Where Do We Stand Now?

[348Winchester]

Considering the EHD outbreak back in '07, where does the herd in Tennessee stand in terms of recovery?

 

[landman]

a few GW's have told me some places still haven't recovered,
and maybe never will...

I know parts of Trigg Co KY haven't and pockets of Stewart and Houston Co's in TN

 

[MickThompson]

I would argue that 2007 was, in fact a recovery. The herd "recovered" when it declined to what the land can actually support in many places, and the deer should be (and is, based on my observations) healthier for it. I have hunted units A, B, and L, before, during, and after, and really haven't seen a decline in sightings or success. I can say that I killed some a couple of really fatty does last season (in mzl and gun) with a negligible acorn crop.

 

[BSK]

I agree with a lot of what Mick wrote. I think the '07 die-off was a Godsend in some areas, especially in parts of Unit L. I was growing very concerned about the deer density I was seeing in '05 and '06.

I also believe the continued use of the liberal doe limits in Unit L has prevented the deer herds from rebuilding to those unhealthy pre-EHD levels, and the deer herd is healthier because of that.

 

[CAW]

I agree with BSK. In Lincoln County (Part of unit L) things have just gotten better and better. The numbers may be down a bit, but the quality is as good as anywhere in the country.

 

[landman]

I agree with BSK. In Lincoln County (Part of unit L) things have just gotten better and better. The numbers may be down a bit, but the quality is as good as anywhere in the country.

CAW Congrats to you if you killed those
or either of those deer
Something to be proud of

 

[CAW]

No, I did not kill any of these bucks. The top and bottom ones came off of one of my farms in 2012 (before I bought it). The rest came from the surrounding area. I have several more pics from the last few years, but these are good examples that the quality in Lincoln County is pretty dang good.

 

[Boll Weevil]

CAW,
Any chance you could you make a little room in your PM bucket?

BW

 

[CAW]

CAW,
Any chance you could you make a little room in your PM bucket?

BW

Done.

 

[BSK]

I have several more pics from the last few years, but these are good examples that the quality in Lincoln County is pretty dang good.

Lincoln County has come on strong in the last few years as one of the new "trophy" hotspots of TN. I think it has a lot to do with the good mix of agriculture and hilly timber in the county--great food to grow antlers, yet also a lot of hilly woods to hide in and grow old.

 

[CAW]

I have several more pics from the last few years, but these are good examples that the quality in Lincoln County is pretty dang good.

Lincoln County has come on strong in the last few years as one of the new "trophy" hotspots of TN. I think it has a lot to do with the good mix of agriculture and hilly timber in the county--great food to grow antlers, yet also a lot of hilly woods to hide in and grow old.

I agree with all of that. I also think it has a lot to do with hunter behavior in recent years. More and more people are being selective with what they kill. I have lots of friends who hunt in Lincoln County and I can't think of a single one who took 3 bucks last year. Most guys are letting the young deer walk and trying to take 3 1/2 and older deer. Sure, there are still a lot of young deer being taken throughout the county, but overall it's working out very well.

 

[BSK]

We can talk regulation all we want, but it is VOLUNTARY hunter restraint that will change local buck age structures most dramatically.

I've seen regulation only produce nominal changes. Yet I've seen widespread changes in hunter attitude produce dramatic results.

 

[CAW]

Oh no, don't get me wrong - I am not talking about or suggesting that we change the buck limits for any county or for the state. I am saying that many hunters in my area are actually voluntarily changing their goals when it comes to killing bucks.

And yes, you are correct - Judging by the bucks that have been taken over the last several years, it is paying off for most folks. It's amazing what happens with a little restraint and people working towards a common goal.

 

[Shed Hunter]

I have no idea about the numbers, but the quality of deer in TN since I've been running cameras (2010) is seemingly above what most people think. 130" deer are not rare at all anymore in the areas I hunt. In fact 140" deer aren't hard to come by. This is in areas that are not high in food plots and AG with no management either. Almost every 4.5+ buck I've photographed makes it to be a 130. If we had the management ethic of many other states, TN could easily turn into a trophy state. I would like to see that, but I understand that the majority of TN hunters prefer a simpler way of hunting.

 

[Boll Weevil]

130" deer are not rare at all anymore in the areas I hunt.

