# Let's be Honest



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

Let me start out by saying that I am an ardent supporter of QDM. I am a member of the Superior Deer Management Association and was active in mustering the votes that got the central U.P. QDM measure made into law. It frustrates me to see the "sales" pitches that pro-QDM people are using to gain favor for the proposed QDM initiatives that are up for vote. Let's be honest; the only reason any QDM measure will gain favor is if it provides more and bigger bucks for hunters to go after. By passing up young bucks and where needed, shooting more does, there are significant biological advantages to justify these measures, but I'm afraid that most "Average Joe" hunters simply won't support QDM solely based on biology. However, if you ask any honest hunter if they want more and bigger bucks to hunt, the answer will almost always be, "Yes." I'm tired of hearing QDM supporters deny that they want more trophy bucks. If you deny the truth, then it smacks of dishonesty, which will alienate those fence sitters that will ultimately decide whether QDM flourishes in Michigan or dies like a gut shot deer. Incidentally, I don't think there's anything wrong with more trophy bucks. I certainly would like to see more of them.


----------



## Liver and Onions (Nov 24, 2000)

I am one of those hunters/landowners who felt that many of the people promoting QDM were really promoting TDM (trophy deer management). I support voluntary TDM on private land, but I don't like it when someone throws up a smoke screen to hide their real desires. I hope others follow your lead Trophy Specialist.
L & O


----------



## Belbriette (Aug 12, 2000)

There is no opposition whatsoever between QDM and TDM :
The second named derives necessarily from the first one and is a proof of it.
Genetic potential cannot fully express itself if the herd and the individual deer do not enjoy the best well being, including a good population structure by classes of age.
I would even dare to say that if genetic obviously govern sex and antler, antler "quality" ("trophy" wise) is more dependent on well being, in the largest meaning of the term, than on genes.
It would be too long to develop again, especially for a Frenchman who does not master your language !!!
Yet, if this statement surprises you, kindly look for my previous posts, especially two long ones, 08 22 00 and 09 16 00.
Friendly yours.


----------



## leon (Jan 23, 2000)

As a promoter of QDM in the eastern UP and hoping dearly that we win our vote this winter like our friends in the Western UP, I too don't try to hide that QDM is about having some bigger bucks around and having more bucks around.

In every editorial I have ever written (and I write lots of them), I always try to stress that hunting is more fun when we see more bucks and when we have a better chance of seeing a mature buck we'd want to hang on the wall.

I love the simple test of you see two bucks together while on your stand, one a great-tasting tender spikehorn and the second a large 3.5 year old tougher eating ten-pointer, which one would you shoot?

I don't know a hunter who would shoot the spike. 

Anyone who tells you they would is lying.


----------



## Neal (Mar 20, 2001)

Good Point TS~ Yes I love big, majestic, mature, Big racked deer, But I also believe that is is important to stress ALL the benefits of QDM.

Neal


----------



## Joe Archer (Mar 29, 2000)

I appreciate honesty. I was one of the "fence-sitters" that was alienated. <----<<<


----------



## Neal (Mar 20, 2001)

I can also Honestly say, Since we instated QDM on my and the surrounding properties, I have had the best hunting experiances ever. The buck sign has increased considerably, and it is a common thing to hear grunting, see and hear bucks fighting, and bucks actively chasing does. I have not taken a buck from this property yet, had a few close calls with some dandys, let dozens of 1.5 and 2.5 year olds go.......Very seldom a dull moment and I am having a ball!!!

Neal


----------



## beer and nuts (Jan 2, 2001)

Leon, Here is another great question to ask hunters.

You see a big ten point slip through the swamp without presenting a shot. Two days later a nice plump three point comes through broad side. Do you shoot the three point or wait for that mysterious 10 point to come back? MOst hunters will tell you they shoot the three point, guaranteed. Nice tender 1.5 year old, plus the experience of seeing the ten point and the mind set he is still out there(OR did one of you QDMers shoot that ten, because he meets your criteria of 'mature buck'.) Either way, you play out scenerios until you get the right answer you are looking for.


