Coolest thing about the brady buck is their is a pair of sheds from the year before and of course horns at death..... consecutive years....

If we would of had record rains that year...that buck could of broke the 300 mark.

Funny thing is there weren't a whole bunch of deer around back then either. I don't know this from first hand experience but my grandpa killed an enormous buck (not nearly as big as that one of course) in the early 1900's and said deer were far and few. I guess meat was their doom.

Good friend of mine's dad killed a 169 net out of his back porch in the 60's in Lake Victor. That plus many other stories such as this one are why i think the deer were way better back 40-60 years ago and longer, than what there are now.

(not counting HF)

Refrigeration and easy access meat at grocery stores made hunting for meat obsolete for many and the elimination of predators led to over population and destruction of forage. That's why I think deer outside of HF and strict management in Texas have declined.

Deer populations were far fewer, especially in the west of the I-35 corridor, but more as a result of very different habitat conditions. Hunters today would not recognize the landscape if they were dropped on the same place they hunt now 100 years ago. The cover and brush we have so much of today existed in more isolated pockets and the deer were pretty well confined within those pockets.

Years ago I leased from an old timer out of Rocksprings and he told me stories of what that country was like in the early 1900's, grass prairie mostly with pockets of Live Oak and cedar and mesquite pretty well limited to the ridges and headers of canyons, draws and some hill sides.

I asked him how much of a factor water was in the deer population and he said that water was steady as the creeks that are dry today ran with water but soon started to dry up as the brush took over from over grazing. Today the deer have moved even futher west strictly because of water available from wells and windmills.

Those are the facts.Farming after the turn of the century quickly denuded the rich but shallow soil layer and the cedars and mesquites took over. This in turn affected the water situation greatly. The early writings of the pioneeers describe central Texas/the hill country as a veritable paradise of mostly open land and fertile soil. The cover which came later led to the burgeoning deer populations seen today.

Deer were very far and few back then. Like posted the terrain looked much different. Rainfall went much farther in grass country than in brush as it is today. If you research the record books on deer you will see that the Edwards Plateau produced some of the biggest nontypicals in the record book. Why? Habitat was the main reason back then and grazing practices. That area is and was rich in forbes and deep rooted forbes. Overgrazing removed many of the forbes and ground cover. Drought let the less desireable plants take hold. Screw eradication along with mast producing trees taking over led to a population explosion in that area. Also due to lack of predators from livestock practices. South Texas was not different back then other than it lacked rain. The areas down south were grassland praires also with only brush in the draws and drainages. Over grazing and drought led to more undesireable brush and weeds moving in. But also some great browse species took hold helping out. Stories I have heard from old timers is that due to the lack of deer in South Texas most ranchers hunted in the Hill Country back the due to the quality and amount of deer. Old time ranchers in the Hill Country talked of very fertile soils but lack of depth in them with very good seasonal rains. I think the good old days of hunting are today. Overpopulation of deer, lack of prescribed burning as a management tool, undersireable species of plants taking over that are poor quality water sucking species have turned some deer herds in a downward trend. The money to improve the habitat is not there any more with land fragmentation. Increased hunting pressure in some areas is part to blame also to help make the family farm/ranch stay alive in todays economy for areas that have lesser quality of animals.

I think the exact opposite. I know in my area the deer herd has improved ten fold in just the years that I have been hunting. I had the priviledge to hunt the same lease for over 20 years and in the beginning you were lucky to shoot a deer and definately wouldn't see deer every time you went out. By the time we left it wasn't uncommon to see 10 or more deer and be able to harvest a 130+ inch buck in a season.

John Stein knows a lot about this buck also. I think he is affiliated with the Buckhorn now in San Antonio.