recurver67

PERSONAL SATISFACTION

huntnbuddy

There is no harm in managing for bigger bucks,as long as you are still having fun and eatting what you harvest. Everybody loves to kill a big buck,people who go the extreme ether way are the ones you have to look out for IMO.

Talondale

The point of QDM is QUALITY deer management. To improve the quality of all the deer in the woods. Yes, that means the does as well. Taking mature does is an important part of management as well. The point is to raise the overall quality, which means numbers and size (body and antler). It creates a win/win for everyone. Meat hunters see more deer. Antler hunters see bigger deer. Trophy hunters see more trophies and bigger ones. What I find amusing is the guys who are against QDM practices are the ones in the areas which need it the most. They are the ones saying they're lucky to even see a deer. Doesn't that make you stop and think? PA has been a by-word for hunters as far as I remember. The goal of the game department was always make sure there were enough deer for all the hunters. 1,000,000 hunters and 1,000,000 deer. Any change from that is going to make a lot of hunters upset. In VA we're more middle of the road. I see a lot of deer but it's not known for it's record book size deer. At this point though I would be satisfied shooting anything 125 or better (maybe even 110). But I'd love to be in the position of the guys in the "corn-belt" where they can afford to pass 140" class bucks. Why would anyone want to have worse conditions? Even if they were only meat hunting, I'd rather see a bunch of deer and go in the woods with the expectation of seeing deer. My question is: all you guys resisting "THE GOSPEL" of QDM , how many of you have hunted in areas other then where you grew up, or have always hunted? How limited is your perspective? I've lived in Alaska, and visited the Rockies and a lot of the east coast and I've seen a lot of differences in game, game management, and habitat. Some I would love to emulate and some I would rather not. But I have a broader perspective than my own "back yard". That SEEMS to be missing from a lot of guys on this thread, on both sides of the arguement. Now let me just say right now (although I know this will be ignored) that this isn't a "pick your own vulgar phrase for one-upmanship" contest so don't get all huffy because I said I've been all over the country (and world for that matter) and you haven't. Just accept some friendly critisism if it applies to you and disregard it if it doesn't. If it doesn't apply to you, no need to defend yourself. If it does, maybe you should admit it and consider if it doesn't play into your attitude.
As far as the more "challenging" aspect, I like a moderate challenge, but I have my limits. As far as trophy hunters lessening their challenge: flawed reasoning. If the trophy hunter had a static size goal that may be true but the trophy hunter looking for the greater challenge will now be hunting a higher class of buck. Instead of the challenge of a 160" class buck he now has the challenge of hunting a 200" class bug. It's a dynamic not a static equation. These arguements always arise when any conservation practice is discussed. As I mentioned earlier with the regulations in the Chesapeake bay with Striped Bass I heard these arguements, but now that we're experiencing the fruit of the labor everyone is singing it's praises. But we are still fighting restrictions on Blue Crab harvest. There's always pain and resistence when something is pushed forward that requires the reduction or elimination of someone's ability to do as they please. We all resist change. But good game management and common sense tells us our approach has to change if we want to see a difference. Look at the success of other attempts; wild turkeys, the overall deer population compared to the turn of the century (20th century that is, for you youngsters).

Having said all that, I still prefer it not be a legislated change. I don't like forcing it down anyones throat and hate having things forced down mine. If the state wants to take it's management practices up a notch, so be it but I think a voluntary, grassroots movement is better. I feel the government has gotten too involved for our own good in the hunting/fishing community. It started as a voluntary surrendering of our rights to pursue game as we see fit, for the over-all good. Now we are over-taxed and over-regulated. We have replaced the Forest of the King with the Forest of the State. But that's another thread.

atlasman

Now that is flawed reasoning.

You never hear anyone say......."I want a shot at a 200" deer instead of a 160" deer so we need QDM to have that chance. You always hear the same broken record about how they just want to hunt MATURE deer and with QDM there will be more MATURE deer around for them to go after........in other words it will be easier then it is right now

This is just one big trend of hunters taking the easy way out............it's nothing more then growing deer to be killed. Hunting bruisers is too hard because they are few and far between in most places so the sure way to fix that is just grow them bigger in your backyard. Requires no skill, or hard work..........just patience.

I know a guy that has about 1,500 acres of land that really only him and a couple other guys hunt. They shoot nothing but MONSTERS.........but they are home grown monsters. They just let them eat and eat off the food plots until they feel like they are big enough to go on the wall.......then they whack 'em. These deer aren't magically wise just because they are a few years older.......they can't be too smart because each guy kills an absolute brute every year. Hunting pressure+age is what makes a deer crafty..........not just age. Anyways......these are some of the nicest deer I have ever seen but IMO they are easier to kill then a 1 1/2-2 1/2 yr old that has been pushed all over the county by hunters and has manaed to escape and is now wise to humans.......and how to avoid them.

Now most people would say that this guy I know has the PERFECT QDM setup..........with his food plots, mature bucks and does under control........yet it offers no greater challenge, it requires no greater skill........just a lot of patience. Any person on this forum could go sit in one of his stands for a couple days and tag a very nice buck.........now if that is not easier then most people's current situations......I don't know what is.

