# Am I a trophy hunter?



## Letmgro (Mar 17, 2002)

Just like everyone else, every time I head out into the woods, I try my hardest to harvest a deer. As long as it isn't a small buck, and I have permits, I'll shoot it. Last year I shot 3 does and passed on Many small bucks, and in MANY areas of this state. 

Am I a trophy hunter? Do trophy hunters care enough about the health of our deer herd to harvest does? I doubt it. Every QDMer I know harvests does, as well as passing up the little bucks, are they Trophy hunters? I doubt it.

Do I have the money to go to a game ranch and pay thousands to shoot a big buck? NO, and if I did I'd never stoop that low. Do QDMers go to game ranches to shoot big bucks? I doubt it because they're spending so much money every year enhancing the habitat on their properties, what would be the need for a game ranch?

Because I choose to let the little bucks walk, and keep the does in check, I'm significantly increasing my chances that someday, just maybe, I'll harvest a monster!! 

But in the mean time, I'll just keep shooting them does!!

So, am I a trophy hunter? I think we ALL are!!


----------



## jamie7117 (Aug 15, 2001)

doesn't matter, just keep hammerin' the does!


----------



## Benelli (Nov 8, 2001)

Very well stated Letmgro.I echo your thoughts and opinions.

I doubt I will harvest a buck this year unless I see a bruiser. 

Im optimistic but realisticand patient too. My chances of seeing the Trophy this year are better than in years past. 

Im banking on two doe to fill the freezer for another winter, I see this as the best way to do my small part for the long term benefit of the entire deer herd.

Anything above the two doe for this year will be a bonus for me.

Guess you can count me in as a "trophy" hunter by your definition.

Good luck to all this Fall!!


----------



## Bob S (Mar 8, 2000)

> _Originally posted by Letmgro _
> *Do I have the money to go to a game ranch and pay thousands to shoot a big buck? *


 It would be cheaper than what I spend on my hunting property every year. But then I would be a trophy hunter and would not be practicing QDM. I would like to get enough does off of my property this year to make up for some of my neighbors who are 1 1/2 year old buck hunters and won`t shoot does.


----------



## Letmgro (Mar 17, 2002)

I hear you Bob S, but think of all that blood and sweat you gave this summer developing your Big buck habitat? 

On second thought, maybe them game ranches are the way to go!

NOT in my lifetime!


----------



## beer and nuts (Jan 2, 2001)

You guys have got to be kidding...YOURSELVES...right. Have you been to one of those deer ranches? They are doing exactly what you guys are doing.....killing does(in large amounts), shooting the biggest bucks, and creating the best habitat(food plots etc..). In one breath you claim not to be trophy hunters(like the ranches) and in another all you talk about is targeting the "monster", "big buck". Oh no you guys are not trophy hunters...I doubt it.....just admit it. QDM = deer ranch management = trophy hunting.....pure and simple....just admit it. Only thing most QDMers are lacking is a tall 12 foot fence and charging people money to hunt it. Please tell what is so different about Ranch Management, besides big fences and charging$$ to hunt, than what QDM is trying to accomplish and then tell me why you are not "trophy hunters"!?!?


----------



## Benelli (Nov 8, 2001)

B&N

I am a trophy hunter.

Q = Quality, which I consider to be healthy deer, resulting from a population of deer in balance with the available habitat. If a 5 year old buck can only support spikes in my area, then it will be a trophy. Problem is that the last 5 year old was taken in 1981, and it was a 12 point, so I know the potential is there.

Ill pass on several small bucks this year just like last year hoping that a buck may make it past 3 years of age. 

Ill harvest more doe this year than last in an effort to bring the ratio back into balance.

Ive taken my share of little bucks in the past, I am just changing the way I do things now with the long term benefit of the deer in mind, and hope that I can harvest a mature buck someday, not sure why someone should be criticized for that. Can you provide me with any data that suggests that harvesting more doe, practicing restraint in harvesting young males, and working toward better habitat is somehow detrimental to the deer herd? Let me know and good luck this fall.

Update...just checked the logs and the last 5 y.o. buck was taken in 1975, it was only a 10 point.


----------



## beer and nuts (Jan 2, 2001)

Benelli,

I'm glad your out of the closet! 

Is what you described "detrimental" to the herd-absolutely not, is it necessary?(and this is where we differ)-absolutely not.

