Just because you can do something doesn't mean that you should do it. Apparently I struck a nerve with the word selfish, though perhaps "thoughtless" would have been more descriptive. Most simply give no thought to what that 1 1/2 year old buck would have been, or all the offspring he would have produced in the ruts he will never see.

Oldtimr: Yes, a buck carries the same genes his entire life, but how many ruts has the 1 1/2 year old been through, versus if he had lived to 5 1/2?

Flags: You may very well have more hunting experience than me, it doesn't mean I'm stupid or that I am wrong. After some research, I find that this is not the first vitriolic rant you have made against anyone who doesn't hunt only for meat.


I don't necessarily believe that a one buck limit is the answer, though I have personally witnessed the dramatic improvement in deer quality in Middle Tennessee in the last decade or so since TWRA started cutting back the buck limit. I can remember in the 90's and early 2000's, when the limit was something like 7 bucks, everyone around killed a truck load of scrub bucks and strutted around like they were some great white hunter. It was awful. I can remember someone killing a six point buck and them thinking it was something special. These were not novice hunters, either.

Kentucky has had good luck with a one buck limit it seems. Dad killed a B&C non-typical (scored 211) in South Central Kentucky in 1987, and then a solid 140 inch 8 point in 89 or 90. Such bucks were practically nonexistent in Middle Tennessee at that time, and are still rare, though I am seeing a considerable uptick in the number of 8 point bucks running around lately. I'm not sure we'll ever see deer in Eastern Tennessee, or Eastern Kentucky for that matter, like we do in the more western portions. The terrain is rugged and there is a lack of agriculture in the east, and the deer just never seemed to take hold there quite like they did in other places.