Trophy Hunting In Tn

[Mike Belt]

Turkey season's over and deer hunting is a ways off. Let's kill some time and piss some people off, lol. What are your thoughts on trophy hunting here in Tn? Before posting try to give it some thought and express your own opinions without being swayed by others, TV shows, etc. and keep it civil.

 

[BSK]

I wholeheartedly support those who want to trophy hunt in TN. Nothing tests a hunter's skills like limiting themselves to the best of the best. I also have no problem with hunters/managers practicing Trophy Management on their land. In fact, I get paid to help people do so.

Just don't ask me to live by your hunting and/or management rules on my land.

 

[chebuck]

Trophy= an object or award after completing a task.

To me every deer killed is a trophy! Whether it's a doe or small buck that your not going to put on the wall to display. The trophy is in the food that has been provided for the family.

 

[TheLBLman]

All deer are trophies to all hunters.
The "meat" hunter is mostly a myth, although most hunters do in fact eat their deer.
"Meat" is typically cheaper via the grocery store, food pantry programs, and welfare benefits for those truly in need.

 

[Mike Belt]

BSK...I whole heartedly agree. I think where it gets sticky is in your last statement. "Just don't ask me to live by your hunting and/or management rules on my land." Unfortunately deer don't seem to care about property lines. I don't think it's so much of an issue of one side wanting to dictate to the other how or what to hunt as it is with one form of hunting possibly being to the detriment of the other...and that can work both ways. I think that's where the conflict arises. What happens on one property can directly affect what happens on an adjacent property. I strive to increase buck age and size on my side of the fence while you strive to kill any deer that presents an opportunity on your side. We both live by my rules and my chances of tagging a bigger buck increase as do yours of seeing more bucks. But what good does it do you if you can't shoot them? We live by your rules but each remain loyal to our goals and your odds of success increase at the same time mine decrease. If we both live by your rules AND your goals your odds of success actually diminish because I'm now shooting bucks that I'd normally pass; bucks that are no longer available for you to shoot. Sort of a Catch 22, damned if you do or don't situation. I really wish there was a winning black and white solution for both sides but for the life of me I can't come up with it.

LBL...I do believe there are many meat hunters. I'd guess that down to the last of them they'd love to kill a monster buck but aren't willing to forfeit all other opportunity to do so, and they're perfectly content with killing their deer of choice for consumption even if the meat may average astronomically more $/lb than what they could buy in the grocery store.

 

[fairchaser]

Since every hunter wants to kill a large or older buck "whether they will admit it or not" we are all trophy hunters to some degree. I don't know any hunter who will pass up a large buck to shoot a young deer if given an equal chance. The difference really is whether a hunter will exclusively prefer a trophy buck over any other deer. Even in so called trophy states you have all kinds of hunters pursuing a variety of legal deer to kill. Almost every state has some restrictions on young bucks either through a limited buck kill or antler restrictions. It was just a matter of time before the state got on board with the rest of the country but they can certainly go too far. IMO it's just about right but any further restrictions on seasons or reductions in buck limits could change the whole equation. I would like to see some restrictions on yearling bucks. I realize there will be those who will criticize this saying they should be able to kill whatever they want as long as it doesn't hurt the deer herd, but I believe more restrictive rules CAN and should protect certain age class deer. JMO

 

[4fshn]

If, through management and habitat improvement you raise the average age and antler size of the average buck so there are more trophy size animals around, is it still a trophy? That resets the bar because it is easier to obtain that trophy size now. Self defeating in the long run and just another form of greed.

 

[poorhunter]

This sounds fun! I'm not a trophy hunter. I will kill whatever my property can handle. I hunt because I LOVE to, and I kill for the meat. We have 6 kids, and we all prefer deer meat to beef, and I don't care what anyone says...its way cheaper than beef. In my opinion, and from basically every study I've heard of, IF a state wants to manage for big antlers, then that state needs to make it more difficult to kill bucks. The only way to grow more bucks with big antlers is to let bucks grow older. Not all 4.5 yo bucks have huge racks, and some 2.5 yo do. But to make an impact across the state, the state needs to implement regulations to allow bucks to get older. Most states have chosen to limit the number of bucks allowed per hunter and reduced the number of days open to firearms hunting, and control any excess doe populations. These WILL allow for bucks to get older and have bigger racks. There are just way way too many examples of this list to prove its viability. Big leases can practice these things and see it happen. Antler high-grading can throw this off, but I don't think over time it would. IF IT WERE UP TO ME (which its NOT, and I'm not suggesting this is what I want to see happen) to make a management decision to increase the trophy hunting in Tennessee here's the list:
1. Two buck limit, only one of which can be killed with rifle
2. Move MZ season to the last 2-3 weeks of December and doe only (unless you didn't kill a buck during rifle season)
3. Shorten rifle season to 3 weeks starting around Nov 10
4. Monitor doe populations by COUNTY yearly and use that to determine desired doe harvest
5. Reduce out-of-state tags and make them expensive (this one I really waiver on. If they are expensive, that limits who can afford it, although western states do this with elk)

Please, I am not saying this is what I want to see happen, just what I think would be a good management plan to increase the trophy hunting in Tennessee.

One of the things that I see as a problem with this scenario is the rifle season and the different rut timings in Tennessee. Having the rifle season so early would mean that some of our counties would miss hunting the rut, which I would never want to see happen to anyone.

My 2 cents.

 

[Lost Lake]

I have zero problems with trophy hunting. I chase big bucks quite a bit, and might shoot one on occasion that isn't what some would consider a trophy.

What I've learned is that worrying about what your neighbor across the fence is doing will give you heartburn if you let it, and I believe the only thing we can do is set reasonable biologically sound limits that benefit as many hunting styles as possible, do no harm to the resource, and live within them. Therein lies the conundrum.

Trophy hunting in itself isn't harmful or evil. Neither is shooting a young buck every now and then.

 

[losthunter]

I hunt because its fun and I like deer meat, I don't specifically go out and hunt for big deer, I just hope to have the opportunity to shoot at something if it happens to cross my path, except buttons, I will not shoot them, shot one last year and that's the last time. Im still trying to figure it all out, so its still fun for me and my son. Kudos to the trophy hunters for putting in the time it takes to figure them out and kudos to the meat eaters, their delicicous.

 

[BHC]

I think people even have different view of what trophy hunting is. I was a part of a long time that claimed to be a qdm club not a trophy club. But what is the difference. Qdm(by bucks selection) is simply only about allowing bucks to reach an older age class. That may be 2.5,3.5, or 4+..and can still be considered qdm. In my opinion trophy management is anytime you manage a deer herd to attempt to produce more deer of a certain age or antler size. I do understand this can be taken to various extents( removing does, and insubordinate bucks to maximize forage. Also attempting to tap into the gene pool). We just picked up 1550 acres and are managing for 3+ year old bucks. Our antler restriction is 20" main beam or 15" inside spread. However two year old meeting the criteria should be passed. This is simply to maximize our 3+ year old age pool without restricting each other from pulling the trigger so much that your chances of harvest in a season are diminished. We also will work to maximize forage and kill does as need to improve overall quality. Hunting pressure around us is minimal I believe so fortunately we should not be impacted too negatively by others practices. I do see where this could become frustrating for people who have neighbors with very different goals. My dad owns five acres in Alabama that has quite a few deer that come through and me and my younger brother (12) hunt out there. I don't shoot small bucks there, but he certainly could and would if given the opportunity lol. And that's fine with us. So while I'm all for "trophy" hunting I understand it is not for everyone. But IMO the key to successful trophy/qdm programs on larger tracts of land is to have like minded hunters. You gotta know what the property is capable of producing and set goals that everyone is happy with and willing to follow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Planking]

I chase the big bucks and what ive learned is that they are very few and far between in the areas i hunt. Yes, i find one to hunt most years after tons and tons of scouting on multiple properties. Never found two to hunt in my life. See lots of young bucks every year. Conclusion: Very long way from a trophy hunting state.

 

[Jon54]

I'm more about the chase than the kill. If you are able to take down an old mature deer, whether a buck or doe, you've done something. Me, I don't pull the trigger unless the deer is truly a mature deer. I don't care about the # of points. I would love to kill a huge 6 point one day.