----------



## boehr (Jan 31, 2000)

I have a question. I see posts that refers to the deer in age, I'm interpeting the age guess is because what it has for antlers. Why are you guessing age. I don't even know of a biologist that can guess age without cutting the jaw open. Antler development has more to do than with just age.


----------



## Belbriette (Aug 12, 2000)

Even "cutting jaw" does not necessarily tell the real age : malocclusion problems between superior and inferior teeth (due to malformation) can lead to wrong conclusions.
Unless the possibility of these malformations are carefully taken in consideration, only the microscopic study of the seasonal deposited cement layers in the inter radicular space of molar teeth is generally considered credible by biologists.
Be it for roe, red or your deer, antler points mean nothing to appraise age : the single most useful criterion is the general morphology of the animal.
Antler MASS (weight) and general behaviour are two more useful guides.
If you have enough experience WATCHING deer, when all three are convergent it becomes possible to give an age, + or - one year : at least this has been my and my buddies experience for many years for roe and red deer.
From the numerous pictures of whitetails I have seen, I feel the same most likely goes for them.


----------



## boehr (Jan 31, 2000)

Belbriette...I will agree with you on telling the age by teeth as for my statement ...


> I don't even know of a biologist that can guess age without cutting the jaw open


...key word being "guess" but then to say just with experience and by looking you can come within plus or minus one year, can't agree with you on that one. As I'm sure you realize antler mass starts normally becoming less as the deer ages. Prime antler mass, depending on habitat and diet will reach maximum at about 5 years, for the whitetail at least. I won't guess on roe or red deer.


----------



## Belbriette (Aug 12, 2000)

What I wrote was a "short cut " on general principles.
It probably is I am clumsy in my use of your language, yet kindly try to forgive the "guess" you referred to, just above.
I did say the most useful single criterion was general morphology, meaning BODY morphology.
When one is very familiar with a species (except the best plastic surgery ...) , it is generally and statistically rather easy to guess some individual age let's say + or - (5- 7) years : in as much as Man life expectancy is around 7 times longer than that of deer, I do think + or - one year of a deer life amounts to 5-7 years in our species.
Veterinarians can make statistically very good guesses about a dog, a horse or a cow age (without opening their mouth ...)
Of course I know about involution of the trophy with age, yet this involution is generally rather easily noticeable on close observation :
Mass decreases in main beam and points length, facts which are quite visible, always on close observation, mass becomes much more visible towards the lower part of the trophy, whereas in young animals it is rather towards its top. 
As to behaviour, one must be very careful : nothingh looks more like an "old" deer than a young one tired for any reason, or very careful because he escaped a shot or an arrow ...
This is why ALL three criterions must be taken in consideration, and why one must accept to meet MANY deer prior making an "educated" good QDM shot of a buck ...
This thought leads me to think your very short periods of hunting oppose a good pyramid of ages in the male population.
Very friendly yours, and Merry Christmas to all of you.
Jack.


----------



## Beagle (Dec 27, 2001)

Thank you Trophy Specialist for your honesty. 

For the record, I live in the Thumb and am against the manditory implementation pf QDM. The "Letters to the Editor" in our local newspaper for the passed six months have been about what you said. One week==> Anti-QDM: "QDM people only value horns." Next week==> QDM Supporter: "No we don't, we just want a healthy deer herd." This has gone back and forth now for six months. It has quite frankly helped to turn me against QDM implementation. 

Again, your honesty is very refreshing. That approach might have gotten a better response. Who know's, maybe the response will be good. The votes have not been tallied.

