Educate me on a 2 buck limit

[RobbyW]

I am not looking for another thread about arguing 2 vs 3. I think we have that covered in other post. My question is what is the advantage biologically of going to a 2 buck limit. I really am undecided on the issue. Is it purely to to allow deer to get more mature? I have read some of the other threads and it seems that it might impact suck a small number (due to very few killing 3) that I am not sure it would matter. I guess I am asking in overall herd stability does having older bucks make a difference? So if you take out the trophy aspect is there a benefit?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Food Plot 101]

To answer your question it's a smokescreen. Not really sure if there's an advantage biologically. Sure, having the oldest, fittest bucks breeding is better but that's not what this is about. It's playing the odds that some of the deer spared will turn into trophies, errrrr "mature deer". And maybe with more mature bucks in the woods it means the likelihood of him slipping up will increase. It will never mean there's a trophy behind every tree like in KY, LOL! It also won't make those older deer any more killable. JMO

 

[Vermin93]

If you are undecided on the issue and you haven't watched the recorded video of Chuck Yoest's presentation at the 4/23 TFWC meeting, then I recommend spending an hour to watch it. Regardless of whether you decide to support a 2-buck limit or a 3-buck limit, you will be able to make a more informed decision.

Go to this link and click on "TFWC Committee Meeting Part 2" from 4/23/2015.

http://twraonline.org/TFWC/index.html

 

[AT Hiker]

The buck limit is one of the few regulations that can benefit the buck age structure as a whole, aside from individual land management which is not reality for the majority of TN hunters.

If you use the "trophy" argument then you are ill informed, regardless if you are a 1,2 or 3 limit supporter. Thats all there is to say about that.

Facts;
-TN has the lowest mature (3.5+) kill than any nearby comparable states.
-A mature deer herd has MANY biological benefits to the wild herd some being; priming the rut, allowing younger bucks to go into winter stronger, more consistent and timely fawning dates, a balanced and mature deer population is natural and lastly from a hunters perspective you are likely to witness more deer sightings of mature and what they bring to the table (intense rut, sign).

Will a 2 buck limit achieve this? All I can say is a 3 buck limit is NOT achieving this and IMO a reduced buck limit is a step toward it.

Of course my facts come from QDMA and you can read a informative article here; http://www.qdma.com/articles/mature-bucks-who-needs-em

Ask yourself; do you want a status quo deer herd or do you want what mother nature intended (or something as close to it as possible with the help of modern game management).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WRbowhunter]

This has nothing to do with killing 2 bucks vs 3 bucks. As its clear that not that many hunters in TN kill 3 bucks. It has everything to do with trying to change the hunters mindset about which bucks you "should" be shooting. Just like the 3 doe a day limit in unit L was to get hunters off the mindset that shooting does was bad and that we should be shooting a lot more of them.

 

[TboneD]

If you are undecided on the issue and you haven't watched the recorded video of Chuck Yoest's presentation at the 4/23 TFWC meeting, then I recommend spending an hour to watch it. Regardless of whether you decide to support a 2-buck limit or a 3-buck limit, you will be able to make a more informed decision.

Go to this link and click on "TFWC Committee Meeting Part 2" from 4/23/2015.

http://twraonline.org/TFWC/index.html

Well, I watched it and all I can say is thank God that we have a commission and everything's not left up to the TWRA, no matter how good a job they've done. There was an elephant in the room and it's that common sense and history suggests that a two buck limit will result in greater opportunities to harvest 3.5 yr old or older bucks. Period. Talk of "more Boone and Crockett bucks" by one of the commissioners was simply off topic.

My only concern is the doe kill on public lands, and yes, particularly in Unit L where I hunt. Other states such as MS address this by managing private and "Open Private Lands" differently in terms of antler less harvest, IN ADDITION TO WMA limits. So this is my question: why doesn't the TWRA manage more public land differently than private land in terms of antler less limits? Wouldn't this help stabilize the herd numbers within the units?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TX300mag]

It's about changing "mindset." It's designed to make your neighbor who may have different goals than you "think twice" about shooting a deer that you think shouldn't be killed.

It's also about trying to be like other states-the grass is always greener on the other side of the state line.

