HuntingNet.com Forums - View Single Post - NRA weighs in on AR
View Single Post
Old 02-22-2010, 07:08 PM
  #35  
glew22
Typical Buck
 
glew22's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: SE PA
Posts: 657
Default

Then tell us Glew, what scientific benefit was realized by protecting 50% (actually a bit more than that) of yearling bucks?
I think the biological benefit of protecting yearling bucks is that it promotes a more balanced buck age structure with bucks reaching maturity. To me its logical to say that a herd comprised of mainly yearling bucks is not biologically favorable because it does not mimic the natural herd dynamics that persisted prior to selective harvest.

Btw, improved odds of trophy success is NOT a scientific benefit, yet remains as the cornerstone of "questionable" deer management.
Well it's actually not one of the four cornerstones of QDM. The cornerstones are: herd management (both antlered and antlerless), habitat management, hunter management, and herd monitoring (observation data, harvest data, and trail camera data). I would also add that its not "trophy success" that qdma is after. "Trophy" is defined on an individual basis. If a kid goes out and shoots a yearling spike, you better believe that deer is a trophy. I'm just trying to make the distinction between tophy and quality. While there is overlap in their "definitions," I refer to a quality buck as one that is 3.5+yrs old. And yes, increased odds of harvesting a quality buck are part of QDM, but it is not a cornerstone, instead, it is a byproduct of managing based on the 4 cornerstones listed above.

When you are willing to advise private QDM practicioners to eradicate their deer herds for the sake of the trees, and force them to accept single digit DD, then I'll stop calling you all a bunch of antler- greedy hypocrites
I wish you wouldn't assume so much about me or my work. Fact is, I have advised the owners and hunters of a 250ac property that there is detrimentally high deer density present on the farm and in the neighboring communities; also, I have re-iterated time and time again that sustained effort is necessary from all hunters to reduce the deer density. One of the habitat management projects I plan to incorporate into this property is TSI. Unfortunately, those plans are on hold until we get a handle on the DD. It is against my morals and ethics to suggest a TSI program when I am not confident that the landowner would get regeneration of preferred species...So im guessing you're not going to call me an antler greedy hypocrite any more??. Honestly though, I don't understand how that stereotype fits...I haven't even harvested a buck since I started practicing qdm 3 years ago.
glew22 is offline