Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

Kansas VS Iowa?

Sligh1

Sligh1

Administrator
Staff member
Follow me here.... I can't see how Kansas isn't blowing Iowa away in SOME areas.....
One of the biggest troublesome spots with Iowa is the good hunting areas being almost entirely 40's, 80's, 160's and a few in the 200's ACRES. I was looking in some counties I could NOT find a tract that would control a good block over 300 acres. We have the genetics, nutrition and regulations in Iowa- no question and we have some giant deer BUT many are killed way before their prime. The BEST examples where this does NOT happen (areas that DO allow great genetic bucks to consistently reach maturity) is places like Skoronski's 3,450 acre farm, Drurys/Lindsays, Dajo ranch, The Ranch in Monroe, etc, etc - BUT the vast vast majority of the land does NOT fit into this category- simply why they have some of the best deer hunting farms I've ever seen or "heard" of - they simply BLOW AWAY every other area in Iowa, by far, their farms are just amazing and I know this. One of the BIGGEST tracts in Iowa was the Dajo Ranch (now split up) and Skoronski's- several thousand acres BUT those are incredibly rare!!!!!

OK, so, follow me here..... KANSAS also has great genetics and almost as good of nutrition- ok, in some parts maybe not as good BUT those poorer nutrition farms still seem to produce 200" deer. It seems like the SOUTH CENTRAL part of state has amazing genetics and good nutrition. Here's the key..... It's ridiculously common to find 1,000 to 10,000 acre tracts ALL over, just as common as me looking for a 200 acre tract here..... 2 examples of MANY.....

http://www.haydenoutdoors.com


Above link, refine the search by looking at KANSAS land for sale (properties) and then ONLY tracts OVER 1,000 acres- there's a BUNCH!!!

OR
http://www.whitetailproperties.com/hunting-land/results/kansas/N/500/0/100000000

I could go on with other sites like this too, this giant tracts are reasonably common, as common as our 200-300 acre tracts here.

Is the state producing far more B&C bucks we just don't hear about (many folks I know don't say a peep when they shoot a giant)???? Overall- you hear MORE about Iowa and top end bucks.

If 1000-5000 or even 10,000 acre farms are common in KS & in SOME parts of state they are (I realize the eastern part they are LESS common & you're back to over-hunted situations) like SC KS- even if managed well- these places have to be churning out TONS of mature bucks and I can't see how some of these places get a dent put in them unless 30-40 guys are hunting them- does this happen?

Skoronski's old 3450 was considered by MANY to be the BEST DEER HUNTING FARM IN NORTH AMERICA- I almost agree with that- mainly because of its size (top 3 sized farms in Iowa - contiguous acres) and management. BUT - are there all sorts of farms as good as that old Skoronski farm????? Maybe TONS as good (OR BETTER!!!?!?!?!?) all over in Kansas and maybe even Alberta or Saskatchewan????? Seems like they have the genetics, lack of people, late gun season, nutrition BUT have a huge advantage over Iowa- TONS of MASSIVE tracts in the THOUSANDS of acres- as common as the 200 acre tracts here.

See what I'm saying???? Thoughts?????

*Yes, I'm a deer hunting nerd that thinks too deep about this stuff BUT doesn't this make sense? I also have some holes in my own thoughts- KS having less nutrition, less COVER (but you can't say IA is a big cover state either- 5-7% timber), Iowa having shotguns vs KS rifles BUT all in all- I really wonder if there's something to some of these areas that could put much of IA to shame- most just don't know it. (which still won't change the fact of me hunting & owning land here- just thinking)
 
Last edited:
Interesting thread. I look forward to some of the responses, I enjoy the discussion threads.
 
Kansas has larger tracts of land, but it takes larger tracts of land in Kansas to hold the same number of deer compared to IA. Its hard to compare the two, the habitat is just totally different. Kansas is riverbottom cottonwoods, huge cattle pastures with cedar thickets, and some hardwood timber scattered around. Iowa, especially the eastern 1/2 is hardwood timber and rich, fertile soils. The biggest difference to me is that a 320 in IA holds way more deer than a 320 in KS.
 