It's MAINLY about transitioning TWRA and the commission from setting limits that the herd can sustain while providing maximum opportunity for the hunter-leaving QDM, TDM, and all of it's variations that no one can agree on anyway up to the hunters to opening to potentially opening the door to setting limits based on "wants" of the loudest group. Once this happens, I think the one-buck limit, shorter season, weapons restriction, antler restriction, etc groups will gain traction and TWRA and commission will have to deal with these in the future.

 

[TboneD]

It's about changing "mindset." It's designed to make your neighbor who may have different goals than you "think twice" about shooting a deer that you think shouldn't be killed.

It's also about trying to be like other states-the grass is always greener on the other side of the state line.

It's MAINLY about transitioning TWRA and the commission from setting limits that the herd can sustain while providing maximum opportunity for the hunter-leaving QDM, TDM, and all of it's variations that no one can agree on anyway up to the hunters to opening to potentially opening the door to setting limits based on "wants" of the loudest group. Once this happens, I think the one-buck limit, shorter season, weapons restriction, antler restriction, etc groups will gain traction and TWRA and commission will have to deal with these in the future.

Fact of the matter is that most hunters want more yearling bucks to make it to the next season and a two buck rule will help with that without reducing opportunities to hunt.

But yes, I know that trophy hunters would be happy if the muzzleloader season became archery only and if we went to a one buck rule.. I can't speak for others but I'd never support either.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[easy45]

The buck limit is one of the few regulations that can benefit the buck age structure as a whole, aside from individual land management which is not reality for the majority of TN hunters.

If you use the "trophy" argument then you are ill informed, regardless if you are a 1,2 or 3 limit supporter. Thats all there is to say about that.

Facts;
-TN has the lowest mature (3.5+) kill than any nearby comparable states.
-A mature deer herd has MANY biological benefits to the wild herd some being; priming the rut, allowing younger bucks to go into winter stronger, more consistent and timely fawning dates, a balanced and mature deer population is natural and lastly from a hunters perspective you are likely to witness more deer sightings of mature and what they bring to the table (intense rut, sign).

Will a 2 buck limit achieve this? All I can say is a 3 buck limit is NOT achieving this and IMO a reduced buck limit is a step toward it.

Of course my facts come from QDMA and you can read a informative article here; http://www.qdma.com/articles/mature-bucks-who-needs-em

Ask yourself; do you want a status quo deer herd or do you want what mother nature intended (or something as close to it as possible with the help of modern game management).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You and I agree on most things on here but changing to a two buck limit would solely be for trophy hunting reasons, sad thing is I'm in a sense kinda a trophy hunter, well I hunt mature bucks, not antlers but I don't support dropping the limit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jcalder]

I understand letting little bucks walk. But what about areas that aren't hunted but still have no mature bucks. I hunted a place last year that hasn't been hunted in several years and had nothin but immature bucks on camera. I also understand I won't get all deer on camera consistently. By the 2 limit supporters I should be covered up with mature deer


Big or small, kill em all

 

[AT Hiker]

You and I agree on most things on here but changing to a two buck limit would solely be for trophy hunting reasons, sad thing is I'm in a sense kinda a trophy hunter, well I hunt mature bucks, not antlers but I don't support dropping the limit.

I do believe some people think dropping the limit will help with producing trophy, I just think they are ill informed.

If dropping the limit will not produce more mature deer, then Im open for what will. Our current regs are not producing them so something needs to be done if we want a balanced herd.

Or maybe its our data collection methodology. I would be all for a hard core data collection method, say a 2 year plan that has aggressive data collection then the TWRA and commission meet and discuss the data.

Or maybe its not a buck limit that improves age, Im game for whatever is best for the herd.

My percentage of time spent hunting in TN now is small compared to the time I spend hunting in other places for other critters so I am content on whatever the decision is. I just want what is best for the herd and according to info available and my understanding of it our herd has a lot of room for improvement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TX300mag]

The buck limit is one of the few regulations that can benefit the buck age structure as a whole, aside from individual land management which is not reality for the majority of TN hunters.

If you use the "trophy" argument then you are ill informed, regardless if you are a 1,2 or 3 limit supporter. Thats all there is to say about that.

