# Question for QDM land Managers



## poz (Nov 12, 2004)

When you guys set goals for your QDM management plan. Do you set them to meet the States goal of an average of 20 DPSM or do you manage them to your own personal goals of more or less DPSM?


----------



## QDMAMAN (Dec 8, 2004)

Our goals have been established at 30 dpsm based on the habitat, harvest data, and cooperation with our local DNR field biologist. Our habitat will support more deer with all the improvements that have been made ie: foodplots, cover etc. but we also don't want to have to have an excessive amount of hunter pressure in order to harvest the proper number of antlerless. That being said we have just as many hunters as before our QDM efforts and even more at certain times during the season.

Our census is done in Sept. and early Oct. with a spot light and with the help of the DNR we determine the existing numbers based on our limited sightings.

Big T


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

poz said:


> When you guys set goals for your QDM management plan. Do you set them to meet the States goal of an average of 20 DPSM or do you manage them to your own personal goals of more or less DPSM?


Where is it said that 20 DPSM is a goal? The official goal, last I knew, was a pre-harvest herd of 1.3 million deer. By my calculation, that works out to over 24 DPSM. Currently, we're at over 30 DPSM.


----------



## Pinefarm (Sep 19, 2000)

Farm, here's what I posted on the other thread...

Poz, it's been widely reported in several articles that there's only about 40,000-45,000 miles that are considered huntable or sustaining possible deer in the state. You need you subtract lakes, cities, suburbs, spawl, etc. That comes to roughly 28-33 deer per mile. But that's only overall average. Some better area's will have 40-ish and some other area's, often UP and TB-NELP will have less. 
Currently, it's pretty much the SLP that's above goal, from what I understand.


----------



## poz (Nov 12, 2004)

Bob, 
That makes sense 

I guess that the question I am trying to figure out is that Many QDM guys are stating that the Ideal herd should be at 60% carrying capacity. So even if the herd can be sustained at 30dpsm than according to QDM standards we should be managing the herd for about18 dpsm, yet many QDM members state they hunt areas in the SLP and are seeing many deer on there land. So lets say if you own a square mile in Hillsdale, has your goal the last couple of years been to reduce the herd to 18 dpsm, or is your herd still at 30-40dpsm. And why. I'm not trying to put anyone on the spot or critisize anyone, It's just I have hunted land where people say they are practicing QDM and you see 25 deer a sitting, and the guy in the next stand has seen 25 different deer. Many of these guys aren't really practicing QDM, the are just self imposing AR's and are calling it QDM.

So for you guys who are practicing QDM or say you are, What is the amount of land you have and how many deer do you expect will be living on your land, we don't need to be exact or give your land location, just an answer like I practice it on 200 acres and my goal is to have 8 deer living off it.

thanks


----------



## Pinefarm (Sep 19, 2000)

I think what's being said is that the full carry capacity is 50-ish and 60-70% of that is your mid 30's for deer per mile. And that's where we are in many places now. Basically, we're hovering around goal numbers is many parts of the state. The cuts in antlerless quota's is a way to feel out quota's to sustain the work already done by us hunters. I don't think we could get to 18 dpsm in many locations if we poisoned them.


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

Every property should be managed differently. For instance, where I hunt in Washtenaw and Jackson Counties the deer numbers vary greatly from one section to the other. Down the road from my house on state land the deer population is probably less than 10 dpsm going into deer season while on a prime agricultural area only 1/2 mile away, the population is over 100 dpsm. In the U.P. where I hunt, deer numbers vary equally as dramatically. Some areas I hunt have in excess of 100 dpsm while just down the road a few miles the population is 1/10th that. The DNR manages deer with a broad-brush stroke mainly though the issuance of antlerless permit. Land managers need to evaluate there own property and surrounding areas and make deer management strategies based on those finding. I look at the general deer numbers in the area and also at the habitat. I also factor in the expected hunting pressure including predators and the toll that will take on the deer. A walk through the woods in the late winter or early spring will show the amount of browsing pressure the herd is putting on the land. Based on my evaluation this year, I plan to hunt bucks only at my southern Michigan spots. Hunting pressure is so high there and the herd is not overpopulated, so I dont feel the need to take any does there. In the U.P. we are coming off a winter that had little winterkill in my hunting areas. Deer numbers are getting high on my property there, but on most public lands the herd is what I would consider under the carrying capacity of the land. We hunt about half the time on private land in the U.P. and half on public. We will take a few mature does off my property, but we did not apply for any public land doe permits in the U.P.


