Rob in VT

vtbuckrulrss,

Being from Vermont also, I have to respectfully disagree with you on several items.

First, the 2002 VT Deer Harvest Report states that of the bucks harvested in VT during the rifle season, 60% were 1.5 year old deer. Can' t remember what the % was for 2.5 and 3.5 year old bucks were, but 4.5 year old and older was less than 5%. They don' t have a chance to mature and grow up. I have two shed found behind my house by my father-in-law in 1958 and 1959. They are of a 160 class buck. The genetics are here, it' s age that our bucks are lacking.

Secondly, the state claims that we have between 140,000 and 150,000 deer - as you stated. I don' t buy it. I think our current population is much less. They also claim the our buck to doe ratio is 1:3. I have an even hard time believing that. I' m sure in some places it could be, but not the state as a whole. And especially not in central Vermont.

Next is the whole QDM issue. I am all for it and have begun working towards it on my property. I am the Habitat Chairman of our local NWTF Chapter. Habitat is a hugh issue. The deer yards need some serious help in restoring the browse. We really need to put some money into the yards for the future of our sport. I personally have begun to put in food plots on my property. From liming the hay fields for better production, to planting clover, corn, buckwheat, and winter rye, to planting crab apple trees which hold their fruit throughout the winter months, berry producing shrubs, and selective timber harvesting for regeneration of the forest. Every little bit helps. If the deer can make it through the critical Dec - March time period with a little extra nutrition, they can begin the spring healthier. This means larger and stronger fawns. More milk produced for the fawns from a fat healthy doe. Larger bodied bucks, and yes larger antlers.

It hard to let a spike horn walk (but I do anyway), when it gets whacked after it leaves my small 95 acre track of land. I also believe the state of Vermont should limit the buck take to 1 per year instead of the potential of 3 bucks. This is part of the reason when NH and Maine have such nice deer taken each year.

Ok, so I am a " meat hunter" . By all means shoot a doe during archery season. Heck, shoot two during archery. Take one more during muzzleloading if you draw an antlerless permit.

As was stated earlier, food plots are more than a place to kill a deer. It turns into being a passion and an obsession. You try to give back to the wildlife you love to watch and pursue. They are not only a place to hunt, but a place to observe, and a place to bring children so they can experience the same thrills we do when we see a deer or turkey or moose or bear.

Good luck this year and I hope we will enjoy hunting in the Green Mountains for many years to come . . . Rob

NorthJeff

Rob,

Enjoyed your prospective of the great state of Vermont. It' s always interesting to hear about the variety of management tactic that can be employed around the country to produce a solid QDM plan, but it seems your area and mine, although pretty far apart, seem very similar.

Good Luck with all you projects, and " fun work" . It' s very rewarding isn' t it!

