Bob LeBlanc Posted June 25, 2007 Report Share Posted June 25, 2007 Should record book deer taken off, or near, food plots be asterisked in the record books to indicate that they were nutritionally enhanced? Should they only qualify as a 'farmed' animal? What do ya think?...We've started doing it to steroid induced athletes! Should the Record Books be re-written to increase the minimum allowable? Bob:confused: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toddyboman Posted June 25, 2007 Report Share Posted June 25, 2007 no. Food plots are not illegal. Here in the mid-west food plots are EVERYWHERE. Its what the farmers do for a living. The deer just benefit from it by having lots of available food. Deer are free roaming animals, just because you have a food plots that does not guarantee you a shoot at a record book buck. I know food and nutrition has a lot to do with growing large antlers but other factors such as genetics and AGE have a lot to do with it as well. In my hunting area the AGE thing is my biggest factor. Most bucks don't seem to make it to the mature age to reach their full potential. Therefor we plant food plots in hopes to keep the younger bucks on our farm to keep them from wondering onto the neighbors land and getting shot. Of course like I said above here in the Midwest there are food plots everywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Daddy Posted June 25, 2007 Report Share Posted June 25, 2007 Your question implies that all a landowner has to do is plant a food plot and then wait for a monster buck to show up. It doesn't work that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob LeBlanc Posted June 25, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2007 It's not meant to imply that, at all, G-Daddy. It may take generations of deer before the impact of nutritional supplements are recognized... Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrud Posted June 25, 2007 Report Share Posted June 25, 2007 No. There should be no penalty or asterik because the deer was killed near a food plot or field or mineral site or whatever. Some places just have better food for deer, whether it's a field planted by a farmer or food plots planted by the hunters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted June 25, 2007 Report Share Posted June 25, 2007 No. There should be no penalty or asterik because the deer was killed near a food plot or field or mineral site or whatever. Some places just have better food for deer, whether it's a field planted by a farmer or food plots planted by the hunters. No. Great answer here. Will go a little further on this and ask you this question. Should hunters who kill record book deer on, or coming to or going from agricultural crops not have those same asterisks??? After all, some might consider those ag fields to be food plots, so what really is the difference or is there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhino Posted June 25, 2007 Report Share Posted June 25, 2007 It may take generations of deer before the impact of nutritional supplements are recognized... Bob Not necessarily. We've been planting over 40 food plots on our club since we stated it 16 years ago. They total 55 acres. Before that they were planted by one of the land owners that ran a guided hunt operation. A mature buck down here (4 1/2 years old) will generally average about 120 gross. I see 3 year old bucks in the midwestern states that score better than that! Do food plots help...yes but not just bucks. It's beneficial to the entire deer herd. As far as buck quality increasing, probably some but sure not like areas that have have crops growing each year. The closest farm land to our place is about 8 miles away. Bucks around crops generally grow better racks with a great food source like that available during the antler growing months. Another issue is location. Without a doubt there are areas in this country that for whatever reason grow more heavy antlered book quality bucks provided those bucks are allowed to mature. Are you going to further segregate those areas because book quality deer just happen to exist in greater numbers? I've seen 3 B&C class bucks on the hoof in my life. All were while bowhunting out of state. 2 were in Iowa and 1 was in Kansas. The Kansas buck is on my wall. No food plots anywhere near the area I hunted in those 2 states but they both definately had crops on or adjacent to them. I still haven't seen a 150 class buck on the hoof on our MS property and the highest scoring buck killed so far grossed 148 and change. And you think if we were able to grow a B&C buck because we planted food plots and put out mineral licks that we should be segregated from book deer killed near crop fields? I don't think so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaskMan Posted June 26, 2007 Report Share Posted June 26, 2007 Well said Rhino. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkoholic Posted June 26, 2007 Report Share Posted June 26, 2007 short answer NO. If that animal is free ranging (may need a definition there) and is exposed to the stresses of staying alive, such as predators and weather, then added nutrition is only a small piece of puzzle. A "farmed" deer has little stress in it's life and is constantly fed a high quality feed on a year round basis. Even with the best of conditions, very few buck will make it to B&C standards. With really good genetics, food plots may increase the number of bucks in a given area that reach trophy (another definition?) size, given the opportunity to get old enough. In my experience, the largest bucks that I have seen here in western Montana were all far from the nearest food plots or farm fields. I firmly believe that along with good genetics, age is the number one factor in determining if there are "trophies" in your area. A buck that will score 170+ inches when mature (5-8 years old) surely will not score that if you shoot him at 2&1/2 years old. Unless he is a freak of nature, no amount of food plots will push him to that score at an early age. As an aside to this, I think that B&C and P&Y should remove the hunters name from the book and give the credit to the animal for growing the rack. Listing where the deer was shot (state, county, etc.) and some other details perhaps. Maybe this would stop some of the craziness associated with trophy hunting and the poaching that appears to be out of control. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TuffnufOutdoors Posted June 27, 2007 Report Share Posted June 27, 2007 No there should not be a disclaimer. What would be the use anyway. I know for me killing a big buck is not about the record book anyway. It is about doing all the right things to be in the same place as that big buck. Also there are already so many questions when someone really kills a big one could you imagine policing that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckee Posted June 27, 2007 Report Share Posted June 27, 2007 There is also more that a good food source involved in Trophy Bucks. Genetics plays a huge roll too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob LeBlanc Posted June 27, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 27, 2007 So all these claims by the various seed companies are bogus ? They do not / cannot influence the growth of antler mass in deer ? (I'm playin' 'Devil's Advocate' here, folks...I know and understand all you are saying...) Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted June 27, 2007 Report Share Posted June 27, 2007 So all these claims by the various seed companies are bogus ? They do not / cannot influence the growth of antler mass in deer ? Sure proper nutrition can help a deer reach their max potential, but better nutrition does not make for hunting the deer any easier, the hunter still has to be successful. Some members here have pointed out, which you seem to be ignoring or for whatever reason not commenting on, that there are book deer taken in agricultural areas. Your idea here in my opinion would or should also exclude them as those are really nothing more than giant food plots. Just does not seem right to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob LeBlanc Posted June 27, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 27, 2007 ...Some members here have pointed out, which you seem to be ignoring or for whatever reason not commenting on, that there are book deer taken in agricultural areas. Your idea here in my opinion would or should also exclude them as those are really nothing more than giant food plots. Just does not seem right to me. I'm not ignoring it WTN...but I do see a differentiation in a deer that is feeding off of an agricultural crop versus one that is being bolstered intentionally...specifiacally to increase its antler mass. One is part of the (modern) natural order...one is not. Now, if that 'crop' is planted for the sole purpose of growing bigger / better deer...maybe they should be excluded too? I'm just asking:rolleyes:...Don't take it personal !! (Just for the record...I am not a trophy hunter. I do have racks that would qualify, but have no intention of doing so. Just trying to spawn some debate, is all.) Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted June 27, 2007 Report Share Posted June 27, 2007 I'm just asking:rolleyes:...Don't take it personal !! LOL, not taking it personal at all Bob, just discussing opinions:rolleyes:. Really I do like debating topics like this, find differing perspectives somewhat interesting. Wish I had an opportunity to hunt some of those alfalfa fields that are NOT food plots in Montana where you see the guys on the videos taking record book bucks time and time again. Those to me really are food plots of extreme proportions, they give deer excellent protein sources for them to reach their full potential, however those fields may be tougher to hunt than say a small secluded corn field in the midwest. Far as the intent of the crops planted and food plots differing from ag crops, dont know how or why anyone would want to differentiate those on what is allowed in the books. Still think if you exclude potential entrants killed where food plots are present, you would really have to also look at excluding those killed in or near ag crops, but that is just my opinion. Why make one exclusion and allow the same thing just because it is not called what it is. Some guys here have acres of corn planted for specific food plots, there are corn fields around here that might be no bigger, but are not specifically for food plots, when a hunter who kills a deer of record book quality on one or the other, why should it matter and that deer be penalized? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowin_in_illinois Posted June 27, 2007 Report Share Posted June 27, 2007 Sure proper nutrition can help a deer reach their max potential, but better nutrition does not make for hunting the deer any easier, the hunter still has to be successful. That is why my answer to... "Should record book deer taken off, or near, food plots be asterisked in the record books to indicate that they were nutritionally enhanced?" ...is no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhino Posted June 27, 2007 Report Share Posted June 27, 2007 I do see a differentiation in a deer that is feeding off of an agricultural crop versus one that is being bolstered intentionally...specifiacally to increase its antler mass. One is part of the (modern) natural order...one is not. Bob I don't Bob. Bottom line is where I mainly hunt in my home state if we had agricultural fields around or on our place there wouldn't be need to attempt to plant summer food plots to help benefit the deer herd. Your so called modern natural food source (crop field) provides far more supplemental nutrition during the antler growing season than summer food plot planters can possibly afford to plant for a deer herd unless you're a multimillionaire that wants to throw a lot of money away. Our summer food plots this year have basically failed due to drought conditions but even so our budget only allowed us to attempt to plant 21 acres spread around 2,800 acres of predominantly timber land. There's no way to irrigate those small fields like many crop fields can be irrigated either. That is not much of an additional food source when you look at the big picture. That same amount of acreage in an agricultural area would probably be close to 2,000 acres of planted crops assuming around 30% of the land was in timber. Now...who really has the supplemental summer food source advantage to grow big antlered bucks? I'm not sure where you got the idea that food plots were planted to "specifically increase antler mass" either. It sounds to me like you don't really understand just how much quality supplemental summer food plots really impact increased antler growth or how it benefits overall deer herd health as a whole. Maybe you ought to google up some honest articles written by wildlife biologist. Bottom line is it helps bucks get closer to achieving their genetic potential, not go beyond it. However, summer food plots in comparison to crop fields won't come close to providing the amount of supplemental food that crop fields provide and thus crops allow bucks to get even closer to their genetic potential. Food plots are definately not the steroid for antler production that you seem to think they are. Genetic potential along with the ability to allow bucks to reach maturity are far greater factors in killing big antlered bucks than anything else. Like I said before quality nutrition during the antler growing season only helps bucks approach their genetic potential, not go beyond it. I'm not taking this personal either just trying to help enlighten you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bonecollector34 Posted June 27, 2007 Report Share Posted June 27, 2007 I think people have way too much time on their hands to even come up with this garabage. Why does everything have to be so complicated? Leave stuff alone that doesn't need fixed.. fatty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okbowman Posted June 27, 2007 Report Share Posted June 27, 2007 No. How would you count something taken on the edge of an agricultural field? Is it a farm or a foodplot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swamphunter Posted June 28, 2007 Report Share Posted June 28, 2007 no. Food plots are not illegal. Here in the mid-west food plots are EVERYWHERE. Its what the farmers do for a living. The deer just benefit from it by having lots of available food. Deer are free roaming animals, just because you have a food plots that does not guarantee you a shoot at a record book buck. I know food and nutrition has a lot to do with growing large antlers but other factors such as genetics and AGE have a lot to do with it as well. In my hunting area the AGE thing is my biggest factor. Most bucks don't seem to make it to the mature age to reach their full potential. Therefor we plant food plots in hopes to keep the younger bucks on our farm to keep them from wondering onto the neighbors land and getting shot. Of course like I said above here in the Midwest there are food plots everywhere. I agree with you toddyboman, but then why should bows with greater let-offs, which are legal, be astericked in the books?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted June 28, 2007 Report Share Posted June 28, 2007 I agree with you toddyboman, but then why should bows with greater let-offs, which are legal, be astericked in the books?? Good off season topic possible for another thread there Ken. Personally even though I shoot a lower let off bow, I dont see where they should be noted differently, but that is just my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob LeBlanc Posted June 28, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 28, 2007 How important do you feel food plots and nutritional supplements are in growing trophy bucks?I live by it31.34%I'm pretty die-hard46.80%Not so enthused20.93%Nah, doesn't work0.93% That's the Poll Question guys... Apparently 78.14% feel that food plots have an impact on the growth of trophy bucks. OK...so according to the respondents in this thread, the claims of the seed companies are bogus...although nobody directly answered that. As has been pointed out...it's a slow time of year:D ! Every once in a while it can be fun to wake a sleeping dog...and see if he tries to bite ya !!:D Dang it !!!...gotta go change these pants !...Me **** is gettin' chewed !!:D Just for the record, Rhino...I don't need enlightenment...just doing a little:add_smilie('> Bob :add_smilie('> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted June 28, 2007 Report Share Posted June 28, 2007 OK...so according to the respondents in this thread, the claims of the seed companies are bogus...although nobody directly answered that. No they are not bogus, but it was brought up that food plots are only a part into what makes a trophy caliber deer, and food plots do not guarantee a hunter success. Rhino gave a great explanation here. Bottom line is where I mainly hunt in my home state if we had agricultural fields around or on our place there wouldn't be need to attempt to plant summer food plots to help benefit the deer herd. Your so called modern natural food source (crop field) provides far more supplemental nutrition during the antler growing season than summer food plot planters can possibly afford to plant for a deer herd unless you're a multimillionaire that wants to throw a lot of money away. Our summer food plots this year have basically failed due to drought conditions but even so our budget only allowed us to attempt to plant 21 acres spread around 2,800 acres of predominantly timber land. There's no way to irrigate those small fields like many crop fields can be irrigated either. That is not much of an additional food source when you look at the big picture. That same amount of acreage in an agricultural area would probably be close to 2,000 acres of planted crops assuming around 30% of the land was in timber. Now...who really has the supplemental summer food source advantage to grow big antlered bucks? I'm not sure where you got the idea that food plots were planted to "specifically increase antler mass" either. It sounds to me like you don't really understand just how much quality supplemental summer food plots really impact increased antler growth or how it benefits overall deer herd health as a whole. Maybe you ought to google up some honest articles written by wildlife biologist. Bottom line is it helps bucks get closer to achieving their genetic potential, not go beyond it. However, summer food plots in comparison to crop fields won't come close to providing the amount of supplemental food that crop fields provide and thus crops allow bucks to get even closer to their genetic potential. Food plots are definately not the steroid for antler production that you seem to think they are. Genetic potential along with the ability to allow bucks to reach maturity are far greater factors in killing big antlered bucks than anything else. Like I said before quality nutrition during the antler growing season only helps bucks approach their genetic potential, not go beyond it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tominator Posted June 28, 2007 Report Share Posted June 28, 2007 Should record book deer taken off, or near, food plots be asterisked in the record books to indicate that they were nutritionally enhanced? Should they only qualify as a 'farmed' animal? No. If this were the case, you would have to remove just about every deer from Ohio, because I flat guarantee you an overwhelming percentage of deer from Ohio were in some farmer's field gorging themselves on corn, beans, alfalfa, wheat, you name it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhino Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 Just for the record, Rhino...I don't need enlightenment...just doing a little:add_smilie('> Bob :add_smilie('> Just churning a little butter there eh Bob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.