Well did it work?

[RobbyW]

Sitting in the stand and the thought of buck limits came to mind. It's been 5 years since the limit was lowered. What are your thoughts now? Have they changed? Do you think it has made a difference? In my little world I do not see any difference, in quality or quantity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hduke86]

To me I haven't noticed a difference but I'm sure there's been pros and cons to it for sure. I know I hunt the same and that's is "if it gets my heart beating faster" then it's good enough for me.

 

[Shed Hunter]

There are a lot more big deer photos being passed around nowadays and definitely more killed. More so than the limit I think it's technology related and hunter mindset related.

With most hunters having cameras and seeing pictures of other people killing big deer it's a lot more common for people to let deer walk. Now do I think the limit is helping? Absolutely. And we should go to the one buck limit

 

[Volbuck777]

I honestly believe it has been a great thing for my neck of the woods. Quality and quantity. I've hunted less the last few years than years prior and seen a lot more big deer. I've killed 3 bucks in the last 2 years here. They were in order an 11 pt 145 inches, a 10 pt 125 inches, and a 9 pt at 125 inches. Before these three bucks I killed good deer but only 1 over 100 inches in 20 years of hunting this county. I've killed other big deer in different counties but based where I am the 2 buck rule has been great. I know y'all are going to be mad at me but I'd take it a step further and put it as 2 bucks, 1 having to be so big such as 15 wide or 4 on one side. I use to hunt Kentucky I don't like the one buck rule.

 

[Matador]

Honestly don't think it has made any difference. Not too many hunters kill two bucks much less three. And if there was gain, CWD will probably wipe it out eventually. There may be a record harvest this year. I think more hunters will take more deer for their freezers. Virus has made life hard for a lot of people.

 

[Jcalder]

Putting my own personal restrictions has done more for the heard and bucks than the buck limits have. Helps when some of the neighbors are doing it as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jcalder]

CWD will probably wipe it out eventually.

very doubtful. Hasn't happened in any other CWD area and those places have had it several years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MUP]

Doubt it has made a difference either way, in my neck of the woods. Poachers still kill their numbers, and I still try to kill one good buck a season, but would kill 2 if I got a chance at a better one than my first one. I'd like to see the biological data I guess instead of hearsay, but deer hunting was already getting better, with more hunters already self imposing their own restrictions, so I'm not sure how any precise measurement of success, or failure, could even be calculated.

 

[BDS05]

I don't feel like it has made a difference.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[megalomaniac]

Statewide, it's made a HUGE difference in recruiting bucks with subpar antlers into older age classes.

The vast majority of the bucks with the best antler genetics are still being killed before maturity.

From a personal standpoint on my farms, I haven't seen much difference since we were already under a self imposed 1 buck limit (plus a cull, if available). Now the difference on my own farms going from a 3 buck limit to a 1 buck limit has been nothing short of incredible.

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

 

[EastTNHunter]

Not on the public properties that I hunt. I think it was already on its way up before then

 

[THE DUKE]

Don't think so it only restricts the honest hunters that know what there doing that can manage there deer herd through knowledge. Every joe blow and his 10 friends are hunting now and have no knowledge about it. That's what's ruining hunting.

 

[BDS05]

Statewide, it's made a HUGE difference

plus a cull

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

What makes you think it has made a huge difference statewide?

What defines a cull?

Do you think all inferior 2.5 y.o. won't be superior 4.5 y.o.?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[ROUGH COUNTRY HUNTER]

a big difference in quantity but not quality on my farm

 

[recurve60#]

Great question. And no I see no difference.

 

[megalomaniac]

Statewide, it's made a HUGE difference

plus a cull

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

What makes you think it has made a huge difference statewide?

What defines a cull?

Do you think all inferior 2.5 y.o. won't be superior 4.5 y.o.?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Look at TWRAs age structure of bucks harvested. Yes, the age structure was increasing since the limit was reduced from 11 to 3 bucks, but it has CONTINUED to improve after reduction in the limits despite most biologists feeling we had reached the point of dimishing returns.

I think 99.9% of inferior 2.5 yos will never become superior 4.5yo. But thats just basic deer biology. Nothing fancy there. Genetics suck, but they are what they are. You cant change them, no matter how old you let that deer get.

