Just A Thought On Limits...

[Mike Belt]

How's this sound?????

Statewide, hunters can't seem to agree on buck limits and particularly if there is no sound "biological" reason for change (there's that word again). Instead let's make a change for compromise. Let's alternate limits yearly. We have a 3 buck limit this year. That satisfies the small minority actually killing 3 bucks as well as those only killing 2 but looking for their third. Those hunters wanting advanced buck age will have to settle for the bucks that slip through the cracks...and some will. This is their year of compromise. The following year we go to a 1 buck limit. This will allow for more bucks walking at the close of season and advancing another year in age making for a much anticipated following season. Those hunters typically killing 2 or 3 bucks will have to be satisfied with only 1 for that year but anticipating a bumper crop of bucks the following season. This is their year of compromise. No one gets "their" way yearly but overall, everyone gets "their" way. Try this for 5 or 6 years and see what happens.

 

[scn]

Sorry, but I would fight a 1 buck limit all the way. I prefer 2, but would rather have 3 than 1.

 

[stik]

how about keep the 3 buck but go back to no more than 2 in any season. many hunters hunt gun season only effectively imposing your 2 buck limit.

 

[ImThere]

I'm kinda a fan of 1 per weapon

 

[mike243]

I reckon no 2 hunters will agree on any thing lol.im not a fan of 1 per weapon or 1 per season. Make the WMA'S trophy area's and then draw for them

 

[stik]

Make the WMA'S trophy area's and then draw for them

many people depend on the wma's that are open with statewide seasons to have a place to hunt.

 

[ImThere]

Make the WMA'S trophy area's and then draw for them

many people depend on the wma's that are open with statewide seasons to have a place to hunt.

Yep

 

[redblood]

How's this sound?????

Statewide, hunters can't seem to agree on buck limits and particularly if there is no sound "biological" reason for change (there's that word again). Instead let's make a change for compromise. Let's alternate limits yearly. We have a 3 buck limit this year. That satisfies the small minority actually killing 3 bucks as well as those only killing 2 but looking for their third. Those hunters wanting advanced buck age will have to settle for the bucks that slip through the cracks...and some will. This is their year of compromise. The following year we go to a 1 buck limit. This will allow for more bucks walking at the close of season and advancing another year in age making for a much anticipated following season. Those hunters typically killing 2 or 3 bucks will have to be satisfied with only 1 for that year but anticipating a bumper crop of bucks the following season. This is their year of compromise. No one gets "their" way yearly but overall, everyone gets "their" way. Try this for 5 or 6 years and see what happens.

I'm game. everyone wins

 

[BSK]

Sorry, but I would fight a 1 buck limit all the way. I prefer 2, but would rather have 3 than 1.

This.

 

[Mike Belt]

Personally I'd rather have a 2 buck limit and would also rather stay at 3 than drop to 1 over the long haul. It was just an idea to try and appease everyone at least every other season.

 

[stik]

how about keep the 3 buck but go back to no more than 2 in any season. many hunters hunt gun season only effectively imposing your 2 buck limit.

i still think this is the best compromise.

 

[Vermin93]

If I read their posts correctly, scn and BSK are both on the record as being 2 buckers.

The winds of change are upon us. The 3 buck army is in full retreat!

 

[BSK]

If I read their posts correctly, scn and BSK are both on the record as being 2 buckers.

The winds of change are upon us. The 3 buck army is in full retreat!

Personally, I don't think a 2 buck limit will make much biological difference. But within biological reason, I think giving hunters what they want is a good idea. If the majority of hunters want a 2 buck limit, so be it.

 

[megalomaniac]

I don't think we need any limit. Just trust the hunters to do the right thing for their local herd. Everything will be just fine.

 

[redblood]

If I read their posts correctly, scn and BSK are both on the record as being 2 buckers.

The winds of change are upon us. The 3 buck army is in full retreat!

Personally, I don't think a 2 buck limit will make much biological difference. But within biological reason, I think giving hunters what they want is a good idea. If the majority of hunters want a 2 buck limit, so be it.

agreed. now since it is inevitable, when do you think the 2 buck limit will come?

 

[BSK]

If I read their posts correctly, scn and BSK are both on the record as being 2 buckers.

The winds of change are upon us. The 3 buck army is in full retreat!

Personally, I don't think a 2 buck limit will make much biological difference. But within biological reason, I think giving hunters what they want is a good idea. If the majority of hunters want a 2 buck limit, so be it.

agreed. now since it is inevitable, when do you think the 2 buck limit will come?

In my personal opinion, very soon.

 

[scn]

If I read their posts correctly, scn and BSK are both on the record as being 2 buckers.

The winds of change are upon us. The 3 buck army is in full retreat!

I've advocated 2 bucks for almost 20 years and haven't seen it yet. Maybe one of those days....

 

[redblood]

it will happen soon, I am confident. the loaded email from TWRA, confirmed this to me. Although, it seems that may not be the way TWRA wants to go.

 

[saddleman1]

Leave it alone.

 

[TDW05]

Im all for 1 buck limit but what about people that rely on the meat? What would be a reasonable compromise? 1 buck 3 does or something like that?

 

[redblood]

Im all for 1 buck limit but what about people that rely on the meat? What would be a reasonable compromise? 1 buck 3 does or something like that?

well in unit L the answer is the 250 or so does we can kil. in east TN, I am sure they will have to allow an extra doe

 

[Hunter 257W]

Im all for 1 buck limit but what about people that rely on the meat? What would be a reasonable compromise? 1 buck 3 does or something like that?

well in unit L the answer is the 250 or so does we can kil. in east TN, I am sure they will have to allow an extra doe

Does that make sense though in an area where low deer numbers are already a problem?

 

[mike243]

If there isn't enuf bucks killing the doe's will drop the #s even more, its been proven buck harvest doesn't control the population so the reason to drop the buck limit is for trophy's

 

[Jcalder]

Im all for 1 buck limit but what about people that rely on the meat? What would be a reasonable compromise? 1 buck 3 does or something like that?

well in unit L the answer is the 250 or so does we can kil. in east TN, I am sure they will have to allow an extra doe

i know one of the places I hunt there doesn't need to be any does killed. But for those in unit l or areas with high deer numbers it's easy to say we should go to 1-2 bucks vs 3. I'm not totally dependent on deer meat but some are and need all the deer meat they can get


Big or small, kill em all

 

[MUP]

how about keep the 3 buck but go back to no more than 2 in any season. many hunters hunt gun season only effectively imposing your 2 buck limit.

i still think this is the best compromise.

11 to 2, then back to 3 was a heckuva compromise imo. But again, compromise is just surrender on an installment plan. :)

 

[redblood]

that was the BSK 2 buck vote I was looking for. I do like the quote about compromise

 

[MUP]

I kinda preferred the other one myself. :D

 

[TNGunsmoke]

how about keep the 3 buck but go back to no more than 2 in any season. many hunters hunt gun season only effectively imposing your 2 buck limit.

This would be a great compromise to me. Too bad it'll never happen.