Does soil quality effect deer size

Defining “big deer” is important. I have no problem growing 5+ year old deer that weigh 250lbs....they just come with <120” racks. It might be their dna has prioritized body weight to deal with our winters as opposed to antler size. What does this say about my soils? I think the deer have to hit a point of sufficient calories and nutrients to permit bigger antlers to be grown. Soil quality is a significant part of the equation....and our ridiculously low PH levels have an impact in my opinion. I can barely keep PH acceptable levels on my plots. Doing that across the property would not be possible. I’d love to see what all the natural forage would do if PH jumped from the low 4s to 6+ across the entire property. Plants are nothing but a nutrient delivery system for the deer. I view poor soil as a huge bottle neck. I also believe I’m fighting dna which has prioritized body weight over antler growth to deal with our brutal winters. I figure I’m fighting multiple battles.

All I know is that without BIG ag it is impossible to grow BIG racks (minus the occasional freak). Big ag relates to great soils, so.....

THE LLC said:

All I know is that without BIG ag it is impossible to grow BIG racks (minus the occasional freak). Big ag relates to great soils, so.....

Click to expand...

Not true...there is no AG for at least 30 miles of me and even there it is not big ag...it is just big woods here...

I think to understand the impact good soils have on the size of deer you have to go way back in time. Science has proven there is an epigenetic response to the environment . Genes shift and change depending on many things especially nutrition. Before modern management changed the habitat paradigm bigger deer were where soils were the best. Good soils produce a higher quantity of quality foods. The sands of Fla. cant provide what the fertile midwest provides.Over generations deer in the more fertile soils got bigger in body and antler.

Antlers are a secondary appendage. Once all nutritional needs are met antler growth needs are met. If, over generations, all nutritional needs are met then antlers grow bigger in those areas as do bodies.. When more nutritional plants are available, successful recruitment is higher and with a higher carrying capacity more deer are around , mathematically you will have more deer with bigger antlers.

Good news! We as managers CAN improve the amount of nutritious forage on habitat thus increasing the nutritional plane. We can do things that keep nutrition 100% 365 days a year. And over generations we will see the epigenetic response to the shift in nutrition. It happens quicker than might be realized and continues to improve.

Okie, what is the average soil pH where you are?

THE LLC said:

Okie, what is the average soil pH where you are?

Click to expand...

No idea...never had it checked. Just know it is all flint rock hills and completely forested. Clover grows well until grass takes it over.

This is the largest 3.5 yr old I ever got on camera. Wish he would have made it another year...


And this is the oldest I have taken off the place at 9.5 years old...I have 1 older than that roaming here now...

I bet the pH is naturally more toward neutral.

MarkDarvin said:

It sets back potential period.

In the bad winters, our deer die. In the good winters, they survive, but there is always a recovery period that has to happen before they get to growing again. Those spring pictures of skinny deer with ribs showing are hard to look at, but they make it. That's why I push as hard as I can to put out a hell of a buffet for the months that I can.

Click to expand...

There is a giant trade off here also.

One of the main determinants of size for whitetails is climate. The coldest areas of any animals range is generally going to correlate to the largest animals in that population. It's simple biology. As animals get larger, their surface area to volume ratio gets larger. This in turn makes it easier to stay warm. Additionally, deer in the north will generally be larger as they have to deal more often with trudging through thick snows.

So for us in the far north, we do lose some potential incredible deer to bad winters, but in true survival of the fittest form, we have some incredible genetics that can pretty much live off the natural land. Look at any list of sized deer, and the majority of the big bruisers are in the far north of the whitetail range.

Rack potential is different than deer size, and rack potential is very closely tied with available forage. Parts of northern areas are incredibly good for rack potential, while others are not.

Edited to add that this phenomena is known as Bergmann Principle.

THE LLC said:

All I know is that without BIG ag it is impossible to grow BIG racks (minus the occasional freak). Big ag relates to great soils, so.....

Click to expand...

Technically that’s not correct, at least not entirely. I think your point isn’t far off the mark though, it’s certainly easier to grow big deer with many factors on your side. Big deer states like Iowa have a lot more going for them than great soil. Low human population, low hunting pressure, low tag availability all help deer express potential.

SC is a good example of a state with very different factors. High human population, high hunting pressure, high buck tag availability (was unlimited for years) AND comparatively poor soil. In that situation, if you ONLY changed the factor of soil quality you wouldn’t likely have an “Iowa of the east coast” on your hands.

I don’t think you’re wrong LLC. The intense management and change in hunting “style” would need to be extreme in most areas with crappy soil. A 150” buck in our corner of NC is a giant but there are many reasons why.

