Did you ever notice the differences in quality and quantity of game in different states and provinces? It doesn't happen by accident. Game is managed, and it's easy to identify the states that put a priority on proper herd balance and trophy quality. Good genes and proper habitat aren't enough; lots of places have those, what matters is a management plan that takes advantage of genetics and habitat. Some states seem to be able to handle this, some simply fail due to politics and poor leadership.

For instance, Arizona and Nevada host the largest (on average) elk, with New Mexico once close behind, because those states put a priority on trophy quality, while still managing herds to crop cows and excess animals and keep grass-hungry ranchers happy. Arizona will tell you the bull to cow elk ratio in any given area of the state, and some of those numbers are pretty impressive, with 50 bulls to every 100 cows being reported. New Mexico got greedy and has issued too many tags and their elk herd has suffered of late.

Colorado, on the other hand, an over-the-counter elk state, kills more bull elk, but sees fewer trophy animals. Give Colorado credit, they do maintain the lands to grow elk, but the bulls seldom live past three or four years old. If you just want to kill an elk, go to Colorado, but don't expect to see those huge 10-year-old bulls. Colorado, however, does carefully limit its mule deer tags of late and trophies have been on the upswing.

Speaking of mulies, Utah and Nevada prize their trophies, and it shows. Montana is a good place to kill a mule deer, but it can't match the best, but go a bit farther north, into Alberta, and big mulies become a real possibility. Again, limited tags and attention to management prove the answer.

Whitetails follow the same hopscotch pattern. Check out Iowa, Kansas and Illinois if you want to shoot a truly old, and huge, whitetail. You don't see many non-residents flocking to Michigan or Minnesota, two states with genetic potential, because the odds of a real trophy are just too low there.

Pennsylvania deserves credit, they went to a trophy management program several years ago thanks to the efforts of a forward thinking wildlife chief who took the time to educate hunters about the real possibilities such a program held. Who knows if the program will last, because I've heard hunters are demanding to return to the old rules. Tennessee and Indiana also have made efforts to improve the quality of their deer herd. Hats off to them.

Wisconsin tried Earn-A-Buck to kill more does and improve trophy numbers, but hunters rejected it. Minnesota does deserve credit for implementing a kind of trophy management in 2005, with an experiment in select controlled units (a few parks and other areas open only to special draw limited hunts) where three- and four-point-per-side rules were implemented. But statewide, Minnesota maintains old party hunting traditions, avoids Earn-A-Buck rules, resists antler restrictions and kills too many young bucks and too few does. The result is a herd that is out of balance with its habitat, where trophy animals are rare to non-existent.

Let's face it; proper game management takes commitment from both state managers and hunters themselves. But in the states that boast the best hunting, decisions aren't left to hunters, nor are they made by legislators, they're developed and implemented by game commissions and game departments that take a leadership role. Here's hoping that you either live in one of those states, or get to hunt in one of them in '06.