TWRA 5 year Management Plan

[Talome13]

I feel like everything is fine the way it is currently. I do realize, with our state, that view is not shared in all regions. I do find it extremely absurd to not allow baiting during season, and the hunting of predators at night.

 

[ImThere]

What if we went to a 1 buck limit nationally....

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

I think I will promote this!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hunt 365]

I didn't see anything in there which suggests a one-buck limit. I think it's commendable they're looking ahead one way or another. But nothing controversial from my read

 

[TX300mag]

It seems to me higher fees, more limited opportunities to kill deer due to less buck tags or antler restrictions and more, complicated regulations is just going to drive the younger generation away from hunting.

Make squirrel hunting great again, that's our only hope.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As I've said many times, I'm thankful squirrels don't have antlers! :D




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[huntinkev]

It seems to me higher fees, more limited opportunities to kill deer due to less buck tags or antler restrictions and more, complicated regulations is just going to drive the younger generation away from hunting.

Make squirrel hunting great again, that's our only hope.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As I've said many times, I'm thankful squirrels don't have antlers! :D




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If they had antlers or other defining characteristics, it would be easier to determine the males so we could put a strict 5 Male limit on squirrels too. How does the squirrel species ever survive without the government strictly managing the kill ratios? [emoji3]

I say that kidding.

I don't have a problem with TWRA managing the herd. I have a problem with making decisions just because an elite group wants it. Limiting the bucks to 1 and/or antler restrictions is just that. It has no biological reasoning. It's just forcing everyone to believe how they want them too. From the pictures I've seen just on here, the TN herd appears fine and healthy. There have been some huge deer killed in this state over the last 8 years. I didn't see the benefit of lowering it to 2 from 3...other than the elites wanted everyone to hunt with their logic of mainly trophy hunting. Lowering it to 1 is just the next phase of their plan to turn everyone into trohpists and horn hunting. And to note, nothing is wrong at all with being a strictly trophy hunter, but there is nothing at all wrong with the hunter that is killing a spike and being happy about it also.

What's wrong is forcing everyone to conform to your line of thinking.


Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Mike Belt]

I'm pretty much satisfied with the regulations as they are with a couple of exceptions. I like the 2 buck limit and would never push for reducing that. I think it's about as fair a compromise between trophy hunters and meat hunters as we 're going to get. If you want to hold out for a "trophy" then you're free to do so. If you want to shoot any buck have at it. Taking 2 smaller bucks out of the population is better than removing 3 or more. If you want freezer meat you're free to take a doe/s in most of the units... which leads me to my exceptions. Over the past few years here in SW Tn there seems to be a drastic decline in our numbers and I'm no where near alone in thinking and observing this. There could be a compilation of several factors but the main contributor is the 3 doe a day regulation. This results in fewer does in the population which in turn reduces the number of fawns; the future of our deer hunting in both sexes. Couple that reduction in birthing with predation and other causes of death and the end result is even fewer fawns surviving.

I have nothing against shooting does. They make up 90% of my freezer meat yearly. I can't really say that I even object to the 3 doe a day limit. I just think it might should be changed to 3 doe a season instead. Take them any time but not more than 3. This move will save a few does not only in a general population but in given areas as well. Most hunters have limited hunting areas and when the does are hammered in those particular areas the future hunting there takes a nose dive. Of course any move like this is subjective. If the population can stand the reduction then go for it. If it can't back off. This leads me to my second exception. I'm all for simplicity except for when just for the sake of it, the resource suffers. I think our Units are too big and may need some fine tuning. I believe in pro-active management rather than re-active. If there's a problem or even a foreseeable problem it needs addressed. I just don't see how that can happen when for the sake of simplicity, so much territory is included in a given area.

 

[jb357]

All I really get out of that so far is they're going to raise license prices. Of course anyone with common sense knew that was coming anyway. Whatever they change will most definitely be nowhere near what actually needs to be done to better the heard. They don't have the resources to collect sufficient data for each county individually to set limits.
Buck limit doesn't matter with no officers on the ground and telecheck. I know of several guys that have killed 4 and 5 bucks this year and done it in years past as well. They either buy another family members tag and check it out in their name or don't check it out at all.

