• Help Support TNDeer:

TWRA meeting today

Considering the reported deer harvest in TN is more bucks being killed than does, I'm wondering how much of the worry over doe-overharvest - especially in western and middle TN - is warranted. Personally, I'm far more concerned about the use of depredation permits by farmers than I am how many does hunters are allowed. Sure doesn't seem like hunters are killing that many does. We/the TWRA have to come up with a better solution to deer eating crops than just giving farmers carte blanche to kill every deer in their fields.

Same here.

It seems like hunters would rather farmers indiscriminately slaughter dozens of deer at night (bucks and does) than have their neighbor kill some does during hunting season.
 
Considering the reported deer harvest in TN is more bucks being killed than does, I'm wondering how much of the worry over doe-overharvest - especially in western and middle TN - is warranted. Personally, I'm far more concerned about the use of depredation permits by farmers than I am how many does hunters are allowed. Sure doesn't seem like hunters are killing that many does. We/the TWRA have to come up with a better solution to deer eating crops than just giving farmers carte blanche to kill every deer in their fields.
finally! oddly enough, I AGREE with you on this one!
 
Permit numbers, wondering just how many property's and acreage to get a idea if the herd is being impacted a lot or what, 3-4 property's per county or 30-40
 
Nobody can say it's making much of a difference without some kind of information besides hunters saying the farmers are killing all of them, the game wardens should have a good idea. if there wasn't any farming there wouldn't be so many deer.
 
Nobody can say it's making much of a difference without some kind of information besides hunters saying the farmers are killing all of them, the game wardens should have a good idea. if there wasn't any farming there wouldn't be so many deer.
So what about counties in Unit L that don't grow hardly anything such as Wilson? I'd be surprised if we were any less than 90-something % cattle for all the ag land.
 
From a CWD perspective alone. Are the suggestions from yesterday's meeting
an attempt to align TN with other states CWD management approach?
All the extra incentives are gone except for earn a buck and replacement deer for testing positive. No extended season, extra week after archery and early rifle opportunities , extra buck. All these things were going to slow the spread.

Is going backwards an admission of a failed strategy that did not contain CWD? Maybe TWRA is trying to follow some other states guidelines. CWD transportation rules reduced the harvest in counties without processors. There was a lot of complaining about slaughtering all the older bucks, the extra bucks, even the letters that went out to land owners after the season about thinning out the deer.

A friend in Benton Co, Mississippi just south of Grand Junction said CWD isn't really even mentioned anymore down there. Lots of panic a few years ago when it first appeared though.
 
So what about counties in Unit L that don't grow hardly anything such as Wilson? I'd be surprised if we were any less than 90-something % cattle for all the ag land.
So what about the cattle farmers? are they getting permits also?
 
So what about the cattle farmers? are they getting permits also?
You said the crops were why there were so many deer and with all the talk about too many depradation permits legitimizing what I'll heretofore refer to as the "Slay 3 a day" antlerless rule, what's the justification for the counties in Unit L or that will be added if the map is approved that don't have hardly any Ag land except for cattle? Wilson county can't be the only one.
 
Last edited:
Nobody can say it's making much of a difference without some kind of information besides hunters saying the farmers are killing all of them, the game wardens should have a good idea. if there wasn't any farming there wouldn't be so many deer.

I don't think they do. There were over 40 deer found in a relative of mine's field last August. He wouldn't have known himself had it not been for the buzzards.

Besides, it's common practice to gut shoot so they run out of the fields before dying. They guys shooting don't even know, really.

Now imagine hunting that area (as my daughter did) and finding a lone deer track on a logging road. It's easy to blame 3/day limits if you have no clue what happened three months earlier.
 
Well it's hard to put a herd reduction down in a whole county due to a few farms culling a bunch. I would think it would affect a radis of some sort depending on the roads and towns ect. Some farms might affect a lot more than others. If the numbers are way off there might be other things affecting them. If they shot 40 deer in 1 field there is no way that number is normal population, I've read where folks see 30-50 deer a day and think that's normal, over here a couple 3 deer a day is average and a big day might be 6 lol. I'm sure BSK knows what a healthy herd number per square mile should be.
 
There will be a huge number of birds killed in a 2-bird county
but "checked in" in a 3-bird county, and many of them will be the very 1st bird
the shooter checks in for the year, not his 3rd.

This means the statewide harvest data becomes even less valuable
because it becomes more skewed.

TWRA has near zero ability to sort out the lawless from the lawful,
so again, just another edict that overall may do more harm than good.
Dishonest shooters get rewarded, honest hunters get punished.
That's the reality.

There is no perfect plan.
But when we went to the very simple, convenient on-line and/or tele-check
(instead of the physical in-person check stations),
we lost the practical ability to more accurately managed by county
and by units.

The current check-in system is rife for abuse,
but at least with a simple statewide limit,
regardless the number, there is little incentive
to falsely claim the county (or unit) of kill.

I don't see doing away with the current internet/tele-check system.
So for that reason, it becomes more imperative than ever
for TWRA to keep game laws as simple and uniform as possible "statewide".
Hoorah ...I concur and have said it before !!
 
I don't think they do. There were over 40 deer found in a relative of mine's field last August. He wouldn't have known himself had it not been for the buzzards.

Besides, it's common practice to gut shoot so they run out of the fields before dying. They guys shooting don't even know, really.

Now imagine hunting that area (as my daughter did) and finding a lone deer track on a logging road. It's easy to blame 3/day limits if you have no clue what happened three months earlier.
22 killed this past summer next to my land in giles. 17 the year before. guy keeps planting beans on the same field year after year which isn't common farming practice. Now instead of seeing 8 or 10 deer a hunt I see 2 or 3. Sucks!
 
From a CWD perspective alone. Are the suggestions from yesterday's meeting
an attempt to align TN with other states CWD management approach?
All the extra incentives are gone except for earn a buck and replacement deer for testing positive. No extended season, extra week after archery and early rifle opportunities , extra buck. All these things were going to slow the spread.

Is going backwards an admission of a failed strategy that did not contain CWD? Maybe TWRA is trying to follow some other states guidelines. CWD transportation rules reduced the harvest in counties without processors. There was a lot of complaining about slaughtering all the older bucks, the extra bucks, even the letters that went out to land owners after the season about thinning out the deer.

A friend in Benton Co, Mississippi just south of Grand Junction said CWD isn't really even mentioned anymore down there. Lots of panic a few years ago when it first appeared though.
CWD must be a concern to some in Mississippi. I just read in the Clarion Ledger that Mississippi is considering a statewide baiting ban to try and curtail the spread.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top