BBM....I admit when I'm licked. You win.

**amended**

1. Good feeding programand/orexceptional soil nutrient values.

(Oh yeah....and all that other stuff)

Actually, your initial assessment is right on. Soil nutrient availability is a major factor. The more rainfall an area receives, the more the nutrients are leached down and unavailable to to the plants. Also the more tonnage of forage is grown on an acre of land, the more of the nutrients are utilized in growing the higher quantity.



That is why fertilization requirements are higher in wetter areas of the country as opposed to drier areas.

A quick "google" for comparison purposes
Kingsville Texas avg annual rainfall 17.15"
Orlando, Fla avg annual rainfall 50.10"

Ok Canada, Northen

Jeff heat has a factor as well, which is why Florida deer are smaller also

Sorry you can have the greatest soil in the land, but if you shoot them before they can get old, well there you go

Interesting question, hadn't ever really thought about it too much, but here is a different perspective on it. It may seem a little of subject, but maybe everyone will see where I am going with this.

I believe I am very lucky to get to hunt where I do in Texas (up in the panhandle), and here is why. Our deer populations are good, and so are the size of the bucks (125-140 is an achievable goal, with muchbigger possible). Between bow season and general season I can hunt over 90 days if I so desire. We are talking Oct 1 thru Jan 7, which encompasses pre-rut, rut, and post-rut. Most of the land is private, and while that does make gaining access harder, it also means once I secure and area I don't have to worry too much about other hunters. I can bowhunt rifle season and not really worry about it, being rifle season really doesn't influence me much. It is big country up here, and hunter denisty is very low compared to what most of you guys have to deal with. I can't imagine complaining with that set of circumstances to work with.

Are there drawbacks? Of course. Access to private land can be tough to get if you don't know someone or have deep pockets. But once you find it, it is worth it. If it was easy to gain access then we likely wouldn't have the deer we do. The piper must be paid somewhere.

Germ, you said it best about minnesota:

"be honest as for has habitat wise Minn has over twice as much as Iowa. Iowa shoots a larger percentage of their herd than Minn. Yet Iowa shoots twice as many big bucks also.

Management plans and hunters make a huge difference in location. Take Iowa's management and hunterattitude, put it in Minn,and we are all hating Minn instead of Iowa" -Germ

I think that makes a good mature state are short firearm seasons, good habitat including soil, and of course some sort of AR.

But whatever Wisconsin is doing has to be good as the numbers speak for themselves.

I'll answer your question if you explain what the highlited stuff means

Sure

Michigans UP has what is called Hunters Choice Tag system

Combo Tag - Two bucks both with AR(Antler Restriction) of 3 points a side.
They can take buck of any size, but than they forefeit there second buck Option and are only allowed 1 buck(OBR)

NP + Northen Peninsula
SLP = Southern Peninsula

SLP is two bucks for season, with having an AR 4 pointson 1 side

The biggest thing a state needs is a bunch of outfitters who control the land and manage it correctly. This way more bucks will reach maturity.

I better throw one of these in........