Well, over the years I have learned to set realistic expectations on my hunting property. I choose 140+. I generally get 4 or 5 bucks on my trail cameras that score over 140 each season, but hardly anything over 150. Last year I ended up shooting the biggest buck I had on my trail cams. He came in at 148 5/8" He's mounted and hung on my wall and looks pretty darn big compared to my trio of 120ish bucks I have. I know that there are bigger bucks living within a mile of me, but they have never showed up on my trail camera. Had a friend shoot a 170+ less than 1/2 mile from me in his 60 acres of solid timber. Had another friend shoot a 160+ on the property next to that one. Both shot last year, less than a half mile from me. I saw neither on any of my trail cams.
Where I live and hunt we don't see a ton of 120" or bigger deer because the gun clubs come down and pound the woods hard during gun season and a legal buck is 3" or better so they shoot everything!! Me personally I don't shoot anything unless it has three on one side. Would I love to kill a monster buck every year? Absolutely!! But it isn't always in the cards so I really try to stick to 3 on one side or better because nobody else does and hope one of those smart old boys gets stupid and walks by my stand during bow season!! I am picky compared to most people in my neck of the woods. I passed up on ten different bucks last year and was able to harvest two decent bucks for our area! My first velvet buck and a decent late season 6 point.
Most will say it's in the eye of the beholder but for me and knowing the potential our hunting area has I put it at 160-170 for a BIG buck.
I tend to usually think a deer on my camera is bigger than it actually is. So when I see a buck on my camera I usually give it far more credit than what it is actually worth and I rarely if ever cross paths with these said "monsters" when I am on the stand... That is my qualifier as to why I selected 150". For all I know I've never had a 150" buck on camera... I've usually laid claim to having at least one 150" buck per season.
I also went with 140+ but as others have said, that number can vary based on other factors. On one of the farms I hunt a 130" deer is pretty good. Some of our 4, 5, 6 year old bucks may never even break 140". On the other farm I hunt there's routinely several 130" 3 year olds running around so "big" becomes a little higher number.
The one that gets my heart racing when he's stepping into view. I don't focus on numbers, honestly. If we are putting the definition to pure inches, in PA, to me, a big buck is anything 120" or over.
I would say anything 130-140 would be a big buck around here. We have a few giants killed or found dead within the last few years that would go 190+. So there is always a chance something like that will step out of the wood works. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I also voted 140+. For my area, that is big. But when I went to IL - knowing what they had - 160+ was considered big.
I am in the 140+ crowd. A lot of things factor in to the choice of shooting a buck. Anything thats 4 yrs old and over 120 is probably a shooter for me
i selected 140 + but than again i never really see that caliber in NY much unless i travel upstate and backpack into the mountains to camp and hunt!!!
Would probably be 140+ for BIG. Hell... I hunted with my rifle for 11 years before I finally had a chance at the 120" deer in my profile picture.
For my area and me personally, a 120"-130" buck is a big buck. I've seen one of the hoof while hunting so far over 130".
I like to say what I think so I am not surprised if I get a dislike once in a while but didnt think I would get one for saying what I thought a big buck was.
