Trophy Hunting In Tn

[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.

 

[AT Hiker]

... or you're lucky enough to have an exceptional hunting territory.

A lot of people do not realize, or admit, how important this factor is. Nothing against it as it is part of the expectations equations, IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[knightrider]

Do i like killing big bucks? Duh heck yes I do. Do I set out and concentrat my efforts on mature bucks? No!! My goal Everytime I step in the woods is to kill a deer I have a tag for, that's it no big buck,little buck,big doe, little doe, just simply which everone walks by that I have a tag for.

 

[landman]

... or you're lucky enough to have an exceptional hunting territory.

A lot of people do not realize, or admit, how important this factor is. Nothing against it as it is part of the expectations equations, IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sometimes those hunting territories are naturally there, but more and more they are created over time by management

 

[KPH]

I am one of these people who wouldn't walk across a street to see a dog fight. That being said I don't waste money to get one mounted or waste wall space to hang one up. If you want to that is fine with me but I don't want you to push what you want on me and think that is the way I should think.

 

[Mike Belt]

KPH...Good for you and here's hoping your walls stay empty but no one is pushing anything here.

 

[AT Hiker]

I am one of these people who wouldn't walk across a street to see a dog fight. That being said I don't waste money to get one mounted or waste wall space to hang one up. If you want to that is fine with me but I don't want you to push what you want on me and think that is the way I should think.

Every year I mount a couple does and yearling bucks for peoples first deer or something special like that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mike Belt]

As far as mounts...I've been deer hunting since 1973 and I've killed a load of deer. In all that time I've mounted a few dozen deer but only 3 for myself. They were done in the 80's and there's nothing particularly special about them other than the weight and age of one of them, and that doesn't show in the rack. None of them would even break 120" but when they were killed I was tickled to death. After that I just started collecting the racks. My goal was to use them in crafts or to build an archway over my driveway or an antler totem pole and at the rate I was going it would have been a real possibility. Before that happened and while the buck limit was still 11/season I suppose I phased out of the kill mode and into the hunt mode. I'd go seasons without a kill although I could have easily taken a limit every year, and still can. I can't begin to guess just how many bucks I've passed since then that were larger than those I had on the wall. My rack collection hasn't had an addition since. Those that I have and do squeeze the trigger on I now skull mount or use as rattling antlers. I seriously doubt that I will ever get another full mount no matter the size of the rack. If I'm to ever to build that pole I'm going to have to start me a "go rack me" account.

 

[KPH]

KPH...Good for you and here's hoping your walls stay empty but no one is pushing anything here.

I don't know so much about that, with Tennessee being pushed as a trophy state, the average hunter is going to be priced out of hunting.

 

[TheLBLman]

. . . . with Tennessee being pushed as a trophy state, the average hunter is going to be priced out of hunting.

Two myths. Neither is happening.

 

[TX300mag]

. . . . with Tennessee being pushed as a trophy state, the average hunter is going to be priced out of hunting.

Two myths. Neither is happening.

I hope you're right, because I see a lot of the same patterns as other places where the average hunter has largely been priced out of hunting.