Facts;
-TN has the lowest mature (3.5+) kill than any nearby comparable states.
-A mature deer herd has MANY biological benefits to the wild herd some being; priming the rut, allowing younger bucks to go into winter stronger, more consistent and timely fawning dates, a balanced and mature deer population is natural and lastly from a hunters perspective you are likely to witness more deer sightings of mature and what they bring to the table (intense rut, sign).

Will a 2 buck limit achieve this? All I can say is a 3 buck limit is NOT achieving this and IMO a reduced buck limit is a step toward it.

Of course my facts come from QDMA and you can read a informative article here; http://www.qdma.com/articles/mature-bucks-who-needs-em

Ask yourself; do you want a status quo deer herd or do you want what mother nature intended (or something as close to it as possible with the help of modern game management).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You and I agree on most things on here but changing to a two buck limit would solely be for trophy hunting reasons, sad thing is I'm in a sense kinda a trophy hunter, well I hunt mature bucks, not antlers but I don't support dropping the limit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can understand that. I favor QDM and pass a ton of bucks every year, I just don't believe it's big brother's role to make everyone else hunt the way I think they should.

 

[huntinkev]

It's about changing "mindset." It's designed to make your neighbor who may have different goals than you "think twice" about shooting a deer that you think shouldn't be killed.

It's also about trying to be like other states-the grass is always greener on the other side of the state line.

It's MAINLY about transitioning TWRA and the commission from setting limits that the herd can sustain while providing maximum opportunity for the hunter-leaving QDM, TDM, and all of it's variations that no one can agree on anyway up to the hunters to opening to potentially opening the door to setting limits based on "wants" of the loudest group. Once this happens, I think the one-buck limit, shorter season, weapons restriction, antler restriction, etc groups will gain traction and TWRA and commission will have to deal with these in the future.

There it is! Nail on the head, hit it out of the ballpark, getting down to the nut cuttin...whatever analogy you want to use.

 

[stik]

Fact of the matter is that most hunters want more yearling bucks to make it to the next season and a two buck rule will help with that without reducing opportunities to hunt.

if i were to kill those 2 bucks during bow and/or muzzleloader seasons, my opportunities to hunt are DRASTICALLY reduced.

 

[redhunterZ71]

Look at cades cove they never get hunted and yes they are some good deer up there just like everywhere in Tn but I have never seen one up there over 140" . Older bucks don't always mean bigger here in Tn

 

[WRbowhunter]

Fact of the matter is that most hunters want more yearling bucks to make it to the next season and a two buck rule will help with that without reducing opportunities to hunt.

if i were to kill those 2 bucks during bow and/or muzzleloader seasons, my opportunities to hunt are DRASTICALLY reduced.

You should be happy with killing 2 bucks that you are able to mount on the wall. And if they are not "mount" worthy than you should not be shooting them. The poor folks in KY only get to shoot 1. :cry:

And to get back to the original poster the theory goes on that Most folks will now only kill one buck instead of two as they are holding out for that monster buck since they only have 1 tag left and it never shows up. So now we have saved all the 3rd bucks and most of the 2nd bucks.

 

[TNDeerGuy]

The problem I have with the whole 2 buck limit is to what effect it will have down the road in 5 years..... No one can answer it. More does are going to be shot and how big of a herd reduction will it be down the road. There is no debate that does need to be hammered in certain areas, but Statewide? During the meeting it was admitted and agreed by the TWRA and the Commission that doe numbers WILL decline, to what extent, that NO ONE can estimate, is one of my big problems...if you kill a doe, you kill all offspring that will come from it. In the age of hunter numbers declining, we must not do something that will help keep those numbers declining by reducing sightings, which has an effect on hunter recruitment because a new hunter will quit if they don't see the numbers. This entire proposal will eliminate opportunities by hunters across the State, in multiple ways, as management styles that are already in place by 97% of Tennessee hunters are forced on all. Once again, nothing is wrong with the herd or bag limits as it stands, and there is no biological need for a correction--therefore, if there is not a biological need for a correction, then no correction should be applied and any correction applied will have negative consequences in certain areas that are not the focus of what is trying to be corrected. History has proven that time and time again... you cannot fix what isn't broken.

 

[mike243]

Fact of the matter is that most hunters want more yearling bucks to make it to the next season and a two buck rule will help with that without reducing opportunities to hunt.

if i were to kill those 2 bucks during bow and/or muzzleloader seasons, my opportunities to hunt are DRASTICALLY reduced.