I'm not critisizing anybody for taking or practicing trophy managment, I was just asking for you guys to admit that yes QDM is actually trophy hunting and you are trophy hunters. I understand you guys take does, but what I am saying is that so do the deer ranches and deer ranches and QDM follow the exact same management plan. You guys have always tried to seperate yourselves from the deer ranches as far as the managing philosophy goes, I do understand the reasons why(bad for your cause, didn't want to be grouped in with ranch style hunting), but isn't time to step forward and admit that the concepts of QDM and deer ranches are on the same parallel?


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

"what I am saying is that so do the deer ranches and deer ranches and QDM follow the exact same management plan."


Beer&Nuts, I honestly have a difficult time deciding if you post your comments to this forum with the intention of deceiving people, or you simply have not done your homework in studying what Quality Deer Management is. It is one or the other; either you haven't done your homework, or you're intentionally trying to deceive forum viewers.

As to the differences betweem QDM and TDM, they are authoritatively well-described, and anyone interested in those differences can easily research them and identify these different approaches. 

Proprietors of trophy ranches will acknowledge that they practice TDM. It wouldn't be economical for them to practice QDM, since QDM is directed at managing a deer herd for a natural age/sex structure, and wouldn't produce sufficient mature bucks for a trophy-management enterprise. 

If you have researched the differences between these deer management approaches, and do know the difference, I suggest you just do the right thing and simply go away. You are not supporting an honest discussion of deer management, which is what this forum ought to be about.


----------



## Letmgro (Mar 17, 2002)

b and n,

If by chance that monster buck walks off my property and onto yours, feel free to shoot it! I won't charge you a dime for it.

Even though I did most everything that I could possibly do to grow that buck BIG, the one thing I'm not going to do is put a 12' fence around my property!

I'll be happy and proud that the monster you shot chose my quality habitat as his home. Please just allow me to take some pictures so I can share with family and friends.

Also feel free to shoot that spike that walks off my property, because it's perfectly legal. But, if by chance you let him walk, he may turn out to be something that I would actually be proud to shoot someday! 

The choice is yours!

In the mean time, I'll keep shooting those does!


----------



## beer and nuts (Jan 2, 2001)

Farmlegend,

You can try, but don't insult me on my knowledge of deer, QDM, TDM. You try to act like QDM is some specialized science. You might be able to confuse some with your babbling of BS.

I have an employee that works at one of Michigans most well known and respected deer ranches, we have set down and talked many times on how they manage the ranch and it is so much QDM that I can hardly find a difference between QDM and TDM besides the names. Here is how they manage in a nutshell, nothing more nothing less, Ratio-they like to keep it around 2:1(favor of does).
Does-they harvest over 200 on average a year usually late summer and they try and harvest 2.5 year does or does with out fawns . Bucks-they harvest only mature 4.5 years and older. They than have a scrub hunt right before the rut where they harvest lesser bucks with less than desable horns(this is the only small difference I see where they truly try in making them perfect even sided trophies). Now they also feed these deer mineral pellets and have a lot of planted crops. These are only to speed the process of growing horns bigger. Besides the fact they harvest scrub bucks and feed them mineral pellets to increase horn size every philosphy of QDM is there, from ratio, to harvesting mature bucks to controlled habitat to a controlled harvest. Sure they have a ton more deer per square mile, but they also supply the habitat for these deer numbers. Only thing I see different is the end result their 4.5 year old is a 170 class buck and a QDM buck is on average a tad smaller on average other than that please explain what is so different in philosphies. I'm getting my info. straight from the horses mouth. I have even asked him if QDM and the way the manage the ranch is the same....answer "pretty dam close".

Again I will not expect you to agree and come right out and admit this, as I understand that any QDM group does not want to be in the same sentence as deer ranches(not good in the eye of the majority). Say what you want but I'm here speaking my peace and you can bet I'm not going away. I respect all opinions but Farmlegend you just fueled the fire by requesting that I "simply go away". I'm truely glad your on the QDM side.


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

Let's go back to your quote, B&N.

"what I am saying is that so do the deer ranches and deer ranches and QDM follow the exact same management plan."

Untrue and unsupportable. Again, either your understanding of QDM v. TDM is lacking, or you are being intentionally deceptive.

