# People are leaving



## Jeff Sturgis (Mar 28, 2002)

Go to the BP station on US-2 leaving the U.P. and most any other road side stop and ask the owners what the feedback was of U.P. hunters this year...many said they were not coming back. Several area resorts and or restaurants around here DO NOT EVEN OPEN during hunting season anymore...not enough business. Frankly, they get more business during fall color tours, which is behind summer tourism, which is behind winter snowmobiling. 

Traditional deer management is ruining what little traffic there usually is in the U.P. and the trend seems to be continuing downward. What would QDM give in it's place? Well, you need to look no further than some of our best price per acre vacant land sales we have ever had. Simply, properties with food plots and great deer habitat, coupled with some good roads and shooting shacks are bringing a premium per acre never seen in the area. 

Many people are extremely misguided about what QDM is and they fail to realize how QDM can and would impact the U.P. in a very positive way...if nothing else it can't do any worse than we have now. Take a look at DMU118. More bucks, older bucks, bigger bucks. QDM would also dictate more deer in the north, less in the south for increased balance with the habitat while at the same time allowing for as many deer possible to not destroy the habitat and provide a sustainable herd. QDM will also result in more rutting activity...scrapes, rubs, chasing, seeking, fighting.

That's QDM and the more we get away from QDM in the U.P., the more we suffer as landowners and local business owners. Hey you might not like it, but QDM is what it is and it's worked everywhere it has been allowed to be implemented correctly....and people like it. 

Again, QDM typically gives you more bucks, older bucks, and larger bucks. Couple that with maintaining our antlerless herd in a smarter way disigned to address the low populations with more deer, as well as the high populations with less deer, and you have a winning combination with a deer herd that is socially and biologically balanced, as well as a happy hunting crowd that can experience some of the joys of hunting out of state...whithout the out-of-state price tag. Get a socially and biologically balanced deer herd that results in a happy hunting community and you ATTRACT hunters to the area resulting in higher customer traffic and increased land prices.

And again, up here in the U.P. if someone tells you that you have to increase doe permits in order to have QDM, or even have doe permits to have QDM, it will tell you one of 2 things about that person:

1. They are knowingly misinforming you about QDM
2. They are unknowingly misinforming you about QDM

Regardless of the motive though, you are still being misinformed about QDM.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

Northjeff -

Do you think that people are choosing not to hunt the UP because of a lack of mature bucks or because of a lack of deer in general?

I guess what Im asking is this, is the average hunter that comes to the UP more interested in shooting a large buck or are they more interested in just shooting a deer, be it a buck or a doe and if it happens to be a large buck it is just a bonus?



The reason that this question is relevant is that it _appears _( and I use that word guardedly since I am in no way an expert on QDM philosophies) that the trade off that QDM makes is a smaller, balanced herd, that has a higher percentage of mature bucks. 

Understand that I am not criticizing the QDM method or defending traditional management techniques, it just seems that the management technique that you would want to adopt might be different depending on which of the two demographics above you were trying to attract.

___________________________
Munsterlndr
Curmudgeon in Training


----------



## QDMAMAN (Dec 8, 2004)

NJ,

The truth has a sweet ring to it when you *hear* it. 
Keep up the GOOD fight.
FWIW, I hunt the UP solely for the opportnity to harvest a mature buck even though the opportunities have been slim the last few years.

Yours in stewardship,
Big T


----------



## Jeff Sturgis (Mar 28, 2002)

"Do you think that people are choosing not to hunt the UP because of a lack of mature bucks or because of a lack of deer in general?"

BOTH!

And that's where QDM comes in. For example, we harvest too many mature does in the north and when that is combined with ever decreasing winter habitat...the herd and hunter suffers. On the other hand we don't harvest enough does in other areas in the south...but not all areas, and when that happens the habitat suffers.

In most areas managing for balance...especially balance in habitat, means less deer. But that is not the case in much of the U.P. In fact, we already have a doe harvest each year several times more than hunters harvest...it's called winter severity. Because of winter severity doe harvest is not needed in portions of the U.P.(by hunters anyways), and that is still QDM.

So, if the U.P. were managed for QDM we could stand to have a few more deer in the north, a few less in some portions of the south, and more bucks....older and larger.

Basically, we need to maintain the herd as high as the habitat will allow with no deminishing return on habitat, while at the same time keeping appropriate sex ratios and increased age structure on bucks, and that is QDM.

