# Now is the time for Quality Deer Management



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

Munsterlndr said:


> If you are referring to the AR surveys, the questions had to do with imposing antler restrictions and acheiving a 1:1 B/D ratio.


I'm only partially referring to AR-related surveys. The Peyton-Bull report, based on a 2001 survey of deer hunters, indicated that 55% of Michigan hunters wanted their deer herd managed for an improved buck age structure.


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

Munsterlndr said:


> TDM is about Maximum Sustainable Yield


Once again, nope. TDM is all about maximum _buck_ harvest. To learn the difference, see chapters 6-8,


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

farmlegend said:


> Once again, nope. TDM is all about maximum _buck_ harvest. To learn the difference, see chapters 6-8,


Keep chanting that mantra all you like, but the fact is, TDM as practiced in Michigan, has incorporated antlerless harvests as part of the management program for over 20 years. In previous threads you yourself have made the claim that you have not shot a buck in 4 or 5 years and that all you shoot are does. Since this occurred under TDM in Michigan and I assume that you were legally harvesting these does, if you are being intellectually honest you will admit, as painful as it might be, that harvesting does is an integral part of TDM in Michigan.

TDM is managing for *"Maximum Sustained Yield" *and this includes harvesting both bucks and does. It's about creating maximum *opportunity *for Michigan hunters.
___________________________
Munsterlndr
Curmudgeon in Training


----------



## rzdrmh (Dec 30, 2003)

[email protected] said:


> To answer another question about what to do when a buck is running through the woods and you can't tell what it is, there's always the "don't shoot unless you're sure" option. Just don't shoot. Not shooting is a novel concept. If you were pheasant hunting and a bird jumped up and flew right into the sun, so you couldn't tell if it was a rooster or a hen, and it was windy, so you can't hear any cackle, one would never think twice about letting that bird go.


yes, whatever side of qdm that you come down on, we as hunters need to eliminate the mentality of "shooting first, ask questions later".

so what if you can't identify a buck? wait and shoot one that you can. that's just good hunting practice - positively identifying game. now you could say, "that's fine, but its almost impossible to identify the size of a buck in the cedar swamp i'm hunting". well, then maybe you need to reconsider. every type of stand has its advantages and disadvantages.. i don't know how many stands i have that leave me thinking "this is a great stand except for ....." and yes, there are areas that i have that would provide excellent opportunities - if i could hunt it right, but i can't - either bad entry points, too close to bedding areas, etc. so you hunt the funnels to that spot.

deer are stealthy animals. sure there will be times when a buck is chasing a doe. enjoy the view of nature in action. more often than not, a deer will make a slow approach, and allow for positive identification.


----------



## luv 2 bowhunt (Mar 27, 2005)

Back to my July 16th post:
"These were state land deer hunting in swamps, I saw a rack and and took the shot. There was no time for counting points. If I had waited to "count points" I would have never had the time to kill any of these bucks. Three were 2 1/2 years old and one was 3 1/2 years old."
What's wrong with shooting 2 1/2 year olds and 3 1/2 year old bucks?
I thought qdm wanted that?
Or is qdm actually "trophy management?"


----------



## Jeff Sturgis (Mar 28, 2002)

"What's wrong with shooting 2 1/2 year olds and 3 1/2 year old bucks?"

That's perfect! "counting points" takes less time than it does to raise your rifle...especially when you only have to count to 3. Literally, it takes no time at all and is not an issue. At the same time, if you really couldn't tell than don't shoot....if you couldn't tell the differance between a yearling spike or 4 point, and a 2.5 year old 6-8 pt. that weighs between 40 and 80 more pounds dressed I'd question if it was even a buck in the first place and obviously not a good shot.

My guess is that most of the time the hunters who think this would be hard, have never done it. They look back and say, "there just wouldn't have been enough time", but they do not know because they really didn't care how many points the deer had..only that it had bone. When you actually try though, it is very easy and if you haven't tried, you'll never know.


