My response from TPWD on AR restrictions...

I just commented that I would like to know some study data on AR and also why they implemented the 13" rule instead of the 4 point one side rule etc...I wasn't bashing at all, I just said that I feel maybe the AR should be revised somewhat...Here is TPWDs' response:

I appreciate your comments. One thing this is unique about the Texas antler-restriction regulation is that it is designed to eliminate the risk of high-grading. Point restrictions certainly could result in high grading. For example, a rule allowing only bucks with 4 points on a side to be killed is allowing for the harvest of the best yearlings and protection of the poorest-quality yearlings. The reason for this is that there is no correlation between age and number of points. However, there is a very strong correlation between age and inside spread. That's one reason why we went with the spread restriction. Another unique aspect of the Texas model is the “slot limit” (i.e., it allows for the harvest of deer with at least one unbranched antler) - further reducing the risk of high grading.



Nonetheless, this regulation does indeed protect some mature bucks with narrow spreads, which is an unintended consequence. But the good news is that only 4% of all mature bucks in these Resource Management Units (RMUs) have an inside spread less than 13" wide (based on data from thousands of harvested bucks). And long-term research has shown us that the bucks with at least one unbranched antler are more likely to be those narrow-racked bucks at maturity. So it would behoove hunters to take advantage of that second buck tag (for spikes and 3-pointers).



I put together a webpage that covers this in more detail, although I admit it needs to be updated:



http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/huntwild/wild/game_management/deer/antler_restrictions/



I remember quite well the public scoping meetings we had in 31 counties when we were considering expansion to the antler-restriction regulation. In almost every public meeting there was quite a bit of discussion on exempting youth hunters. Attendees (hunters and landowners) were passionate in their opinions on this subject, but I was surprised to see which side most leaned towards. There were usually 1-2 attendees who would ask if we could exempt youth from the antler-restriction regulation. But before we had a chance to respond, many other attendees (attendance from all 31 meetings exceeded 1,100) jumped in with their dissenting opinions – with their children at their sides. One of the more common arguments was, “My child has been hunting with me for 3-4 years and he’s never even seen a buck. I want him to understand the need for this regulation – and follow the same rules – so there will be a day when he finally sees bucks when he goes hunting. I realize that the first bucks he sees may be too small to shoot, but at least he’ll be seeing some bucks.” Another argument was, “I appreciate the extra opportunity my kids have with the early youth-only season – giving them the first shot if a legal buck is anywhere around. They have been seeing only young bucks and they take pride in letting them walk another year. But then they get discouraged when a young buck leaves and a gun shot is heard several minutes later in that direction. I want my kids to be able to have more opportunity during that youth-only weekend – by having more mature bucks around.” Another fairly common argument was, “It seems a little hypocritical that I teach my kids the importance of letting most bucks mature, but then I say, ‘It’s alright – go ahead and shoot that young one.’” Please know that I am not placing judgment one way or another on any of these statements. I just thought I’d share some of this with you as I was surprised to hear these comments from so many attendees.



Although we are encouraged with our youth-hunting-participation data in the antler-restriction counties (especially in those counties that have been under this regulation more than 2 years), we will most definitely continue to consider other approaches to increase hunting opportunity provided that such does not have a negative impact on the resource.



Thanks again for your input. Feel free to call Alan Cain, White-tailed Deer Program Leader (830-569-1119), if you would like to discuss this further.



Mitch Lockwood

Big Game Program Director

TPWD

I am going to ask him about this... I have never seen or heard that before; would love to see those stats...

I was pleasently surprised to get a response back in such a timely manner. He makes a good argument, but I would still like to see something changed for youth to have a better shot at getting a deer with horns...

He hit the nail on the head.

ARs and the American Way. 2 winners in my book.

I think that is part of the problem with deer hunting in certain counties, everybody wants to get something with horns no matter if it is a yearling or a mature deer. Thus the need for ARs to improve the overall quality and age structure of the herd for everyone. In my opinon letting youth shoot any buck they see in AR counties is like taking 3 steps forward followed by one step backwards. This is for the long term benefit of the herd and it is easy to get blinded by instant gratification of shooting the first thing with hard horns that walks out. What is wrong with youth shooting does? I promise it will get them just as hooked on hunting, most of the time it is adults who get caught up in the size of deer and the kids are just purely excited to be out there and shoot a deer.

At least it was a good mannered response with some useful information rather than just saying "that's the way it is".

Only problem with my kids shooting a doe is that in our county that can only be done during archery season, and I don't feel we have enough does at our place to justify letting them take one with their crossbow...

But your right and you make a good point about it. I want my kids first buck to be a small one so they don't get spoiled on the larger horns right off the bat.

I read where the Texas deer population currently stands at over 4 million. Sounds to me like our herds are healthy and thriving and I would be willing to bet ARs had very little to do with that. IMO

ARs aren't in every county, Curly.

They're needed some places. They're not in others.

But they're awesome everywhere.

I like his response. I also like what AR are doing in my area. The camera does not lie. Through AR management we are getting far more large mature bucks than 3 years ago. 3 years ago we had none. Those on my lease who raised hell the first year have got over it and now have no comment or one 70 year old man said "just didn't think it would work but look at that".

u know as well as i do, that looking at the total population number in no way means there is a healthy heard....

That's okay, John Wayne, Davey Crockett and Daniel Boone hated ARs.......anyone who says otherwise is fabricating huge untruths!

ARs have nothing to do with deer quantity it's about quality of bucks.

I used to be against ARs and still have some problem with them but last weekend I saw proof first hand of why ARs are needed. Now I am more in agreement with them.

And just how many of those deer have you heard have been in need of going to a doctor? Answer me that! That's what I thought......healthy!

That pretty much sums up ARs alright.

lol, everyone knows that curly.... it doesnt matter how much they tell u its the age structure, it is BUCK QUALITY.....of course with more age comes more quality....

the sooner u accept the fact that they lied to u about the age thing and start understanding that they only want to make bigger bucks, the happier we will all be.

I haven't been following the AR threads so I am confused. What's the big problem, everyone knows that deer hunting has turned into a HUGE money market that the state is feeding off of which is why ARs are implemented. Bigger bucks = more money from hunting.

What's the big deal with that. I would guess everyone hunts for the chance to kill a monster buck, well ARs help that. And if you say that horns don't matter then really why the heck would you care about ARs anyway because does and young spikes which you can shoot still are the best eating.

Ol' Mitch got a promotion....

TPWD Commission meeting Aug. 2005, not so publicized proclimation that we have an original TPWD "Daddy of Antler Restrictions"
linky

Wonder if that comes with the TPWD Commission Meeting Decleration as Grandson of "TPWD Daddy of Antler Restrictions - Bob Carrol" ?

Seems Mr. Wolf is still in the ahead of him probably a son of "TPWD Daddy of Antler Restrictions - Bob Carrol".



Caution TPWD DATA SWITCH>>>>>


Hmmm how can it be that it used to be 5% of mature bucks that slipped through the cracks ?? Protected and Left to breed while all other segments of the buck herd was targeted. and SHAZAMM they went down to 4% ????
Musta gone through a "data massage" to make it sound better.


Still toeing the old TPWD spike line too, I see.
This should read...




Not the webpage propaganda again...to the "6 of use in opposition". Heheheh



Youth hunter question is a good one too.


So just how many youth does it take before they will admit there is a negative effect on 'em.
Do we have to wait for 30 yrs of research for that too? Then they aren't youths anymore.....

Do we want to start paying more money? I don't.

i dont really plan on payin any money.... except property taxes one day... but hopefully those will be gone too. And ya, higher deer hunting prices would be nice... maybe i could lease a place out and make some dough off it.

I too sent an email to TPWD on Antler restriction and why they have not considered Main Beam as an option criteria. Here is there comment. On another note. i was very impressed about how quickly they replied!