Agree with you 100%, sir (although average statewide harvest data may indicate otherwise).

 

[BSK]

I have no idea about the numbers, but the quality of deer in TN since I've been running cameras (2010) is seemingly above what most people think. 130" deer are not rare at all anymore in the areas I hunt. In fact 140" deer aren't hard to come by. This is in areas that are not high in food plots and AG with no management either. Almost every 4.5+ buck I've photographed makes it to be a 130.

Much depends on what part of the state you are in. Some Middle and far West TN counties have average antler scores 10-15 inches higher than same-age bucks from the Highland Rim counties, and are even higher than that for same-age bucks in the eastern mountain counties. For instance, some eastern mountain counties average around 100-105 gross for mature bucks.

But when you say you don't see any mature bucks under 130", I STRONGLY suspect you are mis-identifying smaller-antlered mature bucks as being younger than they really are. Even on the best habitat of the trophy-managed properties of IL some mature bucks are going to be well under 130".

If we had the management ethic of many other states, TN could easily turn into a trophy state.

You do realize we are killing about the same percentage of mature bucks in the total buck harvest as in the "trophy" states, right? And that our mature buck harvests per square mile actually exceed some of the trophy states?

 

[TheLBLman]

We can talk regulation all we want, but it is VOLUNTARY hunter restraint that will change local buck age structures most dramatically.

I agree.

I've seen regulation only produce nominal changes. Yet I've seen widespread changes in hunter attitude produce dramatic results.

But have also seen regulation change produce dramatic changes. Much of the hunter attitude changes have been preceded by regulation changes. A prime example was when TN reduced our statewide buck limit from 11 to 2 back in 1998.

We can discuss and argue whether the chicken came before the egg, but I believe we would have seen much less change in hunter behavior if TWRA had kept the buck limit anywhere above three bucks.

While the 2-buck limit only lasted one year (followed by a somewhat complicated "2 or 3" buck limit for many years), the regulatory impact greatly helped in changing hunter mindset to harvest more does and fewer yearling bucks. And with more yearling bucks becoming 2 1/2's the next year, this encouraged a growing number of hunters to begin passing up more 2 1/2-yr-old bucks than would have happened if we still had a higher buck limit.

Similarly, since our statewide TN buck limit increased to a simple 3 annually (from the "2 or 3"), haven't we seen an increase in yearling buck harvests?

 

[Shed Hunter]

I have no idea about the numbers, but the quality of deer in TN since I've been running cameras (2010) is seemingly above what most people think. 130" deer are not rare at all anymore in the areas I hunt. In fact 140" deer aren't hard to come by. This is in areas that are not high in food plots and AG with no management either. Almost every 4.5+ buck I've photographed makes it to be a 130.

Much depends on what part of the state you are in. Some Middle and far West TN counties have average antler scores 10-15 inches higher than same-age bucks from the Highland Rim counties, and are even higher than that for same-age bucks in the eastern mountain counties. For instance, some eastern mountain counties average around 100-105 gross for mature bucks.

But when you say you don't see any mature bucks under 130", I STRONGLY suspect you are mis-identifying smaller-antlered mature bucks as being younger than they really are. Even on the best habitat of the trophy-managed properties of IL some mature bucks are going to be well under 130".

If we had the management ethic of many other states, TN could easily turn into a trophy state.

You do realize we are killing about the same percentage of mature bucks in the total buck harvest as in the "trophy" states, right? And that our mature buck harvests per square mile actually exceed some of the trophy states?

"Many" not "any." Probably about 50% of bucks I've photographed at a mature age reached 130" in their lifetime. Maybe this has been just a complete blessing from God or maybe everybody shoots the smaller antlered deer where I hunt because I never see them after 3.5, but nonetheless, I can assure you a 130" deer is not even close to rare. Is it rare to see one killed?.. pretty much.

On the state harvest comparison-Yes, you got me there, but there is always room for improvement :)

 

[BSK]

Probably about 50% of bucks I've photographed at a mature age reached 130" in their lifetime.

I can certainly live with that. If 50% are above 130, that means 50% are below 130, and your average is going to be in the low 130s. I've certainly seen properties in TN with averages like that, a few even a bit higher. I've seen several properties that produce multiple 150+ bucks each year.

