I wonder how many of those bucks in E. KY are killed near the Ohio river or the water ways that run off it. Probably the soil is not to bad in those areas...

Anyone that pays alot of attention to KY knows that E Ky is a hotspot for big brusiers. Considering the differences in deer densities between E and W KY it is surprising that E KY produces so many of the top bucks in KY each year and of all time. Its an interesting subject for sure. If you compare W KY to the top bucks harvested in E KY each year in relation to the deer and hunter density the soil dosent amount to a hill of beans in growing big bucks in E KY. After all there is no good soil in E KY so how can it be a factor? :)If E KY could only support the # of deer that W KY could support the differences would be nill IMO. Unfortunately for E KY hunters the habitat cant support it. The 1 buck limit/shortened season combined with some tough terrain is what i believe to be the primary factors for E KY success. These factors are also reflected in KY's harvest #s. They harvest fewer bucks naturally because of the more restricted limits. This enables more bucks to reach an age where they produce the big racks. Age IS the most important factor so that's where it starts.

I believe that both herds are "healthy" but I do believe there are some rut differences between the two. I have noticed personally over many years of hunting the two that the areas i hunt in KY have a shorter more intense rut than the areas i hunt in TN. I have noticed some improvements with this in recent years at my places in TN. I believe that my local management practices are helping but i worry that it might not stay that way. A short well timed rut may have some growth benefits vs a long drawn out rut.

Looking at TN alot of bruisers are walking HAAP in Hawkins Co as we speak. Anyone seen a pic of "moose"? I would fall out of my tree in Iowa if i saw that deer. Fentress Co has tough terrain and a low deer density and its one of the top counties for big bucks in TN. Cumberland has its fair share as well including the state typical. I believe a 200 incher was killed with a bow in E TN (royal blue maybe?)and is close if not the state record (someone correct me if im wrong on this). Big and i mean big deer have been coming from E TN for years. So is good soil the reason for this? Apparently not since it doesnt exist right? These areas have "poor" soil yet some of the biggest bucks? How can soil possibly be a factor if it isnt a factor? I certainly dont have the answer and i havent seen a believeable explanation on here. I believe the main difference between E KY and E TN isnt the soil at all, its the way they are managed, thus the differences. HAAP is managed much different than the rest of TN thus the differences. It isnt hard to see if your willing to look. Sure E TN and E KY is not Iowa bottom land and sure it matters for growing b&c bucks but TN's soil is good enough to put a big buck on my wall or any other hunter's wall and that's all that concerns me and SHOULD be the concern of others that know a little about the subject. There is just too big a big buck difference in E KY and E TN and too little difference in geographic location, subspecies size at maturity and soil quality between the two for me to think that age isnt the real difference. Im sure we will see a graph or some jargin that says otherwise but i aint buying. That's just deer hunter management for ya. Ill not be managed.

So ,are you saying that more hunting pressure in KY leads to bigger bucks?

IMO-Southeast Ky has by far more big deer than east Tn. I live in Tn and hunt both and there is no question in my mind why Southeast Ky has better quality than Northeast Tn. It is all about the buck limits and how the deer population is controlled. Its gotten better in Tn the past few years but still you can see a big difference in the intensity of the Ky rut compared to Tn.

With all due respect, you are wrong. Perception is not reality from the research I have done along the SE KY border compared to the NNE TN side. Everything I have gathered indicates a much larger population of mature bucks on the TN side versus the KY side. Strikingly more in fact. In one area which is about 3,000 acres in a block, I routinely captured the same 11 bucks all of which were 3.5 years+ in age, and in addition to those there were countless little guys which showed as well. 2 of those 11, were 150"+, and the others all appeared to be in the 125"-140" range. Good looking deer for their age.

Similar land and similar size, not 3/4 a mile into KY had 1 buck which showed that was 3.5+, and a smattering of younger bucks.

Sure there could have been variables which were unaccounted for, but I chose both places because of the vast majority of similarities. Food sources basically equal, secondary growth equal, size equal, human access equal, and terrain was equal. If there was something unique to one or the other, then it was insignificant IMO.

I am not say SE KY is void of mature bucks, it just lacks the numbers which inhabit the TN side.

With all due respect, you are wrong. Perception is not reality from the research I have done along the SE KY border compared to the NNE TN side. Everything I have gathered indicates a much larger population of mature bucks on the TN side versus the KY side. Strikingly more in fact. In one area which is about 3,000 acres in a block, I routinely captured the same 11 bucks all of which were 3.5 years+ in age, and in addition to those there were countless little guys which showed as well. 2 of those 11, were 150"+, and the others all appeared to be in the 125"-140" range. Good looking deer for their age.

Similar land and similar size, not 3/4 a mile into KY had 1 buck which showed that was 3.5+, and a smattering of younger bucks.

Sure there could have been variables which were unaccounted for, but I chose both places because of the vast majority of similarities. Food sources basically equal, secondary growth equal, size equal, human access equal, and terrain was equal. If there was something unique to one or the other, then it was insignificant IMO.

I am not say SE KY is void of mature bucks, it just lacks the numbers which inhabit the TN side.

The "mountains" of most of Eastern KY are very different geologically than what most consider the "mountains" of East TN.