 

[Grill-n-man]

Trophy hunting, well like what was said is all in the eye of the beholder. In general, not just here in Tennessee, its inches of antlers that determine this correct? If not why in conversation, media, advertisements, etc that is 1st on the list to mention? We talk about QDM programs but how is that a correct term when the goal is not age structure, population control, genetics, food source, and so on but simply inches? To have an effective management program you must not only address the food and habitat issues but also kill does for population control and lesser bucks to address the genetic issues. Sure I like to see and kill ole mossy head but that is not a true trophy for me just and added benefit. I dont run trail cameras nor use food plots I get pumped from not knowing a specific time and place. A high powered rifle sighted in to make 300-400 yard shots could care less about but give me a handgun and step in the thicket at 50yds and under, better buckle me in. A smokeless muzzleloader that can hit a softball at 225yds who cares, give me an ole hawkin and get with in 80 yds better call call me an EMT. A compound with fiber pins, 75% let letoff. and can drill 1/2 dollars a 50 yds, well that does give me goose bumps, but give me a longbow or recurve and get within 15yds I aint goin to make it. Give me kid and have their 1st one walk out on the side of a ridge hope my insurance is paid. Thats trophy hunting for me and no tape measure needed. Every one got their own idea of what a trophy is but the problem with most trophy hunting like mine is its not very marketable, very low cost, just not good TV or reading. and worst of all there is no politics in it. In todays world if it aint marketable and or fashionable its going to be pushed aside for an agenda that makes money and that agenda will be disguised as what ever it takes to make it profitable. The days of true biology and management are gone and over with. As I see it there are 2 things we can do - accept it or fight it

 

[280longshot]

It's more about the hunt than killing a trophy buck, don't get me wrong I strive to kill a mature buck but many times I come up empty handed.
I enjoy killing does and here recently enjoy taking my kids more than anything. I make the best of what my area has to offer, if it's a big 6 or big 7 I have no problem killing it and being very content.
I'll kill around 8 deer a year and if I don't kill a buck I'm fine with that. It's more about the memories that I made, the friends I hunt with and the nights at a camp fire shooting the bull.

 

[spoon]

I could careless if someone is a trophy hunter or a meat hunter. They are hunting what makes them happy and I'm happy for them. What I don't care for is they try to push their believe/hunting style on others...samething democrats do!

 

[BSK]

BSK...I whole heartedly agree. I think where it gets sticky is in your last statement. "Just don't ask me to live by your hunting and/or management rules on my land." Unfortunately deer don't seem to care about property lines. I don't think it's so much of an issue of one side wanting to dictate to the other how or what to hunt as it is with one form of hunting possibly being to the detriment of the other...and that can work both ways. I think that's where the conflict arises. What happens on one property can directly affect what happens on an adjacent property. I strive to increase buck age and size on my side of the fence while you strive to kill any deer that presents an opportunity on your side. We both live by my rules and my chances of tagging a bigger buck increase as do yours of seeing more bucks. But what good does it do you if you can't shoot them? We live by your rules but each remain loyal to our goals and your odds of success increase at the same time mine decrease. If we both live by your rules AND your goals your odds of success actually diminish because I'm now shooting bucks that I'd normally pass; bucks that are no longer available for you to shoot. Sort of a Catch 22, damned if you do or don't situation. I really wish there was a winning black and white solution for both sides but for the life of me I can't come up with it.

Mike,

I'm not buy the "but what my neighbors' are doing negatively effects my management" argument. Not that it isn't true. It certainly can be. But here's the biological reality: Deal with it. In my professional opinion, a state should do what TN was doing until recently, and that's to provide regulations that allow hunters to practice whatever form of management they prefer, within biological limits. And honestly, I think TN was pretty effective at that. However, notice I said, "allow hunters to practice" whatever management they want. That doesn't mean the state should do anything to make your management more successful, especially if that regulation takes something away from those practicing another form of management. In essence, the state should stay as neutral as possible when it comes to management choices (again, as long as no harm is being done to the resource region-wide).

But to get back to your point in specific. If a neighbor or neighbors are doing something that harms your management effort, that's just too bad. You may be doing something that harms theirs. That's just reality. You may have to find a different property to manage to find the success you seek, and your neighbors might have to do exactly the same thing--go somewhere else or find a bigger property or different property with different neighbors. I see it just like the what our government is supposed to do for us: guarantee us the Right to pursue happiness. Not the Right to achieve it; just the Right to pursue it. The Right to pursue it doesn't mean achieving it will be easy. In fact, it might be very, very difficult.