But the one strange thing is the extraordinarily low number of bucks making it to 170. In the best habitat regions of KY, if you get a bunch of bucks to maturity, you're going to see an occasional buck in the 170s. Yet no matter the age structure on even the best lands I've monitored in TN, a 170+ is exceptionally rare. I think I've seen only 2 on camera.

 

[BSK]

Wes,

I have absolutely no doubt that the buck limit change in 1998 played a role in BEGINNING a change in hunter attitudes. But I believe education, from before that point until now, has played a much bigger role in the results we see today.

I also believe the poor economy and rapidly increasing trend of hunting for meat (sustainable living) is driving the slight increases in yearling buck harvests we've seen in the last 2-3 years.

 

[Boll Weevil]

But the one strange thing is the extraordinarily low number of bucks making it to 170.

I've noticed this as well. Here in SW TN there seem to be a very good number of low to mid 60s type deer, lots of 40-50s hit the ground every year, and 3 year olds in that 120-130" range actually get passes on many places in this region.

I don't know the answer to this, but would a 2 buck limit actually change that appreciably? Is it reasonable to belive that more 170s would be produced by amending the limit?

 

[Shed Hunter]

But the one strange thing is the extraordinarily low number of bucks making it to 170.

I've noticed this as well. Here in SW TN there seem to be a very good number of low to mid 60s type deer, lots of 40-50s hit the ground every year, and 3 year olds in that 120-130" range actually get passes on many places in this region.

I don't know the answer to this, but would a 2 buck limit actually change that appreciably? Is it reasonable to belive that more 170s would be produced by amending the limit?

I can't promise anything, but I seriously doubt it. A good amount of the bucks I see mature make it to 130, but none hit 170. In fact, only 2 have made it to around the 160" mark. That includes a buck that was a 150 at 3.5. It seems that most deer in TN (where I observe anyways) follow a strange growth trend. They don't grow quite like trophy regions. Instead, they might be excitingly larger than average for a young age but will usually never explode into a booner. Why? I wish I knew. It sure is fun to watch them grow over the years though. Even if they get smaller it is an intriguing event to watch.

 

[landman]

Probably about 50% of bucks I've photographed at a mature age reached 130" in their lifetime.

I can certainly live with that. If 50% are above 130, that means 50% are below 130, and your average is going to be in the low 130s. I've certainly seen properties in TN with averages like that, a few even a bit higher. I've seen several properties that produce multiple 150+ bucks each year.

But the one strange thing is the extraordinarily low number of bucks making it to 170. In the best habitat regions of KY, if you get a bunch of bucks to maturity, you're going to see an occasional buck in the 170s. Yet no matter the age structure on even the best lands I've monitored in TN, a 170+ is exceptionally rare. I think I've seen only 2 on camera.

BSK so right about KY, but just in Todd Co. this year 2 bucks were killed opening weekend, one about both less than 10 miles for the TN line, both just were entered into the B&C Books
one I think was just over 200' one high 220"s

 

[landman]

But the one strange thing is the extraordinarily low number of bucks making it to 170.

I've noticed this as well. Here in SW TN there seem to be a very good number of low to mid 60s type deer, lots of 40-50s hit the ground every year, and 3 year olds in that 120-130" range actually get passes on many places in this region.

I don't know the answer to this, but would a 2 buck limit actually change that appreciably? Is it reasonable to belive that more 170s would be produced by amending the limit?

I can't promise anything, but I seriously doubt it. A good amount of the bucks I see mature make it to 130, but none hit 170. In fact, only 2 have made it to around the 160" mark. That includes a buck that was a 150 at 3.5. It seems that most deer in TN (where I observe anyways) follow a strange growth trend. They don't grow quite like trophy regions. Instead, they might be excitingly larger than average for a young age but will usually never explode into a booner. Why? I wish I knew. It sure is fun to watch them grow over the years though. Even if they get smaller it is an intriguing event to watch.

There is a big difference in the size of bucks killed in Fayette
Co Tn than counties a short distance away, I don't think you can even compare all of west tn to each other county in w tn

I think we see pockets in the state, each region and even in pockets of counties, Trigg co KY has this
I think BSK has touched on this before

 

[BSK]

I don't know the answer to this, but would a 2 buck limit actually change that appreciably? Is it reasonable to belive that more 170s would be produced by amending the limit?

The whole idea behind low buck limits is to create more older bucks. Yet many location in TN have equal buck age structures to the trophy states, with 10-15% of all living bucks being mature. Yet still few 170+ bucks in those parts of TN. More older bucks isn't the answer to having more 170+ bucks.

 

[BSK]

It seems that most deer in TN (where I observe anyways) follow a strange growth trend. They don't grow quite like trophy regions. Instead, they might be excitingly larger than average for a young age but will usually never explode into a booner. Why?

Soil and habitat.

 

[Boll Weevil]

More older bucks isn't the answer to having more 170+ bucks.

Thanks BSK; didn't seem like this would be a likely outcome.

 

[TheLBLman]

The whole idea behind low buck limits is to create more older bucks. Yet many location in TN have equal buck age structures to the trophy states, with 10-15% of all living bucks being mature. Yet still few 170+ bucks in those parts of TN. More older bucks isn't the answer to having more 170+ bucks.

I agree with this, but believe there is still much more to the story.

Part of the reason we don't see more truly top-end antlered mature bucks in TN is because (I believe) we have a greater issue of antler high-grading of our largest antlered younger bucks. How & Why? In large part because we have a 3-buck limit coupled with a gun hunting season roughly TWICE as many days as neighboring Kentucky.

Having twice as many days to gun hunt coupled with a higher buck limit is a very mixed blessing. When a top-end large antlered 2 1/2 or 3 1/2-yr old buck is simply seen once, TN hunters can aggressively pursue that particular buck with twice the days (with a gun), and then not think twice about the shooting of a particular 1st or 2nd buck ending their buck hunting for the year. By comparison, the more avid Kentucky hunters seem much more selective about their 1st buck, and much less likely to choose to harvest a top-end 2 1/2-yr-old old.

In discussions with many accomplished hunters who hunt both TN & KY, I've noted that a high percentage of them will allow a 110-120-class 2 1/2 to walk in KY, but will quickly shoot a 110-120-class 2 1/2 in TN. Therein lies much of the answer to why TN doesn't produce more 170-plus bucks, at least relatively speaking compared to say bordering Georgia and Kentucky --- it has much to do with regulations and hunter attitudes.

Meanwhile, I see many 3 1/2-yr-old bucks in TN (on QDM type areas) repeatedly passed up by multiple hunters in the same year simply because their antlers are below average for a 3 1/2. So, yes, while we have good numbers of mature bucks, the ones we have are mainly those with the poorest antler genetics that have survived to maturity. This issue of fewer larger antlered younger bucks being the survivors to maturity appears to be much more the case here in TN than over the line in KY or many of those other "big buck" states.

It's not just about the soil. It's also much about specifically WHICH of the 2 1/2 and 3 1/2 cohorts survive to maturity, and the survivors seem to be mainly those small-antlered bucks that more hunters enjoyed letting walk, even when these bucks were 3 1/2 and sometimes older. Those young bucks with the most potential to become 170-plus mature bucks are the very bucks in TN most likely to be killed as 1 1/2's or 2 1/2's, with relatively few surviving to even 3 1/2.

Yep, we probably have more mature bucks in TN than are found in KY.

 

[BowGuy84]

Haven't been on here in awhile...but I do like these threads.

Having been from TN and now hunting KY and IN exclusively I can attest to the forced change I went through based on regulations.

We still see high grading in KY but IMO it is exercised more on the 130+" bucks than the 115-125" 2.5s. More topend 2.5s getting to 3.5 means they get that much smarter and have a greater chance to grow into 4.5 and 5.5 top of the bell curve (which a 160-170 is anywhere) deer.

 

[TheLBLman]

Having been from TN and now hunting KY and IN exclusively I can attest to the forced change I went through based on regulations.

You, my friend, understand what I've been talking about.

We still see high grading in KY . . . .

Antler high-grading is going to happen almost everywhere deer are hunted. It's just that certain regulations may allow for it to happen more or less. Compared to TN, it seems to happen a little less in Georgia, and a lot less in Kentucky. Perhaps it happens a lot more in Alabama.

The only way to essentially eliminate antler high-grading would be to simply take no bucks before maturity (which is a minimum age of 4 1/2), i.e. aged-based criteria rather than antler-based criteria.