diamond hunter
Well-Known Member
Can you change the bucks on your property by feeding them an expensive more protein rich or mineral rich feed? I mean change antler growth even 10"
cAN U CHANGE THEM
- Thread starter diamond hunter
- Start date
bowhunterfanatic
Well-Known Member
I'm far from a biologist but I imagine over time you'd see a slight increase in antler size from a supplemental feeding program done right. If bucks have plenty of eat after getting run down from the rut seems like they'd put on more bone the next growing season. I would think improving your habitat to its peak potential would far exceed some supplemental protein feeding though. Unless you are managing a few thousand acres though your neighbors may make it tough to ever see much improvement.
I wouldn't waste my money!
diamond hunter
Well-Known Member
Is it really a waste if you dont care about the money?
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2010
- Messages
- 13,575
Yes, put that money towards habitat improvement instead. Its not as easy as buying some buck chow like the tv would have you believe
In a word, yes. But there are caveats. You need enough acreage to encompass their entire range to keep them alive, have comprehensive habitat management plans, and be willing to spend the money it's going to take for the long term project that it will be. If you're lacking in any one of those areas then you're wasting time and money.
It's not as easy as putting high dollar protein pellets in a feeder then next year having a giant. What everyone seems to ignore is that it's epidemic, not genetics that make bigger racks. You have to create an environment where generations of does are beyond healthy and safe with no competition or hardships. That takes several years. All the while you've got to keep the population at or below carry capacity, which means killing a lot of deer. But eventually after several generations of does being at pinnacle health, their buck offspring will grow noticeably larger racks. There's a WHOLE LOT more to it than 99.9% of hunters can reasonably achieve. I'd guess you're looking probably six figures annually if you count mortgage, taxes, management executions, and lastly feed. Good idea in theory and some farms actually achieve it, but for most of us it's a pipe dream.
It's not as easy as putting high dollar protein pellets in a feeder then next year having a giant. What everyone seems to ignore is that it's epidemic, not genetics that make bigger racks. You have to create an environment where generations of does are beyond healthy and safe with no competition or hardships. That takes several years. All the while you've got to keep the population at or below carry capacity, which means killing a lot of deer. But eventually after several generations of does being at pinnacle health, their buck offspring will grow noticeably larger racks. There's a WHOLE LOT more to it than 99.9% of hunters can reasonably achieve. I'd guess you're looking probably six figures annually if you count mortgage, taxes, management executions, and lastly feed. Good idea in theory and some farms actually achieve it, but for most of us it's a pipe dream.
IMO best thing most of us can do is use tags on old bucks that aren't big while saving young bucks that are. Take a reasonable approach to habitat enhancement and reasonable approach to harvest management, and within a few years you'll see bigger bucks because you're creating an inviting environment and allowing bucks to live long enough to reach their potential. Easy concept but for whatever reason even that is more than most hunters are willing to do.
Everybody sees a big 3yr old 10pt and they shoot first chance they get, ignoring that in two more years that buck would be truly trophy size, not just big. Yes there's a very real possibility he'll get killed by someone else but that's just part of the game of trying to increase trophy potential. I lose probably 80% of bucks before they reach 5yrs old, but of that 20% survivors about half become true giants. About every other year I have a giant to hunt. I don't always get him but at least I have one to chase and dream about. And often enough I do kill him. Makes it all worthwhile.
Everybody sees a big 3yr old 10pt and they shoot first chance they get, ignoring that in two more years that buck would be truly trophy size, not just big. Yes there's a very real possibility he'll get killed by someone else but that's just part of the game of trying to increase trophy potential. I lose probably 80% of bucks before they reach 5yrs old, but of that 20% survivors about half become true giants. About every other year I have a giant to hunt. I don't always get him but at least I have one to chase and dream about. And often enough I do kill him. Makes it all worthwhile.