Iowa or Kansas

Some awful big bucks come out of Kansas, so I am not sure. Personally if someone had 3000 acres in Buffalo County, Wisconsin, I think they would have the ultimate farm. I know a guy that has 240 acres and it is just loaded with trophies, so much so, that when he sends me trail cam pictures and harbest photos, I keep thinking to myself how could that be possible?
 
Ive only hunted Kansas once but have drove through it several times. It doesnt seem like they have the deer density that we do. The guys I know who have hunted there have said you really got to get out into the bigger sections to find the deer. My wife went to school down there and I was always impressed with the shear size of some of the sections. I always thought there had to be big deer out there somewhere. I would guess alot of big deer get shot during their rifle season that you never hear about. The pieces of ground might be alot bigger, but an average piece of ground in Iowa would probably have more bucks on a per acre basis than the same size piece in Kansas. I would think you would have to have alot bigger piece in many areas of Kansas to get the same results that you can get on 300 acres in Iowa. I know one thing, I have never seen so many coyotes as I did in Kansas.
 
Kansas was and is a blast to hunt just more crowded now. If you look at a map of Kanas you notice the further west you go the less towns you see on the map. In fact there is a county in SW kansas that doesnt even have an incorporated city in the entire county. More cows than people and it takes more acres to support those cows. The deer in general see less pressure on this huge tracts of land and grow older and wiser. I have hunted Kansas a few times and it was fun lots of action on the private ground I hunted, I havent been down there since they opened the flood gates on NR tags so I am sure it has changed in pressure for sure. In fact the private farm I hunted is now leased out to NR, I had no interest in paying for hunting right on a farm 8 hours from my house that I only go to once a year, no thanks. Back on track here I think Kansas produces giants do to the lower pressure and higher age structure of their herd bucks live longer and fully mature.
I think Iowa has more smaller tracts as there used to be many, many small family farms in the state and the family only owned what they could maintain on their own, Im talking early ag days before big combines and tractors. Gradually Iowas farms have gotten fewer and fewer but bigger so I think you will see some bigger tracts of ground in the future, at least farmground anyways. Hunting land I see that getting smaller tracts. On a side rambling note about Kansas what percentage of those huge tracts is quality habitat? It would be interesting to compare the two states of average acre per acre of quality habitat on a given tract of primo hunting ground.
Done rambling now
 
I'll weigh in with no first hand knowledge really on Ia or Ks but b/c the original post mentioned Ab and Sk so I can throw a bit more light on them.

Truthfully I have zero knowledge of who or what the Skoronski farm is or was nor the Dajo ranch so I can't even speculate about their rank or any other property in Ia or Ks for that matter. Ab's and Sk's best whitetail areas are very similar in terms of habitat. Major differences between the two are 1) pressure 2) outfitters 3) Forested areas
1) Ab simplay has more people therefore there is more pressure on the available private lands.
2) Like in many states outfitters control a good portion of Ab's private lands which have displaced many residents to pulic lands and even across the border into Sk where access is still easy for a stranger to get. In Sk outfitters only operate on Indian reservations or Public lands so private lands have not been lost to outfiters and big money.
3) Ab has far more extensive gas/oil exploration going on in their forested areas than Sk. The reclamation of access roads, gaslines etc with clover and or alfalfa has created an available food source in the forest that is better than that of the forested land across the border to the east. Creating food sources in these areas, though not with the intention of bettering deer hunting has created better nutrition for Ab's forest deer along with making hotspot areas for hunting because of their ability to draw deer to certain food sources.

Like everywhere North America Sk's farm size avg has been steadily increasing as the small farmer sells out and the big farmer gets bigger and huge tracts of land belonging to one owner or family are quite common. I personally have access to 4 or 5 farms that range in size from 1500 to 4500 acres in size. All of those properties are viewed only from the standpoint of the working cattle farm by their owners, deer are just animals that cut down on their forage producation.

Like I stated earlier I have no knowledge of the farms considered to be the best but I'd confidently guess they are managed for deer as much as for the farm revenues where that tends to not happen north of the border. One of the mentioned farms that I hunt has turned out 5 200" bucks (that I know of) in the past 10 yrs, another half dozen in the 190's, a bunch of 180's, and so on with the number of bucks increasing as the number of inches decreases. The actual number of great deer taken of that particular farm is a guess however as access is available to a great number of people including numerous Ab and British Columbia residents who each yr drag their bucks back home leaving the list of bucks taken off that particular farm as a guess at best. I have no idea how a farm like that, unmanaged for deer, would stack up against any farms that are. I just know that I am very fortunate to be able to access such a property and would guess that there are many farms throughout SK that would be as good as that particular one a couple miles down the road from my house.

I'd also speculate that both IA and Ks have a leg up on both Ab and Sk in terms of nutrition. Simply put, the best whitetail areas in AB and SK are forest fringe areas where access to agricultural crops is present, it is just not as beneficial as something such as soybeans as it is usually alfalfa, cereal grains, or canola. Winter is also a nutrition related issue. We currently have about 30" of snow on the ground and have had snow since Halloween, that is common every yr. The lack of quality food for periods of 5 months or more HAS to have an affect on the quality of antlers the deer crank out in the summer. On the flip side, the available escape cover is huge and a great number of bucks live to be an old age, many likely dieing of natural causes so that in itself may be enough to cancel out the poorer available nutrition. Also as mentioned when comparinf Ks to Ia the deer numbers in Sk would be far less on avg per square mile than Ia, I truthfully wouldn't know about AB but would guess it to be the same

As for the mentioning of bucks one never hears about, I bet that happens everywhere. I know for certain I do not hear about every good buck taken around here much as many of you people could also say about your area. One thing I do know for sure is that when a great one is taken in any state and it becomes public, every state hears about it. The same cannot be said about Canada, every yr I see and hear the stories of several monster bucks shot in Ab or Sk that I know do not become part of common knowledge in the hotbed of whitetailed deer talk that the Us is.

I could go on and on and discuss season lengths, weapons etc. but I am sure I've rambled too much already to be keeping anyone's interest.

Good post Skip, fun to discuss such things and learn stuff about dff't areas. I know that someday I'd like to hunt Ks and Ia just to see how they compare to right here at home but also realize that due to the way things seem to be progressing across the US that by the time I am able to persue that dream, I'd have as much luck getting access to anywhere worth the time, distance and $ as a snowball has in you know where.
 
i just came back from shed hunting central kansas. first time ever there and didnt find many but managed to find the one guy out there that does shed hunt and he had alot and some danddys. talking with the locals though i guess the res tag is good for mulies or whitetails and they all try for mulies and only shoot whitetails if they are giants. one guy i talked to had a 194 and a 186 among other giants hanging on his garage wall and he bow hunts but from what he said only people that really bow hunt are non res. very different terrain from home!
 
Sligh1 said:
*Yes, I'm a deer hunting nerd that thinks too deep about this stuff BUT doesn't this make sense? I also have some holes in my own thoughts- KS having less nutrition, less COVER (but you can't say IA is a big cover state either- 5-7% timber)
Click to expand...

Yeah, Iowa as a whole only has 5.6% timber but the really good hunting areas have a significantly higher percentage of cover. This is a little misleading as there are parts of the state that hardly has a tree and other areas that are dominated by timber and cover.

Are the places in Iowa that have 5% timber our best deer areas? What about the areas that are 50% timber/cover?

To look at it the other way, how good are areas in North America that are 95% timber?
 
5.6% timber STATE WIDE- yes and most of that cover is in Southern, Eastern and some small strips in Western IA. There's areas where I drive through each week where I drive past 20 sections and look as far as the eye can see and see ZERO deer cover, not saying there isn't a few deer here and there BUT there's DEER DESERTS for sure in IA. Now, every state is like that though, Kansas has deer deserts, Illinois has deer deserts, michigan (MI probably has 40% timber or more- GUESS), etc. BUT, take like Illinois, I think it at least triples for timbered area (if not, far more). Kansas might be ABOUT the same as IA. some areas I hunt are 40% timber & I've seen the same in Kansas (I hunted NE Kansas) but KS probably has less good cover. Those forested areas in IA condense the hunters and pressure but have the best hunting & highest deer numbers.

