• The SH Membership has gone live. Only SH Members have access to post in the classifieds. All members can view the classifieds. Starting in 2020 only SH Members will be admitted to the annual hunting contest. Current members will need to follow these steps to upgrade: 1. Click on your username 2. Click on Account upgrades 3. Choose SH Member and purchase.
  • We've been working hard the past few weeks to come up with some big changes to our vendor policies to meet the changing needs of our community. Please see the new vendor rules here: Vendor Access Area Rules

Access to Quality Whitetail Habitat

So nutter, to keep this very educational thread going for all of us that have buck fever in August, are most of you guys trying to locate deer habitat that supports high and healthy deer densities in hopes of it also having mature bucks and then target those bucks specifically, or are you guys soley after mature bucks only and following where the P&Y - Booner records take you, giving up less than ideal habitat sometimes and big deer numbers for the purpose of chasing inches of horn, just curious, sometimes this obviously goes hand n hand but not always I suppose, it’s probably also an individuals personal goal as to what there “perfect” season is.
 
Knowing only what I have experienced in my quest for mature deer, I think less pressure is the highest of roles in developing mature deer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
So, I kinda touched on pressure a bit in the post. I think there are two ways to look at pressure. Sheppard lays it out this way:

Access to quality whitetail habitat
Hunting where pressure is light
Hunting in the right spot

Those 3 ideas kinda overlap, right? I've tried to meditate and reflect on them and really understand what each simple little phrase means. This is my interpretation.

Access to quality whitetail habitat mainly revolves around being able to hunt where nutrition is readily available (satisfies a deer desire to eat and procreate successfully) and where hunting pressure (predation) is not (satisfies their desire to not be eaten). The general absence of human predators is one type of pressure.

But, with any area, and especially with a public one, there is never a complete absence of the human predator. Every property has "hot spots" of human activity. This is in my mind the type of pressure that falls into Dr. Sheppard's number two spot on the list.

My lease, for example, does not get much hunting pressure at all compared to some local public. Just me and my dad. He hunts it maybe two or 3 times a month during season, and I try not to hunt it except for opening weekend of archery and during the rut. So it's unpressured in the macro sense. But, my dad rotates basically between 2 stand locations 99% of the time. He sees deer, because he is in quality whitetail habitat. But, I have killed 4 rack bucks on the property to his 2, despite hunting less. That's not a large sample size, and it could very well be a chance situation. But I generally make a point out of never hunting the same area more than once or maybe twice per season, and I frequently choose my spots in areas just out of sight of where he is hunting. I have witnessed the deer avoiding his stands and looking at them even when empty as people like Eberhart describe, despite the fact that they do not get pounded every weekend. I try to hunt around those hotspots of activity, and am therefore hunting where the pressure is light.

Another tract I've had success on is the 500 acres with the 40 that are worth hunting. That general area, looking at the several square miles total in the block of timber that is surrounded by development of communities on one side and river on the other, is quality whitetail habitat on the whole. The 500 acres of public is largely high pressure. Not just deer hunters, but fishermen, small game hunters, and kids with stolen condoms and bud lite. The 40 acres worth hunting is split into 2 general areas, both slight high ground covered in palmettos and surrounded entirely by the kinda swamp you usually need chest waders to get through. If I am on that island, I am hunting where the pressure is light.

And finally, last year I hunted a WMA with a rifle every 40 acres. I was still hunting a small SMZ that required access by wading along a small creek. I heard more deer and hogs than I saw because it was so thick, but I had encounters every day. Up on the treeline across the clearcut I was in the middle of, there were orange hats every few hundred yards. I shot 2 hogs, and played cat and mouse with a nice-looking buck I only got glimpses of. I was hunting where the pressure was light.

Eberhart and Infalt both say that there are generally mature deer on every piece of property, and that you can find them if you hunt the way they do. The cynic in me thinks there's a bit of salesmanship going on there, but it's probably mostly true. Maybe not bedded on the property and using it as a core area, but at least passing through during the rut or some other seasonal occurrence. Deer are present almost everywhere in the eastern half of the US. Golf courses, flower beds, behind shopping centers, you name it. But they have a knack for "filling the holes" and squeezing in and living in areas where we don't notice them as much. I'm a firm believer that deer learn acceptable travel routes and bedding locales from first their mother and sometimes grandmother as part of the maternal herds, and then a buck gets some "college" experience running with the older bucks in bachelor groups.

TLDR, quality whitetail habitat has relatively little hunting pressure. But even on that habitat, deer will avoid areas with comparatively high hunting pressure and slink around in the low pressure areas. High and low pressure is relative.

I think we talk a bit more about finding low pressure spots than we do about quality whitetail habitat. Most of us try to stay away from other stands, ribbons, etc. But I would encourage people to look at pressure at the "next level." Don't think, "Oh, most of THOSE hunters would never go there. But ME, I am a REAL hunter and I can access it." Look at the map and ask yourself where have YOU not been? Where do you not want to go? Where is it "impossible" to get to? Or maybe it's not that it's inaccessible, maybe it's just you've been hunting there for years and had luck elsewhere and just never been there. Maybe it's where the game warden parks, or it's a clearcut in plain view of the interstate. Maybe you scouted it during the summer and it was a ghost town, but did you see what it looked like the day after season ended?

Just avoiding the Fudds is smooth-brain tactics. There are capable hunters hunting your area who do not leave sign of their activities. There's a retired old man who hunts it every Wednesday and knows it like his garage shed. Or, quite possibly, another member of this forum who reads the same books and threads and watches the same podcasts. THAT's the guy's you're competing with. They're the ones putting meaningful pressure on the herd. If you can learn to "hide from yourself" on public land, that's wrinkle-brain stuff.

In my mind, once you've found the best habitat you have access to, and you've located the low-pressure islands inside it, you then seal the deal with items 3 and 4 on the list. "Hunting in the right place," and "hunting when the conditions are good."

Again, this is all really simple stuff, and a lot of us I suspect have internalized it. But I think there's value in hammering home the basics and really understanding them. If you understand ground truths and first principles, you can handle other information more intelligently, weed out the BS, and adapt your technique to different circumstances. You don't need someone to tell you how to hunt piney woods vs hardwoods vs marsh vs agriculture if you really grasp the basics and are capable of covering ground and making sits with your eyes wide open.
 
So nutter, to keep this very educational thread going for all of us that have buck fever in August, are most of you guys trying to locate deer habitat that supports high and healthy deer densities in hopes of it also having mature bucks and then target those bucks specifically, or are you guys soley after mature bucks only and following where the P&Y - Booner records take you, giving up less than ideal habitat sometimes and big deer numbers for the purpose of chasing inches of horn, just curious, sometimes this obviously goes hand n hand but not always I suppose, it’s probably also an individuals personal goal as to what there “perfect” season is.
On a scouting trip last weekend, I located some nice land that wasn't far from the house. I spent 2 days walking around, saw good deer sign and decided it was good enough to come back closer to the rut. This ground coincides with what @Nutterbuster said, a fertile river bottom. I found a handful of natural mineral sites jutting out of the rocks that almost mimicked an elk wallow they were used so frequently. After pulling up maps, it's an area that has high deer density, good P&Y records and backs up to (what I wouldn't have known without scouting) QDMA managed land. On a side note, when the land next to what you're hunting has big signs all over stating NO HUNTING, 24 HOUR VIDEO SURVEILLANCE, etc. and you're pretty sure the person isn't completely nutso, you need to hunt that land next to it.
Using the, "If you build it, they will come" mentality when you find good habitat with high deer densities, you're going to find it coincides with the record books at least around here. Disclaimer: I'm in one of those fertile farming areas mentioned earlier.
 
So nutter, to keep this very educational thread going for all of us that have buck fever in August, are most of you guys trying to locate deer habitat that supports high and healthy deer densities in hopes of it also having mature bucks and then target those bucks specifically, or are you guys soley after mature bucks only and following where the P&Y - Booner records take you, giving up less than ideal habitat sometimes and big deer numbers for the purpose of chasing inches of horn, just curious, sometimes this obviously goes hand n hand but not always I suppose, it’s probably also an individuals personal goal as to what there “perfect” season is.
Generally, I believe high deer density and the potential to have a trophy correlate. Antlers, as discussed, are a tremendous commitment of resources. If you break your leg, it will take months and sometimes years to heal. A buck is basically growing both of your legs and then some every summer, and he's doing it by eating 8-12 pounds of green stuff, which isn't exactly high in protein, calcium, or phosphorus. Does are throwing 2 babies per year, which is also a tremendous energy/resource commitment. If the habitat can support one, it will probably support the other.

Obviously there are cases where this is more or less so. We've discussed it. Gulf Coast piney woods hold many deer, but few booners. You said you had a 20 to 1 ratio, and we're kinda the same here. Like @kyler1945 said, sometimes it makes more or less sense to grow bigger antlers.

All that being said, I am generally a body-count first, horns second kinda guy. I'm not at that point where I would be happy with 10 deerless sits and then a 150" deer walks out. Now, during the rut, I will lean slightly more in the "I wanna hunt where big bucks are" camp. But I'm generally using trophy stats as an indicator of an overall healthy herd.
 
Maybe a dumbed down way to think about it is:

You have ten properties to hunt. And you only have five minutes to make the decision on ranking them. You should Order them in a way that has the one wjth best environment to grow deer (dirt) First, and worst last, number them 1-10. Hunt 1 the most and 10 the least.

if you have a few hours to make a decision and the ability to do some of the riding around research or calling, you should then rank those same properties by total amount of hunting pressure you think they receive. Number these 1-10 in order of least hunting pressure to most. Take the combined scores of quality of habitat and hunting pressure, and make a new list 1-10 with lowest combined score being 1, 10 being highest. Hunt 1 first, 10 last.

If you have unlimited time, take your list of combined scores, and walk every inch of property 1 and find high percentage “right spots”. Mark each prime spot on gps, and assign each spot one point. Continue down your list. Take the total number of points each property gets, and list them in order of total points, with 1 being assigned to property with most points, 10 least points. Now take the score from your combined quality/pressure list, and your prime spots list. Add them together, and list 1-10, with lowest score being 1, highest score 10.

in all scenarios, hunt the property wjth the lowest score first. This will increase your odds of success.

there are obviously many other factors that dictate success. But if you start with this foundation, your odds increase tremendously over someone who has all their gear figured out, but randomly points at a map to pick a property.

great post nutter.
 
Yes. I like gear, and the nature of this site is admittedly gear-focused. Saddles are gear. But sometimes I smell "all gear, no idea" on here.

For those who think I'm joking, here's my coffee pot

View attachment 32179
View attachment 32180

That list starts pretty macro, and the nitty-gritty we like to obsess over is way down at the bottom. My experience working retail was that the guys with deeper pocket books only had better trophy pics on their phone if they had a nice club or lease to go with that Ravin crossbow and the Sitka jacket.

If you read between the lines, Eberhart isn't pounding the local WMA. He's using that charm and brain to social-engineer his way onto some pretty nice properties, and he's hunting some TYPES of public (hint, hint) that don't get the same kind of pressure. Womack isn't sleeping in his truck just because he likes it. The D'acquistos pay pretty money for their property. Infalt lives in friggin Wisconsin...

All different ways to get access to quality whitetail habitat.
I love this thread....but especially the picture of Kurt Cobain with that Tanker of a Buck
 
In all seriousness though, this is is a great conversation. All wildlife biology conversations get traced back to habitat/vegetation, which gets back to site conditions, which goes to the soil....but the complexity of factors that go into vitality, survival and reproduction of these critters is amazing.

I like this stuff because there is no one factor a person can point to and say "this is why those deer are huge" or conversely "this is why our deer don't get that big." Habitat, soil, pressure, age, genetics all play a role

Nonetheless in my mind habitat trumps all...from the ground (soil) up. No matter the animal, a good environment with low stress and lots of nutritious food will allow you to get closer to your genetic potential.

"if you build it, they will come"
- old dead baseball player ghost

Loved the fertile crescent parallel btw @Nutterbuster
 
I hunt the suburbs of Allegheny county not far from Pittsburgh. There are some really good bucks and no farm land . I rely on mast crops and not all years are good . The genetics are there for good bucks but if it wasn't for antler restrictions in are state none of this wouldn't have been possible. It was a game changer.
 
I hunt the suburbs of Allegheny county not far from Pittsburgh. There are some really good bucks and no farm land . I rely on mast crops and not all years are good . The genetics are there for good bucks but if it wasn't for antler restrictions in are state none of this wouldn't have been possible. It was a game changer.
The delta I hunt has no ag, but absolutely tremendous oak crops. Acorns are very high in protein and fat, which makes them a gold mine for deer. Many deer I shoot have stomachs full of orange paste.

Antler restrictions were also something I looked at last year. I think it's important to get a baseline for what you're dealing with to set expectations. My county has 0 bucks on record with pope and young, Boone and Crockett, or alabama whitetail records. This means any buck is a trophy as far as I'm concerned. Some counties have over a hundred, and antler restrictions. If you hunt that kinda place, you might pass a deer and have a reasonable chance of seeing another.

I HATE talking to new hunters in my area who say they passed on a buck, even a spike. They're waiting for a train that ain't leaving the station.
 
The delta I hunt has no ag, but absolutely tremendous oak crops. Acorns are very high in protein and fat, which makes them a gold mine for deer. Many deer I shoot have stomachs full of orange paste.