I used to hunt 150acres surrounded by 750acres that hunting was not allowed. I harvested really nice mature bucks on this property. Had a couple of 160" deer killed on the property and also found sheds of +170" deer. The bucks have to reach 4.5yrs old to start having larger racks. This property was great to hunt during the rut. After the rut, you would see typical small bucks and does. This is the only property I have ever hunted with quality of bucks on it. The owner passed and left it to an individual who does not allow hunting. This property spoiled my dad and I. Since 2014, I have not seen anything that really excites me. I pass on 8/10ptrs that are 3.5yr old only for them to be shot on a neighboring property. If you can't get neighboring properties on board, IMO you are wasting money. The bucks have to reach their prime to have large antlers. I drive by this property everyday and just dream about what is running through the woods.
deerhunter10
Well-Known Member
More to it then just the feed itself. And the amount of money it would take in feed would be a big number and that money could be used in habitat improvements that in the long run is light years better for everything.
BSK
Well-Known Member
I've seen several large-acreage clubs try it, but with no measurable results. The only thing that was measurable was how much money they spent, and that was a lot!
deerhunter10
Well-Known Member
BSK
Well-Known Member
You don't want to know.
deerhunter10
Well-Known Member
BSK
Well-Known Member
They were buying premium supplemental feed by the truckload full.
megalomaniac
Well-Known Member
Nope.
But if you want to see 20 to 30in antler improvements, DONT shoot your best 1.5 and 2.5yos.
That's the single biggest difference you can make to improve antler scores of bucks killed.
yellalinehunter
Well-Known Member
My answer is no. Now, can offering supplemental feed during the hard winter months help your rutted down bucks make it through easier. I'm going to say yes. Can having supplemental feed, and mineral availability during a does pregnancy, nursing, and buck antler growing period hurt anything? I'm going to say no. Can you provide enough supplemental feed to make your land grow better deer in inches? No. When you do habitat improvement you are adding tonnage to their diet. Which includes nutrients that deer is searching for. Deer know what they are needed and know where to find it. They also are browsers not grazers. They want a little bit of everything throughout the day. I've seen deer where it's legal to feed, browse on privet and blackberry briars on the edge of the most beautiful plots you've laid eyes on and have a feeder full of high quality feed setting there as well. The deer just chose what they wanted.
yellalinehunter
Well-Known Member
If you want to see bigger deer let them get older, 5-6 yr old, develop predator control, improve habitat, and then get your neighbors on the same program and like minded goals.
BSK
Well-Known Member
Other than the biological problems of feeding deer from feeders, such as increased disease transmission, increased predation (predator hanging out around feeders), increased social pressures around feeders, habitat damage near the feeders, etc. I would agree with you.
When does it cease to be hunting and start to be farming?
When you try to get a tax break
When you begin growing their rack size.
Lakoskys do it. Drurys do it. Still technically free range wild deer but there's no question they are bigger than deer typically grow in the wild.
Not sure if they still have it but Lakosky had a 24/7 live feed showing one of his trough feeders. The thing would hold about a pallet load of feed and he kept it full year round. Within a number of years he begins dropping 200 inchers and his wife killed a nearly 200" 8pt. How much does it cost? I'd guess all in probably in the six figures annually for many years. But he proved it can be done.
Not my thing. I'm not even interested in hunting shows. But that one had me intrigued enough to look into it a little. While not technically a deer farm where the deer are confined, it's as close as you can get. And he gets results somewhere below deer farm quality racks but obviously well above what good habitat alone produces.
yellalinehunter
Well-Known Member
He also puts in multiple very large food plots, grows corn and soybeans strictly for the deer and does habitat improvement. That feeder is more for advertising than it's for hunting over. Yes the deer get the nutrients but that's not the sole source. He also doesn't shoot deer till they are 6-7 years old.
That's all true but also harkens back to my initial post. It takes an all above approach. One thing by itself doesn't do it. And missing any one thing will prevent it. The feed alone is not the only deciding factor, but it is a critical one. Without it they wouldn't be producing the deer they do. And while I 100% agree the live cam on the feeder is a marketing stunt, it's not the only feeder they're running and the deer are absolutely benefitting from all the supplemental feed.
