Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New Trophy's
New trophy room comments
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Classifieds
Trophy Room
New items
New comments
Latest content
Latest updates
Latest reviews
Author list
Series list
Search showcase
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Tennessee Hunting Forums
Deer Hunting Forum
More meaningless data (but a question)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Popcorn" data-source="post: 5822822" data-attributes="member: 20151"><p>Wow! Interesting. It's a long shot at best but any chance trees lost and or removed were by and large the same variety / specie mast bearing trees that would have affected food availability dates? For example if you remove the majority of a dominant food source then you move the biology related to that ample and nourishing food source to coincide with the next. ie; white oak family to red oak family. Pure speculation </p><p>That's all I got</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Popcorn, post: 5822822, member: 20151"] Wow! Interesting. It’s a long shot at best but any chance trees lost and or removed were by and large the same variety / specie mast bearing trees that would have affected food availability dates? For example if you remove the majority of a dominant food source then you move the biology related to that ample and nourishing food source to coincide with the next. ie; white oak family to red oak family. Pure speculation That’s all I got [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Tennessee Hunting Forums
Deer Hunting Forum
More meaningless data (but a question)
Top