LWD, the fact of the matter is, There Is No One Single Simple Plan That Will Work State Wide In Texas, that is why I point out the failings of the AR's.

Not every region, county or even areas in counties are experiencing the same situations concerning the deer herd state wide.

In the Dakota's, they are trying a system called Earn A Buck, a hunter has to shoot and check in at a check station two does Before they can get a buck tag.

How many Texans are going to like the idea of mandatory check stations, where EVERY deer shot has to be checked in within 24 to 48 hours of being killed. I can tell you right now, not very damn many.

And for that type program to work it has to be mandatory, not voluntary.

If all the AR's are intended to do is raise the age of bucks being killed, why not just close those areas down to killing bucks for 2 seasons?

How far would regulations like that fly?

If land owners and lease holders can not manage their own properties and the listed county and state wide regulations, not including the AR's, can not alter the situation, then either the situation does not need fixing or more draconian steps need to be taken.

The biggest fault I find with the AR's, is the belief that Every hunter only wants to kill "Quality" bucks. That is not true. While many folks would like to kill a nice buck or any buck, some folks just want to shoot a deer.

Because TP&W decided to take the same path with white tails that they took with Large Mouth bass, and try to make Texas the "Go To" state for Trophy Deer, it has caused many resident hunters to have to give up deer hunting due to the costs of hunting.

Yes, I am a guide, yes part of my income comes from a hunting based business. That does not mean that I don't or can't have mixed feelings about the way things have changed here in Texas.

It does not mean that I can't or don't feel bad for friends/acquaintences that own a couple hundred acres that cannot shoot the bucks they see simply because they won't meet the AR requirements.

I just don't believe that AR's are the answer. If they are working for someone and they like them, that is great, it does not mean I have to like them or agree with them and does not mean that I can't or should not point out the problems I see with them.

As an example of why I don't feel that the AR's are the Savior of the Texas deer herd, my boss and a partner owned an 1100 acre tract in Baylor county, the county on the west side of Archer county.

When the AR's were instituted, Archer county was put under them, Baylor was not.

Before the AR's, both counties were 1 buck, 2 doe counties. After Archer went under the AR's, both counties went to 5 deer, no more than 2 bucks, bag limits, but Baylor did not go under the AR's.

That right there shows me that the comment about the AR's being instituted because of the increase in herd numbers, is pure

Here is another example, these are the deer regulations for Comal county:

Special Antler Restrictions (East of IH 35 only)

Archery Only: October 1-November 4, 2011. No permit required to hunt antlerless deer unless MLD permits have been issued for the property.

(West of IH 35)
Bag Limit: 5 deer, no more than 2 bucks, all seasons combined.
General Season: November 5, 2011-January 1, 2012.

Special Late General Season: January 2-15, 2012 (antlerless and spike buck deer only).

(East of IH 35)
Bag Limit: 4 deer, no more than 2 bucks, and no more than 2 antlerless, all seasons combined.

General Season: November 5, 2011-January 1, 2012. Antlerless deer may be taken by antlerless MLD permit only.

I am sure that not a lot of deer make it across I-35 alive, but I do know driving down thru that part of Comal county I never noticed fewer deer there than I saw in the northern part of the county.

Add in to the equation, the growing number of hunters that are not shooting any does or are not shooting a deer unless it is bigger than what they have on the wall at home, and the herd is just continueing to increase and expand into marginal areas.

What too many folks either do not understnd or have never heard of, is that when I was growing up in the 50's early 60's, most of Texas was recovering from an extreme drought period during the late 40's early 50's and a large portion of the deer herd in the state had died off.

Also, the deer herd in Texas was much smaller and inhabited a smaller range than it does today, add to that, screw worms had not yet been eradicated.

Add all of those things together, throw in changes in farming and ranching practices and the increased interest in deer hunting which brought about the implementation of supplemental feeding, and the Texas deer hewrd has been increasing at an excellerated rate during the past 35 years or so.

I or anyone else can come up with or list all sorts of management techniques, and not one single one of them will work state wide and not one single one of them will be without its critics one way or the other.

Here is another SMF statement from me, but I really believe that TP&W will start removing counties from the AR regs in the next 3 to 5 years, simply because not enough deer are being taken out of the herd and as this year is going to prove over a good portion of the state, the deer herd is too large for the native range to support.

If CWD ever reaches Texas, and TP&W shuts down supplemental feeding, the die off of white tails is going to be greater than during the drought years of the early 50's, simply because the deer herd is larger.

Regardless of whether you like the antler restrictions or not, I think its ridiculous to claim that the restrictions themselves drove up the cost of hunting.

Its a supply and demand issue and hunting in TX gets more expensive every year

I did not say it drove up the price of hunting state wide, I said in the area I am most familiar with it did effect the price.

What is so hard to understand about the concept that I am describing what I have experienced in one particular region?

Why do people believe that everything is the same in Texas, state wide???

Is everything on the Front Range in Colrado the same as it is on the West Slope, I have been to both places and the answer is Hell No.

The conditions as far as deer numbers/deer hunting in the south east/piney woods are of Texas is a whole lot different than the conditions in south Texas/the Panhandle/the Rolling Plains or the Hill Country.

Now someone tell me I am wrong about that!

