#2006142 - 07/24/10 10:41 PM
Re: Now I have a Different view
[Re: Quailman]
|
Tree Tramp
8 Point
Registered: 07/22/09
Posts: 1560
Loc: Tennessee
|
Offline
|
|
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2006145 - 07/24/10 10:49 PM
Re: Now I have a Different view
[Re: Quailman]
|
RAFI
10 Point
Registered: 12/20/09
Posts: 2552
Loc: Tn
|
|
Offline
|
|
RAFI, I'm just providing the facts. Our agency mapped the soils on LBL (as well as everywhere else in the U.S.). I have no reason to think our soil scientists would make flase claims. On a side note, I walked a lot of those ag fields on LBL this past turkey season. Next time you hunt there, see how many chert fragments you find in those crop fields. I can't imagine how many disc blades have been broken over the years.  If you have your maps that prove these other maps wrong then post them up. Read the bottom left corner of the map where it says "NRCS." That is our map.
Ok i still see it being better soil than most of Tn like i said and they have plenty of corn and soybeans .i thought the way you talked you had some other proof other than the maps already shown.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2006149 - 07/24/10 11:26 PM
Re: Now I have a Different view
[Re: RAFI]
|
Quailman
8 Point
Registered: 08/04/03
Posts: 1329
Loc: Winchester, TN
|
|
Offline
|
|
We do provide a really nice web service to everyone for absolutely free. It's called the Web Soil Survey, and I've provided the link below. It's a good tool for looking at soil properties for any land in the U.S. It has a lot of other features available that you might find useful.
Soil taxonomy can be difficult to understand, but the web soil survey provides a lot of the soils information in layman's terms. Check it out.
Web Soil Survey
_________________________
Why work when you can hunt?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2006165 - 07/25/10 12:07 AM
Re: Now I have a Different view
[Re: Quailman]
|
BigGameGuy
TWRA Biologist
12 Point
Registered: 05/14/04
Posts: 6353
Loc: Nashville
|
|
Offline
|
|
So the reason more B&C entries come from 2 KY counties that border 2 TN counties is because of glacial soils and more acres of agriculture?
Interesting opinions.
Chris -
In your opinion, what is causing the difference between the two areas between the two states?
_________________________
If given the choice between education and regulation, I'll choose education every time.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2006353 - 07/25/10 09:35 AM
Re: Now I have a Different view
[Re: BigGameGuy]
|
Quailman
8 Point
Registered: 08/04/03
Posts: 1329
Loc: Winchester, TN
|
|
Offline
|
|
So the reason more B&C entries come from 2 KY counties that border 2 TN counties is because of glacial soils and more acres of agriculture?
Interesting opinions. Chris - In your opinion, what is causing the difference between the two areas between the two states?
Daryl, I would say it's combination of factors, some of which has already been stated. No doubt agriculture plays a role in regards to Stewart county, which has very little. Christian and Todd are 2 of the bigger row-crop counties in KY, and Stewart county can't compete with that high quality nutrition. Montgomery doesn't have the total acres of agriculture that the KY counties do, but it still has plenty throughout the county (exluding Clarksville) to support a healty deer population. But, total acres of agriculture will definitely go to the KY counties.
In my opinion, I can't see glacial soils playing a role in this discussion. We're talking about 4 counties that are divided by state lines, not soil map units. A discussion of the role that soils play in regards to antler development could be used when discussing regional differences, but not for these 4 counties. I'll state again that LBL produces more "trophy" bucks than just about anywhere in the state, even though available nutrition is substantially lower than it's neigboring KY counties.
In addition to agriculture, I would also say bag limits are contributing to the success that KY hunters have had in producing B&C bucks. A 1 buck bag limit not only limits hunters, but it also creates a different mindset by hunters as to what size of buck they will shoot with that one tag. The result is that more bucks are recruited into older age classes. I don't have the data, just an opinion.
I just think that there is more to this difference than just agriculture and soils. There's no doubt that hunting regulations play a role, but it's rarely admitted. If we are going to discuss the reasons for the difference between these 2 areas, I think they all need to be provided as possibilities. Just my opinion.