The only changes I wish for and know will likely not happen are unit L doe limits reduced and a change in the weapons seasons. Gun season is entirely too long and needs to be broken up. Something like an early 1-2 week ML season around Halloween a late ML around Thanksgiving, then rifle from the 3rd week in December through season close.

 

[lightsareout]

If they are going to raise license prices I really wish they would get away from this mentality of pay up to bow hunt then pay up to rifle - sure you can shoot a ton of does under that model but I'd rather buy just the tags I need and they are good for any means of harvest. They nickel and dime us much more I'm just going to go non-resident in Kentucky.

 

[EastTNHunter]

The only changes I wish for and know will likely not happen are unit L doe limits reduced and a change in the weapons seasons. Gun season is entirely too long and needs to be broken up. Something like an early 1-2 week ML season around Halloween a late ML around Thanksgiving, then rifle from the 3rd week in December through season close.

I'm vehemently opposed to this idea. I know of several states that have very short rifle seasons, and it can become a non-selective shooting frenzy. I also write this while sitting at home sick, having lost my second straight weekend of hunting. The longer season allows people to spread out their hunting over a longer time period regardless of the reason. If you have ever hunted in the late season you will know that very few people take advantage of late season deer hunting. That is when I usually concentrate my doe harvest (now reduced to 2) on public land. The deer are still very much there, and have not been shot out.

If the season is to be shortened, the best way to do that is to delay the start of bow hunting into later October and leave everything else alone

 

[jlanecr500]

I'm concerned that deer hunting is likely to get overly complicated and expensive. Add to that, the east side die off last year. I'm seriously considering only buying a ML permit next year and spend more time with my grandson squirrel hunting. Maybe even get a squirrel dog for companionship when by myself.

Time changes everything. I'm not a sport hunter who doesn't even eat what he kills like so many are today. My family consumes 100% of what I kill.

 

[rmmonty32]

Seems to me its all a matter of what unit you are in as to your perception of the regs. Where I am you only have one week to get a doe in rifle season. Rifle season is also the only season i hunt as it is the only one I can afford. So i desperately hope they do not shorten it. I hardly see anyone out after first week of rifle season anyway. Point is its all a matter of where u are hunting. No regs fit everywhere

Sent from my SM-S327VL using Tapatalk

 

[ERIC]

I hunt in Jefferson county. We don't have a high deer density or above average buck age structure. I would like to see gun season shortened to 3 weeks/4 weekends, buck limit remain at two per year, but at least one buck with antler restrictions. Maybe 3 or 4 points on one side. Also adjust antlerless harvest to 4 does per season, any weapon. This should allow plenty opportunity for hunters to take several deer, but hopefully increase the number of 3.5 year old bucks. I also like the idea of smaller management units than what we have now. Should enable them to manage more effectively, but might be more confusing.

 

[poorhunter]

I honestly don't care if they let everyone kill 10 bucks a season if they would lower the doe limits. Bucks don't have fawns but 1 buck can breed a dozen does! I see people say their hunting season is over when they kill 2 bucks but personally my season is over when I get enough meat to last til next season in the freezer. I don't care if they are all does or 2 small bucks and a couple does. The more Tn becomes a trophy destination the more expensive the lease prices will get and more crowded the public land will become due to more people not being able to afford leases.

Pretty much my thoughts. I hunt only to fill my freezer. I have few opportunities to hunt, so the first deer I see is the one I shoot. I would love to shoot a big buck and wouldn't pass one up, but that's not my goal anymore.

 

[JeepKuntry]

The biggest change I would like would be to allow shotgun or break action larger caliber during ML. TWRA might want to consider the doe numbers around the EHD areas as well. I hate to take opportunities away, but a short term fix may be needed. Going to 1 buck will cause some on the fence to quit buying licenses. You know how they say the future is our children, well our children have lifetime licenses so they aren't gonna pay all the increased cost. Those will backfire on TWRA.

