HuntingNet.com Forums - View Single Post

12-01-2002 | 12:56 PM

#106

RICHIE3

Joined: Feb 2003

Posts: 548

Likes: 0

From: saint joseph missouri USA

RE: Trophy Hunting?

NMAINERON,
Please keep in mind that the original arguement or debate is about experienced hunters taking small, young buucks or not.(refering to your now 3rd to last post)
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quotequote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
By the way....still no answer to #3!

Come again?? What was it you asked that wasn't already asked by Richie?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote> I think he is waiting for you to answer the question both of us asked, but was never answered.

Oh, I forgot. You harvest small bucks because you choose to. I think I am getting it now. You are going to take care of you and yours first, right? Who cares what the consequenses are for future generations. I get your way of thinking now, so I will stop asking that question........good answer.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Yes, but you think it is for a different reason. Having more does taken in the name of "herd reduction" doesn't make sense. The next answer will explain why.

Doesn't make sense?? Your losing me here! If you want to drastically reduce the herd you target the female species. You know , the ones that give birth to one , two , sometimes three fawns each year. Much like when I was younger the does were protected (lottery tag) to increase the herd size.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

I see now. The does in your herd must be some sort of "Virgin Mary" does. Wow!! That is a miracle in itself!! I didn't know that a female deer could reproduce with out the male of the species being around??

I am truly sorry for bringing in the Blessed Mother into this debate, but this goes to show how obsurd your statement is. If there is a herd explosion that needs to be eradicated or reduced, ALL sexes of said herd would be targeted.

Take for example the the CWD outbreak in Wisconsin I think it was. They were targeting getting rid of the disease and trying to stop the spread of it. Now, how did they try to do it?? Did they try to do it by killing off the does so they could not have babies with CWD???? Absolutely not!!! They targeted all deer in sight to try to reduce the spread and possible reprodcution of infected animals. This is the same reason your "doe harvest for herd reduction" theory does not make sense.

If I send you my address, will you mail me the regualtions book or guide that states these facts of herd reduction?? Missouri has one that I mentioned earlier, that comes right out and says the reasons why we have and need a significant doe harvest program, and in not one paragraph does it state in the name of "herd reduction" or anything close to that. QDM can be put into place in areas with a lcak of herd numbers, and still work.

Remember, QDM is not just about big rack bucks. It is about achieving and maintaining a healthy herd. In cases of small herd numbers, QDM may very well mean the complete elimination of hunting all together for a few years, so that the numbers build and can be more easily managed for a healthy herd. This is something I hope will never happen, and I am doing my part in preventing it from happening.
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Yes, according to you. You must believe that their are not too many small bucks being taken. Here are some of your exact quotes.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Do you think their wrong for shooting the first legal buck that comes by"

"There are alot of us "regular ole plain vanilla brown it's down kinda guys."

"Some hunters are perfectly happy harvesting mediocre bucks while hoping someday, that huge trophy buck (you know, that rare mystical creature, the one you can't see every time you go out, due to TBM) will come by."

"If your into small racks, good for you."

Here you go again! Taking comments I made and twisting them around to look like the comment was meant towards everyone everywhere.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>
I don't see how I can be "twisting words around" when they are the every words YOU stated in earlier posts!! Did you state these facts about yourself just to deny that you don't believe what you yourself have said??? Like I said earlier, it is painfully obvious that you belive differently than I do, otherwise we would not still be debating about this subject. You believe it is o.k. for anyone, no matter what the level of experience, to harvest small, young bucks. I believe that the harvest of these young bucks should be left to only inexperienced and younger hunters.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>As for the hunter who shot the first legal buck?? I was refering to northern Wi (btw , you didn't answer that question) or places like northern Maine.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>I think you made a mistake, or it is possible you did not read my entire post. I did answer this question already. And I will pinpoint it for you.

Go back to to my post where I numbered questions #1 thru #8. It is the first response in black text after those questions. I would definately question it if it were an experienced hunter taking the small, young buck. The only possible exceptions now that I think about it, would be if an experienced hunter is in dire need to feed his/her family, like the one I need to hunt for, putting a young animal out of its misery due to sickness, unrecoverable injury, or immediate danger to his/her life or family members life, ect. Other than that, there is no reason what so ever, for an experienced hunter to tag a young buck.

If this is not the question you wanted answered, please number and post it again byitself, and i would be happy to give an answer.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Plain ole vanilla brown it's down kinda guys? That was sarcasm aimed at wolfen68. But yes! There are alot of true hunters who understand the big picture.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>Well...If this is your idea of a "true hunter", than I guess I am not a true hunter at all. I am sorry for not being a true hunter due to the fact that I am looking out for future generations of hunters everywhere, by doing my part in any way I can, to help insure a quality herd for them to persue. I guess I am missing the "big picture" all together.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>The last two quotes! Heck ya! I stand by it! Now where was it I said that there weren't too many young bucks being shot in particular?
I am not argueing at all that there are places that need drastic measures to decrease the herd or balance the herd.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>I am sure you do. Now, did you say exactly "I said that there weren't too many young bucks being shot"??? No, you did not.....But you made it quite clear to everyone, that it is O.K. for all experienced hunters to harvest small, young bucks. This is what you are implying in one way or another. You know it and I know it, so don't try to back up the truck now.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote> Well... That is a good step in the right direction, but still not the desired results. The key in this is to let small, immature bucks pass, culling out the old bucks who haven't generated any quality traits, and maintaining an equal balance of the buck to doe ratio by harvesting a sizable amount of does until the ratio is balanced and kept in check.

Ahhh , it's only a step in the right direction? So , if it's all about QDM and the health of the herd , what would hurt the health of the herd by shooting two or three does and then shooting a young buck? If the herd is out of wack then surly it doesn't matter how old of a buck you remove? Which is exactly what Bowdacious did! He shot three does and then a young buck. Whats your squabble? Is it QDM? The health of the herd? Or bigger antlers?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>You have never been so wrong in your life. QDM and the health of the herd are one in the same. Big antlers are icing on the cake, which in turn, turns some who believe in it(QDM), into trophy hunters, so that the younger bucks can move forward in developement.

Answer me this...How can a young buck have the chance to breed and pass on quality genetics to its offspring, whether they are bucks or does, if it doesnt matter what time in their life they are taken????

This is not a good scenario to put up because your theory doesn't make sense. IT MOST CERTAINLY DOES MATTER when a buck is harvested!! A buck cannot pass on quality genetics to its male or female offspring, if it is never allowed the chance to mature to breeding age!!!! I am disappointed in your response on this one.

Edited by - richie3 on 12/01/2002 13:59:40