• Help Support TNDeer:

Can You Have Too Much Land To Hunt?

M

Mike Belt

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 26, 1999
Messages
27,376
Location
Lakeland, Tn.
Not hunting over the next couple of days and my mind wanders....

I hunt at Ames... touted as a premium Tn hunting club. We've been under a buck management program for the last 11 years or so. We have 18,600 continuous acres although safety zones and terrain reduce that by at least 25%. Over that time span we may have taken a couple of bucks scoring in the 160's and the 150's, several in the 140's, and a quite a few from the low 120's to the mid 130's. Our land is spread between 2 counties; Hardeman and Fayette. We have enough property that to some degree we can (or should) somewhat be able to control the buck population; both in number and size. As an added feature you almost never have to worry about crossing a property line when hunting. The rub comes when properties bordering us (or anywhere else in the state for that matter) are killing the same caliber of bucks we are and better.... and on properties ranging from 50-500 acres in size. Which takes me back to the original question: can you have too much land to hunt?

Deer are going to travel with complete disregard for property lines. When doing so they may cross several property lines. Those properties from 50-500 acres all probably have hunters on them. Each of those properties may be divided up into timbered tracts, agriculture, and pastures thus reducing available cover for those traveling deer. This would seem to make those targeted bucks easier or more readily killed. So... which is better? Having enough land to raise and attain a number of older, bigger bucks which you may never lay eyes on or a smaller parcel of land more defining travel patterns and sightings for those bucks that could potentially travel through that area? Thoughts?
 
I believe that you can. White oak is 7000 plus acres in a block with that much I don't feel like deer have to move a long distance. Or move during hunting times. Very difficult to place stands and to find the deer and move with them accordingly.
 
The larger land tract gives you a better chance of keeping deer within your management and protection under your own qdm practices. 50-500 acres isn't generally enough land to "hold" Deer within its borders.
How is a 500 acre parcel surrounded by 13,000 acres any different than what you have to hunt other than the fact that you don't have neighboring hunters pushing deer for you?
With that much land if you're truly not doing any better than the surround areas with less land and less management, either the hunters need to step up, or the Plantation needs to change their management.
I sure wouldn't pay that much per year to hunt property that cant produce bucks bigger than 120-130 on a regular basis.
 
:drool: hFrom a management standpoint I don't think you can have too much but from a hunter's standpoint I think you can . But with that being said have any of the managers tried to get adjoining landowners to adopt Ames' QDM goals ? If not then your problem with deer raised on Ames will continue to be killed on adjacent property . Being a hunter you would think thousands of acres would be a dream but it can be a unsettling nightmare trying to second guess your stand selection . One year I was on four different leases one being several thousand acres in different counties and the others ranging from 300 acres to 93 acres and nan that was a headache trying to figure out where was the best place . I want to tell you I didn't fare well but it was one of those years when deer came to wherever I was but I was second guessing myself constantly . I settled the next year on two of the smaller tracts and have done better now down to one lease plus what I have I don't pay for , easier on the mind . Seems to me Mike from reading your posts you are second guessing your self at times . Good to do that because your trying for perfection but adding stress when you should be enjoying yourself . From what I've read you seem to be a dedicated hunter sticking to goals so I hope for you the best !!
 
I guess the point I was trying to make is that bordering managed land or not, do you stand a better chance at seeing your buck on a smaller parcel (provided he's crossing it) than you do on the large parcel of land where he could be anywhere. And yes, I second guess myself a lot... particularly when I'm recording so many 0 sightings in areas with traditionally high deer sightings as well as newly sought out areas. A few trips like that are to be expected. Most trips like that are highly unusual.
 
The reason those 50 to 500 acre joining properties have that same opportunity at older bucks that an AMES member does is because of the work AMES has done to manage deer. The same 50 to 500 acre property placed elsewhere in the state wouldn't fare so well. They are simply benefiting from the inevitable overflow of deer from a joining property. I'd always want more property compared to less. Just because you have a small property and know it intimately doesn't mean you can always find where the deer are at any given time. On a small property, they may not be on your property at all a lot of the time!
 
Just my opinion, but yes you can have to much land. By that I mean if you don't hunt areas of the property, deer eventually will figure that out and seek those areas out. Ames is one of the few places that I can see this being a problem.
 
I have a lot of different tracts to hunt. None are over 500 acres but numerous tracts. The problem with that is that I can't get to them all during the year. So I may miss out on a giant just because I do t have the time or resources to monitor them all.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
There wasn't a buck killed all of archery or muzzleloader season. Not until rifle started did we kill a buck and thus far I think we're behind in kills and of those made, half are bucks that didn't score.

Going back to smaller parcels, granted with more land you can manipulate the buck structure better. Hunting smaller parcels you may not have the chance at a big buck often but when and if he does cross your land you have a better chance at taking him than if you have a lot more land with a lot more bucks but never see him. Because of this I often see as good of bucks as we kill and better taken on much smaller parcels of land...AND I'M NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT LAND THAT BORDERS US. Just makes me wonder about our place.
 
