Why not a point restriction in TN?

[Guest GunTroll]

I have been hunting deer in MO for the last two years and really enjoy the fact that they have a 4 point minimum on one side. Most of the bucks I have been seeing are mature with nice or potentially nice large racks. I am a horn hunter when it comes to bucks. If I want meat I'll take a doe. I am from SC and when I grew up the policy was and still is "if its brown its down". This is worthless for growing big bucks. Why not want large racked bucks? Has TN ever thought of following this route? I sat in a tree last season and saw 20+ bucks all under the min. I thought this was exciting seeing them all crazed up in the rut! The ones I did see above the min were very nice. Its the norm to harvest 10-12 point bucks where my in-laws live. Would you guys like to have a similar reg? And if not why?

[ShaunM]

The state has gotten better, in the past you could harvest a million bucks it seemed. They have lowered the number of bucks you can take all season long. I think a lot of it has to start with us, we are all the main conservationists. If we do our part we can have nice deer, but until they put something into law that regulates how many points they have to have to be legal then hunters will continue to harvest non mature bucks.

[ShaunM]

I do know several hunting clubs that have something to that effect. I think they have to be 6 points or better to shoot at one club and one has to be a mature buck to shoot.

[Guest redbarron06]

Some counties in TN do have a point restrictions but most dont.

[ShaunM]

Some counties in TN do have a point restrictions but most dont.

That only applies to the

2009 TWRA WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREA BIG GAME QUOTA HUNTS

* ANTLER RESTRICTIONS

Catoosa (all hunts) - Bucks must have at least 4 antler points, 1 inch or longer, on one antler or a 15-inch minimum outside antler spread.

Laurel Hill (all hunts) - Bucks must have at least 5 antler points, 1 inch or longer, on one antler or a 15-inch minimum outside antler

spread.

Presidents Island - Bucks must have at least 9 antler points, 1 inch or longer.

Yuchi (all hunts) - Bucks must have at least 4 antler points, 1 inch or longer, on one antler or a 15-inch minimum outside antler spread.

Edited July 10, 2009 by Hunting101

[timcalhoun]

Well, like my dad always said " there isn't any gravy in the antlers". The point being some folks are not trophy hunters. PA, since they first established licensing, it was legal to take a spike over 3 inches. Then they changed that maybe 5 years ago to 3 or more points on one side. Plenty of big bucks were taken before the new law (and for a while I was a big horn hunter and killed some real nice ones), but if you didn't care about horns you could shoot a younger buck. IMO the hunting was better before but it is mostly due to how the doe tags are done now.

[DaveS]

It's been proven time and time again, that this system does not work. I know for a fact that "minimum" antler length is a much better deal!

Dave

[ShaunM]

If you truely want big bucks on your land then you need a good food source and buck managment, but unless you own a thousand acres or your neighbors help out it will never happen. My cousin lives in Mississippi and he said that the antler restriction does help, well the way he talks about it does.

[Guest GunTroll]

It's been proven time and time again, that this system does not work. I know for a fact that "minimum" antler length is a much better deal!

Dave

Show examples of how this fails. And elaborate on you knowing for a "fact" of the length way being a better deal. Is it the amount of time you/majority of people have available to put in the field that drives this/your take on it? If its about an overpopulation then increase the number of tags. I see that this is a meat vs. horn style of hunting issue and neither side will come to an all agreeing decision. But bigger bucks are more rewarding to take than button bucks or fork horns IMO.

MO has been getting massive deer since instating this reg. TN isn't known to produce large racked deer and this is an option to do that. It could become a destination to hunt for non-residents like IL or Iowa, Wisconsin, MN,etc are. The south is behind on this one. I understand the meat issue but does taste good too.? And I can count points better than guess inches when it comes to that for knowing when and when not to kill.

So please enlighten......

Edited July 10, 2009 by GunTroll

[ShaunM]

We can sit here and debate on this until we turn blue, but unless TN does this and sets other rules to coinside with it we will never know. I do agree that counting points will be easier than making a measurement.

[DaveS]

As an X military game warden and a hunter of modern times, I can tell that chump $^&^$ basket rack 6 or 8 pointers do not contirube a whole lot to the gene pool. Thus point being, 6 point "minimum' means nothing to the gene pool if that 6 pointer aint no bigger that a collie dog. On the other hand I've seen more spike bucks or 4 pointers in the 150lb class..... shoot them! Let the others grow!

