tvc184

....... in the eye.

[quote name="piratepride86" post="921735" timestamp="1291002060"] a coyote at 468 yards, a doe at 452 yards and this year an 8 point at 292 yards, all with a .270 and the distances were checked with a rangefinder. [/quote] I hit a 185" Boone and Crockett buck from 673 yards verified while hanging from a tree limb by my legs and shooting upside down. I just didn't want to bring it up.

[quote name="the_dude_abides" post="916745" timestamp="1290464872"] Will this game take place?  What are the chances these two teams can make this happen? Where would the game be played at ( r e l i a n t)? Yes, I know it's early and I don't care.  It's never too early to pad a threads post count. [/quote] It's never good to count the chickens before they hatch and these two eggs died in the incubator.

[quote name="nedfan88" post="920280" timestamp="1290893718"] That's weird you didn't answer my question GO DOGS!!!! [/quote] If you are really a Nederland fan as your screen name indicates, why do you need to ask? When did you become a fan, last week?

How long has it been since Nederland was in the playoffs? How long has it been since Nederland was not in the playoffs? How many times has Nederland been in the playoffs in the last 15 years? Has any team in the Golden Triangle been to the playoffs more in the last 15 years than Nederland?

........ and a lot of people don't know that it exists. So shhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!

Great post from the voice of experience.

That's always been a hot spot though. It can really be as good as any location when the timing is right.

The dog or the greenwing tore your pants off?

They have been running this AR thing for many years with very results. It was put in place because of people not wanting to manage and cull. So don't hold your breath waiting for a change very soon.

I have said my piece but I will leave it with this. I am not going against anyone that says AR's are a better management program than an all inclusive package. The problem is that no matter how much anyone argues with it, a majority of people on leases in east Texas do not follow good management practices. Three years from now the results will be in and a more mature, healthy and bigger deer herd will result. Even those that have managed leases now will benefit (as will mine) because no matter how much you manage your lease or private property, the guy next door is likely not doing it. That is especially true the smaller the land area. For a law as a general rule that applies to everyone, the AR's are simply the best that are easy to understand and easy to follow. In a perfect world, everyone would be selective (including those that hunt public lands) and no laws would be needed at all. This is far from a perfect world and the AR's are the easiest to implement.

Like the other areas that have had AR's in place for a few years, the east Texas hunters will be drug along kicking and screaming. Look at any of the hunting forums from the people that hunt in those areas and ask them if they wish to get away from AR's. The results outstripped their anger at the government telling them what to do. Many of the ones that complained the loudest are now their biggest proponents.