Traditional deer management has given us:

1. Approximate 75% harvest of all yearling bucks, resulting in a poor age structure(dead bucks don't grow)
2. Populations too high in areas that need to be reduced and too low in areas that could stand to be increased.
3. Poor sex ratios especially in the south.

QDM gives you
1. Adequate buck age structure...NOT TROPHY(big differance!)
2. Populations maintained in balance with the habitat
3. Adequate sex ratios

Again, I'd like to see some of our deer herds protected more(especially mature does) in the northern areas to promote a both an enjoyable and sustainable herd, while at the same time limiting harvest of young bucks so that we can have the same number of bucks to harvest, if not more, just a little older. In a nut-shell, more deer and older bucks....it's really not a bad thing and if you understand QDM you can see how easilly it fits in the U.P.

Really, the philosophy is no different than U.P. Whitetails preaching of "let em grow, let em go" and "take a doe with your permit", except for it's called "QDM", has been around for nearly 40 years, is biologically proven and backed by the nations top whitetail research biologists under an organization called the QDMA, and that "take a doe with your permit" slogen under QDM would be more accurately applied to only most of the southern U.P., and not a blanket statement for the entire U.P. So basically the same, except we need to stay away from the focus of harvesting mature does in northern portions of the U.P.....and that is still QDM.


----------



## just ducky (Aug 23, 2002)

NJ-
An interesting twist to your thought about more and more people leaving and never coming back to the UP....wouldn't this mean less "weekend warriors" shooting any buck that moves, which in essence would assist in preservation of the older bucks? Just thinking out loud here, but it seems like a real catch-22.....less people going up to hunt = less young bucks shot = an older age class? Now certainly less people hunting also means less antlerless deer taken (where permits are available), so the ratio is not getting better. Obviously more hunters bring more dollars to the area, so economically it's better. But I'm trying to decide from a deer management point of view if it's in your best interest up there to have more hunters, or less hunters.


----------



## Sib (Jan 8, 2003)

People aren't coming back, it's true, having hunted there my entire life, I can see people are finding more fertile ground. I disagree with your interpretation of their exodus, tho. I think it has more to do with opportunity and the best opportunity for harvesting deer is no longer in the UP. If it's deer opportunities they're looking for, they have better choices and that's how I see it.

It's related to quality, but not qdm, imo. It's about habitat and all the QDM in the world only addresses a tiny fraction of the problem. The problem is the fact that the majority of land in the UP is public land and habitat on the public land is less than ideal. With private land food plots and habitat refurbishing is a viable tool, but how does one address habitat improvement at camp level, while on public land? You can't just start to throw in food plot, or clear cut...it's more difficult to improve habitat when the land isn't your own.

I think it's about deer number and guys aren't seeing the same number of deer they once were. In fact, the numbers are down in some areas over the past few years that folks are just getting discouraged. A guy can see more deer, on any given day, while on his drive into work in the southern 1/3 of the lower, than he'll see his entire hunt in the UP. That wasn't always the case, so it has people questioning their hunts and the opportunities provided. 

We've been hunting our camp since '79 and numbers of deer sighting peaked about '89-'93 and have been dropping since. We came up with our rules before we ever heard of qdm and many of the camps in our area share the same rule, 6 or better if you have to shoot a deer, get a doe permit. Second decade for these rules and numbers haven't improved, imo. So 25 years at one camp and we're questioning whether the UP is a place for a camp.

Ironic that as the bottom seems to be falling out qdm is on the mind of many. I suspect it will get blamed by many not returning, it's a timing issue, just happens that increased doe permits by dnr, qdm, and habitat issues are happening at a time deer sightings are down. I don't believe that qdm is the cause, but feel it will catch much of the blame. Personally, habitat and hunter expectations are the number one concern for those not returning, but that's just opinion, don't have any data to back that up.

The grass is always greener on the other side, until you get there and look back at what you left. I think that's where most folks who won't be returning are at.

I'll always hold the UP in high esteem and will probably be back next year, just like the last 25, but I can't say for sure.


----------



## BDL (Dec 17, 2004)

The problem NJ is referring to is also seen through parts of the Northern Lower. Uncontrolled baiting is drawing deer off state and fed. lands. The 2.0 gallon limit isn't pulling deer off, but rather the 10 plus gallon bait stations are to blame. This results in nocturnal movement. Also, many of today's hunters aren't willing to work for a buck. If there isn't an ATV trail nearby, you might find yourself a high grade buck.