Sylvan

Well I agree with your point of what the quality in QDM really means i.e. "which means numbers and size (body and antler)". These, however, are alll atributes of Quality Hunting I'd say and not necessarily about quality of the individual deer in the woods at all. Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with wanting to make it easier to kill a big buck and like I've said before if your goal is lots of big body big antlered deer in the woods then QDM, AR, PBS will help you get there. I just find it ammusing that many advocates try say its for the benefit of the deer when its benefit is clearly for the hunter. Does anybody think it makes a difference to the deer if the average age in there population is 2 1/2 or 4 1/2. Can't a population of deer where 80% of the buck are 1 1/2 year olds all be healthy and strong well fed and of good weight for their age? Of couirse they can. That's basically what we have in NY now. We have had 60 years of what the QDM guys call an unhealthy situation yet the population has gone from nothing to nearly 1 million in that time and year after year hundreds of either P&Y or B&C trophies are taken and in every district across the state. Our deer are healthy and strong and just because there aren't enough buck in that population of "trophy" age to make you happy they're still QUALITY deer.

Again, if you want to practice QDM,AR,PBS or whatever that's fine with me. If it makes it a little easier for you to get your trophy and that makes you happy then go for it. But please don't try and feed us all a line of bull about how its better for the deer. And please don't go around acting like your hunting values are somehow superior to others because they aren't. There just different. I would also ask you to consider the idea that too much emphasis on killing a big rack can be bad thing.

Double Creek

Can you say Engergizer Bunny?

It keeps going and going and going and going and goingand goingand goingand goingand goingand goingand goingand goingand goingand goingand goingand goingand goingand going[:'(]

atlasman

That was VERY well said.

Talondale

Talk about flawed logic. More mature deer doesn't equate less pressured deer. You are trying to make two circumstances that are unrelated the same. Just because the median age of deer has been raised doesn't mean that the number of hunters in the woods has lessened and that the deer don't become less wary. It just means the average deer taken will increase in size, body mass or antler. The older bucks will have had close encounters and will be just as elusive as it's younger cousin in non QDM zones.
I agree. But QDM does not reduce the number of hunters in the woods or pressure on the deer. If you can't shoot a deer until he's 2 1/2 yrs old (for sake of example) then you will have a bunch of 2 1/2 yr old deer that are tame (your claim) but after that they become a target, so any deer over 2 1/2 will have been shot at and will be just as alert and wary as any deer hunted. All QDM does is raise the average ages across the board.
"Perfect" is a subjective term. He does have a well mangaged herd. Whether it is a more challenging hunt, I doubt it. But maybe challenge isn't his desire. As I mentioned earlier, I only want a moderate challenge. I want more, better quality, deer. Which would you rather catch all day: a boat load of 1 lb. bass or a boat load of 3 lb bass? The fish all taste the same but if you can catch bigger ones, why not? If I could raise the median size of deer (antler wise) from 85" class to 125" class I'd probably shoot quite a few 125" deer with the occassional higher class. Eventually I will stop shooting even the 125" and start shooting higher class exclusively just for a higher level of challenge.
Actually I have done studies of hunting pressure on deer herds during my undergrad for Biology and a good culling plan for mature does does have a positive impact on herd health. As far as bucks, it does have an impact but it's more a population dynamic than pure health.
To the 1 1/2 year old deer that isn't shot it does.
Not entirely. Young does 1 1/2 years old or younger, that breed don't have as high a fawn survival rate as does in the 2 1/2 to 4 1/2 range and don't have as many twins. So you do set up a population decline syndrome. True QDM takes the doe population into consideration, not just the buck population that everyone focuses on.
I agree. It lessens the value of deer hunting as a whole.

No one has answered my question yet: What is wrong with having more deer, and bigger body mass, and older age structure? Who doesn't want that? Who wants deer that are a rarity and scrawny and small? Who wants a forest full of only fawns and button bucks? Given the choice, which would you prefer, honestly? It makes no sense to defend a practice that has given you a set of woods that only offers a prayer at sighting a deer and a small one at that? Again, I'm not advocating legislation but self restraint. Nothing smug, just an invitation to something better.

IL-Cornfed

Some good posts Talondale! I just can not understand WHY in the world anyone would stand against or have anything negative to say about QDM???? What part of the concept is to difficult for them to grasp? Maybe more research and questions on the QDMA's site are needed from them to embrace the idea and start becoming part of the solution instead of part of the problem???

Sylvan

I'd be curious as to how you determined the health of the deer. How large was the population that you studied and what percentage of that population did you examine for maladies? Seems to me that QDM was designed by hunters for hunters.
Not much of an anwer. Did you ask him?
The population didn't decline here in NY, in fact the herd has been expanding at a rapid rate for some 60 years. The DEC has been issuing more and more doe permits to hold it back so its pretty hard for me to buy your "population decline syndrome".
Thank you for an honest answer.

Like I've said there is nothing wrong with it as long as its value is kept in perspective with other important hunting values and traditions. But your premise is wrong at least here in NY. We have lots of healthy deer. We don't have a woods full of fawns and button bucks. Every year hundreds of trophies are taken as well. Would QDM increase that number? Sure it would but there is a price associated with it. If the bigger buck mentality (no scarcasm intended) becomes too obsesive. That is if it winds up convincing young hunters that killing a big buck is the all important ultimate end to successful deer hunting then the price is too high for me. Atlasman made a great point when he said "QDM itself is one big assumption that everyone shares the same goal". We don't, and its time for the QDM,AR,PBS or whatever advocates to accept it and stop trying to push their value on others. It's also time for them to stop the arrogance and assuming the only reason many of us oppose these things is not because we are ignorant of there benefits its because we believe there benefits don't out weigh the negatives.