[quote name="westend1" post="911434" timestamp="1290013843"] I guess that's where we disagree.  I don't think it has worked well for a long time.  [/quote] [quote author=bullets13 link=topic=61122.msg911519#msg911519 date=1290021629] if you let private land owners and leasers start defining what a "cull" is on their property, we'll start seeing people "cull" 1 1/2 year old 4 points again. [/quote] You are both correct. I has not worked and it is very obvious. [quote author=LumRaiderFan link=topic=61122.msg911533#msg911533 date=1290022568] [quote author=bullets13 link=topic=61122.msg911519#msg911519 date=1290021629] if you let private land owners and leasers start defining what a "cull" is on their property, we'll start seeing people "cull" 1 1/2 year old 4 points again. [/quote] Over half the counties in Texas do just fine without restrictions.  How do you explain that?  If I applied your logic the bloodthirsty hunting masses would kill everything in sight unless restrained by the antler restrictions. [/quote] Why have more than half the counties in Texas not gone to AR's? Because it was not needed. It is not hard to explain. The majority if hunters and land owners set their own restrictions and they are a lot more strict than any 13" rule by the state. In effect, they are self governing. If you think there is a lot of self governing going on in east Texas then you are playing ostrich and ignoring the truth. That deer that I "culled" was at the discretion of the land owner that is under MLD. The deer was also aged by an on scene biologist as 6.5 years old. Would age be the best restriction and not merely go by antler size? Again and again and again.....  Yes. Age is the issue and not horn size. If I had taken a 2.5 year old deer that was 18" wide and measured 135" then I would be wrong in my opinion. Again and again and again..... AR's are not about the best management tool. It is just the most simple to visibly see and enforce. If you believe that the average hunter can age deer on the hoof with any real degree of accuracy then I have the Brooklyn Bridge in my back yard and it is for sale cheap. If the law was to kill any 3.5 year old deer or older (instead of AR's), then sit back and wait for the violations to come rolling in. You would have people swear that the 110 pound 6 point with a neck like a doe is a mature buck. I have seen just that in person on a trophy bowhunting ranch. Such a rule would be ridiculous and almost a non law. A schmuck can look at a deer and see if his horns are outside of his ears and if he can't clearly see that, not shoot. After reading a few more threads on a bowhunter's forum, I have come to the conclusion that there could be exemptions to the AR's like if a biologist or game warden ages the deer at 4.5 year old or older or if maybe it could be that the deer is 150 pounds or more, then the AR's do not apply. If such a move was made however, I think the AR's should be very strictly enforced with no slack given and very heavy fines issued. If a hunter is going to make the call that a deer is only 12" wide but is obvious a mature deer then he had better be able to back it up or pay dearly. As it is, AR's are not the best management tool, they are the easiest to make a judgment on quickly and the easiest to enforce. They also show results even though they are not the best management possible and yes the results do show quickly. It is not like we are telling people to lay off of the deer and in 20 years we will have a good herd. Again, we could start with all fawns and within 3 years we would have a mature deer herd.

Then why do all of the AR counties all show a fairly quick improvement in their deer herds. It would be folly to ignore the results. Like it or not, this program works (and again, not a perfect solution). We will all benefit from it and soon.

[quote name="LumRaiderFan" post="911139" timestamp="1289965871"] If there are several small acreage landowners [size=11pt][b]that are like minded in their management aproach[/b][/size], like in our area then you can manage several small tracts like a large tract if allowed. Taking inferior deer will improve the herd...that is a fact.  It's a practice that [size=11pt][b]all good leases follow[/b][/size]. [size=11pt][b]The quality of the deer in south Texas is not because they applied the 13" rule in years past.[/b][/size]  I'm not saying it didn't help but the biggest impact is allowing the good quality deer to mature and removing the culls. And even if a deer did manage to reach 13" after 3 1/2 or 4 1/2 years, its not the type of deer I would want in the gene pool.  I'm sure some oppose the rule because they want to kill anything with horns, but that's not my reasons. [/quote] IF they are like minded and IF they were all good leases. Well if they were all like minded, we wouldn't need the new rules. South Texas never needed a 13" rule because they had enough sense to manage their deer herd by the complete package and not some "one rule fits all". The problem is, the state needs to do something and the 13" rule is simply the easiest to do. I have no disagreement at all that the 13" rule is not a great management plan by itself. I don't think anyone including anyone from the state will claim that either. Something had to be done though and it had to be understood and implimented by the masses, not like minded managers. It is put in place for the lowest common denominator and in deer hunting, that can be fairly low. It works and has already been proven to work. Is it the best plan? Not by a long sight. Is it one that works and will improve the herd? You betcha.

Fortunately for you, even though you don't like it and don't agree with it, you will reap the benefit of it. Not liking the rules won't make the rules invalid. I didn't like the 55mph speed limit but there is no doubt that the roads were safer at that speed. Not liking the speed limit doesn't change the facts. The fact is that our east Texas deer herd will be greatly improved in the coming years no matter how much anyone feels about their right to take any animal that they wish is being infringed. A couple of questions for you. With centuries of hunting and even poaching where horns are almost no issue and inferior or cull bucks could be killed at will, why are there still inferior bucks? Also, if you take this cull off of a small acreage, how will that improve the herd which due to the small land area, is living almost assuredly off of the property?

