Also, I see more "breeders" releasing their captive bred deer on low fence hunting areas. They end up killing them, and since they are now "wild" deer, they qualify for the record books. I know of multiple locations doing this. I take the new B&C and P&Y entries with a grain of salt now. The rules have changed on how record deer can be grown and taken.

Chad the disease deal is a myth.

THAC has been working and certifying well before TPWD.
Scientifically it’s been said THAC is better equipped since disease is what they actually focus on.

Removing TPWD eliminates any turf war and simplifies governing body. It’s been stated that many feel TPWD is too political, but then again what state body isn’t.

But any way THAC has being monitoring and working with breeders in disease issues for years.

I personally believe that TPWS really screwed up when they started giving permits for breeding Deer. Look at what it has come to.

Dang, I thought I already posted this so I hope it wasn't on wrong thread.
I just left TWA Convention and the update they gave on Legislative session just ended was about captive deer. They said brand new law just passed says captive breeder deer can only be released on High Fence ranches. Also another bill passed about the identification standards of released deer. If someone knows better then correct me but I heard it personally in committee meetings and in the TWA Presidents remarks during Director meeting. Also, Dr Dittmar the TPWD head veterinarian gave an hour presentation to update CWD.

I may be wrong on this but I think that releasing deer from a breeding pen onto a LF property was stopped around 2014. I was told that at one time you could release deer from a breeding pen onto a LF or HF property prior to 2014 but if you TTT deer that had to be released onto HF only. Allowing deer from breeding pens to be released onto LF properties was not very smart IMO. I know of a good size LF ranch that is about 7 miles to my SW that released about 60 bred breeding pen does onto their ranch from 2010-2014.
As far as B&C or P&Y, their regulations have been the same on what qualifies as far as I know. Same for TBGA entries as to what is allowed or not allowed, as it should be. For as long as I can remember TBGA never allowed a deer to be entered that had been touch by a human hand when the deer was alive.
Also as far as I can remember the ruling in the OP has not changed as far as who "owns" the deer and what deer breeders can or can't do with deer. They never officially "owned" the deer but were allowed to sell and move them with proper permits since the 80's. They were just allowed to do what they do if they had a permit and followed the rules.

Im not at all sure what the regulations were before but they just made a big deal at the meeting that the law had changed and "breeder deer could NO LONGER be released onto LF". Stx, I don't even know what "TTT" means. As far TBGA, they do not currently allow entries of deer that have been handled by humans but I don't think it has always been that way-not certain.
Also past my bedtime, im worn out from a record day of posting for me.

TBGA has had a clause on the entry form about release or breeder deer not being allowed since the early to mid 90's. You had to sign the score sheet and enter the info about the ranch, size, fence, location etc. I know of a ranch that had a hunter kill a release deer and then entered it in the TBGA in the mid 90's and would have won it had it not been brought to TBGA attention. The landowner did not try to hide that deer was released and the hunter had still entered the deer in the TBGA. The LO never denied anything about the deer. IIRC the TBGA added in to their rules about deer being bred in DMP pens and released onto ranches in the past few years also. They gave a time frame after the last release date that a deer could be then be entered. IMO if a ranch brought in and released TTT deer, breeder deer or used DMP with native genetics from their ranch they should not be allowed to enter deer in TBGA. TBGA should only be about native genetics to each ranch.
TTT is Trap, Transport and Transplant. It has been used for 30 yrs or more now by ranches wanting to "improve" their genetics with deer from a different or better managed ranch. To me it was similar to what TPWD did by going to larger LF ranches in South Texas many many years ago and catching deer, then relocating them to restock other areas of the state that had no or low populations of whitetails.

Is a 223 enough gun for a " breeder " deer ?.......................Joking

Legitimate question.


In most cases, yes. Unless they’d have been fed double down.


Then you will need a .338

It’s a shame these questions have to be asked, at all.

I think if you could get a map of all the deer breeders ranches in Texas you would be shocked!
There are deer that are going to be turned loose or get out on their own, and the native populations are going to be diluted when those deer breed with the native deer.
It's been going on for years, so TBGA is saying they want people to sign a score sheet saying their deer was not a breeder buck?

An example is all the escaped exotics running around in the hill country on ranches where they were never stocked.
I hunt on a LF ranch a ways down the road from a breeder ranch, and have seen a doe with an ear tag running with native does, so she will get bred by a native buck I would assume.
No hunter who kills a trophy buck on a non breeder ranch is going to know if his buck was not an offspring of one of those breeders from years back, and the genie is already out of the bottle.

I think the reason this was breeders wanting compensation when "their" deer were destroyed by TPWD when CWD was present. Breeders aren't compensated for deer that are euthanized because the state owns them. If they are private property, the state would have to pay for the euthanized deer.

Actually other way around, Proven fact that you simply can not influence genetics with a few deer, native genetics will swamp them out pretty quick. Mathematically its even pretty easy to prove.

Perfect a example is genetic swamping via DPM pen were one buck is breeding 10+ Does and you are trying to swamp the herd with a certain genetic, even then if you stop it slowly reverts back to native.

Another example is trying to cull 8pt genetic out of a herd. Stop culling and you have 8pts again

The idea that a gene will just go away is absurd. Genes don't work that way.

That buck may breed two does in one year, it’s genetics’ will not stick around for years.... and that native doe immediately contribute to washing down the genetics on his first generation off spring...

Again is simple mathematics. It doesn’t take many generations for those traits to be irrelevant. Same reason The practice of DMP is so popular vs just live release. You would have to live release more deer then what’s currently present. Most live release are for that deer @ an older age not it’s offspring for same reason offspring wash down


It’s already proven science, There isn’t a specific 200 inch gene, it’s a plethora of genes..

I never was good at math!....

Took me a while to realize it too, biologist wrote it on paper except he used one blk bull, 4 Charolais bulls and 10 Charolais cows.

I had a Texas biologist tell me that the genetics to make 200"+ deer are out there. She said that you can get Hill Country deer and put them in a pen and feed them only protein and you will be surprised what you get.
It would seem that a 400" pen raised buck that is released is only going to generate as big of deer as the food source will allow, regardless of his genetics. It isn't like you suddenly have a few generations of monster deer.
I see post from guys loving the fact that some HF deer got out and might breed with the natives. Due to the wash down of genes that Bobo explained and lack of a high protein diet, I think these deer will not affect the native herd at all.
Monster deer are as much a product of their food source as they are of genetics.

Interesting

TP&W Code Sec.1.011 (which mandates all wild animals are public property and which I have been citing on here for years) is in direct conflict with the entire deer breeding industry and the laws created to support that industry. You can’t have it both ways. Either the deer belong to the public or they don’t. Yet here we are.

Bad laws lead to strained court decisions.

The reason it is easy to see both sides is because there are laws supporting both sides - laws which are in direct conflict.

But what about dominant vs recessive genes? It's not necessarily a direct reflection of the numbers. The more dominant gene is more likely to be passed on.

How can you tell which one is the dominant gene that will be passed on? You probably don't know until it's been passed on.

That's why you can't completely cull out a gene, and when you stop culling it returns. It's a dominant gene.

Definitely more than just simple math!

Got people that flunked biology trying to tell us that you can breed out a gene.

If it is the dominant gene it's more likely to be passed on. That is a scientific fact!

That’s my point, native genetics are the expressed genes that have stood for years.

200” isn’t a singular gene, now brows might be. If you want to argue 200” is a set of dominate traits then we wouldn’t have the prevalence of 120” 8 pets @ maturity, and a single release would yield multiple 200” equivalents of the sire

Take a homozygous blk bull and put him in with a bunch of charolais cows and bulls, remove him, so how many generations does it take to get the blk back out of the herd? Depending on his sired %, Not many usually three per generation

If you want to continue to argue you can change genetics with a deer or even a few that probably won’t breed more then 2-3 does each a year, knock your self out, again it’s been shown time and time again it waters down... not up.

Well well let’s get to name calling.... because you think you are right. Show me where 200” native set of genes is expressed more so then any other ....look forward to this one....and explain why singular release are the least use /preferred method compared to gene swamping with DPM for herd improvement.