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
I did not say it drove up the price of hunting state wide, I said in the area I am most familiar with it did effect the price.

What is so hard to understand about the concept that I am describing what I have experienced in one particular region?

Why do people believe that everything is the same in Texas, state wide???

Is everything on the Front Range in Colrado the same as it is on the West Slope, I have been to both places and the answer is Hell No.

The conditions as far as deer numbers/deer hunting in the south east/piney woods are of Texas is a whole lot different than the conditions in south Texas/the Panhandle/the Rolling Plains or the Hill Country.

Now someone tell me I am wrong about that!

Prices are different in different areas in all places. South Texas is more expensive than the hill country and here in CO the price for an elk hunt near Meeker is typically less expensive than the price for an elk hunt in Southern CO.

The only thing that has been constant is that the average cost to hunt private ground has gone up every year in all places.

My family owns ranches in TX, to try and put the rising cost of leases on antler restrictions is a stretch at very best. What it boils down to, especially in areas where there is very little public land, is that you have more people competing for a limited number of leases.

One more time just to clarify things, there was a price increase, as I described, the year the AR's were put in force in the counties I am most familiar with.

I do not think it was merely coincedental, Can You Prove Me Wrong?????

quote:

One more time just to clarify things, there was a price increase, as I described, the year the AR's were put in force in the counties I am most familiar with.

I do not think it was merely coincedental, Can You Prove Me Wrong?????

More correctly, can you prove you're right? Correlation and causation are two entirely different things. It is logically and statistically flawed to assume that they are.

You claim that the antler restrictions can’t be based on a deer herd increase because adjoining counties (Baylor and Archer) weren’t placed under them at the same time. Huh? Under that logic TPWD would have to institute antler restrictions on all counties at the same time or none at all. Otherwise, some one’s---not TPWD’s---assumed reason for them couldn’t be rationale or correct; therefore, the antler restrictions would be wrong.

quote:

some folks just want to shoot a deer.

Then shoot some does and help the problem! Some of the funnest times I’ve had hunting have been on doe culls.

quote:

Because TP&W decided to take the same path with white tails that they took with Large Mouth bass, and try to make Texas the "Go To" state for Trophy Deer, it has caused many resident hunters to have to give up deer hunting due to the costs of hunting.

Oh come on. Seriously? Antler restrictions haven’t done this. In fact, the only thing you’ve said that even comes close to supporting this notion is your claim that antler restrictions imposed in some area of the state caused lease costs to jump a few hundred dollars in that area. Whenever and wherever that was. Fuel prices and corn prices have done more to the costs of hunting for those of us on leases than anything. I saw hunts at ranches selling hunts commercially fall last year.

quote:

It does not mean that I can't or don't feel bad for friends/acquaintences that own a couple hundred acres that cannot shoot the bucks they see simply because they won't meet the AR requirements.

This is the same argument that people make for why kids should be exempted from the antler restrictions---so they can shoot an immature buck “to get their buck.” Sportsmen who are stewards of our wildlife resources shouldn’t even want to shoot animals that shouldn’t be shot.

quote:

If all the AR's are intended to do is raise the age of bucks being killed, why not just close those areas down to killing bucks for 2 seasons?

Because not killing any is almost as bad as killing the wrong ones.

quote:

Here is another SMF statement from me, but I really believe that TP&W will start removing counties from the AR regs in the next 3 to 5 years, simply because not enough deer are being taken out of the herd and as this year is going to prove over a good portion of the state, the deer herd is too large for the native range to support.

The extra buck tag for spikes and additional doe allotments are designed to prevent this problem. The does are the key to controlling the population. If people won’t kill some does, then the problem can’t and won’t be controlled. And removing the antler restrictions on bucks so that a few more will be taken is the proverbial drop in the bucket.

In fact, I wouldn’t have a problem at all with more Draconian restrictions. An “Earn-a-Buck” program would be an excellent idea in many areas of the state. We need to shoot more does. Until people do, we won’t get the population under control. That might go a long way toward educating forcing many of the “we only shoot trophy bucks” crowd to get their collective heads out and get to work. The surplus meat could easily be donated through the Hunters for the Hungry programs. But as you point out, it wouldn’t be very palatable to many Texas hunters. So I’d speculate that TPWD is trying to implement what it believes is the simplest, most effective, most palatable program on average.

At the end of the day, the problem that I and others here have with your criticisms of the antler restrictions is that they are emotional and unfounded in fact or logic. This simply feeds the misinformation andf misunderstanding out there. None of us claim that they are perfect; a one size fits all solution rarely is. But they are much needed improvement to the situation that can help the overall situation quite a bit in just a few seasons.

LWD

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
One more time just to clarify things, there was a price increase, as I described, the year the AR's were put in force in the counties I am most familiar with.

I do not think it was merely coincedental, Can You Prove Me Wrong?????

Can you prove that the antler restriction directly contributed to the increase? Didnt think so.

