GMMAT. . .

I'm really not trying to start an argument over it. . .but what fact are you trying to bolster? Your original post was title "Telling photo of soil nutrient content" and you used a photo to try and prove this. I know now what your goal or objective is. Deer in the midwest are getting better nutrition, which is an obvious fact. But the photo isn't a tell-tale sign the corn is from the midwest.

I want to point back to this. . .

Corn, with ample amounts of nutrients, appropriatehybrids selected for the appropriateenvironment, and of course, enough rainfall can appear tall, healthy, and produce decent yields (for the farmer, wildlife, etc) in a wide variety of soils. And thus, can appear like corn grown in superior environments.

While you aregoing to see a majority of our nation's corn from the Midwest, food plots around the country can have corn appear exactly as it didin the picture and at the same time, be nutrituous for the wildlife, decent yields, etc.

I agree with you on soil types. . .and why farmers in the midwest grow corn (heck, my father and I do it every year). Butany food plot can be manicured to provide thedeer in the area with the same nutrition theycan get throughout the midwest. Will it be onthe same scale as in theMidwest?Definitely not. . .thereturn isn't always therefor corn to be grown as a primary cash crop.

Trust me, I am not blind to the fact that deer in the midwest are getting a better chance to get propernutrition. ..and amajor reason behind that is large amount of good soil types. But conversely, with the right amount of rain and enough fertilizer, we could have corn in NC looking as well as some stuff in the Midwest.