Even if the playing fields were essentially even in every other category, Iowa would still produce a higher density of larger antlers; at least that’s how I’m interpreting the available data.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

weekender21 said:

Technology that’s not correct, at least not entirely. I think your point isn’t far off the mark though, it’s certainly easier to grow big deer with many factors on your side. Big deer states like Iowa have a lot more going for them than great soil. Low human population, low hunting pressure, low tag availability all help deer express potential.

Click to expand...

Ever been in Iowa during the firearms seasons?

OkieKubota said:

Not true...there is no AG for at least 30 miles of me and even there it is not big ag...it is just big woods here...

Click to expand...

In heavy ag, there is often times also heavy pressure/lots of dead deer on the side of the road. In parts of southwest MN, bucks have amazing genetics, but the average mortality age is under 2 years for bucks. Less ag can be very good for age structure.

That's where I'm confused because I thought we were talking about rack size.

THE LLC said:

That's where I'm confused because I thought we were talking about rack size.

Click to expand...

Same. Body size and antler growth are two VERY different sets of parameters.

THE LLC said:

Ever been in Iowa during the firearms seasons?

Click to expand...

Never, not claiming first hand experience there. What I do know is the buck limits in SC were unlimited, now I believe it’s four plus a few more point restricted tags and the rifle season is 3-5 MONTHS long depending on the part of the state you’re hunting.

Age structure in a state with those kind of liberal bag limits and seasons is dramatically lower than places like Iowa.

I guess my point is there are lower holes in the bucket in SC than soil type although that may very well be a hole.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

DRandall90 said:

In heavy ag, there is often times also heavy pressure/lots of dead deer on the side of the road. In parts of southwest MN, bucks have amazing genetics, but the average mortality age is under 2 years for bucks. Less ag can be very good for age structure.

Click to expand...

I Thought everyone already agreed Whitetail genetics are Whitetail genetics and other factors limited the genetic expression (antlers and overall health). That’s one of the major points of the latest study being discussed in the podcast.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

weekender21 said:

Never, not claiming first hand experience there. What I do know is the buck limits in SC were unlimited, now I believe it’s four plus a few more point restricted tags and the rifle season is 3-5 MONTHS long depending on the part of the state you’re hunting.

Click to expand...

Understand. Just pointing out that Iowa gets a TON of hunting pressure in the gun season. AND, most bucks killed are 1 1/2. Big ag and good soil help the ones that survive grow MONSTER racks. At a young age.

Any state with a 1 buck limit doesn’t have a ton of hunting pressure...as far as everything else goes put me in big woods because big deer that enter openings in daylight here die before season...that leaves the big smart boys that rarely even enter an open field at night...

OkieKubota said:

Any state with a 1 buck limit doesn’t have a ton of hunting pressure...as far as everything else goes put me in big woods because big deer that enter openings in daylight here die before season...that leaves the big smart boys that rarely even enter an open field at night...

Click to expand...

Not to be contrary, but Pennsylvania has a one buck limit and a ton of hunting pressure. We used to put a million hunters in the woods on opening day of rifle season, now since the PGC partially ruined the deer hunting in 2002, we have about 740,000 hunters. Throw in nonresidents and opening day on state game lands is a sea of orange.

Mennoniteman said:

Not to be contrary, but Pennsylvania has a one buck limit and a ton of hunting pressure. We used to put a million hunters in the woods on opening day of rifle season, now since the PGC partially ruined the deer hunting in 2002, we have about 740,000 hunters. Throw in nonresidents and opening day on state game lands is a sea of orange.

Click to expand...

Just imagine if those same guys came back out after killing that first buck for the 2nd buck, and then again for the 3rd...

OkieKubota said:

Just imagine if those same guys came back out after killing that first buck for the 2nd buck, and then again for the 3rd...

Click to expand...

How many people are going out for a second buck? Just curious.

Just comparing my home state (MN) to a state like North Carolina. Each state has the deer population estimated about 1 million deer, so a fair comparison.

MN hunters numbered about 600,000 in 2017, while North Carolina numbered about 250,000. 33 Percent of Hunters were successful in MN, which totals about 200,000 deer. 50 Percent of North Carolina residents harvested 1 deer (125,000) and about 25% harvested more than 1 deer, so add 67,500, which totals about 190,000 deer.

I guess I would say based on deer availability and hunters, you could argue those states are about equal in hunter pressure based on those numbers.

That being said, 1/2 hunters in NC will harvest a deer, while 1/3 hunters in MN will harvest a deer. For whatever that is worth.