----------



## Happy Hunter (Apr 14, 2004)

After hunting 3 years with a 3 pt. AR rule I can assure you that determing if a buck is AR legal can be quite difficult. I have yet to positively identify an AR legal buck during rifle season and none of the six hunters in our group has had a shot at an AR legal buck in 3 years.

Of course if you are hunting private ground where the number of hunters is severly restricted and you are assured of seeing several AR legal buck in a season, then identifying an AR legal buck may not be a problem. But,when hunting heavily pressure deer one is often lucky just to get one chance at one ethical shot without having to take the time needed to determine if a buck has 1" brow tines.


----------



## Jeff Sturgis (Mar 28, 2002)

HH,

Maybe you are hunting in the wrong spot. My friend and I from MI have shot 5 bucks in the three years with AR's and haven't had a problem in the least. In fact, in all 3 years we've passed on many more bucks than we have shot and have never had an instance where we began to wonder how many points a buck had. But, the differance may be we are basically hunting 2.5 year olds+, so if it's a yearling...smaller body, spike to 8-9" spread, thin rack, we don't even bother. On the other hand if it's 12-15" wide, a little larger body, we just pull up to aim and shoot and count 3 points on the way up...then shoot. Takes less than a couple seconds and much longer to actually raise the gun, look through the scope, take off the safety, find a shooting lane, and fire. By the way, this is all on public land with about 20 cars parking where we do.

If it's a 2.5 year old buck counting points is a non-issue. If you are trying to put another 1" point on a yearling 3 pt. or 4pt, well, it might take you a while.


----------



## Happy Hunter (Apr 14, 2004)

"On the other hand if it's 12-15" wide, a little larger body, we just pull up to aim and shoot and count 3 points on the way up...then shoot. Takes less than a couple seconds and much longer to actually raise the gun, look through the scope, take off the safety, find a shooting lane, and fire. "

If every PA hunter used that approach there would be a whole lot of non-AR legal buck shot and either left in the woods or reported as illegal kills. Before AR's 18% of the 2.5+ buck weren't AR legal and some of the guys in 2 G are saying they are seeing more big Y's than ever before.

BTW, I am not hunting in the wrong place since I don't care if I harvest a doe, a 2.5 8 pt. or a 1.5 6 pt. The PGC wants the herd in our area reduced to 6 DPSM ,so I am doing my part to reduce the herd by harvesting any legal deer. I have seen the negative effects of combining AR's with herd reduction and have no hope of harvesting a 2.5+ buck in our area and I don't want a trophy bad enough to move to a new area.


----------



## Ogre (Mar 21, 2003)

Ninety-nine percent of the time I sit back and read and don't participate in the discussions because frankly some of the statements that are made here get me so mad that if I did respond it would cause nothing but trouble and generally does. What I observe here is that if anyone challenges something within this forum it's perceived as either a personal attack or an attack on QDM and the person is either deemed ignorant, a bad hunter, or a labeled a malcontent. Even though the forum is labeled as whitetail management QDM predominates and anything counter to QDM is stifled. I have also noticed that a lot of things get passed off as fact and are never challenged or if they are challenged then the above comments apply. With all of that said, I am having a hard time passing on this one hence my response.

Earlier in the thread there was a statement. "While some remain hardened in their attitudes, the number of hunter/managers that embrace QDM continues to gain converts at an impressive rate, tipping the scales day by day."

Where are these numbers published so that I can verify this claim?

In another statement: "The question begs, is there two groups of biologists? Any biologists, legit biologists, that still defend the merits of TDM? Not authors, but legit, state employed biologists? That's who we should be interested in analyzing."

Yes there are many renown biologists including many within our own DNR that believe that the QDM philosophy is one of many factors that can or should factored into the overall deer management equation. I know the points have been made before but lets bring them back. Agriculture, the Insurance industry, the forestry industry, the big rack hunter, the more deer at all costs hunter, and yes even politics all have a place in influencing how the NRC comes up with their eventual decisions and none of these factions should be dismissed. There are many wise and sage biologists that understand we live in the larger world and that there are always gives and takes in life. Do I believe that the deer herd has been mismanaged: yes. Do I believe that QDM philosophy is the one and only philosophy to right all of the wrongs: unequivocally no. Yes, there are many LEGIT biologists that understand that there is no one right or wrong answer and that there are many factors to use in deer herd management so yes there may be two camps for biologists. I guess I don't have a problem with this and would ask: is this bad? For that matter, why should we assume that even one LEGIT Michigan biologist subscribes to QDM in total?


