Atlasman, I' m about to quit,but aren' t you saying skill is more important than land in the success of the harvest ,cause it sure looks like your skilled hunter is doing better both places (?)
No I am not.........and what are you ready to quit??? I am not trying to prove you wrong man................I am just giving reasons why I voted for land.
If 2 guys hunt crapville USA and the average hunter gets skunked while the skilled hunter bags a spike buck after 2 straight years of hard work and long hours on stand........I wouldn' t call either one of them a shining success. Spending an entire season and being able to count how many deer you saw on one hand and never even coming close to a shot attempt is not a successful year.........even if someone else had a worse year then you.
Put both those guys in a well populated sweet spot and they will both enjoy much more success. The skilled hunter may get a more impressive deer.......he may not. Either way you will have a tough time convincing either one of them that they did not reap more success on the better land because they will both point to the mounts on their walls and the freezer full of meat as proof. The skilled hunter may get bragging rights with a better rack but that hardly makes the average hunter a failure with a solid 8-10 trophy and a freezer full of backstraps. This was all acomplished with less effort then they put into Crapville USA to get a spike between 2 guys over 2 seasons.
All the skill in the world will get you no deer if your land doesn' t provide them. Average to below average skill will get you deer year after year if you are fortunate enough to hunt bountiful land.