• Help Support TNDeer:

Crossing the Campbell County Line . . . . .

jar":30zry9ol said:
Ive hunted several of the counties around Whitley. Bell and Knox mostly on coal company land. A lot of the guys will shoot whatever buck they see. The length of the gun season seems to me to be more of a factor than what the buck limit is. On most of my trips I'm not expecting to see many deer maybe a couple for a weekend of hunting but seeing the type of deer my cousins have on camera makes it worth a 4 hour drive for me.
Click to expand...

If harvest numbers are similar in Campbell, TN and Whitney, KY that wouldn't make sense. If a place had longer to hunt, they would more than likely hold out for a larger buck, but that isn't happening. If the season were shorter, you would more than likely capitalize on your first opportunity.

Without over-analyzing the numbers, limits and populations don't appear to be a factor either.
 
If harvest numbers are similar, deer populations, public vs private land,, and all regional influences appear to be similar down to median household income, it dang near has to be the soil. Ever heard the phrase "there's something in the water." It fits here.
 
What would be interesting is the data showing points what percentage were 4 points 6 points and 8 etc... I ain't doing it say its the soil believe what you wanna believe it's a mindset they want big deer and that's what the majority shoot. Blame it on. What you want to blame it on but its obvious.
 
deerhunter10":2x9avbrj said:
What would be interesting is the data showing points what percentage were 4 points 6 points and 8 etc... I ain't doing it say its the soil believe what you wanna believe it's a mindset they want big deer and that's what the majority shoot. Blame it on. What you want to blame it on but its obvious.
Click to expand...

Being picky about what they shoot wouldn't explain 15 more B and C bucks across the line. Sooner or later more than 1 would come out TN just by accident. Allowing a deer to just get old won't get him in the books. They have to have superb genetics and nutrition, along with age.
 
deerhunter10":ur9jl451 said:
You said it age so there the buck limit comes into play.
Nutrition how?
How are the genetics that different in that little of a distance ?
Click to expand...

That's what I'm telling you. There are old deer in that county of TN, the genetics are the same as across the state line, so they get it from the nutrition in the SOIL.
 
deerhunter10":4avxcwxy said:
How? He just showed you data that would disagree with that statement so how? How is it different? What do they have that we don't in our soil?
Click to expand...

I'm not a scientist, but by deductive reasoning there is pretty good evidence here for some scientist to conduct some new geologic research in that region of the country. I bet there is an available government grant for such a wasting of time as well.
 
A lot less hunting pressure in Whitley Co ( only 9 days of rifle hunting) with a one buck limit can make a lot of difference overall in a span of 30yrs or so... Let's not forget we are only talking about 16 deer out of prolly 20,000 in a span of about 30yrs.....oh and let's not forget about the most restrictive antlerless harvest zone in the state... You know the momma deer do have something to do with making big racks......
 
Roost 1":35s4281h said:
A lot less hunting pressure in Whitley Co ( only 9 days of rifle hunting) with a one buck limit can make a lot of difference overall in a span of 30yrs or so... Let's not forget we are only talking about 16 deer out of prolly 20,000 in a span of about 30yrs.....oh and let's not forget about the most restrictive antlerless harvest zone in the state... You know the momma deer do have something to do with making big racks......
Click to expand...

Roost, I don't know the numbers for all those years, all I looked at was last year. But if they are similar, as they were last year, then season length and bag limit have nothing to do with it, and a shorter season would encourage someone to shoot quicker because they wouldn't have as much time to wait on a biggun. That's all I'm saying. There may be a very 'deep' reason, but skimming the surface, it seems pretty logical that there's "something in the water."
 
HUNTER MINDSET........ That's what different. Us KY boys might not be as quick on the trigger as you think.. Everybody is using trail cams nowadays, we know what's around. Not too many years ago I hunted the same buck for 3yrs, I never got him and eventually stopped getting pics.. But for those 3yrs I did not shoot any buck while waiting on him. I was fortunate to kill a nice buck this year, although I never had a picture of him the neighbors had several. He was living on their farm but he chased a doe onto my place and I killed him, first time in 4yrs I have killed a buck... Just saying that a shorter season does not make for a faster trigger...
 
Below is a link to the USDA's national soil map of "alfisols".
We have been told for years that the main reason KY produces more larger antlered bucks than TN is because KY has more of these alfisols.
I believe that has been a true statement, and may still be.

But to believe the soil is the primary factor for why Whitley County is producing more larger antlered bucks than Campbell, would that mean our nation's leading soil scientists made a huge mistake when they didn't show better soils in Whitley County?

Then there is the issue of much of West TN ---- notice all those alfisols, just not as much in TN as we see in KY. Again, how could a single Appalchacian county in East KY be producing more larger antlered bucks than ALL of West TN, much of which is rich these alfisols?
ALFISOL Map
http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_M ... 237724.jpg

My entire premise for starting this thread was the primary factor for these different outcomes CANNOT be the soil.
 
Roost, if someone in Campbell county had pictures of a huge buck, I would think they would try just as hard to kill him, unless they don't care about antlers. You can't make someone care about them. The TN guy would have longer to get him as well apparently.

LBLMan, I'm not a soil expert, and I don't know how soils relate exactly to antlers, but they are obviously a contributing factor. I don't think science has figured it out completely yet. The glaciers seem to have stopped in the EXACT areas you are referring to.

1. Do you not think there is reason to believe, based on some of the above assumptions, that there could be something in the soil helping produce larger antlered deer.

2. If every aspect otherwise is comparable, what is your reasoning as to why the deer bigger.

Please answer the post in it's entirety.
 
There is also the issue of "Mollisols".
For years I've been told the main reason some mid-western states grow such large antlered bucks regularly is because they are rich in these mollisols. I have no doubt this is a major factor, and may very well be THE main factor, there.

MOLLISOL Map . . . . .
http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_M ... 237740.jpg

Note all those vast areas of these mollisols in places such as Central Illinois, Iowa, and the "Great Plains" States.

But do you see any mollisols in Kentucky?

Isn't Kentucky now producing more larger antlered bucks than most (if not all) of these states so rich in mollisols?

Doesn't this seem to contradict much of what we've been thinking about the soil being the most important factor?
 
The bordering county example is starting to sway me more in the direction that soil could be astronomically huge. Could be a breakthrough, or a type of soil that hasn't even been discovered as of yet. J/K, but bigger than thought. In this example it appears there is something north of the border besides seasons, limits, population, etc. Maybe its the air. lol
 
AXL78":38tkd15b said:
Roost 1":38tkd15b said:
A lot less hunting pressure in Whitley Co ( only 9 days of rifle hunting) with a one buck limit can make a lot of difference overall in a span of 30yrs or so... Let's not forget we are only talking about 16 deer out of prolly 20,000 in a span of about 30yrs.....oh and let's not forget about the most restrictive antlerless harvest zone in the state... You know the momma deer do have something to do with making big racks......
Click to expand...

Roost, I don't know the numbers for all those years, all I looked at was last year. But if they are similar, as they were last year, then season length and bag limit have nothing to do with it, and a shorter season would encourage someone to shoot quicker because they wouldn't have as much time to wait on a biggun. That's all I'm saying. There may be a very 'deep' reason, but skimming the surface, it seems pretty logical that there's "something in the water."
Click to expand...

Ridiculous to even remotely think that season length and bag limit have nothing to do with it.
 
scn, I'm going on the premise of one years harvest data and assuming deer population levels are pretty close too. I didn't say its right, but if harvest is the same, and deer population is the same, how would Ky's sample size out of the same population of deer have more B and C entries than Tn's sample size.

It wouldn't matter what season length, bag limit or anything had to do with it.

If TN had 1000 deer and killed 150. and
If KY had 1000 deer and killed 150
Why does KY sample size produce higher scoring racks?

Those are my presumptions, theoretically.
 
It is pretty obvious that the B&C deer from that area are older age class deer. The rugged terrain, couple with a VERY short rifle season, gives some deer a chance to make it into the mature status where they express the majority of their genetic potential. They don't get old when they are killed at 2.5 and 3.5.

Season length and bag limits are two of the biggest harvest factors. In states with short seasons but very high hunter pressure during those seasons, there are bucks that have learned to survive by turning virtually nocturnal for that short period of time. It is hard for them to keep that routine when they are hunted for weeks upon weeks like in TN. They don't get into the mature ages where they express the majority of their genetic potential when they are killed at 2.5 or 3.5.

And, before anyone jumps, I'm NOT advocating that TN mirror their season after KY. I have little doubt that we would see a dramatic change in our older buck structure with a "KY season". I don't think we would equal the B&C results due to the differences in soils, but we would see many more deer in the 150s-160s.

But, there is a lot to give up for the small improvement we would see. Think about being stuck with two weeks or less of rifle season and not being allowed to take any vacation time during that period. Or, think about being sick, or having a vehicle broken down during that short time that keeps you at the house.

IMO, we have it pretty good here. We have a long season that gives us the opportunity to get out even with life's other issues, and an increasing number of "nice" deer to hunt. It is a pretty good deal right now.
 
The number of male deer harvested was very similar in each county, so this assumes that KY has more older deer in their sample size. TN would have some older deer in their's as well. If those county's harvest records were broken out into age class, and only took deer killed in "prime" scoring condition, I still don't think it would show an even balance at all. 1 to 15 is huge. Just out of happenstance, luck, or whatever, TN would have had at least 1 or 2 more drifters, if they are capable of growing them just like KY. Just because you can't kill them due to pressure doesn't fit well. A 5 y/o is just as hard to kill regardless of score. A statistical analysis I think would show that, but it is not that big a deal one way or the other to me.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top