----------



## Bob S (Mar 8, 2000)

poz said:


> So for you guys who are practicing QDM or say you are, What is the amount of land you have and how many deer do you expect will be living on your land,


I own 42 acres. I don`t expect to have any deer _living_ on my land. 



poz said:


> thanks


You`re welcome.


----------



## Whit1 (Apr 27, 2001)

We are dealing with deer management. If there's ever an example of the falisy of "one size fits all" this is it. What is good in one area is not a viable, healthy option in another. That's one reason why I believe the DNR needs to break up the state into, besides the DMUs, 8-10 zones, by county and begin to manage the deer, in regards to MARS, QDM, TDM, and they need to do it PDQ!! or we'll be SOOL as far as effective deer management goes.


We have 25.5 acres here. I don't expect deer to be "living" on my property. It's far too small. Yes, they pass through, use it as fawning areas (about one doe a year) and security cover. Other than a small food plot there is very little nutritional attraction unless you count my hostas, strawberries, sweet corn, etc. in the veggie garden or my golf tee on which I've seen deer munching on rare occassions.......:lol:


----------



## Pinefarm (Sep 19, 2000)

Whit, we already have such zones in place. My pdf file stuff isn't working. Click here...
http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,1607,7-153-10370---,00.html

Scroll down to bottom center where it says contact info, then open Wildlife Management Units. That's a better system for making sub sets of rules IMHO. The differing units could have differing rules, above our current county antlerless quota's and TB bait rules. 

Look at how Ohio has differing rules for differing deer zones determined by where the most deer need to be killed...this is very interesting...
http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/wildlife/regs/deer.htm

Granted, MDNR made great strides with confining the TB zone and the new SLP muzzleloader season. But deer zones is yet even more in the right direction, IMHO. Why does the whole state need a 15 day gun season for bucks? Maybe have the SLP have a 20 day gun season and the NLP have a 10 day season? Either way, going to rules by those WMU's gives biologists far more options of how best to get what they need done.


----------



## Whit1 (Apr 27, 2001)

http://www.michigandnr.com/publications/pdfs/huntingwildlifehabitat/offices_wmu_map.pdf

Yes, we do have zones. However, in my opinion, their boundries are ineffectively formed. For instance in the U.P. they are form via an east/west axis. This puts the Lake Superior watershed areas in the same zone as the Lake Michigan watershed. Menominee County and Kewanau County are in the same unit/zone yet they are FAR different from each other.

The same can be said of much of the L.P., although not to the extent the above example is.

Ohio, and other states, have a more adaptable system of regulations depending on zone/unit. Although there are some notable exceptions with our regs, for the most part here in Michigan we tend to have a "one size fits all". Yes, I know there are some notable exceptions, but (again in my opinion) we don't go nearly far enough.


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

Not to nitpick, but our gun season (November 15-30) is 16 days long.

I really like the Ohio regs. Six day gun season, beginning at the right time(November 28), a four month long archery season. One buck limit, all seasons combined. Deer tags are _deer_ tags, not antlered buck or antlerless tags. Of course, in order to enforce something like this with a one buck limit, mandatory check-in would be required, but I'd happily put up with that sort of annoyance in exchange for Ohio-style regs.


----------



## Happy Hunter (Apr 14, 2004)

I think ED Spin statement that he saw 24 bucks on 120 acres at one time goes a long way toward answering your question. QDMER's all say they support balancing the herd with the habitat, but then they manipulate the habitat on their land in order to justify much higher populations that the goals established state agencies .

In PA where the goal is 12 OWD PSM, those 24 buck would represent all the buck on 6 SM of land. It would be interesting to know if those 24 buck represent the entire antlered buck population of 1 SM ,2 SM or more. In any case it is unlikely that adjacent land owners would support such a large population unless they were all QDM deer hunters and not farmers who derive their living from their crops.


----------



## David G Duncan (Mar 26, 2000)

60 acres and 3 deer, so this year it looks like we are at the 30 dpsm mark in our backyard. Interesting thread.

My wife and I recently took a drive around several square miles near our home (drove about 8 miles total) just before dark and were surprised to count over 50 deer in the fields. In one field we counted 25 deer and two of these does each had three fawns each. So, it appears that the extremely low number of doe permits being issued here during the past two years is definitely having a big positive impact our the deer population.

Based on our very unscientific survey it would appear that we are definitely at or well above the 30 DPSM figure being quoted in this thread.


----------



## Pinefarm (Sep 19, 2000)

It's impossible to tell by those numbers. On the other hand one could speculate that 8 sections times 640 acres is 5120 acres. Assume that at dark in August that 50% of the deer in the section will be feeding in fields and that comes to one deer per 50 acres. Of course, since either guess is 100% unscientific, this is only fun speculation.


----------



## Luv2hunteup (Mar 22, 2003)

I find it real hard to determine what I'll see in November when I'm buying doe tags in August. My DMU only had 3,000 antlerless tags for sale this fall. Right now I'm only seeing a few deer on my property but when the surrounding hay fields are knocked down with frost and snow the deer seem to filter on my land until we get sub zero temps for more than a few days. After that all the deer head for the yards and are gone for about 4 months.

The 4 month break really helps because nothing is being browsed on except what the snow shoe hares eat. I've planted trees, shrubs and 5% of my land in high quality food plots. The deer have plenty to eat from the time they come out of the yards till my plots go dormant in late fall. With that in mind I just try to shoot 3 does for every buck taken but buying doe tags is my biggest limiting factor along with trying to predict what will show up come hunting season.

If I'm seeing does in muzzleloader season my doe tags get filled if I'm not they don't get filled for that season.


----------



## David G Duncan (Mar 26, 2000)

I can buy your estimate of 50% and therefore 100 deer in 8 sections, which would workout to 12.5 deer PSM. However my gut tells me that it could just as likely be a little low.

Even so, I have to believe that even at 12.5 deer PSM this is a very respectable deep population for northern lower michigan .

But again this is for a very small area, containing mostly private property, with some obvious signs of food plot deer management going on. Makes you wonder what the DPSM might be out in the State Land  . Definitely quite a bit lower.


----------



## Ferg (Dec 17, 2002)

Happy Hunter said:


> I think ED Spin statement that he saw 24 bucks on 120 acres at one time goes a long way toward answering your question. QDMER's all say they support balancing the herd with the habitat, but then they manipulate the habitat on their land in order to justify much higher populations that the goals established state agencies .
> 
> In PA where the goal is 12 OWD PSM, those 24 buck would represent all the buck on 6 SM of land. It would be interesting to know if those 24 buck represent the entire antlered buck population of 1 SM ,2 SM or more. In any case it is unlikely that adjacent land owners would support such a large population unless they were all QDM deer hunters and not farmers who derive their living from their crops.


I'll say it again - summer batchlor group numbers are meaningless - 

ferg....


----------



## Happy Hunter (Apr 14, 2004)

You are entitled to your opinion, but just because you say it, doesn't make it a fact. Those buck represent the buck population in a specific geographical area and since many QDM managers claim to know how many buck they have based on their trail cameras , it would be interesting to know what deer density produces bachelor groups that large. 

It is a fair question and one that ED Spin should be eager to answer since it would demonstrate the benefits of managing the land based on QDM principles.


