Effect of the New Antlered Deer Definition

[TNCharlie]

I guess that this is the way that the new anterless deer definition was intended to work.

Note: I'm not offering a judgement or opinion in this note. I'm just telling my personal experience. I am not a meat hunter; I am not a trophy hunter. I am a deer hunter. My only personal requirement for a deer is that it be legal.

Yesterday morning I had a 4-point buck offer a shot. Typically I shoot the first deer I get a chance at to start the season. This one was no exception and now is at the processor.

I was back in the stand this morning. After a couple of hours I saw a deer approaching and got ready. Its head was down and it was in no hurry. As I watched it turned its head and I saw what I thought was a small antler. Peeking through my scope I could see two small antlers; not clearly but they were there.

Immediately I realized that this is the third day of the season. If I shoot any antlered deer now, then I have absolutely no margin for error for the rest of the season. Then if I make a mistake and discover a deer that I shot has a nub that has broken the skin I will be in trouble. I wouldn't even want to hunt anymore this year. So I let that one walk.

Now I'm thinking that I will let any buck walk unless it is some kind of personal record or if I'm ready to stop hunting for the year. After I kill a second one, accidentally or intentionally, I'm just not going to enjoy hunting knowing that if I make a mistake and shoot one of those "through the skin" buttons I'm in trouble.

So I probably won't shoot another antlered deer and will just shoot does. If I do accidentally kill a button, I'll just quit hunting for the year. It's not worth taking the chance that I might make a second mistake.

 

[Duck dogn]

I feel the same way I feel maybe these careless hunters will probably leave alot of those bucks dead in the woods!

 

[Urban_Hunter]

I feel the same way I feel maybe these careless hunters will probably leave alot of those bucks dead in the woods!

This

 

[jb357]

I feel the same way I feel maybe these careless hunters will probably leave alot of those bucks dead in the woods!

Or do the usual and not check them out/telecheck them as a doe. I figured this would be the first raging rant post about the new rule. We'll see it in a few weeks.

 

[Southern Sportsman]

I just dont understand how this new rule is objectionable to anybody. If it has antler, it's a buck. You get two bucks per year. If somebody "accidently" shoots a buck that they thought was a doe, dont blame the government.

 

[pockets]

I just dont understand how this new rule is objectionable to anybody. If it has antler, it's a buck. You get two bucks per year. If somebody "accidently" shoots a buck that they thought was a doe, dont blame the government.

This op:

 

[jb357]

I just dont understand how this new rule is objectionable to anybody. If it has antler, it's a buck. You get two bucks per year. If somebody "accidently" shoots a buck that they thought was a doe, dont blame the government.

But it's all the liberals fault for taking away our deer hunting opportunities! :roll: . There's no excuse for "accidently" shooting a buck with scopes and binoculars. If you're still not sure, dont shoot.

 

[Vermin93]

I just dont understand how this new rule is objectionable to anybody. If it has antler, it's a buck. You get two bucks per year. If somebody "accidently" shoots a buck that they thought was a doe, dont blame the government.

x4

 

[lightsareout]

every other state has the 3" rule, why would TN change to this level of idiocracy. I sure hope it changes back next year.

 

[Headhunter]

every other state has the 3" rule, why would TN change to this level of idiocracy. I sure hope it changes back next year.

Not even other state has a 3" rule. That is wrong.

 

[landman]

every other state has the 3" rule, why would TN change to this level of idiocracy. I sure hope it changes back next year.

Not even other state has a 3" rule. That is wrong.

True KY says visible antler

 

[lightsareout]

every other state has the 3" rule, why would TN change to this level of idiocracy. I sure hope it changes back next year.

Not even other state has a 3" rule. That is wrong.

Thank you for pointing this out; every state that I'm aware of - mostly midwest states

 

[JKC]

(Peeking through my scope I could see two small antlers; not clearly but they were there) Looks like you can see pretty good go ahead and hunt and if you make the mistake then worry about then.

 

[iowavf]

every other state has the 3" rule, why would TN change to this level of idiocracy. I sure hope it changes back next year.

Not even other state has a 3" rule. That is wrong.

Thank you for pointing this out; every state that I'm aware of - mostly midwest states

In Iowa a legal buck must have 1 forked antler, or it's considered a doe. We also only have 1 buck tag for the gun seasons, 1 buck tag for archery seasons and if you qualify as a landowner, you can get a buck tag for your property only.

 

[Vermin93]

every other state has the 3" rule, why would TN change to this level of idiocracy. I sure hope it changes back next year.

With the new rule, TN now aligns with most adjacent states. KY, VA, NC, GA, AL and MS all have similar definitions.