Jeff...U.P. of Michigan

vtbuckrulrss

hey rob, we are practically neighbors, i am writing this from barre. i am right now looking at two things to answer some points that you brought up. one is the deer harvest report that you have, and the other was sent to me by john buck, for those reading this, john is the head deer biologist here. this is a paper regarding qdm and vt. in the second report, i do not have the author, so i don' t know if it was john who did this or not, it talks about the age class here. it states that " harvest and age data indicate that about 50% of vermont' s buck' s are 2.5 years and older." first page of the 2002 report states the age distribution of examined bucks during 2002 were 53% yearlings, 29% 2.5 year olds, 15& 3.5 year olds, and 3% 4.5 years or greater. so when i said that mature bucks, i guessed accounted for 47ish percent of the harvest, i was close. having for a few years in this area, having moved from waterville, and done a lot of hunting in the walden, hardwick, stannard area, i think the amount of deer, and ratio, is correct. what many people forget is that when a biologist states the ratio to be 1-3, they are talking about adult deer, those that are 1.5 years old, and older. they do factor in the yearling doe population, which is what we see, but of course that would be a different number, if we did that, yearling bucks would need to be added in too, which should still give us mathematically about the same ratio. i can' t say that i have ever had a problem seeing deer here during hunting season, maybe just not as many bucks as i would like to see. as for the central vermont numbers, check the stats on the reportplainfield had a nice 1.99 bucks per square mile reported, with a total of 3.69 per square mile killed, montpelier4.00 and 18.40, amongst the highest in the state, e.montpelier, 2.84 and 5.59, etc. our area has been producing some nice numbers of deer, and large ones, too. as for deer yards, i can' t say much, but from what i have seen, since my folks live in a deer yard, and the surrounding area roads, rt 15, 109 and the hogback in johnson are deer yarding areas, i have yet to hear of anyone finding very many dead deer from starvation in there, the only dead ones seen , it seems like, come from vehicle collisions. if you wish to enact qdm on your property, go for it, many of the guys here have told me that it is a rewarding experience, but if you do decide to do it, and try to help push it through in certain areas, i have to say two things, one, if you truly want qdm, realize that limiting us to one buck a year will not work towards this goal, and two, that i detest, makes me want to puke, the thought of any state implemented qdm regulations, and i have enough studies on it that i will fight this all the way, it isn' t needed or wanted in this state, as we are well within acceptable limits as to age, sex, and habitat structures. we do not have a population large enough that we should worry about it. i too hope to enjoy hunting here for many years, without any state mandated regulations other than what we have. i, too am a meat hunter, like you, and that is what i am more concerned with, not what grows out of an animals head. and, after attending the montpelier meeting this spring,( if you were there, i was the one who asked for the recipe about cooking horns, still waiting for the recipe from someone) got the feeling that many, not all, of the people attending, who were for qdm, flat out are too damn lazy to go back in the woods, and find the quality deer they are looking for. it' s called hunting for a reason, they need to get out in the woods more to get what they want. i saw a study once that stated that most hunters go less that 200 yards into the woods, perhaps if they did, the would see the larger animals they are crying for. also, nothing against you, if you wish to let a spike or small four go by, yes it is hard, more power to you, for your goals are different than mine. i will drop that deer in a new york minute, for i need to fill/want to fill my freezer.

vtbuckrulrss

sorry, to throw some more numbers out there, during archery season, out of 654 2nd deer shot, 24% were bucks, so that is roughly 27 extra bucks shot there, and only 1% of all archery hunters bagged 2 deer. only 338 people harvested 3 deer, of which at least one was a buck, during all seasons combined, or less than 1%

NorthJeff

VT,

I think you are missing the point of QDM. You say your numbers, age class, sex ratios, and habitat degredation is under control.......Do you realize you and your state is already following QDM for this to happen?!

Again, that' s all QDM is, and if you are already there, you are already following it.

So looking at it from the outside:

You ALREADY have a successful QDM state, your state ALREADY has a harvest strategy that promotes QDM, you ALREADY participate in your states current management plan that promotes and sustains QDM.......but you detest QDM?![]

You are already follow QDM and don' t even know it. Thanks for your support!

See the irony?!

Jeff...U.P. of Michigan

vtbuckrulrss

northjeff, i HATE you!!!!!!!!!!!!!lol, yes, from what i have read, we do seem to have all of the pieces put into place, and could be under the defintions of qdm already( god i hate admitting i' m wrong), we just don' t think of it that way. i believe that many people do, in fact, confuse qdm with trophy deer management, another thing i don' t care for. that is the program i truly dislike, because to me it seems that we are taking away the reason many of us hunt, for meat, and put too much emphasis on what a deer can grow out of it' s noggin. tdm seems like to me, could in the end, give hunters a black eye. i do have a question for anyone out there, though. according to qdma, and others, when a true qdm plan is put into place, being called by it' s name, such as in pa last year, the amount of posted land, and pay-per-kill areas, will increase. has anyone experienced this personally? our land here is posted enough, i can' t imagine what the hunting would be like if even more land were to be posted.

Deleted User

[Deleted by Admins]

NorthJeff

VT, always glad to be hated!

I think in general, where you have quality hunting, whether it be state mandated, group or individual initiated, or just plain luck, tresspassing is even further frowned upon.

I' m a real estate appraiser by profession, and there is definately a trend towards paying a premium price for great deer property. Couple that with the fact that prices per acre, compared to wages, has increased so dramatically over the past 20 years that land is simply far too expensive to own, pay taxes on, take care of, to have some low life tresspasser come in and take advantage of you.

I personally, from when I was 4 years old and was required by my mom and dad to go to the local neighbors at the pond and ask for permission to fish, with signed index cards, NEVER stray on someone elses land unless I ask first, especially to hunt or on purpose for that matter.