You should be happy with killing 2 bucks that you are able to mount on the wall. And if they are not "mount" worthy than you should not be shooting them. The poor folks in KY only get to shoot 1. :cry:

And to get back to the original poster the theory goes on that Most folks will now only kill one buck instead of two as they are holding out for that monster buck since they only have 1 tag left and it never shows up. So now we have saved all the 3rd bucks and most of the 2nd bucks.

Here is a good post telling it like it is, What a frigging joke

 

[huntinkev]

If they are not mount worthy you shouldn't shoot??

That may be some opinion but your view shouldn't be pushed and forced on others that don't agree. Some like to shoot deer and are just as happy with a spike as they are a 10 point.....I am one of those people. I am not hunting just to mount something.

Wanting to force others to conform to your views, the propaganda...it all looks familiar. [emoji9]

 

[muddyboots]

I'm for the 2 buck limit so I'm sure it won't happen. Do I believe it will make trophy deer behind every tree. No way. Do I believe more bucks will survive for the next year. Absolutely. It is a mindset. It would make a tremendous difference on of my leases. I have one lease with only 5 members and we only shoot mature deer anyway and only shoot does with a bow. I have people ask me to go hunting and guess which lease they want to go to. Lol. And if u kill both bucks in bow season then u should be thrilled with a good season. U could kill 3 bucks in bow season now same difference. If I had my wish it would be a 2 buck limit and does only legal with a bow. I absolutely loved bow hunting back before does became legal with firearms. It was awesome. All this is opinion anyway so let's just see how it plays out. I have seen firsthand how passing bucks improves hunting.

 

[RecurveShooter]

It's about changing "mindset." It's designed to make your neighbor who may have different goals than you "think twice" about shooting a deer that you think shouldn't be killed.

It's also about trying to be like other states-the grass is always greener on the other side of the state line.

It's MAINLY about transitioning TWRA and the commission from setting limits that the herd can sustain while providing maximum opportunity for the hunter-leaving QDM, TDM, and all of it's variations that no one can agree on anyway up to the hunters to opening to potentially opening the door to setting limits based on "wants" of the loudest group. Once this happens, I think the one-buck limit, shorter season, weapons restriction, antler restriction, etc groups will gain traction and TWRA and commission will have to deal with these in the future.

The above is exactly why I don't think the buck limit should change. A regulation change is not going to make me a trophy hunter or change my mindset. A large number of hunters desiring the 2 buck limit have unrealistic expectations about what the results will be if the limit is reduced. Then what? The only thing you have left is a 1 buck limit (or less) and antler restrictions.

 

[stik]

I have seen firsthand how passing bucks improves hunting.

more and more hunters are VOLUNTARILY doing just that without forcing others to hunt by your standards.

if the limit goes to 2, i will probably quit bowhunting. can i get a refund on my lifetime license?

 

[8 POINTS OR BETTER]

I have seen firsthand how passing bucks improves hunting.

more and more hunters are VOLUNTARILY doing just that without forcing others to hunt by your standards.

if the limit goes to 2, i will probably quit bowhunting. can i get a refund on my lifetime license?

Why not use bow season to shoot a doe, to make up for the lost buck tag?

 

[bjohnson]

 

[Jcalder]

I have seen firsthand how passing bucks improves hunting.

more and more hunters are VOLUNTARILY doing just that without forcing others to hunt by your standards.

if the limit goes to 2, i will probably quit bowhunting. can i get a refund on my lifetime license?

Why not use bow season to shoot a doe, to make up for the lost buck tag?

some of us don't have enough does to be shooting regardless of season.


