Collapse bottom bar
Deer of the Day Trophy Bucks

Robert Gramoll: 202-Inch Wisconsin Possible Record-Breaker

by North American Whitetail Online Staff   |  December 7th, 2012 4

Hunter: Robert Gramoll
State/County: Wisconsin/Juneau County
Score: 202 1/8 inches, green score
Gear: Remington Model 7400 .30-06 auto-loading rifle

Persistence wins the day.

Just ask Robert Gramoll, who thought about packing it in early on the second to last day of Wisconsin rifle season, having been shutout to that point during bow and rifle seasons. A couple of buddies told him to stick it out, which he did. It was a decision he won’t soon forget.

That day he struck whitetail gold, spotting what was clearly a wall-hanger approaching through the woods. At about 75 yards the monster buck spotted him and turned to run, but by then Gramoll had touched off a shot with his Remington 7400 .30-06, dropping the buck dead in its tracks. When he got to the buck, he finally realized what he’d shot—a 202 1/8-inch monster that beat out the previous county record for typical deer by six inches.

“I was hunting with my boss on his property, and when we walked up to the deer, our mouths dropped. We couldn’t believe it, we were both in shock,” Gramoll said. “I’ve been hunting my whole life and never seen a deer like this. It’s like winning the lottery.”

According to John Ramsey, a scorer for the Wisconsin Buck and Bear Club, Gramoll’s buck will most likely be the new Juneau County record and place top 10 in the state. All that waits is the required 60-day drying period, but according to the Star Times, Ramsey believes it will be more than enough to take the top spot in the county.

As for Gramoll, it was all about being at the right place at the right time. When he was met by a crowd of onlookers at the town general store, several landowners had trail camera photos of the deer in velvet. But in the end, Gramoll was there when it counted. He battled through the season, as he had many, and was rewarded.

“At first I was so discouraged, I just wanted to go home. We hadn’t seen a damn thing during bow and rifle seasons,” Gramoll said. “But you know I stayed, and that kind of says it all. I’ve been real blessed with this monster buck.”

  • Bill Gibbons

    The article "Down to the Wire" in the latest issue of NAW had several factual errors by author PJ Reilly and contributor Bernie Barringer. The table listing composition of corn and soybeans is so inacurrate that it is comical. Corn contains 70% carbohydrates, not 19%, and also contains closer to 8% protein rather than 3%. The claim that soybeans contain 13% protein is equally inaccurate, as they actually contain 35-40% protein.

    I expect NAW to do a far better job in reviewing submitted articles for factual content, especially such commonly known information.

    Bill, South Dakota

  • Patrick Hogan

    Mr. Gibbons,

    Thanks for your interest in NAW, and thanks for taking the time to post your concern about the accuracy of the data in our December issue.

    We built our chart based on data provided by the United States Department of Agriculture's National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, which is available for your perusal at

    Keep in mind that we are using nutrient data consistent with raw, uncooked, unaltered agriculture products, like sweet, white, raw corn and green, raw soybeans. The process of cooking these agricultural products will decrease the moisture content and, therefore, increase the PERCENTAGE of protein, carbohydrates and fat in the remaining product.

    I think you'll find that the data contained in our chart is consistent with that of the USDA's official nutrition research on raw agriculture products.


    Patrick Hogan
    Editor, North American Whitetail Magazine

  • Bill Gibbons

    Patrick,__ Thus I'd suggest you include a correction in a future edition. One way to do this would be to just publish a correct version of the table, using appropriate data for yellow corn (report 20014) and mature soybeans (report 16111). These would be accurate for the in-field composition for the timeframe the article is written. I'd also suggest providing the data on a dry matter basis, as that is what is assumed when a % moisture value is not included.__I am a research scientist, so perhaps might be a little overly concerned, since NAW is not a peer reviewed journal. However, most of your readers in the Midwest would realize the gross inaccuracies of the corn and soybean numbers presented. __Bill Gibbons

  • Bill Gibbons

    Patrick,__Thanks for responding. I had to split the messages, and the second part got sent first. I looked at the usda website and you are correct in the numbers cited for sweet, white, raw corn an green raw soybeans. However The title of the table (late season salad bar) and the content of the article (late season hunting) obviously implies a Nov/Dec timeframe. The corn and soybean data provided in the article would come from the crops in July or maybe August. __Bill Gibbons

back to top