 

[BSK]

Since every hunter wants to kill a large or older buck "whether they will admit it or not" we are all trophy hunters to some degree.

Uh oh, I'm going to be a nitpicker again. But I hope everyone realizes I just have a pathological inability to let logical holes pass without comment..

First let me clearly state I am not attacking you fairchaser. From your posts, I believe you are a fair and reasonable person. But to me, that statement comes across as elitist. Basically it's saying, "deep inside, you really want what I want, so I'm going to force to live by my rules because eventually you'll thank me once you kill bigger bucks." I just don't agree with that all. In addition, I no longer agree "every hunter wants to kill a large or older buck." I used to believe that, but I've met WAY too many hunters that honestly don't give a darn. They hunt for the fun of having hunted. I realize many trophy hunters don't believe that--they believe that no matter what a hunter says, they secretly want to kill a big buck. But again, that just isn't true. Now I will agree MOST hunters would be thrilled to kill a big buck (myself included), but that doesn't mean that is the goal of their hunting. If I knew I would never again kill a trophy buck, I would still be just as excited to get into the woods on opening morning.

I don't know any hunter who will pass up a large buck to shoot a young deer if given an equal chance.

This a hypothetical I see used all the time to insinuate all hunters are trophy hunters. Sure, in the hypothetical situation where two bucks are standing side by side, and a hunter must choose one, they will probably choose the larger antlered one. But this assumes a hypothetical situation that almost never occurs. Twisting a hypothetical to the outer edges proves nothing because it isn't a realistic situation. In over 30 years of hunting I've never had two bucks standing side by side and I had to choose one. Not saying it never happens, but it's not a common experience, hence is not a realistic hypothetical situation.

 

[TX300mag]

In general, trophy hunting itself is great. I can't see why some are insulted when it's insinuated that they are a trophy hunter. I grew up in Texas and fell right in the middle of it in 1992 when I started leasing managed land.

Like anything else, some will take it too far and insist that it's the best method of hunting for everyone, or at least that it's superior to others. As far as trophy hunting in Tennessee goes, sadly it's following the same track that Texas did although 20 years behind. I could tell stories that make your head spin over friendships and even families destroyed over obsession with the size of antlers.

This thread is making a LOT of sense and I see a lot of similar patterns Texas went through.

It doesn't make sense to ME, but I've come to the conclusion that (in general) the hunters with access to the most private managed land seem to worry most about what their neighbor is doing (and feels the need to employ politicians to limit their opportunity).

I've also learned that the more money someone spends on their hunting, the more they assume everyone else does and that meat hunting doesn't make sense.

I know people who use their rifle passed down to them, buy no hunting clothes, and hunt on landowner exemption. If they kill five deer a year, a box of .30-30 shells lasts a long time. Am I the only one that knows these type of people?

It sounds as if some would rather people be welfare than hunt for food.

Like someone mentioned above, I also have six kids. I haven't bought beef in MANY years other than occasionally cooking a ribeye or sirloin for my wife (a handful of times in 18 years).

And one other thing I heard mentioned-I will give TWRA WELL over $300 in my license this year just to hunt deer. What is your definition of expensive? Take comfort, there are already plenty of NR who don't hunt anymore because of the cost of the license. My dad doesn't hunt his OWN FARM because he can't justify spending well over $300 for a license to hunt with family a couple of days around Thanksgiving and Christmas.

 

[TNRifleman]

The trophy status for me is based more on the hunt and preparation than the actual kill. Would I love to kill a big buck someday? Sure but I really do not have the inkling right now to spend a bunch of money on a QDMA club or lease just to kill a deer with a lot of bone. I save that money for elk hunting these days.

Here are my trophies. A nice 6 point that I patterned and figured out at the Wolf River WMA a couple of years ago. I figured out where he bedded and where he ate and set up on a day with perfect wind. He came right down his rub line and I shot him at 40 yards with my MZ. My other trophy also came from the Wolf River WMA. I had never shot a deer with a bow before but had been practicing a ton to be ready. The deer appeared out of nowhere and I finally got a clear shot at 37 yards. In my haste, I didn't even check the head for nubs but low and behold, this one had both antlers broken off at the base. Neither of these are trophies because of the size of their antlers but more because of the prep that went into the hunt.