Big or small, kill em all

 

[TboneD]

The problem I have with the whole 2 buck limit is to what effect it will have down the road in 5 years..... No one can answer it. More does are going to be shot and how big of a herd reduction will it be down the road. There is no debate that does need to be hammered in certain areas, but Statewide? During the meeting it was admitted and agreed by the TWRA and the Commission that doe numbers WILL decline, to what extent, that NO ONE can estimate, is one of my big problems...if you kill a doe, you kill all offspring that will come from it. In the age of hunter numbers declining, we must not do something that will help keep those numbers declining by reducing sightings, which has an effect on hunter recruitment because a new hunter will quit if they don't see the numbers. This entire proposal will eliminate opportunities by hunters across the State, in multiple ways, as management styles that are already in place by 97% of Tennessee hunters are forced on all. Once again, nothing is wrong with the herd or bag limits as it stands, and there is no biological need for a correction--therefore, if there is not a biological need for a correction, then no correction should be applied and any correction applied will have negative consequences in certain areas that are not the focus of what is trying to be corrected. History has proven that time and time again... you cannot fix what isn't broken.

I don't see how the proposal will "eliminate hunter opportunities across the state" as you say, but I too am concerned about the doe harvest. Of course, there's areas in UNIT L where that's already the case. No surprise when you basically tell hunters to kill all the does they want. I mean, who wants to field dress and haul out more than three deer a day, anyway? No wonder we get so much help from guys from other parts of the state to come and make sure our herd isn't exceeding the carrying capacity. But wait, I'd suspect a lot of those guys are going to hunt public land where the herd is already pressured. Now that doesn't make sense from a management perspective, does it?

So my point is that no matter what the buck limit is, antler-less deer harvests could be much better managed if the TWRA would simply be a lot more particular with their limits, both geographically and private lands vs. open public lands, like they do in MS, or like the TWRA doesn't mind doing for their WMA's. For instance, they eliminated the antler-less harvest on Cheatham WMA during firearms seasons to get the population back up so why can't they drop the antler-less limit down to something reasonable for all public lands like my neck of the woods, Cedars of Lebanon State Forest? As I mentioned in my feedback email to them, I don't think the deer herd around Cedar Forest was what they were thinking about when they came up with the 3 antler-less deer a day limit for Unit L.....and while at the same time as already posted by someone else here, there are areas in east TN where they need to allow more antler less harvest. Sometimes the Devils in the details, and if it takes more work to work out the details, sounds like better job security for the TWRA than basically telling all the hunters across the state that they need to come and shoot all the does they can in all these counties. Get my drift?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[8 POINTS OR BETTER]

more and more hunters are VOLUNTARILY doing just that without forcing others to hunt by your standards.

if the limit goes to 2, i will probably quit bowhunting. can i get a refund on my lifetime license?

Why not use bow season to shoot a doe, to make up for the lost buck tag?

some of us don't have enough does to be shooting regardless of season.




Big or small, kill em all

If your herd is in that bad of shape do you really think you need to be killing three bucks.

 

[mike243]

killing a few xtra bucks dose not affect the herd # like killing a doe. no doe =no fawns =no deer. how do you think the 11 buck limit didnt wipe out all the deer when it was in place?

 

[Jcalder]

more and more hunters are VOLUNTARILY doing just that without forcing others to hunt by your standards.

if the limit goes to 2, i will probably quit bowhunting. can i get a refund on my lifetime license?

Why not use bow season to shoot a doe, to make up for the lost buck tag?

some of us don't have enough does to be shooting regardless of season.




Big or small, kill em all

If your herd is in that bad of shape do you really think you need to be killing three bucks.

no I don't. But everyone keeps saying kill more does. It's not that simple across the state.


Big or small, kill em all

 

[muddyboots]

It's about changing "mindset." It's designed to make your neighbor who may have different goals than you "think twice" about shooting a deer that you think shouldn't be killed.

It's also about trying to be like other states-the grass is always greener on the other side of the state line.

It's MAINLY about transitioning TWRA and the commission from setting limits that the herd can sustain while providing maximum opportunity for the hunter-leaving QDM, TDM, and all of it's variations that no one can agree on anyway up to the hunters to opening to potentially opening the door to setting limits based on "wants" of the loudest group. Once this happens, I think the one-buck limit, shorter season, weapons restriction, antler restriction, etc groups will gain traction and TWRA and commission will have to deal with these in the future.

The above is exactly why I don't think the buck limit should change. A regulation change is not going to make me a trophy hunter or change my mindset. A large number of hunters desiring the 2 buck limit have unrealistic expectations about what the results will be if the limit is reduced. Then what? The only thing you have left is a 1 buck limit (or less) and antler restrictions.

The only expectation I have is more bucks will live to be a year older. I don't think that is unrealistic.