 

[nabowhunter]

I believe increases in license fees will backfire in general. Kids who are not raised in hunting families probably do not have lifetime license and will not purchase expensive licenses to figure out if they enjoy hunting. A sportsman license cost double what it did when I began hunting. I no longer purchase it and only buy what I need and don't do some things that I used to because I will not pay for something I'm only going to do maybe twice a year. If my old tail is willing to give up outdoor activities how does TWRA expect to get young people with many options of activities to spend money on licenses

And the lifetime licensed kids ( mine include ) aren't spending money for working capitol for TWRA. I'm not sure where the increased funding is going to come from, but feel positive an increase (again) in fees will backfire

 

[BULL MOOSE]

I have not read it, but I do not want a 1 buck limit.

Move all those October quota hunts to November..

 

[TheLBLman]

Just my opinion, but the number of new people getting into hunting has little to do with our license prices, little do to with our buck limits, much less very little to do with our deer season(s).

The number one reason we don't have more youth going into hunting is today's multitude of other activities/entertainment that compete for their time. Same for adults of all ages. Most "youth" (and most adults) waste or blow more money every month on all kinds of stuff, than the current cost of an annual sportsman's license.

I don't have a problem with TWRA managing the herd. I have a problem with making decisions just because an elite group wants it. Limiting the bucks to 1 and/or antler restrictions is just that. It has no biological reasoning. It's just forcing everyone to believe how they want them too. . . . . . .

Never mind that most TWRA decisions have little to do with what any elite group is wanting, never mind TWRA has never pushed for a 1-buck limit, nor antler restrictions, nor is a majority of hunters wanting any such thing.

Too much of this talk is little more than divisive tactics where one type hunter is stirring up crap that doesn't even exist in reality.
Our current deer regs/seasons allow unprecedented great opportunity for the majority of hunters.

What's wrong is forcing everyone to conform to your line of thinking.

Never mind that appears to be exactly what you're doing yourself?

I'm happy with our current 2-buck limit, but the sky wouldn't be falling if it were either 1 or 3.

Ironically, by all appearances, more youth are getting into hunting in the State of Kentucky,
where they have a relatively short deer season, with a 1-buck limit.
Go figure.

Make squirrel hunting great again, that's our only hope.

Seriously, more small-game hunting seems to provide more hope for the future of hunting than the deer hunting that has dominated most the hunting talk the past two or three decades.

Believe it or not, just over 3 decades ago in TN, more people squirrel hunting, spent more time doing it annually, than deer hunted. Most who became avid squirrel hunters became avid lifetime hunters, hunting everything, including deer. In fact, it may be that despite our best efforts in promoting "juvenile" deer hunting, we have done more to harm the future of hunting in general, than to help.

Has there been too much emphasis on deer hunting at the expense of too little emphasis on just hunting in general?

 

[TheLBLman]

As to the licensing costs, they are but one factor in a multitude of factors.
In fact, adjusted for inflation, our TN licensing costs have changed very little over the decades.

Perhaps the bigger problem is people placing more priorities on other things when they decide how they spend their money?
The game of golf has exploded over the past couple decades --- it typically costs the average golfer more to golf regularly than the average hunter to hunt regularly?

Years ago, we didn't spend over $100 monthly on cable TV, we didn't have atv's, we didn't have multiple guns with expensive optics, the list goes on, and on.

Heck, I can't believe how much people spend today on fishing tackle compared to just a couple decades ago.

Or how about just "pleasure" boats?
Been on a big lake lately?
Some of these "pleasure" boaters spend more on boat gas daily than the annual cost of a sportsman's license.
Just a choice they're making.
Many of them used to hunt & fish, but now choose to entertain themselves more with other, often even more expensive, activities.