Around here, just 13 years ago, and 80 acre parcel was 1/8th of my dad' s 1990 salary. When he retired in 2000, and 80 acre parcel was EQUAL to my dad' s 2000 salary. Taxes are also reflective of property values, so not only has the cost per acre increased substantially, but taxes have as well.

I guess bottom line: The more it' s worth, either in quality or price......the more you care!

VT, by the way, does that mean you' ll become a member of the QDMA now!, since your an ardant supporter and all!?

Jeff...U.P. of Michigan

Rob in VT

Do you live in Barre? I work in Montpelier. Small world isn’t it!

Ok, counter points . . .

As far as the harvest results go, whether it’s 47% or 50% 1.5 year old bucks taken the point is that I feel it is too high a number. They are not mature animals. I know many people don’t care which is why they get shot in the first place. It’s a vicious circle. People shoot the first buck they see because there is a good chance it will be the last buck they see in a season. If everyone passed on 1.5 year old bucks, we would be seeing more bucks, which in turn could result in seeing more mature bucks.

I also realize a very small percent of people take more than 1 buck in a year. Again the point is if you are only allowed one buck a year, when you draw on the spike during bow season you may not release that arrow because you will be all done for the year. You may decide to wait for a larger animal, which in turn could help young bucks mature.

Buck to Doe Ratio – sorry but I still don’t buy it. 1:3 would be awesome for places like Texas, Illinois, and Saskatchewan. It’s not even close in Vermont.

As far as bucks per square mile and deer per square mile, 1.99 and 3.69 aren’t bad for Vermont. I hunt western New York where 5.6 to 8.0 bucks per square mile (not sure what the total deer per square mile is).

Deer yard management. Because we aren’t finding scores of dead deer doesn’t mean the yards don’t need help. If they were improved, deer would fare much better through the critical winter months and begin the spring stronger and healthier. Again, this would result in larger bodies, stronger fawn survival, and larger antlers because the bucks would be spending less time regaining weight.

I understand that you dislike the QDM concept, and I respect your opinion. I do think that there are many in this state that are ready for and want a change. How many people do you know who hunt deer in other states besides Vermont? Could it be because they have a better chance at a mature buck in NH, ME, MA, and NY. Sad but true. I wish F&W would take one WMU and institute an antler restriction and issue a few more antlerless permits. Give it three years and see what an awesome unit it would be.

One other thing, large antlers is a by-product of good deer managemt[8D]

. . . Rob

vtbuckrulrss

hey jeffHAHAHAHAH, QDMA, HAHAHAHAHAHAH. i just got an e-mail back from the state, and this out to really put those here in vt' s ( not directed at you, rob) panties in a twist. apparently we are at the higher end of our carrying capacity of deer, yet many people say that they don' t ever see deer. to knock down our deer herd to get it closer to a qdm acceptable capacity, that would mean shooting more does, yet the state has been cutting back on issueing doe permits. something isn' r making sense here, if we need to protect the wintering habitat, shoot does, but take the amount of permits away at the same time? anyone understand that logic? rob, i know that many people question the ratio, i wasn' t certain myself, but i e-mailed almost every state agency in the country after the montpelier meeting, and one of the things that i asked them was whether or not our method of determining the ratio was acceptable, and all of the agencies replied yes to that question, so i guess that would mean that we have to accept their numbers regarding sex ratio. and as far as doing qdm in a wmu, we can' t willy-nilly choose one, like was tried this spring in the legislatue. i have researched this one, consulted with qdma experts, and to try it, we should be doing it in the islands, beacuse of several reasons, including a captive herd, limited access to deer, good habitat and genetics are there also. we need to also follw the plan, according to guidelines, for at least 5 years to get a true picture of any potential. as far as using antler erestrictions like you suggested, it has been proven time and time again that antler restrictions fail as a tool of qdm, many states have stopped using restrictions because of failure, and i have had, can' t find it now, a study that suggests that antler restrictions may actually be detrimental to a herd. also, don' t forget this point, under a qdm planwhich many people seem to forget, the total buck harvest will decrease, never to be reached again at current levels. people complain now, what do you think they will do about that one? also, does it really matter if you see more bucks, if you can' t shoot them? what does that accomplish?