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

 

[DRSJ35]

Without age you cannot get a buck to its biggest antler status. We can argue till the moon falls out of the sky. But soil is always brought up and it makes a difference no doubt. I'm positive about the the 2 buck reg. Think it has made a difference. We as selective hunters have also. Years ago it was brown is down for me. But I was a youngster. And I think youngsters should kill whatever they want. That go's for anybody really. If it makes you happy. No matter what we all dream of giant head gear. And I can't see how 2 buck limit doesn't help that situation.

 

[timberjack86]

My dad is a pretty good record keeper and I asked this question to him. He was also in favor for 2 bucks. He said there is no noticable difference in 5 years on our family hunting property.

 

[redblood]

I think it has only been 4 yrs, but i think it has definitely made a difference. Especially in hunter who kill a buck early in the season. They have to really be careful. Most want to hang on to a buck tag to justify still getting up early to go. It saves alot of bucks in my opinion. An example, i passed a 4.5 yr old buck last yr who was mid 130s. The guy who leases the neighbors farm killed him the 1st afternoon. We have. 155" 10 that is very daylight active. He hasnt hunted again because he is afraid he will kill that buck if he sees him, although we suspect he is only 4.5. No doubt the 2 buck limit has saved this buck so far. He is not my primary target buck so i have left him alone. I have no interest in deer until the necks get thick and they are pushed by rut. In 2 weeks, he could be in trouble.

 

[mike243]

I haven't seen any difference here in the east end, there may be pockets where the numbers/size have increased but you don't hear about much , I drive a lot of miles daily and I haven't seen a increase in the numbers, ymmv

 

[Shed Hunter]

Statewide, it's made a HUGE difference

plus a cull

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

What makes you think it has made a huge difference statewide?

What defines a cull?

Do you think all inferior 2.5 y.o. won't be superior 4.5 y.o.?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Look at TWRAs age structure of bucks harvested. Yes, the age structure was increasing since the limit was reduced from 11 to 3 bucks, but it has CONTINUED to improve after reduction in the limits despite most biologists feeling we had reached the point of dimishing returns.

I think 99.9% of inferior 2.5 yos will never become superior 4.5yo. But thats just basic deer biology. Nothing fancy there. Genetics suck, but they are what they are. You cant change them, no matter how old you let that deer get.

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

Agreed. Antler restrictions will only make this worse. Especially the 4 on one side restriction. 99.99% of superior 4.5 year olds had at least 4 on one side at 2.5

 

[tree_ghost]

I don't know if it's from the reg change or the fact that I'm improving at my craft or maybe I just got lucky with the herd this year but I'm in more big mature bucks than ever. I almost tagged out yesterday morning but I'm kinda glad I didn't before the rut. Now come December I may regret saying that....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JCDEERMAN]

I don't know if it's from the reg change or the fact that I'm improving at my craft or maybe I just got lucky with the herd this year but I'm in more big mature bucks than ever. I almost tagged out yesterday morning but I'm kinda glad I didn't before the rut. Now come December I may regret saying that....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

HA that's the only downside to me. I've been on both ends of the spectrum - I've been tagged out by 11/10, and I've also passed on several bucks I would have likely shot if I hadn't already killed one......only to not fill that second tag

 

[JeepKuntry]

No noticeable difference. TBH East Tn needed to drop the antlerless limits to help recovery from ehd a few years ago and they did not.

 

[Headhunter]

Statewide, it's made a HUGE difference

plus a cull

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

What makes you think it has made a huge difference statewide?

What defines a cull?

Do you think all inferior 2.5 y.o. won't be superior 4.5 y.o.?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Look at TWRAs age structure of bucks harvested. Yes, the age structure was increasing since the limit was reduced from 11 to 3 bucks, but it has CONTINUED to improve after reduction in the limits despite most biologists feeling we had reached the point of dimishing returns.

I think 99.9% of inferior 2.5 yos will never become superior 4.5yo. But thats just basic deer biology. Nothing fancy there. Genetics suck, but they are what they are. You cant change them, no matter how old you let that deer get.

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

Sorry, but I believe the TWRA has no clue as to age structure of deer killed. There is basically no data collection on that aspect deer killing in Tennessee. Never has been.

Really, 99.9 percent of 2.5 years olds will never become better bucks. That is wrong also. Way to many areas that "never had any decent bucks, no good genetics, bad soil, etc." and the hunting is restricted, or access is lost completely for whatever reason, and in a few years there are all kinds of bucks, nice ones, trophy bucks, and the occasional giant. True, not every deer will grow into a good deer and most likely many will never be much over the average, but to say 99.9 percent will not be better deer??? That goes against anything I have ever personally seen. Also those areas that suddenly have little or zero hunting pressure and you start seeing great bucks happen for a reason. Deer know when they are or are not being hunted. Just because you don't see better bucks or even get pictures, sure DOES NOT mean they are not there. People that hunt strictly by cameras have no clue what they are missing out on.

