Jason N

I like Alt because he's actually doing something! How long has it been since we've had a change in the deer seasons? Who was the last biologist in charge of whitetails in this state? I don't know the answer to either of these questions.

Like Frank said, I don't like the way he's chipping away at archery season, but he's doing scientifically proven things to make the herd healthy.

While we've all sat back and let the PGC manage for QUANTITY deer in the past, Alt comes in and starts immediately making changes. He's broadened opportunity, made changes to seasons and regs, and most importantly of all....HE'S TRYING TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC.

I think he deserves a chance....especially since he's trying!

NorthJeff

Cardeer,

As of 1999 there were 21 states that had some type of QDM regulations implemented in their states, at various levels. The Dooly County expirement in GA started in 1992, with a 15" minimum spread and drastic population contol measures-it includes 5 counties. The initial approval rating was 66%, that climbed to an approval rating in the 80's within 2 years, and over 90% today.

The QDM map lists 21 states as of 1999. I don't have the map with me, but states that come to mind with some sort of QDM guidelines, are LA, IL, KY, GA, MD, AK, NJ, MI, and now PA. PA and MI were not part of the map.

MI has point restrictions varying from 2 to 3pts on a side. Approval ratings for MI have gone up each year for the different management zones.

The point with all of those states is that there is great hard data out there to support QDM, but none to dispute it. In fact, I just got off the phone with the Midwest Director of the QDMA, and he and I were talking about that we don't think that anywhere QDM has been implemented, the approval rating has gone down. I'm sure if you do some digging you will find lots of information, either from the state DNR's, or the QDM organization itself at www.qdma.com.

Protect yearling bucks, lower population to carrying capacity of land, improve sex ratios, and improve age structure-basic formula for improving the herd based on QDM. I just look at it as there is nothing else out there that is a proven system, so who are we to argue. If you look into it also makes sense.

Jeff...U.P. of Michigan.

cardeer

Thanks jeff for the info.I have one question in my head.As far as bringing the herd number in line with the available food.Why elminate deer if you can add the food sources???? And States I hunt in come to mind like Iowa,Texas,Missouri I see lots of deer maybe 40 to 60 a day in Iowa ,but yet they have awesome buck.Has to be the food source i quess. Pa. has the area for huge food sources in its gamelands. They have alot of public land,but all they do is sell the timber and dont aggressively farm it and supply the food.In my mind that would be alot better.Healthy deer and enough for everone to fill there freezer. Maybe I'm all wet,but I'm tired of seeing 5 deer a week in Pa. and there going to eliminate more.Myself and my friends almost made up our minds not even to buy a Pa. license this year.We are almost ready to lease some land in Alabama where you have enough deer to shoot one a day.Two weeks there and I can shoot more deer then I can shoot here in 10 years.Then go to Missouri for the big buck If thats your thing.I really dont care if it has antlers or not as long as it is mature and healthy.Thanks

Buck Magnet

Cardeer, that post was awsome, it just opened up an entirely new thought to me.

Do you think that the PGC wants the overall number of deer down because it is easier to manage less of something? This might stir up the pot, but just think about it. Cardeer's post was right, we could have the best of both worlds. We could have the same amount of deer overall and we could have alot more food planted on game lands. This would mean that the deer herd will be HEALTHY and it will still be large. The main purpose of Alt's plan is to make a healthy deer herd, well, give them more food and that will definetly make them more healthy. It almost seems that the PGC wants less deer in our state because it would be easier to manage with less deer. This may be a long shot, but who knows, it could be true.