Respectfully,

Beagle


----------



## PERRY (Nov 29, 2001)

Some of the discussion about judging age on a buck by using the jaw bone only is certainly not a realistic method when the animal is alive and your hunting. However, a yearling buck is about 25% of his antler potential and a 2 1/2 buck is approximately 50 to 60% of his antler potential and so on. bucks tend to max out in their individual antler developement when they reach five and six years old. it doesnt have to be made difficult, but the pragmatic point should be that hunters shoud start to determine whats mature and whats simply a yearling. In the heart of the thumb which has been nic named the core of QDM. We have collectivly watch the adult buck to doe ratio increase with more abundant mature bucks in the population. this Area has entered into our sixth year with many 2 1/2 year olds (8pts) with some outstanding 3 and 4 year olds being harvested. Its certrainly a shift in mind set to let a young yearling walk by but the rewards for most of us QDMers goes for beyond the harvest. Many of you may have had the opportunity to travel outside Michigan and hunted in Canada or out west with your experience being far better than it is at home. The goal for sportsman today should consider maintaining doe numbers in area's with low deer densities and decrease the doe population in high deer densities areas while making sure you leave the deer woods better than you found it. Simple suggestions and wise use of individual restraint goes a long way when you desire a quality experience.

Support QDM

Perry S. Russo


----------



## Stinger (Jan 29, 2000)

Perry said "Simple suggestions and wise use of individual restraint goes a long way when you desire a quality experience." 

I agree with that statement Perry. And I would like to add that anothers success shouldn't be due to the mandated restriction of others via antler restrictions or on access acutely limited or on hunting opportunities restricted. The entire "quality deer" thing is a smoke screen and could teach our children the wrong lesson about wildlife conservation.


QDM is sugar coated TDM plain and simple.


----------



## PERRY (Nov 29, 2001)

Hi Stinger

Yes some personal restraint goes along way in the deer woods. keep in mind that as state agencys developed traditional deer management strategies it was with the understanding of restoration. If state biologist were at that time thinking far into the future and said that when the deer population reaches carrying capacity of habitat or exceeds it we will then have to start harvesting these surplus does to achieve a better adult buck to doe ratio. I occasioally come on this site every so often and from the discussions being made very few sportsman are taking the time to upgrade the guality of life for the whitetail deer. Again most of us out their would like to have the possibillity of harvesting a nice buck, but QDM goes far beyond the harvest. I personally have had the opportunities to hunt in Canada and montana, Ohio. Wisconsin and these states at one time had the same associated problems with skewed buck to doe ratios like Michigan. You know one of the old sayings goes " you can lead the horse to water, but you cant make him drink". I'm not trying to be smart here just that under our states current deer population plenty of education has to done so that sportsman and hunters and landowners will have a good understanding of deer management stategies that address todays current population. I have talked to many hunters over the last several months and one of the things I talk about is the post season when hunting is over with and your out their tring to find or even see what bucks are left over for next year. most hunters dont even see yearlings or mature bucks at this time of the year because you have to wait for next years recruitment of yearlings so that they may be harvested and meet the anual 75% of our states buck harvest. look QDM is for everyone. and its not about antlers its a shift in mindset. Certainly you have to understand the quantity of bucks under TDM OR QDM is meant to reach the recreational demand for hunters. Therefore, you honestly have to ask yourself is harvesting a buck the most important part of the hunting experience? I believe many of Michigan sportsman would desire to view natural rutting behaviors associated with older age class bucks being present to intensify the rutting activity. but given the choice most of us would not want to see changes in our whitetail deer hunting traditions. but whether we have noticed it or not, for the past century whitetail deer hunting has been shifting course towards a healthier socially balanced adult deer herds

Try and aquire all the information on QDM. Thus, deer hunting in MIchigan during the next two decades under Quality Deer Mangement may be even better than it was during the past 20 years. learning to broaden your horizons as a hunter makes you far more aware of the important issuess in deer management. the better you are at it, the easier it is to make decisions that benefit yourself and enjoyment of your hunting experience

Give it a Try

Perry S. Russo
Thumb Area Branch Pres


----------



## Stinger (Jan 29, 2000)

I agree with you again Perry!! EDUCATION on these issues are the key. Not the mandatory regulations QDM followers advocate. As we both know you won't get anywhere with QDM unless it has local support and you won't get that needed support by trying to make them "drink the water". 

You have to make them thirsty first!