----------



## Jeff Sturgis (Mar 28, 2002)

Ogre, 

We can start with one name, Munising's own, John Ozoga. I challenge you to find anyone with more national respect and experience managing deer in the state of MI that does not support the principles of QDM:

1. Adequate buck age structure
2. Populations maintained in balance with the habitat
3. Appropriate sex ratios.


----------



## sporty (Jun 24, 2004)

Ogre,


I have to agree with everything you stated in your point of view. I just never really understood how so many people became experts in management of wildlife and conservation or farming. Excuse me for giving an opinion but the D.N.R., talks out its buttocks playing the number game and then suggesting a kill number to maintain a buck to doe ratio. Now we have the Q.D.M. followers who cite numbers, these people must be field workers and trained biologist, no they just use the numbers provided to them. Oh God!, please for give me but look at the big supporters of Q.D.M., its big money and look at certain members who are just so active, Wow! they sell books and seed to pad their own pockets. Now you have certain followers who pump each other up because they want to hailed the expert. Ogre, you are correct don't say anything here because mother nature isn't the expert providing the genetics and proper selection.


----------



## Tracker83 (Jun 21, 2005)

sporty said:


> Ogre, you are correct don't say anything here because mother nature isn't the expert providing the genetics and proper selection.


Oh, you want mother nature to perform natural selection? I guess that pretty much puts an end to hunting... Or are you advocating that we harvest only the "smallest and weakest" from the herd? If that's the case then I guess the button bucks and doe fawns better prepare for a hurtin'...

Tracker


----------



## Jeff Sturgis (Mar 28, 2002)

Really Sporty,

John Ozoga doesn't have any money to make off of this..he's supported QDM from the beginning and is one of the last true Deer biologists in MI that was actually paid to study deer for a living. You need to look at what information is being spread, and where that information is coming from. A "biologist" title means that person received a degree from college. If that "biologist" does not study deer for a living, than their opinion means nothing more than the average person on the street. So, when you see the likes of John Ozoga supporting QDM...and has in theory for decades, before there was the QDMA or anbody in MI had even heard about it, there is quite a bit of credibility....no different than being a true fan of a professional sports team BEFORE they start winning.

"providing the genetics and proper selection."

and when you see that happen...you have QDM  Just like in the northern portions of the U.P. We have QDM in the northern portions of the U.P. and hunters don't even realize it. Adequate buck age structure, herds in balance with the habitat, and good sex ratios. The irony is we have QDM in the U.P. in those portions, people hunt there because of the results of QDM(some realize it, some don't), but some of those same people are against QDM.


----------



## Whit1 (Apr 27, 2001)

sporty said:


> Ogre,
> 
> 
> I Oh God!, please for give me but look at the big supporters of Q.D.M., its big money and look at certain members who are just so active, Wow! they sell books and seed to pad their own pockets. .


To my knowledge there is only one member who supports QDM who has written a book, Ed Spin. The book is not about QDM, but rather planting and maintaining food plots for deer. I have the book and it is excellent and trust me, at the price Ed is charging he ain't going to the Bahamas for the winter.

The members in here who support QDM are not in it for the money despite what the post above extrapulates. That's a very far stretch. I can't imagine how much gasoline North Jeff used over the past winter traveling around the U.P. promoting QDM/MARS. At well over $2 a gallon to say that he is in it for the money is ludicrous.

Is someone/group of people making any money off QDM........probably, but they certainly aren't the members of this site.

Let's stick to facts that we know..............on either side of these issues........and let's stay on topic in the threads.


