Current trajectory??

[TheLBLman]

its very easy to get the results you want when you survey the areas with your same agenda in mind.

You won't get any disagreement from me on that statement.
It's also very easy to get the results you want when you design the questions to favor a particular answer.

 

[BHC]

I would love for archery to open early in September!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Os2 Outdoors]

At one time the survey showed a large percentage wanting 2 bucks, but Darly stated in one meeting they had UT change the question in the survey to get a different result, and yes it's on film

That's what I would call "politics".
Yes, a majority stated they preferred a 2-buck limit in early 2015, so rather than accept those results, the survey was changed and re-run with some interjected bias towards higher limits, only to show very little difference (although the later run did show a slight preference towards 3 bucks).

It remains my opinion that those survey shenanigans (by the TWRA, not the Commission) factored heavily into the Commission changing the buck limit in 2015 from 3 to 2. If the survey had simply been a bit more openly and honestly presented, I don't believe the Commission would have changed the buck limit at all (at least in 2015). We should add that the current TWRA Chief of Wildlife Mark Gudlin had nothing to do with that 2015 survey.

I keep hearing majority of surveyed hunters, funny thing is I don't know one person who was surveyed, not a single one. its very easy to get the results you want when you survey the areas with your same agenda in mind.

The survey was sent out via mass email. It also bounced around this site and Facebook. So I would assume a few people seen it.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[TheLBLman]

The survey was sent out via mass email. It also bounced around this site and Facebook. So I would assume a few people seen it.

Taken as a whole, the most recent "surveys" (late winter 2015-early spring 2015) seemed to indicate most TN deer hunters really didn't care much whether the buck limit was either 2 or 3. Actually seemed more cared more about simply knowing the number than whatever it might be, even if that number were only one. Of course, those posting on TNdeer.com were more highly opinionated. :)

 

[Hunter 257W]

At one time the survey showed a large percentage wanting 2 bucks, but Darly stated in one meeting they had UT change the question in the survey to get a different result, and yes it's on film

That's what I would call "politics".
Yes, a majority stated they preferred a 2-buck limit in early 2015, so rather than accept those results, the survey was changed and re-run with some interjected bias towards higher limits, only to show very little difference (although the later run did show a slight preference towards 3 bucks).

It remains my opinion that those survey shenanigans (by the TWRA, not the Commission) factored heavily into the Commission changing the buck limit in 2015 from 3 to 2. If the survey had simply been a bit more openly and honestly presented, I don't believe the Commission would have changed the buck limit at all (at least in 2015). We should add that the current TWRA Chief of Wildlife Mark Gudlin had nothing to do with that 2015 survey.

I keep hearing majority of surveyed hunters, funny thing is I don't know one person who was surveyed, not a single one. its very easy to get the results you want when you survey the areas with your same agenda in mind.

I did get the emailed 2nd survey along with the biased comments from TWRA saying that in spite of the original survey's output leaning towards hunters wanting a 2 buck limit, they(TWRA) wanted to do a 2nd survey, obviously not liking the outcome of the 1st.

 

[Deer Assassin]

who knows

 

[muddyboots]

Every deer hunter I know and I'm in 2 leases. Only one was against the two buck limit. Only one is for a one buck limit. Don't see that happening. I've only killed one deer in my life that would have fooled me with the new law. I really don't see the uproar.

 

[MickThompson]

Don't confuse the UT survey with the TWF survey or the solicitation for comments last year. The UT survey is sent to a random sample of TWRA ID #s. It is a statistically valid method to sample opinions. Same principle you see in elections when they "call" an election when only 10% of the vote has been counted.

The others aren't random surveys but "targeted" outreach efforts to solicit public comments on proposed changes.

 

[scn]

Don't confuse the UT survey with the TWF survey or the solicitation for comments last year. The UT survey is sent to a random sample of TWRA ID #s. It is a statistically valid method to sample opinions. Same principle you see in elections when they "call" an election when only 10% of the vote has been counted.

The others aren't random surveys but "targeted" outreach efforts to solicit public comments on proposed changes.

Well said.

 

[TX300mag]

I looked at the TWRA Facebook page. There is consistent demand for a one buck limit. Although those wanting if are in the minority, they are very vocal about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Headhunter]

Until you accidentally kill an acorn spike while thinking you're killing a doe and your season is suddenly over, and for NO GOOD REASON.

But that would absolutely be an untrue hypothetical to the majority of TN's deer hunters. That would only be true if we had a 1-buck limit, which we do not.

What if you've already killed a buck? Now you have a defacto 1 buck limit. I've read twice in the last 24 hours hunters telling about having the opportunity to kill both a buck and the doe he was following. After dropping both, the hunters found out the "doe" was a sub-legal spike. Not only would that have ended the hunter's buck hunting for the year, it would make them an outlaw, as at the time, killing two bucks in one day was illegal.

And I can make just as many valid arguments that are the opposite of what you say BSK. How about presenting facts instead of what may happen or what you have heard about. Just saying that because you state so much everything should be based on facts and science.

 

[Andy S.]

And I can make just as many valid arguments that are the opposite of what you say BSK.

I don't follow this logic, please post some of your counter arguments for a better understanding of this statement.

How about presenting facts instead of what may happen or what you have heard about.

If the scenarios he is describing is not far fetched and BS, which I have no reason to believe, then he is referencing a factual scenario that could play out under these new regs. I don't see how that is not obvious to anyone who can read and comprehend a writers intent?

 

[BSK]

Let me be as clear as possible so that my words are not being misinterpreted. I think the current rule changes imposed by the Commission, and most of where they are heading in the future, will NOT have disastrous biological consequences for the state's deer herds. Some negative ramifications, yes; but not disastrous consequences.

On the other hand, I feel very strongly these changes will have very, VERY negative consequences on deer hunting in TN. I believe they will harm hunter recruitment and retention, as the average hunter won't benefit from any possible increases in the number of older bucks in the population (and I think the rule changes will have minimal to no impact on buck age structure). I think many supporters of the changes the Commission is trying to implement forget that they are part of a small sub-set of all deer hunters--the hardcore hunters. These hardcore hunters do the vast majority of the buck killing each year because they hunt many days a year, and spend considerable time learning to be older buck killers. These hardcore hunters DO benefit from improvements in buck age structure, because they focus so much attention and effort on doing so. But unless a hunter takes the necessary step to become hardcore, he or she rarely benefits from changes in the number of older bucks in the population. I realize it sounds like common sense to assume more older bucks means ALL hunters will see and kill more older bucks. But time and again I've seen this NOT be the case. When large clubs make the necessary management/harvest changes to produce more older bucks, not all hunters benefit. In fact, it's usually just a small subset that benefit--the hardcore hunters in the club. For those hunters that DON'T take the necessary time/effort steps to be a better older buck hunter, their successes to do not increase as the older buck population increases. Only those in the club willing to become hardcore truly benefit (and they do benefit).

I'm also seeing a CONSIDERABLE percentage of the deer hunting population becoming disgruntled and disillusioned with the state's current style of management. These hunters no longer believe the Commission--the very group that is supposed to represent the viewpoint of the average hunter--actually do represent the average hunter. They see the Commission as representing elitist, big-dollar trophy hunting interests, instead of biologically sound sustainable resource management the TWRA has been practicing for the last decade or more. Once the majority of deer hunters no longer believe the Commission represents the "average hunter's" desires, nothing good can follow.

 

[huntforme7909]

In their fixation/obsession for reducing buck harvests, I would suspect making button bucks count as bucks will be on their agenda.

I believe some of you are "fixated" on negativity. :D
The sun's going to rise in the morning, and we're going to have a great deer season.

This definition change of antlered/antlerless is going to make very little difference to most us, other than maybe raise some awareness.
If it's 1/10th the problem some of you are assuming, I suspect it will get changed back to that old 3" rule we've had for decades (which, like you, I believe served us better, and I personally preferred no change, but it's not causing the sky to fall).

By the way, the buck limit was changed to two (2) last year, something I've heard many of today's complainers state was their preference over the past many years. TN is not going to a 1-buck limit, no matter how negatively some of you want to assume that.

X2.....all negative instead of focusing on doing what you love and abiding by gods rule and not letting mans rule overcome your soul.....

 

[MUP]

I'm also seeing a CONSIDERABLE percentage of the deer hunting population becoming disgruntled and disillusioned with the state's current style of management. These hunters no longer believe the Commission--the very group that is supposed to represent the viewpoint of the average hunter--actually do represent the average hunter. They see the Commission as representing elitist, big-dollar trophy hunting interests, instead of biologically sound sustainable resource management the TWRA has been practicing for the last decade or more. Once the majority of deer hunters no longer believe the Commission represents the "average hunter's" desires, nothing good can follow.

This is how I'm interpreting the direction of deer hunting in Tennessee.