Reply
Go Back   TexasBowhunter.com Community Discussion Forums > Topics > Game Management/Age & Score/Trailcam Pics
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-03-2015, 08:48 AM   #1
deer farmer
Ten Point
 
deer farmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Shreveport
Hunt In: Harrison Co and other places
Default is it Genetics or is it food ?

I am sure this has been discussed many times but what the heck, I watched a segment on Growing Deer TV, and followed a link to the state of Mississippi, where a large group of biologist made recommendations, from their conclusion of their study, was to improve the food instead of bringing in larger genetic northern deer. It took two generations to see the benefit of planting food for the deer. my point here is to say, plant food plots guys, plant food plots and in two generations you might see better deer around your place. A 35% improvement in the deer were seen where food was made available to the deer.

Last edited by deer farmer; 08-03-2015 at 08:51 AM. Reason: additions
deer farmer is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 08:51 AM   #2
Artos
Pope & Young
 
Artos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Deep South TX
Hunt In: Deep South TX
Default

age

genetics

nutrition

...in that order to reach a deer's individual potential.
Artos is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 08:57 AM   #3
Buff
Pope & Young
 
Buff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: AvingerTX
Hunt In: The World
Default

Marion county texas is famous for their small deer. most every 1.5 buck is a spike, most every 2.5 is a small fork horn.
I bought some high dollar does and turned them out with the native deer on my place.
This year I have a 1.5 year old 10 point.
These deer have unlimited feed and have had for the last 5 years.
Up until now I have just had fat spikes.
Genetics counts
Buff is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 09:15 AM   #4
KingsX
Pope & Young
 
KingsX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Angelo
Hunt In: Irion ,Tom green co.
Default

Genetics
Then food
And then you play the age game.

For me it's in that order.
KingsX is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 09:21 AM   #5
tbgascorer
Ten Point
 
tbgascorer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tomball, TX
Hunt In: Mills County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsX View Post
Genetics
Then food
And then you play the age game.

For me it's in that order.
Agreed and I think true in my situation as well.
tbgascorer is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 09:25 AM   #6
deer farmer
Ten Point
 
deer farmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Shreveport
Hunt In: Harrison Co and other places
Default

Are u saying spikes never grow beyond spikes? And I have seen some nice deer taken out of Marion Co. What would happen if tree farmers started growing soybeans instead of pine trees in Marion Co. Or added soybeans to their property? In the Mississippi study, the biologist said the most growth was seen in the areas where pine trees dominated the farming. The biologist started growing food for the deer in that area, and in the 2nd generation the deer had seen a 35% improvement in weight and racks. I am not here to argue about genetics, we all know that comes into play but according to the Mississippi biologist group doing the study, they recommended planting food over importing genetics. if you can do both, go for it, but planting for improving your local herd is Good for all, the deer and the hunter.
deer farmer is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 09:26 AM   #7
Artos
Pope & Young
 
Artos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Deep South TX
Hunt In: Deep South TX
Default

wrong...how can any individual deer be larger when he is immature or post mature vs. his prime horn making years??

Age is the 'primary factor' in producing an individual animals best set of antlers...he will almost ALWAYS be biggest when they are mature with genetics & nutrition being equal through their lives.

Not sure how this can be debated??
Artos is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 09:30 AM   #8
tbgascorer
Ten Point
 
tbgascorer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tomball, TX
Hunt In: Mills County
Default

I think what Buff is saying is that all things equal, his native yearling bucks were mostly spikes, even with unlimited protein available. He brought in new genetics and his yearling bucks are now much larger.
tbgascorer is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 09:33 AM   #9
FCTrapper
Ten Point
 
FCTrapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Charlotte Texas (El Tesoro Ranch)
Hunt In: Atascosa/McMullen County
Default

The Genetic attribute is only effective in certain scenarios. A small HF vs large low fence would be the 2 opposite sides of the spectrum. In some scenarios there is absolutely no way you could alter or assist the genetics. Genetics is a very complicated subject that truthfully I doubt many understand the magnitude of its power. Back to the OP in my opinion the most important of the 3 is AGE then NUTRITION and Lastly Genetics, unless your in a scenario that is more controlable then Genetics would be second.
FCTrapper is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 09:41 AM   #10
Buff
Pope & Young
 