I appreciate your input. Yes, you’re right…Texas is definitely the leader in deer management, and my good friends with Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks will be among the first to admit that. Although, they certainly don’t agree with everything that is allowed in Texas regarding deer management! We are fortunate to have such a good relationship with them and all other deer biologists in the country. We meet twice each year to discuss research, management, and other topics. This particular topic is discussed every time we get together. As you probably know, Mississippi has had a 4-point rule for quite a while. In fact, they were one of the first states with an antler-restriction regulation, and we were fortunate to learn from the shortcomings of their statutes (i.e., passed by their legislature rather than by their Commission). Their more recent rule you referenced is not a statewide rule, but rather something they finally got approval to try out in some areas. You’ve probably noticed from their literature that they basically adopted our 13” rule (and changed it to 12” to cover some anomalies in their coastal plains region). So we learned from them, and then they learned from us. It’s a pretty neat relationship we have…

They did add the beam length as a second criterion in some areas, to appease some who really wanted it. They believed that biological data did not indicate it was a bad idea. They did understand that it would be much more difficult for hunters to judge beam length than to judge inside spread. But if a hunter wanted to take a chance, they were willing to allow it. In Texas, we’ve learned (from a much more voluminous data set), that adding that criterion to the definition of a “legal buck” simply won’t make more bucks “legal” (with very few exceptions). So it would unnecessarily complicate the rule (by adding an additional criterion), which would confuse hunters. Hunters told us they wanted simplification, and we took that to heart.

The deer you described is quite unusual, assuming he’s a mature buck. Data (from tens of thousands of harvested bucks in these Resource Management Units) indicate that only 4% of all mature bucks in these Resource Management Units (RMUs) have an inside spread less than 13" wide.

I put together a webpage that discusses our antler-restriction regulation more detail, although I admit it needs to be updated:

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/huntwild/wild/game_management/deer/antler_restrictions/

Thanks again for your input. Feel free to call Alan Cain, White-tailed Deer Program Leader (830-569-1119), if you would like to discuss this further.

Thanks,

Mitch Lockwood

You could say Mitch is doing a good job for the TP&W.

Yep Company man all the way.

All of you anti-AR guys should just stop shooting big bucks since you don't care about the quality of bucks in your county.

Awesome logic right there. I guess it just pizzes some folks off when one of us anti-AR guys shoots a big buck and yet still hate ARs. I have some big buck mounts on my wall that were taken pre-ARs...so why should I have to like ARs? By the way, I shot each one of them because they walked out in front of me, not because I was out to shoot a big buck. Icing on the cake is what they were.

Only one problem with that one, white-tailed and mule deer do not have horns, they have antlers. Horns are permanent, antlers are shed/lost each year and new ones grown.

Hi Chris.

Howdy back at ya!

You hunting this weekend or have other plans? Hope it's a good one for you and stay safe! Can't ask for better weather!

Son got a doe last wknd. (sausage is safe)

I may go out but don't plan on shooting anything cept (hog, "kyotee";o)

I'm just not as mad at 'em as I used to be. Might rattle and take pics.

Gotta lot of work to do this wknd, too.

Good luck to ya,

Phish-TX
ARs still suck,

As much as I hate to say it I agree. ARs are a science, they have proven that they will produce better quality bucks. Sure there are some deer that need killed that get protected but overall they do work.

Really ARs are a common sense thing. It is common sense that if you let nice young bucks live and kill crappy ones then your deer quality will improve. I personally don't see why you would want to kill a under 13" buck unless it was a old cull.

I don't buy the premise that Gov't should be able to tell me which deer I can shoot. (Like which car I can drive or which light bulb I have to use.)

Letting bucks get older doesn't improve the "quality" of the buck. The quality is inherent to the buck. Let bucks get older just gets you mature bucks.

Letting bucks get older for sure does improve their quality as far as horns go. It's crazy to say they don't get better with age

This just gets you mature bucks and bigger antlers.
The quality is inherent to the buck whether it is killed as a fawn or as a 9 year old.