----------



## luv 2 bowhunt (Mar 27, 2005)

I have a question to the qdmer's.
How come the U.P. is the "chosen" area to enact MANDATORY QDM?
Why not Zone 3?
The Southern Lower Penninsula to me would be the perfect place to make qdm mandatory, No wolves, Little if no Winter Severity, Great soil and food sources, Private lands. 
Why continue to try this on 70% public lands?, with poor food, poor soil,wolves, winter severity problems.


----------



## Sib (Jan 8, 2003)

luv 2 bowhunt said:


> I have a question to the qdmer's.
> How come the U.P. is the "chosen" area to enact MANDATORY QDM?
> Why not Zone 3?
> The Southern Lower Penninsula to me would be the perfect place to make qdm mandatory, No wolves, Little if no Winter Severity, Great soil and food sources, Private lands.
> Why continue to try this on 70% public lands?, with poor food, poor soil,wolves, winter severity problems.


That's a fair question, imo. One I don't have an answer to, but a good question.


----------



## Bwana (Sep 28, 2004)

luv 2 bowhunt said:


> I have a question to the qdmer's.
> How come the U.P. is the "chosen" area to enact MANDATORY QDM?
> Why not Zone 3?
> The Southern Lower Penninsula to me would be the perfect place to make qdm mandatory, No wolves, Little if no Winter Severity, Great soil and food sources, Private lands.


Because of the exact reasons you mentioned, it would not produce the improvement in hunting on a percentage basis as instituting in the UP would. The law of large numbers comes into play: Is it easier to double a dollar or a million dollars! See my point! Because the hunting in the UP is at a lower threshold, it will increase the most from QDM and that is the same reason it will benefit Public Land Herds more than Private Land herds and the respective hunters!

Additionally, the amount of Land in the SLP that is under some sort of co-op management arrangement allows the herds Bucks to be better protected than the UP. 



luv 2 bowhunt said:


> Why continue to try this on 70% public lands?,


It is a myth propogated by some that QDM cannot work on Public Land due to not being able to improve habit. Not correct! Check into QDM and show me where it says habitat improvements are needed to have success.  Its not!



luv 2 bowhunt said:


> with poor food,


Only in the Deer yards. With the deer under target in 11 DMU's there is enough to go around! Where the deer are over-populated....I think you know the solution to that! :evil: 



luv 2 bowhunt said:


> poor soil,


Habitat quality is not a prerequisite to QDM. But it certainly helps. But do you think increasing the amount of mature whitetails will further erode the habitat? Studies have shown does are the driver of deer populations; not bucks!



luv 2 bowhunt said:


> wolves,


Wolves, like most creatures, will choose the easiest target. Now do you think a mature Buck is easier to kill than a Button Buck? MARS may reduce the threat from wolves!



luv 2 bowhunt said:


> winter severity problems.


You should check into J. Ozogas research regarding mature whitetails and their ability to survice harsh conditions. Antler Restrictions would cause more Bucks to survive the exact winters you are referring too.


----------



## glen sible (Dec 11, 2004)

I'll post this again since it surely seems appropriate at this point in the thread. Taken from a MDNR publication from 1999:

Appendix B. List of conditions where Quality Deer Management may be difficult to achieve. (QDMQ 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
Ver low densities of deer


I would submit that the UP fits into at least 5 of Dr. Murphy's list, which shows, to me anyway, a fairly strong dichotomy amongst the proponents of QDM for the entire UP.

glen

Thanks for reading and carry on


----------



## Bob S (Mar 8, 2000)

Whit1 said:


> To my knowledge there is only one member who supports QDM who has written a book, Ed Spin. The book is not about QDM, but rather planting and maintaining food plots for deer. I have the book and it is excellent and trust me, at the price Ed is charging he ain't going to the Bahamas for the winter.


Yes, Ed wrote a book. That book is published, marketed and sold by the Mid-Michigan Branch of the Quality Deer Management Association. *ALL* proceeds from Ed`s book go to the Mid-Michigan Branch of the Quality Deer Management Association. Ed has never made a cent from his book.

There is no one in QDMA for the money. Even those who are involved professionally are paid far less than what they could make elsewhere.


----------