----------



## Jeff Sturgis (Mar 28, 2002)

Keep in mind when talking about 60% carrying capacity that those numbers are hard to understand.

You have Maximum carrying capacity, and Maximum Sustained carrying capacity. Maximum carrying capacity is the number at which the land will support x number of deer for that year only. The deer totally consume all food sources and each year you experience a deminishing return on total Maximum carrying capacity so that the land supports less deer each year. Then, you have Sustained carrying capacity, which is a number more reflective of the 60% figure that so many quote and reflects a number at which a population can safely be maintained indefinately. 

For ease of the discussion, forget about 60%, maximum, or maximum sustained and we can then ask a simple question...how many deer can the land support per square mile? For that answer, every area is site specific, so consulting a professional deer biologist...especially a deer research biologist would be the best source to answer your question. I like what BSK, that manages with Grant Woods across the country has said in the past....he wants to have twice as much food on the property that is needed for the deer herd. 

Every area is site specific....even down to the individual property.


----------



## luv 2 bowhunt (Mar 27, 2005)

Can someone please tell us then, who is the person that is going to go around and tell us how many deer per square mile we can have on each square mile in Michigan?

Is is the dnr?
or the landowner?
a hired biologist?
WHO?


----------



## Luv2hunteup (Mar 22, 2003)

> Can someone please tell us then, who is the person that is going to go around and tell us how many deer per square mile we can have on each square mile in Michigan?


Just curious why would you need to know how many deer per square mile you have? Walk around the square mile or whatever portion that you do own and then inventory your browse usage. If your land shows significant usage of anything less than prefered browse you may have too many deer. Browse usage is the best indicator of how the deer are impacting your habitat. When you do your inventory don't look above 4.5ft.


----------



## Adam Waszak (Apr 12, 2004)

I'd like to manage in an area like Bob S does and this is no shot at him but I am serious. He gets to shoot shoot shoot and they keep on coming. It would be a wonderful thing IMO. But I think it depends on your area. I think Baldwin area is a little low but I also agree the population 5 years ago was too high. I don't know if the average guy can determine deer density per square mile etc but I think a lot of them after implementing QDM can determine the food levels and health of the local deer. We have a lot less deer this year but as much as it hurts to say on a public forum they do look pretty darn healthy as well. I think it comes more down to the health than the numbers anyway although we would all love deer behind every tree if we could sustain them and the habitat. JMO

AW


----------



## Jeff Sturgis (Mar 28, 2002)

There are so many ways to become educated about individual property carrying capacities:

1. Do it all yourself. Learn what the deer should be eating, and what they shouldn't be eating. Learn how much they should be eating of native browse, and what amount they shouldn't be.

2. Hire a private biologist. Pay a well-informed deer biologist (not just any biologist) that completes property census and browse utalizations studies for a living...except nothing else.

3. Consult a local DNR district wildlife biologist about average densities in your area and density goals.

4. Use a combination of all 3, or 2. For example, hire someone to give you a number, even show you how to estimate numbers, and then you do the work to get the number and maintain the property density with harvest strategies designed by the expert while using habitat indicators to inform you of signs of overbrowsing. Maybe have an expert stop by and look at your browse annually and tell you where you are at.

There is no one number that will be that magic number. Every property is site specific and needs to be treated as such. Also, you need to understand how deer travel, migrate, and form bachelor groups, as well as understand your regions plentiful and lean periods of the year so that you can make both an informed and appropriate harvest decision that impacts your management efforts the most, and is the most effecient use of the available tags for your property at the right time of the year. Nothing will be perfect, but the more information you get, the more professional advice you get, and the more you are open to management styles and seek researched and fact based information the closer you will come to making the best management decisions as possible. It's always a work in progress. Remember, this is a positive endeavor. Listen to advice based on something...something of merit and truth based on research and expert advice as opposed to negative opinion based on nothing but hunches and assumptions.

