Forums36
Topics40,963
Posts557,999
Members18,506
|
Most Online3,612 Jan 10th, 2023
|
|
8 members (FishinRod, Fishingadventure, Deancutler, JoshMI, Joe7328, BamaBass9, Bigtrh24, Bobbss),
1,399
guests, and
370
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,668 Likes: 57
|
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,668 Likes: 57 |
It's about the food in my opinion when it comes to big bucks and or quail numbers. Much like growing large fish. Habitat is also a strong influence in size and numbers. Same with fish. Many blame poor racks on genetics but it has been proven (to me) that if the food is there, along with the right habitat you can raise larger numbers of good bucks per acre. Whether it be quail or better bucks on a given piece of land, an excess of food makes a difference. I have seen the same with quail and the number of coveys per acre. Rah, I am not saying doe numbers don't have an influence, they do, because I have seen where a buck/doe ratio of one to one defiantly made for easier hunts because there were more bucks per acre to hunt. Especially, if the food is there. And, I have seen a 120 pt buck where it was a trophy to the one that shot it. I have also seen where a Doe was a trophy.
Do not judge me by the politicians in my City, State or Federal Government.
Tracy
|
1 member likes this:
SetterGuy |
|
|
Moderated by Bill Cody, Bruce Condello, catmandoo, Chris Steelman, Dave Davidson1, esshup, ewest, FireIsHot, Omaha, Sunil, teehjaeh57
|
|