There was a thread over on another forum that was started somewhat like this but it really got out of hand just because the the OPer put the number "150 inch" deer into the discussion and it got ugly in a hurry! Pretty sad seeing all the mud slinging but what happened basically was those hunters in areas where deer that size were either very few or non-existent started saying if they lived anywhere in the Midwest they'd have walls full of big deer as well.
So before we go any further can we use "mature" deer instead of 140-200"? Mature deer are everywhere and can sport 120" at 7.5 years old which IMO is just as impressive as 4.5 year old 170" deer. If a hunter in any place in the country can kill a mature deer thats 3.5 and up every year I'd say he's pretty accomplished. Some areas just lack good numbers of deer in the 140" and up class but should have several in mature age classes.
So before we go any further can we use "mature" deer instead of 140-200"? Mature deer are everywhere and can sport 120" at 7.5 years old which IMO is just as impressive as 4.5 year old 170" deer. If a hunter in any place in the country can kill a mature deer thats 3.5 and up every year I'd say he's pretty accomplished. Some areas just lack good numbers of deer in the 140" and up class but should have several in mature age classes.