Originally posted by DirtNap
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Hill Country Deer vs. South Texas Deer?
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by TalonErickson7 View PostSo you think you could have 5,000 acres in South Texas and 5,000 acres in the Hill Country and produce the same quality of deer on each place?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No way. Go look at Los Cazadores low fence. All over 200” Webb, LaSalle, Dimmit. I bet there wasn’t one low fence 200” deer taken anywhere in the hill country.
Comment
-
Originally posted by panhandlehunter View PostNo way. Go look at Los Cazadores low fence. All over 200” Webb, LaSalle, Dimmit. I bet there wasn’t one low fence 200” deer taken anywhere in the hill country.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Longue Carabine View PostBone structure is a product of nutrition over multiple generations. There was a great "common garden" experiment done in South Dakota that addressed this.
https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/etd/392/
However, genetic factors largely account for the body size. You could take a bunch of Llano county fawns and drop them in a high fence in Webb county. At full maturity they would still not rival native South Texas bucks. Even when maximum body weight and antler size are achieved, genetics are a limiting factor, not just antlers but skeletally as well.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sika View PostWithout reading all of that, I can see how nutrition plays in a role in survival of the fittest where the healthiest, largest deer survive to produce more large, healthy deer. Over several generations, you would have a population of bigger deer. Small, unhealthy deer are more likely to succumb to malnutrition or fall victim to predators.
However, genetic factors largely account for the body size. You could take a bunch of Llano county fawns and drop them in a high fence in Webb county. At full maturity they would still not rival native South Texas bucks. Even when maximum body weight and antler size are achieved, genetics are a limiting factor, not just antlers but skeletally as well.
Agreed, no different from Humans.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Comment
-
Originally posted by Quackerbox View PostMaybe easier to kill is a better?
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sika View PostWithout reading all of that, I can see how nutrition plays in a role in survival of the fittest where the healthiest, largest deer survive to produce more large, healthy deer. Over several generations, you would have a population of bigger deer. Small, unhealthy deer are more likely to succumb to malnutrition or fall victim to predators.
However, genetic factors largely account for the body size. You could take a bunch of Llano county fawns and drop them in a high fence in Webb county. At full maturity they would still not rival native South Texas bucks. Even when maximum body weight and antler size are achieved, genetics are a limiting factor, not just antlers but skeletally as well.Last edited by Longue Carabine; 12-25-2020, 11:36 AM.
Comment
-
Think it is not genetics Its high protein and managing herds. There is hunter on here that is growing 200 class deer in Louisiana with natural genetics using food plots feed and letting deer reach proper age class. I bet the average age deer killed on most ranches in hill country are lower than STX.
Comment
Comment