TWO BUCK LIMIT

[a retrohillbilly]

If I'm re-visiting a worn out topic forgive me, BUT, I strongly think a two buck limit would help all of our hunting experiences immensely! That lets you get a good one and hold out for a great one. If you need to kill more than that, you are meat hunting and that's what all those does are for. I hope many of you will join me in letting the commisioners hear this! What do you think??

 

[spoon]

sorry bud, you are beating a dead horse

Do a search in serious forum under this topic

 

[a retrohillbilly]

Forgive me and may the moderator strike me down

 

[TheLBLman]

I think a simple 2-buck limit would be better for most hunters.
Put another way, I think more hunters would kill at least one buck, more hunters would kill one or more deer, i.e. overall hunter success and satisfaction would improve. Buck:doe ratios would improve, buck age structure would improve.

However, most hunters are reasonably happy and content, no matter what TWRA does or does not. I suspect TWRA believes they can sell more licenses with a higher buck limit, and so long as most hunters are pretty content, they're not going to reduce the buck limit. The only hope I have for TWRA reducing the buck limit will come from backlash from non-hunters about increasing deer densities becoming a bigger problem. TWRA might need to reduce the buck limit just to encourage more hunters to harvest a female deer instead of a buck.

Don't want to be taken wrong, as I'm not attacking TWRA, just stating how it "appears" to me, and I might do exactly like TWRA if I were facing everything they're facing, like severe budget shortfalls.

Similar can be said about the lengthy gun seasons (muzzleloader & rifle). And again, by no means would I want TWRA to start modeling the way KY manages their deer regs, but it is interesting to note that the overall hunter success of a KY hunter is very comparable to that of a TN hunter. This is most ironic because KY's gun seasons have less than half as many day's as TN's, and KY has a simple 1-buck limit, whereas we have a 3-buck limit.

Yes, there's more to it than buck limits and how many gun days we have, but I continue to believe a 2-buck limit would be the most ideal for TN. And I wish KY would go to a 2-buck limit as well.

 

[megalomaniac]

yes, you're revisiting a worn out topic,

but yes, the hunting in TN would improve for quality, opportunity, and success for everyone I believe.

 

[Beekeeper]

yes, you're revisiting a worn out topic,

but yes, the hunting in TN would improve for quality, opportunity, and success for everyone I believe.

Just an opinion with nothing to support it.

 

[PickettSFHunter]

You have alot of support here its justt thats it been beat to death. Besides that, we dont need all those brown/downers coming over here and messing up our great QDM forum

 

[landman]

I've done told them that same thing

 

[landman]

TWRA Commissioners that is

 

[richmanbarbeque]

You have alot of support here its justt thats it been beat to death. Besides that, we dont need all those brown/downers coming over here and messing up our great QDM forum

ha!

 

[BSK]

I have no problem with a 2 buck limit. I like the message it sends to hunters. I've always favored a 2 buck limit. On the other hand, I think we are actually beyond the point at which buck limits are driving the quality/age of what bucks hunters choose to shoot.

Since the most restrictive buck limits we've had in modern times were implemented in 1998 (2 buck limit), the buck limits and season dates have been slowly liberalized until they reached their most liberal point this last year. However, over that same time period, the age of harvested bucks has continued to climb. I honestly believe we are at the point that the majority of successful hunters--the hardest-core hunting group and the most successful year after year--are now self-regulating their buck harvest by limiting the age of bucks they choose to kill.

 

[BowGirl]

You have alot of support here its justt thats it been beat to death. Besides that, we dont need all those brown/downers coming over here and messing up our great QDM forum

 

[landman]

BSK
I think there is a large percentage thats falls into the group your talking about, oh there always be the "Number Guys", even if its on slick heads.

I myself look at lots of bucks, wondering did all the work I have done on my place "help" grow that deer or make him a bigger, healthier animal. There has been a lot said about the way deer hunters age:
Any Deer
A Buck
Limit of Bucks every year
Trophy Deer
Manager Roll
Then just enjoying the hunt

 

[8 POINTS OR BETTER]

You have alot of support here its justt thats it been beat to death. Besides that, we dont need all those brown/downers coming over here and messing up our great QDM forum

Amen

 

[redblood]

We will have a 2 buck limit eventually. It is just a matter of time.

 

[Right_Tackle74]

4 Buck limit.

 

[Boone 58]

I agree with outback.....too many hunters are afraid someone else is gonna kill too many so they want a rule that makes them feel secure about the overall effect. If you want a two shoot rule then practice that rule and if possible join a club with your goals in mind...or better yet start one and make your own rules. I will shoot three if the possibility prsents itself on my trophy rules. I have only shot three good bucks one time in all the years i have hunted and i took one of them from private, one from a wma and one from our lease two counties combined to do this feat. what do you think of that strategy?

 

[Boone 58]

Here are the the three i took in one year and i was proud of each of them and they met "my" criteria for taking three in one year.
I could have killed three in each year for the last 10 years had i not practiced restraint....a move i have never regreted.

 

[Football Hunter]

You have alot of support here its justt thats it been beat to death. Besides that, we dont need all those brown/downers coming over here and messing up our great QDM forum

Yep,looks like some are infiltrating

 

[Football Hunter]

Here are the the three i took in one year and i was proud of each of them and they met "my" criteria for taking three in one year.
I could have killed three in each year for the last 10 years had i not practiced restraint....a move i have never regreted.

That bridge in the background must be a good funnel

 

[a retrohillbilly]

I am lucky enough to have 43 acres on which to hunt. When I let them walk, they go around the hill and my "neighbors" from a bordering state hammer them. I still put out mineral, food plots, and let a bunch walk. Just killed one buck last year. Shure is fun seeing bigguns!

 

[Winchester]

I think our buck limits are fine just the way they are now. I really like the opportunity of killing 3 bucks in a season, if the right 3 show up.

 

[megalomaniac]

yes, you're revisiting a worn out topic,

but yes, the hunting in TN would improve for quality, opportunity, and success for everyone I believe.

Just an opinion with nothing to support it.

Sure, it's an 'opinion'. That's exactly why I said, "I believe". The only way to support or disprove my opinion is perform a pre and post hunt census with three bucks, then perform another pre and post hunt census after a 2 buck limit. Which is getting closer to being a reality with thermal imaging, but we're still not quite there yet.

It is also my 'opinion' that you are inciteful and contribute nothing of value to this forum.

 

[Football Hunter]

wish this could be moved to serious forum

 

[Beekeeper]

yes, you're revisiting a worn out topic,

but yes, the hunting in TN would improve for quality, opportunity, and success for everyone I believe.

Just an opinion with nothing to support it.

Sure, it's an 'opinion'. That's exactly why I said, "I believe". The only way to support or disprove my opinion is perform a pre and post hunt census with three bucks, then perform another pre and post hunt census after a 2 buck limit. Which is getting closer to being a reality with thermal imaging, but we're still not quite there yet.

It is also my 'opinion' that you are inciteful and contribute nothing of value to this forum.

Not inciteful. I just want all of the facts. As I have said on many other threads if you can show where a two buck or a one buck limit will improve the health of the deer herd then I would support it. Do not confuse someone that wants all the facts known with someone that is inciteful.

 

[Football Hunter]

yes, you're revisiting a worn out topic,

but yes, the hunting in TN would improve for quality, opportunity, and success for everyone I believe.

Just an opinion with nothing to support it.

Sure, it's an 'opinion'. That's exactly why I said, "I believe". The only way to support or disprove my opinion is perform a pre and post hunt census with three bucks, then perform another pre and post hunt census after a 2 buck limit. Which is getting closer to being a reality with thermal imaging, but we're still not quite there yet.

It is also my 'opinion' that you are inciteful and contribute nothing of value to this forum.