_________________________
Why work when you can hunt?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2006453 - 07/25/10 11:43 AM
Re: Now I have a Different view
[Re: Quailman]
|
BigGameGuy
TWRA Biologist
12 Point
Registered: 05/14/04
Posts: 6353
Loc: Nashville
|
|
Offline
|
|
Chris,
Just so you know, the following is not directed at you. This discussion is an awesome platform to display some of our beliefs.
I absolutely agree that the limits play a significant role as to what is walking around in the standing herd. Just look at the numbers, we are killing an extra 1,200 bucks a year. Knowing that, I would be quite comfortable saying that KY hunters have more bucks to choose from when it comes to killing their bucks. Could this be the difference? Possibly. However, I think hunters on both sides of the line shoot the largest antlered deer they get a shot at, meaning the best deer in both areas stand a good chance at getting killed. Since we have the data to show that age isn't the difference between the two, and especially since Tennessee is killing more 3-1/2+ year old deer than KY each year, I would have to contend that there is something else tipping the scales in Kentucky's favor. It is my guess that the X-factor is nutrition.
I also agree with you that "soils" is not the stand alone defense in this debate. What happens on top of those soils is more important than anything else when it comes to providing nutrition. That is why no Tennessee deer hunter should become discouraged when it comes to managing the deer on their property. Although it may take a little extra work in the area of liming and fertilizing, on a small scale, they can provide the same nutrition that is seen anywhere in the country. In other words they can provide the nutrition for the deer in their area.
Now I don't claim to be a soil scientist but when it comes to overall potential of an area I think the average biologist can draw some valid conclusions from the literature. In my opinion here is where soil type becomes important (fyi - you'll see where I have to resort to the literature due to my lack of knowledge in some of these definitions).
Where soil type comes into play is on a large scale where the predominant land-use can be classified as unmanaged. That is when natural browse becomes the major player in the deer's development. The map you guys (NRCS) provide for the regions of ultisols even states that these areas can be amended for row crops but they are naturally low in nutrients. By definition, ultisols are as follows:
Ultisols (some varieties, such as those prevalent in the American South, colloquially known as "red clay soil") are an order in USDA soil taxonomy. They are defined as mineral soils which contain no calcareous material anywhere within the soil, have less than 10% weatherable minerals in the extreme top layer of soil, and have less the 35% base saturation throughout the soil.
The word "Ultisol" is derived from "ultimate", because Ultisols were seen as the ultimate product of continuous weathering of minerals in a humid temperate climate without new soil formation via glaciation.
Ultisols vary in color from purplish-red, to a blindingly bright reddish-orange, to pale yellowish-orange and even some subdued yellowish-brown tones. They are typically quite acidic, often having a pH of less than 5. The red and yellow colors result from the accumulation of iron oxide (rust) which is highly insoluble in water. Major nutrients, such as calcium and potassium, are typically deficient in Ultisols, which means they generally cannot be used for sedentary agriculture without the aid of lime and other fertilizers such as superphosphate. They can be easily exhausted, and require more careful management than Alfisols or Mollisols.
Alfisols on the other hand tend not to lack the nutrients as much. They are defined as:
Alfisols are a soil order in USDA soil taxonomy. Alfisols form in semiarid to humid areas, typically under a hardwood forest cover. They have a clay-enriched subsoil and relatively high native fertility. "Alf" refers to Aluminium (Al) and Iron (Fe). Because of their productivity and abundance, the Alfisols represent one of the more important soil orders for food and fiber production.
Alfisols have undergone only moderate leaching. By definition, they have at least 35% base saturation, meaning that Calcium, Magnesium, and Potassium are relatively abundant. This is in contrast to Ultisols, which are the more highly leached forest soils having less than 35% base saturation. In eastern North America, Alfisols are commonly found in glaciated areas while Ultisols are restricted to the areas south of the limit of maximum glaciation.
I can't help but conclude that an unmanaged area that is sitting predominantly in a region of alfisols will provide a slight better advantage nutritionally over an area sitting predominantly in an area of ultisols. Now lets zoom in on the counties we are discussing...