[quote name="LumRaiderFan" post="910878" timestamp="1289944898"] That's my point...some deer will never grow up and will pass on poor genes for years.  A hunting club or private landowner should be able to take out cull bucks if needed IMO.  [size=10pt][b]This rule was set up with unmanaged public land in mind[/b][/size] (and yes there is a lot of public land...go check out a type 2 map book)where nobody has an a long term interest in improving the herd and anything with horns was taken out.  These magical lines between being able to take a cull buck and not being able to take him because of antler restrictions already exist because not all counties have antler restrictions. [/quote] The AR's started years ago in the coastal bend in counties that much like east Texas, did very poor jobs of managing deer. Talk to people in Colorado County (one of the original counties) who almost never saw a mature deer but now kill lots of trophies. While there is a lot of national forest in east Texas, where is all the public land in south Texas where the AR's started? Simply put, the AR's were not put in place for public land. Assuming that was correct, why not simply make that the law? The AR's were put in place because a majority of people on private lands were not following good deer herd management. If they had, the AR's would not have been needed.

[quote name="ST413" post="910813" timestamp="1289939820"] I agree public and private ruled should be the same just feel that maybe their should be an execption, public and private, I the cases I mentioned. I love some of the pics I have seen of deer killed in this area after just one year. Although, I personally haven't seen a deer in enough light that has over 3 pts.  One of [size=10pt][b]the problems where I have hunted in Tyler county has been hunters on private land killing anything and the mentality if I don't take it the neighbors will.[/b][/size] Now this year game wardens have told us the hunting club bordering our land has been ticketed more for small horns than any other area in the county. [/quote] That is where my lease was for the last 7 years. We started voluntarily restricting out deer about 5 years ago. A 120" set of horns was a rarity on the lease and in my years there and up to three years ago, a 118" deer was the best taken (I dropped out this year for personal reasons that had nothing to do with the lease or its members). In the last two years our 11 hunters have taken a 138", a 141" and a couple more this year that may be pushing the high 120's or low 130's. We went from taking a rare buck of any size to taking several good ones in the trophy class. We are not running a trophy lease but who would trade a single 118" deer for several over 130" and in less year?

[quote name="LumRaiderFan" post="910497" timestamp="1289918338"] I agree...if a hunting club or a private landowner wants to take out an inferior deer to improve the herd, they should be able to.  Right now they have no choice but to let poor quality deer walk (that may never reach 13") I see the thought process behind the law but it handcuffs clubs and landowners that are managing for quality deer,. [/quote] Except that the hunting club or private land owner do not own the deer. They belong to the people of the state of Texas even when they are crossing private property. There is very limited public hunting land in Texas. A large majority of the viable hunting land is on a hunting club or private property. Even in areas of public land, many of the deer that live there cross onto private or lease property. If there was such a law allowing the killing of less than the antler restrictions due to private property or a hunting lease, about 95% of the area now covered by the current restrictions would not even apply. It would be a meaningless law. Sorry, this law only applies to you poor folks that can't afford a hunting lease or have the money and simply can't find one in your area. As noted by Bullets, there is already a program in place for many hunting clubs through MLD. Look at it this way. Let's say that a guy hunts on public land in Texas. He is hunting in one of the national forests near a fence line that is on private property. A buck comes out but can't be taken by the public hunter even though he has his young son with him. Then they watch as the deer runs 50 yards and jumps over the fence and is immediately blasted by a hunter and his young son. The reason? The deer crossed the fence line onto "private" property. What is the guy on public property going to tell his son? Sorry but I couldn't afford $500 for a lease this year so the guy a few yards away can kill him but we can't. So it is the same deer in almost the exactly same location but one is on that magical private land or a lease. That is deer management? I don't think so. By the same reasoning, we could catch any fish without regard as far as size or bag limit if we were standing on a private dock. Never mind that the fish could swim a few feet and be where it could only be caught from public waters. Texas fish and game belong to the people of the state and one person has no more right to that game because it happens to cross onto or in front of private property. Let the deer grow up and the kids won't have to "settle" for that baby 4 point to get the "first deer".

