Reasonable Expectations for Middle TN, by County

[Rick Dillard]

A couple of years ago I produced a map to give hunters a reasonable expectation of what to expect in Mississippi. From deer entered in the Magnolia Records Program, average gross scores were calculated for each county. The computer program evaluated the average gross score of each county and all of the surrounding counties. The results on the map almost mirrored our soil/geographic regions with the Delta and Black Prairie regions producing the highest gross scores.

 

[Pursuit Hunter]

A couple of years ago I produced a map to give hunters a reasonable expectation of what to expect in Mississippi. From deer entered in the Magnolia Records Program, average gross scores were calculated for each county. The computer program evaluated the average gross score of each county and all of the surrounding counties. The results on the map almost mirrored our soil/geographic regions with the Delta and Black Prairie regions producing the highest gross scores.

That's a great map! Did you do it in ArcView?

 

[Rick Dillard]

A couple of years ago I produced a map to give hunters a reasonable expectation of what to expect in Mississippi. From deer entered in the Magnolia Records Program, average gross scores were calculated for each county. The computer program evaluated the average gross score of each county and all of the surrounding counties. The results on the map almost mirrored our soil/geographic regions with the Delta and Black Prairie regions producing the highest gross scores.

That's a great map! Did you do it in ArcView?

Thanks! Yes, I did it in ArcView.

 

[scn]

BSK,

In your learned opinion, what percentage of the total deer herd in a county are in the category of the top five scores on an annual basis?

 

[bowriter]

I believe it is a tad or maybe more high for Wilson county. That is, if I read it correctly. Mid-low 120's is my reasonable expectation for this county with a few in the 30's.

Dang few.

 

[FARMTOFIELD]

Very accurate imo Lawrence county is a bit off because of the 158 being listed twice. I know of a 170" deer taken a couple years back (typical) but the guy won't have it scored. Several 140s taken annually

The two 158s are different deer. There is a guy with two deer in the top five, but they have different scores. Are you saying it is the same deer scored differently?

Its the same deer, just somehow something got messed up. I know this because the guy is my preacher.

 

[Pursuit Hunter]

OK, I got map envy. Not quite as pretty as Rick Dillard's but interesting nonetheless. Maybe one day I'll be able to justify an investment in AcrView.

 

[Pursuit Hunter]

Very accurate imo Lawrence county is a bit off because of the 158 being listed twice. I know of a 170" deer taken a couple years back (typical) but the guy won't have it scored. Several 140s taken annually

The two 158s are different deer. There is a guy with two deer in the top five, but they have different scores. Are you saying it is the same deer scored differently?

Its the same deer, just somehow something got messed up. I know this because the guy is my preacher.

Thanks for the info. I will adjust the numbers. Isn't TnDeer Great? Never would have known that...

Do you know which score is correct?

 

[scn]

Thanks for the neat map!

What immediately jumped out at me was Robertson Co. With its proximity to KY, soils, etc., it looks like it should have the same expectations as the other counties in that swath. Any ideas on why it isn't?

 

[Pursuit Hunter]

Thanks for the neat map!

What immediately jumped out at me was Robertson Co. With its proximity to KY, soils, etc., it looks like it should have the same expectations as the other counties in that swath. Any ideas on why it isn't?

Probably isn't all that different in real-world terms. I took the counties and split them into four groups. Robertson is only one inch lower than Benton, which made the top quartile. Dickson Co is another that missed the cut for the next higher category by one inch.

 

[scn]

Thanks for the neat map!

What immediately jumped out at me was Robertson Co. With its proximity to KY, soils, etc., it looks like it should have the same expectations as the other counties in that swath. Any ideas on why it isn't?

Probably isn't all that different in real-world terms. I took the counties and split them into four groups. Robertson is only one inch lower than Benton, which made the top quartile. Dickson Co is another that missed the cut for the next higher category by one inch.

Thanks!

 

[Rick Dillard]

Nice map!

 

[Pursuit Hunter]

Nice map!

You're too kind.

 

[Andy S.]

Nice map Rick. Do you have any figures for what the shaded colors equate to, or possibly a range of scores (125", 140", 120"-130", etc) other than "largest, smallest"? Or is the map just a generalization of what to expect in the shaded geographic areas (this area more inches than that area etc)?

 

[Andy S.]

The results on the map almost mirrored our soil/geographic regions with the Delta and Black Prairie regions producing the highest gross scores.

This sounds all too familiar. Thanks for sharing Rick, good stuff.

 

[FARMTOFIELD]

Very accurate imo Lawrence county is a bit off because of the 158 being listed twice. I know of a 170" deer taken a couple years back (typical) but the guy won't have it scored. Several 140s taken annually

The two 158s are different deer. There is a guy with two deer in the top five, but they have different scores. Are you saying it is the same deer scored differently?

Its the same deer, just somehow something got messed up. I know this because the guy is my preacher.

Thanks for the info. I will adjust the numbers. Isn't TnDeer Great? Never would have known that...

Do you know which score is correct?

158 5/8 i believe

 

[UTGrad]

Good map

 

[nodog]

From the little research I've done so far I'd say the map was off. I have an invite to Moore county which according to the state isn't as good as it's 2 neighbors. The map shows them equal in color, but Moore is as I've heard on the map.