Buff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: AvingerTX
Hunt In: The World
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by deer farmer View Post
Are u saying spikes never grow beyond spikes? And I have seen some nice deer taken out of Marion Co. What would happen if tree farmers started growing soybeans instead of pine trees in Marion Co. Or added soybeans to their property? In the Mississippi study, the biologist said the most growth was seen in the areas where pine trees dominated the farming. The biologist started growing food for the deer in that area, and in the 2nd generation the deer had seen a 35% improvement in weight and racks. I am not here to argue about genetics, we all know that comes into play but according to the Mississippi biologist group doing the study, they recommended planting food over importing genetics. if you can do both, go for it, but planting for improving your local herd is Good for all, the deer and the hunter.


No, I think I said the spikes were fork horns the next year.
I have hunted Marion county for 50 years and I can count on one hand the 150 + inch deer I have seen taken by anybody.
What I was saying is that I plant 20% of my farm and feed unlimited protien and the deer that weighed 120 pounds 5 years ago do not now weigh 162 pounds (35%) bigger.

It is just my opinion that some deer herds are made up from deer that are just never going to weigh 200 pounds or have 180" racks.

I have no doubt planting helps them be all they can be.

Genetics has to count.
I raised 3 boys.
Two I sired, one that my wife had before I met her.
They lived in the same house, ate the same food, cooked by the same lady.
My stepson is 5'8" and weighs 135 pounds
The other two are 6'4" and weigh 250
Buff is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 09:41 AM   #11
Encinal
Pope & Young
 
Encinal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Location, Location
Hunt In: Spite of Wife's Complaints
Default

What do you want? Do you want the best animal your property can produce or do you want the biggest animal possible?

There are a whole lot more factors than age/genetics/nutrition when starting to manage whitetails. Be careful when making your choices, because many are nearly impossible to reverse if you decide you aren't happy.

Producing the size animal you want is many times very high on a new landowner/leaseholder's list. How you go about it is important. Many times management choices affect your hunting experience. Try to do things in a way that once you get to where you want to be,you actually want be there.

Density is something that can throw this off. Lower densities allow individuals more habitat to munch on, but is it fun seeing so many fewer deer when you are hunting.

Fence/game cameras are other ones. They are wonderful management tools, but does the loss of the "surprise" aspect of your hunt takeaway from the experience more than the knowledge of what is out there adds?

Importation of genetics is another one. Does moving the bar of what is a trophy really help you long term? Pen raised genetics require pretty constant management and supplementation, or they start to slide backwards over time as line breeding unwinds in the pasture. Do you enjoy putting your hands on deer more than you do hunting them, can you balance those two things equally or does it tip your experience one direction or the other?

These are all personal choices and there is no right answer, but consider them all and know, it's not just about the biggest. It's about how you feel about the biggest when you get there.

Last edited by Encinal; 08-03-2015 at 09:57 AM.
Encinal is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 10:01 AM   #12
unclefish
Pope & Young
 
unclefish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Katy, TX
Hunt In: Elk in CO....Deer in Lyons, TX
Default

A prime example to back up what the study says is what el gato has done.

All native genetics. He started pouring the food plots and protein to the deer and now is producing 200" native LA whitetails annually where before he said the average buck was ~ 120". His average now is 145-150" I think he wrote on the QDMA forum. All on pour soils.

He needs to chime in because his results are just astounding.....and he didn't play mad scientist to do it.
unclefish is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 10:17 AM   #13
perfectstorm
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Default

As far as El Gatos deal. It is amazing what he has done but he also has a program that probably less than 5% of people on TBH could afford to build & sustain. Nutrition on that grand of scale is higher than buying genetics.
perfectstorm is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 10:25 AM   #14
KingsX
Pope & Young
 
KingsX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Angelo
Hunt In: Irion ,Tom green co.
Default

Age is first in layman terms.
It gets more complicated after everything is established and you start playing the peaked out guessing game.
Never implied that age should be last or that it is ok to kill young bucks. I thought the original Post was geared towards weather genetics vs food played a more significant role in producing better bucks when age management was already practiced.

Last edited by KingsX; 08-03-2015 at 10:29 AM.
KingsX is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 10:33 AM   #15
unclefish
Pope & Young
 
unclefish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Katy, TX
Hunt In: Elk in CO....Deer in Lyons, TX
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsX View Post
Age is first in layman terms.
It gets more complicated after everything is established and you start playing the peaked out guessing game.
Never implied that age should be last or that it is ok to kill young bucks. I thought the original Post was geared towards weather genetics vs food played a more significant role in producing better bucks when age management was already practiced.
Exactly. Age is a given...the study was just comparing nutrition vs genetics.
unclefish is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 10:50 AM   #16
perfectstorm
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by unclefish View Post
Exactly. Age is a given...the study was just comparing nutrition vs genetics.
I'm confused about this study. How would nutrition on natural genetics ever result in bigger deer or faster results than buying enhanced genetics? (If the goal is the biggest deer.) The only realm that nutrition beats genetics, is the emotional aspect i.e. "I want to see how nice I can make my native deer population".
perfectstorm is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 11:16 AM   #17
unclefish
Pope & Young
 
unclefish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Katy, TX
Hunt In: Elk in CO....Deer in Lyons, TX
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by perfectstorm View Post
I'm confused about this study. How would nutrition on natural genetics ever result in bigger deer or faster results than buying enhanced genetics? (If the goal is the biggest deer.) The only realm that nutrition beats genetics, is the emotional aspect i.e. "I want to see how nice I can make my native deer population".
The study did not say that nutrition will improve it faster than genetics.

The study is saying the difference in antler size from two regions was based on nutrition and not genetics because after two generations of good nutrition....the "poor region" caught up with the "good region".

Link to the summary of the study.
http://www.growingdeer.tv/?ep=whitet...act-or-fiction

Last edited by unclefish; 08-03-2015 at 11:20 AM.
unclefish is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 11:23 AM   #18
perfectstorm
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by unclefish View Post
The study did not say that nutrition will improve it faster than genetics.

The study is saying the difference in antler size from two regions was based on nutrition and not genetics because after two generations of good nutrition....the "poor region" caught up with the "good region".

Link to the summary of the study.
http://www.growingdeer.tv/?ep=whitet...act-or-fiction
I'm sorry. I thought when you said "vs." that meant in relative comparison to the other. So this was just a study in if nutrition helps at all. No doubt it adds to the equation. Was the study LF or HF?
perfectstorm is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 11:24 AM   #19
jkelbe
Ten Point
 
jkelbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Richardson
Hunt In: Anderson County
Default

I don't have the practical experience but from what I have been able to put together reading and watching everything I think...

If you have to let the deer get old to see what it can be.
If you want him bigger, then you need to make sure it has great food 365 days a year.
If you still want him bigger, then you need better genes.

I think you need to get the first 2 steps down first, but at least the steps done in this direction are the cheapest to most expensive.

BTW I would love to have the land to do the experiment. What ever you decide, it's fun doing it.

Last edited by jkelbe; 08-03-2015 at 11:26 AM.
jkelbe is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 11:25 AM   #20
jkelbe
Ten Point
 
jkelbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Richardson
Hunt In: Anderson County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by perfectstorm View Post
I'm sorry. I thought when you said "vs." that meant in relative comparison to the other. So this was just a study in if nutrition helps at all. No doubt it adds to the equation. Was the study LF or HF?
They tagged and transported deer to high fence and then tagged the fawns, so they could track the parentage.
jkelbe is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 01:44 PM   #21
elgato
Ten Point
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Default

Age--without age genetics don't show
nutrition--without nutrition genetics don't show
Genetics-- Can be dramatically improved with nutrition especially over time.

I surely believe infusing store bought genetics can very quickly improve a herd assuming: you have complete control { read relatively small, high fence, intensively fed }

Is importing genetics cheaper and/or more effective than a long term nutrition program. Maybe again in a smallish highly controlled environment.

To think about the role of genetics lets play: We have 2500 acres high fenced. Assume abstractly we have a deer to 10 acres. Assume 1:1 ratio That yields 125 bucks. We want ALL the bucks to achieve the highest quality possible. We feed from January to mid August and last year fed about 60 tons maybe a bit more. At $500/ton $30K. Ag budget is usually $6-$8K yr. Rounding up thats $40-$50K. Divide by 2 cause my neighbor foots the bill on his property.

What the outcome over time from such a program? Many of you know the deer we are growing but suffice to say our deer are substantially bigger than anything around the area including other high fenced properties . They are also significantly bigger than when we started and seem to keep getting bigger.

Now think about importing genetics. How many breeder bucks would need to be purchased at what cost to impact the 125 bucks already in place. Using DMP pens how many deer need to be released over how many years to make an impact again at what cost.

Even then for these deer to express their full genetic potential they need to be on a very high nutritional plane. I can't get the costs to work and I have always chosen to spend the $ on nutrition instead.

I frankly think most folks would be better off taking the word 'genetics' out of their vocabulary. Focus on the things you can control..age and nutrition.With that I believe bucks can be grown that meet or exceed the most wonderful dreams of most hunters.
elgato is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 01:56 PM   #22
BrandonA
Pope & Young
 
BrandonA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Marble Falls/Burnet
Hunt In: Mills and Burnet County
Default

In my opinion nutrition is the mot important factor. With out nutrition doesn't matter how old or what type of genetics a deer has they will never fully maximize
BrandonA is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 02:04 PM   #23
lovemylegacy
Pope & Young
 
lovemylegacy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Mauriceville
Hunt In: SETx,La,Il,Ks,Mo
Default

Without nutrition, genetics can NEVER show its full potential. Nutrition has to be #1.
lovemylegacy is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 02:07 PM   #24
KingsX
Pope & Young
 
KingsX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Angelo
Hunt In: Irion ,Tom green co.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elgato View Post
Age--without age genetics don't show
nutrition--without nutrition genetics don't show
Genetics-- Can be dramatically improved with nutrition especially over time.

I surely believe infusing store bought genetics can very quickly improve a herd assuming: you have complete control { read relatively small, high fence, intensively fed }

Is importing genetics cheaper and/or more effective than a long term nutrition program. Maybe again in a smallish highly controlled environment.

To think about the role of genetics lets play: We have 2500 acres high fenced. Assume abstractly we have a deer to 10 acres. Assume 1:1 ratio That yields 125 bucks. We want ALL the bucks to achieve the highest quality possible. We feed from January to mid August and last year fed about 60 tons maybe a bit more. At $500/ton $30K. Ag budget is usually $6-$8K yr. Rounding up thats $40-$50K. Divide by 2 cause my neighbor foots the bill on his property.

What the outcome over time from such a program? Many of you know the deer we are growing but suffice to say our deer are substantially bigger than anything around the area including other high fenced properties . They are also significantly bigger than when we started and seem to keep getting bigger.

Now think about importing genetics. How many breeder bucks would need to be purchased at what cost to impact the 125 bucks already in place. Using DMP pens how many deer need to be released over how many years to make an impact again at what cost.

Even then for these deer to express their full genetic potential they need to be on a very high nutritional plane. I can't get the costs to work and I have always chosen to spend the $ on nutrition instead.

I frankly think most folks would be better off taking the word 'genetics' out of their vocabulary. Focus on the things you can control..age and nutrition.With that I believe bucks can be grown that meet or exceed the most wonderful dreams of most hunters.
Could you achieve what you have done on your place on a Florida ranch with same results or would genetics become a factor?
KingsX is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 02:11 PM   #25
lovemylegacy
Pope & Young
 
lovemylegacy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Mauriceville
Hunt In: SETx,La,Il,Ks,Mo
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by perfectstorm View Post
I'm confused about this study. How would nutrition on natural genetics ever result in bigger deer or faster results than buying enhanced genetics? (If the goal is the biggest deer.) The only realm that nutrition beats genetics, is the emotional aspect i.e. "I want to see how nice I can make my native deer population".
Watch the Growingdeertv article OP is talking about. Grant Woods is probably the premier biologist in the nation. Nutrition is the #1.
lovemylegacy is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 02:19 PM   #26
Encinal
Pope & Young
 
Encinal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Location, Location
Hunt In: Spite of Wife's Complaints
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsX View Post
Could you achieve what you have done on your place on a Florida ranch with same results or would genetics become a factor?
You can polish a VW bug all you want. It is never going to be a Ferrari.

It will however be a VERY Shiny VW bug.
Encinal is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 02:20 PM   #27
KingsX
Pope & Young
 
KingsX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Angelo
Hunt In: Irion ,Tom green co.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Encinal View Post
You can polish a VW bug all you want. It is never going to be a Ferrari.

It will however be a VERY Shiny VW bug.
Exactly. Some seem to think with the right wax that they can or have done it.
KingsX is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 02:25 PM   #28
elgato
Ten Point
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Default

What I have done on my place is start with what was on the farm then shift the bell curve using nutrition. I imagine that principle would work anywhere. The difference is that in Fla the starting point would be different than here primarily resulting from low soil fertility compromising nutrition for many historical generations.

Significantly enhancing the nutritional plane would quickly shine up the Vw's though.
elgato is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 02:27 PM   #29
tbgascorer
Ten Point
 
tbgascorer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tomball, TX
Hunt In: Mills County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Encinal View Post
You can polish a VW bug all you want. It is never going to be a Ferrari.

It will however be a VERY Shiny VW bug.
Couldn't have said it better.
tbgascorer is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 02:40 PM   #30
KingsX
Pope & Young
 
KingsX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Angelo
Hunt In: Irion ,Tom green co.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elgato View Post
What I have done on my place is start with what was on the farm then shift the bell curve using nutrition. I imagine that principle would work anywhere. The difference is that in Fla the starting point would be different than here primarily resulting from low soil fertility compromising nutrition for many historical generations.

Significantly enhancing the nutritional plane would quickly shine up the Vw's though.
I agree.

Do you think or have you ever experienced a place that has fed a large amount of suplemental feed without food plots in place experience a downturn in certain quality like antler mass for example? Would a deer heard become too dependent on a suplemental feed over natural browse and suffer because of it? Not sure if this has happened before but I believe I've been apart of a few ranches that it may have happened to in comparison to places that do not suplemental feed at all. I'm sure it boils down to correct density to a degree but I've always been curious to the effects it may have if deer choose to eat mostly suplemental type feed over natural browse considering you have good value browse to begin with.
KingsX is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 02:41 PM   #31
lovemylegacy
Pope & Young
 
lovemylegacy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Mauriceville
Hunt In: SETx,La,Il,Ks,Mo
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsX View Post
Could you achieve what you have done on your place on a Florida ranch with same results or would genetics become a factor?
I think if you will read elgatos thread you will see where his neighbor brought in genetically superior deer and did not achieve the results that elgato did. elgato was following the guidance of Harry Jacobsen if I remember correctly, which teaches at Miss St.
lovemylegacy is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 02:46 PM   #32
KingsX
Pope & Young
 
KingsX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Angelo
Hunt In: Irion ,Tom green co.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lovemylegacy View Post
I think if you will read elgatos thread you will see where his neighbor brought in genetically superior deer and did not achieve the results that elgato did. elgato was following the guidance of Harry Jacobsen if I remember correctly, which teaches at Miss St.
i think most are misunderstanding me. The natural genetics that are already in place are a primary factor.
KingsX is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 02:57 PM   #33
tbgascorer
Ten Point
 
tbgascorer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tomball, TX
Hunt In: Mills County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsX View Post
I agree.

Do you think or have you ever experienced a place that has fed a large amount of suplemental feed without food plots in place experience a downturn in certain quality like antler mass for example? Would a deer heard become too dependent on a suplemental feed over natural browse and suffer because of it? Not sure if this has happened before but I believe I've been apart of a few ranches that it may have happened to in comparison to places that do not suplemental feed at all. I'm sure it boils down to correct density to a degree but I've always been curious to the effects it may have if deer choose to eat mostly suplemental type feed over natural browse considering you have good value browse to begin with.
Interesting theory but I have often thought along the same lines. My problem is that they eat supplemental and all the native groceries available too. So much, that I have worried that I was hurting the habitat more than I was helping the deer by offering feed. Biologist seems to think it's all okay.
tbgascorer is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 02:59 PM   #34
elgato
Ten Point
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsX View Post
I agree.

Do you think or have you ever experienced a place that has fed a large amount of suplemental feed without food plots in place experience a downturn in certain quality like antler mass for example? Would a deer heard become too dependent on a suplemental feed over natural browse and suffer because of it? Not sure if this has happened before but I believe I've been apart of a few ranches that it may have happened to in comparison to places that do not suplemental feed at all. I'm sure it boils down to correct density to a degree but I've always been curious to the effects it may have if deer choose to eat mostly suplemental type feed over natural browse considering you have good value browse to begin with.
I have not experienced that and can't really comment. While I am a big fan of supplemental feeding It is still critical to control population to the habitat. Lots of folks saw that during the recent drought. You simply can't out feed a drought. Maybe some deer will do ok but the overall herd struggles.

I question wether deer ever become so dependent on feed they don't eat browse unless there are way to many deer.
elgato is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 03:02 PM   #35
unclefish
Pope & Young
 
unclefish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Katy, TX
Hunt In: Elk in CO....Deer in Lyons, TX
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsX View Post
Could you achieve what you have done on your place on a Florida ranch with same results or would genetics become a factor?
Yes I believe he could. Florida already has several native deer over 200" in their record books. Here is one killed in the 40's.


Last edited by unclefish; 08-03-2015 at 03:05 PM.
unclefish is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 03:02 PM   #36
lovemylegacy
Pope & Young
 
lovemylegacy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Mauriceville
Hunt In: SETx,La,Il,Ks,Mo
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsX View Post
i think most are misunderstanding me. The natural genetics that are already in place are a primary factor.
The genetics in Tx can grow a 140-150 class deer on natural vegetation with no plots or supplemental feeding. So yes I agree with you, then add the nutritional value and the health, size and antler potential go out the roof. I watched the same vid that the Op stated, they saw some significant antler size in the 1st gen, but 2nd and 3rd went up with each gen as did the health and body weights. He shows that the lowest quality deer actually caught up to the highest quality deer in a few gens. Good discussions for sure.
lovemylegacy is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 03:19 PM   #37
KingsX
Pope & Young
 
KingsX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Angelo
Hunt In: Irion ,Tom green co.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by unclefish View Post
Yes I believe he could. Florida already has several native deer over 200" in their record books. Here is one killed in the 40's.

I like your confidence in Florida and Elgato. Florida has killed some 170+ deer in the past 100+ years of history but for making some sort of point it's reaching for straws I think in defense of Florida. Lol.
Viva la Florida!

By the way those bigger deer killed in Florida are probably Gerogia or Alabama escapees anyway.

Last edited by KingsX; 08-03-2015 at 03:25 PM.
KingsX is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 03:26 PM   #38
Terry
Ten Point
 
Terry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Salado, Texas
Default

Age, nutrition genetics in that order
Terry is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 03:35 PM   #39
Mud Shark
Ten Point
 
Mud Shark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Fate, TX
Hunt In: Randolph, Co IL
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsX View Post
Genetics
Then food
And then you play the age game.

For me it's in that order.
Bingo
Mud Shark is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 04:07 PM   #40
Encinal
Pope & Young
 
Encinal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Location, Location
Hunt In: Spite of Wife's Complaints
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lovemylegacy View Post
The genetics in Tx can grow a 140-150 class deer on natural vegetation with no plots or supplemental feeding. So yes I agree with you, then add the nutritional value and the health, size and antler potential go out the roof. I watched the same vid that the Op stated, they saw some significant antler size in the 1st gen, but 2nd and 3rd went up with each gen as did the health and body weights. He shows that the lowest quality deer actually caught up to the highest quality deer in a few gens. Good discussions for sure.
That is the Vogt Effect.