----------



## PERRY (Nov 29, 2001)

HI stinger

By the time we get everyone on board to drink the water it may be to late for our deer population. I have traveled hundreds of miles over the last 3 years educating an putting on seminars in the Thumb and throughout the state. How many miles have you traveled or how many tanks of gas have you paid for out of your own pocket to move hunters and landowners from just being a deer harvested to a deer manager. From sports writers to TV outdoor programs have taken the facts about QDM and have kept hunters guessing and assuming what is really true. Assuming stifles your curiousity and quessing denies the importance of evidence, neither is likely to lead to any amount of knowledge when you consider deer management philosophys. most important be honest with yourself and others about what you may or may not know. to admit you dont know something shows good sense, restraint, and intellectual honesty. these are not weaknesses but strengths and will help provide a prudent path of managing deer populations here in Michigan with good resourcefull knowledge instead of the usual guessing and assuming. 

keep an open mind
and keep the fun In Hunting

Perry s Russo

THUMB AREA BRANCH PRES


----------



## jamie7117 (Aug 15, 2001)

great post PERRY!
keep up the good work!
will you be at the Jan. 12th meeting?
looking forward to it


----------



## Beagle (Dec 27, 2001)

Since the president has posted here I will take this opportunity. I have debated some good people on this board about QDM and the reasons for or against. The comments made in this post are aimed only at the Thumb Area Branch. By that comment, I am not suggesting that the Thumb Area Branch is not good people. I know that this post is long, but please read the entire thing.

Except for my college years, I have lived and hunted in the Thumb for all of my life. I love the Thumb and all it has to offer. I live here even though I have to drive a distance to practice my chosen profession.

I really am happy for the people in the heart of the Thumb (the core of QDM as you call it). Heck I even work with a gentleman who participates in Cass City. It was even fun for a while to hear the stories. We even chatted a bit about it this morning. I am real happy for the guy because he has the opportunity to CHOOSE to practice QDM on a section of land with his neighbors. He explained that how over the years he and his hunting partners grew to not even get excited about a small buck walking in. That is his opinion, but he has that right. To be honest, my heart still skips a beat when a small doe walks by. The day it doesnt is the day I hang it all up. But the point is that he has the right to CHOOSE. 

Why cant you all be happy with your success and your increase in the enjoyment of your hunting experience? Please dont try to define enjoyment of the hunt for the rest of us. My entire hunting career has been very enjoyable. 

I was real disappointed when I found out about the end around you pulled by going to the NRC and having the implementation plan all ready by the time you even talked to the rest of us. Sure there was an informational meeting in Ubly on September 23, but it was after the fact. I wont comment much on the meeting because I was not there. But from want I heard, it was just an informational meeting about the plan with a very small percentage of time dedicated to hearing from the opposition. In a letter to the editor of the Tuscola County Advertiser (October 22), Paul Plantinga noted several times that this meeting was heavily advertised. Maybe I had my head in the sand, but I honestly did not know about it.

In the midst of story telling about the bigger antlered deer, I also heard many complaints about people who do not CHOOSE to participate. Like the Amish spread throughout the area and the 2 guys with 40 acres in our section. From this and other comments, I cant help to wonder if this mandatory QDM proposal is less about the health of the heard and the enjoyment of the other hunters and more about protecting your deer.

As you can tell by now, I am not real pleased with the Thumb proposal. I have pointed out my concerns with the proposal on other posts on this board, so I wont spell them out again. On the other hand, I have been very willing to listen and learn about why you all think that there is a problem with the health of the herd. If there is truly a problem with the health of the deer herd in the Thumb, I want to be part of the solution. I believe if presented in the right way, most would. Your tactics have done nothing but alienate people.

I would much rather be collaborating with you all on things like improving habitat, education about not killing buttons (even mandatory buck tag use on buttons), education about the importance of harvesting a doe in the appropriate areas, mapping out the true population and densities in the different areas. And yes even a discussion on your concern about having a balanced herd and passing on 1 ½ year old bucks. This seems that it would be much more constructive than what is going on now. Sure you are always going to have people that will never change. 

Some examples of your posted comments that stirred negative emotions in me are listed below. 

very few sportsman are taking the time to upgrade the quality of life for the whitetail deer.

To most this sounds like a take from a tree-hugger presentation. You talk about quality of life, when we send ¾ million hunters to the woods every year with the express intent of killing ¼ - 1/3 of the total population. The deer herd is bigger and healthier (not counting TB) than it has been in modern times. Despite all the nasty things that we do to them, like urban sprawl, Scent Lok suits, baitingetc.

 you honestly have to ask yourself is harvesting a buck the most important part of the hunting experience?

Why should someone be ashamed because the pinnacle of a good fair hunt is the kill?

By the time we get everyone on board to drink the water it may be to late for our deer population.

It has been mentioned by a pro-QDM wildlife biologist that the population has been skewed since the early 1800s era commercial kill-off. Do you really honestly believe that that if we dont act this exact moment it will be too late. Please do not insult our intelligence. In fact, if the danger is so clear and present, why is the NRC doing a survey about implementing rather than just implementing? Noe that you have all of our attentions, I suggest a more pragmatic approach.

I wont even go into the emotions that your lead a horse to water argument stirs.

You give people far too little credit. If information were presented to the masses that clearly showed that there was a danger too our herd, I believe most would jump on board. The leaders of the anti-mandatory QDM have been identified. Maybe if the proposal does not pass you could work with those people to find common ground. It seems to me that any good management plan would need the support of more than 66% of the people. For those of us against mandatory QDM, bigger antlers, is not a good enough reason for change.

I only picked out a few of your comments to illustrate the type of approach that has alienated many of us. I do realize that the antis comments have been just as inflammatory, if not worse. I will only defend that by saying that in messing with our deer hunting you have stirred deep dark emotions. 

This post is more or less a rant to let you know how I feel. I know that it will not change yours or anyone elses opinion and will have no effect on the outcome in the Thumb. The respondents to the survey have most likely already decided that. 

At this point I will continue to lobby against implementation of the Proposal. I am working, though, to better understand the perceived issues with the herd. If there is an issue, I truly hope we can mend fences and come together to find common ground. Who knows, maybe it will not be necessary, if you get your agenda implemented?

Beagle


----------



## Neal (Mar 20, 2001)

> _Originally posted by Beagle _
> *
> I was real disappointed when I found out about the end around you pulled by going to the NRC and having the implementation plan all ready by the time you even talked to the rest of us. Sure there was an informational meeting in Ubly on September 23, but it was after the fact. *


Beagle~ This "end around" was done in accordance with the NRC's proposal protocol......you make it sound like it was snuck in. There were two other informational meetings, one as early as Jan. 01' at the Ubly Hunt Club......complete details of this proposal were discussed at those meetings. Both of these meetings were standing room only. It was at this time that the "Anti-QDM leadership" should have made their stand and formed a opposition where compromises could be made. I can assure you Lounsbury and Randy Brown knew about this proposal well before it was submitted.

I can also assure you if this proposal doesn't pass, we will sit down with the opposition, (now that there officially is one) and work out our differences.

Neal


----------



## Stinger (Jan 29, 2000)

Ah yes, education is a beautiful thing. Your twisted form of religious qdm isn't fooling anyone in the thumb area and your dubious and disingenuous solicitations are going to result in the defeat of the qdm proposal. All to many people are discovering your less than honest promotion of this self-centered agenda. 

Just remember to keep an open mind.


----------



## jamie7117 (Aug 15, 2001)

i think someone's delusional, or maybe just desperate.


----------



## Neal (Mar 20, 2001)

> _Originally posted by Stinger _
> *Ah yes, education is a beautiful thing. Your twisted form of religious qdm isn't fooling anyone in the thumb area and your dubious and disingenuous solicitations are going to result in the defeat of the qdm proposal. All to many people are discovering your less than honest promotion of this self-centered agenda.
> 
> Just remember to keep an open mind. *


Well then I guess you don't have anything to worry about, do you? You are right, we are not fooling anyone, because we are not trying to. All of us have been up front and honest, since you can't seem to absorb that...... just take your ball and go home.

Neal

BTW~ Who appointed you the spokesperson for the people of the Thumb?


----------



## Huntnut (Jan 21, 2000)

Stinger,

The viciousness of your posts degrades your arguement.