 

[BSK]

The results on the map almost mirrored our soil/geographic regions with the Delta and Black Prairie regions producing the highest gross scores.

What a coincidence! But now that you've posted the obvious link between soil quality and antler quality, get ready to be viciously attacked and vilified by the trophyists on this site!

And by the way, great Spatial Analyst work!

 

[BSK]

Wow check out grundy Kinda supriseing but I know some good bucks come from here evey year. Does anyone think the fact that we are not in unit L have anything to do with Grundys antler expectations?

Although these calculations are a good rule of them, they don't always work, and when they don't, it's usually because of a couple of top-end non-typicals in the recordbooks. I agree with Quailman that the number for Grundy County is inflated.

 

[BSK]

BSK,

In your learned opinion, what percentage of the total deer herd in a county are in the category of the top five scores on an annual basis?

Looking at the MS data on age versus gross antler scores (10,000+ bucks), the top scoring bucks (gross) fall into the top 3-5% of mature bucks. Considering that in a well-managed herd, 10% of all bucks are mature, you're talking about 3-5% of 10%, or 0.3-0.5% of all bucks. So, in a given area with a good buck age structure, around 1 out of every 200 to 300 bucks should have antlers scoring in that "top 5" range.

 

[BSK]

And just so everyone is clear, the calculation is:

Average the NET score of the 5 largest bucks recorded for the area. Then take 75% of that average of the top NET scores to get a reasonable estimate of the GROSS score that will be available in harvestable numbers from a well-managed property.

I would love to take credit for this calculation (as it works so often), but it was taught to me by Dr. Grant Woods.

 

[scn]

BSK,

In your learned opinion, what percentage of the total deer herd in a county are in the category of the top five scores on an annual basis?

Looking at the MS data on age versus gross antler scores (10,000+ bucks), the top scoring bucks (gross) fall into the top 3-5% of mature bucks. Considering that in a well-managed herd, 10% of all bucks are mature, you're talking about 3-5% of 10%, or 0.3-0.5% of all bucks. So, in a given area with a good buck age structure, around 1 out of every 200 to 300 bucks should have antlers scoring in that "top 5" range.

Thanks, Brian!

IMO, this is one of the main areas where our almost instant media information is hurting hunters. When one of those monsters is killed, it is almost immediately on the internet. Somehow, hunters EVERYWHERE, and not just TN, begin to think that is the norm for big deer in that location. When they begin to expect and sometimes even hold out for a one in 300 buck, there is a great disconnect with reality.

IMO, having a knowledge of what realistic expectations as shown in this thread are for any area, even if traveling into a "trophy" state, leads to a much happier hunt. If you want to pass up 99.5+% of the available bucks for the chance at the Holy Grail, then that is fine. But, a hunter who does so shouldn't be disappointed with his/her hunt when they go home empty handed. Even though the realistic expectations differ between states and even locals in those states, these top end animals are extremely, extremely rare everywhere, even if TV wants you to think otherwise.

 

[timberjack86]

Wow check out grundy Kinda supriseing but I know some good bucks come from here evey year. Does anyone think the fact that we are not in unit L have anything to do with Grundys antler expectations?

Although these calculations are a good rule of them, they don't always work, and when they don't, it's usually because of a couple of top-end non-typicals in the recordbooks. I agree with Quailman that the number for Grundy County is inflated.

Thanks Brian!

 

[ClubHead]

One thing Ive noticed of the map is Wma's.Take Benton for Instance,it has the following Wma's.Natchez Trace,Camden,TNWR,Big Sandy,Harmons,Nathan Bedford,New Hope,Lick Creek.I know several Bruisers that have been taken from Big Sandy,TNWR and Nathan Bedford in the past that have a seperate registry.Nice work by the way.

 

[Andy S.]

IMO, having a knowledge of what realistic expectations as shown in this thread are for any area, even if traveling into a "trophy" state, leads to a much happier hunt. If you want to pass up 99.5+% of the available bucks for the chance at the Holy Grail, then that is fine. But, a hunter who does so shouldn't be disappointed with his/her hunt when they go home empty handed. Even though the realistic expectations differ between states and even locals in those states, these top end animals are extremely, extremely rare everywhere, even if TV wants you to think otherwise.

Very well said Steve and spot on, I agree 100%.

 

[Deer Assassin]

but no matter what you have to be in the woods

just like fishing u never know what you might catch

 

[Coach]

There has been, in the past, much more negativity when a thread similar to this is posted. Especially, when soil is disussed and a few other items. I'm really enjoying this thread and the posts. And, like DA said, you gotta have your worm in the water to catch some fish...being out there is the only way to get it done.

 

[Coach]

The results on the map almost mirrored our soil/geographic regions with the Delta and Black Prairie regions producing the highest gross scores.

What a coincidence! But now that you've posted the obvious link between soil quality and antler quality, get ready to be viciously attacked and vilified by the trophyists on this site!

And by the way, great Spatial Analyst work!

Don't duck until the shots are fired BSK! haha

 

[BSK]

Don't duck until the shots are fired BSK! haha

On this site? They will be fired! Too many idgits hiding in the bushes for them not to be fired.