I agree with Cardeer though, I don't like the idea of having the deer herd cut in half. I really love going out in the woods and seeing big bucks, but I REALLY love going out in the woods and seeing lots of deer. Give the deer more food and they will be more healthy. Think about it, what does a deer REALLY need to survive? Food and Water. A deer could live in the middle of New York city if there was ample food and water suplies around. Habitat is important, don't get me wrong, BUT I think food is much more important. That is why I still think that the PGC should plant huge food plots on Public Lands. This could actually help the PGC recieve money. You may wonder how this is, well, if the public lands have more deer and healthier deer the word will spread fast. People who didn't really want to travel to PA for hunting will because they know that they have a good chance at a nice deer. That will bring in money which could pay for the food plots. Heck, if the PGC planted a 50 acre food plot of standing corn on every State Game Land, the quality of dee would rise dramatically.

Another thing that I have been thinking, since the PGC is considering allowing baiting, why not regulate it. They don't want deer to get diseased from too many eating in one area, well, don't allow piles of corn. I think that if the game commission made it legal to bait, and baiting was defined as "hunting around/in/or near a planted food source such as standing corn, alfalfa fields, clover fields, etc..." This would mean that alot of people would try to plant food plots of corn, alfalfa, Mossy Oaks BioLogic, seed blends.... That would intern make the overall quality of deer go up.

I am fortunate enough to live in probablly the best, most UNDER RATED county for deer hunting in Pennsylvania. I am fortunate enough to see deer that are VERY healthy and in large numbers. There are State Game Lands near my house, they don't have food plots on them, but they are surrounded by corn fields and farms. The quality of deer that come off of these State Game Lands is good. I think that six or seven 8 points, and two 10points came out of their this year.

I would go as fas as to say that the PGC/Gary Alt should come to Indiana County, heck, come to my home. I will show them around. They should try to get EVERYWHERE in Pennsylvania to be an exact replica of Indiana County. The overall deer quality would be right up there with Texas, Kansas, Iowa, and Illinois.

Good Luck This Season: Buck Magnet
"Hunting is not a sport, it is a passion, it is a WAY OF LIFE"

NorthJeff

Part of the problem is that the deer herd has been so high, for so long, that some plant species will probably never regenerate. For others to come back, and for the browsed out areas of young trees to come back, the herd needs to be drastically reduced first, and then other means of sustainable herd growth can be explored.

You mentioned Alabama. A friend of mine(also a National QDM board of Director), is a professional whitetail manager with a masters in forestry, and biology. Many of the private land owners of large parcels are fencing their properties in AL. They do this not to keep deer in, but to keep deer out. Inside deer weights are doubled, population is 25% of outside, and sex ratios are 1:1.

There is a bunch of food in AL for the deer. Lots of food sustains life, though, not necessarily a quality life. Mark has fenced in properties that have total numbers of plant species in the hundereds. On the outside of the same fence, plant species are in some cases less than 20.

Except for the extreme southern portion of the Upper Peninsular, where I live in MI, the population is controlled by the severity of the winter. On an average winter we lose 50,000 fawns(50%). Those same 50,000 fawns would live in most other states, they'd just be stunted and malnourished.

In the Camp Cusino deer research facility, by my house, populations were raised and lowered drastically during a period of over 30 years. Optimum weight and antler development for all sexes was best at 60% of carrying capacity of land. Supplemental feed was used, and although the carrying capacity of the land was in the 40-50 deer per square mile, the herd was increased in various stages to almost 200 deer at one time. The deer lived because of the supplemtal feeding, but their was a substantial decrease in body weights, birthing rates, lactation rates, and antler beam diameter. Avg. fawn rates went from well over 1.5 per doe, to under .5 per doe. Average yearling weights decreased by over 20%, with only a marginal increase in population. Lactation rates and quality were decreased substantially, with poor fawn development, and increased fawn mortality.

Basically they found they could artificially increase the herd, but with major health consequances due to increased herd stress and anxiety, eventually leading to increases in disease suseptability, such as MI's Alpena area, and the TB outbreak. Carrying capacities can be increased, but to what degree?, and at the expense of what?