Why do you suppose there are so many proffesional wildlife biologists that support the principles of QDM?

Do you think that these proffesional biologists are staking their proffesional integrity and careers to appease a small minority of hunters?

Or do you think the dozens and dozens of biologists that support QDM actually believe it works? 

I haven't heard one person against QDM quote a biologist that claims it is harmful.

Do you understand that I do not want to implement this if it does not have public support?

We want the public to support it!

If we were to implement qdm without asking the public how they feel, then you can call us sneaky and underhanded.

I want hunters to want QDM. 
I want to educate hunters on why it is better. 
I want the public to fully understand and participate in this implementation. 

I would be happy with a 66% approval, but I would be much happier with a 90% approval.

We voted on Prop G to start making the NRC use scientifically sound regulations, we rely on the NRC to implement the ideas of these biologists. 

We talk to the public. We are here discussing your concerns with you.

Would you feel better if we just ignored you, and marched on with QDM without involving the public???

Hunt


----------



## Beagle (Dec 27, 2001)

Hunt,

Please do not take this question as any kind of attack against you and your belief in QDM. But I noticed on the other site that Sparta-T (biology degree) had a little different take. 

I asked this before. Is the belief in QDM mainstream among your peirs? Are there any other takes or proposals among wildlife biologists in the State? 

I just want to look at all sides.

Thanks,

Beagle


----------



## Stinger (Jan 29, 2000)

What a great title for this thread. For the record gentlemen I am not against QDM. What I am against is the antler restriction proposal. 

Name one state biologist (MDNR) that has come out and supported the QDM proposal. 

If you take the time to research the issue there are plenty of biologists in other states who not support or agree with antler point restrictions as being the "only" way to manage a deer herd. Some in fact are solidly opposed to it, and some even say it could be harmful.


----------



## jamie7117 (Aug 15, 2001)

"If you take the time to research the issue there are plenty of biologists in other states who not support or agree with antler point restrictions as being the "only" way to manage a deer herd. Some in fact are solidly opposed to it, and some even say it could be harmful."


name 'em


no one said "antler restrictions" is the ONLY way to manage a deer herd, it is just ONE way.


----------



## Neal (Mar 20, 2001)

Stinger~ try to keep in mind that there is already doe reductions in effect in the proposed areas as well as an increase in the betterment of habitat by private land owners. Since you are Not against QDM, just antler restrictions, why don't you get involved and help on the other aspects of a solid QDM program. This is a great opportunity to be involved in an inevitable QDM future. 

Neal


----------



## Stinger (Jan 29, 2000)

All in due time Jamie, all in due time.

If antler restrictions are not the only way to manage a herd then why is that all we hear from the qdm advocates, and why is that in the proposal?


----------



## Huntnut (Jan 21, 2000)

John Ozoga....lifetime QDMA member.

Gary Alt. PA's QDM implementation biologist.

I bet some other fellas can name alot more.
I don't have the time now.

Stinger,

QDM is not really about BALANCING the herd, but a technique used to harvest correct proportions of all bucks and does in all age classes and within carrying capacity once the balance has been achieved. 

We get too hung up on the BALANCING technique, and QDM gets a bad rap for it.

The NRC dictated the antler restrictions and tied the hands of the QDMA of every other balancing technique.

A few ways to start the balance: 

One buck/year....period. 

Buck tag on a button (you can still hunt for an antlered buck with 4pt on one side.) 

Overall antler restrictions on all bucks. (I could live with it, but..)

A lottery buck harvest with all unsuccessful applicants being eligible for a doe permit. Excess doe permits are lotteried off. 

A doe only season. 

Take QDM out for a second....which way is the best to achieve balance while keeping the same # of deer? 

Why don't you get NRC commisioner Bob Garner on the phone, and ask him why he only would consider antler restrictions?

Hunt


----------



## Neal (Mar 20, 2001)

Stinger~ Please tell me what other aspects of QDM you would like to see addressed.

Neal


----------



## Stinger (Jan 29, 2000)

This QDM process (antler point restrictions) was started way before Bob Garner was a commissioner Huntnut, you need to do way better than that.


