• Help Support TNDeer:

Deer Numbers

Biggun4214 said:
What few permits I issued had a set number of deer allowed by the permit.
Click to expand...
Biggun4214,

I just wanted to make it crystal clear I do not blame those tasked with issuing permits. There are rules in place and I'm sure they are followed. My problem is with those who are making "the rules" within the agency. For an agency that is quite strict about how, when, where their constituents exercise their regulated privileges, I am truly shocked landowner permits are not more closely tracked. No, let me take that back. I'm not shocked, I'm appalled the agency does not require tracking/reporting the potential mass-killing of deer.
 
Lets set who owns the deer and who twra works for straight, twra was set up by the state to control the wildlife, the governor picks the folks on the board that sets all of the rules. twra makes suggestions and they either accept them or disregard, they don't work for us as we didn't elect them, show me the laws stating they have to post every bit of information they acquire, lot of folks want to run the rules and regs and manipulate numbers to back up their theory's, just like the government does. Like I said you all want the farmers to not shoot your deer when in fact you have no deer, the state owns them.
 
mike243 said:
Lets set who owns the deer and who twra works for straight, twra was set up by the state to control the wildlife, the governor picks the folks on the board that sets all of the rules. twra makes suggestions and they either accept them or disregard, they don't work for us as we didn't elect them, show me the laws stating they have to post every bit of information they acquire, lot of folks want to run the rules and regs and manipulate numbers to back up their theory's, just like the government does. Like I said you all want the farmers to not shoot your deer when in fact you have no deer, the state owns them.
Click to expand...
I may be wrong on this point but I believe the residents of the state own the deer. Not the state. If the deer are on your property that does not make the deer your property. I believe there should be some basic accountability to how many of the residents deer you have killed.
 
Well you answered the question as to who owns them,( If the deer are on your property that does not make the deer your property.) they are the states until we shoot them, if they became ours when they trespassed we could have a hunt anytime we wanted.
 
(I believe there should be some basic accountability to how many of the residents deer you have killed.) There is there is a season and a limit, the depredation permits have nothing to do with the set hunts.
 
mike243 said:
Well you answered the question as to who owns them,( If the deer are on your property that does not make the deer your property.) they are the states until we shoot them, if they became ours when they trespassed we could have a hunt anytime we wanted.
Click to expand...
you are wrong! the deer do NOT belong to the state! the deer belong to the people of the state, the twra just regulates
 
mike243 said:
Lets set who owns the deer and who twra works for straight, twra was set up by the state to control the wildlife, the governor picks the folks on the board that sets all of the rules. twra makes suggestions and they either accept them or disregard, they don't work for us as we didn't elect them, show me the laws stating they have to post every bit of information they acquire, lot of folks want to run the rules and regs and manipulate numbers to back up their theory's, just like the government does. Like I said you all want the farmers to not shoot your deer when in fact you have no deer, the state owns them.
Click to expand...
A little history lesson. Because market hunters had wiped out the deer and other game, hunter organizations asked the state to set up a regulatory body to protect the resources through seasons, bag limits and licensing. They also asked to have their purchases of hunting/fishing equipment taxed and this money used to help fund the regulatory agencies (Pittman-Robertson Act of 1937). Hunting organizations in each state asked for and helped design each state's independent wildlife agency. Each of these receives Pittman-Roberts funds, and in some states, like Tennessee, hunters/fishermen completely fund the agency beyond the federal dollars. These agencies work for and are funded by hunters and fishermen/women. The "state" does not own the wildlife. The people of the state own the wildlife collectively, and the agencies just manage that collective property.

Originally, the Wildlife Commission was set up as a "safety net" - a buffer - between what the scientists of the agency believed was best for the wildlife and what hunters/fishermen felt was best. That is why they have the ultimate power of setting regulations. Sadly, the Commission has turned into a "reward" to big doners to the current governor's campaign, and these doners use the Commission to set rules that benefit their own hunting and fishing instead of protecting the needs and wants of the general public. A sad state of affairs. One more proof that "power corrupts."
 
