What's your opinion! Which new hunter will learn faster?

[ODH]

High density in both scenario's. Most of the reasons are already mentioned but one more that sticks out - new hunters - takes a special person to persevere through trial and error and failure. Same reason we take our kids to the bass pond for their first time fishing, not the trout stream.

[csoult]

Higher population = more exposure

Higher population, all other things equal

A few people have said variations of this and I don't necessarily agree. I think there is something to be valued in the pressure created by each encounter in areas with few deer. More reps aren't always better.

For the sake of the debate.... would you rather fly with a pilot in a thunderstorm who has flown a thousand flights and in two hundred thunderstorms or a pilot who has flown a thousand flights but only 5 thunderstorms?

[greenhorndave]

Interesting way of putting it, CS.

I started typing a response, but Scratchman said it better than I could. So +1 on his reply.

[Rmallen]

? Idk I’ll be a statistic just moved from Iowa to MO.

[Grizzlyadam]

IMO for a new hunter to learn about deer and their behavior, it's going to happen faster if there are more deer to be observed. On the other hand, for a new hunter to learn how to find deer and get on them, it's going to take more effort, woodsmanship, etc in low density situations. Resulting in a better education in that regard.
So there are advantages to both situations but with different aspects related to hunting. As far as big buck hunting goes, I would say the same applies.

[elk yinzer]

Higher population = more exposure

Higher population, all other things equal

A few people have said variations of this and I don't necessarily agree. I think there is something to be valued in the pressure created by each encounter in areas with few deer. More reps aren't always better.

For the sake of the debate.... would you rather fly with a pilot in a thunderstorm who has flown a thousand flights and in two hundred thunderstorms or a pilot who has flown a thousand flights but only 5 thunderstorms?

Yeah, I don't know. Tough analogy to apply. Planes today pretty much fly themselves as I understand it from a cousin that's a AA pilot.

I get the argument, I fundamentally disagree that the whole situational aspect at the moment of the kill takes a lot of reps to master. I think to a degree people either have that or they don't. At a minimum it places too much importance on one aspect of the hunt. I place more value on all the scouting and decisions leading up to the kill. And I think lower deer densities present more opportunity to truly master those woodsmanship type skills. Probably the best of all is being well-rounded and hunting/trapping other stuff too.

[A5BLASTER]

The low density public land hunter. Will learn the fastest and be the better big buck hunter and killer of them all.

I have friends that grew up hunting high deer population areas. And they have killed monsters nearly every season they gave hunted.

They came down here and couldn't even find deer. Fact is they didn't learn anything from their hunts.

So for me the guy who has less, has to learn quicker too know what to look for and how to find,setup and make the shot.

[live2hunt]

Each will only learn as much as they drive themselves to learn. Goals and self motivation would be more of a factor in my opinion.

[cspot]

Neither. In this hypothetical both hunters are as dumb as a box of rocks.

[_Swamp_Stalker_]

Very interesting question! From my personal experience, I have grown up hunted a low-density deer population on public land (Strictly big/ hardwoods) since the early 90s. (If you see a deer, you have had a great day.) I have only seen one mature buck on the hoof in all of those years, and he is now on my wall. Trail camera tells the truth, they are in there.

in 2014 I went to a DIY outfitter in Illinois with a friend from Indiana I met on another forum. He had been hunting for ten years in high deer populations (mid-west farms, little woodlands), with many kills, no big bucks though.

at the DIY outfitter we had a 450 acre farm to ourselves for 6 days. We used our own stands, scouted ourselves. 300 acres was an open field, corn recently harvested. the rest was woods. I looked at a topo map and went into the woods, found hot sign and set up within a half-hour. Within two hours I saw more bucks then all my years combined back home. 120" and under. at sunset I had a 132" big boy come in from my snort wheeze. 15 yards broadside. I elected to pass because I had just shot a 129" buck back home. (The one mentioned earlier). in total the first day I saw over ten bucks.

He scouted for hours and ended up sitting right inside the woodline on the field edge. He only saw a few small deer.

The next day he spent a couple hours scouting while I was hunting. unbeknownst to me, he ended up setting up within a hundred yards of me. I got the "BBD" text from him later that afternoon. It was the buck I had passed on the previous day. 132"! (I had taken a video of him from my cellphone) I was thrilled for him to say the least!

I ended up having my chance at a 130"+ buck a few days later, but blew the 22-yard shot from 23' up, under the shoulder, just grazed the brisket.

So I had more woodsmanship and saw many more deer than he did, but he had experience from shooting so many deer that there was no error when it came down to the shot.

I'd still prefer it my way, it's not always about the kill.

[Dpierce72]

I was going to say the one who spends the most time ...but that is an 'equality'.

I'm going with 'low' as there are less chances to be strung along by smaller bucks, and it will take more scouting/trial and error for successful encounters. I say this person learns more as the process is tougher and there are less chances for distractions.

[Boogieman1]

I would say the low deer density guy atleast in my parts. High deer density attracts a lot of hunters, which means more pressure which equals less movement and smarter deer.

Most guys don't have the guts for serious low deer areas and go elsewhere or quickly wave the white flag. A new Hunter with patience can learn a lot due to sitings being so low they tend to pay more attention to why the deer was there and the timing.


Chances are the guy in the high density area would know more about family groups and food sources. But if we are judging better by results on better bucks I put my money on the low deer numbers Hunter 6 days a week and twice on Sunday!

[Crazinamatese]

The smartest learner would pack their bags and move to an area with higher density. Work smarter not harder!

[dan]

There are a lot of variables in that question. I could go either way for a number of reasons. You certainly learn more and become a better and more humble person by your struggles. But each hunter has the ability to set goals and establish struggles. I've seen a lot of hunters move up from hunting deer to hunting 2 or 3 year old bucks never grow farther because they become cocky due to their rapid growth. Attitude and mindset will be the determining factor

[Huntress13]

I say it depends on the individual.... The person that only hunts in high deer density might have trouble finding deer if he ever goes to low density area. A low density hunter wont struggle finding deer in high density. But again, the drive and determination will have a far greater impact IMO.

This.

And I think they would learn different things faster than the other.