Kentucky vs. Illinois

[Georgia Transplant]

Who has hunted both states and what do you think is the difference in big bucks?

[Georgia Transplant]

Who has hunted both and what do you think is the difference in trophy potential?

[Georgia Transplant]

Now I have hunted Indiana and I know there are some brusier bucks there where I killed my 1st pope and young buck. This will be my 1st year hunting Kentucky so I have no comparisons yet. Who has hunted both and is there any difference in big bucks that you can tell of?

[Georgia Transplant]

I know that the Beatty buck was killed in Green County in south west Ohio and there must be some whoppers from that state. Who has hunted both and what would be your opinion on trophy size and potential comparison in both states?

[buckfever]

Who has hunted both states and what do you think is the difference in big bucks?

Kentucky vs. Illinois - I've hunted both states. Illinois has better trophy potential.

Kentucky vs. Kansas - Never hunted Kansas, but I'd say that it has much better potential based on the deer that are coming out of there.


Kentucky vs. Indiana - I've hunted Indiana. I'll take Kentucky if you're talking about the entire state, but Indiana has some areas that can rival if not surpass Kentucky's best areas.

Kentucky vs. Ohio - Hunted both. Depends on where you're hunting, but I'd say that the trophy potential across all of Kentucky is better than all of Ohio. The potential for growing a really huge buck is probably in Ohio's favor.

[Rabbitdawg19]

I have hunted ohio for over 20 years and it is hard to argue with the quality deer the Buckeye state has produced. Location is key. The southeastern part of the state is superior to all others. Muskingum, Harrison, Belmont, Coshocton, Jefferson and Noble counties produce hogs every year. If you're after a big non typ then the southwest is where to be. Northeast OH (where I'm from is good, not great) Although the hole-in-the-horn was found about 20 minutes from my house. Poaching and development are the hunters worst nightmare in NEO. Forget about NW Ohio, nothing but cornfields for miles. They have different regs than the rest of the state because of the inferior numbers in that area. But as in any county in OH they kill their big boys too. This will be my second year here in KY and I love it. Where I hunt (Anderson/Spencer Counties) the pressure is much lower than NE Ohio. There are more deer, but I don't believe that the size is there yet. But the hunters on this forum have a different mentality than most in my home area. You guys realize the importance of managing a herd for quality instead of shooting everything you see. Therefore I believe that in five years or less with your efforts, KY will equal or surpass OH in terms of quality deer. I know that I have changed my thought processes in the short time I have been here and I look forward to managing my lease for some big bluegrass bucks in the future.;)

[Louhunter]

I think everyone should hunt all those other states, much better trophy potential

[Cornpile]

I have hunted ohio for over 20 years and it is hard to argue with the quality deer the Buckeye state has produced. Location is key. The southeastern part of the state is superior to all others. Muskingum, Harrison, Belmont, Coshocton, Jefferson and Noble counties produce hogs every year. If you're after a big non typ then the southwest is where to be. Northeast OH (where I'm from is good, not great) Although the hole-in-the-horn was found about 20 minutes from my house. Poaching and development are the hunters worst nightmare in NEO. Forget about NW Ohio, nothing but cornfields for miles. They have different regs than the rest of the state because of the inferior numbers in that area. But as in any county in OH they kill their big boys too. This will be my second year here in KY and I love it. Where I hunt (Anderson/Spencer Counties) the pressure is much lower than NE Ohio. There are more deer, but I don't believe that the size is there yet. But the hunters on this forum have a different mentality than most in my home area. You guys realize the importance of managing a herd for quality instead of shooting everything you see. Therefore I believe that in five years or less with your efforts, KY will equal or surpass OH in terms of quality deer. I know that I have changed my thought processes in the short time I have been here and I look forward to managing my lease for some big bluegrass bucks in the future.;)
Well said,for a Buckeye :D If all hunters had your outlook on deer hunting we are in on a big buck bonanza

[nicbuc]

Kentucky!!!!!!!!

[Redlined]

I've hunted in Illinois for years, and can say that there is no top end for trophy potential there. As good as our trophy potential is in Ky, it doesn't hold a candle to Illinois. Why is easy enough, they have short firearm seasons outside the main rut and near the entire state is considered a major agricultural area. That being said, Illinois firearm hunters still kill a whole bunch of deer, but since their first firearm season doesn't fall until late Nov. it keeps a lot of the mature deer out of hunters sights that would be very vulnerable if it coincided with main rut.

[kison]

Having hunted Kansas for the past five years, I've seen larger bucks in Kansas than in Kentucky, not to mention overall numbers. If I had to count on a brusier, KS would get the nod. But, and this has been beat to death, location is everything. Any of the states mentioned has the potential to produce huge bucks. So, it depends on your land in each state.

[treedweller]

I know that the Beatty buck was killed in Green County in south west Ohio and there must be some whoppers from that state. Who has hunted both and what would be your opinion on trophy size and potential comparison in both states?
I grew up in Greene county Ohio and yes there have been a few big buck come from there, they(the big'uns) are mostly in the east and southeast of the state.
I enjoy Kentucky hunting more because we have a larger herd and better opportunities for better deer. I still hunt in Ohio in Muskingum county and just east of Chillicothe. Hunt everywhere if you can.

[Georgia Transplant]

My buddy just sent me 2 pictures of 1 buck in the mail yesterday from an Indiana bean field where we hunt that is a ten pointer and will gross score around 150 something. It has 9 to 10 inch brow tines. It looks to be 4.5 or 5.5 years old and can someone tell me how to post pictures on here?

[hollandhunter]

Indiana to me has more quality deer. With the crops and stuff for them to feed on they get huge. By the way I saw the biggest deer I have ever saw while hunting in northern indiana. I think Kentucky may have bigger numbers but smaller deer. Ill and Ohio I dunno. Havent hunted either one of them. Ill I hear have some monsters though. Its all about being in the right spot at the right time I guess.

[skin_dog1]

Kentucky vs. Illinois - I have limited experience in IL, but my experiences as well as all that I've read and the record books tell me that overall IL has the better trophy potential

Kentucky vs. Kansas - I've spent alot of time hunting KS and KY. Both big bucks I've killed as well as the largest living wild deer I've ever seen were in KS. The places I hunt in KS are nothing special either.

Kentucky vs. Indiana - Don't have IN experience, but from all I gather, I'd say KY has a slight edge

Kentucky vs. Ohio - I've hunted OH twice and both times saw some bruisers. Once was far northern OH, and once was southern OH. Seeing the World records coming from OH leads me to go with a definate answer of OH.

Now, I've hunted KY for 6 years. I've only killed 2 bucks, both 2 y/o. I pass deer after deer after deer every year waiting on Mr. Big. I've seen 2 deer that qualify as Mr. Big on the farms I hunt, but one was before the season, the other only gave me the backend view as he was headed south real fast. In those 6 years, I've hunted IL, OH, and KS as well. I killed a nice 3 y/o my first morning in IL that is bigger than any deer I've killed in KY. In KS I've hunted it twice and taken 2 real nice 4 y/o and seen scores of 3 y/o or older bucks. OH hasn't been as nice. My first trip let me lay eyes on a booner at 40 yards with a ML in my hands but he saw me first and a running shot wasn't an option. The second trip was the trip of a lifetime. 4 shooters seen in 2 1/2 days of hunting but never a shot oppurtunity. The farms I hunt in KY are obviously not the best, but they also aren't the worst. My IL hunt was in RockIsland and mercer counties, any one ever heard of em? probably not. It was an outfittd hunt and they've taken deer up to 190+ as well as found sheds on deer over 200"! They do nothing special except limit harvest to 8 points pass the ears. The OH hunts were both on private land that isn't managed other than passing on young bucks. They are average at best I'd say. They all offer much better trophy potential than anything I've hunted in KY.

[canemaker]

Wow...

An over whelming majority are seeing bigger deer (bucks) in more numbers from other states that have a vastly different outlook on deer herd management than Kentucky.

It has to make one wonder if our management tactics are more in line with the southern states. You know, those that manage more for numbers, like Alabama and Georgia..

Now to be fair and not get accused of bashing our Fish and Wildlife Department for their management of our deer herd, I would like to offer this.
I have had the opportunity to travel all over this state and work with the sportsman of Kentucky and have seen some fine deer here in our own state. And we have large numbers of deer in certian areas. (hunters do like seen large numbers of deer when hunting)
But Kentucky can not be compared to IN, KS, OH., ILL, or even IA. they beat us by a large margin when it comes to "book" deer, according to what I have seen myself and read from the prior posts on this thread. Oh, by the way, don't over look Iowa. I have bird hunted there and have seen some monsters.
(now if someone has more time than me and would like to compare the numbers in the B&C, and P&Y books, please do) I would even be interested in the numbers.

Whether it comes from better management or not I don't know, better genetics', beyond me. I do know that from reading these post, many of you agree with the observation that the above mentioned states have more book making deer than Kentucky.

So what's the answer... Lets hear it from the people that count, the deer hunters themselves.

I will start and go out on a limb...I think we need to get away from southern states management techniques, and start thinking about Kentucky as it's own state with it's own unique problems.

[deerchaser_1]

i have hunted both sides of the river and have found nice bucks and does on both sides , i really dont like the 400 dollars that illinois charges for non residents but hey its worth every penny because it goes back to the conservation dept

[Southpaw]

I have great farms in Oh,Ky and Ind. My oh farm is less than 3 miles from where the Amish buck was killed.I have hunted Indiana with a bow the last 25 yrs during the pre rut .I usually hunt Ohio during our modern gun season.With that said the largest deer I have seen on the hoof have been in Ky and of all places Ft Knox.I have saw two legitimate Booners there and missed one of them so easily it literally made me sick for three weeks.It was killed 10 minutes after I missed it. The other one ran a doe out of a closed impact area and was too close to the road for me to shoot.I have killed quite a few P/Y deer on my Indiana farms the largest being a 154 gross 10 pointer. He is the largest deer I have seen alive over there and this is prime Switzerland/Ohio/Ripley properties.I know they are there I guess I am not Good enough to get close.In Oh I hunted 9 straight days last year and never saw a deer over 120 inches.I saw tons of hunters from all over gods creation but no shooters.It all comes down to LOCATION,LOCATION,LOCATION and having the luck and time to hunt them.Good Luck wherever you hunt because it truly is a blessing...

[slickhead slayer]

But Kentucky can not be compared to IN, KS, OH., ILL, or even IA. they beat us by a large margin when it comes to "book" deer, according to what I have seen myself and read from the prior posts on this thread. Oh, by the way, don't over look Iowa. I have bird hunted there and have seen some monsters.
.

The numbers say otherwise. Maybe someone can post up the numbers, but Ky beats several of those states in Boone and Crockett animals. The most telling statistic is the last 5 years. The Boone and Crockett data just from the last 5 years shows Ky to be doing very well. I can't recall exactly the numbers, but I want to say that Ky is second in BC bucks in the last 5 years.

[HornHunter]

I would say that all the states mentioned above are all very similar to the bucks produced and the greatest variable would be the location in question. For example, if you came to deer hunt in western NC, I'd say very few would ever come back. the deer numbers here are very slim, However if you went to eastern NC YOu would probably be overwhelmed by the number of deer. So location depends on your judgement. From what I've read the management strategies are very similar with all the states mentioned allowing only one buck and a few does depending on location........

[Rackophrenic Rick]

I think that most of the states mentioned have several commonalities to include;rich soil, good genetics, good food source, proper cover and better manangement practices, all of which are needed for trophy potential. Given that, Illinois in my opinion seems to be a bit ahead of the curve. For one, as already mentioned, they do not have their gun season in the prime rut period and they use shotguns that somewhat limit effective range during the gun season. Then they also have a little more agriculture favorable to deer. Finally, and I may be a bit off base but it seems that the majority of their hunter base does not have the brown its down mentality.

If you watch a lot of hunting shows on T.V. as I do, you have to notice that the big names associated with trophy class bucks always seem to journey to Illinois. I will have to say that recently, KY hunts are more common.

I will have to agree, as someone mentioned earlier, KY needs to venture away from the Southern method of deer management, it hasn't worked since deer management began for GA, AL, FL, LA, or TN and the proof is in the pudding in Illinois, Iowa, Ohio, and Kansas. However, that task should not be put soley on the backs of our wildlife department. KY hunters need to make wiser choices through the self management of deer on the lands they hunt. The state only makes the regs. Hunters are the ones that choose to let young bucks walk.

[buckfever]

I will start and go out on a limb...I think we need to get away from southern states management techniques, and start thinking about Kentucky as it's own state with it's own unique problems.

What do you mean by "southern states management techniques"? Ky's 1 buck rule is about as far away from "southern mgmt" as you can get.

The reality is that agricultural states in colder northern climates will and should be able to grow bigger bucks than Kentucky.

IMO, states like Iowa, Kansas, Wisconsin (particularly southern Wisconsin), Illinois, and certain parts of Ohio have will always be able to consistently produce trophy (and by trophy I mean 160" or larger) caliber bucks than Kentucky. And I believe they will always have that advantage regardless of what Kentucky does in terms of management.

All Kentucky can do is maximize its own potential.

In the past, many southern states allowed hunters to shoot bucks and ignore does. Over time, southern hunters generally adopted the mindset that shooting bucks was good, and shooting does was bad.

I think that pretty much everyone, in retrospect, realizes that this was a colossal mistake, as virtually every southern state ended up with way too many deer, a completely lopsided buck/doe ratio, and a generally dysfunctional herd.

Our southern neighbors are now in the process of trying to correct these past mistakes by encouraging the liberal harvest of does and passing on young bucks. One problem they've encountered is that, once established, hunters' attitudes are difficult to change. Shooting does is still frowned upon in many areas in the south. This has left the south in a quandary. A one buck rule in Alabama would never work as a mgmt tool, b/c it would undoubtedly lead to the harvest of far too few does (as repeated studies have proven that hunters will not hunt in "doe only" seasons w/out an opportunity for a buck). IMO, those states have placed the need to reduce the deer numbers ahead of growing trophy caliber bucks by continuing to offer multiple buck tags in the hopes that the hunters would still shoot a lot of does. In essence, they've left trophy mgmt in the hands of the private landowners. Over time, the hope in Alabama and other states is that hunters (at least hopefully) will reduce the overall herd size to an acceptable level, and once they reduce the herd, those states can then consider options to maximize trophy potential.

Kentucky is a tweener state. We have too many deer, but we also have the habitat to produce trophy bucks. Kentucky still struggles with its overall harvest and keeping the herd in check, and part of the cause of this problem is our one buck rule (which is clearly not a southern mgmt technique). IMO, the only thing Kentucky could do to better maximize its potential is to possibly consider ways to induce hunters to shoot more does. I believe the only methods to accomplish a bigger doe harvest would be offer things like "earn a 2nd buck", or possible offer an extra buck tag for archery/xbow, etc.

[Rackophrenic Rick]

BF,

Point taken.
I guess my big issue with KY management is the idea that we need to kill every doe in every corner of every county based on a zoning that is established that only considers the part of the county with the largest people populations. This has resulted in over harvests of does in the part of the counties without the over population of deer and the areas around the cities are still over populated due to the fact that hunters aren't granted the opportunity to hunt there.

There is a fine line between balancing and screwing up herd dynamics. We can't afford to continue a harvest limit like a southern state because our land is too conducive to overkill due to the way farms with a lot of open country back up to one another by fencerows. Open season on does can and has desimated herds in many areas of some counties in KY. You take an area comprised of three farms boardering each other and a group of guys hunting these farms with rifles could basically erradicate a herd in a season. I have been witness to it.

The one buck rule is great but we need less harvest of young bucks over all and a educated plan to manage does on a area by area scale. It takes both bucks and does to produce new deer not to mention trophy class deer.

[Shelbyhunter]

I think we need a section in the hunting guide about buck maturity, what a mature buck will look like, what a young buck 1.5 or 2.5 will look like on average.

We have to continue to educate ky hunters about qdma and passing young bucks, especially spikes.

Ky is catching up to the other top states but one thing that hurts us is the firearms season during the rut. I don't care either way because I hunt the firearms season too...

If the gun season was moved, you would see an increase in p&y bucks from ky. Hunters would be forced to bow hunt the rut if they wanted to hunt during the late oct. early nov time period....

[buckfever]

BF,

Point taken.
I guess my big issue with KY management is the idea that we need to kill every doe in every corner of every county based on a zoning that is established that only considers the part of the county with the largest people populations. This has resulted in over harvests of does in the part of the counties without the over population of deer and the areas around the cities are still over populated due to the fact that hunters aren't granted the opportunity to hunt there.

There is a fine line between balancing and screwing up herd dynamics. We can't afford to continue a harvest limit like a southern state because our land is too conducive to overkill due to the way farms with a lot of open country back up to one another by fencerows. Open season on does can and has desimated herds in many areas of some counties in KY. You take an area comprised of three farms boardering each other and a group of guys hunting these farms with rifles could basically erradicate a herd in a season. I have been witness to it.

The one buck rule is great but we need less harvest of young bucks over all and a educated plan to manage does on a area by area scale. It takes both bucks and does to produce new deer not to mention trophy class deer.

I understand where you're coming from, but I've gotta admit that I'm in the corner that believes that, across the entire state, more does need to be taken in Kentucky, not fewer. I believe that this will not only help the herd's health, it will also maximize our big buck potential.

I certainly understand your concerns about doe over-harvesting, and I agree that the deer herd could be micro-managed better in various areas to prevent the kind of "herd decimation" you're describing. I also agree that passing on young bucks is a wise practice regardless of where you live. In all honesty though, I almost exclusively hunt in Zone 1 counties, so I may have a slightly different view. Liberal doe harvests has been, IMO, the single biggest factor in producing larger and better bucks in those zone 1 counties, but the zone 1 hunters just haven't completely bought into the philosophy that we follow (i.e. harvest as many does as you can).

On way too many gun season opening mornings, I'll hear a barrage of artillery on opening morning from all sides. On a typical opening morning, we'll shoot about 8 does and maybe a buck. After cleaning the deer, we'll take those deer to the processor. When we get there, at least 60% of the deer will be bucks, and probably 90% of those will 2 yr old bucks or younger. IMO, if we could persuade those hunters to simply shoot a doe and pass on that yearling buck for at least 2 years, I'd bet that we'd see significantly better bucks in the following years with no decrease in harvest levels. I don't believe this would be true for all areas of the state, but it's my opinion that it would be true for most zone 1 counties.

[buckfever]

By the way, I just realized that somebody has violated my constitutional rights and invaded my "zone of privacy" by adding this to my signature line:
"Honorary Member of the Kyhunting "IN" clique".

This is deeply disturbing to me, and I doubt I'll be able to sleep until I get to the bottom of it, which will probably not be anytime soon as I have no idea how to add/delete signature lines.

However, in the interest of "playing nice with others", I'll agree to drop my 55 page lawsuit with 15 different claims (including punitive damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress) if I can get my signature line changed to reflect that I've been promoted to full-time member of the clique, as well as an officer (preferably court jester). ;)

[quackrstackr]

http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/violent083.gif




I hadn't expected this one yet.....

[buckfever]

http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/violent083.gif




I hadn't expected this one yet.....

Yeah, but if we got rid of all those dead horses, we'd all actually have to go back to the real world, and that would suck. :D

[Rackophrenic Rick]

It's a brain washing conspiracy. Mind control through repetitive suggestion.:D

Let the little ones walk, let the little ones walk..............:eek:

[naturalelite]

I have never heard a bad word from anyone that hunted IL about the actual hunt. I have heard many complain about the price but not once about the quality of the hunt.

KS, OH, IA, about the same with them not many complaints. Now I have not talked to anyone that has hunted public land on these three states but the private lands that I have been told about are all extremely good.

IN, is like Kentucky its all about location.

I would have to give IL the nod just on word of mouth.

On a personal note. It wouldn't bother me one bit if KY adopted the later gun season or the shotgun/ML only season. If it were all about pleasing me YES I would love to have between OCT20th-NOV20TH bow only. It unfortunately isn't about pleasing me it is about pleasing several hundred thousand other sportsmen/women in this state and managing the deer herd.

[quackrstackr]

It would bother the heck out of a lot of people over this way.

We start shooting birds on Nov. 25th. The deer hunting tends to get a lot less productive in areas where there is a constant 21 gun salute going on for 60 days straight.

[itallushrt]

The numbers say otherwise. Maybe someone can post up the numbers, but Ky beats several of those states in Boone and Crockett animals. The most telling statistic is the last 5 years. The Boone and Crockett data just from the last 5 years shows Ky to be doing very well. I can't recall exactly the numbers, but I want to say that Ky is second in BC bucks in the last 5 years.


http://www.boone-crockett.org/bgRecords/records_whitetail.asp?area=bgRecords

[Georgia Transplant]

http://www.boone-crockett.org/bgRecords/records_whitetail.asp?area=bgRecords

I'm looking for data for the past 5 years and can't find it. I heard Kentucky was 2nd only to Illinois in the past 5 years with boone and crocket bucks taken. Has anyone else heard this?:confused:

[Georgia Transplant]

I think we need a section in the hunting guide about buck maturity, what a mature buck will look like, what a young buck 1.5 or 2.5 will look like on average.

We have to continue to educate ky hunters about qdma and passing young bucks, especially spikes.

Ky is catching up to the other top states but one thing that hurts us is the firearms season during the rut. I don't care either way because I hunt the firearms season too...

If the gun season was moved, you would see an increase in p&y bucks from ky. Hunters would be forced to bow hunt the rut if they wanted to hunt during the late oct. early nov time period....

I agree with your assertion that Kentucky needs to move gun season away from the rut and let us bow hunters have the rut. LOL j/k
But really I would be all for it.:)

[skin_dog1]

I've said it a bunch on here, but I'll say it again - The numbers of bucks entered in the B&C books doesn't accurately reflect the number of actual booners killed each year. KY has just recently started consistently killing numbers of big bucks, places like IL, KS, WI and IA have been doing it for years. It's old news! Guys just don't bother. I've visited many taxiedermist and meat lockers in KS and KY and can guarantee you more bigguns are killed each year in KS than KY, it doesn't come close! I can't vouch for that in the other states.

[Redlined]

I've said it a bunch on here, but I'll say it again - The numbers of bucks entered in the B&C books doesn't accurately reflect the number of actual booners killed each year. KY has just recently started consistently killing numbers of big bucks, places like IL, KS, WI and IA have been doing it for years. It's old news! Guys just don't bother. I've visited many taxiedermist and meat lockers in KS and KY and can guarantee you more bigguns are killed each year in KS than KY, it doesn't come close! I can't vouch for that in the other states.

I hear ya bro, and I can attest to Illinois in the same way. I used to stop at a local taxidermists shop nearly every season about the second week of Nov. and it wasn't anything for him to already have 250 bow kill bucks and anywhere from 10-25 that would gross over 170"! The "average" P&Y bucks up tp 150" were just piled in a corner waiting there turn to be put on their form, a 140" deer just doesn't turn many heads up there. Mind you, this is still nearly two weeks before their first firearm hunt and nowhere near the Pike, Brown, Adams county hotbeds you see on the Outdoor Channel.Thats more big bucks than a lot of this states most famous taxi's take in for the entire deer season. Its a well kept secret that theres a whole lot more of that state thats covered up in big deer than the three that get all of the press. It would behoove any serious deer hunter to head to Illinois for just a season to see what all of the fuss is about, I'm sure all the naysayers would come back with a different mindset........

[redbone]

Kentucky vs. Illinois - I have limited experience in IL, but my experiences as well as all that I've read and the record books tell me that overall IL has the better trophy potential

Kentucky vs. Kansas - I've spent alot of time hunting KS and KY. Both big bucks I've killed as well as the largest living wild deer I've ever seen were in KS. The places I hunt in KS are nothing special either.

Kentucky vs. Indiana - Don't have IN experience, but from all I gather, I'd say KY has a slight edge

Kentucky vs. Ohio - I've hunted OH twice and both times saw some bruisers. Once was far northern OH, and once was southern OH. Seeing the World records coming from OH leads me to go with a definate answer of OH.

Now, I've hunted KY for 6 years. I've only killed 2 bucks, both 2 y/o. I pass deer after deer after deer every year waiting on Mr. Big. I've seen 2 deer that qualify as Mr. Big on the farms I hunt, but one was before the season, the other only gave me the backend view as he was headed south real fast. In those 6 years, I've hunted IL, OH, and KS as well. I killed a nice 3 y/o my first morning in IL that is bigger than any deer I've killed in KY. In KS I've hunted it twice and taken 2 real nice 4 y/o and seen scores of 3 y/o or older bucks. OH hasn't been as nice. My first trip let me lay eyes on a booner at 40 yards with a ML in my hands but he saw me first and a running shot wasn't an option. The second trip was the trip of a lifetime. 4 shooters seen in 2 1/2 days of hunting but never a shot oppurtunity. The farms I hunt in KY are obviously not the best, but they also aren't the worst. My IL hunt was in RockIsland and mercer counties, any one ever heard of em? probably not. It was an outfittd hunt and they've taken deer up to 190+ as well as found sheds on deer over 200"! They do nothing special except limit harvest to 8 points pass the ears. The OH hunts were both on private land that isn't managed other than passing on young bucks. They are average at best I'd say. They all offer much better trophy potential than anything I've hunted in KY.

if you run the #'s on typical bucks coming out of KY vs. OH - OH is way down and has been on a down swing the past few years - I haven't ran the #'s compared to the other states.

[redbone]

I've said it a bunch on here, but I'll say it again - The numbers of bucks entered in the B&C books doesn't accurately reflect the number of actual booners killed each year. KY has just recently started consistently killing numbers of big bucks, places like IL, KS, WI and IA have been doing it for years. It's old news! Guys just don't bother. I've visited many taxiedermist and meat lockers in KS and KY and can guarantee you more bigguns are killed each year in KS than KY, it doesn't come close! I can't vouch for that in the other states.

Dave, not to bicker with you but you have to use some type of measuring device, rather than just subjective guessing - the only real means of measuring that output is the B&C entries. Granted there are bucks in KS that aren't entered, but that holds true for KY as well... just last winter when we went up to Lewis Co. and entered in another 9 bucks or so that had never had an official tape to them, alot of hunters in KY still aren't aware that B&C even exists.

[slickhead slayer]

I've said it a bunch on here, but I'll say it again - The numbers of bucks entered in the B&C books doesn't accurately reflect the number of actual booners killed each year. KY has just recently started consistently killing numbers of big bucks, places like IL, KS, WI and IA have been doing it for years. It's old news! Guys just don't bother. I've visited many taxiedermist and meat lockers in KS and KY and can guarantee you more bigguns are killed each year in KS than KY, it doesn't come close! I can't vouch for that in the other states.

Like Redbone said, do you have anything to prove this? How do you know more BC bucks in Ill go unreported than BC bucks in KY?

[Georgia Transplant]

It sounds like to me that Kentucky is the nations best kept secret. Sure Kansas, Illinois and Iowa produce record bucks and by all means they should. I think Kentucky is the state that has so many professional hunters puzzeled and amazed. They keep asking themselves how is it that Kentucky can produce with the big boys of the midwest. I predict in another 5 years when B&C come up everybody will say "well you have Illinois and Kansas and wait a minute I believe Kentucky had more B&C taken the last 5 years then Kansas then you have Iowa, Ohio and don't forget Indiana they are coming on strong. This is just My opinion you see I've been keeping an eye on Kentucky since 2001 and every year the data amazes me. This will be my 1st year of hunting Kentucky and I have high hopes of a booner or at least a 150 class.:)

[quackrstackr]

It sounds like to me that Kentucky is the nations best kept secret.

Kentucky is far from being a secret.

You can't watch many hunting shows or crack many deer related magazines without seeing somebody hunting here.

It's showing up in oos hunter numbers and jacking up lease prices, too.

[buckfever]

Like Redbone said, do you have anything to prove this? How do you know more BC bucks in Ill go unreported than BC bucks in KY?

I gotta agree with skindog on this. I can't really speak about Kansas, but I think it's definitely true of Illinois. I think KY has great quality deer hunting, but if I was strictly after a booner, I would think about either Illinois, Kansas, Iowa or Wisconsin.

I lived in Chicago for 8 years, and it seemed like every outdoor expo and show was loaded with booners, not a couple, but virtually every deer. People didn't even both with 150-160 class deer. It was the same way at the lodges. In Kentucky, a good outfitter might have 25 heads in the great room, and 2-3 of those are booners. It seemed like every deer was a booner over (up?) there.

[redbone]

Ok - some quick research

This is based on B&C entries since 2000

KY - total entries 271 / comes down to 1 buck entered for every 149 sq miles

IL - total entries 464 / 1 buck entered for every 124 sq miles

KS - total entries 197 / 1 buck entered for every 417 sq miles

Some quick interesting notes - during that time frame KY has entered one typical buck over 200" and IL has not - on the other hand IL has entered 8 bucks scoring 190" or better and KY has zero entries in that class range.

So based on the above data I would say you have a slightly better chance of taking a B&C buck in IL than KY.


One other real quick thing to point out - if you take the data from 2005 to present for typical bucks entered

KY - 67
IL - 74

consider the land mass and KY would be the better choice.

[Georgia Transplant]

Ok - some quick research

This is based on B&C entries since 2000

KY - total entries 271 / comes down to 1 buck entered for every 149 sq miles

IL - total entries 464 / 1 buck entered for every 124 sq miles

KS - total entries 197 / 1 buck entered for every 417 sq miles

Some quick interesting notes - during that time frame KY has entered one typical buck over 200" and IL has not - on the other hand IL has entered 8 bucks scoring 190" or better and KY has zero entries in that class range.

So based on the above data I would say you have a slightly better chance of taking a B&C buck in IL than KY.


One other real quick thing to point out - if you take the data from 2005 to present for typical bucks entered

KY - 67
IL - 74

consider the land mass and KY would be the better choice.

WOW!!!!!! this is interesting data where did you find it? My point in all of this is how incredible it is that Kentucky even compares to the main B&C state of Illinois. It looks like Kentucky might be in 2nd place for now and blows Kansas away as far as 1 buck per square mile killed. It's great to be a whitetail hunter in Kentucky.

[naturalelite]

What if you factored into the equation the total # of hunters. The more hunters you have out there would have a significant impact on the total# of B&C deer.

[redbone]

What if you factored into the equation the total # of hunters. The more hunters you have out there would have a significant impact on the total# of B&C deer.

That's a very good point - the only stat I have for that is IL has roughly 237,820 firearm hunters - I don't think KY has any estimate on # of hunters and I don't have a clue on KS.

[slickhead slayer]

I gotta agree with skindog on this. I can't really speak about Kansas, but I think it's definitely true of Illinois. I think KY has great quality deer hunting, but if I was strictly after a booner, I would think about either Illinois, Kansas, Iowa or Wisconsin.

I lived in Chicago for 8 years, and it seemed like every outdoor expo and show was loaded with booners, not a couple, but virtually every deer. People didn't even both with 150-160 class deer. It was the same way at the lodges. In Kentucky, a good outfitter might have 25 heads in the great room, and 2-3 of those are booners. It seemed like every deer was a booner over (up?) there.

I agree that their outfitters and lodges have a ton more BC bucks on display. But part of that has to be attributed to the fact that Ky is the johnny come lately. They were killing dozens of booners a year in Ill, when Ky barely had a deer season. If you look at the numbers, the Ill,Kansas and Iowas had a HUGE head start on Ky. Thats why I think its much more relevant to look at the last 5 years, the last 10 years etc. Nobody doubts that historically Ill has produced ALOT more big deer than Ky.
What I am saying, is that according to the numbers Ky is second in recent years in B&C bucks. I don't buy the excuse that more deer aren't checked in Ill and Kansas than Ky. I think thats purely speculative, and if anything, I would think Ky checks in less deer because this B&C phenomenom is so new to KY. Many don't even know about BC bucks in Ky. Just my opinion.

[Georgia Transplant]

I agree that their outfitters and lodges have a ton more BC bucks on display. But part of that has to be attributed to the fact that Ky is the johnny come lately. They were killing dozens of booners a year in Ill, when Ky barely had a deer season. If you look at the numbers, the Ill,Kansas and Iowas had a HUGE head start on Ky. Thats why I think its much more relevant to look at the last 5 years, the last 10 years etc. Nobody doubts that historically Ill has produced ALOT more big deer than Ky.
What I am saying, is that according to the numbers Ky is second in recent years in B&C bucks. I don't buy the excuse that more deer aren't checked in Ill and Kansas than Ky. I think thats purely speculative, and if anything, I would think Ky checks in less deer because this B&C phenomenom is so new to KY. Many don't even know about BC bucks in Ky. Just my opinion.


I agree with you 100%

[buckfever]

What I am saying, is that according to the numbers Ky is second in recent years in B&C bucks. I don't buy the excuse that more deer aren't checked in Ill and Kansas than Ky. I think thats purely speculative, and if anything, I would think Ky checks in less deer because this B&C phenomenom is so new to KY. Many don't even know about BC bucks in Ky. Just my opinion.

Slick - I'm not saying that Kentucky doesn't have awesome deer and hunting, b/c it does. I just think you can't really compare Ky to some of these other northern states.

It would be an interesting experiment, but I'd bet that if you randomly selected 5 outfitters from Illinois or Kansas and then 5 from Kentucky (with the same number of hunters), you'd end up seeing that there are more booners killed in Illinois or Kansas than Kentucky. You might see more bucks bigger that 110" taken from Kentucky, but I'd bet that those other states would end up producing more high end deer.

Funny that this topic is on B&C. When I lived in Illinois, I knew several guys that entered every bow-killed qualifying buck into P&Y, and they all seemed to be proud to have their 5 or 7 or whatever entries. Interestingly, I can I honestly say that I don't know a single person here in KY that has ever entered a singly buck in P&Y. Now, I'm sure I actually do know somebody that has entered a buck, but Kentuckians just don't seem to be too enthralled about P&Y.

Although it certainly cuts against the logic about what I experienced with the Illinois bowhunting circles, I think that the opposite is true of the booners. Maybe it's just b/c there are so many booners killed in Illinois every year with guns that people just don't bother with it.

[Rackophrenic Rick]

I wouldn't bet my farm on the B&C data being a complete set of data to compare trophy buck production from state to state. I know several guys that have B&C class bucks that didn't register with the club. One thing that needs to be pointed out is there are two record programs with B&C, all time records that remain on the books indefinitely and the 3 year record. A 165" net typical can make the 3 year but not the all time but they still count as a B&C record when used to compare one state to another. I'd venture to say many of these do not get officially scored.

I'll just go back to what I observe, there are far more pro hunters heading to the midwest a betting the success of their business there than in KY.
I will say I feel blessed to live and hunt here because I know there is always the potential a harvesting mature trophy bucks but if I did it for a living making videos, I'd move to Ill, Iowa, or Kansas.

I do believe that the state management plan has little to do with the reason we may be less of a trophy producing state than the other states mentioned. I truely believe it has more to do with hunter choices. From folks I have spoken to in Illinois, Iowa, and Wisconsin, I got the feeling that the general hunting public is a bit more inclined to set there harvest goals to assist in producing more trophy class animals.

[naturalelite]

I'll just go back to what I observe, there are far more pro hunters heading to the midwest a betting the success of their business there than in KY.


15 years ago (Besides Knight and Hale)had you ever seen a pro hunter coming into the state of Kentucky? I have watched 5 shows in the last week that were taped in Kentucky. I still see more shows in IL, KS and even MT but KY is making its way toward the top.

I think all things equal if you add hunter #'s, Land mass, and B&C taken deer, your more likely to kill one in KY than any other state.

[redbone]

I wouldn't bet my farm on the B&C data being a complete set of data to compare trophy buck production from state to state. I know several guys that have B&C class bucks that didn't register with the club. One thing that needs to be pointed out is there are two record programs with B&C, all time records that remain on the books indefinitely and the 3 year record. A 165" net typical can make the 3 year but not the all time but they still count as a B&C record when used to compare one state to another. I'd venture to say many of these do not get officially scored.

I agree that the B&C data isn't complete but just as there are bucks in IL that haven't been scored or entered the same holds true for KY or any other state - but it's the best tool that we have currently to get some kind of assessment ... if the B&C data doesn't qualify for you, what data can you use to back up your view?

I score officially for B&C and you know how many times someone has called me to say I've got a booner I want scored - do you know what happens when I put the tape to it? Wow, it suddenly shrinks. All you guys here claiming that you see all the B&C bucks might not be quite on - what I'm saying and I'm guilty of this as well, just because it looks big doesn't mean it will tape the same way.

Also, I have no clue as to why you are saying that many of the 165" bucks aren't being scored - I'd disagree with that and i'll tell you why - of the 253 Typical bucks that were entered in the books from IL since 2000 - at least half of those entries net below the 170" all-time awards.

I really could care less if KY was #1 or #10, personally I'd love for KY to stay under the radar b/c it would mean less pressure from out of state hunters and keep property values in check.