 

[WGK]

Trophy hunting, well like what was said is all in the eye of the beholder. In general, not just here in Tennessee, its inches of antlers that determine this correct? If not why in conversation, media, advertisements, etc that is 1st on the list to mention? We talk about QDM programs but how is that a correct term when the goal is not age structure, population control, genetics, food source, and so on but simply inches? To have an effective management program you must not only address the food and habitat issues but also kill does for population control and lesser bucks to address the genetic issues. Sure I like to see and kill ole mossy head but that is not a true trophy for me just and added benefit. I dont run trail cameras nor use food plots I get pumped from not knowing a specific time and place. A high powered rifle sighted in to make 300-400 yard shots could care less about but give me a handgun and step in the thicket at 50yds and under, better buckle me in. A smokeless muzzleloader that can hit a softball at 225yds who cares, give me an ole hawkin and get with in 80 yds better call call me an EMT. A compound with fiber pins, 75% let letoff. and can drill 1/2 dollars a 50 yds, well that does give me goose bumps, but give me a longbow or recurve and get within 15yds I aint goin to make it. Give me kid and have their 1st one walk out on the side of a ridge hope my insurance is paid. Thats trophy hunting for me and no tape measure needed. Every one got their own idea of what a trophy is but the problem with most trophy hunting like mine is its not very marketable, very low cost, just not good TV or reading. and worst of all there is no politics in it. In todays world if it aint marketable and or fashionable its going to be pushed aside for an agenda that makes money and that agenda will be disguised as what ever it takes to make it profitable. The days of true biology and management are gone and over with. As I see it there are 2 things we can do - accept it or fight it

Great post!!!

 

[poorhunter]

Trophy hunting, well like what was said is all in the eye of the beholder. In general, not just here in Tennessee, its inches of antlers that determine this correct? If not why in conversation, media, advertisements, etc that is 1st on the list to mention? We talk about QDM programs but how is that a correct term when the goal is not age structure, population control, genetics, food source, and so on but simply inches? To have an effective management program you must not only address the food and habitat issues but also kill does for population control and lesser bucks to address the genetic issues. Sure I like to see and kill ole mossy head but that is not a true trophy for me just and added benefit. I dont run trail cameras nor use food plots I get pumped from not knowing a specific time and place. A high powered rifle sighted in to make 300-400 yard shots could care less about but give me a handgun and step in the thicket at 50yds and under, better buckle me in. A smokeless muzzleloader that can hit a softball at 225yds who cares, give me an ole hawkin and get with in 80 yds better call call me an EMT. A compound with fiber pins, 75% let letoff. and can drill 1/2 dollars a 50 yds, well that does give me goose bumps, but give me a longbow or recurve and get within 15yds I aint goin to make it. Give me kid and have their 1st one walk out on the side of a ridge hope my insurance is paid. Thats trophy hunting for me and no tape measure needed. Every one got their own idea of what a trophy is but the problem with most trophy hunting like mine is its not very marketable, very low cost, just not good TV or reading. and worst of all there is no politics in it. In todays world if it aint marketable and or fashionable its going to be pushed aside for an agenda that makes money and that agenda will be disguised as what ever it takes to make it profitable. The days of true biology and management are gone and over with. As I see it there are 2 things we can do - accept it or fight it

Very well said!!!

 

[poorhunter]

BSK said "In my professional opinion, a state should do what TN was doing until recently, and that's to provide regulations that allow hunters to practice whatever form of management they prefer, within biological limits. And honestly, I think TN was pretty effective at that. However, notice I said, "allow hunters to practice" whatever management they want. That doesn't mean the state should do anything to make your management more successful, especially if that regulation takes something away from those practicing another form of management. In essence, the state should stay as neutral as possible when it comes to management choices (again, as long as no harm is being done to the resource region-wide"

Never really looked at it like this. When I moved to Tennessee a couple years ago, I was shocked to fully understand the deer regulations here. They seemed very excessive and I wondered how does any deer make it to the next year! I have since come to see that things have really worked pretty well as a whole. Lots of opportunity for the meat hunters and somehow a pretty good number of big bucks. I know there's not as many Booners as some states, but where the bucks are allowed to age (Cades Cove, Presididents Island come to mind) the deer here can certainly get pretty big! I have found what you said in this post to be true, and should be the governing principle the state uses.

 

[Mike Belt]

BSK...You made the statement that "a state should do what Tn was doing until recently, and that's to provide regulations that allow hunters to practice whatever form of management that they prefer". What changed?

 

[Headhunter]

BSK...I whole heartedly agree. I think where it gets sticky is in your last statement. "Just don't ask me to live by your hunting and/or management rules on my land." Unfortunately deer don't seem to care about property lines. I don't think it's so much of an issue of one side wanting to dictate to the other how or what to hunt as it is with one form of hunting possibly being to the detriment of the other...and that can work both ways. I think that's where the conflict arises. What happens on one property can directly affect what happens on an adjacent property. I strive to increase buck age and size on my side of the fence while you strive to kill any deer that presents an opportunity on your side. We both live by my rules and my chances of tagging a bigger buck increase as do yours of seeing more bucks. But what good does it do you if you can't shoot them? We live by your rules but each remain loyal to our goals and your odds of success increase at the same time mine decrease. If we both live by your rules AND your goals your odds of success actually diminish because I'm now shooting bucks that I'd normally pass; bucks that are no longer available for you to shoot. Sort of a Catch 22, damned if you do or don't situation. I really wish there was a winning black and white solution for both sides but for the life of me I can't come up with it.

Mike,

I'm not buy the "but what my neighbors' are doing negatively effects my management" argument. Not that it isn't true. It certainly can be. But here's the biological reality: Deal with it. In my professional opinion, a state should do what TN was doing until recently, and that's to provide regulations that allow hunters to practice whatever form of management they prefer, within biological limits. And honestly, I think TN was pretty effective at that. However, notice I said, "allow hunters to practice" whatever management they want. That doesn't mean the state should do anything to make your management more successful, especially if that regulation takes something away from those practicing another form of management. In essence, the state should stay as neutral as possible when it comes to management choices (again, as long as no harm is being done to the resource region-wide).

But to get back to your point in specific. If a neighbor or neighbors are doing something that harms your management effort, that's just too bad. You may be doing something that harms theirs. That's just reality. You may have to find a different property to manage to find the success you seek, and your neighbors might have to do exactly the same thing--go somewhere else or find a bigger property or different property with different neighbors. I see it just like the what our government is supposed to do for us: guarantee us the Right to pursue happiness. Not the Right to achieve it; just the Right to pursue it. The Right to pursue it doesn't mean achieving it will be easy. In fact, it might be very, very difficult.

I disagree BSK. No way, no how did Tennessee have a handle on exactly what was being killed (and they do not now) as far as age of bucks or age of deer period. There was small (and I mean small) percentage of deer that were being "officially" aged and there were many times that wasn't right. How to correct it? I don't think it is possible. The change to 2 bucks was for sure thought out and a good change. I support Chuck Yoest and believe he is and will do a great job given a chance and if he isn't run off.

 

[fairchaser]

Since every hunter wants to kill a large or older buck "whether they will admit it or not" we are all trophy hunters to some degree.

Uh oh, I'm going to be a nitpicker again. But I hope everyone realizes I just have a pathological inability to let logical holes pass without comment..

First let me clearly state I am not attacking you fairchaser. From your posts, I believe you are a fair and reasonable person. But to me, that statement comes across as elitist. Basically it's saying, "deep inside, you really want what I want, so I'm going to force to live by my rules because eventually you'll thank me once you kill bigger bucks." I just don't agree with that all. In addition, I no longer agree "every hunter wants to kill a large or older buck." I used to believe that, but I've met WAY too many hunters that honestly don't give a darn. They hunt for the fun of having hunted. I realize many trophy hunters don't believe that--they believe that no matter what a hunter says, they secretly want to kill a big buck. But again, that just isn't true. Now I will agree MOST hunters would be thrilled to kill a big buck (myself included), but that doesn't mean that is the goal of their hunting. If I knew I would never again kill a trophy buck, I would still be just as excited to get into the woods on opening morning.

I don't know any hunter who will pass up a large buck to shoot a young deer if given an equal chance.

