Forums46
Topics546,242
Posts9,832,887
Members87,705
|
Most Online25,604 Feb 12th, 2024
|
|
|
Re: Genetics vs Nutrition
[Re: redchevy]
#3064759
03/05/12 03:43 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 60,296
stxranchman
Obie Juan Kenobi
|
Obie Juan Kenobi
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 60,296 |
Age, nutrition and genetics really all have to go hand in hand for it work. One missing link drags the other ones down.
Are idiots multiplying faster than normal people?
|
|
|
Re: Genetics vs Nutrition
[Re: redchevy]
#3064911
03/05/12 04:14 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 688
kamolaw
Tracker
|
Tracker
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 688 |
Yeah I know, but zero genetics would be deer living on a hi fenced concrete slab in the middle of an open field. No browse no food. Given naturaly available food and better than average genetics or better than average nutrition and average or less than average genetics I think I would take the genetics and average nutrition, but Im sure and argument can will and has been made for both sides.
matt So it all depends on the law of averages?
I dont shoot innocent animals...only the ones that bare thier teeth at me... Semper Fi
|
|
|
Re: Genetics vs Nutrition
[Re: kamolaw]
#3064999
03/05/12 04:39 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 60,296
stxranchman
Obie Juan Kenobi
|
Obie Juan Kenobi
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 60,296 |
Yeah I know, but zero genetics would be deer living on a hi fenced concrete slab in the middle of an open field. No browse no food. Given naturaly available food and better than average genetics or better than average nutrition and average or less than average genetics I think I would take the genetics and average nutrition, but Im sure and argument can will and has been made for both sides.
matt So it all depends on the law of averages? Or a trigger finger most of the time.
Are idiots multiplying faster than normal people?
|
|
|
Re: Genetics vs Nutrition
[Re: stxranchman]
#3065007
03/05/12 04:40 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 28,069
Navasot
Hollywood
|
Hollywood
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 28,069 |
Yeah I know, but zero genetics would be deer living on a hi fenced concrete slab in the middle of an open field. No browse no food. Given naturaly available food and better than average genetics or better than average nutrition and average or less than average genetics I think I would take the genetics and average nutrition, but Im sure and argument can will and has been made for both sides.
matt So it all depends on the law of averages? Or a trigger finger most of the time. there it is
|
|
|
Re: Genetics vs Nutrition
[Re: jshouse]
#3069012
03/06/12 08:48 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 9,185
hook_n_line
THF Trophy Hunter
|
THF Trophy Hunter
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 9,185 |
No problem with feeding but think of the best condition on your palce and what deer looked like then. That's what you get. We've watched our deer go from skinny to fat on place but the antler growth was minimal (4years). These deer had nice racks good tines average 12-16 inch spread. On another place 11 miles down the road the deer were already in good shape but were really impressive after a few years. (short browe tines and crab claws were common) Looking at 14 years in the same area working with different land owners, genetics made the most difference. Feeding will increase the survival rate and body sizes of young and prime deer and will help some with antler growth but giants are products of genetics. Keep feeding, you never know when a flood, a drought or human encrouchment might push those genes your way. We see a new deer from time to time. I saw a buck on my place Saturday that we've not seen before. He's hitting the clover and soy beans but not the protien or corn. I hope he sticks around. Let your deer get old and fat. Then you'll see if they can grow the headgear.
Sometimes it's hard being me! But somebody has to do it.
|
|
|
Moderated by bigbob_ftw, CCBIRDDOGMAN, Chickenman, Derek, DeRico, Duck_Hunter, hetman, jeh7mmmag, JustWingem, kmon11, kry226, kwrhuntinglab, Payne, pertnear, rifleman, sig226fan (Rguns.com), Superduty, TreeBass, txcornhusker
|