 

[JCDEERMAN]

Statewide, it's made a HUGE difference
I think 99.9% of inferior 2.5 yos will never become superior 4.5yo.

Sorry, but I believe the TWRA has no clue as to age structure of deer killed. There is basically no data collection on that aspect deer killing in Tennessee. Never has been.

Really, 99.9 percent of 2.5 years olds will never become better bucks. That is wrong also. Way to many areas that "never had any decent bucks, no good genetics, bad soil, etc." and the hunting is restricted, or access is lost completely for whatever reason, and in a few years there are all kinds of bucks, nice ones, trophy bucks, and the occasional giant. True, not every deer will grow into a good deer and most likely many will never be much over the average, but to say 99.9 percent will not be better deer??? That goes against anything I have ever personally seen. Also those areas that suddenly have little or zero hunting pressure and you start seeing great bucks happen for a reason. Deer know when they are or are not being hunted. Just because you don't see better bucks or even get pictures, sure DOES NOT mean they are not there. People that hunt strictly by cameras have no clue what they are missing out on.

I believe mega is referring to the majority (in red above), not ALL 2.5's. I completely agree with him....and I have seen several superior old bucks that were very inferior as a 2.5 and grew into giants

 

[DRSJ35]

Another thing if it has worked or hasn't worked. My enjoyment of hunting is still just as good. I still hunt the same way. I take what I can eat. Or what a friend or family can eat on. Let the young ones go. I might see him Or her again when next season. And just remember I LIKE BIG BUCKS AND I CANNOT LIE. Lol

 

[catman529]

I haven't seen a difference in my personal observations of public land deer. But instead of shooting 2 good 2 year old bucks, I only shoot 1 and sit on my last tag in case I get a chance at an older buck. So I am more picky because of it. A lot of the gun hunters around here on public aren't picky and shoot to fill the freezer or whatever. So every year there's a good crop of yearlings and really nice 2 year olds and a handful of mature bucks that I can see in soybean fields every summer. But the older age class bucks are hard to come by during season. I think a lot of those upper end 2 year olds get shot regardless of the bag limits. I know I take at least one a year if I get the chance, more than 1 if a bonus buck hunt is involved


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[bowhunterfanatic]

Hard to say for me. I've seen it save numerous bucks' lives, but for one reason or another either I'm not seeing those bucks the next year or they aren't growing very much year to year.

 

[megalomaniac]

JC is right. If a buck is at the bottom 10% of antler scores compared to other bucks his age at 2.5yo, he won't miraculously develop into the top 10% of all the other 4.5 yos a couple years later.

I used to think it was all about nutrition.... but its just ISNT when talking about 150in plus deer in TN. Its ALL about genetics. Some deer have it, MOST dont.

Now if you want to talk about 120 to 130 in deer in TN... ill agree that is all about age and nutrition.

So if your goal is to kill a 150 to 160in deer in TN, you MUST protect the 120in 2.5yo or the 140in 3.5 yos. And pray like heck he dodges your neighbors. And if your standards are set at killing a 150in deer in TN, (even if you are willing to pass the 140in 3.5yos), you are probably going to end up heartbroken and disappointed because you yourself are not likely to pass a 140in deer even if he is only 3.5, and your neighbors sure as heck wont.

To me its more fun just to let ALL bucks reach maturity, then be happy with whatever their genetics allow them to grow.

Oh, a previous poster asked what I define as a 'cull'... a cull is any mature buck (must be at least 4.5yo) with subpar antlers (which on my farm is less than 115 to 120in) that any experienced adult would not choose to shoot as their 1 'buck of choice'. A buck like that is not going to explode into a 150in deer at 5.5yo, so there is no need to keep feeding him, and those big fat 200 to 225lb bucks make a lot of sausage. Oh, a broken rack deer is not a 'cull' on my farms... even if he wouldn't have scored well with both sides intact. Similarly, a deer with misshapen antlers is not a 'cull' unless he's had the same rack for 2 years in a row and is at least 4.5.

The last 2 'culls' i have personally shot were a 5.5 yo 5 pt that scored 116in, and a 5.5 yo 8pt that scored 108in.

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk