Why not southern Wisconsin bowfanatic? Yeah, theres CWD and they've drastically reduced the population, but YOU CAN'T CATCH CWD BY EATING INFECTED ANIMALS! The lower population would probably be better to hunt. We have 750 acres outside Boscobel which is in the intensive harvest zone and we killed roughly 15-20 anterless deer each season for 3 years and we've seen so many more decent sized bucks. we dont see as many deer overall, but we dont have a problem filling the freezer. The lower the population= the less competition for food=better nutrition for the deer=bigger bucks in most cases. Look at Texas's P&Y entries...looks likea bunch of big bucks taken from there huh there probably was...because they were all shot from BEHIND A FENCE and couldnt be entered in the books![:'(]

slayer

iowa and then kansas. I would love to hunt those places

Brian

It's not the presence of CWD that bothers me. It's the DNR's over reaction to CWD that bothers me. The slaughtering ALL deer to eliminate CWD is what removes southern Wi from my list of places to go for a trophy. How many days of the year has deer hunting been open in the CWD zone the last couple years?

i can only go by the videos i see. i would have to say the milk river in montana looks like a good one[:-]

It is actualy only a little area that has CWD. Alot of Southwest wisconsin wehre im at is CWD or is only in the intensive harvest zone. i dont think they overreacted. What are they supposed to do? Let it sweep through the population and infect all the deer? I think the DNR has handled it as best they can. Now they say they're setting their goals a little lower and leaving a few deer. In another 5 years the population should return to normal levels, but shouldnt be let to get as high as it was. Too many deer is unhealthy for the population. I've seen first hand what population reduction can do for the deer herd, and its great.

slayer

All the above that everyone said. But one state that doesn't get much recognition is Nebraska. The southern side of Nebraska is full of brutes. Anybody heard of the "General" or "Del Austin Buck"? I think it doesn't get a lot of recognition mainly because there is a lot of land in the north and western side that doesn't produce a lot of deer.

I haven't hunted much for other states except Kansas. My logic... if you're seeing big deer consistently then why go somewhere else.

Seein's how I live in Iowa, guess I'll just hunt here. Would love to win the lottery and hunt Wisconsin, Illinois, Kansas, and Texas. Maybe someday.

Right here in my own back yard.Alot of big bruisers if you can find them.There are alot of B/C and P/Y bucks shot here but everyone is so hung up on the body weight and usually discards the antlers.Thankfully we are starting to turn around,and give the buck the recognition it deserves.
My second would be Iowa then alberta and sask,maybe even manitoba,this province really produces some big bucks
I am really surprised nobody mentioned canada in there choices.

has to be west central iowa. i dont know about the rest of the state but the amount of bow hunting pressure and the fact every time i go down that way i see a deer that i sit back and say WOW look at that monster puts it way up there on my list. i am from there so i guess i am biast. Any deer i kill is a trophy to me and that is real feedback.

i would love to hunt edgar county illinois....monster bucks up there.....but i love bowhunting in my state .......southern tennessee