Your so hysterical about these antler restrictions I'm suprised you havent blamed them for "global warming" yet

If anything, placing a "restriction" on something would devalue it. Go back and look at what people payed for leases from 1990-1995, 1995-2000, 2000-2005 and 2005 to present and you'll have a better understanding of the rising costs of hunting leases in TX. If you want to waste your time doing this you'll have to trend leases costs from every county in the state to have a sample thats worth a crap. You can then compare the upward trend in counties with an antler restriction to the trend in counties that dont have it and you'll have an apples to apples comparison. Until you do this your merely spouting an opinion that doesnt make any sense to a rational person

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
quote:
generally likes to be cantankerous, which in your defense does describe Gatogordo.



Moi? (from Fawlty Towers)


xxxxxxxxxx

Yes. Moi!

drummond,I have been hunting and killing deer in the part of Texas I live in since 1970.

I can remember 500 acre deer leases costing $500.00 for the whole place for up to 8 hunters, dollar an acre, 20 years before your earliest time frame.

I am talking about the counties I was born and raised up and lived in for the most part of my almost 61 years.

I know what I witnessed take place in this area.

At no point did I say it was a statewide situation, but it did take place up here when the counties went under the AR's.

I know what happened in this area and you don't.

Really simple concept, I live and work here, and you do not. You are calling me a liar and odds are you have never been in the area I am talking about.

I have my reasons for not liking the AR's none of them hysterical but based on facts. Have you ever hunted in Archer, Young, Baylor or Throckmorton counties? Have you ever been in any of these counties? Can you just answer those two questions?

LWD, do you believe that the R's are a state wide cure all, I believe that you said you didn't.

All I have been saying is that I don't believe that they are a sgtatewide cure all.

quote:

You claim that the antler restrictions can’t be based on a deer herd increase because adjoining counties (Baylor and Archer) weren’t placed under them at the same time. Huh? Under that logic TPWD would have to institute antler restrictions on all counties at the same time or none at all. Otherwise, some one’s---not TPWD’s---assumed reason for them couldn’t be rationale or correct; therefore, the antler restrictions would be wrong.

What I said or tried to say, is that Archer,Young etc. are the Last counties that will be placed under the AR's, Period, that came directly from TP&W.

Baylor will never be under the AR's. Both Baylor and Archer were 1 buck/2 doe counties, no doe days, does were legal all season, since at least the 2007-2008 season. Then when the AR's were instituted in Archer, both Archer and Baylor went to being 5 deer/2 buck counties, except Baylor was not placed under the AR's.

For just a little more information, I have not shot a buck in ANY of the counties I normally hunt or have hunted since 2005, all does.

Your real quick to tell me where I am wrong with my opinion about the AR's, so tell me why a person with a reasonable amount of hunrting experience under their belt can not disagree with regulations they feel are wrong?

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

You are calling me a liar and odds are you have never been in the area I am talking about.

I have my reasons for not liking the AR's none of them hysterical but based on facts. Have you ever hunted in Archer, Young, Baylor or Throckmorton counties? Have you ever been in any of these counties? Can you just answer those two questions?

Please quote me where I called you a liar. That would be great.

I will be more than happy to answer your questions as soon as you post up the quote where I called you a liar

quote:

Originally posted by LWD:

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
quote:
generally likes to be cantankerous, which in your defense does describe Gatogordo.



Moi? (from Fawlty Towers)


xxxxxxxxxx

Yes. Moi!

Tsk, tsk, tsk, as somone who is sending his wife and a couple of kids to Paris for a week's vacation, I've had to polish up (well, re-learn would be closer) my long disused French so that I could teach them the basics. It should be "Toi", unless you're intending to include yourself in the cantankerous crowd. Counselors should be more careful in the use of language even if they don't know it.

I always hunted in 2 buck counties, untill about 16 years or so ago, when I got on a lease in NW Texas, that was in a one buck county.

I noticed an immediate difference in the horn quality and the size of the deer as well.

The first year on that lease I killed the biggest whitetail I ever had.

We always see many nice bucks each season.
Our rule is to not shoot a young buck, only a trophy.

Just receintly the rules were changed to make it a two buck county.

We have chosen to still keep it at one buck.

We want to maintain the quality of our deer heard, and the quanity of our bucks.

Those of us that eat a lot of deer meat shoot does. I have only shot 4 bucks on this lease, I usually let my wife shoot the buck, and she is more picker than me, she had only shot 4 or 5 bucks. We only shoot one buck in any year between the two of us.


While the area, genetics, and the water and feed [they can vary from year to year], all effect horn size...
Still...

If you want to have BIG horns, you got to let them grow a few years longer.

quote:

Posted 07 July 2011 02:08 Hide Post
LWD, do you believe that the R's are a state wide cure all, I believe that you said you didn't.

All I have been saying is that I don't believe that they are a sgtatewide cure all.

quote:
You claim that the antler restrictions can’t be based on a deer herd increase because adjoining counties (Baylor and Archer) weren’t placed under them at the same time. Huh? Under that logic TPWD would have to institute antler restrictions on all counties at the same time or none at all. Otherwise, some one’s---not TPWD’s---assumed reason for them couldn’t be rationale or correct; therefore, the antler restrictions would be wrong.



What I said or tried to say, is that Archer,Young etc. are the Last counties that will be placed under the AR's, Period, that came directly from TP&W.