[Guest GunTroll]

I'm not for a minimum if counting both sides. 4 on one side is a better way if this ever were to be.

Did you warden at Ft. Campbell? Did you guys have QDM areas as Ft. Stewart does?

And I'll have to ask again....were is the proof that this is a flawed way to go? Links,something scientific,polls of hunters,etc. Not just your qualified (and it is with your background) opinion. Please do tell.......

[memphismason]

Lets make sure this stays civil. Opinions are just that.

Now for my opinion.

I grew up with the theory also of "if its brown it goes down". As I mature I understand that this is not the way you raise big bucks.

That also brings me to say "No matter how long you boil the antlers, you still can't eat them."

I am a meat hunter. It has been 5 years maybe since I killed a buck....and yes it was a "little one" 3 pointer. I am not opposed to shooting small one because I am out there for the food. Largest buck I ever shot was an 8 point, and if I never kill one bigger, I will die a happy man.

I have let a small buck walk if there is a doe with him I can harvest, but if he is alone, I am grilling up some venison latter on that week.

I would also support the decision if TN choose to adopt a point limit. It can only help out the fellow hunters who are "rack hunters".

[ShaunM]

Lets make sure this stays civil. Opinions are just that.

Now for my opinion.

I grew up with the theory also of "if its brown it goes down". As I mature I understand that this is not the way you raise big bucks.

That also brings me to say "No matter how long you boil the antlers, you still can't eat them."

I am a meat hunter. It has been 5 years maybe since I killed a buck....and yes it was a "little one" 3 pointer. I am not opposed to shooting small one because I am out there for the food. Largest buck I ever shot was an 8 point, and if I never kill one bigger, I will die a happy man.

I have let a small buck walk if there is a doe with him I can harvest, but if he is alone, I am grilling up some venison latter on that week.

I would also support the decision if TN choose to adopt a point limit. It can only help out the fellow hunters who are "rack hunters".

These days I try to take good deer but it doesn't have to be a monster. Most places I hunt don't have a lot of "big bucks" but it has descent size bucks 6 to 8 pointers. I love deer meat (best thing since sliced bread) so I usually don't pass on good bucks. Mason you are correct no matter how long you boil the antlers you still can't eat them, thats why I take my share of slick heads.

[gregintenn]

I'd be in favor of such a regulation. It seems to me that the quality of bucks I'm seeing has been getting gradually better since the harvest limit was cut a few years ago. I wouldn't even be opposed to you having to check in a doe before you were allowed to shoot a buck. However, if any such restrictions were placed, I'd like to see them waived for the juvenile hunts.

[memphismason]

I'd be in favor of such a regulation. It seems to me that the quality of bucks I'm seeing has been getting gradually better since the harvest limit was cut a few years ago. I wouldn't even be opposed to you having to check in a doe before you were allowed to shoot a buck. However, if any such restrictions were placed, I'd like to see them waived for the juvenile hunts.

In the magazine "Deer & Deer Hunting" I read an article about Doe harvest, and it made mention of the "Earn-A-Buck" system. It is where a hunter must kill a doe first then he or she will be allowed to kill a buck. It even made mention of being able to check them in at the same time (killing both on one trip). I am not sure if the article said a state was doing this or considering this system.

[ShaunM]

I think Mason there are a couple of states that do this.

[DaveS]

Fort Campbell doea not have QBM areas. I think most places try to achieve a 3 to 1 buck to doe ratio. The ratio for this part of Tennessee is I believe 8 to 1. Proper buck to doe ratio can only be achieved by harvesting multiple does, and scrub bucks that will never amount to anything. I believe (someone tell me if I'm wrong) that deer reach maturaty at about 3 years of age. When they hit maturity, and the buck can/will only produce a "basket rack" for example, He most likely will be putting "bad genes" in the gene pool. That "minimum number of points" is now all over the country side, because he could not be legally harvested. Not really what I want on my land. As example, I shot a spike buck two years ago that had a 3 inch spike on one side and a 5 inch spike on the other. The deer was 41/2 years old according to the biologist running the check station. Again, not what I want in my herd.

Edited July 10, 2009 by wd-40

[ShaunM]

Well I think a lot to do with "bad racks" is what kind of food source they have. I would say a full mature buck would be more around 4 to 4 1/2 years old.