Not inciteful. I just want all of the facts. As I have said on many other threads if you can show where a two buck or a one buck limit will improve the health of the deer herd then I would support it. Do not confuse someone that wants all the facts known with someone that is inciteful.

Ruger,can you move this to the serious forum?PLEASE?!?!?!?!

 

[mathews338]

yes, you're revisiting a worn out topic,

but yes, the hunting in TN would improve for quality, opportunity, and success for everyone I believe.

Just an opinion with nothing to support it.

which is what you gave us :grin:

 

[Beekeeper]

yes, you're revisiting a worn out topic,

but yes, the hunting in TN would improve for quality, opportunity, and success for everyone I believe.

Just an opinion with nothing to support it.

which is what you gave us :grin:

mathews338,

If what I said is opinion rather than fact then disprove it. Show me the studies and observations that support megalomaniac's statement that he says is just his opinion anyway.

 

[TheLBLman]

We will have a 2 buck limit eventually. It is just a matter of time.

I believe likewise.
And it most probably will not be due to a shortage of bucks, but rather a demand by the general public for TWRA to reduce the deer population. When buck limits are decreased, doe harvests are increased (assuming female deer legal game). Some areas have already gone to 1-buck limits and "earn-a-buck" rules mainly just to increase the doe harvest. Why? Because most hunters would rather kill 3 bucks than 3 does.

yes, you're revisiting a worn out topic,

but yes, the hunting in TN would improve for quality, opportunity, and success for everyone I believe.

Just an opinion with nothing to support it.

Beekeeper, you have anything to support your opinion that increasing the buck limit improves quality, opportunity, and success for everyone?

I've seen volumes of data that show reduced buck limits (provided all hunting is "either-sex") improve both herd quality and hunter success (especially if hunter success is measured by how many hunters kill 1 or more deer instead of multiple deer).

Hypothetically and realistically, just imagine if the hunter who posted the above 3 pics had been under a 1-buck limit. He would have taken one buck, still would have been happy, still would have "limited out". Additionally, might have had more motivation to take a doe or more doe to help balance the sex ratios. He also would have left 2 bucks still walking, increasing the opportunity for other hunters, increasing the opportunity that more bucks would carry over to the next hunting year (thus also increasing the opportunity for both himself and other hunters to take a yet older buck next year).

It's not just about me and this year's opportunity.
It's also about everyone's opportunity and next year's opportunity as well.

But I'm glad we don't have a 1-buck limit, as simply believe a 2-buck limit is most ideal and fair to everyone.

 

[mathews338]

yes, you're revisiting a worn out topic,

but yes, the hunting in TN would improve for quality, opportunity, and success for everyone I believe.

Just an opinion with nothing to support it.

Sure, it's an 'opinion'. That's exactly why I said, "I believe". The only way to support or disprove my opinion is perform a pre and post hunt census with three bucks, then perform another pre and post hunt census after a 2 buck limit. Which is getting closer to being a reality with thermal imaging, but we're still not quite there yet.

It is also my 'opinion' that you are inciteful and contribute nothing of value to this forum.

Not inciteful. I just want all of the facts. As I have said on many other threads if you can show where a two buck or a one buck limit will improve the health of the deer herd then I would support it. Do not confuse someone that wants all the facts known with someone that is inciteful.

years ago i shot every buck that walked by which was not that many, then i started being more selective when the regs changed and in the next couple of seasons i saw a huge difference in quantity and quality of bucks but i was still taking three off that property

the biggest change that i have made is that a few years back i started to try and find other places to hunt so i could have 3 different spots to kill three bucks on ( 1 from each )

the difference in my property now that i only take one buck from it is unbelievable compared to when i was taking 3, not saying it is world class but seeing a 8 pointer is common, i know i let at least 7 or 8 walk this last year, not counting what i seen from the yard or while driving down the road

i don't mind the 3 buck limit, i take 3 every year but the above paragraphs are all the proof i need that a 1 or 2 buck limit would help, i know it helped me with my success on the individual properties

herd health seems fine also