I can respect that. I still don't agree that the state made a "bogus rule" when in fact it is based on real data from atleast 2 sources. Like I said sorry it isn't working for you. Sounds to me from your post Sig, that deer numbers/harvest limits are the issue in your area. Am I correct?

That is part of the problem... the whole scheme doesn't set well with me either. First, we've been hunting here for about 12 years, and the old men in our group of friends longer than that, and we were seeing increases every year, until the AR's(and accompanied increased bag limits) came about. Since then, fewer deer total.

What few bucks we see, are old, 5+ bucks with 11inch basket racks, most are even slick 6's (a genetic inferiority by everyone's standards). But we can't take them, and they won't ever get over 13, ever. But they get to keep breeding and passing that lineage to their offspring each year.

And since the inclusion of spikes, it's our opinion that fewer of them are surviving, since no one needs to "wait" for that trophy deer. Most people in the county here don't give a ratsarse about a trophy, or atleast know they need a deer first, and a trophy second.

Its a cycle, and its not getting better. And under the current system, there's not much way to correct it or manage it.


RedneckMesiah from here killed the only legal buck, a real thick horned big old buck, taken since AR started. It was a monster by local standards, but barely 13 inches. Great deer none the less. (OK, there was his brother in law's button buck taken on Thanksgiving day last year thinking it was a doe)

In our place and in our views, there was nothing wrong with what we were seeing. Especially since numbers were up. Now we don't have the numbers, or the trophy deer.

How big is your place. How many neighbors have you talked to that are in on your plans? Do you have problems with neighbors shooting more deer, any new neighbors that may be shooting deer now? Just trying to figure out your decreased deer numbers. Also with a lower number of deer on your place you should have more food available thus creating bigger antlered deer (ie over 13"). Seems like something is not adding up at all. Do you have a game cam out?

PLenty of acreage for east texas (over 400 now) other place was even bigger, neighbors are friendly but the ones that live there are going to shoot a deer in deer season no matter what, and I can't blame them. They pay for their raising all year so they need to get one. Deer hunting neighbors are doing the same thing in my opinion, and it's perfectly legal now, drop the first spike you see no matter what, get all the does you can Thanksgiving weekend, and all the time look for the elusive big one.

The decreased deer numbers are easy to figure, until AR's started you could only get one a year. Now they let you get four. That's not opinion, or rocket science, just math. I am not saying everyone is getting four, but many are... and I don't think the area can handle those numbers for an extended period of time.


Your last statement about decreased deer/more forage is true, but nutrition here has never been the issue with antler size, and again, we never had a problem with antler size, since we didn't expect to see Muy Grande there. There was a chance, guess there still is a chance, to get a nice buck...but the chance is definitely diminished if the numbers are down.

Game cams see the same thing we see.

All great questions, and I am glad to fill you in, but we're not new at land or deer management. There's a distinct event that occurred to start the decrease in numbers of deer....

What are your management objectives? What is the outline of your plan. Just my .02 but 400 is hard to manage on but is do-able. A deers home range is one square mile (640 acres). AR's can still be effective even though 4 deer are allowed to be shot in your area. You could try to work with your neighbors to reduce the number of animals they kill. I still believe your issues lies with the number of deer that can be killed legally in your area (Deer densities), not if a deer is going to make 13" wide or more.

No amount of management, groceries or age can improve poor genetics.

There is no way possible to manage, feed and breed donkeys and have them produce race horses, same goes for deer

Management objectives: Venison Sausage

I. wake up around 6:00-6:30
A. coffee
B. 2 eggs over easy
C. Constitutional

II. Head Outside
A. Start truck or tractor
B. Call/load dog

III. Head to barn
A. load feed & hay
B. Put out feed
C. check & count livestock

IV. "Make a round" in the pasture
A. See deer
B. Shoot deer
C. clean deer
D. Make Sausage

Really it's about that simple. I also hunt other counties so just "taking a deer" is not a problem. But it is for the guys in Red River only... and it's just not right in any way to use a blanket policy that might work on one place to govern another. They/We shouldn't have to change our deer hunting, or lose it altogether, to help someone else somewhere get bigger horns.

Here's some of the best info. I have found on deer and it even includes how to age one: http://chefdepot.net/agingwildgame.htm

I disagree Rustler. Deer are not as a whole in certain areas not dispositioned to poor genetics. Just doesn't work that way. Antlers on deer are mainly a product of the health of the range. Not saying you can make every deer into a 150" monster, but you can make a place with generally poor weight/antler quality into quality deer (for argument sake over the 13" AR's) just by improving the range (ie adding supplemental feeding, bringing back native browse, etc.)

I thought you mentioned earlier in your post that you have been managing deer for a long time? If you are managing you would have a clear plan and objectives. I just wanted to see what they were?

Different plans for the different places, in Red River, until a few years ago, we were looking for 4.5 or better bucks, slick 6's, and 8 points or better. With the increase in limits around us, that has become pointless.

If we stuck to that and Antler Restrictions, we might as well quit hunting that property. But that's probably what some people want.

Our other places in Archer, Baylor, and Lampassas Counties have different plans based on the combined wishes of landowners and hunters.

This is our 12th year to manage places for deer outside of our own hunting, about 14,000 acres in 11 blocks with 64 hunters/spots total.

You can call me a dummy but I don't understand your first sentence. (not picking on ya)

I couldn't disagree more with your health of the range statement.


Google " The importance of genetics in deer antler growth" or you can substitute production for growth.
You'll find 9380 to 40,300 hits, most will agree genetics are one of the main factors in antler size.

Or if you want the short version. poke here

If you believe all breeding age deer (buck and doe) in every area of Tx have the genetic potential to produce 13" and over offspring, I dont know what to say, except, it simply isn't true.

I like the mule to racehorse analogy....

We have more fora, age and nutrients than most parts of the world for deer. It's not the nutrition side that's hurting here.

There are many different kinds of whitetails in America, and even in Texas. It would take something strange for my offspring to play in the NBA.....ever.

You guys are missing the point. I don't think that every deer has the potential to be a monster buck and never have. I don't even think that every buck can/will be over 13". The main number can however, but they need age, nutrition. Genetics does play a role in antler size. But to think that genetics alone affects the antler size is ignorant at best. Deer need food, good quality food (high protein values) in order to produce top of the line racks for there genetic potential. That is proven. Deer need age, nutrution and genetics to produce top quality bucks (monsters). I am just talking about getting deer over the 13" AR's. East Texas along with most of the Southeast has substandard natural nutrition for whitetails. Guys please do a little research on what it actually takes to manage your herds in a positive light. It seems that you guys need to educate yourselves on what exactly management of a deer herd even is. I am done with this conversation.

This thread is offically being sponsered and ran by the energizer bunny.

Were did you get the info that says east tx has sub standard natural nutrition? South tx grows big bucks and it looks like you would be lucky if you could grow a good crop of tumbleweeds. We have more crops and tons of white oaks and other mast crops. And it it like the bunny, it keeps going and going.

Just becuase you have water doesn't mean you have great nutrition.

East TX has histrotically bad soil. The plants in S. TX and Panhandle may not look like much but the nutrition level is higher.

good example: Compare coastal hay protien levels from East TX compared to say Cross timbers or even furter west. They will get blown a way. More rain isn't always a good thing.

Hit the nail on the head there. South Texas has MANY native plants that are very high in protein.

I will bet east tx has just as many nutritional plnts and deer are foragers and eat many different plants besides hay. The big reason deer get bigger in south tx is because they have a longer life span and a whole lot less pressure than east tx hunter around every corner problem and the small acredge land owner. [wich im one of] Hunted many times in west tx and a few times in s. tx and seen many a skinny deer. I will take e.tx everytime for deer food quality but for numbers s.tx wins everytime for numbers.

Whooooaaaa.

First, I am done having my intelligence questioned or insulted because I don't believe what Antler Restriction Proponents are saying. Just because someone disagrees doesn't make them stupid, or ignorant.

Second, why don't you guys say what county you hunt in? If it's a lease, family owned land, or what? And what was your management plan before Antler Restrictions?

Lastly, while I am not a biologist, I have raised a bunch of cows, and been around raising even more. Her we can measure cows per acre. In the Panhandle it's acres per cow... don't lecture me on the greatness of prairie grasses over bermuda. Same for deer, there may be great things other places too, but the vegetation, agrarian and natural, is abundant in North East Texas. Saying there's not enough food sources here is like not having enough sand in the desert.

I am glad to discuss, and even debate the situation with all of you, but I am not getting into a childish name calling session, or seeing whose is bigger, or comparing IQ's. I will not stoop to that level, I quit that about the 7th grade.

Do South Texas bucks poosibly have "wider" antlers because they live in more open spaces than bucks in the woods of East Texas?

LMAO thats pretty funny

I agree east texas does have an age harvest problem... so did TPWD AR's : )

J/K Again not a big AR guy but thought that was funny.

no name calling here.. I promise.

Not challageing IQ's either.

Not saying your deer don't have enough to eat just saying comparing forage in S. TX is not comparing apples to apples. I'm just saying S.Tx has a better soil(higher plant nutirtion) then East Tx soil. Give the south & west the same amount of rain in one year and you will running more cows too.
See some brutes come out of east texas. I actually think well know that parts of east has as good if not better genetics then a lot of south texas. Being that East Tx's deer came from there and upnorth