The above map is showing the concentration of alfisols. I hand drew the boundaries of the four counties we are looking at so by no means is it exact but it does give you a general idea of the regional soil types. Due to the higher predominance of alfisols I believe it is safe to say that the unmanaged areas in KY will more than likely have a slightly higher nutritive value than the unmanged lands in TN.
Why do I believe the key to this discussion is unmanaged lands?
Although I don't have the stats for the KY counties, here is the land use data for the two TN counties.
Montgomery: 55% Forested, 33% Agriculture, 11% Grassland, 2% Wetland
Stewart: 84% Forested, 8% Agriculture, 8% Grassland, 3% Wetland
As you can see, the majority of land in unmanaged (non-agriculture), meaning the nutritive value of the area is relegated to the natural browse. In addition, the natural browse will more than likely be affected by the soil it grows in.
I believe this principal is enough to cause the difference between 16 deer.
_________________________
If given the choice between education and regulation, I'll choose education every time.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2006528 - 07/25/10 01:51 PM
Re: Now I have a Different view
[Re: BigGameGuy]
|
Quailman
8 Point
Registered: 08/04/03
Posts: 1329
Loc: Winchester, TN
|
|
Offline
|
|
Daryl,
Very good post and I don't take it as being directed towards me at all. Biologists, as a whole, will not agree on all aspects of wildlife management. If that were the case, all state wildlife agencies would manage their wildlife populations in similar fashion, and we all know that is not happening across the country.
I can even draw similar conclusions when we talk about quail management. We all know (hopefully) what habitat requirements are needed for bowhites (based on scientific studies), yet there is still some disagreement as to why populations are in decline. Just last year, I even had a biologist (that you know) tell us that he sees a direct correlation between an increase in soybean production in the U.S. and a decline in quail numbers. He surmised it was related to an increase in mycotoxins across the range of bobwhites. Far-fetched in my opinion, but another opinion nonetheless.
Back to the topic. I do see your correlation between soil type and B&C entries for these 4 counties, and its plausible. But, I don't feel it is the only reason. Yes, more productive soils will have an effect on the quantity of available browse, but not necessarily the quality. A current project being conducted by U.T. between the Ames Plantation (west TN, "good soil) and Rocky River Hunt Club in Van Buren Co. (east TN, poor soil) shows no nutritional difference for preferred browse species between the two locations, yet antler scores per age class vary between the two. So, quantity seems to be the key, in addition to row crop agriculture on Ames.
Why do I believe the key to this discussion is unmanaged lands?
No doubt it is a critical factor and I agree that is probably the most important key in this discussion as well. I have always felt that land use patterns in TN are a driving force behind antler scores per age class. If it weren't then highly managed private farms in Middle TN on somehwat poor soils wouldn't consistently produce 150" B&C bucks like they are currently doing today. Stewart county, especially, is heavily forested, and somewhat poor in terms of nutrition because there is very little high quality browse, unilke it's KY neighbors to the north.
I guess some of my opinions are based on what I've observed over the last 11 years while hunting the midwest. No doubt a different mindset by many hunters to pass up smaller and younger bucks, because the opportunity seems to exist for realistic chances at larger bucks. Although my data set is fairly small and only includes my 310 acre farm in Illinois, in 2009 39% of the bucks we captured on trail cameras were 3.5 years old or older, with 13% being in the 4.5+ age class. We have similar results over the last 10 years as well. I've never seen numbers like that on any farm I've hunted in TN. I'm sure similar numbers exist, but maybe I don't see that on my home farm of 412 acres because of excessive hunting pressure on adjacent properties and lengthy hunting seasons? I run cameras from July through February with no noticeable difference.
I can't argue with the data you have for TN & KY becauase it's all we have, and I'm sure it's fairly accurate. I just think the standing herd between the 2 states is somewhat different, but I have no data to back up this opinion. And as it has been said before, just because there are more mature bucks available doesn't mean that hunters will be able to shoot them.
Good discussion and I appreciate the opportunity to provide my input.
_________________________
Why work when you can hunt?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2006663 - 07/25/10 05:32 PM
Re: Now I have a Different view
[Re: Quailman]
|
Wes Parrish
16 Point
Registered: 06/12/02
Posts: 16952
Loc: Knoxville-Dover-Union City, TN
|
|
Offline
|
|
For those who know your county geography, note the "white" hole for Henry County, TN that appears as a smaller version of the "Nashville Basin".
I've pretty much stayed away from this thread, as much of what I would add would contradict much of what BGG said, and I know to many, I must sound like a "broken record" with some of my ascertains about antler high-grading being much more a factor than most can imagine. IMO, for whatever the reasons are that cause it, this antler high-grading is much worse in TN than in KY or IL.
Although Quailman didn't refer to this as antler high-grading (and maybe I'm confusing folks with that term being used not in it's most pure context),
he certainly touched on the issue as well as much of why it happens to a lesser extent in some places vs. others.
I have the utmost respect for the opinions of both BGG and Quailman, and believe both see me as their friend. But my "outside the box" thinking seems near identical to Quailman's, and is in large part based on some remarkably similar experiences and observations over a long period of time. Not to mention having had in person discussions with some of the same real-time "boots on the ground" TENNESSEE deer management researchers such as Mike Black and Allen Houston. I only wish I had the privilege of just spending a fraction as much time discussing these issues with Mike & Allen (and some others) as has Quailman in working with them on their projects.
Daryl,
Have a suggestion.
Why don't you compare Trigg County, KY to Henry County, TN?
According to the above soil map, doesn't Henry County, TN have more similar soils to Trigg Co., KY than to Stewart Co., TN?
Then compare Stewart Co., TN to Henry Co., TN?
Or maybe even compare the poor-soil LBL WMA to any of a number of WMA's (nearly all with better soils) on a per square mile basis?
Then tell me just how much difference the soil could possibly be making in producing such different outcomes in terms of B&C class or TN Registry-class bucks.
By the way, I totally agree the soil is a big deal.
Just think many other factors must be so far "outside the box" of traditional deer management "thinking", that they are being almost totally overlooked. Kinda like one of those, "if it were a snake, it would bite you." 
And by the way, some mentioned there was a lot of agricultural fields at LBL. This has never been true. What you see just driving around the roads is misleading. Those corn and soybean fields probably account for less than 1% of the land mass area of LBL, as most is just woods with a relatively low deer density compared to many other WMAs. If you want to see a lot of agriculture, and according to BSK's soil map the same soil as Trigg Co., KY ---- then just look across the river at Henry County, TN. A stone's throw from LBL, high portion of land in corn & soybeans, and soil like KY . . . . . . . . then look at the record books for Henry County. Leaves me shaking my head that the most obvious reason for "why" (in my opinion) is usually overshadowed by "soiled" talk about soils.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2006664 - 07/25/10 05:34 PM
Re: Now I have a Different view
[Re: Quailman]
|
Wes Parrish
16 Point
Registered: 06/12/02
Posts: 16952
Loc: Knoxville-Dover-Union City, TN
|
|
Offline
|
|
Good discussion and I appreciate the opportunity to provide my input.
x 2
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2006678 - 07/25/10 05:48 PM
Re: Now I have a Different view
[Re: Wes Parrish]
|
RAFI
10 Point
Registered: 12/20/09
Posts: 2552
Loc: Tn
|
|
Offline
|
|
wes how do you get your numbers that lbl has a lower deer density than most other wmas?there are more wooded areas than fields by far but my point was that lbl still has more ag. than probably any other public land in Tn.
Edited by RAFI (07/25/10 07:41 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: RUGER, Tennessee Todd, Unicam, Cuttin Caller, CBU93, stretch, Bobby G, Outdoor Lady, TurkeyBurd
|
12102 Members
38 Forums
115553 Topics
1407877 Posts
Max Online: 756 @ 11/20/12 09:10 AM
|
|
|
The TnDeer.Com Deer Talk Forum is for Tennessee Deer Hunters by Tennessee Deer Hunters. If you enjoy using our Talk Forum and would like to contribute to help in it's up-keep. Just submit your contribution by clicking on the DONATE button below and paying with PayPal or a major credit card. Any amount is much appreciated. Thanks for your support!
|
|
|