 

[deer hunter 21]

It makes you look hard before you shoot

 

[WRbowhunter]

I have had 3 instances while bow hunting this year that I thought I had a doe coming in. Each time it was alone and I started to watch it closely . The more I watched the more something told me it was a buck. Each time I had to wait until the deer was almost under me to figure out it was a button buck. In 2 of the cases once it was directly under me I could see white specs on the nubs I assume were the horn barely breaking through. I guess the law works as in the past maybe I would have released an arrow. For those that like those young tender does its just not worth it taking a shot especially later in the year when your tagged out on bucks and want a shoot a doe for the freezer.

 

[Mike Belt]

I haven't heard of anyone I know shooting one of those "contradictory" bucks yet but I suspect it'll happen before it's all over. All I can advise anyone is that if you're buck hunting you probably won't make any mistakes. If you see antler and want to shoot that buck then shoot away. If you're doe hunting you need to take a good look before shooting. That's what the new regulation was designed to do; make you take a good look BEFORE shooting.

 

[TNDeerGuy]

I've already walked up on two of these little bucks, laying there wasted, one clearly dumped and one just in the woods. Both had maybe ½" of hard antler. The one dumped may have been checked out, as it had been partially deboned, but the one in the woods, I'll bet wasn't because it just had the backstraps cut out. Just as predicted by many.

 

[Winchester]

This new law will definitely get some small bucks wasted, but I think it will save some as well.

 

[megalomaniac]

I suppose in future years if it is too much work to bother looking for visible antler, one would be better off NOT shooting the first buck they see. Save that buck tag for late in the season,so it won't matter if you make a mistake and kill one acorn spike thinking it was a doe.

But honestly, any rule that makes people think and really study an animal before pulling the trigger is probably a good thing. Hopefully fewer livestock will end up accidentally shot, and it may even save another hunter's life.

 

[Grill-n-man]

First let me address that antler restrictions might save a persons life, WTH.

Now back to reality, many comments/ideas on this being a decision based on true biology or not - political agendas - or simply just plain ole business - as well as the pros and cons. One topic seems to be getting left out, that is the new hunter/next generation. Yeah its been covered about how the 150" booners will be running every where in a few years for these new hunters to kill, yup said kill cause farmers harvest and thieves take but hunters kill. But lets think on this for a minute, have we progressed from teaching our children that killing any animal that spends most of its life trying not to be supper that one is lucky/skilled enough to kill is cause enough for joy and celebration? Has it now been replaced with the idea that if a certain part of said animal doesn't reach a certain number on a tape measure it is to be looked upon with shame and will be condemned by others? Seems most have forgotten what is was like to be new, the mistakes, the bad shots, just learning how to spot a deer much less the sex, thinking it was a doe only to find out it was a button or small spike, etc. I wonder how many of today's experts/experienced hunters if they could stand eye to eye with themselves during those first couple of years with the mentality as it is now could look themselves in the eye? To me this new antler rule is more than just growing bigger racks, its leading hunting away from what its meant to be and leading it into the world of business. Think not? Only time will tell but then again from what I hear about how how many inches of antlers is acceptable before one kills an antlered deer is being taught in some hunter safety classes that time may already be here.

 

[TX300mag]

Good post grill-n-man




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hunter 257W]

I guess that this is the way that the new anterless deer definition was intended to work.

Note: I'm not offering a judgement or opinion in this note. I'm just telling my personal experience. I am not a meat hunter; I am not a trophy hunter. I am a deer hunter. My only personal requirement for a deer is that it be legal.

Yesterday morning I had a 4-point buck offer a shot. Typically I shoot the first deer I get a chance at to start the season. This one was no exception and now is at the processor.

I was back in the stand this morning. After a couple of hours I saw a deer approaching and got ready. Its head was down and it was in no hurry. As I watched it turned its head and I saw what I thought was a small antler. Peeking through my scope I could see two small antlers; not clearly but they were there.

Immediately I realized that this is the third day of the season. If I shoot any antlered deer now, then I have absolutely no margin for error for the rest of the season. Then if I make a mistake and discover a deer that I shot has a nub that has broken the skin I will be in trouble. I wouldn't even want to hunt anymore this year. So I let that one walk.

Now I'm thinking that I will let any buck walk unless it is some kind of personal record or if I'm ready to stop hunting for the year. After I kill a second one, accidentally or intentionally, I'm just not going to enjoy hunting knowing that if I make a mistake and shoot one of those "through the skin" buttons I'm in trouble.

So I probably won't shoot another antlered deer and will just shoot does. If I do accidentally kill a button, I'll just quit hunting for the year. It's not worth taking the chance that I might make a second mistake.

Why would you not shoot another antlered deer? You said you always start out by shooting the 1st deer that comes along. You did that and now you can hunt for a bigger buck that makes you happy. Why wouldn't you shoot it if it comes along? If it's not big enough to make you happy, keep hunting?