I live in a very forested area, with over a million acres owned and controlled by corporations-timber companies like Mead, Champion, and Shelter Bay forests. 84% of the land in the UP is corporate/public owned, and trust me, neither know how to manage for deer herds. To try and cordinate the efforts of all of them would be impossible. Most forests managed for saw timber, yeild very little for deer and wildlife, in fact a mature pine forest will yeild as little as 50#'s per acre of forage per year. Most forest managed for wildlife, yeild very little timber, especially vaneer, and a substantial board per foot amount. When you throw in the tree-huggers, who want mature forest at the expense of the wildlife, whether they like it or not, and you have a mess. For Alt to coordinate the efforts of corporate, public, and special intrest groups such as the Nature Conservancy, and others, would at best take years, and would most likely fail.

I hunt in northeast PA, near Bradford in the national forest. A few years ago some of the guys in camp were complaing about not seeing the herds of 50 coming down the hollow, in fact some would come in after opening day with only 4-5 sightings. I've always hunted and hour to and hour and a half in, so I've still seen between 20 and 40 deer per opening day. The difference with my sightings have been instead of 1 buck per opening day, I've seen 4-6 per day the last 6 years. In our camp, although we've been seeing less, we still have a 60-70% success ratio, with no spikes, increased body weights, almost half 2.5+ years old, and more points. Some of the guys in camp have had to change their hunting habits, but now we all agree it's progress, and are excited for the future.

No one can be perfect, but Alt has taken the fundementals of QDM, implemented them, and has taken the time to talk at over 200 seminars in the last 2 years. Some say it's his job, I say it's the work of a dedicated, caring individual, with a mission of progress and hope for the health of the herd, and future hunter enjoyment.

Jeff...U.P. of Michigan.

Buck Magnet

Good post Jeff. I do believe that it is hard to manage herds in a way that makes everybody happy. I will admit that it would be hard for the PGC to work with all of those people, tree huggers and timer companies.

I have a question about your post. What where they feeding the deer in the study that made the overall health of the deer decrease? I mentioned planting food plots in my last post. Wouldn't a good, quality food plot of plants that are high in nutrion help increase the health of the deer herd? I mean, if the PGC planted buckwheat, corn, Mossy Oaks BioLogic Seed blends, red clover, winter rye, white oaks, soybeans, alfalfa, chickory, chufas, lab lab, trefoil, benne, cowpeas, aeschynomene, sorghum, oats, and other plants like these, wouldn't that allow the deer to have more feed, and create a more helthy deer herd?

Good Luck This Season: Buck Magnet
"Hunting is not a sport, it is a passion, it is a WAY OF LIFE"

NorthJeff

Supplemental feeding high quality food plots definately increased the health of the herd. Although it doesn't when the population is to high. Studies have shown that planting only 1% of the available land in food plots will have an average increase of 20% in the body weights of the herd. That 20% probably wouldn't be possible in your area, because of all the available food anyways, in my area the body weight increase could even be higher, because of the lack of food. For your area, food plots would probably work best as harvest plots, with the use of natural funnels and corridors to offer great ambush sights, as opposed to nutrition plots.

The camp Cusino Deer research facility used high protein pellets for supplemental feedings, along with a limited number of small food plots. The deer actually had to be trained to eat the pellets, but when they were it was easy to catch them on the outside because they would just use the pellets as bait-none of the "wild" deer would ever be caught.

The problem wasn't the type of food, it was the herd density. Deer hate to be crowded. I have several small food plots, and get the same pictures, of the same deer, on each plot. Those deer have chosen the various field as "theirs", and there is usually alot of competition for the best food sources, even in low populations. If you increase that population, then yearling bucks, low does in matriarchal society, and their offspring, get the worst food sources. They all suffer because of increased herd stress and diminished food sources.

Deer have to have variety, and as you know, it's easier to list what a deer won't eat. With a high herd density, and the variety needed, some of the more attractive food sources can become completely eliminated due to overbrowsing, even if great food plots and supplemental food is depleted. After the 200 deer density days at the camp, there was virtually no browse available for any deer other than a mature buck. A mature buck could reach the highest available browse-around 7', and even mature does could not. It's been around 10 years since the incloser closed, and it would be very interesting to see what browse is available-I bet it hasn't regenerated much.

I've only been to central PA, from Harrisburg to Bloomsburg, and around the entire Bradford area, and from I've seen it seems there are still too many deer-just look at all the browse lines. Even the best lands can only support 50-60 deer per square mile before contributing to herd stress. If I'm seeing 25 on opening day, in a heavily forested, non-agricultural area, the deer herd seems pretty high.

Just a question, would you rather see 10 deer on opening day, with 4 bucks-even a couple of older ones, or 25 deer on opening day, with 1 buck-maybe a spike.

I feel fortunate to live and hunt where I do, there are low deer numbers and very, very few bowhunters, and I only average 2-3 deer seen for every 2 times I sit. I quess I chose the no hunter route, over the high deer population route.

Forgot something, who will take care of all those food plots if they are planted. Who will plant them? I spend hours and hours on just 5 acres of quality food plots a year(70 last year-according to my tractor, let alone my 4-wheeler), I put out 16 tons of lime last year, and have spent over a $1000 in bulldozer work in the past 3 years. Not to mention the clover that needs mowing 1-2 times a year for weed control, and the replanting needed when weeds eventually take over because of new farmland created, and the lack of funds to use effective hebacide control. The state folks are not farmers. We have clover fields by us that were cleared, planted, and then turned to weed the next year when funding ran out at the state level. You guys actually have lots of food in PA, try coming to the U.P. of MI. and I'll show you what the lack of food looks like. I can tell you it looks like spruce, tamerack, and tag alder, mixed with uneadible grasses, no nut crops, no fruit crops, no farmland, virtually no woody browse, and sand. Not many places in PA fit that description.

Jeff...U.P. of Michigan.

Edited by - NorthJeff on 03/04/2002 14:14:24

Jason N

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Just a question, would you rather see 10 deer on opening day, with 4 bucks-even a couple of older ones, or 25 deer on opening day, with 1 buck-maybe a spike. <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>

Jeff,
Unfortunately, too many people would rather see a bunch of doe that they won't shoot as opposed to seeing those couple good bucks and a few doe.

After all tradition is most important for the deer herd....right?

Jason

BTBowhunter

I'm behind Alt because his goals are for a healthier herd in balance with the habitat. What he has done so far has a basis in scientific management. He has said that this will be an evolving process and will be adjusted if mistakes are made. He even admits that some mistakes will be made!

Frank has a valid point in that Alt seems to not care much about archery hunters as a group. I don't think he's anti-archery as some in the PGC are but he's not a big ally to us either. That is something we can change by making a concerted effort to be a significant factor in his management plans by killing does in early archery season. I also agree with several of you that we need to start a push for more food plots on OUR gamelands. Many of them seem to be managed more for timber than for food and cover for wildlife. If labor for planting and seed cost are a problem, maybe some type of sharecropping program could work where a local farmer plants and harvests but leaves some standing for the wildlife.

Buck Magnet, I tried several times to email you to respond to your email but cant get it to go. Is there just supposed to be a space between your first and last name? I think Big Country told me he's having the same problem.

Buck Magnet

BT, there is a underscore between my first and last name. [email protected]

Here is something to help, put your mouse on the e-mail address, don't click, then just look down at the bottom left hand corner of the computer screen, it will say mailto, then it will give my e-mail address without it being underlined. And just incase you don't know how to make an underscore, you hit shift, then the dash key.

Here is what my e-mail looks like, just take the spaces out of it.

jason_lowmaster @ yahoo.com

Good Luck This Season: Buck Magnet
&quot;Hunting is not a sport, it is a passion, it is a WAY OF LIFE&quot;
[img]http://www.hunting-pictures.com/members/BuckMagnet7/Me%20and%20Horns.jpg&quot;&gt;

Edited by - Buck Magnet on 03/04/2002 15:41:10

Edited by - Buck Magnet on 03/04/2002 15:43:27