[Guest GunTroll]

Well I think a lot to do with "bad racks" is what kind of food source they have. I would say a full mature buck would be more around 4 to 4 1/2 years old.

I agree with that^!

[DaveS]

We have food plots on our land, with good creek bottoms and awesome hardwood ridges, with good mast every year. Good mature bucks always seem to stay in the area year after year. Large mature bucks is what we want breeding our does, not scrub meat deer. I guess every one has thier own opinion on how to manage thier deer herds. Bottom line is...it's my 167 acres and anyone that I allow to hunt it, is required to harvest a doe or what I call scrub bucks, BEFORE they tag "big boy", or they won't be back. Private land in this part of the state is getting hard to come by. Trophy hunting on Fort Campbell has been declining some over the years, and every piece of farm land in the area is being built up on. The only option for most people is LBL (gun hunting by quota only) and state WMAs. In this part of the state and while hunting on public land and as crowded as they get, you have to pretty much have a "if its brown its down" attitude. You may not get another shot at a deer. Something has to be done statewide to better control/manage the deer herds, or we'll be on a collision course with disastor (sp). But in keeping this thread on subject, I do not, nor would I support a limit of minimum number of points on one side. I have plenty of "nice" bucks on my wall, and not a single rack is edible. I'll take a scrub any day of the week. Besides, who wants to drag a 210lb 12 pointer out of the woods...too much like work! Have a nice day!

Dave

Edited July 11, 2009 by wd-40

[Guest Muttling]

One thing to understand is that TWRA manages different WMAs for different purposes. (Please note, I haven't hunted WMA's in a few years so this info may be quite dated.)

Chuck Swan is the state's high success rate management area. The bow success rate on Chuck Swan is as good as Catoosa's gun success rate. Of course, the deer are far smaller and trophy bucks are very rare.

The Tower Shielding area in Oak Ridge is one of THE trophy hunts in Tennessee. It's bow only and there's usually only 1 hunt per year, but it's all monsters. (Odds of drawing the Tower Shielding hunt are 1 in 10.) Another problem with these bucks is that they have been on the Oak Ridge reservation for many years and it's not uncommon for a trophy to fail the frisk out for radioactive contamination at the checking station.

[ShaunM]

We have food plots on our land, with good creek bottoms and awesome hardwood ridges, with good mast every year. Good mature bucks always seem to stay in the area year after year. Large mature bucks is what we want breeding our does, not scrub meat deer. I guess every one has thier own opinion on how to manage thier deer herds. Bottom line is...it's my 167 acres and anyone that I allow to hunt it, is required to harvest a doe or what I call scrub bucks, BEFORE they tag "big boy", or they won't be back. Private land in this part of the state is getting hard to come by. Trophy hunting on Fort Campbell has been declining some over the years, and every piece of farm land in the area is being built up on. The only option for most people is LBL (gun hunting by quota only) and state WMAs. In this part of the state and while hunting on public land and as crowded as they get, you have to pretty much have a "if its brown its down" attitude. You may not get another shot at a deer. Something has to be done statewide to better control/manage the deer herds, or we'll be on a collision course with disastor (sp). But in keeping this thread on subject, I do not, nor would I support a limit of minimum number of points on one side. I have plenty of "nice" bucks on my wall, and not a single rack is edible. I'll take a scrub any day of the week. Besides, who wants to drag a 210lb 12 pointer out of the woods...too much like work! Have a nice day!

Dave

I think injured deer or mature bucks with small racks should be taken first, that would for sure help out the herds. Your right different people have different views and we know the TWRA does.

[DaveS]

You are right. But something has to be done to cut down on the number of does. TWRA allows 3 a day, which means nothing if hunters don't have access to land to hunt on. We can control those deer on public land, but, the problem lies within private holdings and the "NO Hunting" signs that are nailed to almost every tree in the county. This is where the problems lie in controling deer numbers. It's a fight that goes on year after year. The problem is going to continue to worsen until the state steps in. And I feel putting a point restriction on deer will worsen the population problem.

[rab1961]

Offer this option to TN sportsmen as they purchase their hunting/fishing permits to "vote" on a antler size restriction. I for one would vote yes on an antler size restriction to further enhance the quality of our deer herd. A previous hunting club I belonged to had a restriction we voted, antlers had to be "wider than the deer ears" to harvest.