Tennessee B&C Bucks ?

[TN24081]

I tried to google it and find out how many Boone and Crockett bucks have been killed in Tennessee but I didn't have any luck. Does anyone know off the top of their head or have a link to that info ? Just curious.....

 

[fairchaser]

I checked my 2003 edition of the B&C record book and there were only 20 typical and 12 non typical entries in TN. I'm sure have been added but guessing not too many.

 

[HuntingDicksonDTC]

Still looking for a total but from 2005-2010 15 typical and non typical combined.

 

[TN24081]

Thanks guys... You'd think that info wouldn't be that hard to find but unless you have a hard back book, it's pretty hard to find !

 

[easy45]

Re: Tennessee B&C Bucks ?

31 typical, 21 non typical


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[landman]

I know 2 went in the Book this year from TN

 

[Good time Charlie]

Lot of people do not fool with having them put in the book.

Seems Like it cost a couple hundred bucks..if anyone knows for sure feel free to chime in.

 

[TN24081]

31 typical, 21 non typical


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks Easy45 !!

 

[ROUGH COUNTRY HUNTER]

I personally know of 4 that aren't in the books.

 

[Tomahawk]

I've got one (2007) in B&C books that is official. It did cost around $200 if I remember correctly. Little bit of a process as far as sending in non digital pictures from many angles with one including tape measure visible against the rack. I don't worry with registering any more of my bucks either P&Y or B&C, even though I have several that would qualify P&Y and another that would qualify B&C.

 

[ZachMarkus]

Tennessee B&C Bucks ?

Guy the hunts the farm next to us killed this one a few years ago that netted 171" he never entered it in the book.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[fairchaser]

I personally know of 4 that aren't in the books.

There are many bucks that will gross over 170 that won't qualify B&C. It takes a very balanced rack to net 170 typical. The entry fee is only $40 so that is not much of a deterrent. Some just don't care to enter but that would be true in every state. So how do you explain the paltry number of entries TN has compared with other states? May-be we just don't grow or kill as many. There could be many reasons for this, most of which is determined by us and some is just the environment. Our long seasons and liberal limits are limiting factors for growing big or older bucks. If a buck with the right genetics, good nutrition and enough age does escape the gun, he has won the chess match so many times, he is virtually unkillable. He will die of old age, usually 6.5, and the predators and rodents will erase any evidence of his existence.

 

[Triplepro]

Currently in the BC record books there are 35 Typical deer from TN that have been entered that net over 160, The reason the numbers are low are because off the management system put in place for Tennessee deer, the management plan Tennessee embraced is similar to Alabama which is to manage for opportunities to harvest deer not to help manage herd for mature deer.

All one has to do is look to the North (Kentucky) which has very similar soils and terrain to Tennessee , in just the counties of Kentucky that touch Tennessee there have been 125 Typical deer entered into BC

It is just a matter of what we want, more deer in the freezer or a trophy on the wall and the thrill of hunting smart 4.5 plus age deer, I live close to state line and have the opportunity to hunt in both, most of time it is the short drive to Kentucky it is amazing the difference in age class just a few miles up the road, but to each his own, most people say they want to harvest old mature bucks but few people want to do what it takes to make it happen.

I am new to the forum and look forward to being apart of the Deer group

 

[Mike Belt]

How many non resident licenses are sold to Tn versus Ky and if there's much of a difference why would one state sell more of them than the other? I may be totally wrong but I'm figuring that the biggest percentage of those sold to hunt Ky are bought by hunters seeking a chance at a B&C buck while those in Tn are just for the hunt. A combination of factors exists as to why Ky may produce more bucks in that category and Tn falls behind Ky in every one of them. Simply put, Tn doesn't provide the environment to produce record book bucks under past and current regulations. The only way to ever rule out the scope of nutritional value of soils would be to have identical regulations and that will never happen. I also doubt that Tn hunters would be willing to go that route. Meanwhile, Tn will still produce a few bucks that size although they may never be killed by a hunter. The 2 buck limit will allow for more bucks surviving by season's end and who knows, maybe 1 or 2 of them will meet the criteria for growing to that size. Personally, I'd love to kill a buck big enough for the record book even though I have no desire to enter into the records.