Also, let's face it, the public land hunter doesn't have many options when it comes to deer management. Currently, traditional deer management promotes an inferior buck age structure and on public land it's hard to pass up that young buck when there is a guy on the next ridge sitting within 200 yards of you. It's even harder when you know there is another guy on the other side of him, and there were several other trucks parked at your parking area in the morning. Also, the public land hunter can do nothing with the habitat, nothing with the timber, and typically has to live with much lower deer numbers. In most cases, the only thing a public land hunter would ever have is to improve buck age structure by limiting overall buck harvest significantly, an antler restriction, or limiting hunters. Other than that, it's the same low deer numbers including a strong majority of young bucks with no ability to improve the habitat.

Many do not like the fact that private land hunters can manipulate both their habitat and deer numbers. Just like the feds, state, or timber companies can come in and complete a cutting on several hundred acres or more and increase deer densities within the region due to signficantly increased browse and cover for a decade or more.....a hunter owning 40 acres, 100 acres, whatever they can afford, can do the same with the aid of food plots and professional habitat minipulation. It is possible to have more deer on a parcel, and a healthier larger deer herd and habitat on that same parcel...than a similar parcel just a couple miles away with many less deer. If you do not own private land, that fact may bother you, but if you live by that principle it's going to be a long life for you because someone always has more, and someone can always do more.....life is funny that way.

Personally, I find that some look for the negative in everything. Instead of attempting to understand, attempting to learn, they spend a lifetime of negativity and in the end learn very little. Those individuals are few and far between, but at the same time they can be the the most vocal. How does the saying go....a happy person tells one person, and angry person tells 10? There are a lot of happy people out there that look for answers and solutions instead of looking to attack and discredit....just depends on who you want to spend time with, but in the end if you openly and honestly seek truth and knowledge in a positive manner you will find it. Surround yourself with negativity and malice and life is going to be a very bumpy road full of little success or understanding. Deer management should be an easy and enjoyable topic to discuss. Deer management is full of great research, great information, great people, and although complex in nature....full of sometimes very obvious and simple solutions. I'll never understand why the majority of some peoples posts are filled with attacks...virtually every post for some. This is a whole lot more fun than some make it out to be and again, stay positive, look for answers, and not only will you find those answers, but find a lot of good in a lot of people along the way, and unfortunately that may surprise a few.


----------



## Bob S (Mar 8, 2000)

Jeff, that last paragraph, Amen.

*Walk around the square mile or whatever portion that you do own and then inventory your browse usage. If your land shows significant usage of anything less than prefered browse you may have too many deer.*

Luv2hunteup, fantastic two sentences.

Too many hunters get hung up on numbers of deer. I don`t know how many deer per square mile there are where I hunt and I certainly don`t care. It is a meaningless number. 

What I do know is the primary winter browse species on my property. How much of that browse the deer eat, and when it becomes exhausted in March. That is how I determine whether or not there are too many deer where I hunt. A healthy deer herd is a herd in balance with it`s habitat.


----------



## poz (Nov 12, 2004)

Guys, CAn someone please answer the question, We have all these so called QDM guys on here and no one can answer a simple management question. If you ask a farmer how many bushels of corn he gets out of acre he can tell you. Why can't someone in QDM tell us that he or she planted X amount of acres, and plans to yeild X amount of bushels of food, which should be able to sustain X amount of deer.


----------



## jk hillsdale (Dec 7, 2002)

poz said:


> Guys, CAn someone please answer the question, We have all these so called QDM guys on here and no one can answer a simple management question. If you ask a farmer how many bushels of corn he gets out of acre he can tell you. Why can't someone in QDM tell us that he or she planted X amount of acres, and plans to yeild X amount of bushels of food, which should be able to sustain X amount of deer.


There are three basic tenets of QDM, NorthJeff has patiently stated them over & over again on this forum. Being a QDM practitioner has nothing to do with the invalid analogy you attempted to create between a farmer's expected yield as compared to how many deer are "sustained" by food plots.