 

[Southern Sportsman]

. . . from what I hear about how many inches of antlers is acceptable before one kills an antlered deer . . .

This is what I dont understand. If you kill a buck with antlers, you kill an antlered buck. It is absolutely "acceptable" to do so. You can do it twice per year. And if it makes you happy, it makes me happy for you. I have never heard anyone condone a kid or anyone for that matter for killing an antlered buck even if less than 3 inches. Buy why do people think they should be able to kill an antlered buck, but not have it count as an antlered buck? It just seems silly.

 

[jb357]

. . . from what I hear about how many inches of antlers is acceptable before one kills an antlered deer . . .

This is what I dont understand. If you kill a buck with antlers, you kill an antlered buck. It is absolutely "acceptable" to do so. You can do it twice per year. And if it makes you happy, it makes me happy for you. I have never heard anyone condone a kid or anyone for that matter for killing an antlered buck even if less than 3 inches. Buy why do people think they should be able to kill an antlered buck, but not have it count as an antlered buck? It just seems silly.

Its just something else for them to complain about that's been "taken away by liberals" and "catering to trophy hunters". Kill what makes you happy within the confines of the rules. The only people I have a problem with are the ones that kill the first fork horn that walks by and says they wish it was bigger and they're no big bucks around.

 

[TNCharlie]

"I guess that this is the way that the new anterless deer definition was intended to work.

Note: I'm not offering a judgement or opinion in this note. I'm just telling my personal experience. I am not a meat hunter; I am not a trophy hunter. I am a deer hunter. My only personal requirement for a deer is that it be legal."

Those sentences are how I introduced my note. Unfortunately it seems that many people didn't read them or didn't understand them. I offered absolutely no opinion about the rule (in fact, I said that it works), I didn't "blame" anyone (blame for what?), and didn't complain about anything. I simply stated how the new definition means that I have to adjust some of my methods. Those that understood replied and commented about how they would make sure that they also commit no violations.

Then people started with the opinions. Some of the statements were asinine beyond belief. I really wonder if some of the posters even hunt.

Thanks to those that understood and commented appropriately. I'm done with this.

 

[megalomaniac]

. . . from what I hear about how many inches of antlers is acceptable before one kills an antlered deer . . .

This is what I dont understand. If you kill a buck with antlers, you kill an antlered buck. It is absolutely "acceptable" to do so. You can do it twice per year. And if it makes you happy, it makes me happy for you. I have never heard anyone condone a kid or anyone for that matter for killing an antlered buck even if less than 3 inches. Buy why do people think they should be able to kill an antlered buck, but not have it count as an antlered buck? It just seems silly.

exactly... no one is restricting you from killing TWO of them per year. 'meat' and 'deer' hunters should be happy as a pig in slop getting to kill two buttons plus however many does their particular unit allows. If you would rather 'trophy' hunt... well, that's a whole different ballgame. You actually have to learn how to tell the difference between a buck fawn and a doe fawn to trophy hunt and still shoot surplus fawns. So... it only hurts the 'trophy' hunters in reality

 

[megalomaniac]

First let me address that antler restrictions might save a persons life, WTH.

Personally, I've never heard of a fatal hunting accident where one hunter shot another that started out with... 'well, I saw this hunter coming through the brush... he looked to be a pretty good redneck, so I got my gun up quick and could just barely find him in the scope since it was almost too dark. Luckily, my 50mm objective let just enough light in to see the crosshairs, so I levelled them on his chest and smoked him!'.... seems like every shooting accident I've EVER heard of went like this... 'I saw something moving, THOUGHT it was a deer, so I shot... gosh, I'm SO SORRY I killed my best friend'.

Most of us went to hunter safety course... Know your target and what is beyond your target. Part of 'knowing' your target is determining what animal it is, the sex of the animal, and whether it is legal to kill. 'nuff said

 

[Southern Sportsman]

"I guess that this is the way that the new anterless deer definition was intended to work.

Note: I'm not offering a judgement or opinion in this note. I'm just telling my personal experience. I am not a meat hunter; I am not a trophy hunter. I am a deer hunter. My only personal requirement for a deer is that it be legal."

Those sentences are how I introduced my note. Unfortunately it seems that many people didn't read them or didn't understand them. I offered absolutely no opinion about the rule (in fact, I said that it works), I didn't "blame" anyone (blame for what?), and didn't complain about anything. I simply stated how the new definition means that I have to adjust some of my methods. Those that understood replied and commented about how they would make sure that they also commit no violations.

Then people started with the opinions. Some of the statements were asinine beyond belief. I really wonder if some of the posters even hunt.

Thanks to those that understood and commented appropriately. I'm done with this.

FWIW, my comments were not directed at you. Just general observations about the new rule.