Baylor will never be under the AR's. Both Baylor and Archer were 1 buck/2 doe counties, no doe days, does were legal all season, since at least the 2007-2008 season. Then when the AR's were instituted in Archer, both Archer and Baylor went to being 5 deer/2 buck counties, except Baylor was not placed under the AR's.

For just a little more information, I have not shot a buck in ANY of the counties I normally hunt or have hunted since 2005, all does.

Your real quick to tell me where I am wrong with my opinion about the AR's, so tell me why a person with a reasonable amount of hunrting experience under their belt can not disagree with regulations they feel are wrong?

Under these entirely revamped opinions I don't disagree with anything you've said. But these positions aren't at all what you've been espousing in previous posts.

LWD

quote:

quote:
Originally posted by LWD:

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
quote:
generally likes to be cantankerous, which in your defense does describe Gatogordo.



Moi? (from Fawlty Towers)


xxxxxxxxxx



Yes. Moi!

archer



Tsk, tsk, tsk, as somone who is sending his wife and a couple of kids to Paris for a week's vacation, I've had to polish up (well, re-learn would be closer) my long disused French so that I could teach them the basics. It should be "Toi", unless you're intending to include yourself in the cantankerous crowd. Counselors should be more careful in the use of language even if they don't know it. :wink:

Picking a fight are you? Well, at least you didn't call me a stupid MF.......



LWD

quote:

Under these entirely revamped opinions I don't disagree with anything you've said. But these positions aren't at all what you've been espousing in previous posts.

I have not changed one damn thing. From my first response, I was relating what I have experienced in the counties I am most familiar with.

Drummond as for your claim about not calling me a liar: Can you prove that the antler restriction directly contributed to the increase? Didnt think so.

Can you prove that it didn't, No. I know what leases were going for in this area pre-AR's and I witnessed first hand what they went to after the AR's were put in place. I live in the area, you don't, I could show you all kinds of proof and you would still maintain I was wrong.

The AR's were not needed in the area I am most familiar with, reduction in overall deer numbers is what was/is needed in these counties.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

Drummond as for your claim about not calling me a liar: Can you prove that the antler restriction directly contributed to the increase? Didnt think so.

This is the reason nobody can take you seriously. Your so emotional about this you actually thought I called you a liar when all we are having is a difference of opinion. Time to take a break, step away from the keyboard and get some fresh air.

No need to apologize for accusing me of calling you a liar.

Yes, I have been to Throckmorton County with a friend of mine that has a place there. It was a few years back and I was not hunting, I went with him to get away one weekend. I have always declined invitations to hunt on other peoples ranches or leases unless I have hosted them previously.

The FACT of the matter is, you do not have any data supporting the claim that you made. Its not up to me to disprove it, I'm not the one that brought it up. Until you can post facts to substantiate you claims its nothing but an opinion.

quote:

I can remember 500 acre deer leases costing $500.00 for the whole place for up to 8 hunters,

I don't know of anywhere in Texas lowfence that can sustain a buck per 63 acres being shot. That is horrible wildlife management.

Crazyhorse do you know what the state is trying to avoid with the antler restrictions in these counties? Do you know what their alternative choice was?

quote:

I can remember 500 acre deer leases costing $500.00 for the whole place for up to 8 hunters,

STU, those leases were available in this part of Texas back in the 1970's. There are still deer on them, they are going for $1500.00 to $2500.00 dollars a gun, and they did not go under the AR's until 2009.

Have you hunted deer in all parts of Texas?

quote:

I don't know of anywhere in Texas lowfence that can sustain a buck per 63 acres being shot. That is horrible wildlife management.

You may not, I do know low fence places that can stand that type of pressure and produce quality bucks at that.

Since it sounds like/reads like you think I have no idea what the AR's were designed to do, I doubt that my explanation of my interpretation of what their intent was will satisfy tou or some of the other folks, but here goes.

TP&W realized that in some areas/regions of the state the age structure and antler quality had degraded over the years thru indisciminant hunting practices. The original areas were in the south eastern part of the state, where there are lots of small acreage land holdings interspersed with the majority of Public Lands and timber company holdings.

That portion of the state also experiences some of if not the highest level of hunting pressure in the state. The results being that the recruitment of young bucks into the herd was extremely low, due to over shooting of these animals.

In addition to the above, the area while having deer, does not have the population densities of areas in other parts of rhe state, i.e. the hill country.

In formulating various plans, the most palatable or easiest to implement, was the 13 inch inside antler spread instead of implementing a program where hunters would have to try and visibly age a live deer. Studies had produced enough evidence that most buck deer will be at least 2.5 years old or older by the time they produce a set of antlers with the 13 inch I.S..

Ageing a live deer by body confirmation is difficult at best, impossible for the once a year hunters.

When the AR's were implemented and the initial areas they were implemented into were directly tied into improving the quality of the deer in the area and the quantity. From the various reports I have seen/read, the quality and age structure has improved, deer numbers however have not improved that well, probably due to habitat limitations and poaching.

As hunters across the state learned more about the AR's, some of them in various areas liked the concept and petitioned TP&W to establish them in areas, some of which were not really having any problems with the deer in their area, that is how some of the counties I am familiar with/hunt in ended up with the AR's.

From the info I have gathered from TP&W the last group of counties that were placed under the AR's, is the last group of counties that will be placed under the AR's.