I know youre not necessarily talking about "where" to hunt on a certain amount of land.. But I go back and forth about 15 times trying to decide out of 3-4 spots where to go that day on 40 acres, cant imagine having that much to choose from.. Id drive myself crazy haha
 
Sometimes no matter what you do its just not in the cards that day. I tell my Son..we are part time hunters hunting full time deer. Just enjoy the opportunity.
 
jb357":vb1i4tai said:
The larger land tract gives you a better chance of keeping deer within your management and protection under your own qdm practices. 50-500 acres isn't generally enough land to "hold" Deer within its borders.
How is a 500 acre parcel surrounded by 13,000 acres any different than what you have to hunt other than the fact that you don't have neighboring hunters pushing deer for you?
With that much land if you're truly not doing any better than the surround areas with less land and less management, either the hunters need to step up, or the Plantation needs to change their management.
I sure wouldn't pay that much per year to hunt property that cant produce bucks bigger than 120-130 on a regular basis.
Click to expand...
from experience,no matter what you do,some areas are just not going to consistently produce the size of deer that people think it's going to by changing bag limits,age structure,and other things.I am speaking from the experience of being in clubs that implemented these strategies a decade ago.
 
Tennessee280":km33bqpy said:
I know youre not necessarily talking about "where" to hunt on a certain amount of land.. But I go back and forth about 15 times trying to decide out of 3-4 spots where to go that day on 40 acres, cant imagine having that much to choose from.. Id drive myself crazy haha
Click to expand...

EXACTLY!!! I will pick one spot and have pictures of bucks at the spot I did not pick. Seems like a never ending merry-go-round...
 
Mike Belt":3bk9f4kg said:
There wasn't a buck killed all of archery or muzzleloader season. Not until rifle started did we kill a buck and thus far I think we're behind in kills and of those made, half are bucks that didn't score.

Going back to smaller parcels, granted with more land you can manipulate the buck structure better. Hunting smaller parcels you may not have the chance at a big buck often but when and if he does cross your land you have a better chance at taking him than if you have a lot more land with a lot more bucks but never see him. Because of this I often see as good of bucks as we kill and better taken on much smaller parcels of land...AND I'M NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT LAND THAT BORDERS US. Just makes me wonder about our place.
Click to expand...
Mike the realization that I come to on our small club is that the harder we work on habitat improvement,the harder it gets to see and kill these bucks once they reach 4 1/2 years old.the bottom line is they just don't have to move.I honestly think once the deer mature,the less they try to breed.
 
Several of my buddies own or hunt parcels of land that are 50 acres or less, and they seem to take very good bucks almost every year. And not just because they border better properties, as a matter of fact, most are near either urban areas or heavily hunted farms. These guys are more or less forced to hunt what they have, which is usually one or two stand sites, and they hunt them during the best times and the odds have been in their favor.

In know on the rare occasions that I hunt the family farm, I drive myself crazy second guessing myself and thinking I should be in another stand, especially with the low deer sightings I've experienced over the last several years.

Yes, I think there is only so much land a guy can hunt effectively.
 
I'm not an expert, but I think it's obvious that Ames is poorly managing the deer herd for big bucks. I don't know enough of their particular management plan, but sometimes proof is in the pudding. 16000 acres is lots of land. There's (probably, tell me if I'm wrong) enough pressure on Ames to keep deer moving. What's the hunter per acre ratio? I'm guessing that it's not a nutrition issue or genetics issue if the deer around Ames are getting bigger racks.

As bucks get older, their racks get bigger. That IMO could be the problem, and it may be caused by different things, high grading being one.
 
poorhunter":3sqlm6fb said:
I'm not an expert, but I think it's obvious that Ames is poorly managing the deer herd for big bucks. I don't know enough of their particular management plan, but sometimes proof is in the pudding. 16000 acres is lots of land. There's (probably, tell me if I'm wrong) enough pressure on Ames to keep deer moving. What's the hunter per acre ratio? I'm guessing that it's not a nutrition issue or genetics issue if the deer around Ames are getting bigger racks.

As bucks get older, their racks get bigger. That IMO could be the problem, and it may be caused by different things, high grading being one.
Click to expand...
Not always true.the racks get bigger if the deer is eating.if the deer are stressed they will stay hid when they should be eating which in return grows smaller racks
 
I once hunted a lease with 5000 acres. I think there were something like 113 ag fields on this place. There was one substantial block of timber and the rest was in strips of timber that ran between these ag fields. Although we may not have had the opportunity to raise or see as many big bucks as we do at Ames, the opportunity to see one "IF" he chose to travel through our property was actually as great or greater than at Ames. That's one of the reasons the hunting season in some Midwestern states is shorter, limited to certain weapons, and you see such great deer coming out of them.

Hey, I don't want to sound like I'm crying in my beer. If I wanted to leave Ames and hunt elsewhere I could. I'm also not trying to say we don't have any deer at Ames. I do believe we have much fewer deer than several years back and it appears to be getting worse. No matter what we do or don't do, the biggest percentage of bucks we have wouldn't get much bigger. That's just a matter of where we're located and the soil types, etc. We can't grow Iowa deer in Grand Junction Tn. I don't disagree with our buck standards. 125" or 4.5 years old. In fact I'd promote that same regulation anywhere. I do disagree with the number of does we kill... or are required to kill. If that number was reduced there would be more deer running around. They may not be any bigger than what we already have but they'd be there to be seen and hunted. The more bucks you have the more opportunity for a few of them to slip through the cracks and reach whatever potential they may have.

poorhunter...Believe me we have the land and plenty of places to avoid pressure and the deer eat just fine. I think our problem is 2 fold. We kill too many does to sustain a population adequate to maintain hunter satisfaction in sightings combined with the fact that we have entirely too much cover. Just as you wouldn't expect to go sit in the middle of a Walmart parking lot and kill a buck we feel much the same hunting some of the areas we have. I highly doubt that it happens but I suspect we have some areas a deer could live out his entire life without ever leaving cover that's almost impossible to penetrate, much less hunt. kill
 

Latest posts

Back
Top