----------



## jamie7117 (Aug 15, 2001)

i would expect if someone made claims and paraphrased wildlife biologists they would at least have the names and/or sources readily available. guess not!LOL


----------



## Huntnut (Jan 21, 2000)

Excuse me?

Why don't you read the play by play in the October 2001 issue of woods and Water News?

Listen, I don't want to talk QDM with you, you are unreachable.

I think turning a Vegan into a deerhunter would be easier than getting you to accept a single good thing qdm has to offer the deerhunters in this state.

Have you found a biologist to back your anti-qdm claim?

I am interested.

I spend time writing this for the fencesitters that don't know what qdm is about.

I am sorry you believe that every last single qdm advocate is interested in trophies.

God forbid some of us may be into qdm as a way to better our deer and sport.

What have you done lately?


Hunt


----------



## Stinger (Jan 29, 2000)

You should check the sources you use Huntnut. 

At least in PA they are doing a study before implementation.

Ever wonder why states out west have given up on anlter point restrictions? They used that system years ago and gave up on it. Must be some reasons don't you think?

P.S. Not anti-QDM Huntnut just anti antler point restrictions. Can't you understand that?


----------



## Huntnut (Jan 21, 2000)

No check YOUR facts!

There are many antler restrictions out west!

"At least in PA they are doing a study before implementation."

So many Michigan anti-qdm'ers are pleased with PA's implementation.

But do you realize the fireworks that are still blazing in that state because of antler restrictions???

It sounds like they may can the whole project because of antler restriction debates.

"P.S. Not anti-QDM Huntnut just anti antler point restrictions. Can't you understand that?"

I believe there are more ways to achieve balance other than point restrictions. Other choices.

But why do you bash the QDMA when it was the NRC that stopped every other choice?!

Hunt


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

Stinger, your disingenuousity is showing!

Quote: "For the record, gentlemen, I am not against QDM."

Quote: "QDM is sugar coated TDM, pure and simple."

If you understood QDM as you have claimed to, your comment about "sugar coated TDM" can only be intended to mislead people. The differences are very fundamental, and you know it.


And sometimes you outdo yourself.
Quote: "Name one biologist (MDNR) that has come out and supported the QDM proposal."

As someone who is obviously following this issue closely, you know perfectly well that the DNR has taken an official position of neutrality on the matter of QDM demonstration areas in the Thumb and the Eastern UP. Their staff biologists, cognizant of the internal politics within the department and potential impact on their careers, are not about to go public in support of these proposals. Some have done so privately, but have expressed sincere concern that their views not be known.

Is all this duplicity worth it, just to defend your privilege of harvesting yearling bucks when you feel like it?


----------



## Stinger (Jan 29, 2000)

Keep in mind that this entire QDM push is based on the fact that you claim that we have an "unhealthy deer herd" in Michigan. I don't think anyone here has proven that the herd in Michigan is unhealthy. (exclude the TB area of course).


When I posted:

"QDM is sugar coated TDM, pure and simple" 


I should have instead stated :

"this twisted and convoluted form of QDM is sugar coated TDM, pure and simple".

The NRC approved the evaluation process that was brought to them by a "QDM workgroup". I have read the document and the process "recommends" using antler point restrictions but does not specifically state other methods can not be used in such a proposal.

Farmlegend, I would like to have a choice and a voice in the matter.


----------



## hasenpfeffer (Oct 6, 2001)

Stinger, I agree.
The more QDM stuff I read, the more I have come to the realization that what is proposed here in MI as QDM is just a little bit different. It's that little bit that makes all the difference. It's that little bit that turns many people off. 
The study I just posted about the culling of inferior bucks actually came from QDM information I aquired through friends at MI bow hunters. 
As for PA, I recently read an article that says their cheif biologist believes the carrying capacity of the land at this time could not withstand the insurgence of young bucks into the system without causing major problems. Therefore he believes PA should hold off on any antler restrictions until the herd can be culled enough to allow for this insurgence. I believe I still have a copy of that article if anyone wants to read it.


----------