----------



## Ron84 (Apr 29, 2004)

I think habitat improvement and limiting the deer harvest per hunter (1 buck and 1-3 doe tags depending on area) will caused an increase in the number of deer, which will increase the number of people hunting in the UP.

While QDM beliefs are a little bit of that equation (habitat), I don't think that they are the anser to this problem.


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

Its funny that in the central U.P. where we have been under QDM laws for four years, deer hunter numbers have actually been on the increase in recent years. In the area where I hunt, overall, our buck to doe ratio has improved dramatically. For those willing to hunt hard and smart, trophy bucks are more available now than they have been in many years. If you venture outside the central U.P. QDM area though, all you hear is doom and gloom about the deer hunting. I dont think the better hunting in the central U.P. is a coincidence either, rather in my opinion; it is due entirely to QDM.


----------



## Bowhunter30 (Nov 8, 2004)

I am one of those hunters who are not coming back next season, plus my buddies. We hunt up by Toivola area and it has been getting worse and worse the past 2 or 3 years, this year being absolutely pathetic. 

So, keeping it brief, no we will not be back for quite some time. I had better luck down here, which is the first time I can ever say that.


----------



## Pinefarm (Sep 19, 2000)

I heard much of the same from unhappy "tourist" hunters around Baldwin too. It sounds like it makes no sense to leave great hunting to travel to poor hunting. The expection is that many said that they will still go "north" for gun opener, but it will be limited to a quick 48 hour stay. A couple beers, a bowl of chili, a $10 roll of quarters in a poker game, opening day in the woods and bolting south ASAP. 
Many of the people with land up here will still hunt here, but I know of several landowners who are selling and looking for land in the shotgun zone. If I didn't have the attachment to my family land that I'd kill to protect it and will have my ashes spread over it, I'd give it serious consideration too. 
IMHO The reasons for hunters staying south are both, recently far less deer in the NLP deer and a 50 year history of virtually no buck over 125 B&C in my little 3 mile radius. Keep the DPSM around 30 and have regulations so 40% of bucks live to 2.5 years old and I think the smiles will return in the north. I'm not sure what MDNR has planned for DPSM in my area, but I'm guessing that 25-30 is ballpark.


----------



## Luv2hunteup (Mar 22, 2003)

More deer died of winter kill in '95-'96 & '96-'97 than were living in the UP in the late 60s & early 70s. The UP deer hunting tradition survived those lean years and it will continue to survive in the UP no matter how many hunters go back below the bridge.

Michigan's UP experienced 14 years of the warmests winters in the years leading up to the mid 90s huge deer die off. Years of too many deer have devastated the UP winter yarding areas. It will require years of low deer numbers to ensure recovery of our winter habitat.

It's unfortunate that many of todays hunters don't remember how bad it used to be. I'm all for less people coming across the bridge to hunt deer. It might even give me a chance at a 4.5 year old buck. :lol:


----------



## fishin' fin (Feb 12, 2004)

Trophy Specialist said:


> Its funny that in the central U.P. where we have been under QDM laws for four years, deer hunter numbers have actually been on the increase in recent years. In the area where I hunt, overall, our buck to doe ratio has improved dramatically. For those willing to hunt hard and smart, trophy bucks are more available now than they have been in many years. If you venture outside the central U.P. QDM area though, all you hear is doom and gloom about the deer hunting. I dont think the better hunting in the central U.P. is a coincidence either, rather in my opinion; it is due entirely to QDM.


Richard p.Smith wrote an article recently about QDM and why it wouldn't work in the U.P. (I don't remember where) I think the jist of the story was the terrible winter attrition mostly on the superior water shed. Heck, when I lived up there we called the middle and east side the "banana belt". Certain areas still have great hunting where they manage the forest. But come on, is Seney managed for any thing but geese?


----------



## Pinefarm (Sep 19, 2000)

BTW, I'm not saying that hunters leaving the north woods is a bad thing. When we had 60 DPSM in much of the NLP, we could support 30 hunters (HPSM) on gun opener. But now, having less hunters in the north from Oct 1 on will actually be a good thing, since deer numbers have been cut in half. If we're going to have less deer in the UP and NLP and higher deer populations in the shotgun zone, then we may as well have the reverse of the past and have the exodus of hunters going and staying south. For too many years, the hunting pressure in the NLP has been too high. Extremely high, in some area's. In the long run, as many hunters abandon the NLP and UP never to return, the overall quality of the deer herd and hunting in the NLP and UP will likely improve. Probably substantially in many area's where the major problem was extreme hunting pressure.
So I'm not saying it's a bad thing, I'm just saying that's it's happening and very real. Our Nov 14 license sales and shop sales don't lie. Neither do the "deer camp" driveby observations. The amount of "tourist" hunter participation, at least in the Baldwin area, has been crashing since 2003. I suspect another 10% drop in 2005.


----------



## glen sible (Dec 11, 2004)

Would the proponants of QDM for the UP please explain to the readers if the following applies to the UP and if not, why not? Please remember this is not my list but comes from a very respected leader of QDMA.


Appendix B. List of conditions where Quality Deer Management may be difficult to
achieve. (QDMA slide presentation by Dr. Brian Murphy, President, Quality Deer
Management Association at the 21st Annual Meeting of the Southeast Deer Study Group)
Quality Deer Management is typically more difficult to achieve in areas with:
Short hunting seasons
Low bag limits
High hunter density
High percentages of public land
Small landownership patterns
Severe winters
Very poor site quality
Very low densities of deer

Thanks for reading and carry on


----------



## trout (Jan 17, 2000)

North Jeff,
I really like the way in which you clarify your plan on QDM.
You have the ability to get the true points to the reader.
Keep up the good work, I can understand your overall logic and the long term/short term goals.
Your deer hunting plans benefit the deer and the hunters as well as those who make/made a living off of the hunting seasons.
We do need changes and your type of plan is one I can understand .
Thanks


----------



## Whit1 (Apr 27, 2001)

I just deleted two posts in this thread. The first was because it added nothing of value. The second was in response to the first and therefore was not needed. The next post that begins to get out of line will cause this thread to be closed.


----------



## Bwana (Sep 28, 2004)

just ducky said:


> NJ-
> An interesting twist to your thought about more and more people leaving and never coming back to the UP....wouldn't this mean less "weekend warriors" shooting any buck that moves, which in essence would assist in preservation of the older bucks? Just thinking out loud here, but it seems like a real catch-22.....less people going up to hunt = less young bucks shot = an older age class? Now certainly less people hunting also means less antlerless deer taken (where permits are available), so the ratio is not getting better. Obviously more hunters bring more dollars to the area, so economically it's better. But I'm trying to decide from a deer management point of view if it's in your best interest up there to have more hunters, or less hunters.


I don't think reducing hunting numbers is good for the sport or the area. true, more bucks will survive with lower hunting pressure, but the cost in terms of the sport and economic ramifications for the area are too great a trade off IMO. 

One of the biggest challenges up there is the habitat. If the habitat can be overcome and the young bucks can be provided a greater degree of protection, great things will happen.

In my opinion the NLP and the UP can only get better from here so they are probably going in the right direction as far as deer hunting is concerned. I think the hunters that are leaving these areas are going to pile on the SLP which is going to exacerbate the problems they have down there like over-crowding and tresspass just to name a few.

The best way to ensure good hunting in the state is to promote relative balance between the SLP, NLP and the UP; which we have not had for a long time.


----------



## bunji_hunter (Jul 4, 2003)

I gotta go with Jeff on this one. People who have not hunted the U.P. that hear all the tales of the BIG YOOPER BUCK have a distaste for hunting here. They somehow think Hey It's Michigan and we have lots of deer and they just come to you. This mentality comes from years of hunt club overgrowth that produced lots of deer and small racks. They see the MONSTER YOOPER RACK and think "huh-huh gonna get me one uh dem". They don't realize that BIG YOOPER BUCK means they are heardy and inteligent and few and far between compared to the lesser bucks of the hunt clubs.

Ask NJ, LUV2, and any other U.P. hunter and you'll find we do see deer. Not the 40-50 at a time like down state but more like 4-5 a day that have some girth to them. You'll get one chance at that big bruiser and if you aren't there you missed him. Hunting the U.P. is an all day affair. Some hunters just cannot do it and they think QDM in the U.P. means even less deer.


----------



## BDL (Dec 17, 2004)

In my opinion, the un-natural patterns of deer stimulated by illegal use of bait and overbrowsed deer yards (resulting in winter kill) is the main culprit in the loss of deer sightings in parts of the U.P. and Northern Lower. 

Folks, we have to accept that the days of the 80's are over and for good reason. 

As a previous post notes, the 60's and 70's were slim. This is supported by my late father and his brother's accounts. I remember back to 1980, when I began to hunt, deer were just starting to rebound in numbers. A lack of control led to overbrowsing of the yards.

My question, which may need to be a thread by itself, is how many years does it take to rejuvenate a deer yard? Mature cedar with a browse line will never grow an understory.......thus what are the answers?

We can grow the best of summer plots, but what about the winter range? If we can truely answer that question with action, the U.P. and Northern Lower will have more deer and retain the hunting numbers that are dropping. Those ranges will be able to support more deer.


----------



## Adam Waszak (Apr 12, 2004)

The hunter numbers dropping off are a real problem but not just for the UP. We need to address this statewide and bring Mi back to what it should be. I remember relatives and friends going to the UP and always coming back with a respectable buck. What happened and how do we improve these deer yards or can we? It seems more and more like habitat issues than strictly QDM although it is all related. We also need some help from mother nature along the way. NJ< what is currently being done for the habitat/deer yards etc? Thanks
AW


----------



## WILDCATWICK (Mar 11, 2002)

Adam Waszak said:


> The hunter numbers dropping off are a real problem but not just for the UP. We need to address this statewide and bring Mi back to what it should be. AW


  

When I lived there in the 90's I had a lot of success deer hunting even after the big snow years. It's hunting...you have to *adapt* , *scout* , and be willing to put in the work required to get the big U.P. buck. 

As many have expressed food is a big issue. But there are logging operations going on all over the place. Usually they are wel off the beaten path. But I have seen an amazing amount of large bucks in these areas. When I hunted behind my home where the food was minimum the bucks were almost sickly looking. 

I think alot of what has happened as far as trolls going up to the U.P. is that that they want to hunt in the same areas that do not provide food. So they are not willing to adapt. It's also a lengthy trip for many so the scouting is out. Word of mouth has done the rest. 

But I bet with a little scouting and a look at where the logging is being done. Or where some of the farms are....there are big bucks still there.


----------



## Swamp Ghost (Feb 5, 2003)

Hunter numbers are not dropping as some would think, most have simply shifted there area's of pursuit, mainly to the SLP.

These numbers have fluctuated +/-1-2% for the past 10 years. 

If anything hunting effort has been unchanged in most areas and increased in others (ML/Youth)


----------



## beer and nuts (Jan 2, 2001)

I actually think deer yards are misunderstund by most. The classic deer yards in the UP rarely are there to provide a food base. The yards are there to limit the amount of snow that gets to the ground, less energy for deer to move. Large canopy of cedar has alot less snow on the ground when compared to areas outside the canopy. Also, they provide a slight higher temperature, might be .5 degree could be as high as 5-10 degrees warmer on given days, it all counts when you talk about survival. Sure they provide a browse line IF the snow gets high enough for the deer to reach the cedar and with limited amount of snow can provide ground browse or easier for deer to paw away. But winter habitat is so different to summer habitat, and used by deer in so many different ways. Deer Yards are a very interesting and complex surviving tool for UP deer.

Now to the UP hunters, the hunters are leaving the UP because of the lack of deer, not mature bucks but lack of deer sightings. The doe permits for too many years have really put a hurting on the numbers and in the UP take a longer time to recover. If people want to put more hunters back in the woods in the UP they must let the does go. Really a misunderstanding for most on here that think every hunter must get a buck to think it was a successfull season, I think a majority of hunters would claim success if they were actually seeing some deer, but when hunters see 0-2 deer a day, let a alone 0-3 deer for the first three days of gun your going to hear whining. If those same hunters at the BP stattion were seeing 2-5 deer a day, we wouldn't be having this conversation.


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

I started hunting upper Michigan back in the mid-70s. Deer numbers then were much lower than they are today. We used to hunt very hard though by camping out in the middle of road less swamps and our success then was phenomenal. Then came a couple real bad winters in the late 70s. The deer bounced back though, but it wasnt until the mid-80s that deer numbers finally recovered. Even when deer numbers were at their lowest though (in my lifetime) from 1979-1981, we still were able to find hunt able numbers of deer and still took whopper bucks each season. Keep in mind that we hunted areas that received no hunting pressure at all accept for our efforts. During those lean years, we saw more bucks than does. When Mother Nature dishes up a hard winter, fawns and old does are mainly what dies, not antler-age bucks. Things have changed drastically in the U.P. over the last thirty years. Logging roads have opened up almost every section of the U.P. and ATVs have access to just about everywhere. There are very few places left where a hunter can hunt, unhunted deer. The result, in most areas, the lions share of antlered bucks have been shot every year for decades resulting in highly skewed buck to doe ratios. Because we are cropping off most of the yearling bucks every year in most areas, we are highly dependent on a good fawn crop surviving to adulthood every year. What happens then when a hard winter hits now? Most fawns will die and the next year will provide few bucks for hunters to see and hunt. Put two back to back bad winters together and the hunting can be awful for years. That is where we have been for the past eight years. Every few years we get a bad winter or two and the hunting in most areas has sucked because of it; that is in areas without widespread QDM in place. Where I hunt in the central U.P. QDM rules have provided us with good hunting every year since they were implemented. Because nearly all yearling bucks are passed on to the next season, even after a hard winter, we still have lots of bucks available from past years to buffer the season. For the future of U.P. deer hunting, that is why QDM is so critical.


----------



## Dawg (Jan 17, 2003)

> Regardless of the motive...you are still being misinformed about QDM.


I'll agree with that much.

UP tourism is a tough business, has been for at least 30+ years and land values have been riding a strong growth curve for at least the past 10 years.

I've heard the glorization of QDM professed many ways. This one is unique. My problem with QDM is this type of propoganda. If it is science, please sell it on science - not economics. Precisely why people question if the deer herd is the priority.


----------



## Jeff Sturgis (Mar 28, 2002)

Thanks for the good discussion guys...seems to be going well so far.

I'd like to share a few tidbits about the U.P. just to mull over for a bit.

*Prior to 1980 the 4 central counties of the U.P. had more CBM record book entries than all lower MI counties...combined. Since 1980 the U.P. is barely even on the map and I don't think all U.P. counties combined are more than the best 1 county downstate.

*In the last 15 years hunters have harvested 1.1 million deer in the U.P.

*In the last 15 years winter severity has harvested 900,000 deer

*If the current supposed population of wolves of 350 was used for the past 15 years(even though the numbers were especially not that high 10-15 years ago, but some may say could be an average, although not documented)...that would result in approximately 100,000 deer killed by wolves in the last 15 years.

*The Petrol grade deer yard in Shingleton was maintained for approximately 40 years with a rotational cutting of large blocks of cedar that actually resulted in a 50-70 year rotation with regenerating cedar and many stages of growth and browse for deer to utalize. That cutting plan was discontinued in the mid 90's and the population has gone from 1000 to 300-400 deer.

*John Ozoga, who has had as much experience as anybody with deer yards and our northern deer herd, has said that unless the winter habitat is improved in some way, in most northern portions of the U.P., the deer herd will continue to decline in total population. There may be small peaks following historically mild winters, but overall the average winter will continue to pull down the population. The ONLY way to stop this is winter habitat improvement.

*The U.P. is over 70% public land. Those that have private land are more than ever taking advantage of both QDM principles, as well as habitat improvement, and those owners are reaping the rewards. BUT, the public land hunter is stuck in a seemingly never ending downward spiral of mediocrity.

*Entering the 2004 hunting season, the U.P. stated population goal was below by 8%. Considering that most of the U.P. herd is in the southern U.P., and portions of those areas are considerably above populations goals, that 8% figure illustrates just how below stated population goal our northern deer herds are....and it isn't getting any better.

So, if you have private land, manage for QDM principles and practice extensive habitat improvement, like I do, you can really have a great local deer herd. BUT, for the hunters that historically have come up here to hunt the U.P. public land of which much is in the northern 1/2 of the U.P., and for those that live around here and do so, hunting opportunities are getting smaller by the year. Local restaurants around here used to be "bursting at the seams" during hunting seasons. The bars were full, the hotels were full, and tents dotted the landscape as hunters roughed it for up to 2 weeks on annual trecks that were tradition and a way of life. Today, most of the tents are gone, the hunting quality has suffered, the numbers of deer are gone(unless you are fortunate to own land and manage it well), the CBM record books reflect the drastic changes, and some local establishments are not even open during the hunting season, because they just do not have the customers to pay the utilities like they do during the winter and summer seasons.

Sure, we'll have more peaks and valleys, but the big picture is not that great and drastic changes need to take place in the U.P. to reverse the continuing downward spiral of mediocrity. We are slowly being lulled into an atmosphere of low expectations and complacency in which the "it will come backs", and the "we are just in another low cycle" mask the real problems of traditional deer mangement and continuing habitat decline.

What would QDM give instead?

1. Possibly more bucks, but at least older and bigger...not a reduction though.
2. Populations maintained in balance...not too low, not too high. For example, we can stand to have MORE in the north, and less in some portions of the south. Get back to traditional deer yard management techniques, educate the public on what they can do on their own winter habitat, get the state, feds, and corporate land owners to recognize the problem and improve land holdings with just a little thought on habitat....and the carrying capacities can actually safely be RAISED.
3. Better sex ratios. In especially high populations areas this can mean actually less does....but MORE bucks, if managed properly.

So, more deer in the spots where they are needed, less in problem areas, larger bucks, older bucks, and possibly more bucks and all the accompanying sign all in balance with the habitat. That's QDM and it certainly addresses many of the negatives of our U.P. deer herd. Maybe it's just a coincedence that in the last 20 years CBM records have left the U.P., the deer numbers have gone down, and local establishments are not even open for hunting season....but I don't think so.


----------



## just ducky (Aug 23, 2002)

NorthJeff.....hunters roughed it for up to 2 weeks on annual trecks that were tradition and a way of life. Today said:


> Good point NJ. My Dad and buddies (all 80 or older now) hunted in the UP from the early 50's until mid 70's. Most of them worked up there in the early years and had developed a heck of a tradition at one of their camps in the Newberry area. They tell stories about having to snowshoe into the camp some years because of deep snow (this was pre-snowmobiles). They even tell the story of the time they heard what they thought was a chainsaw, and it turned out to be a snowmobile...first one they had seen. They got deer then, but as you say it was different hunting. They often got on a track in the snow and simply still hunted until they jumped the deer. Even back then, seeing a handful of deer in the week was a good year. Once the guys all moved to the lower, going to the UP was a regular Thanksgiving week tradition, and continued into the mid 70's. Slowly in the later years, the hunting up there went south, but they continued to go for purely sentimental reasons. Then one of the guys started seeing lots of deer on their family farm in mid-Michigan, where I learned to deer hunt, and we still do a lot of hunting today. Many of them started hunting down here instead, and some of the guys died, and some of them just quit hunting. In any case, the tradition of going to the UP ended. I suspect there are similar scenarios with many familes. And with the advent of baiting and hunting from shacks in the 80's, the "UP style" of hunting has disappeared. Many hunters nowadays have no idea how to still hunt for deer, which is a mainstay up there. So it's a change in hunting culture as well that has dropped the hunter numbers going to the UP.


----------



## Jeff Sturgis (Mar 28, 2002)

JD,

I would agree about the hunting culture as well....we want results quicker with less work and I don't think people place as much of a priority on hunting as there used to be, especially for the 2 week deer season. I know some old timers that have never missed the entire 2 weeks of deer season.....that has really changed. I've seen some statistics that people actually work less hours than ever, but at the same time life is filled with so many things that were not there 30 years ago.

Culture, quality, methods, numbers (deer) I believe have all changed, not necessarily for the better.


----------



## Ferg (Dec 17, 2002)

NorthJeff said:


> Digdug,
> 
> I've had the same experience as well, in fact I've shot 4 in the past 7 years on public land and passed on 3-4 times more bucks than I've shot. BUT, there are less than 1/2 the deer herd there used to be yarding in Shingleton and it wouldn't surprise me if that was the case east of Seney. There are many mature does being shot with bows out of the deer yards every year as well...it will eventually take it's toll. You are in one of the more wilderness settings in the entire U.P. I know plenty of hunters that know the woods up near you and they get their bucks every year, most likely due to how remote some of the areas are and because of that the hunting doesn't change as much. There are very few "wilderness" areas left in the U.P. with large, unbroken blocks of timber with very little access.
> 
> There are still areas you can scout a little, know what you are doing, and have a very good chance at a decent buck, but those areas aren't getting any bigger.


On NorthJeff's orginal topic - the last two posts, while fine posts, should be the start of a new thread - Thanks guys - 


ferg....

I split off the last two posts to the whitetail hunting forum - but - when i did it locked, I have another mod going to open it up there - newbies!!!! Go figure. Thanks again - great thread.


----------

