Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Hobbies & Interests
Hunting & Fishing
Cy Curtis Typical and Non-Typical County Density Maps
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="fishfurlife" data-source="post: 1926739" data-attributes="member: 15170"><p>Yes, last year sucked for weather and conditions. Look back over the history of deer harvest in Oklahoma. You will find a pretty stark correlation between poor years and increased harvest. The deer simply move more to get to and from water/food. Thus making them easier targets.</p><p></p><p>I will stick with my guns on the gauge of potential. To turn it around and look at it from the other side. Look at Comanche county. I would say that it is a safe bet that of the deer submitted, 75% or better most likely came off of Ft Sill or the WMWR control hunt. Everyone can't hunt those areas, yet they are known for large deer. I agree that they are still part of the county and the deer are growing in that county, but I think they skew the idea that the county would pump out nice deer. </p><p></p><p>Those two areas are perfect examples of what can happen if deer are actually managed. Heck, the deer on the refuge fight with some of the poorest soil/nutrition in the state and the place produces huge bucks. I swear that those deer grow big by chewing on rocks sometimes.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="fishfurlife, post: 1926739, member: 15170"] Yes, last year sucked for weather and conditions. Look back over the history of deer harvest in Oklahoma. You will find a pretty stark correlation between poor years and increased harvest. The deer simply move more to get to and from water/food. Thus making them easier targets. I will stick with my guns on the gauge of potential. To turn it around and look at it from the other side. Look at Comanche county. I would say that it is a safe bet that of the deer submitted, 75% or better most likely came off of Ft Sill or the WMWR control hunt. Everyone can't hunt those areas, yet they are known for large deer. I agree that they are still part of the county and the deer are growing in that county, but I think they skew the idea that the county would pump out nice deer. Those two areas are perfect examples of what can happen if deer are actually managed. Heck, the deer on the refuge fight with some of the poorest soil/nutrition in the state and the place produces huge bucks. I swear that those deer grow big by chewing on rocks sometimes. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
Hobbies & Interests
Hunting & Fishing
Cy Curtis Typical and Non-Typical County Density Maps
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom