Arguements from BOTH sides debunked..

I don't want this to become a OBR vs. TBR debate, honestly there are great arguements on both sides but here are a couple reasons both sides have stated that are absolutely ridiculous.

First from those in favor of a TBR:

#1-If allowed to take 2 bucks, I can manage the genes of the buck population better, taking one good buck and then a smaller one with lesser genes.

Okay, first of all you gotta know something about genes. Just like humans situations, nutritition, stress levels and timing of birth can play major factors in what we see on the tops of deer's heads. You cannot judge a deer's genetics simply by what it sports on the top of it's rack. Honestly, if you can, you need to report to some scientific lab because you are a special breed.

Only observations of the same buck over a few years can assist in the true judgement of genetics in a buck....but even then you could be seeing more of a result of their nutrition level or stress level. I remember one year there was a spike in our woods, he had maybe 6 inches of total antler...however his body structure was tough and stocky, almost calf like. Needless to say he had a tell tale marking on his left hid leg just above his knee which made it possible to pick him out rather quickly. This small "antlered" spike grew into a decent young basket 8 pointer in just one season! My educated guess is he was simply a late birth as while he was stocky he was a little under sized...and instead of his body focusing on antler growth it needed to focus on the body maturing.

So do yourself a favor and don't believe you're a genetic scientist capable of analyzing a deer's dna from the tree stand...that scraggly spike or four pointer may just grow into something special. And if he doesn't turn into anything...why not shoot him when his 3 or 4 1/2 years old and no matter what's on his head he'll be more meat and a wiley deer you managed to out smart?

#2 Meat...ugh the old meat arguement. If allowed to go to the two buck rule I could supply my family with more meat.

Really?! You aren't fooling anyone with this arguement. You're a trophy hunter and simply want to touch antlers twice as much. If filling the freezer is really all it is for you, than shoot does. I've yet to come across a hunting place where there just weren't any does...100% buck 0% doe spot. And I'll be honest does (the good eating 2 year olds) are usually very easily harvested as they aren't nearly intelligent enough to know any better half the time.

So leave the whole, "it'll help me fill the freezer better" bullcrap behind and come up with valid reasons.

Now for those in favor of the OBR:

#1 If we go to TBR we will decimate the buck population.

Okay, I'll be honest in areas, yes the buck population will get decreased substantially, but come on'? Somewhere I read that the last year TBR was used only 6000 hunters double-dipped, meaning they harvest two bucks...6000 spread out across the entire state isn't much at all. NOT CLOSE TO THE DECIMATION.

Now I'll admit with the new technology on bows, guns and now crossbows that number is likely to be higher...but to be frank with everyone, there just aren't as many hunters out there that will double dip as we think.


No matter what side you're on, remember we are a brethren and we need eachother to protect our hunting rights. Also when discussing this topic, please do so from an intelligent point of view, and leave the un-proven, naive or assumption type ideas at home.

Just my .02 rant.