Why should I have to hunt according to what someone else thinks is a quality buck.

To me quality isn't 13" and above. It is the deer, buck or doe, that God put in front of me kill and eat.

The premise for AR's as I understood it was to get a more mature herd. Thus a better breeding and diverse age structured herd.
The antlers get bigger with age, the buck gets bigger, up to a point, with age, but the "quality" is in the genes and age does not affect the genes.

If all you care about "quality" wise is the taste of the meat then why the hell do you care about bucks anyways Does are the better eating as well as the 1.5yr old spikes and you can still kill them.

I love to eat deer meat so I kill does every year. Why would I kill a 12" wide buck, or even want to for that matter, to eat when I could kill a doe/

True, but what good does that quality gene do when every deer with it gets killed at 1.5, 2.5 ,3.5 yrs old before it can even begin to reach it's potential

It's all about the head bones!

First, Antler restrictions are not a science, they are a stab in the dark, as a solution for a qualitative problem. Try as they may, it's not a solution if there wasn't a problem to begin with.

They know they have flawed data collection methods and data sets, and that trying to take regional level data and make local level decisions from it is pure horsehockey.

I do agree with them that they need more investment into data collection and sampling, and analysis, at lower levels. RMU's didn't even exist for the pre-AR data, yet they have been "arranged" by that data.

I don't doubt that selective harvest criterion may help in some areas. What I still can't understand is how someone that sees it helping on their place, is so sure and positive that its a great thing everywhere?

What I am going off of isn't data collected by harvest records or anything like that. I am going off of what I was told from multiple wildlife biologists. They weren't saying they agreed with them because that is what the state wanted them to think. They have worked on the same WMA for years, pre ARs until now and they all said that the deer have gotten bigger in the area

And the whole idea of ARs is a science. Genetics and breeding is a science whether you treat it like one or not

I guess the bottom line is, the hunters that would like to shoot a buck with large antlers out number the hunters that don't care how big the rack is. And the good news is, if you don't like it where your at, then hunt some where else.

We were against the AR at first when it was implemented in our county now 3 years ago. BUT, over time we have noticed a huge difference in the type of deer that come through our doors. Prior to AR it used to be mainly 2 1/2 deer with small racks. Now we don't ever see a deer under 3 1/2 and they are rare. The majority of bucks now is 4 1/2 and up with racks measuring in the 130's and up. Best part is, those are deer from the exact same places that used to bring in those little 2 1/2 year olds. We ourselves shot the two best bucks we had ever seen on our place 2 years ago. One was 128 and the other 132 gross. AR does work if it is given time. Now everyone has the chance for a big buck including the youth hunters.

But age doesn't improve the genes, breeding does. True letting them get older lets them breed more but their are too many variables to have a selective breeding program for the entire state of Texas. Sheer hubris.

Why couldn't the "neighbor shoots my deer" crowd have "hunted somewhere else.........Before this regulation was passed?

Instead of asking TPWD to make up some data to make it look like there was an Age Structure problem, and try to justify "neighbors shooting deer" as a Scientific herd problem.

Now all we have is a bunch of "Neighbors Shoot my deer" whiners crowing at a BAD Regulation...and a State wildlife department that look like idiots.

Wow, people you must realize that that we as avid somewhat educated hunters are not the vast majority of the people who hunt. I wish it was so. The AR's are in place for the people with poor judgement. I say that because in my experience the people who just dont care are still going to kill what they want anyway law be damned. Yes, there will be bucks that will walk because of AR's that shouldn't because of bad genes and there will be bucks harvested that shouldn't be because of ignorance or total disregard for anything except self gratification. When I was younger "Redneck" was not a bad word and I felt proud to be one. Now days its associated with "Ignorant Redneck" and the trash that makes up much of our state/nation. OK im rambling and will shut up before it gets ugly. Thats not my intention. But where do you want to be classified.

These statements do not apply to all so when you get on your soapbox in a minute remember that.

Edited because I cant spell (ignorant redneck?)

I don't know...I don't like AR's mainly because it is government intervention.

We will always have rules and regulaions....but I just don't like unnecessary ones that basically satisfies those who want others to have to hunt like them. Like Sig and Phish have stated...there's no REAL proof or good studies to back up the need for manditory ARs. Sig has a bus load full of the so called TP&W data.

Not directed at you Curly, sorry if it came across that way.. It's at the AR subject itself. They go on for page after page and nothing is settled.

Most of the pro AR guys say it's all about the "quality of the herd". I say BS. Think about this. What if a Whitetail buck at 1 1/2 year old had his best set of antlers of his life and then began to decline from there every year. Would all the emphasis be on letting the deer age for the "quality of the herd"? Heck no it wouldn't. It's all about the antlers on their head and nothing more. Anybody that says anything other than that is just kidding themselves. I have heard it said many many times lately that "I really don't care about the antlers, I just want to harvest a mature buck". I say BS to that too. If a 6 year old 180 inch deer and a 7 year old 140 inch deer were side by side which one would you shoot? Come on folks, give me a break.

The trophy is in the eye of the beholder. Have none of you AR guys heard that before? I would not buy a Dodge truck so I am going to get a regulation passed that says nobody else can buy a Dodge truck. After all, I don't like them so nobody else should be allowed to own one either. Same concept and just as wrong as somebody in a deer infested county defining what your or my trophy should be.

I can't stand speed limits either, who is the government to tell me how fast I can drive

That's what I mean by quality of the herd, it's the quality of their horns. I thought everyone knew that

That's a safety regulation so you don't drive 120 MPH and kill my family. If you can't spot the obvious difference in the two there is no since debating with you about it.

The problem is the two have nothing to do with each other.

Maybe I can drive 120mph safer than the guy across the street can drive 70mph.

If you want to go that route though then there are plenty of laws out there that are just like ARs and have nothing to do with safety

Never said they did. ARs are for quality of the horns because be honest, isn't that what 98% of hunters look for.

I don't doubt that in the least. What's your point?

Here is one more point and I'm about done.

A very good friend of mine hunts in Iowa every year. His personal best buck is a 174 inch monster. He has not shot a buck in 3 years. I asked him the other day why he does not pull the trigger. He said the he would not think of shooting one that was not at least close to his personal best. I can understand that completely. He would never try to tell me or anybody else that they should only be looking for a 170" deer or bigger. That would be crazy, wouldn't it?? It's the same dang thing the AR's do. Have you ever been to my hunting property? Do you even know what county my hunting property is in?? I didn't think so. So how is it that you know so much about what I should call a trophy?

Speed limits can save lives....ARs just let a buck get bigger so the hunter can puff his chest out and brag more when he shoots it.

There's one (1) thing we can ALL agree on...the current regs say a buck has to have a 13 inch inside spread, TP & W is going to enforce it, and it ain't gonna get changed this year, period. Like it or not, it's still gonna be a part of your 2010 - 2011 hunting season.

Carry on. LOL

Yep you're right but this is so much fun!

The county I hunt in doesn't have AR I don't know if it would help or not, but I do know that there are a lot of basket bucks that will never make it past 13" spread and they are the ones doing the breeding.

X2

Ok,

I got one for you. If AR's are here to stay (and I believe they are), instead of sitting around gripeing about them... why don't we try and make them more "livable". As an example... before ARs... the combonation of the fine and civil restitution for taking an illegal deer was pretty significant (thousands for some bucks). But of course, the main reason for the stiff fines and civil resititution was deer were illegally taken either in or out of season (poaching). Before AR's ...anyone shooting a illegal deer was poaching. Back then you didn't accidentally shoot a deer. Shooting an illegal deer was intentional. I was all for high fines and civil resitiution levied against the true poachers and law breakers.

Now that AR's are here... hunters are supposed to field judge the 13" spread and then take the buck. If the hunter judges wrong.... he is subject to the same significant fines set up to deal with poachers (true law breakers) in the past.

