• Help Support TNDeer:

I’ll just leave this here

AT Hiker said:
Then simply don't shoot a deer with antlers 🙄.
I'm the proud holder of a permit that allows me and a handful of other approved hunters to take 50 deer within the city limits. It's purely a population reduction hunt and instead of paying someone to do it, the city had the genius idea to allow us to do it for free. Only stipulation is we cannot keep antlers. If we choose not to keep the meat it goes to a food bank….I can't think of a more honorable way to honor the life of a free ranging animal.
Click to expand...
Still less opportunities for others. And doesn't "fix" the problem of shooting "pet" deer, and having them run onto adjacent properties before expiring.
 
AT Hiker said:
Then simply don't shoot a deer with antlers 🙄.
I'm the proud holder of a permit that allows me and a handful of other approved hunters to take 50 deer within the city limits. It's purely a population reduction hunt and instead of paying someone to do it, the city had the genius idea to allow us to do it for free. Only stipulation is we cannot keep antlers. If we choose not to keep the meat it goes to a food bank….I can't think of a more honorable way to honor the life of a free ranging animal.
batten_down said:
Still less opportunities for others. And doesn't "fix" the problem of shooting "pet" deer, and having them run onto adjacent properties before expiring.
Click to expand...

IMO, you both make very valid points.

My point is we hunters are in the minority, and it's in our own best interest to be cognizant of the property rights of non-hunters, even their thoughts about hunters.

My first question to every hunter is, "Just why do you deer hunt?"
And, it there a difference in killing semi-tame deer and hunting truly wild deer?

Is is your "dream hunt" to be "hunting" semi-tame to very tame deer in a subdivision?
Be honest. This is just killing some deer more than it's "hunting"?

Non-hunters generally don't have a problem with deer hunting for the primary purposes of deer population control and obtaining free-range organic meat. Many non-hunters will actually welcome you to hunt their property for these reason.

But the non-hunters' views change dramatically when they believe your primary purpose for deer hunting is about "trophy" antlers. The abuses of urban "trophy buck" hunters is quickly turning many non-hunters into anti-hunters. And more and more, the non-hunters equate poachers & hunters as one of the same.

So please don't take me wrong, as I'm not totally opposed to urban deer hunting, even if your primary purpose is for trophy antlers. Just ask in advance for deer retrieving permission from the adjoining property owners, be super careful to only take the highest probability shots, and maybe just don't do it if you cannot receive that in advance retrieval permission from those adjoining property owners.

We should have a goal of making more non-hunters our friends than our enemies? We should respect their private property rights just as we expect any of them to respect ours? You do that, and you'll actually have many private property owners begging you to come kill some of "their" deer and give them some venison, and even help you get advance retrieval permission from adjoining property owners.

What I'm opposed to is losing more important, higher quality, wild deer hunting privileges when too many non-hunters are transitioned into anti-hunters, and those antis "influence" more voting non-hunters to decrease our more quality hunting opportunities on public lands, as well as adversely effecting statewide hunting regs on private lands.

The general public really cares little if we lose significant hunting opportunities nationwide.
Other forms of "outdoor recreation" have been quickly displacing wild deer hunting.

IMO, glorifying urban "trophy buck" killing puts us on a faster track to losing far more quality hunting opportunities than a few of us ever gain via urban buck killing.
 
I am not allowed to use archery equipment on this permit, gun only. This greatly reduces the chances of deer leaving the property.
We also have to call dispatch to let them know we are going out, in case someone calls in that they heard gun shots.

It's either let us do it for free or pay someone and let the meat likely go to waste. It's a no brainer.

In my case, the only opportunity taken away is for the city to spend money on a "sniper".
 
batten_down said:
So in other words, take away opportunities for local folks who have done the right thing for who knows how long, because of the actions of a few bad apples, and open the door to tax-payer funded population controls?
Click to expand...
I will ABSOLUTELY support doe-only hunting in urban areas. It WILL control the population in about 5 years (if anyone actually participates).
 
AT Hiker said:
Then simply don't shoot a deer with antlers 🙄.
I'm the proud holder of a permit that allows me and a handful of other approved hunters to take 50 deer within the city limits. It's purely a population reduction hunt and instead of paying someone to do it, the city had the genius idea to allow us to do it for free. Only stipulation is we cannot keep antlers. If we choose not to keep the meat it goes to a food bank….I can't think of a more honorable way to honor the life of a free ranging animal.
Click to expand...
How many deer have you killed under your permit?
 
I live in East Nashville. Just a couple thoughts:

1) Obviously it's a liberal area, but in my experience there's a lot more tolerance for/interest in hunting (especially meat hunting) than you'd think. I've helped a couple guys that I met over here kill and butcher their first deer, and even most guys who don't want to try it out are sort of interested in what it's like.

2) There are very, very few parcels over here where I'd be confident that I could put a deer down with an arrow or bolt without it crossing property lines. And the deer—even the mature bucks—are not very wary of people.

3) if the scenario in #2 was the kind of hunting I did, I doubt any of these people would be interested or supportive.

I'm definitely not saying urban liberal non-hunters should determine how people hunt. But this kind of urban hunting, which is the first way some of these people see hunting up close, is about the last way I'd want to introduce someone to the practice.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top