catoosa just decreased the quota buck permits from 1250 to 1000,</p><p>and made those buck permits <em>NOT</em> "bonus", meaning those kills now count</p><p>"same as statewide" applying towards the statewide 2-buck limit.</p><p>IMO, this will now accomplish far more than the antler restrictions in terms of</p><p>saving more of the above averaged antlered 2 1/2's & 3 1/2's.</p><p></p><p>Keep in mind decreasing the number of hunters by 20%</p><p>does not equate to decreasing the number of bucks killed by that.</p><p>Realistically, 20% fewer hunters may kill only 5% fewer bucks.</p><p>But hunter success per hunter should be improved.</p><p></p><p>Making the bucks "not bonus" may reduce the buck kill a lot more</p><p>than 20% fewer hunters, but it will each hunter's choice.</p><p>Many hunters will just raise their personal shooter buck standards</p><p>when they now have a 2-buck rather than a 3-buck annual limit.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TheLBLman, post: 5369584, member: 1409"] 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 [I]NOT[/I] "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. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Tennessee Hunting Forums
Deer Hunting Forum
Catoosa anyone heard
Top