This a hypothetical I see used all the time to insinuate all hunters are trophy hunters. Sure, in the hypothetical situation where two bucks are standing side by side, and a hunter must choose one, they will probably choose the larger antlered one. But this assumes a hypothetical situation that almost never occurs. Twisting a hypothetical to the outer edges proves nothing because it isn't a realistic situation. In over 30 years of hunting I've never had two bucks standing side by side and I had to choose one. Not saying it never happens, but it's not a common experience, hence is not a realistic hypothetical situation.

You ,make some valid points BSK. Not every hunter is a trophy hunter and my definition was a stretch. But, I still think its in every hunters DNA to shoot a trophy buck at some point in their hunting life at least once. That doesn't make them a trophy hunter! My brother talks with me about hunting mature bucks and loves to discuss the topic but he will go out once a year and sit in a shooting house and shoot a young doe for meat. I often ask him if he would shoot a big buck if it walked out and he definitely would. But, he won't pursue one. He's not a trophy hunter and would argue with me if I called him one. So, Ill give you that one.


All hypotheticals fail to perfectly explain a point. Just as you make the point "if you knew you would never kill another trophy buck you would still be just as excited to hunt". Can this ever be the true? Probably not. It is rare that two bucks will be standing side by side giving the hunter a choice of which one to shoot but hunters are faced with the dilemma often of what they will shoot or not shoot. How often do they choose the deer providing the best most tender meat over the larger or older or bigger racked deer? In this day where deer meat is not needed for survival, most of us have evolved into sport hunters versus subsistence hunters. Yes, we eat the meat and enjoy the meat and use it instead of other protein sources but our natural selection is predicated on larger, older, bigger racked bucks or does. I've never heard of anyone specifically hunting fawns even though that is the most tender meat. I just think we are programmed differently with regard to hunting compared with our ancestors. I'll stand with my hypothetical even though it is rare, it does focus on my point that our selection process as hunters has changed.

 

[Snake]

I have been on both sides of the fence so to speak not really a trophy hunter but one who likes to shoot only fair size racked bucks and have at one point in my hunting life I would about shoot anything legal . Always said I'm a hunter first trophy hunter next but to my point . I think (opinion) once a hunter reaches the threshold of being strictly a trophy hunter with age and rack size guidelines then he will never be content , realizing that each year they are wanting to best their biggest buck therefore not really ever being content with their biggest . With the so called meat hunter they are going to be content with a deer period . With those who practice QDM with only age guidelines they will be content to take a buck that has reached that age regardless of the headgear it possesses . So to me a mix would be your ideal hunter which I am not , rarely shoot a doe but to each his own because we are all hunters and don't need to give anti-hunters any ammo but this is just my opinion .

 

[Boone 58]

To each his own, and may the trophy you shoot, be the trophy you are proud of.

 

[AT Hiker]

Trophy hunting defined by B&C entry, thats a tough venture to undertake here in TN (I can honestly say I have seen for sure 1 here in TN, maybe 2 B&C bucks while I was hunting).
Heck, its tough in well known B&C states/areas. I personally cannot let a 140" whitetail walk, I did for the first time last year in KY only because I thought he was smaller. His body was so big I thought he wouldn't break the 130" mark, later when I studied the pictures of him did I realize I let the biggest buck walk. I then shot and missed him later, oh well.

I can assure you though that I have plenty of trophies that I have hunted and killed here in TN. Despite the anti QDM and shooting a old buck rhetoric that goes on, I like to target 3.5+ yr old bucks here in TN. Will I shoot one younger, yep. Have I, yep. Will I continue to, it would be a lie if I said nope.

As I have gotten older the adventure of the hunt has taken the top priority for me.

 

[Mike Belt]

I guess it all depends on how you define trophy... and across the board there can be differences in that definition. For all practical purposes I'd define trophy based on score. I realize that there can be trophy hunts based on the difficulty of the hunt or hunting conditions, the choice of weapon, or even the particular animal hunted and success in any of those situations may very well outweigh the score an animal might have. Generally speaking though, "trophy" is defined by score and those scores vary by state. Here in Tn my opinion of trophy status starts somewhere in the neighborhood of 130-135" and upward; a far cry from many other Midwestern states. Taking a deer of that caliber here is not easily done but still a realistic possibility in much of the state. Once you break 140" you've taken an elite buck even though you may not be an elite hunter. When you can do it consistently (every 1-3 years) you've either gained ground towards becoming that elite hunter or you're lucky enough to have an exceptional hunting territory.