Antler restrictions were also something I looked at last year. I think it's important to get a baseline for what you're dealing with to set expectations. My county has 0 bucks on record with pope and young, Boone and Crockett, or alabama whitetail records. This means any buck is a trophy as far as I'm concerned. Some counties have over a hundred, and antler restrictions. If you hunt that kinda place, you might pass a deer and have a reasonable chance of seeing another.

I HATE talking to new hunters in my area who say they passed on a buck, even a spike. They're waiting for a train that ain't leaving the station.
So in your opinion what is the reason for 0 bucks in the record book, over pressure, I think you said you have high deer numbers, wrong habitat, just curious.
 
We also have a great acorn crop where I hunt . In most of are state the antler restrictions are 3 points on one side but where I hunt you have to abide by three up rule. That's three points including the main beam counted as one of the three points, on one side , excluding the brow tine. They started this years ago and even up north in are state where I use to hunt they are taking P&Y bucks which use to be very rare .
 
So in your opinion what is the reason for 0 bucks in the record book, over pressure, I think you said you have high deer numbers, wrong habitat, just curious.
Good question. We basically have very sandy soil, and high hunter population. Our deer subspecies is also very small in size due to Bergmann's rule (specimens are smaller near equator and larger near poles). It's hard for a smaller buck to grow heavy horns because the necessary minerals aren't actually from the food he's eating at the time of growth, but from their bones. Smaller skeleton, less building material for antlers. There's also the buck/doe ratio. Why fight and strut your stuff and grow big antlers when you can breed a doe as a spike?

There is lots of paper company land down here, so they have space to hide and scrape out a living, but pine needles don't really fill the belly. There are pockets of good dirt here and there. Farmland can produce more and slightly bigger bucks occasionally, and the delta i hunt has deer that are quite a bit bigger body-wise and they grow heavier antlers.

The below buck was killed by my dad on the Alabama/Florida line in my county. Just a few miles from the coast. He was taken from 5,000 acres of lease land that had been under QDMA management for probably 5 years or so at the time. Bucks only, 8 point or better (times have changed, but at the time the leadership of the club were all farmers and serious hunters who did their best to use biology to manage the herd). He was 7.5 years old according to the biologists reading of the jawbone, and weighed 132lbs in January (pre-,early rut).

Screenshot_20200814-105251_Facebook.jpg

That buck was the best that came off of the property that year. The president of the club paid my dad's taxidermy deposit. People hunted the heck out of the area my dad shot him in for years after the fact.

That deer does not come CLOSE to making the B&C books. But it is one of if not the biggest deer i have seen come from that area. I measured it years ago at just over 100 inches. But that deer is mature! Had buckshot in his hams from getting shot the year before. If that deer lived in Michigan, he'd be another feather in Eberhart's record book cap.
 
Last edited:
Antlers are for fighting over mates, and attracting mates based on the size of the antlers - like nutter said - you’re healthy and can afford to grow them. Well, when you have 20 does to every buck, things change. You can start breeding long before you have big fancy antlers. You don’t have to fight much to secure a mate. This selective pressure will generate smaller antlers over generations. No matter how good the soil is, sexual selection is going to play a large role in dictating what happens with genetics.

I have a lot of questions about the confidence being given to epigenetics. I think a better descriptor for what largely makes up the differences we encounter is called the non shared environment. It’s definitely not worth getting into detail here.

but, genetic selection and sexual selection are interwoven through the environment. This is a complicated puzzle. But I haven’t seen sexual selection mentioned once. It likely explains almost all of the genetic differences in antler size. Not that genetics aren’t related to the small antlers you’re seeing top dog - just that genes for big correlates with big antlers.

another helpful piece of information is to recognize that there isn’t one, or even 5 genes that a switch is flipped one way or the other to determine antler size. There’s likely thousands of genes, of which certain combinations thereof, create large antler potential.

having those combinations of genes, good soil, and the time needed to express big antlers before you die, and a continued need to fight/impress does for sexual selection to play its role, all contribute.


I agree with your comments that there are many factors, and love that you mentioned time especially. I really am enjoying reading all of this and your comments in particular. But I disagree with several statements made here including the over simplification of the role of antlers in fitness.

Your assumption is that the biggest bucks get the most does and does hold out for the most fit individuals is not always the case. There is a wide array of work that shows sexual selection in whitetails isn't that black and white, and even suggests that more aggressive deer can be more successful breeders regardless of rack size. You are suggesting that antlers serve as either an index (My massive antlers must mean I am very healthy and fit) or a handicap (Antler growth is extremely extravagant and costly so I must be worth shagging if I can do this and still survive).

The problem is, there is still a lot of debate among deer biologists as to exactly how antlers fit into the sexual selection picture. There is an interesting meateater episode on antlers that discusses some of these questions. In a study on doe preference in penned deer, the does were more likely to bed against the fence holding a buck with bigger antlers. However, it has been documented that breeding success doesn't vary substantially with age and that yearling bucks successfully breed. Here is an article from QDMA that discusses some of these findings: https://www.qdma.com/will-dominant-bucks-dominate-breeding/

I won't go into epigenetics or the non-shared environement here either because that is a deep rabbit hole but those are interesting points. While you're right, and it is complex and involves many genes, there are absolutely examples in wildlife of the methylation of a single promotor sequence controlling hundreds of other genes and there is a huge body of work on epigenetic effects on phenotypes in ruminants and similar agricultural species.


The reason sexual selection isn't mentioned as often in the deer literature or online is, in my opinion, the fact that you can only see the expression of genes we care about (antlers) in one of the sexes. If the doe contributes 50% of the genes to the offspring, any clear role of sexual selection is typically obscured in the absence of gene sequencing studies.
 
I HATE talking to new hunters in my area who say they passed on a buck, even a spike. They're waiting for a train that ain't leaving the station.

And if everyone has this same attitude, there will never be a record buck book. Let them go so they can grow!
 
I agree with your comments that there are many factors, and love that you mentioned time especially. I really am enjoying reading all of this and your comments in particular. But I disagree with several statements made here including the over simplification of the role of antlers in fitness.

Your assumption is that the biggest bucks get the most does and does hold out for the most fit individuals is not always the case. There is a wide array of work that shows sexual selection in whitetails isn't that black and white, and even suggests that more aggressive deer can be more successful breeders regardless of rack size. You are suggesting that antlers serve as either an index (My massive antlers must mean I am very healthy and fit) or a handicap (Antler growth is extremely extravagant and costly so I must be worth shagging if I can do this and still survive).

The problem is, there is still a lot of debate among deer biologists as to exactly how antlers fit into the sexual selection picture. There is an interesting meateater episode on antlers that discusses some of these questions. In a study on doe preference in penned deer, the does were more likely to bed against the fence holding a buck with bigger antlers. However, it has been documented that breeding success doesn't vary substantially with age and that yearling bucks successfully breed. Here is an article from QDMA that discusses some of these findings: https://www.qdma.com/will-dominant-bucks-dominate-breeding/

I won't go into epigenetics or the non-shared environement here either because that is a deep rabbit hole but those are interesting points. While you're right, and it is complex and involves many genes, there are absolutely examples in wildlife of the methylation of a single promotor sequence controlling hundreds of other genes and there is a huge body of work on epigenetic effects on phenotypes in ruminants and similar agricultural species.


The reason sexual selection isn't mentioned as often in the deer literature or online is, in my opinion, the fact that you can only see the expression of genes we care about (antlers) in one of the sexes. If the doe contributes 50% of the genes to the offspring, any clear role of sexual selection is typically obscured in the absence of gene sequencing studies.

I can only speak casually on the topic. And I certainly don’t claim that biggest antlers = most attractive mate. It also isn’t the cause of breeding success. But like you said, it’s probably a very good index to use - in that antler size will probably show a strong correlation to a doe’s breeding preference, when compared with other traits or circumstances. Two problems there - that’s a tough study to design, and a doe can go into heat when there isn’t a big boy around to breed with, and she’ll slowly drop her standards as that clock starts ticking louder. I’m open to the idea that big bodied, muscular, aggressive buck with mediocre rack will outbreed smaller bodied buck with big antlers. Especially when the smaller racked butt is kicking everyone’s butt.

I didn’t mean to imply that it’s black and white, or that it’s the single indicator. it’s most definitely more complex than my caveman brain can unravel.

but a startlingly different buck to doe ratio in topdog’s examples Having a strong connection to antler size would be difficult to explain away without sexual selection.

and antlers can only serve two main functions as I see it - actual fitness(fighting) and perceived fitness(as a sexual signal). Both are closely related to breeding success. Both anecdotally, and evidenced by the fact that good antler genes get passed on when other factors are controlled for. Ladies prefer the tall rich guy over the short rich guy all day.

I remain skeptical that any one factor can explain much in the real world, because each ecosystem is so dynamic. It’s also why I can land on “hunt good ground that doesn’t get hunted, and hunt it in a smart way”. It seems to lay the odds most favorably for you.

It sounds like you’ve got some good training on the subject. It would be awesome if you started a separate thread on the genetics side of things. Would be a great contribution to us knuckle draggers!
 
Back
Top