----------



## poz (Nov 12, 2004)

jk hillsdale said:


> There are three basic tenets of QDM, NorthJeff has patiently stated them over & over again on this forum. Being a QDM practitioner has nothing to do with the invalid analogy you attempted to create between a farmer's expected yield as compared to how many deer are "sustained" by food plots.


So your telling me that when you manage your land for deer and you plant crops specifically for the deer, that you should have no clue on how much you should plan and what type you should plant? 

Why are you being so defensive, QDM guys on here state that they are land managers and many of them are good or even great at it. Yet no one wants to share what they think their land can support.

There are many hunt clubs both fenced in and not fenced in where the land managers can tell you what their herd size is and what crops they plant to sustain their herd, yet nobody on this site has a clue. This is a whitetail deer management site. Suppose I want to plant and I want to get info on how much I should plant to achieve the herd I want on my property, I shouldn't ask the QDM guys. We have had arguements on this site on the thinning of the herd in certain areas of the state and many QDM guys say it needed to be done because the land couldn't sustain it, yet are you telling me that a QDM guy is nothing like a farmer and doesn't need to what his crop will yeild. IF he doesn't know what his own property can sustain how does he know what the stateland can sustain.
I'm not trying to bash QDM guys here, I just thought they would best be able to answer this question without beating around the bush. I guess I was wrong. Everyone is on the defensive.


----------



## jk hillsdale (Dec 7, 2002)

poz said:


> I'm not trying to bash QDM guys here, I just thought they would best be able to answer this question without beating around the bush. I guess I was wrong. Everyone is on the defensive.


Now I understand - it turns out that you're just a diligent seeker of QDM information. 

And as you stated in your previous post, you simply want answers from the "so called QDM guys here". I'm sure you didn't intend any disrespect by referring to everyone as "so called QDMer's". Hopefully one of the aforementioned "so called QDMer's" can provide the answer to your per bushel question, as I think we'd all agree it's critical to the practice of QDM. 

I apologize for not realizing until now that you're simply motivated by a genuine desire for QDM truth and knowledge. Carry on.


----------



## Whit1 (Apr 27, 2001)

poz said:


> Guys, CAn someone please answer the question,


 

If I'm not mistaken North Jeff has given an answer as quoted below.

_There are so many ways to become educated about individual property carrying capacities:

1. Do it all yourself. Learn what the deer should be eating, and what they shouldn't be eating. Learn how much they should be eating of native browse, and what amount they shouldn't be.

2. Hire a private biologist. Pay a well-informed deer biologist (not just any biologist) that completes property census and browse utalizations studies for a living...except nothing else.

3. Consult a local DNR district wildlife biologist about average densities in your area and density goals.

4. Use a combination of all 3, or 2. For example, hire someone to give you a number, even show you how to estimate numbers, and then you do the work to get the number and maintain the property density with harvest strategies designed by the expert while using habitat indicators to inform you of signs of overbrowsing. Maybe have an expert stop by and look at your browse annually and tell you where you are at.

_


----------



## Bob S (Mar 8, 2000)

poz said:


> When you guys set goals for your QDM management plan. Do you set them to meet the States goal of an average of 20 DPSM or do you manage them to your own personal goals of more or less DPSM?


To go back to the original question. I don`t set goals to manage for a specific number of deer. As I said before, numbers of deer don`t matter. What matters is how does the herd relate to the habitat?

What a professional deer manager says about deer numbers:

*"When doing property assessments, I know exactly what the land-owners first question will invariably be. "How many deer do we have." Everyone wants to know density numbers. I think the human mind--especially the male mind--wants numbers to mentally work with. Yet, in reality, the density numbers aren't that important when trying to produce a healthy herd. How the current density relates to available food resources is the important factor. The land-owners are always a bit disappointed and shocked when we tell them we really don't know, nor seriously care, about the deer density on their property. But what we can tell them from looking at the habitat is how the current density (whatever it is) is relating to available food sources (browse pressure). This relationship is far more important than the actual density numbers."*
Bryan Kinkel, Woods and Associates, Inc.

If Dr. Grant Woods and his team say that numbers of deer don`t matter. I won`t argue with them.


----------



## Ferg (Dec 17, 2002)

I think this as been answered - let's move on.

ferg....

let's let this run for a bit more, HOWEVER, let's get back to the main topic at hand - just how many deer do you manage for, not in a numbers sense unless you have a feel for that figure. But taking everthing into count would you say you have xx number?

Njeff has about the best reply todate, and I think he likely has a pretty good feel for the actual number too - does anyone else a good feel for the number?

ferg....

how that number relates to the DNR goals simply don't matter in this case.


----------



## Guest (Aug 30, 2005)

Ferg, in relation to your guestion, "How many deer do you manage for"? The answer varies as seasons pass. The 160 acre property that I hunt in Clare County Michigan has a magnet for deer around the first of September. The first 80 acres I purchased in 1974 was an old abandoned homestead that had an old orchard. Subsequent owners used this land primarily for grazing cattle. There was only 30 acres useful for tillage ,due to the hilly landscape. Only until the late 1950's did deer start to show up in the area and stayed for the winter season starting in the 1960's. I have scattered throughout this 80 acres well over 700 apple bearing trees. Most of them along the back side. Cattle would eat apples from the orginal orchard and do their thing outside the 30 acre fenced crop field. Deer allowed these trees to survive due to them not being there in large numbers until the 1970's and the cattle were removed for the winter season. This year the apple crop is so large that several large tree limbs have broken.

So, around the second week of September I can set up in a tall blind and observe dozens of deer that I'm sure many come from a long distance. My guess is that there are probably no more than 20 deer living on the 160 acres during the summer, so my forage needs can be low during that period. Come October to supplement the many deer and encourage them to continue their visiting the apples I plant around 15 acres of attractant type forage around August 1st. This encourages them to hang around till the first of the year. Since I helped bring them onto the property I plant at least 10 acres of corn to carry these too many deer through the winter, ( I counted 104 deer on February 5th 1999 in this corn field). Come spring Ferg, they are gone but leave healthy and well fed. I see many does with triplets. 

There is more to this story to help control deer movement pass strategically placed blinds using super attractant forage and other means of controling deer movement. I have a few employees and customers for a weekend of bow hunting in late October. I ask them to count the number and type of deer they see each hunt. there are times that the the total count in one evenings hunt reaches 60 or more deer, with just about every deer moving toward the apples and attractant forage from all directions. These are not deer counted more than once. Hunting by myself I have counted many times over 30 deer passing through in one evening. 

How many are there in October? I do not know ,but many more than the summer. This picture is differant at the farm home base in Gladwin, which I do not hunt. Here the land is primarily open (now in CRP), which encorages bucks to stay during the summer for their rondeyvous. 

As Dr. Woods suggests and he is right, concentrate on keeping the habitat sufficient from being over browsed and things take take of themselves. It's the habitat my friend!


----------



## Ferg (Dec 17, 2002)

Very informative answer and helped me a ton put this question into prespective - 

ferg....


----------



## Swamper (Apr 12, 2004)

Going back to the original question...NJ points are right on the money. And they all support the notion of site and area specific planning, with the area and site defined locally. Points to the inhearent structural weakness of issuing doe permits by DMU, as well as QDM by DMU. 

Swamper


----------



## Happy Hunter (Apr 14, 2004)

Ed Spin,

Thanks for answering my question regarding what OWDD produces a bachelor group of 24 buck . When you have 104 OWD on a 120 acre parcel seeing 24 buck in a group would not be a big surprise. Now maybe in your area such a large OWDD is not a problem , but I can assure you that if your parcel was surrounded by active farms , that OWDD would be a big problem.

As I said before, QDM'ers manage their habitat so they can ignore the states OWDD goals and have much better hunting than the average public land hunter and that is why statewide QDM will fail just as it is failing in PA.


----------

