is it Genetics or is it food ?

[deer farmer]

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.

[Artos]

age

genetics

nutrition

...in that order to reach a deer's individual potential.

[Buff]

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

[KingsX]

Genetics
Then food
And then you play the age game.

For me it's in that order.

[tbgascorer]

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.

[deer farmer]

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.

[Artos]

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??

[tbgascorer]

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.

[FCTrapper]

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.

[Buff]

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

[Encinal]

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.

[unclefish]

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.

[perfectstorm]

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.

[KingsX]

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.

[unclefish]

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.