Boy howdy, just think what kind of monster bucks the midwest could grow if they planted pines instead of corn and beans!

You should see some of the plantations we manage for timber. They don't look like pic 2 (if they do, it's just a very short time). But they also can't look like pic 1 (somewhere in between mostly). Cause you guys still want walls studded with 2x4's, TP to clean your butt, a carton to buy your beer in, and boxes upon boxes for Amazon to ship you hunting crap. So.... there's that.

And who says they don't see wildlife value. You seen the lease forum....ever?

I'm like you Anthony. I just don't see how natural habitat browse has more protein than acres and acres of soybeans.

Since our 23 million acres of timberland is composed of 11 + million acres of hardwood type and 11+ million acres of pine type (of which only 6 million acres are planted), also imagine the bucks we could grow on the moist soils that hardwoods take up by clearcutting all that and planting it to corn and beans!!

The point is, a deer can only get so big due to his genetic makeup. The deer that live in Gobbler's pic are getting enough to reach their potential.

If the timber in Gobbler's pics were replaced by soybeans and corn, how much bigger do you think that they would get?

Don't misrepresent what I said. It always seems that everyone slams pines for wildlife habitat and that is a mistake. It is in how the stand is managed NOT the tree growing on it. I LOVE managing pine stands because of all I can do with it. The native browse is great food, year-round cover, nesting habitat and diverse, easily managed natives that I don't have to plant. It does NOT generate the volume nor protein levels of planted and fertilized beans. Maybe better than corn but hard to beat beans for forage. Two different things that can't be compared.

I've hunted in Kansas and the dirt there is some of the most amazing stuff I've ever seen. The Alabama Black Belt only wishes it had soils like they do. The 3-1/2 year old bucks have 140" or more. The Midwest deer is also a different subspecies, but the soil there is also a big factor in the size and quality of deer. Only pine trees I saw were planted in someone's yard outside the town where we stayed.

Exactly why I don't want to hunt pine plantations. Such as timber company land. No food. Down in banks below Troy there is a lot of ag and there are some sure enough big ones shot. They have big bodies too. Far,ing definitely has a big impact.

Yeah, ok. Let's go walking tomorrow.

Never mind, you got it all figured out.

I grew up hunting farmland and there is no comparison to timber company pine plantations in quality or quantity of wildlife..

You show me a place that is 50/50 ag & woods that regularly cuts timber & is on a burn schedule and I'll show you a place that will grow wildlife & lots of it.

I agree the this type of land would be ideal. The problem is that none of the timber company or public lands and most private lands many of us hunt do not resemble the scenario you describe. You will be lucky to have 3-5% of your land available for food plots on Timber Co. land, and many of these lands are never burned. Our club is privately owned but the Landowner is against burning. The debris on the floor of the pine areas is several inches deep and has virtually no available food. The pines which have been thinned have so many logs and limbs it is difficult and noisy as hell to walk through. We have a couple of larger plots but most of our green fields are old loading areas.

Gobbler is right but unfortunately the big timber company lands I see and hunt around this state are managed strictly for wood production. The utopian forests he manages are not available to most of us.

It's important to remember that intensively managed pine plantations (managed with the goal of maximizing timber production), only make up roughly 20% of the entire acreage of AL (33 million acres). Out of available acres identified as timberland (23 million acres), plantations are only 31% of that.

So, total acres statewide, only 1 out of 5 acres is plantation.

It just doesn't fit the narrative when blaming everything on pines.

So, what's wrong with the other 80%?

If you and Gobbler would get your noses out of those books and start hanging out at the factory y'all might learn something about biology and land management!

Then whats the deal with Marengo co? I have heard several folks say the numbers are pathetically low. Is that just in the areas distant from row cropping? I have no idea.

Not a damn thing where I'm from, we have row crops and hardwoods , river bottoms and mountains . Screw a bunch of pines.

Be hard as hell to plow and plant on the sides of the mountains in Northeast Bama. Seed will all wash away, but we can the tops and river bottoms in the valleys.

it ain't age, it ain't nutrition....the state of Alabama imported Michigan deer and released em into that area in the 40's. Northern deer genetics is what makes Bankhead STILL produce outstanding bucks.

Jackson County = All the natural lime in the dirt ?

I didn't mean to be blunt. Bad habit. My bad. I would hunt them, but for instance I'm not a huge fan of timber company land, but I'd hunt it. I do love the plantation type hunting where it's managed. But where it's just pines for days with hard,y any food like posted its different.

I know age and nutrition is important, but genetics plays the biggest role in antler potential. Where I hunt you can let them live to 5.5 + years and the average buck will still be in the 100-110" range with the very occasional freak.