You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics!

[landman]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

I hate to tell you list but this is not for this fall...... 2014-2015

This deer season would be 2015-2016....

Year to date 53,884 Hunters have killed 1 buck

 

[Deerbuster1996]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

I hate to tell you list but this is not for this fall...... 2014-2015

This deer season would be 2015-2016....

Year to date 53,884 Hunters have killed 1 buck

[emoji23]

 

[Os2 Outdoors]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

To even further skew the numbers, I've got no less than 5 people in my family that have lifetime or sportsman license that DO NOT deer hunt. But are registered deer hunters lol

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[TX300mag]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

I would love to think that the 1/3 limit reduction would translate into a 1/3 buck kill reduction, but the truth is a LOT of hunters were already passing up bucks before the government forced them to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Biggun4214]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

Also consider that some of the hunters that killed bucks whether it was their 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc or combination thereof were bonus bucks to start with.

 

[Good time Charlie]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

I hate to tell you list but this is not for this fall...... 2014-2015

This deer season would be 2015-2016....

Year to date 53,884 Hunters have killed 1 buck

If this is true than the numbers are useless.

 

[wsm]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

:?

 

[jimm37870]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

Do you all not know that it doesn't make any difference what the numbers
are. It is now in the hands of politicians not biologists. The biologists
had set the limits at what they determined they should be. When politics
is involved the last thing they look at is factual data.

 

[Deer Assassin]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

I would love to think that the 1/3 limit reduction would translate into a 1/3 buck kill reduction, but the truth is a LOT of hunters were already passing up bucks before the government forced them to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

amen


3% of total bucks killed is nothing

the 2 buck rule will not have no more of an affect in increasing antler size that what was trending in that direction due to increase doe kill in unit L

it screws the east tn guys big time

 

[Deer Assassin]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

Do you all not know that it doesn't make any difference what the numbers
are. It is now in the hands of politicians not biologists. The biologists
had set the limits at what they determined they should be. When politics
is involved the last thing they look at is factual data.

ditto

 

[WG Taxidermist]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

Do you all not know that it doesn't make any difference what the numbers
are. It is now in the hands of politicians not biologists. The biologists
had set the limits at what they determined they should be. When politics
is involved the last thing they look at is factual data.

100% correct!

Sent from somewhere in the sticks using Tapatalk

 

[JeepKuntry]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

As DA mentioned, it further screws Unit B. TWRA decided to screw us over by starting the late season doe days on a Monday. Years past we gotten to hunt the weekend before as well. Factor in the higher temps and weather (which I know cannot be predicted) late season numbers in our area are sure to be down. I've only got a hunt or two left in me.

 

[mathews338]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

I would love to think that the 1/3 limit reduction would translate into a 1/3 buck kill reduction, but the truth is a LOT of hunters were already passing up bucks before the government forced them to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

amen


3% of total bucks killed is nothing

the 2 buck rule will not have no more of an affect in increasing antler size that what was trending in that direction due to increase doe kill in unit L

it screws the east tn guys big time

sounds to me like the east tn guys badly need lower limits. They may not like that but if it meant having more deer in the future to hunt then it needs to happen. I love deer meat but I would rather eat a ham sandwich if it helped the deer herd. You would think they would be the ones really wanting the lower limits but it almost seems just the opposite sometimes from some of the posts I see.

 

[landman]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

I hate to tell you list but this is not for this fall...... 2014-2015

This deer season would be 2015-2016....

Year to date 53,884 Hunters have killed 1 buck

If this is true than the numbers are useless.

It's True, he posted the DEER REPORT from last year, the data he has is from a 3 Buck Limit Season........

DEER REPORT comes out usually in March. Guess that's why we can't handle it. :bash:

 

[mathews338]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

I hate to tell you list but this is not for this fall...... 2014-2015

This deer season would be 2015-2016....

Year to date 53,884 Hunters have killed 1 buck

If this is true than the numbers are useless.

It's True, he posted the DEER REPORT from last year, the data he has is from a 3 Buck Limit Season........

DEER REPORT comes out usually in March. Guess that's why we can't handle it. :bash:

he knows, he said in the OP that it was from 2014.

 

[farmin68]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

Do you all not know that it doesn't make any difference what the numbers
are. It is now in the hands of politicians not biologists. The biologists
had set the limits at what they determined they should be. When politics
is involved the last thing they look at is factual data.

.
Very well said, and very true.

The game has changed and not for the better. What special interest is next to play political games with wildlife management?

Archery hunters wanting more days exclusive to themselves?
The one buck only crowd?
Antler restrictions?
The one week centerfire season advocates?
No centerfire rifles?
Waterfowlers wanting management areas closed to everything but waterfowl?
.
Some of you may laugh, but anything is possible now. And everyone of the things I listed already has someone who is in favor of it becoming regulation.

 

[AT Hiker]

The government is not forcing anyone to pass up any legal deer. They limit how many you can kill but not what you pass up. Just as the limit last year was three, you could only kill three but "pass" whatever/how-many you wanted.

I sorta see the logic you use but can we also say that the government is not dictating which deer we shoot, only how many? Its been asked many times already and some say the new limit has affected what they shoot and some say it hasnt, for me, and a lot others, it hasnt.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AT Hiker]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

Docpoco,

Its obvious a few of us didnt read the original thread fully or skipped over the part where you mentioned the date and explained the 3 buck representation in harvest data.