 

[easy45]

Re: Tennessee B&C Bucks ?

It only cost me $30 to enter mine in Pope and young last year


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[farmin68]

All one has to do is look to the North (Kentucky) which has very similar soils and terrain to Tennessee

That statement is NOT accurate. Hate to call you out on your first post, but this is the kind of misinformation that feeds the trolls and soil deniers.

 

[AT Hiker]

Re: Tennessee B&C Bucks ?

All one has to do is look to the North (Kentucky) which has very similar soils and terrain to Tennessee

That statement is NOT accurate. Hate to call you out on your first post, but this is the kind of misinformation that feeds the trolls and soil deniers.

I have been out of the production ag loop for a couple years now but last I remember KY raises about 1.5 million acres of corn and TN raises close to 1 million. Yields are pretty consistent between both states. If KY had much better soil wouldnt yields be much higher?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[farmin68]

All one has to do is look to the North (Kentucky) which has very similar soils and terrain to Tennessee

That statement is NOT accurate. Hate to call you out on your first post, but this is the kind of misinformation that feeds the trolls and soil deniers.

I have been out of the production ag loop for a couple years now but last I remember KY raises about 1.5 million acres of corn and TN raises close to 1 million. Yields are pretty consistent between both states. If KY had much better soil wouldnt yields be much higher?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Your corn crop numbers are close (920,00 vs 1,520,000 acres)., but it doesn't stop there. KY has 2,100,00 acres MORE farm land than TN. For a mental image, that's an area 6 TIMES THE SIZE OF LBL.

But it still doesn't come down to yield. As I've already mentioned, it's the extra nutrients in the browse on those mineral-rich KY soils. There IS a difference...Tennessee's heavily leached mineral- deficient soils don't produce the same nutrient density in the plants that grow from them..

Back to my Roman soldiers comment - if a serving of wheat has the same levels of minerals and vitamins, regardless of the ground it grew in, the Romans wouldn't have went to the trouble of saving and transporting wheat from the highest quality soils to their soldiers. They realized a difference with no lab analysis centuries ago.

 

[Triplepro]

Man getting called out on first post, that is tough I understand that is part of the learning process, I would like to know more on your comments on minerals at different levels Once you cross the state line,
1. Why do the minerals change once the state line is crossed?
2. What minerals are you referring to?
3. If I took a plant tissue sample what would be considered idea for deer in regards to the plant analysis for maximum antler growth
4. Also what Do the TDN and TDF need to be on the forages for best antler development?

Thanks and I appreciate your response and time on this.

 

[AT Hiker]

Re: Tennessee B&C Bucks ?

Man getting called out on first post, that is tough I understand that is part of the learning process, I would like to know more on your comments on minerals at different levels Once you cross the state line,
1. Why do the minerals change once the state line is crossed?
2. What minerals are you referring to?
3. If I took a plant tissue sample what would be considered idea for deer in regards to the plant analysis for maximum antler growth
4. Also what Do the TDN and TDF need to be on the forages for best antler development?

Thanks and I appreciate your response and time on this.

It happens if you dont support a certain theory, get used to it.

As for nutrients, I believe protein and calcium are about the only researched nutrients in the deer antler world. All the other micro and macro nutrients that forages have play an unknown role in antler development (there may be a few other studied minerals though) and trying to talk tdn and balancing rations in a wild deer herd will put you into the deer farming world, which is taboo as well.

Back to soils...Take ND for example, that state is practically ALL mollisols yet their crop "yields" and "B&C" scores tell a different tale. Since most of that state has the very best soil shouldn't they produce the very best deer? Once again, it takes a lot more than soil quality to produce crops/food ( aka nutrition) and big deer.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Huntaholic]

Man getting called out on first post, that is tough I understand that is part of the learning process, I would like to know more on your comments on minerals at different levels Once you cross the state line,
1. Why do the minerals change once the state line is crossed?
2. What minerals are you referring to?
3. If I took a plant tissue sample what would be considered idea for deer in regards to the plant analysis for maximum antler growth
4. Also what Do the TDN and TDF need to be on the forages for best antler development?