 

[Bone Collector]

Here we go....lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yep... :roll: :roll: :roll:

 

[TheLBLman]

I have not read it, but I do not want a 1 buck limit.

The reason you have not read it is because TWRA hasn't proposed it,
and is in fact opposed to a 1-buck limit.

However, at some point in the future, strictly for biologically sound deer management,
a 1-buck limit could become necessary to insure an adequate doe kill by hunters.

Most hunters have a "practical" limit of only a couple or three deer annually.
Doesnt matter how many deer the limits, most will not kill more than 2 or 3 deer annually.
But ongoing deer populations are controlled by the doe kill, not the deer kill.

It's therefore plausible a 1-buck limit COULD become necessary to get more hunters to kill a doe and a buck
instead of 2 bucks and 0 doe.

Think about it:
In Unit L, hunters can kill 3 doe a day, but maybe 1% of hunters even kill 3 doe in the entire season?

Most hunters naturally prefer to kill bucks, simply because bucks have antlers,
doesn't matter whether we're talking small bucks or large bucks,
most hunters prefer to kill deer with antlers.
Just the way it is, and it's been this way since Day One.

Most hunters, including most who claim to be "meat" hunters,
consider antlers, any antlers, an additional "trophy" over a deer with no antlers.
Given a chance to shoot a doe or a buck, just note how many "meat" hunters will shoot the buck rather than the doe.
And there's absolutely nothing wrong with this! Unless more doe are needed to be killed.

If most of us will focus on killing both doe & buck (not just bucks)
we'll likely have a 2-buck limit ongoing, and never need worry about a 1-buck limit (in TN).

I'm going hunting, if not for deer, then for ducks, or squirrels, or maybe coyotes.
Deer seasons and limits actually have more effect on my other hunting than my deer hunting.
If deer season was shorter, I'd have more opportunity to hunt other game.
It's all good.

 

[huntinkev]

Just my opinion, but the number of new people getting into hunting has little to do with our license prices, little do to with our buck limits, much less very little to do with our deer season(s).

The number one reason we don't have more youth going into hunting is today's multitude of other activities/entertainment that compete for their time. Same for adults of all ages. Most "youth" (and most adults) waste or blow more money every month on all kinds of stuff, than the current cost of an annual sportsman's license.

I don't have a problem with TWRA managing the herd. I have a problem with making decisions just because an elite group wants it. Limiting the bucks to 1 and/or antler restrictions is just that. It has no biological reasoning. It's just forcing everyone to believe how they want them too. . . . . . .

Never mind that most TWRA decisions have little to do with what any elite group is wanting, never mind TWRA has never pushed for a 1-buck limit, nor antler restrictions, nor is a majority of hunters wanting any such thing.

Too much of this talk is little more than divisive tactics where one type hunter is stirring up crap that doesn't even exist in reality.
Our current deer regs/seasons allow unprecedented great opportunity for the majority of hunters.

What's wrong is forcing everyone to conform to your line of thinking.

Never mind that appears to be exactly what you're doing yourself?

I'm happy with our current 2-buck limit, but the sky wouldn't be falling if it were either 1 or 3.

Ironically, by all appearances, more youth are getting into hunting in the State of Kentucky,
where they have a relatively short deer season, with a 1-buck limit.
Go figure.

Make squirrel hunting great again, that's our only hope.

Seriously, more small-game hunting seems to provide more hope for the future of hunting than the deer hunting that has dominated most the hunting talk the past two or three decades.

Believe it or not, just over 3 decades ago in TN, more people squirrel hunting, spent more time doing it annually, than deer hunted. Most who became avid squirrel hunters became avid lifetime hunters, hunting everything, including deer. In fact, it may be that despite our best efforts in promoting "juvenile" deer hunting, we have done more to harm the future of hunting in general, than to help.

Has there been too much emphasis on deer hunting at the expense of too little emphasis on just hunting in general?

How is allowing more opportunity making people conform to my thinking? I thought more choice allowed for every one to practice their views or beliefs without effecting the other. If you want to shoot 1 great buck or 2 scrub bucks you can.