As I have said, if a person is hunting in an area with the AR's and is happy with the results they are seeing, that is great, But, it does not mean that there are not problems with the AR's and that people that do not like them/believe in them can not state their opinion.

The area I am most familiar with/hunt in did not need them, the land owners/lease holders/lease managers do a good job with the properties they control. The biggest reason the AR's were established in this area, was, since it is all low fenced property, to control what the smaller property hunters could shoot.

People hunting on 500 acres felt/still feel that "Their" bucks were/are being killed on the 100 acre places adjoining them. If it had just been directed at the 1.5 year old bucks that is one thing, they don't believe the hunters on the smaller acrages should be shooting any of the older legal bucks either.

You asked about alternatives, one that has been and is kicked around from time to time is limiting deer hunting to tracts no smaller than 100 acres.

Do you believe that would be a fair or equitable method, not letting people hunt their own land because it is too small? I have concerns about deer hunting on smaller sized tracts, but where could or should the line be drawn. It is already against the law to hunt on tracts of 10 acres or less if the commissioners court in the county in question has passed regulations prohibiting it.

I don't like the AR's personally, but I have not hunted bucks since 2005, I only shoot does. But I also am not the only person that believes the AR's are not the be all/end all in deer management practices.

Drummond, the lease prices went up $150.00 to $300.00 per gun in this area when the AR's went into effect. Now if you want to call that coincidense, that is your business, I just don't believe in coincidences.

And yes, when you or anyone else tells me that I did not experience what I said that I did, you are calling me a liar, plain and simple.

quote:

I don't know of anywhere in Texas lowfence that can sustain a buck per 63 acres being shot. That is horrible wildlife management.


You may not, I do know low fence places that can stand that type of pressure and produce quality bucks at that.

Someone has fed you a line of

I know that deer can still live within that acreage but it would be a horribley unhealthy and skewed deer heard. How many quality deer come out of Leon county every year? How many come out of La Salle?


The answer to the question that I posed earlier, is the state was trying to dodge a draw system for those counties. Would you rather have a draw system?

One example of how AR's have worked in Lavaca county is that antlered bucks can NO LONGER be shot indiscriminately.

Some years back, we had an adjacent landowner of 28 acres next to a 500 acre property we own who had 4 blinds and 4 feeders running year round on his property. Before ARs, on opening morning it would sound like a small war erupting on the east side of our pasture. They literally hammered everything with hard antlers that crossed the fence, spikes, 3 pointers, etc.

We went from seeing 115 to 130 class deer to rejoicing when we spotted a multi-tined buck on our ranch in just a few years. As a result, we joined with several larger ranch neighbors to create a designated "managed lands" area to try and counter the results we were seeing before the smaller properties caused even greater harm to our wildlife populations.

A year or so after the Antler Restictions were passed and the game wardens actively enforced them with surprise checkpoints, we began to see more antlered deer. After approximately five years the nice, mature bucks are cropping up with regularity again. Seeing several multi-tined bucks on a morning hunt is a regular occurence now. The majority of landowners we know feel it has been extremely beneficial for the wildlife.

I am sure some lease hunters have a problem with ARs... but these are probably hunters I would not want on my property. The kind that feel the price they pay entitles them to collect every animal they have tags for without regard for the long-term good of all involved. Instead of viewing their lease payment as the chance to enjoy time in the great outdoors and an opportunity at a quality animal.

I hunt both my own properties and have been on a number of south Texas leases and I always feel, regardless of which property I am hunting, to be privileged to do so and to treat the land and wildlife on it as a resource to be passed on to the next generation. We are but stewards not owners of the land and the creatures on it. But that is just my $.02...

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
And yes, when you or anyone else tells me that I did not experience what I said that I did, you are calling me a liar, plain and simple.

Wow, your an emotional wreck right now.

I never said that prices weren't going up. You blame the rising prices on antler restrictions and I respectfully disagreed and said that I felt it was simply a supply and demand issue and that the upward trend of lease fee's was in line with the trend across the state. I never called you a liar and I am sorry that you do not have the mental capacity to recognize the fact that some people can have different opinions and it doesn't make anybody a liar.

If you were to present facts to support your claim it would help your argument, instead we get to hear that your an expert because your 61 years old and have hunted there since 1970 and nobody else has and this is supposed to make you right. That's such a childish way to support your position it wouldn't surprise me if you dropped a "nanny nanny boo boo" on us soon.

If you want anybody to take you seriously and you want to validate that the antler restrictions have caused lease fee's to go up in these few counties please post some facts that support this. As I mentioned previously, to put together something that carries any weight whatsoever you need to include samples from across the state. Until you can provide this Crazyhorse, we will continue to have a difference of opinion.

Also, before you tell me to prove that the restrictions didn't contribute to the rising cost, that's not my job. You are the one that made the claims that they did and it's not unreasonable to expect you to come up with quantifiable facts to support your argument.

quote:

quote:
I don't know of anywhere in Texas lowfence that can sustain a buck per 63 acres being shot. That is horrible wildlife management.

I know that deer can still live within that acreage but it would be a horribley unhealthy and skewed deer heard. How many quality deer come out of Leon county every year? How many come out of La Salle?

STU, you can not comprehend plain english. From post one, I have been talking about the conditions I am familiar with and hunt under in North Texas.

Do you know how many quality bucks or even legal bucks were killed in Archer, Young, Baylor, Jack or any of the counties that I have listed in my earlier post, No, you do not.

I do not care if there is a draw system in the counties you hunt in, it does not matter to me.

The counties that I am familiar with and that you are not, was not having the problems that the counties you are hunting in has had or are still having.

How many times does a person have to state that if a person is in an area and the AR's are working for them, that is good, but AR's are not the ultimate be all end all in deer management on a state wide basis.

When I can go out and spend an afternoon in a blind and see 20 to 30 deer, a third of them bucks and several of those bucks being 2.5 and older, some of them legal under the AR's but not legal under the lease regulation i.e. not 4.5 or older, and some of them legal under the lease regulation 4.5 or older, but not legal under the AR's because they are not 13 I.S., then that tells me the AR's are not addressing the supposed problem in this area.

Drummond, I ain't emotional about anything, I am out everyday working on these properties, seeing deer checking game cams etc. etc. I am just relating what I have experienced over my hunting career. Since you seem to know all about me and what I have experienced and have no trouble inferring that I am lying about everything I have said, then you should not have any problem with me calling you a SMFCS.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

Drummond, I ain't emotional about anything, I am out everyday working on these properties, seeing deer checking game cams etc. etc. I am just relating what I have experienced over my hunting career. Since you seem to know all about me and what I have experienced and have no trouble inferring that I am lying about everything I have said, then you should not have any problem with me calling you a SMFCS.

OK, I'll bite, what is a SMFCS?

I know nothing about you other that what you have posted in this thread.

We agree that the price of leases has gone up, we differ on the reason. Again, how is that calling anybody a liar? I have a difficuly time rationalizing irrational thoughts so spell it out for me Crazy

Thank you

Drummond

quote:

One example of how AR's have worked in Lavaca county is that antlered bucks can NO LONGER be shot indiscriminately.

Some years back, we had an adjacent landowner of 28 acres next to a 500 acre property we own who had 4 blinds and 4 feeders running year round on his property. Before ARs, on opening morning it would sound like a small war erupting on the east side of our pasture. They literally hammered everything with hard antlers that crossed the fence, spikes, 3 pointers, etc.

We went from seeing 115 to 130 class deer to rejoicing when we spotted a multi-tined buck on our ranch in just a few years. As a result, we joined with several larger ranch neighbors to create a designated "managed lands" area to try and counter the results we were seeing before the smaller properties caused even greater harm to our wildlife populations.

A year or so after the Antler Restictions were passed and the game wardens actively enforced them with surprise checkpoints, we began to see more antlered deer. After approximately five years the nice, mature bucks are cropping up with regularity again. Seeing several multi-tined bucks on a morning hunt is a regular occurence now. The majority of landowners we know feel it has been extremely beneficial for the wildlife.

I am sure some lease hunters have a problem with ARs... but these are probably hunters I would not want on my property. The kind that feel the price they pay entitles them to collect every animal they have tags for without regard for the long-term good of all involved. Instead of viewing their lease payment as the chance to enjoy time in the great outdoors and an opportunity at a quality animal.

Between the AR's, the wildlife co-op system, and increased activity of the GW's, everything worked the way it is supposed to.

In the area I am most familiar with the effects are fairly negligible. We don't have many real small acreage properties, poaching is a problem, not as major as it once was. When I began deer hunting in the early 70's our dweer population was low and concentrated in a few specific areas in these counties.

As more folks began moving out of the area and the marginal croplands were rotated out and became pasture, the deer herd started increasing. The poaching during those days included any deer. As the herd has grown, poaching these days is pretty well limited to the larger bucks in this area.

In some of the original counties placed under the AR's, the over all deer population is still at the point that the doe harvest is limited both numbers wise and days available to hunt them.

In some of the latest/last counties to go under the AR's conditions, herd wise the move to the AR's really has not made that much, if any difference.

With very few exceptions, the land owners/lease holders-managers in this area already had rules in place that stipulated what could and could not be shot, the majority were/are centered around shooting mature bucks and letting the younger bucks walk.

One of the problems, as I mentioned earlier, is that under the rules set up by the land owners/lease holders-managers mature 4.5 and older cull bucks could be taken out. With the AR's those animals now are being left in the herd to breed and pass along those genetics.

Like any other goverment program, things work great if everyone gets involved and there is an actual problem to be addressed. In the case of the counties I am most familiar with, there was not an actual problem to begin with. That is changing and not for the good.

quote:

OK, I'll bite, what is a SMFCS?

You think your so knowledgable, figure it out for yourself.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

OK, I'll bite, what is a SMFCS?

You think your so knowledgable, figure it out for yourself.

I would prefer to have you spell it out for me so I know I'm not missing something

Hey Dude, don't get so emotional!!!!

Think of it as just being one of those coincidental things that happened because you don't feel that you are calling me a liar about something, when all you are trying to say is that I am stupid and don't understand the working of things as worldly types like you!