Could they be getting those results from habitat and food plots alone? There are thousands of other farms that suggest no. It's hard to deny that a bigger factor isn't the supplemental feed.
DoubleRidge
Well-Known Member
In a wild free range herd I dont think its benifical enough to justify the cost.
Also...managing the habitat by opening the canopy and allowing sunlight to the forest floor will generate way more tonnage per acre than what most land managers would be willing to spend on feed in a bag. Even food plots should be supplemental to our native forage management plan.
But without a doubt the number one factor is age. Forget genetics, we've all learned that we cant manage genetics in a wild herd. Nutrition...again, manage the natural forage and then consider food plots to be a supplement...but age is key....and no, not all old bucks are big....but I'd be willing to bet there are many bucks, if they made it to 4½ or 5½, would meet many deer hunters goals...we can grow bucks 120" to 130" (and even much bigger when everything lines up)...but age is the common denominator.
I love managing the habitat and watching wildlife benifit and respond. I enjoy food plotting. Love planting trees. But the single biggest action that we have taken over the years is to let deer walk and reach maturity.
And in addition, we have worked with neighbors who have the same or similar goals.
Also...managing the habitat by opening the canopy and allowing sunlight to the forest floor will generate way more tonnage per acre than what most land managers would be willing to spend on feed in a bag. Even food plots should be supplemental to our native forage management plan.
But without a doubt the number one factor is age. Forget genetics, we've all learned that we cant manage genetics in a wild herd. Nutrition...again, manage the natural forage and then consider food plots to be a supplement...but age is key....and no, not all old bucks are big....but I'd be willing to bet there are many bucks, if they made it to 4½ or 5½, would meet many deer hunters goals...we can grow bucks 120" to 130" (and even much bigger when everything lines up)...but age is the common denominator.
I love managing the habitat and watching wildlife benifit and respond. I enjoy food plotting. Love planting trees. But the single biggest action that we have taken over the years is to let deer walk and reach maturity.
And in addition, we have worked with neighbors who have the same or similar goals.
BSK
Well-Known Member
Agree. In my area, the average 4 1/2 grosses 120. That meets many deer hunters' desires. Not the trophy hunter, but most hunters. And as you mentioned, some mature bucks are large-antlered, some small-antlered. I've got a 4 1/2 on my place this year that won't gross 80. Yet we've also had mature bucks that went well into 160s.
Urban_Hunter
Well-Known Member
I always hear this and I can't wrap my head around it. Everywhere around me that consistently has big deer are areas of overpopulation. Hendersonville peninsulas, around the Nashville airport, Shelby bottoms… all of these areas have acknowledged overpopulation with extremely established browse lines… and they have monster bucks.
BSK
Well-Known Member
But is simply that those areas have far more MATURE bucks because they're protected?
How much hunting pressure? How many deer are living to maturity vs deer that get heavier hunting pressure? Starving isn't how those deer get big. Imagine how many more big ones there would be if there was enough food that browse lines didn't exist.
megalomaniac
Well-Known Member
Spot on!!!!
Way more can be achieved through habitat management than anything supplemental (out of a bag or planted)
megalomaniac
Well-Known Member
Sort of agree...
If you are going for 120 to 130in bucks, age is the most important leg of the 3 legged stool... (Age, genetics, nutrition)
Unless you are in an area with TERRIBLE soils. Nutrition (next to impossible to improve with terrible soils) becomes no 1... and you are screwed. Just hunt elsewhere.
BUT, if you are going for 150in bucks or better... its ALL about genetics. You can't control the percent of the population that has the genetic potential to be 150 or up... but that tiny percent of the population has to be protected until maturity to regularly produce 150in and up bucks. 90% of most bucks just dont have the genetics to ever break 150.
