What do you want me to say? You didn't ask a question, you made a statement...lol.

So how does protecting most bucks until they are 3 1/2 years old improve the health of the herd? Please, do tell!

And by the time there is a die off, the deer will have completely consumed all of the most beneficial plants species, probably all of the 2nd and 3rd most desireable and healthful plant species, leaving only the lease desireable, and lease nutritious. And , yes nature may eventually recover, but not in our, or our kids lifetimes. And not to mention the semi-permanent effects of soil erosion, due to lack of plant life.

PLEASE contact your biologist!!

No, I do not work for TPWD.

I wonder how the heck the remote places in this world still have wildlife without man's help?

Do AR's improve deer health? That is the question. I don't know how many times I can type it. AR's don't prevent die-off's if that's what you're trying to say.

As far as herd health is concerned: proper age structure, proper buck to doe ratios, and better fawn production all contribute to herd health, including better genetic distribution and natural selection through breeding competition (points I mentioned before that you chose to ignore). Herd health and better bucks are not contradictory terms, they pretty much go together. A heard with a bunch of does and a few scattered bucks for breeding is NOT a healthy herd. But go ahead, disagree with the experts at TP&W who have put in countless hours in the field before implementing AR, disagree with the majority of hunters and landowners who support AR and have witnessed the benefits. Try reading a few TP&W publications on the subject, might be of interest to you. Go ahead, spin away. You'll get no more responses from me, life's too short.

Do you know what AR's even are? You keep talking about buck to doe ratios and yet the regulation allows more bucks to be killed than before. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that will not improve the buck to doe ratio. You contradict yourself and so does the regulation. If you don't work for TP&W you should apply, with your logic they would hire you on the spot!

I'll make it easy for you.

Q 1): Do you you actually believe all or most yearlings have at least one unnranched antler and are thus unprotected by ARs so they can grow up?

Q 2): If so, do you have any facts to document that or are you just pulling it out of your nether regions?

Q 3): Do you contend that yearlings are being killed in significantly greater numbers in AR counties than they were before the implementation of ARs?

Q 4:) If so, do you have any facts to document that or are you just pulling it out of your nether regions again.

Same questions with more does being killed if that is also one of your contentions.

Taking a 1 buck County that has too many does and not enough bucks and making it a 2 buck County is supposed to help with the buck to doe ratio. Now I get it! Why didn't I think of that?

You sir, are all hat and no cattle.

In other words, you just spout the same over and over again hoping it will start smelling better.

In remote places, man hasn't removed their natural predators, so the natural balance still exits. In Texas, unless we have a massive human die off, we need to manage the asset. Guess we could eliminate all hunting seasons and bag limits. Then we could see the same result as in the late 19th and early 20th century?

And the answer to your question (that you really don't want an answer to) is:


IT DEPENDS ON THE LOCAL SITUATION!!!!

(your local biologist would be happy to explain it to you, but you already knew that, didn't you)

Never even think of those things. The only thing I have additional there is corn. License is a donation in my mind. Corn no big deal I feed the deer even if I'm not hunting the property.

To say people are griping about AR because of money invested is ridiculous.

In other words, you don't know what you're talking about and would rather sling mud than be proven wrong. Why don't you answer some of the actual questions instead of spouting garbage? How does making a 1 buck county a 2 buck county improve the ratio????

Do any of you Pro AR guys even hunt here? If so, what County?

At least you know it depends on the local situation. TP&W does not even know that. And I'm not talking about on a County level, I'm talking about on a property by property level. All properties within the same County are not the same. There is no reason for me to contact my local biologist, we actually have a great relationship. He also hates AR's just so you know.

Guess what? I don't need to answer any questions at this point.

I gave my thoughts and opinions at the public meetings when ARs were being considered.

Guess what else? They passed and are the law now. So I guess you lost.

I like them. They helped my place tremendously.

You are the one griping about them. So I guess it's on you now to try to get them changed.

Hint: If you plan to be taken seriously, you better have some facts instead of the BS accusations you've been spouting on here.

Good luck to you.....

How old are you? 12? What accusations? Making a 1 buck county a 2 buck county under AR's is a Fact. Allowing the harvest of 2 yearling bucks under AR's is a fact. Grow up dude.

Dang. Now I know how Chital feels.

Interesting topic.

I think the problem is that you are focusing on what the law allows, but not necessarily what is actually taking place in most AR counties. That's probably why NP is asking for harvest info, because he likely suspects that this info will show that the vast majority of hunters in AR counties are not killing 2 "spike" bucks per season. Just because the regulations allow this does not mean most do it.

My take on AR's is that they have dramatically improved the hunting in the areas that I hunt. Before AR's I would usually see one 13"-plus buck every 2-3 years. Now, I typically see at least 6-8 a year. I hunt primarily in Nacogdoches, Shelby, Rusk and Van Zandt counties. My views are shaped by my own personal observations. I don't doubt for a second the observations of folks like Curly, Hoytman, and others on the forum who have reported negative results. It sure sounds like deer are probably being overharvested in some areas, including the areas they hunt. I would like to see TPWD consider modifying the regulations in some ways if there are areas, which there apparently are, where AR's, coupled with additional doe harvests, have led to overharvesting. Based upon everything I have read and heard, I would say those areas represent a distinct minority of the affected areas.

I don't think too much about ARs anymore. I hunt in one of the first counties to implement them and just the thought of contemplating them gives me the squirts . I Will tell you this...80% of these wildlife biologists that you trust so much are biology majors who weren't bright enough to get into medical school. 20% give a s&$@, for the rest it is a job.

Look, I never said AR's were not effective in some places for growing larger antlers. I do not dispute that. I stated before why I don't like them and that is why. If they would exempt kids from the regs I would not say another word about it. AR's do not affect what I harvest now and they have never affected me. 2 of the properties I hunt are MLD 3 so the AR's have no bearing. It's my own property at my home that frustrates me. My son can hunt it for a month every day after school and never see a deer the state says he can shoot. I don't like that and never will. People should just own the fact that they like AR's because they have more chances to shoot deer with large antlers. Stop hiding behind the health of the herd BS. The herd was not unhealthy before.

NP has already stated that he voted for the regs and he has also stated that he didn't even know the regs or what he voted for. He also stated that he didn't care about the extra yearling tag because that was not what he was after anyway. That is my entire point. Everybody does not have the same goals and certain people should not be allowed to force their goals on others. That's it, nothing more. I had a lease in my home county that I got solely for my son to be able to go to and hunt by himself with no AR's. The year after I joined the lease they implemented AR's so I dropped the lease and moved out west. I knew it was not a "trophy" lease when I got it but that was fine, I didn't want a trophy lease. Now the state says if you are going to hunt you have to have a trophy lease.

Anyway, for the 50th time that's where I stand. I know full well how to grow trophy whitetails in East Texas and have been doing it long before they made it mandatory. It was a choice I made and now we no longer have that choice.

Then why do folks get off leases after not seeing much? Or want to jump on one that;s already being managed instead of putting the work in from the ground up?

AR's are awesome. Cure all for all the problems with folks with no self restraint. Just think about all your neighbors that aren't seeing/shooting the same deer you aren't

here's something to ponder? Since county bag limits are based on what TPW feels the county can handle, how do extra MLD permits factor into the equation?

4,000,000

is that the most we've ever had b/c I remember our current AR county not even allowing us to shoot does at one point based on TPW regs...on into the 90s...