I can garentee this absolute certainty of a significant fines.... has caused many 12.75" deer to be left in the woods.... of course this is an absolute waste.

Since we are being asked to field judge 13" (sometimes at great distance).... why can't there be a margin of error? how about bringing in the deer's age as a factor? WRT the fines....Why does the fine and Civil restitution have to be so significant (some deer could cost thousands)? We are not intentionally poaching.... why can't the fines be a little more reasonable... say $50-$100 dollars for the first offence... $100-$150 for the second offence.... make them accue over a life time if that's what is voted on, etc. etc.

Short answer is..... ARs are here to stay. Instead of hashing out the why's and wherefores that caused ARs to be started is a little like spinning your wheels in a mudhole.... it throws a lot of crap but you don't get anywhere. Instead.... I submit, let's focus our energys into makeing them better. We can start by addressing the stiff fines and civil restitution along with getting some sort of secondary indicator for frield judging.... such as age.

Just my two cents...
CamoLee

Think about it this way...would Nancy Pelosi be a fan of AR's? I think the answer is YES, that is what makes them wrong.

sorry, hard to take this too seriously.

Say what you like, but the AR regs helped more than even I could have believed down in Colorado County. I hunted on a small piece of family land (like me and everyone around me) forever from the time I could hold a gun. As a kid, I would pray to see anything other than a spike, of which I saw very few of anyway. Today, I can see bucks on every hunt. Sure, many are nice 1.5 and 2.5 year olds that are protected, but there are a few bucks that are older... and that I never would have dreamed existed down there as a kid, teenager and young adult.

Yes, hunters do have to identify their targets... can't just shoot any buck. And I do understand the difficulty for some hunters because they can't (don't want to) judge 13 inches on a deer. These are the same guys that shoot buck fawns while attempting to harvest does. Sloppy hunting practices yielded them the "antlerless tags" we have on our licenses today.

In every county that has ARs, the simple fact of the matter is that young deer were making up a huge percentage of the harvest pre-AR. I know that yearling bucks (1.5 year olds) comprised 50% of the harvest in Colorado County before this reg; 2 year olds another 30%. Hunters in that county pre-AR lived by the "it's brown it's down" mantra.

I like a big buck as much as the next guy, but for those arguing that AR regs are about producing trophies. Please. If you consider 3 year old bucks as "trophy horned deer" then you needed this reg as much as we did. But for the guys that just want to shoot deer, congratulations. Now you have 2 buck tags. Quit complaining. The simple fact is that hunting will become more restrictive over time. They are making a whole lot more people and wildlife habitat is shrinking.

I know you are right about one thing...."The simple fact is that hunting will become more restrictive over time". I just hope you remember the AR restriction as one of the first ones that started taking away our liberties. Maybe then and only then will you AR guys get the point.

Phish im not sure what the chip on your shoulder is about TPWD...maybe you were fired or not hired there??? Your always on here busting them up. A VAST majority of landowners and hunters I know in AR areas say they have drastically improved deer hunting/management conditions.

I think our TPWD boys are doing a great job and dont "look like idiots". Keep drinking the "Dr Deer Kroll" coolaid.

There is no perfect plan but as it is they are doing what they can. Cant please everyone.

Keep up the good work TPWD.

X's 1000

Here is one point that never gets thrown into the equasion. I have hunted family property in Mills county for over 25 years. This county for those unfamiliar has no deer density problem and is now going into its second year of AR's. One thing that ticks me off is it use to be a 2 buck county now its one 13" or wider and spike. I always enjoyed shooting a nice buck and then having the option of holding out for a better one. That theory is now gone and for those that are paying to hunt in former two buck counties has your lease payments gone down (less to hunt you sure are not getting more for your money)? Thus it not that important for me to even harvest a buck (I have not pulled the trigger on a buck in three years and had plenty of opportunities) I reserve that privelledge for my younger hunters in the family. Good hunting this weekend and be safe

Not too many leases now days that allow two bucks anyway. Most places have too many hunters so you cant take two bucks each.

Not with more than half the state under AR rules.