Thanks and I appreciate your response and time on this.

Im like you, I can dang near see that mystical magical KY dirt from my window here at the house and I can tell you from personal experience that the most important difference between here and there is the people that hunt it. Some people are so set in their ways that they will never see anyone elses view. Im quite certain also that if you or I had some fancy letters after our name, they would pay a little more attention. Its either that, or as they say, follow the money trail to find the root of the issue.

 

[7mm08]

Seen pictures of four killed in E.TN in the past four years. None of these were registered with B&C or did they went public with it. Believe it or not but not everyone cares about record books or belongs or wants to be on deer hunting websites. They are out there, even in east TN.

 

[landman]

All one has to do is look to the North (Kentucky) which has very similar soils and terrain to Tennessee

That statement is NOT accurate. Hate to call you out on your first post, but this is the kind of misinformation that feeds the trolls and soil deniers.

Your right on this......cause if you run east of I-65 KY has WORSE TERRAIN than E TN

 

[landman]

How many non resident licenses are sold to Tn versus Ky and if there's much of a difference why would one state sell more of them than the other? I may be totally wrong but I'm figuring that the biggest percentage of those sold to hunt Ky are bought by hunters seeking a chance at a B&C buck while those in Tn are just for the hunt. A combination of factors exists as to why Ky may produce more bucks in that category and Tn falls behind Ky in every one of them. Simply put, Tn doesn't provide the environment to produce record book bucks under past and current regulations. The only way to ever rule out the scope of nutritional value of soils would be to have identical regulations and that will never happen. I also doubt that Tn hunters would be willing to go that route. Meanwhile, Tn will still produce a few bucks that size although they may never be killed by a hunter. The 2 buck limit will allow for more bucks surviving by season's end and who knows, maybe 1 or 2 of them will meet the criteria for growing to that size. Personally, I'd love to kill a buck big enough for the record book even though I have no desire to enter into the records.

Here you go Mike 2014-2015 KY

The one thing I learned with clients since
1993, out of state KY land buyers and leasees
Mostly don't ask about B&C Bucks.

Most if the non-res hunters are coming from
the South, were they have much small deer
than use on the average. I thing I hear
People asking of a place to kill a 130" or better
deer. Out of staters willing to spend money
usually are realisict on that, but and at the same
time those who are wanting larger at times
can and will spend it. Yet several times you
have properties turn over there and TN where the
new owners or hunters do better and worse.
The type of management and hunter skills at
work cause it usually.

More and more I'm seeing non- res land buyers
for TN asking for 140-150" deer, many are learning
whats going in parts of the state.

 

[TheLBLman]

I can dang near see that mystical magical KY dirt from my window here at the house and I can tell you from personal experience that the most important difference between here and there is the people that hunt it.

THIS is one of the most overlooked aspects of all the factors (comparing one state or region to another).
Hunting on both sides of the TN/KY line (mostly within 10 miles either side), I have several friends who regularly pass up multiple bucks in KY (every year) that they would never give a single pass to in TN. You can call this factor "the mentality of the people who hunt the region" or "localized hunter attitudes" or whatever, but it is a major factor effecting the outcome.

What causes the same hunter to have a totally different standard on the north end of a 2,000 acre farm than he has on the south end, just because the TN-KY state line runs thru the farm? I've heard more than one guy say, "If I see that one on the TN side, I'm going to shoot him."

 

[landman]

I can dang near see that mystical magical KY dirt from my window here at the house and I can tell you from personal experience that the most important difference between here and there is the people that hunt it.

THIS is one of the most overlooked aspects of all the factors (comparing one state or region to another).
Hunting on both sides of the TN/KY line (mostly within 10 miles either side), I have several friends who regularly pass up multiple bucks in KY (every year) that they would never give a single pass to in TN. You can call this factor "the mentality of the people who hunt the region" or "localized hunter attitudes" or whatever, but it is a major factor effecting the outcome.

What causes the same hunter to have a totally different standard on the north end of a 2,000 acre farm than he has on the south end, just because the TN-KY state line runs thru the farm? I've heard more than one guy say, "If I see that one on the TN side, I'm going to shoot him."

Been there done that

 

[TheLBLman]

Been there done that

And I've been guilty of same.

What I'm referring to here has absolutely nothing to do with the soil or the crops.
IMO, this is the ultimate difference in state regulations as it gets expressed via "hunter mindset".

In most cases, it has to do with 100 to 120-class 2 1/2-yr-old bucks.
THESE are the bucks that will typically become 120-140-class 3 1/2's, then 140-160-class 4 1/2's.
Even by the very same hunters (who live near and hunt both sides of the line), these bucks get mostly killed south of the line, mostly given a pass north of the line.

The outcome?

A much higher percentage of the top-end 2 1/2's (and 3 1/2's) survive to 4 1/4 in KY, ultimately meaning more 140-plus bucks there, and ultimately many times more opportunity for a B&C.
By comparison, nearly all the top-end 2 1/2's in TN are killed as 2 1/2's.

Whether this is good or bad is a matter of perspective.

 

[SAWDUST]

A much higher percentage of the top-end 2 1/2's (and 3 1/2's) survive to 4 1/4 in KY, ultimately meaning more 140-plus bucks there, and ultimately many times more opportunity for a B&C.
By comparison, nearly all the top-end 2 1/2's in TN are killed as 2 1/2's.

Whether this is good or bad is a matter of perspective.[/quote]



That right there is A BIG REASON ky. kills more bigger antlered deer than tn.

 

[scn]

"By comparison, nearly all the top-end 2 1/2's in TN are killed as 2 1/2's."

That is an interesting THEORY. What data is there that on a statewide basis there is any truth to that statement?

 

[TheLBLman]

"By comparison, nearly all the top-end 2 1/2's in TN are killed as 2 1/2's."

That is an interesting THEORY. What data is there that on a statewide basis there is any truth to that statement?

What data is there that this isn't what's happening?

The evidence for this THEORY is compelling.

Begin with speaking to those hunters who regularly hunt TN & KY. It's not "official" data, but it is compelling.
Next, look at the data (although very little is maintained, and to my knowledge, none for the purpose of this THEORY) showing the B&C scores of harvested 2 1/2's, 3 1/2's vs. 4 1/2 & older bucks in TN over the past few years.

Don't go back to decades ago when bucks were typically randomly shot as presented rather than selectively based on their antler sizes more today. However, I believe because there was so much less age-based antler high-grading by hunters decades ago, that may be why so many B&C bucks were taken then (relative to the size of TN's deer herd). May be little more than happenstance, but still noteworthy that Tennessee's highest scoring typical buck was taken in 1959.

Heck, just the data set from Ames Hunting Club is pretty compelling.

Also, what happened to the data that BigGameGuy collected last year from several QDM hunting clubs? It may not have been a large enough sample size to be meaningful, but that's the kind of data that is needed (in a very large sample). Was it just thrown out because it didn't fit a particular narrative? Have heard nothing farther about it, nor was it requested to be collected again (to my knowledge). That could be some great ongoing data?

One more thing, some will disagree, some know it's true:

2 1/2-yr-old bucks are the easiest bucks to kill that exist. They may only "seem" harder in areas where they hardly exist (areas where most are killed at 1 1/2, therefore there aren't' many 2 1/2's). In a well-balanced deer herd, the 2 1/2-yr-old bucks are the ones moving around most during daylight, and the ones most obvious to hunters during the rut. They behave much like a 16-yr-old boy who just got his driver's license and a new car.

And the size of their antlers has little to do with their ability to avoid hunters. In fact, it seems those will larger antlers may be even "bolder" and more likely to be walking around stupidly during the rut. Of course, this isn't unique to TN. Just saying a hunter in TN is more likely to shoot them than a hunter in KY. And neither a dataset nor a PhD is needed to come to that conclusion. We have approximately twice as many gun-hunting days as KY, and twice the buck limit (had been triple until this year) ---- no way we're not going to kill more of what's out there. But then part of this issue is, just what is surviving "out there".

OK, BSK, here's great TIMING for you to come back. :tu: