Looks like I really stirred the bucket on this one.

quote:

---

Hunters fighting with others hunters... Now that is good for the sport.

---

Assuming the sarcasm, I would rather see opinions and discussion (and possible self-regulation), rather than government intervention (more laws) being demanded by non-hunters.

Bushman, unfortunately because I just registered on Texas Bow Hunter, I can't look at the classifieds (leases) for another 30 days

[sorry for the hijack]

Texas is sort of an odd duck when it comes to hunting regulations, usually it is other hunters that are pushing for the regulations. Like I have mentioned on here before, if a regulation doesn't biologically make sense, there's some politics behind it.

Non-hunting interests are growing, but to date have little impact hunting regs IN Texas. Certainly not the case in other states.

[This message has been edited by ursusguy (edited 8/9/2011 10:37a).]

I don't hunt deer over man made food sources nor do I use a deer blind. It is all native forage on my place. No skin off my back if others want hunt differently as long as it s legal.

quote:

---

Hunters fighting with others hunters... Now that is good for the sport.

---

...I think he was talking about the originally linked article. But I could be wrong.

Yes I was mainly talking about the article. As humans we always try to improve things to our benefit. God gave us this right when he gave us control of all the creatures of the earth. We have done it with cattle,farming, computers, etc. though some might disagree with some of the methods, we always try to improve them.

Conservation has been huge for our game populations over the last 75 years. Without some gov. interventions there would be population issues all over the country.

When I was a little kid my dad would let me shoot anything I wanted to. On our local ranches in lee co., we never saw any mature animals. Now thanks to some gov intervention(which I dont totally agree with) the age structure has gotten to a place were we actually see bucks that are mature. In any game animal(bass, deer, elk, etc) I view it as my so called duty to allow that animal to reach an age where it is mature. Unfortunately some of my neighbors could care less about that and if it wasnt for antler restrictions here they would still kill anything that walks.

I have a 7 yr old son, that just like me when I was 7, wants to kill everything that walks out. But due to our management practices I feel like I am teaching him patience and how to be a good steward of our land. I still let him shoot a 4 yr old 8pt last year that probably needed one more year.

As for my comment. We live in an age where I feel like we could be on the verge of loosing these privileges any time(not to worried in Texas). As hunters we should be sticking together at all cost. Im all for good dialog between views, my only issue is that certain groups always seem to get in pissing matches and loose focus on the common goal. If you dont like high fences, hunting over feeders, planting food plots, hunting in an acorn full tree, etc...so be it. But dont try to belittle a man that is just trying to enjoy Gods creation, and the fruits of his labor. Yes some aspects of hunting have gotten expensive, but there are still many cost effective ways to harvest game. QDMA has done a lot of good, if anything just to raise awareness of age structure of deer and adding value to your property.

^
^
You know that is a perfect crossover that I actually never made myself. You mention bass. Hell, there have been length restrictions in place on fish for about as long as I can remember.

quote:

---

You know that is a perfect crossover that I actually never made myself.

---

Of course not - you've been too busy learning really important things like how tag things on Texags....

My 2 cents ....

I've seen the two extremes. On my home place in Coryell County, we've leased it to the same family for nearly 30 years. There was a time where 2 bucks each for 4 guns was allowed. I honestly believe these folks thought themselves incapable of getting erections for the next year unless they shot 2 bucks during deer season. 4 pt, 6 pt, 2 year old 8 pt - it didn't matter. If it had forked horns it died. They also refused to shoot does until the last weekend of the season (which they rarely hunted if they already had their bucks). As time went by, it went to a 1 buck county, and finally some serious antler restrictions (which I still insist will select for some really high/narrow racked deer in the future). Now we see mature bucks, and they shoot their does. Good came out of it.

The other extreme is when I hunt with Doebusters(TM). We slaughter the does (except for the special tagged ones), hammer the spikes, and select for racks as the age increses (tine length, brow tines, spread, etc ...). All of this is so that the owner's son and grandson will have excellent hunting in the future, and to provide some package hunts. Do I hunt over bait? Darn straight. I'm not there to just "happen" upon deer on a trail, I'm there to slaughter and maintain the numbers for the habitat. The owner's son and grandson however .... they are bow hunters and do get in some odd places (well, water troughs aren't exactly odd, but not really over food). I have restrictions on that place, and know the consequences of breaking the rules. Over the last 10 years, we've about wliminated some really ugly genes from the gene pool.

Thought this was interesting from another article. It pre-dates this mad TV hunter rant, so it's not "in response" to the article per se. ...but it seems pretty on point nonetheless.

quote:

---

To get a better perspective, I went to the head of the Quality Deer Management Association himself, Brian Murphy.

“We’ve talked about this very thing here at QDMA,” he says. “The proliferation of magazines and television shows that focus on hunting big whitetails makes it look like if hunters don’t shoot a super-big buck, they are somehow less of a hunter. But if you hunt fair chase on land that you manage and the buck is nice for where you hunt, you should be proud.”

That is particularly true when comparing bucks–or hunters, for that matter–in different parts of the country.

“You can’t compare a buck killed in South Carolina to one shot in Illinois,” Murphy says. “If a hunter kills a 105-inch buck in Florida, it is a heck of an accomplishment.”

Rather than focusing on antlers, Murphy suggests that the true mark of a trophy deer and the effort it takes to successfully hunt it is based on age.

“That’s the real measure of a trophy. If you are killing bucks in the top 10 percent of the age bracket for your area, you are doing great,” says the QDMA leader. “Killing a five-year-old in Alabama when compared to killing a three-year-old in Illinois can be much more impressive even though that three-year-old’s rack will likely be larger than the buck from Alabama.

“I hope the benchmark will ultimately become buck age rather than antlers.”

---

The reason why Quality Deer Management causes so many arguments is that quality is extremely subjective and, as such, so are the opinions pertaining to it.

The mainstream opinion is that quality is directly proportional to antler size; the bigger the rack, the better the quality. (Interesting that men, who traditionally make up the majority of the hunter population, make everything about size! I wonder what deer hunting would be life if women made up the majority of hunters without the historical influence of men...)

For some, quality is about the experience of the hunt and the actual harvest is of smaller importance than the time spent afield. For some, quality is about the number of animals harvested. For some, quality is about the type and palatability of the meat harvested.

quote:

---

For some, quality is about the type and palatability of the meat harvested.

---

...then shoot does. They taste WAY better.

quote:

---

I personally think it should be illegal to high fence anything less than about 8,000-10,000 for the purpose of keeping deer in.

---

Sean - agreed with about all of your points but this one.

Property rights trump hunting rights. Without property rights we have nothing. It's one of the most basic tennants of our liberty (which we have less and less of everyday).

Granted, I know I am not telling you anything you don't know, just saying, we need a lot less laws, not more.

quote:

---

Sean - agreed with about all of your points but this one.

Property rights trump hunting rights.

---

Philosophically, I agree with Sean. In a perfect world, people with smaller acreages would forego their property RIGHT in the interest of doing the right thing. Instead they put their self-interest first.

Urban, i agree except that youre fencing in (and trapping) a public good. It'd be like if you owned land on both sides of the Brazos and "trapped" all the water for your own use. People downstream would be pretty pissed.