TROPHY POINTS: BIG GAME RESEARCH ONLINE -- PART 9
TUESDAY, JUNE 21, 2011
FRANZ VOGT'S FEEDING EXPERIMENTS GENERATING RECORD ANTLERS
By Valerius Geist, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Science, The University of Calgary; Boone and Crockett Club Professional Member

"Managing with the rifle", a conception which arose in Europe at the turn of the 20th century, contained the notion that the culling of the "unfit" was a genetic upgrading of the population, a means of eliminating genetic degeneracy of deer. The culling of the unfit by predators was to be replaced by culling by hunters. It was trumpeted as the best way to achieve large trophy antlers.
However, one who did not think that the small antlers and bodies of European deer were genetic degeneracy was Generaldirektor Franz Vogt, a captain of industry, a successful industrialist, and a chemist by training. He hypothesized that the small antler and body size of native deer was a question of inadequate nutrition, not of inadequate heredity. His approach to testing this hypothesis was that of a chemist. It was unique as it was quantitative, followed by a precise record of performance of his deer. This included annual photographs of each stag during its development by professional photographers. Vogt calculated the intake of nutrients (protein, calcium, phosphate, starch equivalents) by stags on maintenance rations and when growing antlers. He analyzed native forages for their nutrient content and his data remain some of the best available today. He was then able to show that native forages from the "cultural forests" of central Europe could not possibly provide enough protein, phosphate, and calcium for large antlers, let alone for antlers as large as those of medieval red deer, Vogt's basis for comparison.
Vogt organized a large scale experiment using two species of deer, red deer and roe deer, which lasted from 1927 to 1942. He used two strains of red deer, one from an enclosure of Count Merveldt in Alt-Warthau, Prussian-Silesia, with typical west-European features, and one from Draskovich's Selley enclosure in Hungary with typical east-European features. For details see my 1998 book Deer of the World. He took pains not to breed for large antler size by selecting for dominance, not antler size. He used a 150-ha enclosure, separated into three 50-ha partitions, where he kept track of deer from pure and mixed lineages. The native forages within the enclosures were poor, which forced his deer to accept the experimental forages he provided year-round. After meticulous research, he provided forages with high enough quantities of protein, minerals, energy, and vitamins to grow bodies and antlers of medieval or record proportions. The best feed in this regard were pressings from sesame seeds formed during oil extraction. He had a professional wildlife photographer record his deer in an ongoing fashion. Despite the very high density of deer in his enclosure (about 40-60 deer/100 ha), after five generations, his red deer had reached medieval proportions in body and antler size and 7 from 35 of his stags had broken the then world record. Body weight doubled in red and roe deer. His roe bucks sported antlers in the record class, though none broke the world record.
Vogt's work is not only exemplary science, much misunderstood be critics, but provided crucial insights. The five-generation lag of two species of deer before reaching maximum body dimensions was subsequently re-discovered some 40 years later and labeled "maternal effect". His deer, at large body size, proved to be very sensitive to forage quality in maintaining health; they could only function well on a luxury diet. His results put in question any taxonomic judgments based on body size, revealing the great plasticity in phenotype size and proportions; in this he paralleled the findings of classical Anglo American Animal Science. He emphasized that only well developed females and their offspring could produce large trophy males, so that attention to female nutrition was crucial. He found that females, not only males, were important in the transmission of antler characteristics. His work shows that not low density of deer, but net nutritional intake was responsible for growing large deer - in opposition to the popular claims of his time. The cost of combat injury to stags was high in that they regressed in antler mass and dimension during healing - despite excellent and abundant feed. Moreover, Vogt's data remains open to re-examination and analysis. For instance, his data on antler measurements shows that (1) the racial differences in antler structure and proportions became maximally expressed at maximum body size, (2) that F1 hybrids reflected primarily the features of the more primitive East-European red deer, and (3) that the West-European red deer, which live currently at relatively small body and antler size, have actually superior inherent antler producing capacities compared to the much heralded east-European red deer.
The Second World War brought Vogt's work to a halt in 1942 as he could no longer obtain the high quality feed crucial to his experiments. Yet, he wrung insights from even this defeat by circumstances, showing how substituted feed of somewhat lower quality could not maintain his deer in health. His stags regressed in antler growth, the calves grew poorly, ill health threatened his experimental herd. He shut down the operation. His deer had increased steadily in body and antler size, till his high quality feed ran out. What dimensions would they have reached five years hence? Vogt published two books on his red deer experiments; his roe deer experiments were published posthumously. He died in 1946. During a visit to Austria I could only find one set of antlers from his once famous collection; it had been sold and apparently cut up for knife handles and buttons. The irreplaceable scientific value of this collection had not been appreciated. My wife Renate translated Vogt's second and most highly developed book into English, but no publisher could be found. Vogt's careful work and lucid, unpretentious writing remains to this day a treasury of insights - and an inspiration.
Geist, V. 1998. Deer of the World: Their Evolution, Behavior, and Ecology. Stackpole Books, Mechanicsburg PA. 421pp.
Encinal is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 04:17 PM   #41
elgato
Ten Point
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Default

Perfect,

Fits this discussion splendidly
elgato is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 04:20 PM   #42
KingsX
Pope & Young
 
KingsX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Angelo
Hunt In: Irion ,Tom green co.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elgato View Post
Perfect,

Fits this discussion splendidly
I like seeing all of the studies and personal success stories. I enjoy reading them.
KingsX is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 04:24 PM   #43
Encinal
Pope & Young
 
Encinal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Location, Location
Hunt In: Spite of Wife's Complaints
Default

Stuart Steadman found Vogt. It was a great find, and explains what is happening to nutritionally enhanced deer herds extremely well.
Encinal is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 04:39 PM   #44
lovemylegacy
Pope & Young
 
lovemylegacy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Mauriceville
Hunt In: SETx,La,Il,Ks,Mo
Default

Never heard of ol' Franz Vogt, but enjoyed the read.
lovemylegacy is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 04:40 PM   #45
elgato
Ten Point
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Default

I've seen Stedmans presentation. Makes all the sense and helps explain what I'm seeing both here and at ranch.
elgato is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 04:46 PM   #46
millman
Ten Point
 
millman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Edgewood, Texas
Hunt In: Sonora, and anywhere I can draw a tag
Default

Thanks for the read! We all do it but dang its hard to argue with science.....
millman is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-03-2015, 04:56 PM   #47
lovemylegacy
Pope & Young
 
lovemylegacy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Mauriceville
Hunt In: SETx,La,Il,Ks,Mo
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsX View Post
I like your confidence in Florida and Elgato. Florida has killed some 170+ deer in the past 100+ years of history but for making some sort of point it's reaching for straws I think in defense of Florida. Lol.
Viva la Florida!

By the way those bigger deer killed in Florida are probably Gerogia or Alabama escapees anyway.
Oh my, what a monster.
lovemylegacy is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-04-2015, 08:40 AM   #48
deer farmer
Ten Point
 
deer farmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Shreveport
Hunt In: Harrison Co and other places
Default

I am happy about starting this thread. Thanks goes out to several here, Uncle fish and Elgato and Buff and the others who posted. My goal was to get people thinking about how to improve on what they have available to them. I love food plotting it's work and money but it is very rewarding.
deer farmer is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-04-2015, 10:25 AM   #49
lovemylegacy
Pope & Young
 
lovemylegacy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Mauriceville
Hunt In: SETx,La,Il,Ks,Mo
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by deer farmer View Post
I am happy about starting this thread. Thanks goes out to several here, Uncle fish and Elgato and Buff and the others who posted. My goal was to get people thinking about how to improve on what they have available to them. I love food plotting it's work and money but it is very rewarding.
Yessir, you done well.
lovemylegacy is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 08-04-2015, 12:20 PM   #50
lovemylegacy
Pope & Young
 
lovemylegacy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Mauriceville
Hunt In: SETx,La,Il,Ks,Mo
Default

Hate to see this thread die so quickly.
lovemylegacy is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 1999-2012, TexasBowhunter.com