Mother of God...

Well done, tlk!

Nice pics!

Good looking animals. At one time, a long time ago, my area South of Bowie had monster bucks and does. And, they bred true on both body size and antlers. Then a 4 year drought hit and we lost a lot of wildlife. Ponds and spring fed creeks dried up. I no longer see snakes, cottontails, skunks, armadillos, road runners or possums. Turkeys are only occasionally seen. Haven’t had a tick in years and the pigs don’t have many. Still plenty of coons.

2 high fence places are growing exotics and not whitetails. Several neighbors, and I, supplemental feed year around but we aren’t getting pics of big deer.

I recently had a cup of coffee with the retired GW and Regional TPWD game management guy and we talked, like all old men, about the good old days. We agree that the seed stock in my area is mostly gone and that the numbers of deer are still down.

For some reason, pigs have left my area. Nobody has quite figured that out.

I hunted South Texas for nearly 40 years, Zapata/Webb County lines and these bucks here are magnificent. We commonly saw big 140-160 typicals, very occasional 170ish but nothing like you have here. Awesome specimens TLK...

Some incredible deer.

I tend to be of the mind that all low fence deer are hinz 57 muts. Given the same acreage feed and management and huge deer will be grown across the state, or pretty much anywhere they live.

Unfortunately that’s just not the case. Genetics can vary even in micro areas. 15 or 20 miles one way or the other can make a huge difference in the size of deer they are killing.

What makes maverick county so special is the NUMBER of big deer there. These are not one off deer, they are present in numbers.

Friend of mine hunts a ranch about 15 min this side of eagle pass. I’ve hunted there a few times and if given a green light to kill whatever I wanted I am pretty sure I would pass on a 170” deer because there are bigger deer. Neighbor kills 3-4 170”+ deer a year on 1500 acres. It’s insane county for monster whitetail.

Believe that’s due more to management habitat etc than the actual genetics. You can see the same difference across a fence or road pending the management practices on each side.

I really think you two are right in a large sense, have to first have the foundational genetics then you must have an intensive game management and supplemental feeding program. With both of those you may, will grow some bruisers, however I do agree achieving TLK's quality will still be very, very aspirational in reality....

I wish you would post what yall pay ? It's $15,000 a gun right? Add feed and buy in fee I hear some members paid $ 25,000 last year I got money but that's still too rich for my blood ......

Those are some fine animals.

I think there are places with genetics, feed, management, time, etc. that create the perfect storm and when this occurs, you get a chance to have deer like you pictured. The longer things stay the same, the more of these deer you have around. In most cases one of the factors is lost in the equation and things become a lot more normal and without all of these factors, you have fewer of these type of deer. Enjoy it while you have it.

Ranch85, nothing wrong with asking that but he may not want to answer on an open forum. Not my place to comment but Im trying to give him an out. Some people dont like to leave a question unanswered, but on the other hand, dont really want that info to get out to everyone. Im sure if you have a serious interest in getting on the place at some point that you could send him a pm and see what happens.
For what its worth, I dont know the costs but Im sure it is a whole lot because you get a whole lot and some will pay.
Congratulation, tlk, on all the work to get where yall are at.

Depending on acreage, # members, feed bills, camp fees, etc., it's likely significantly more than that. If you have to ask how much, it's probably more than you're willing to pay.

txtrophy85, you realize the inverse of what you are saying is that any low fence pocket in Texas (or anywhere) can alter the genetics of a deer herd.

I know for a fact that has been discussed ad nauseum on here and the consensus among biologists and research has shown this is just not the case.

While I know and have acknowledged different deer subspecies have been introduced to parts of texas, the wild herd will eventually breed with those subspecies and the genetics will blend out rather quickly. The case example to use would be introducing some stocker animals into a low fence property and expecting those same genetics to last more than a few generations

In a lot of cases the “ wild herd” didn’t exist prior to a lot of introductions. Populations were extremely low or non existent. Hence the genetic strongholds in those areas.

But deer genetics are not the same across the board. That’s why on well managed ranches in the Hill Country they are not killing 200” native deer.

It takes 3 things to produce big deer, age, nutrition and genetics. But without genetics, the other two won’t matter. Good example of this is the number of large bucks that are killed in the Midwest that are 3 and 4 years old. The Milo Hansen buck was 3 years old. But he grew a rack over 200” because he had the genetics.

Age and nutrition make the genetics reach maximum potential but you cannot over compensate nutrition and age to overrule genetics.


By your theory you could just high fence any place in Texas, feed the native herd and let them get old and you will be killing 180-200” deer….but that is not the case. That’s the reason deer breeding got big in the first place.

Free-range I'm not asking I'm saying.....I know the place he's on ....I just want others to know those buck pictures come at a steep price......one that many can't afford

How big a place and how long do you get to undergo substantial supplementing and management?

I think having 10,000 plus acres and years of some type of management and a fair number of years of extreme management will get you a lot of places.

Based on those monster headgear, kind of figured top 1% of TX lease pricing, stands to reason...

But the highlighted text is where you are wrong, and here is a link to research that proves the point.

It isn't quick, but after three generations the researchers essentially changed "hill country deer" to be more like "typical south texas deer" (quotations added for emphasis this is a similar type distribution of deer to what we are talking about)

Epigenetics in deer

A steep price in money, time, and work I am sure.

Well it’s not a secret that well fed deer are going to be heavier, healthier and produce better antlers than a deer that struggled as a fawn or yearling diet wise. That’s common sense.

What I’m talking about is growing exceptionally large racked deer. Those deer referenced in the study were heavy in body weight, especially in the delta with better nutrients but still relatively modest in terms of antler size at 3 years old. It isn’t uncommon for a 3 year old maverick county deer to be 140” or better.


But see for yourself. Go buy a piece of ground in the hill country, fence it and see what you’re able to grow. We had a high fenced south Texas ranch for 28 years and fed, managed and culled the hell out of it, and the best we were able to produce was mid 170’s, because that’s what our genetics were capable of. I can give you countless examples just like ours.

Yet in maverick they are killing 180-200” regularly on low fence country. What’s the difference? Genetics!

you missed the point of the study. The original deer that came in from the one area were smaller with smaller antlers. It took three generations for the smaller deer on full feed to catch up, but by the time the third generation of deer on full feed reached three years old, there was no significant difference between the original big deer (who were also on three gens of full feed) and the original genetic smaller deer in terms of body size and antler size.
The study showed that generational changes take place and that means certain genes are switched on or off generationally. In areas where food is more scarce or habitat requires leaner smaller deer for long term survival, we wouldn't expect changes to happen over one season or two. It takes a minimum of 7-10 years. This is also why many (if not all) good managers will say protein use needs to be free choice and long term for any difference to be seen.


So let me make this an easy exercise by switching some names around:

Hill country deer are smaller in body and antler size than maverick county deer. If one were to implement a program where deer density was ideal, and hill country deer were fed maximally free choice for three generations (more or less). By the third year in that third generation, the hill country deer would be statistically the same from a body weight and antler size to similarly maximally fed maverick county deer.


That would be a great experiment to try. I do not know if such subspecies introductions took place in Alabama as they did in some parts of Texas. But....then again, isn't the gene pool diluted for free range deer???

BTW, love the discussion. I hope I am not coming off as any kind of know it all or anything

you are assuming that Hill country doesnt have genetics. Much of the hill country “genetics” are suppressed because the land has a lower cc then stx and in addition, hill country also has higher numbers of deer per acre. I know several guys that if they had all the money in the world would buy specific area hill country ranches over much of STX.

with that said getting a herd back to its full potential is more work then most want. With all of this said Hill Country has pockets just like STX has pockets, STX just has more pockets. Alot of ranches in STX that cant and wont ever get to 200 also

alot of the US was reintroduced with STX/King deer and KS deer. Think Miss and Bama have some king ranch deer

Alabama has some really screwed up deer (bucks). Yes, there are some nice ones, but there are A LOT of retarded looking racks in Alabama. My guess is the good genes were shot out and they left the retarded ones to do the breeding.