Darwinisme

[m9a9g9i9c]

Ok,

just something I was wondering about here. I'm not looking to hear excuses from the trophee hunters. And I'm not pointing the finger or blaming anyone.
Darwin's theory of evolution is build on the statement that the fittest animals survive. This means the fittest animals get to reproduce and pass on their genes for future generations, so that the species survives.
If we as hunters only shoot the trophee quality animals, those who are mature and look fit and strong. Would this not upset the balance in genes, because now we take out the best animals fit for reproduction, carriyng the best genes for offspring that in turn will grow to become the fittest of the species.
Making room for the less fit animals to reproduce, thus creating generations of weaker animals.

Or do we like other predators hone the present populations into even more fit animals by culling the less smart subjects of the species ?
In my opinion we do it at a very fast rate, much faster than any other predator.
This does not mean I will give up my dream to bowhunt, it might make me want to change the idea of what I want to hunt.

Frank

[BvrHunter]

You have to much time on your hands!!!!!!

[kldad06]

This is kind of the theory of QDM though. That big nice mature buck that is 4-5 years old that has very good genetics has bred and produced many offspring that are now 2,3,4 yrs old now and are on there way to becoming nice deer and have also bred and produced offspring. You are almost classifying young to be bad genetics. There is a difference. Where people mess up is by letting that 4-5 yr old 5 pt that is all jacked up walk and shooting the 2-3 yr old 8 pt. I say mess up loosely. I don't know just my opinion, but by taking only mature bucks will make your hunting process harder for a few years and you might not even get to harvest a true mature buck. But, after that there should be lots of mature bucks and a greater likely hood that you get a shot.

[psebwhntr16]

For the scientifically and numerically literate, I remember from my undergraduate biology that the 'Hardy Weinberg Principle' illustrates the rate of large genetic changes...Do I consider a hunter allowing a small buck to walk by, only to kill a larger genetically 'superior' buck to be unnatural selection? Of course I do..It is..I'm sure Im going to be the minority on this arguement, but I've seen stacks of data and research to validate my side. Marco Festa-Bianchet of the University of Sherbrooke in Quebec and Doug Chadwick of Nat. Geo have some outstanding literature on the subject. It's not just about subtracting the biggest antlered deer from the equation. The populations actually evolve as genes are removed from the pool.

[09_bobcat]

through management, which is ultimatley selective breeding, we are producing a more fit animal. look at what happen to deer herds since the early 1900's. the population was revived to what it is now, by hunters for the most part! so if your thinking of getting out of hunting i would not reccommend it. we need all the help we can get to maintain what we have, but if you dont enjoy hunting then i dont think you should do it. just dont forget to support us when the argument comes up!

[wild at heart]

I agree with kldad06. The "trophies" that get harvested are trophies due to their age. QDM allows for us to harvest good mature deer and still allow those deer to breed and disseminate their "trophy" genes. If a trophy hunter lets say shoots and average deer at 4 yrs of age, that deer has probably already bred 40 - 50 does depending on the herd, location, buck:doe ratio, etc. Now when someone shoots a 2 yr old deer with tons of potential before he has been given the chance to breed, you are absolutely diminishing the "good" genes from the pool. I have no knowledge of the research that is referenced above but I would be willing to bet that that data is taken from predominantly publicly hunted areas where no trophy management practices are conducted and many young male animals are harvested which as I described earlier will diminish the genes. I think trophy hunting absolutely promotes good genes because it allows the good deer to live and reproduce before they are killed. Just take a look at south Texas where there are huge mature deer in an abundance because QDM is very prominent in the area.

[wis_bow_huntr]

things that make you go "hmmmmmmmmm?" you maybe onto something here. Quick everyone stop shooting trophies and shoot the spikes and forks! lol....no but really a good question on theory.

[BvrHunter]

Originally Posted by 09_bobcat

through management, which is ultimatley selective breeding, we are producing a more fit animal. look at what happen to deer herds since the early 1900's. the population was revived to what it is now, by hunters for the most part! so if your thinking of getting out of hunting i would not reccommend it. we need all the help we can get to maintain what we have, but if you dont enjoy hunting then i dont think you should do it. just dont forget to support us when the argument comes up!

How is a deer today more "Fit" than a deer from the early 1900's??? That is about the most ignorant thing I have heard!!!! And when did anyone revive their species lol..... look I agree that deer mangement and selective breeding is a why to keep a certain type of gene passed down to the next generation, thats simple science!!! But honestly, you think that your creating a more "fit" animal?? Come on now. So what the deer are all the suddon working out now or something? They still have the same basic diet and nutrition. And we are specifically talking whitetail deer.. not the Schomburgk's deer which is now extinct and once lived in Laos,Thailand!!!

[m9a9g9i9c]

forgive me my belgian ignorence but what is QDM ?

F

[boilermaker85]

Originally Posted by wis_bow_huntr

things that make you go "hmmmmmmmmm?" you maybe onto something here. Quick everyone stop shooting trophies and shoot the spikes and forks! lol....no but really a good question on theory.

the pgc does it this way!!!!!!!!!!!!!it does not work!!!!!!!