Many areas I hunt in IA have averages of around 50 deer per square mile. I've hunted a few with over 100 deer per square mile. N.E. KS maybe had 30 deer per square mile. I have NO IDEA the deer densities in SC KS where these GIGANTIC TRACTS exist???? Or Alberta or Saskatchewan- sure sounds like less BUT I sure here lots of stories about FOOD SOURCES in Canada being incredibly packed with deer & numbers. Most areas I hunt in Iowa do not have VAST amounts of bucks dying from old age, too many get killed at 2.5-4.5 - before they reach full potential. Seems other areas like KS, AB, SK have a huge advantage on that level. We sure have a lot of other top notch things going for us in IA though. I read all your above posts- great posts guys, very interesting stuff!!!
 
Good discussion for learning stuff about respective landscapes and areas of the world if nothing else. I can't speak for Ab in regards to deer densities. I know we have an estimated population of around 400000 whitetails which is and avg of a bit under TWO per square mile. However that avg is figured out over the entire province in terms of size. Truthfully, if you get more than 60 miles north of me you'll have a tough time finding a huntable population of deer, much further than that and the only hoofed animals walking are moose, woodland bison and caribou. With that figured in I'd suppose the avg deer density nearly doubles to around 4 per sq. mile. Like anywhere there are higher concentration areas.

Stories of extreme numbers of deer on food sources in Canada would be indicative of the location and time of yr. Any sort of grain crop that does not come off is going out draw huge numbers of deer in any area with good deer numbers. If such a food source exists in the winter in an area with big timber then you'll draw 100 sq. miles of deer into one tiny area making the numbers seem higher than they are after they disperse back into traditional ranges outside of the winter stretch.

I'd guess that what Iowa lacks in terms of large farms and possibly timber, they mae up for in food. Nutritionally deer there are leaps above the ones in the forest fringe areas of SK. Again, just guessing, that deer in such spots as Ia and Ks are able reach a point at 4.5 in terms of avg. antler growth what may take a northern SK buck 6.5 yrs to reach.

On the flip side, SK is as good a spot as anywhere for a buck to reach old age due to the habitat and the fact that there are fewer people. SK has less than 4 people per sq. mile on avg as opposed to 54 for Ia and 35 for Ks. I don't know how many people hunt Ia or Ks for whitetails each yr but I am sure that it is likely higher than the 40000 or so that buy a whitetail tag here each yr.

Lots of diff't things to think of when looking at all places for sure. I would venture a guess to say that most people on the planet who hunt whitetails would be happy to hunt any of them 3. Sorry if I have veered away from Ks vs Ia Skip.
 
SaskGuy said:
Sorry if I have veered away from Ks vs Ia Skip.
Click to expand...

NO- I really should have titled it- KS & CA vs IA- I LOVE hearing about Canada & understanding it. Those are the 2 other areas I think have the possibility to churn out MORE top end freaks VS Iowa - KS & Canada.

In ANY other state, you run into MORE problems than IA has, even smaller chunks owned, more hunters, often more poor nutrition (vs IA) or all of those combinations.... Illinois - great nutrition & cover BUT too much pressure & smaller land owners than IA- way more 2.5 to 4.5's being killed on avg VS IA, Ohio - smaller land owners, more hunters, not quite the nutrition- , WI more hunters, not quite the nutrition AND earlier gun season, NE - early gun season with rifles, less nutrition. I could go on and on and on. Canada & KS are my top contenders for places that rival the quality and potential that IA has, sometimes I think with all the ups and downs of each- those places are VERY ATTRACTIVE TO ME FOR TOP END MONSTERS!!!
 
Just not as many deer, if residents were allowed to shoot 2 bucks a year like Iowa, the buck herd would be wiped out. Also, don't know how much of a problem poaching is in Iowa, but in central and western Kansas, poaching is a HUGE problem -- just nobody around to catch the scumbags. Some speculate just as many deer are taken illegally as legally, just speculation though. IF Iowa adopts Kansas' liberal deer regulations, your logic will become more valid. Bigger tracts will help Kansas then. One more thing, I don't know if you've been in western kansas much, but saying the cover is sparse is an understatement, when you do find deer though, you find a bunch; and that land is usually leased for lots of $$$. You would be mystified to hear of some of the lease prices for riverbottom ground around Garden City -- it's UNBELIEVABLE!!! The locals do not deer hunt anymore...
And mulies can no longer be hunted with just any either sex deer tag anymore, resident or non-res., the muley population has taken a real hit in recent years.
 
As a resident land owner in Iowa we are allowed to kill 3 bucks legally.
If every hunter who may own 80 acres is shooting 3 buck a season....you have a problem.
In Kansas with the huge ranches 800+ acres they are allowed 2 bucks.
Do the math.....If Iowa doesnt get off the 3 buck law per resident hunting land owner, in the next 10 years 150 inch bucks will be huge bucks in most places away from the Skoronski's type places.
The DNR sometimes doesnt look at the end result when so liberal with tags for so many years.
As Sportmans of Iowa we need to police ourselves and be happy with one buck per season. This will drastically improve the age class of bucks seen everywhere.
 
bowhuntia said:
As a resident land owner in Iowa we are allowed to kill 3 bucks legally.
If every hunter who may own 80 acres is shooting 3 buck a season....you have a problem.
In Kansas with the huge ranches 800+ acres they are allowed 2 bucks.
Do the math.....If Iowa doesnt get off the 3 buck law per resident hunting land owner, in the next 10 years 150 inch bucks will be huge bucks in most places away from the Skoronski's type places.
The DNR sometimes doesnt look at the end result when so liberal with tags for so many years.
As Sportmans of Iowa we need to police ourselves and be happy with one buck per season. This will drastically improve the age class of bucks seen everywhere.
Click to expand...
"If every hunter who may own 80 acres is shooting 3 buck a season". I think that statement says it all! I don't believe 5% of the landowners are shooting 3 bucks a year. Probably less than 2%. As long as we have limited public ground to hunt, and the liberal doe seasons for everyone; i see nothing wrong with 3 buck law. This gives the landowners the option to hunt longer; not necessarily harvesting more. Take hunting options from the landowner, and you'll lose hunting options for the nonlandowner.
 
I am Not trying to loose hunting options for land owners,
Just trying to make people think and police theirselves before shooting even 2 bucks per season.
I to like hunting all the long seasons, my doe hunting keeps me doing that, I also know many people shooting 3 bucks and this doesnt count for the ones hit and not recovered.
All i am saying is more upper class deer would be around if we all police our own actions rather land owner or non land owner
 
I haven't done research on Iowa deer densities in a while but I can speak to KS. I hunt some very large pieces in KS. If i have friends come in to hunt with me, I tell them that they should plan on almost half of the bucks they see being shooters. (Sound good so far?) But the kicker is that there are only about 8 or 9 deer per square mile. This means that you can hunt hard and have days where you only see a couple of deer. I think the percentage of deer that are big mature bucks is every bit as good here and IA but there are just FAR fewer deer and they are much more spread out. If i were to guess, I think it probably takes 2500 acres here to hold the same number of mature bucks as an 80 in southern IA.
The other aspect here is the distance a rutting buck will routinely travel. I hunt some properties that are 5 miles apart on the same river bottom and it is not at all uncommon to see the same deer one both properties on consecutive days during the rut.
I love to hunt both states but if I had to pick IA or KS, it'd be IA all day long.

Matthe
 
glasgowm said:
I tell them that they should plan on almost half of the bucks they see being shooters.
Click to expand...



See, that's frickin' huge, I agree with you and I believe you that many bucks you see are shooters, I've heard that MANY times over. In all honesty, I've had FULL DAYS in IA where I've seen around 30 bucks+ (more during ML season) and usually 1 or 2 are shooters. Sure, I pass up 4.5 year olds and finding a shooter is tough BUT to have 1/2 the bucks be shooters, that's incredible and fully has to do with low pressure and how vast the areas are out there. The low deer #'s BUT giant buck sightings sound like some of my buddy's experiences in northern Canada as well- very similar. Thanks for feedback!

We police ourselves in IA quite frequently (I personally NEVER shoot the legal limit) but in areas with too many hunters, it's very hard for deer to get to maturity when many of them are getting shot at 3.5, etc. A piece of land might get hunted by die-hard deer managers that pass up 3.5-4.5 year old bucks and ONLY take 1 or 2 bucks BUT.... When the orange army shows up, does a drive and shoots 6 bucks (vast majority NOT at full maturity) in 60 minutes- it really destroys an area. I have seen this all over the place, many examples like that.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom