Current trajectory??

[TheLBLman]

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.

Like you, I do not like the new definition, and I hope it gets changed back to what it was.
But the reality I see is that's it's not as big of an issue as many are trying to make it.

 

[BSK]

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.

 

[BSK]

Like you, I do not like the new definition, and I hope it gets changed back to what it was.
But the reality I see is that's it's not as big of an issue as many are trying to make it.

TheLBLman,

Please don't get the impression this new buck rule is what I'm concerned about. Although it is a bad rule, and WILL cause problems--most notably a reduction in doe harvests as hunters ensure they don't accidentally kill an acorn spike--the real problem is the tone and trajectory of TN deer management. I believe I've been involved in the politics of state deer management long enough to see where we're headed. This isn't anything new. This new buck rule is just one more symptom of the larger problem. I've seen it time and again in states across the Southeast. In fact, I don't believe my predictions are overly dire, considering how other states have followed this pattern. In my professional opinion, for an entire state, managing for larger antlers is a very bad idea, and that is unquestionably the direction we're headed.

 

[chris1976]

A bunch of hogwash. Did they send personal surveys to ALL Tennessee resident hunting license holders? Nope. Then they only got a slight majority of those they heard from. Most were unaware. If you think the commission puts merit into our feedback then you are being way too "positive" [emoji3]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TheLBLman]

--the real problem is the tone and trajectory of TN deer management.

As they say, everyone will never be happy, no matter what.

I was personally very concerned about the trajectory when the November muzzleloader buck limit went from 1 to 3 bucks, and the number of days doubled (at least in Unit L). But maybe that was a bit selfish of me, since my focus was more on losing a week of exclusive archery-only hunting during the peak of the rut. Now, I have to share those woods with more hunters, but do admit, this change benefited the majority and did make the regs "simpler". No more opening/closing, opening/closing of various "special" weapons season segments. It's oh so simple now.

I suspect a true majority now care little whatever our perceived tone and trajectory.
However, if statewide hunter success significantly improves in 2016, how will most hunters "feel" about our trajectory?
I may very well be wrong, but I do believe statewide hunter success is going to improve significantly with the 2016 deer season.

Rather than perceiving a problem, the majority of TN's deer hunters MAY see the positives of our overall deer regs having become simpler over the years, and may not be so concerned about whatever is the definition of an antlered vs. an antlerless deer, since both are now legal game, STATEWIDE, during the time the most hunters are afield with the most effective weapons, the opening week of rifle deer season. THIS is a major milestone in TN's statewide deer regs, and almost no one has even mentioned it.

Today, fully half the State of TN is now Unit L, basically no limit on female deer, although for those killing multiple deer, being more sure of one's target has become more an issue with this new definition. Is that necessarily a bad idea? Again, for the majority of hunters who fail to kill even a single deer, how much issue is it?

Prior to 2016, during the first weekend of rifle season, a hunter could have killed a spike buck with 2 7/8" spikes, and been guilty of taking an illegal deer since a spike must measure 3.0" or more to be considered a legal buck, in our prior "buck-only" hunting environment. Yep, the limit on antlerless deer was zero to the majority of the hunters hunting in most TN counties during the first week of gun season. Now, it's become "either-sex", with zero concern for the definition of antlered/antlerless, at least until at least "a" deer has been killed.

I've many times heard so many say that hunter "education" is the key to better deer management. Yet in 2015, it appeared a significant segment of TN's deer hunters didn't know the difference between "antlered" and "antlerless" deer based on our longstanding definitions. It remains my belief that part of the impetus for this definition change was educational in nature, and to "raise awareness". If that's the case, it seems to be working.

Next year, if enough of us really want to go back to that 3" definition (again, that would be my personal preference), I truly believe it will get changed back. But I also believe relatively few hunters are going to care much what it is, so long as they simply understand the definition clearly, the lack of that being part of the "issue" at present. Meanwhile, many are simply going to be elated they can now kill ANY deer instead of "buck only", overshadowing much of "our" concerns about this definition change.

I'm personally looking forward to a great upcoming deer season,
and refuse to be company to those so now miserable by nothing more than a minor definition change.
There is more than one tree in this forest.

 

[landman]

. . . . . please tell me how you ASSUME that it's not on the future agenda?

The Commission (as well as the TWRA now) has placed much merit in the surveys and opinions of the majority of TN's deer hunters. For the past many years, they have been right on the line of preferring either a 2 or a 3 buck limit. In early 2015, the initial surveys showed a slight preference for a 2-buck limit, while later surveys showed a slight preference for a 3-buck limit, but taken as a whole, the Commission believed most hunters had a very slight preference for a 2-buck limit and that's what ultimately happened.

Only a small minority (of hunters) preferred a 1-buck limit, and neither the TWRA nor this current Commission has any intention of pushing a 1-buck agenda. In fact, it was agreed that the 2-buck limit would be a 5-year deal, so I fully expect it to be early Year 2020 before the buck limit is revisited. The expected discussion is whether to keep the 2-buck limit, go to a "2-3" like we had for many years, or go to a 3-buck limit like we had for only a short time before going to the current 2-buck limit.

Of additional note, even many "big buck" states (such as Illinois) do NOT have a 1-buck limit. Most states now have a 2-buck limit, which appears to have been the best overall compromise between what few prefer a 1-buck limit and those who prefer a higher buck limit.

For whatever reasons, anything perceived as "negative" always becomes the front page discussion, a zillion pages, while anything "positive" goes to the back page and is ignored. Just look at all those posts about the definition change of an antlered/antlerless deer, while the bigger positive of ALL statewide hunters for the first time in TN's deer hunting history being able to hunt opening day of the 2016 gun season "either-sex" isn't even being discussed.

Again, 2016 is the first year in TN's deer hunting history where ALL deer hunters across the state (including all of East TN) can now legally hunt "either-sex" for at least the first week of our rifle deer season (which includes Thanksgiving week). What's more, unless and until AFTER "a" deer is killed, the definition of antlered/antlerless is now totally irrelevant to this majority of hunters because ANY deer will be legal to them.

How can this not be a "trajectory" of increasing opportunity for the majority of TN's deer hunters?

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

 

[TheLBLman]

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.

 

[Ballerski]

One of the more "positive" things that is happening with the 2016 deer season:

For the first time in Tennessee's modern deer-hunting history, hunters in EVERY TN county will be able to take to the field on the traditional opening of "gun" deer season, and kill ANY deer they prefer. ANY deer; it's no longer "buck only" as it has been even recently in most East TN counties.


Great positive post! I like the changes and am excited that gun season allows my family to select the animal they chose to take anytime of the season.

 

[Headhunter]

I disagree with the new buck rule, but it is what it is and when I hunt in Kentucky I have never had an issue with it and never given a second thought to it and where I hunt in Kentucky there is NOT a limit on does. The area I hunt there is virtually a jungle so you really do not get much time to look at a deer.

As far as the commission and TWRA are concerned, like everyone else, there are things I would like to see changed but overall they are doing a great job and I am sure glad Chuck Yoest is where he is at now.

A shorter rifle season would be great with me, one month total. Maybe beginning and end dates would need to be modified for different parts of the state but for every place I hunt (except Giles county) seeing a mature buck becomes next to impossible after the first week or so of December.

 

[knightrider]

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.

 

[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