Anyways, I suggest a nice pretty little graph with all the bells and whistles. No reason other than they are nice to look at[emoji14]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Boone 58]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

Interesting! I am hearing a lot of talk about folks just not reporting bucks so as to kill what they want, when they want. I honestly believe in Wayne county that many are not turned in at all. I am even finding bucks with antlers left on them but the meat taken...............really?..............who in the crap kills a young buck just for meat in unit L when you can kill 3 does per day! I shake my head that that ridiculous mentality.

 

[stik]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

I would love to think that the 1/3 limit reduction would translate into a 1/3 buck kill reduction, but the truth is a LOT of hunters were already passing up bucks before the government forced them to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

amen


3% of total bucks killed is nothing

the 2 buck rule will not have no more of an affect in increasing antler size that what was trending in that direction due to increase doe kill in unit L

it screws the east tn guys big time

sounds to me like the east tn guys badly need lower limits. They may not like that but if it meant having more deer in the future to hunt then it needs to happen. I love deer meat but I would rather eat a ham sandwich if it helped the deer herd. You would think they would be the ones really wanting the lower limits but it almost seems just the opposite sometimes from some of the posts I see.

to grow a population, you protect the does and shoot the bucks. shooting bucks does little to nothing to affect the population.

 

[SelphLogging]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

I would love to think that the 1/3 limit reduction would translate into a 1/3 buck kill reduction, but the truth is a LOT of hunters were already passing up bucks before the government forced them to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

amen


3% of total bucks killed is nothing

the 2 buck rule will not have no more of an affect in increasing antler size that what was trending in that direction due to increase doe kill in unit L

it screws the east tn guys big time

1/3 reduction is not 3%, it's 33% and that's significant.

 

[SelphLogging]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

Also, heres a really interesting breakdown of size/weight/age.

3,068 bucks examined by TWRA;

By far most bucks were 1.5 or 2.5. Over 80% of bucks harvested are 1.5 or 2.5 in this sample size.

What is surprising is that more 2.5 yo's were seen than 1.5s. It makes sense though, as a 2.5 yo is much easier to kill than a mature buck, but often has appealing antlers.

434 were 3.5 (this is good, as it represents over 10% of harvest and its also where the biggest jump in meaningful antler gains were made from 2.5 to 3.5)

123 were 4.5 or older. This represents less than 1% of buck harvests. This is a number that could stand to improve imo.[/quote]

To start with, I've been around when TWRA has been collecting age data, and it's a little comical sometimes. I'm sure not at all places, but the ones I've been observing, interns/college students were doing the aging, and sometimes weren't even opening the jaw of the deer. So, I take those stats with a grain of salt. There are some very reputable guys doing it in TWRA, so some are done properly.

Your math is off in regards to the percentage of 4.5s and older in relation to the aged deer. 123 is not less than 1% of 3,068. It's 4.01%.

 

[TX300mag]

The government is not forcing anyone to pass up any legal deer. They limit how many you can kill but not what you pass up. Just as the limit last year was three, you could only kill three but "pass" whatever/how-many you wanted.

I sorta see the logic you use but can we also say that the government is not dictating which deer we shoot, only how many? Its been asked many times already and some say the new limit has affected what they shoot and some say it hasnt, for me, and a lot others, it hasnt.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm just going by all of the "Look at how many bucks the limit saved this year" threads that began just after season started.

I can relate. When I first started hunting the Texas hill country in 1992 it felt great to pass up legal bucks-some of them nice-sort of a rite of passage. I wanted to tell people about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[diamond hunter]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

I say unit L goes to a 1 buck as well as bait and get it over with.I don't care what happens in the other units.

 

[tree_ghost]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

Interesting! I am hearing a lot of talk about folks just not reporting bucks so as to kill what they want, when they want. I honestly believe in Wayne county that many are not turned in at all. I am even finding bucks with antlers left on them but the meat taken...............really?..............who in the crap kills a young buck just for meat in unit L when you can kill 3 does per day! I shake my head that that ridiculous mentality.

Yup, I can say with a 90% certainty that I could kill a doe at least one sit out of three on any piece of land in unit L... They are everywhere!!! And that's with archery gear


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tree_ghost]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

^^^good point doc!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AT Hiker]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

I'm just going by all of the "Look at how many bucks the limit saved this year" threads that began just after season started.

I can relate. When I first started hunting the Texas hill country in 1992 it felt great to pass up legal bucks-some of them nice-sort of a rite of passage. I wanted to tell people about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Gotcha. I often wonder if these threads are legit or created to ruffle feathers or a little bit of both.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Deer Assassin]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

bingo

 

[TboneD]

Docpoco,

Its obvious a few of us didnt read the original thread fully or skipped over the part where you mentioned the date and explained the 3 buck representation in harvest data.

Anyways, I suggest a nice pretty little graph with all the bells and whistles. No reason other than they are nice to look at[emoji14]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's what I don't like about social media. Folks are too slow to READ and too fast to POST in response to a thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[farmin68]

Re: You want the statistics? You can't handle the statistics

I would love to think that the 1/3 limit reduction would translate into a 1/3 buck kill reduction, but the truth is a LOT of hunters were already passing up bucks before the government forced them to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

amen


3% of total bucks killed is nothing

the 2 buck rule will not have no more of an affect in increasing antler size that what was trending in that direction due to increase doe kill in unit L

it screws the east tn guys big time

1/3 reduction is not 3%, it's 33% and that's significant.

.
Selphi, I think you Might have missed part of the discussion. The total number of bucks killed by hunters who bagged more than two bucks only amounted to 3% of the total buck harvest. That is insignificant.
.
The limit was reduced by 1/3 (33%). That is significant in many ways, but not a significant factor in the total number of bucks killed.