If you want to continue telling folks how stupid I am concerning deer management and stuff I actually experience by all means go ahead, but if all you can come up with is just petty crap then your not really adding anything to the discussion YDB.

quote:

Do you know how many quality bucks or even legal bucks were killed in Archer, Young, Baylor, Jack or any of the counties that I have listed in my earlier post, No, you do not.

I know the carrying capacity of Jack and archer county is much less than La Salle. If you don't believe me contact you regional biologist. They are very helpful. Ask him if you should be killing one buck per 63 acres and see the expression on his face. If you think I don't know what I am talking about think again. My family ranched in palo pinto county for thirty years and that neighbors one of your counties.

LWD

STU, the carrying capacity is lower, but with supplementa feeding, the population is continuing to increase, and it is not just the doe segmentv of the population that is increasing.

When was the last time you or your family was in Palo Pinto county and what area in Palo Pinto?

Things have changed in this area, and things are not the same all over a county.

There are lots of deer in Palo Pinto going from Mineral Wells up to Graford and then over to Pk and down Highway 16 to Brad and back on 80 to hru Palo Pinto to MW.

There always has been a lot of deer in that area from back when I started hunting deer in the early 70's.

Over the past 40 years, I have noticed that lots of places in Palo Pinto that used to be wheat fields has become pasture, same in Stephens add infinitum.

Fact still remains, land owners/lease holders-managers up in that area have set up lease rules and regulations that address the situation better than the AR's do.

First off, you need to get that 63 acre business out of your head, that was back ib the early 70's, that all changed in the 90's and the AR's were not implemented up here until 2009 or so.

Your 63 acre reference is irrelevant to what is in place now.

On the pastures I work in, the set up is one hunter per 200 acres, limits are 1 trophy buck 4.5 or older and 1 spike or 1 cull buck 4.5 or older that is legal under the AR's and 1 spike or 2 spikes, and however many does you have tags for. Guests can only shoot spikes or does.

Those rules have been in place since 2001 or 2002, 7 or 8 years BEFORE the AR's were put in place. The AR's have made no signifigant impact up here, other than preventing hunters from taking out definite cull bucks that should be taken out to prevent them from passing along those bad genetics.

What was said about comparing large mouth bass to the way they are treating deer hunting is dead on.
To this date I have never known anyone that has had horns for dinner.
If that were serious about leaning the deer herd the number of deer allowed to be taken should be increased.
Seems them folks that have to have a book deer or nothing wants everyone else to pay for it.
In Parker county when they opened up the liberal doe season the locker plants were full of them for 2 years running.
The number of deer seen on my mother in laws ranch were like finding the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
I understand needing to keep the numbers of deer in an area under carrying capacity,but it seems that they have caused the lease price up in areas that didn't have things like this happen.
The number of deer seen on a lease in Jack county have declined for the last 3 years.

quote:

The number of deer seen on a lease in Jack county have declined for the last 3 years.

Holy cow we haf crazy horse who is against the AR because his deer density is increasing anyway in Jack county and then Plainsman is against the AR because the deer density is decreasing in Jack county.

Crazyhorse I haven't been back there in probably five years. The ranch we were on actualy had about %10 of the north end of the ranch was in Jack county. We were North east of Graford. There is not a single place in this state with or without supplimental feed that can support taking 1 buck per 63 acres. Like I said call your egional biologist. They are extremely helpful and see what he recomends for a harvest on your place.

I'll just call you Crazy for short, its more fitting anyway

Crazy, the definition of an opinion is a belief or conclusion held with confidence but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof.

The dispute is not whether your lease fee's have gone up to $300 per year(which is still dirt cheap), its whether the cause of the increase is directly correlated to the antler restrictions

On one hand you say that the antler restrictions have caused the increase and then later in the discussion you claim that most landowners already had rules in place that would be more beneficial because you could effectively cull older, less desirable bucks from the gene pool

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
With very few exceptions, the land owners/lease holders-managers in this area already had rules in place that stipulated what could and could not be shot, the majority were/are centered around shooting mature bucks and letting the younger bucks walk.

If you stand by your statement then I would hope you could understand why I would question your statement that the antler restrictions caused the increase, especially if it is not as productive as the rules that the landowners allegedly already had in place

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
One of the problems, as I mentioned earlier, is that under the rules set up by the land owners/lease holders-managers mature 4.5 and older cull bucks could be taken out. With the AR's those animals now are being left in the herd to breed and pass along those genetics.

So because you are now not allowed to kill cull bucks that dont meet certain criteria and are allowed to now stay in the gene pool and breed these less than desirable genetics the prices have gone up?

Doesnt make a bit of sense to a rational person

quote:

The dispute is not whether your lease fee's have gone up to $300 per year(which is still dirt cheap), its whether the cause of the increase is directly correlated to the antler restrictions

First off Mr. Perfect, I stated that lease prices had increased in this area. Those $150.00 to $300.00 price increases were tacked on to $1250.00 to $2500.00 per gun leases.

The land owners/lease holders/managers did and still do have lease rules and regulations in place that are better than the AR's for this area. The only difference the AR's have made is to make many obvious culls that need to be taken out of theherd, off limits because they do not meet the 13" I.S. regulation.

The AR's were implemented, the prices went up, no one gave any real thought about what was going to happen with the culls with he poor genetics.