I don't need a history lesson, I see what it has become, nobody has ever asked to be taxed, the feds came up with another way to get $$. I know how it's supposed to work and I see how it isn't, the average hunters have no say and palms are getting greased to get stuff approved. You cant say you own something when you have 0 control of it,
 
mike243 said:
I don't need a history lesson, I see what it has become, nobody has ever asked to be taxed, the feds came up with another way to get $$. I know how it's supposed to work and I see how it isn't, the average hunters have no say and palms are getting greased to get stuff approved. You cant say you own something when you have 0 control of it,
Click to expand...
Actually, yes, hunting organizations ASKED to have their equipment taxed as a means for paying for the wildlife agencies. KNOW YOUR HISTORY!
 
So long the farmers are killing deer that are causing damage to their farms, their way to make a living, I don't care how many they kill or what they do with them. Their families, farms and making a living come way before any hunters wants. Actually I don't even know why there is a need for a depredation permit, if they own the land, they should be able to kill as many as they want.
 
Headhunter said:
So long the farmers are killing deer that are causing damage to their farms, their way to make a living, I don't care how many they kill or what they do with them. Their families, farms and making a living come way before any hunters wants. Actually I don't even know why there is a need for a depredation permit, if they own the land, they should be able to kill as many as they want.
Click to expand...
I understand your sentiment but they own the land not the wildlife.
 
They don't want the wildlife, especially if they are destroying their way to make a living and I agree with them. When it comes to going to court, I support and believe that as long there is proof wildlife damaging their farm, then the farmer wins. Also, if I owned land and had an issue, I would tell them, come get your wildlife. If the wildlife were not taken, then I would take care of the problem and I support the farmers for sure.
 
knightrider said:
But they have to own the problem that someone else's wildlife is causing? The whole you own the land but we tell you what to do on it even if its affecting your living dont add up! SSS
Click to expand...
I'm on a summer shoot permit. I'm not the farmer but I've probably dealt with it much closer than you have. We found a solution that didn't require massive summer slaughter, but it took us working together along side the farmer to make it work.
 
Headhunter said:
Also, if I owned land and had an issue, I would tell them, come get your wildlife. If the wildlife were not taken, then I would take care of the problem and I support the farmers for sure.
Click to expand...
That's fair. I have no issue with the depredation permits AS LONG AS the farmer / landowner actually allows hunting. But in cases where no hunting is allowed but the farmer just wipes them out all summer long I have major issues with that.
 
bowhunterfanatic said:
That's fair. I have no issue with the depredation permits AS LONG AS the farmer / landowner actually allows hunting. But in cases where no hunting is allowed but the farmer just wipes them out all summer long I have major issues with that.
Click to expand...
I disagree with that to. It is his land, he works it, he pays the taxes on it, etc. If he doesn't want anyone to hunt, that is his business. In this crazy SUE happy world we live in, actually don't blame someone for not allowing hunting.
 
bowhunterfanatic said:
I'm on a summer shoot permit. I'm not the farmer but I've probably dealt with it much closer than you have. We found a solution that didn't require massive summer slaughter, but it took us working together along side the farmer to make it work.
Click to expand...
I work with it in some form or fashion nearly everyday
 
Headhunter said:
I disagree with that to. It is his land, he works it, he pays the taxes on it, etc. If he doesn't want anyone to hunt, that is his business. In this crazy SUE happy world we live in, actually don't blame someone for not allowing hunting.
Click to expand...
That's what insurance is for.

I own my own business. I pay taxes it on it. Yadda yadda yadda. That doesn't give me the right to sell narcotics out the back door to insure that I make a good living. IMO, it's a much more nuanced situation than just saying his land, his livelihood, his right to slaughter unlimited number of deer.
 
ChadB said:
Do we know how many deer are killed with deprivation permits, seems like that should be published along with hunting numbers, so we can have true count of our deer population?
Click to expand...
39 known at the bottom of my hill in the last 2 years. Giles county.Every field this guy Farms he rotates crops except this one. Soybeans every year. Sucks!
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Back
Top