If some elite group didn't cause the change from 3 to 2 then what did? I thought most of the biologists recomedations were to keep it at 3. I thought it was the commissions choice to change. The same people that wanted the 2 want a 1 buck limit with antler restrictions and a shorter rifle season.

I'm not trying to stir the pot, just stating the way I see it. I'm not very bright and may be wrong.


Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[MUP]

Just a thought on comparing TN with Kentucky...remember, Kentucky allows baiting full out. Careful what some folks wish for, you may get it. :D I do find it ironic that TN gets compared with all states around us with buck limits and shorter seasons and such, but when it comes to allowing baiting, as do these other states, it becomes a mute point. :?

And remember this about the TWRA...they've been bullied by the commission into some of these policy changes of late, as in the two buck limit, remember? TWRA did NOT recommend the limit be restricted any further from the current 3 at the time, but the commission demanded them come back with a plan to reduce the limit to 2. And I don't see any reason why they won't continue the slide and end up with a 1 buck limit, regardless of how many hunters say it won't happen. We're just not in control of this system, and have very little say in the matter, a little yes, but in the end it's negligible. JMO

And for the record, I can't manage the time to go to Nashville and attend the meetings when they have them, especially during the week, but I do put my 2 cents worth in when I can via email. :)

 

[scn]

"The same people that wanted the 2 want a 1 buck limit with antler restrictions and a shorter rifle season. "

IMO, that is not a correct statement. Most of the folks I know that supported the move to 2 will fight any movement to a one buck limit.

And, the implication that TWRA was "bullied" by the Commission in the move just isn't correct. There was a great deal of support throughout the agency for a two buck limit. The decision to stay at a recommendation for three that year was by a narrow vote internally, and the vote swung that way primarily due to the fact that TWRA didn't want to make the change the same year as a license increase. I would have been very surprised not to see a recommendation for two from TWRA the following year. So, at best, the Commission moved up the timetable by one year.

Most of the TWRA field officers were very supportive of the move to two, and, most of the agency biologists were neutral or supportive, including the Chief of Wildlife (from personal conversations). During the TWRA season setting process, the overwhelming response by the public was for the change to two. With the exception of one survey which was "directed" to a specific outcome, the response in surveys overwhelmingly supported the change.

Continued attempts to vilify the TFWC on this issue are bad revisionist history.

 

[MUP]

Well I'm glad to hear that explanation from you Steve. That puts, in a nutshell, what I've been wanting to know since the 2 buck limit was instituted. But, I still do NOT favor restrictions on a resource that , to my knowledge, was still growing and plentiful at the time of implementation. It just didn't make sense to me from a resource pov, and still doesn't to be honest. From what I've been reading lately, there needs to be a 2 DOE limit it seems like now, but that's just from heresay around here and from other hunters I've talked to, and from my own personal observation this season, as I've only seen 4 does all season long so far. It is nice to have some insider knowledge that we can trust, and I appreciate you sharing it.

 

[scn]

Well I'm glad to hear that explanation from you Steve. That puts, in a nutshell, what I've been wanting to know since the 2 buck limit was instituted. But, I still do NOT favor restrictions on a resource that , to my knowledge, was still growing and plentiful at the time of implementation. It just didn't make sense to me from a resource pov, and still doesn't to be honest. From what I've been reading lately, there needs to be a 2 DOE limit it seems like now, but that's just from heresay around here and from other hunters I've talked to, and from my own personal observation this season, as I've only seen 4 does all season long so far. It is nice to have some insider knowledge that we can trust, and I appreciate you sharing it.

Hindsight is always 20-20. While I had been on record as supporting a change back to two for a number of years, after the way things went down and the fallout from the move, I wish it had never been done. It likely personally cost me a friend or two. While I personally prefer the move to two and staying at two, the slight improvements that I think it is bringing and will bring likely weren't worth the ill will that was generated in the process. But, they don't issue crystal balls in making those decisions.

 

[ImThere]

I just don't understand why the vast majority of folks wouldn't want TN managed to become a viable trophy destination.


Bring on the one buck limit, TWRA.

It all ready is a hunters destination. Go hunt any middle Tn public land ml through rifle and see how many trucks are not local to the area.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rtaylor]

For the sake of our hunting future I hope they are making decisions that will entice larger numbers of hunters and not less hunters with larger pocketbooks.

 

[rmmonty32]

Im still fairly new to hunting im general so im seriously just asking. Why do some people think we need more hunters on public land and tn to be a trophy destination?

Sent from my SM-S327VL using Tapatalk

 

[VolsMadness]

I'm 26 and hunt in Wilson County and Sumner County. In my neck of the woods there are tons of deer, but not a ton of mature bucks. I see quite a few 2 1/2 year old bucks, very few 3 1/2 year old bucks, and I have yet to see a 4 1/2 year old buck or older while hunting this year (have 2 on camera from before the season started out of around 50 bucks total). I'd love to see us go to a 1 buck limit in this area. There are so many does that if you are just hunting for meat then there will be countless opportunities to take a mature doe throughout the season.

As for the increased prices of licenses, that's an expectation. Pretty much everything rises in price over the years. I'd pay much more then I currently do for a Sportsman's to be able to do the hunting and fishing that I do throughout the year right now.

 

[huntinkev]

"The same people that wanted the 2 want a 1 buck limit with antler restrictions and a shorter rifle season. "

IMO, that is not a correct statement. Most of the folks I know that supported the move to 2 will fight any movement to a one buck limit.

And, the implication that TWRA was "bullied" by the Commission in the move just isn't correct. There was a great deal of support throughout the agency for a two buck limit. The decision to stay at a recommendation for three that year was by a narrow vote internally, and the vote swung that way primarily due to the fact that TWRA didn't want to make the change the same year as a license increase. I would have been very surprised not to see a recommendation for two from TWRA the following year. So, at best, the Commission moved up the timetable by one year.

Most of the TWRA field officers were very supportive of the move to two, and, most of the agency biologists were neutral or supportive, including the Chief of Wildlife (from personal conversations). During the TWRA season setting process, the overwhelming response by the public was for the change to two. With the exception of one survey which was "directed" to a specific outcome, the response in surveys overwhelmingly supported the change.

Continued attempts to vilify the TFWC on this issue are bad revisionist history.

Thanks for the comments, that clears up a whole lot. I knew TWRA didn't recommend the 2 and I was under the impression the commision went against their recommendations. If what you are saying is true, and I don't doubt you, then it appears I was mostly wrong. I was happy with 3 and I'm still a proponent of 3 bucks but it appears TWRA was almost split in the middle on it.

My comments about the 1 buck limit and shorter rifle seasons were made from most of the comments at that time on here from those that were happy about the reduction. Most of those said they would prefer 1 buck limit and would like the rifle season shorter but 2 bucks were a start. Some, not the majority, even wanted antler restrictions. Those comments were not made about anyone in an official capacity from TWRA or TFWC, just the consensus I got on here from the the posts that were pleased with the buck reduction.

I trust the TWRA to manage the health of the herd. I just don't want to see them start managing it just from a trophy antler perspective to please the out of state hunters and those just hunting for the antlers. In my opinion, a 3 buck limit or even a 2 now, gives those that wish to hunt horns the opportunity to show restraint and wait and it also gives those that just want a deer and are thrilled with a couple of spikes. To me a trophy is all in the eye of the beholder. I have been hunting lately for a few specific bucks that I've seen around that are larger, that's my choice. I have passed several small 8 pointers. I might shoot a spike tomorrow though. Again, that's my choice.

I would like to see the stats on the hunters pushing for a 1 buck limit, shorter rifle season, etc. I would dare say most of them hunt multiple states and have multiple opportunities where as a lot of TN residents depend solely on TN.