Too many of the hunters leasing in this area are only concerned with 135 class and above main frame 8 and 10 pointers.

The only thing many of these guys are interested in is how to manage just the bucks, and only the better bucks, with no thought given to the overall increase in the herd.

It has only been since the AR's were instituted in this area of the state, approximately 2 years ago, that folks around here began to realize that there was a price to be paid, and that price is showing up at the feeders now, bucks that can not be taken out of the herd but do breed and produce offspring.

Rationality is only as good as the experience level of the person and the area or subject that experience was gained from.

STU, when my boss and his partner first started managing the initial 7300 acres in 2000, they got into the MLD program.

At that time the biologist in this area placed the population of deer at 1 per 40 to 45 acres.

Now the numbers are 1 deer per 10 acres or less.

You seem to have some kind of extreme mental block, because I have already explained and evidently you can not read, but that 500 acre lease with 8 hunters on it was the way things were up here in the early 70's.

That was a good while before deer hunting became so poular and before land owners began managing their properties for deer, and before all Texas counties came under TP&W jurisdiction.

Fast forward 30 years, and that same 500 acre lease I was on with 7 other hunters for a total of $500.00, now has 4 hunters at most at a cost of $1500.00 to $2000.00 dollars per gun. Now is one buck off of 125 acres too many?

On the 2700 acre pasture my boss hunts, they have a maximum of 10 hunters, that works out to 1 buck per 270 acres, is that too many?

quote:

originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
I can remember 500 acre deer leases costing $500.00 for the whole place for up to 8 hunters, dollar an acre, 20 years before your earliest time frame.

quote:

originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
You may not, I do know low fence places that can stand that type of pressure and produce quality bucks at that.

This thread is awesome, the guy who yearns for the return of the days when he and 7 of his buddies could go commit genocide on the deer herd on 500 acres for $62.50 per year is whining about antler restrictions being imposed on him. Hmm, now why in the world would we need antler restrictions?

quote:

OK, I'll bite, what is a SMFCS?

I think that is textese for st@p!d m*th&rf@ck!ng c%ck s@ck&r, I may be mistaken though.

quote:

This thread is awesome, the guy who yearns for the return of the days when he and 7 of his buddies could go commit genocide on the deer herd on 500 acres for $62.50 per year is whining about antler restrictions being imposed on him. Hmm, now why in the world would we need antler restrictions?

Full of shit as usual 505, ignorant and arrogant as always.

I don't want to return to those days, I just don't think the AR's are all that some people claim them to be, especially in the area I am most familiar with.

I don't hunt bucks, haven't since 2005, 4 years before the AR's were put in effect in the counties I hunt. I feel that the land owners/lease holders-managers in this area were doing a good job with out the AR's.

The hunting pressure is not that great, the deer herd is increasing annually, the system up here was in good shape, putting the AR's in effect here in these counties was a case of trying to fix something that was not broke.

If you will slime your big mouthed ass back thru this thread, most people state that the AR's are not perfect, but that something needed to be done and this was TP&W's best compromise plan.

As I have stated several times in this discussion, if people think they are working for them and the situation they are in or the area they hunt in, then that is great.

But the AR's are not the be all-end all solution for deet management problems all over Texas, and I don't like them, especially in areas where they are more detrimental than helpful.

And Drummond don't start crap with me on here and then start pm'ing me. I am just as entitled as you or 505 Blow Hole to have an opinion on a subject and to stae that opinion.

I do not ask or expect people to agree with me nor do I ask anyone to. Don't like my opinons or responses, put me on ignore, that will make two people happy, me and you. Also some of you arm chair pysco-analysts need to work on your theroies and grow up a little also.

quote:

Full of shit as usual 505, ignorant and arrogant as always.

I don't want to return to those days, I just don't think the AR's are all that some people claim them to be, especially in the area I am most familiar with.

I don't hunt bucks, haven't since 2005, 4 years before the AR's were put in effect in the counties I hunt. I feel that the land owners/lease holders-managers in this area were doing a good job with out the AR's.

The hunting pressure is not that great, the deer herd is increasing annually, the system up here was in good shape, putting the AR's in effect here in these counties was a case of trying to fix something that was not broke.

If you will slime your big mouthed ass back thru this thread, most people state that the AR's are not perfect, but that something needed to be done and this was TP&W's best compromise plan.

As I have stated several times in this discussion, if people think they are working for them and the situation they are in or the area they hunt in, then that is great.

But the AR's are not the be all-end all solution for deet management problems all over Texas, and I don't like them, especially in areas where they are more detrimental than helpful.

And Drummond don't start crap with me on here and then start pm'ing me. I am just as entitled as you or 505 Blow Hole to have an opinion on a subject and to stae that opinion.

I do not ask or expect people to agree with me nor do I ask anyone to. Don't like my opinons or responses, put me on ignore, that will make two people happy, me and you. Also some of you arm chair pysco-analysts need to work on your theroies and grow up a little also.

Randall,
Are you binge drinking again? Call Jim or Velma at the Abilene AA (325) 673-2711, they answer that phone 24hrs a day. I assume this is the closest chapter to you. Remember, it's not a weakness, it's an illness and it's not your fault. PM me if you would like some personal support.