[quote name="AFC77" post="909465" timestamp="1289801323"] Not sure if I'm misunderstanding your message there, but no I'm not going to shoot a deer unless I have clear evidence that it is greater than 13". I'm still learning though on how to age deer on the hoof so I can take a more mature deer vs. a younger deer. [/quote] I read a lot of forums and talk to plenty of people and it is like they are eyeballing a few deer that are around 12-13". They are looking to take the deer since he may actually measure the magic number. If it is legal, I have could care less what someone kills on their lease or public land. But the point of the spread is to let deer grow up into mature deer. Hopefully the herd will not be a bunch of 3.5 year olds that just make the restriction width and are taken out. So we will have a bunch of deer in a 2.5 year old herd instead of the 1.5 year old herd now when everything brown is put down. Yes, I am aware that a lot of people actually manage their lease or private property but I don't think that a majority do. If they did, there would be no need for restrictions. The 13" spread is the minimum. That doesn't mean that we should try and search out every deer when he hits 13" and kill him. Looking for mature deer would obviously be a better judge of when to shoot a deer and not his spread. If we let the herd grow up, we will be killing 15-20" spread deer and not looking for the deer that may or may not measure up and kill him to see if he makes it. That is why I think that if a deer is close, you don't kill him. You let him walk and next year he will probably be no debate as to his size. I am not making a moral judgment in what someone kills. If it is legal by state law, go for it. With the current rules in many counties now set at 13", we should be looking for deer that are clearly over that and not debate whether this deer or that deer is 12.5" or 13.25". I see hunting forums and a guy will post a couple of pictures from a game cam asking for opinions if a particular deer is 13" yet. Some will say yes, some will say no. If it is that close..... why even ask? That is my point.

As I have said before, the intent of the rule is not some arbitrary opening to fire a shot but the desire to get a more mature herd. I understand the desire to kill a deer but I went for six years without killing a buck (killed plenty of does however) even without the now required restrictions. Just because a deer might be close to the magical 13", it doesn't mean that a person should risk shooting it. Unless the deer is clearly over 13", it should not be attempted to kill it in order to ground check the deer. It is not like a fish that can be caught and tossed back if he doesn't measure up. Of course, a person can do what he wants and risk it but that is not the way it should be undertaken. We should be looking for clearly mature deer and not just the state mandated inch rule. I wish that the rule was not needed and that people were more management minded. That simply is not the case however. In my opinion.

[quote name="AFC77" post="908751" timestamp="1289756584"] So tvc184, your saying it has happened? What would the outcome be if someone were to get stopped by a TPWD officer and it didnt measure 13" but was outside the ears? Do you have any idea? [/quote] You are completely at the discretion of the game warden or any other officer. In all citations (game warden or any other peace officer) it comes down to officer discretion. If you are stopped speeding, a cop can warn you or give a citation. The same for not coming to a complete stop at a stop sign and so on. A game warden has the same authority. If you have a deer that is 12.8 inches, he can give you a warning, issue a citation or take you to jail and confiscate the deer. You can then be charged a replacement fee for the deer that may run $1,000 where they are basically suing you to restock the herd for the one you killed. It all goes by the game warden and maybe the mood that he is in. From my experience, game wardens use less discretion that other officers. They are put out there for basically one reason and that is to protect the state's fish and game resources. In a way it is not quite like a city cop that catches you going 38 in a 30 mph zone. Okay, slow down....... no harm, no foul. If a game warden catches you with 3 speckled trout in your ice chest that are 14" (1 inch under the limit), there is no putting them back to live another day with a warning. The damage is done. If game wardens are giving warning for close in some areas, great (I guess). I have read some hunting forums from different areas with the restrictions and some game wardens are giving a bit of latitude and in other areas they are holding it to the letter of the law.

[quote name="ST413" post="908931" timestamp="1289770740"] My wife took care of the 3 pt this morning. Dropped it off at the proceessor. Where a biologist aged it at 3.5 yrs. Said it needed to be killed. [/quote] Oh yeah. It is a 3 point and it is not a yearling, it needs to go.

Yep. Wait a couple of more years and watch the results.

Red Stag or Axis = Steaks, roasts and sausage. It doesn't equal pets.