RE: Witch Doctors Should Hunters Believe
 

Fair enough. Just for the record, what are the average DD in Brown and Pike Counties Illinois, some of those most intensively QDM manged land anywhere? Better yet, what are the DD goals on your own managed properties there?

RE: Witch Doctors Should Hunters Believe
 

Illinois DNR has far less information readily available for the public. I'll email a resident friend and see if he has any better sources for information. Here's what we do know. Recent deer harvest densities for Pike and Brown were 9.1 and 8.0 deer harvested PSM. Those are posted DNR numbers. It's pretty much a general consensus that does are not being harvested enough statewide. Doe tags are unlimited over the counter for archery and very liberal for both firearms and muzzleloaders

Contrary to what you may think, Illinois properties are not nearly as "managed" as you would think. There's very little public ground and the landowner or leaseholder is, in effect, the deer manager. Based on my own observations, theres way more seat of the pants management than anything else. Much like PA, the management varies wildly from property to property. Unlike PA, sheer hunter numbers are much fewer.

On one of our farms that just happens to be 640 acres, exactly one square mile, we have had an annualharvest goal minmum of 15 adult does and half that number as our max goal for bucks 3.5 and older.The tenant farmer estimates that he loses up to 30% of his crop to the deer and our doe kill numbers at first were simply to honor his request.We have complied and it seems to be working well. It must be noted that this particular example has huge blocks of timbered property around it that is either not hunted or is lightly hunted.

I don't claim to be a wildlife biologist but here are some observations based on 12 years of participating in one form or another in Illionis.

Antler restrictions don't exist in the part of Illinois where I hunt simply because they arent needed. Illinois huntersjust don't shoot immature bucks. It's simply their culture. I'm not sure how it evolvedbecause the practice was in place when I first went there. The average hunter expects to shoot a few does for meat and lets young bucks walk.

Having hunted there for 12 years and having had the opportunity to observe bucks of all ages in sufficient numbers, We all know that the three factors that affect antler quality are genetics, nutrition and age.Mypersonal observationslead me to agree with the experts that list the order of importance of those three as 1 Age, 2 Nutrition, and 3 Genetics.

We have also seen evidence of the striking difference in antler development based on the birthdate of the buck fawns. On a scouting, shed huntingtrip we saw a fawn being born on April 1. Unusual but not really remarkable till a localtold us that it wasn't that unusual. We have observed and several occasions, small antlered bucks that still had the two rows of faded spots running down their back. The spots were undeniable indicating that these were buck fans of the year. IMHO,the fact that these buck fawns developing antlers, however small, in their first year are an indicator of why we have had 125" class bucks harvested that aged at 1.5 years and yes, we have had that happen!

It is also interesting to note that we had one harvested here in PA last year less than a mile from my campin 2F. The buck was harvested as an antlerless deer in the early muzzy season. FWIW,The shooter was personally very unhappy about shooting the small buck but he had observed the deer for 3-4 minutes in a scope and still failed to see the antlers.) The very thin spikes measured 2" and 1 3/4" and the deer had the undeniable two rows of faded spots that a fawn loses last running down its' back. Yes it's just one deer but this phenomenon has been virtually unheard of anywhere I've hunted in PA. I take that as an indication ofimproving herd health.


Disclaimer: much of this is simply from personal observations and experience. It's up to the reader to interperet as he sees fit. I have no doubt that Bluebird will dive into this post with his calculator and come up with a post that twists and turns it around in order to make another unwarranted attack on Pa's deer management. To the rest of you, these personal notes areobservations from our little group. Nothing more

RE: Witch Doctors Should Hunters Believe
 

Based on the data you provided you are trying to harvest 21 DPSM,while in PA the average post season deer density goal was only 12 DPSM. which would have produced a harvest of around 4 DPSM. If you are harvesting around 33% of your PS deer, then before hunting season you had a DD of around 64 DPSM.

What your data shows is that QDM leases are managed at DDs that are more than triple the densities that PA is managing our herd.

RE: Witch Doctors Should Hunters Believe
 

See! I told ya!!
Bluebird has to twist it all up. Screaming Steel asks a fair question. I was reluctant to respond for good reason but the question was posed reasonably so i answered that way. Now Bluebird ignores my last paragraph, tries to oversimplify and compare two states that are HUGELY different in terms of habitat. He also ignores that our very localized specific harvest goals include deer that spill over from unhunted properties and makes a broad based declaration about all QDM properties. SS, maybe now you can begin to understand why I claim that Bluebird intentionally distorts facts to suit his agenda.




Guess what Larry? Your apples vs oranges question is irrelevant!

RE: Witch Doctors Should Hunters Believe
 

I didn't twist anything,because it doesn't matter if some of the deer you harvested come from adjoining properties , because some of the deer from your lease may harvested on the adjoining property. And it is funny that Alsheimer used the same excuse for harvesting 8-10 doe/ 200 acres.



QDM supporters make a concerted effort to hide the true DD on their leases by claiming they harvest a lot of doe. What they don't tell you is the high harvest is needed because of the high OWDD. Remember ,the DD Alsheimer reported were for Stueben Co. NY , which is just over the border from Potter and Tioga Co.

RE: Witch Doctors Should Hunters Believe
 

You are wasting your time BTBowhunter! It's useless with these guys.[:@]

RE: Witch Doctors Should Hunters Believe
 

It is only useless because you,BTB and RSB don't have the facts to support your position. All BTB can do is accuse me of lying ,while at the same time he posts data about his lease that proves QDM herds are managed at much higher densities that the PGC will allow.

RE: Witch Doctors Should Hunters Believe
 

Wrong again! I posted some specifics as related to one square mile of property and included all the facts. You chose those that suited you and attempted to turn it around.

You said:

So lets see, are the Girl Scouts on te 1000 acre camp next door suddenly going to start killing deer? Maybe the 80+ year old widow who has one grandson who kills one deer a year max on her hundreds of acres will start hunting and mow em down. Maybe the State park will start letting people hunt that 1500+/- acres thats currently closed to hunting.

Just one more example of Bluebird making up his own facts to suit his agenda.

RE: Witch Doctors Should Hunters Believe
 

"Remember all the useless studies the PGC did to convince hunters that the PGC was really concerned about the quality of deer hunting in PA. The fact that the PGC refuses to release the data from their annual surveys at deer processors tells me they are hiding something. If the data showed ARs produced a dramatic improvement in rack sizes of 2.5+ buck, that info would be screaming headlines"

I agree 100%. And i find theirlack of plastering all that "supportive data" into our faces peculiar to say the least. Especially when their plan is under scrutiny, highly suspect and they claim to be badly in need of license fee increase. One would think a license fee increase would be a bit more acceptable if more "successes" were shown instead of nothing but one failed prediction after the next.

RE: Witch Doctors Should Hunters Believe
 

Without a doubt you provided facts for your lease in Ill. which showed you managed the herd at a much higher DD then the PGC will allow. As yet you have provided no facts about the PGC deer management plan.

The fact remains that the deer you kill are on your property and contribute to the deer density on your lease. It doesn't matter if the two adjoining properties have 100 DPSM, your lease still has a DD that is over 3 0r 4 times the density at which the PGC is managing our herd.