RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

I live and hunt in one of those big deer states up here. Big deer meaning size of body mass and not the size of deer numbers... Success is mostly based on hours spent hunting for that big one..Although in this area seeing much of any deer is doing something most of the time. Big woods and low deer numbers success has a lot of different factors to weigh in. The size of the racks on most big deer up here wouldn't make a Pope and Young while body mass makes up for alot of it... I did see one yesterday while heading out on a dirt road fishing, I will be looking for this fall. That is one of the rare ones that carried a hugh rack complete with a lot of body mass. So i will be putting in my hours looking for him...Also a factor that should be concidered is if you hunt from a stand or do you stalk your game? I enjoy stalking and believe me it is a very hard thing to do up this way. But, that is my stile of hunting...

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

You brought up a good point that escaped me earlier.

Its hunters who go after one paticular deer. They may have pics of him from a trail camera, seen him during the summer or at some point during the season. They let deer after deer walk just in hopes of getting a shot at this buck.

It makes it so much sweeter when you finally get (if you ever do) the deer you've hunted all season, two, or even three seasons.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

All depends on what you consider a "successfull or prolific hunter".

What if I specifically picked out a certain 4.5 year old doe that I wanted to kill. I scouted this one particular doe for 2 years and planned my attack for the upcoming season in October. Then I grabbed my loin cloth and spear and headed to the woods. I rolled myself in mud and cow manure for scent control and climbed a tree. I stood on top of a big limb and predicted the time the doe would come under me to the minute. When she arrived I jumped down with my spear tarzan style stabbed her. She drags me around for 500 yards through the woods and thickets untill she finally expires. Successful hunter?

or
(not that this is that easy, but to make my point)
A hunter in Illinois has several mature bucks running around his/her private non pressured property. After hundreds of pictures from his trail cam he has determined the exact time he needs to be in his summit viper treestand to kill one of 12 140" bucks he has caught on film. He slips into his enigma camo and grabs his pack with all the modern gear. Up he goes with his bowtech guardian. Just as planned a mature buck comes down the trail and he rips an arrow at 300fpsthrough the heart. The buck drops on sight. It scores 142"'s!!!

Who's the more successfull hunter?

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

Both hunters acomplished the goal they set out for. So there for both are successful.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

It takes a great hunter to kill a shadow.[8D]

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

Nice Deer!!;)

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

I would have let him go at least one more year.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

So Scott.....

Let's say the guy does all these things....

He's scouted, plotted, planned all year round.....but he lives in homestead, Florida. You still say 25%? Heck....you admitted he would have to change his location to be considered (in the public eye) "successful" or "prolific".

I'd say location was 100%.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

If size is the criteria for being successful than location is everything.

Here in Florida a 110inch, 125# deer is a dandy.

In Ohio I saw many two year olds that blew that mark away.

So if size matters, a Florida hunter who has taken 25 bucks all under 120" is not considered successful?

I would have to dis-agree.

If memory serves me right Florida is the only state in the lower 48 that doesn't have a BC buck in the book.

To me a successful bow hunter can be from anywhere in the country and if you plop him down in any patch of woods with deer in itin 2-3 days he will be dragging one out.

Success/prolific==Skill/ability
Success/prolific trophy hunter== skill/ability/location

IMHO

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

Cptcle1, very well said.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

cptleo1:

While I agree with you.....my original intent was discussing public perception. Public perception is the guy who shoots the big deer is a good hunter. Big deer live in the big deer states. We can all do the math ;):).

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

For what it is worth.

This is a HUGE buck for Florida.

I would make an educated guess that over 98 % of Florida hunters havenever seen a deer of this size in the woods/alive

I doubt he scores 125

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

That buck scores over 125...

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

EASILY.;)

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

When I said they find new ground I wasn't talking about packing up the family and heading to the midwest. There are big bucks in every state that holds deer, you just have to find them.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

So we're back to "location".

My only point (and Im not bustin on you Scott...at all) is that public perception is that "successful" hunters are the ones killing big deer. "Big" is relative. Check the P&Y entries for Florida.

Location is 100% of it. You don't see many revered whitetail hunters come out of Fl, SC, etc... . Why is that?

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

That is very true, but finding them and being able to hunt them are two different things. I have found a lot of properties that hold P&Y deer, but I have never been able to gain access to these properties for one of two reasons. They are either locked up exclusively by another hunter or group of hunters, or there is no hunting allowed on or near where these deer live.

Believe me Scott, I have done all of the things you have mentioned as have a lot of hunters around me, but we can't hunt those deer. What is really frustrating is that many times, the guys that do have permission on these properties are clowns that have very little hunting skill, but regularly score on big bucks because of the property they have.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

Ya'll aren't gonna believe this coming from me......but I'll give you a PRIME example of the down-side of not living in the right place....but likely being a damned good hunter.

Atlasman.

Stick him in Illinois and watch his trophy room wall grow.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

I agree they don't hold the numbers of big bucks like other areas do. I believe the long gun seasons, very liberal buck bag limits, over population of animals, use of dogs etc etc.... hold these areas back. Alabama has good bucks, so does Georgia and Mississippi.... Look how far South Texas and Mexico are.... Why do these southern states have more good deer thanthe others????

All I am saying is it isn't the "location" as much as what happens there.

Like I said there are "big" bucks every where deer are found..... Like I posted in another thread NC just had a 140some inch buck entered into P&Y..... They are there.
[/align]

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

GREAT POINT!

So...we have all those things....BECAUSE we have so many deer. Do away with them....and we're severely overpopulated (which stunts deer growth).

OK....let's all do an experiment. Let's all go out (people in these three states AND NC, OH, IA, IL)in our back yards and plant an azeala. It'll survive the cold of the midwest states.....and it'll be fine in our heat. Catch is....don't add any topsoil. Just stick it in the existing soils. Let's all check back in a year and see how they're doing.

The soils in the states of the midwest....AND the states you mention, Scott....are the reason the deer grow bigger. What they're eating is far more nutritous in the midwest and select southern states.

NC had "A" 140" buck entered? How many did OH have (out of curiosity)?

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

I love it when out of state hunters talk like there is a monster buckbehind every tree in the mid west states.Sure are herds is more in check with a better age structure thanks to proper management.In my area crops are few,getting hunting access is extremely tuff.If it was as easy to kill big bucks as some seem to think,I probably would grow board with it and stop hunting if it was that easy.
Too me it is about the skill and knowledge learned along the way.That can come from any state.Killing big bucks consistantly comes with a price.Lots of hours scouting,preperation,and time in the woods.Also forcing yourself to pass on younger deer and hold out for a mature animal.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

Who said that?

What can NC do to be just like OH?

Sounds EXACTLY like my situation/area.

Cool. Then prove it to me. Move to Islamorada and shoot a P&Y.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

Years back here in Florida they planted some 200 lb + deer from
Minnesota.

Trying to breed some size into our deer herd.

Didn't work, those fat boys

1. Couldn't take the heat. (low sperm count)
2. Couldn't get enough nutrition to support themselves.
3. Got boged down in the swamps.
4. Were very suseptable (SP) to mange
5. There were breeding issues with our rather small does.

Now that I think about it, I believe it has been tried several times.

That other fellows story about the Azeala has a lot of merrit.

Another good example is the old "Black Belt" in Alabama. That is only about 100 miles north of FL and the deer there were much bigger (Especially the horns).

Why

Better soil
Better minerals
Cooler weather
At that time much better food supply.
Probably better genetics.
BETTER AZALEAS !!!!!!!!!!!!

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

But there are big bucks behind every tree in Ohio. I'm just always on the wrong side of the tree.[8D] I hunted Ohio two of the past 4 years. Passed on lots of little guys but did see the biggest deer I've ever seen in the woods. Saw him the first night and just didn't have the heart to shoot anything less. Anyone want to have a tag fire. I will say Icould have killed a nicedeer just about every time in a tree. THis year.;) I finally figured out this woods and know where he is.:) He's right behind the tree with the others.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

Are you playing Captain Obvious again..... :D

I don't recall how many bucks were over 140 from Ohio during the Spring recording quarterbut they had 20 total entries.

I used to live in NC for a year and a half as a kid. Beaufort City, moved back to Ohio after Hurricane Hugo.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

I argue this point... It is just likethe farmer with deer problems who allows everyone who asks for hunting permission access to his property. More harm than good, excessive pressure is not the way to cut down deer numbers, it is however the best way to educate them.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

My vote is in the majority right now, If a person is as successful as the hunter next to him or fairs even better than most an harvest the top class percentage of bucks more often than others he is sucessful.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

Scott:

Everything else aside (and I'm glad you didn't take this post the wrong way)....you can't argue with herd #'s. Check the pops for our state. It'll blow you away. We'd be overrun in a short time if we didn't have such liberal limits. I think we took a step in the right direction this year.....with unlimited doe tags on private ground. We'll see. I wish everyone would do their part.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

Iagree this is a step in the correct direction. However the liberal buck limits, long gun seasons, hunting with dogs, heck you guys are allowed to use buckshot out of shotguns...

You should consider yourself lucky to get to hunt in the playground in such a screwed up state.

The best way to get your state like the other successful southern states is compare your rules and regs to theirs and most importantly educate the hunters.

Look at PA it was a mess for as longs as anyone could remember, they changed their rules and regs, educated the hunters and the state is starting to flourish. It can be done.

Maybe NC should give Dr. Gary Alt a call.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

Buckeye.....I'm not being captain obvious, now.

We have roughly the same numbers of deer PA has......and roughly ONE FOURTH the hunters. We have to do whatever we can to keep the herd numbers in check. Reducing harvests is NOT the answer. First....we need to get a handle on the numbers.

I'd be in favor of reducing the buck harvests for a year or three. Make killing does more attractive to the everyday hunter. I'll kill more deer with my bow, this year.....than THREE COUNTIES I could name you. We need more people killing more does.

Still......if we have a 1.5:1 buck/doe ratio.....we'll still never have the size deer other states have. We have our share of anomolies......but they're the exception and not the rule.

I really cant believe this fact is still debated by some.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

I never said restrict the harvest of the herd, I think a few of the tactics the NC employs does more harm than good. This is all I am saying.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

I haven't read all the posts, yet.....So hopefully this hasn't been answered, but what does buck/doe ratio have to do with the SIZE of deer?

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

Maybe not the ratio, Mobo....but sound management practices shouldhave a ratio similar to that as an "ideal". The sheer numbers, however, DO have a huge impact on the size of the herd. The deer I hunt......their growth is stunted due to the sheer numbers. There's only so much food to go around. 6' and down .....winter time....the place I hunt is barren of browse.

Fewer deer...fewer mouths.....bigger deer ( with 'bigger' being relative). If we try to take care of one of the problems (herd numbers)....we'll undoubtedly help the ratio...which is why I cited it.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

What ya got in mind, then, Scott? To reduce the herd numbers.....but still aid the overall herd as far as size of deer and ratio of bucks to does?

Heck I've got a lot of friends here.....and we're all ears.

Name another southern state that has the amount of hunters we have.....and the amount of deer we have......and that is doing a great job with management.

Cant cite PA. Same deer (amount).....fewer hunters. If we had the herd numbers you have in Ohio.....we could easily manage our herd. We have a problem. We have too many targets.....and not enough shooters. You have the opposite problem. I'm looking at a deer as I types this ;)

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

That makes sense......I misunderstood, I thought you were referring to the size of each deer, not the size of the herd as it relates to numbers of deer....My mistake.

RE: What percent of "success" is determined by "Location"
 

I am talking about the size of each deer.

If we get the numbers down.....and the deer dont have to compete so much for food......"I" have to assume the remaining deer would flourish (with 'flourish', again, being relative).