I'm willing to acknowledge that you may in fact be an expert on the concepts of these two management styles. The differences are clear. Assuming you are such an expert, however, I can reach no other conclusion than you are intentionally trying to spread mistruths. And if that's the case, perhaps your posts need to be accompanied by a warning label.


----------



## Neal (Mar 20, 2001)

Of course there are simularities between QDM & TDM. These strategies develop healthy, well structured herds. The big difference is the ranches use it soley for antler growth where QDM does it for the betterment of the deer we love to pursue. Large antlers are a bi-product of QDM, not its purpose.

I have hunted Two whitetail enclosures with 100% success on trophy bucks, I have hunted my QDM land for five years with 0% success on a mature deer......Trust me there is a difference.

Neal


----------



## beer and nuts (Jan 2, 2001)

Thank you Neal.

Even though you still try to sweeten it up a little to distinguish that they might be seperate(TDM and QDM). Either way, they both are managed with the same philosphies and strategies and the "product" is the same-its just "used" for different purposes(one for $$$ and the other for enjoyment).

I don't believe success(whether its 100% or 0%) as anything to do with the managing strategies and/or differences. 

5 years without success!?!?!?-MMmmmm how much land do ya own?


----------



## Neal (Mar 20, 2001)

80 arces of the nastiest swamp in the state, near Bad Axe........I truely have had more fun hunting over the last couple years, since the inception of our QDM program. There is hardly a time out when you don't hear a fight, grunting, chasing,rubs, scrapes. I have taken several does and am having a blast.

One thing you are leaving out is the "control factor"......fences allow a lot more control over the resource.


----------



## Belbriette (Aug 12, 2000)

I have followed attentively this forum for around three years.
From the other side of the "pond", after all I have read, I cannot understand why this TDM - QDM quarrel is still going on ... that is except if, as I am personally deeply convinced, all hunters are somewhere trophy hunters, BUT VERY DIFFERENT ones : 

- On one side, I have read about "meat" hunters who prefer to shoot a small weight spike and refuse to shoot any heavier doe.

- On another one, I have read about deer enclosures and deer ranches devoted to "manufacture" large trophies, by all means.

- I have also read QDMers about deer management, about a most NATURAL scheme of the deer resource management in view of its best long term perpetuation.

In ALL polygenous mammal species, only the physically fittest males are serving the females : to reach this stage, they must have reached their heaviest body and antler weights (both go together).
As I came to learn, this natural mating "apogée" is taking place at around 5-6 / 7-8 years old in your deer.

As a result, it is very clearly obvious, for anybody concerned about the future and best renewal of the resource, that ENOUGH males should reach this normal age of mating, to sustain the the best competitive renewal of the species.

Again, as a result, it is not less clearly less obvious that the big antlers QDMers are looking for are NOT for themselves to put above their chimney but , PRIMARILY, to garanty the best perpetuation of the resource, according to its NATURAL scheme of reproduction.

When ENOUGH bucks at their "apogée" are present to perpetuate competitively the species, the possible harvest of some of them becomes a REAL harvest any hunter may be proud of : as a good gardener disserve a good harvest, so it goes with the hunter.

Of course, QDM goes against ease and selfishness for any reason, it is, above all, concerned by the best sustainability of the resource.

The choice is easy but the way is hard ... this most likely explain that ...

"The users must be useful to the used" . 

Kindly forgive my language approximations, just try to get the idea.

Jack.


----------



## Fred Bear (Jan 20, 2000)

wait a minute, let me try and understand this. A non-QDM'er would rather see and shoot small racked and bodied bucks for less meat and less antler. A pro QDM'er would rather shoot larger bucks with more meat and more antler...... right? Sooooo.... would'nt a "meat" hunter want to shoot a bigger deer with MORE meat? Why is there even a argument? I don't understand why anyone would be oposed to learning how to help our herd become a bigger and stronger herd. Some hunters just want to shoot deer. period. and thats fine but wouldnt it make sence to impove not only the size of the rack but the size of the body? You meat hunter must think that does dont have any meat on them and young fork horns do.


----------



## Belbriette (Aug 12, 2000)

Fred Bear wrote : " Some hunters just want to shoot deer. Period. "
This " Period " looks to me as being the heart of the problem :

- From a purely ecologic point of view (habitat and herd welfare), to shoot deer is a must, especially in your case because of frequent overpopulation. 
- Yet, all I have read indicate the cull is very far from what it should be :
Overpopulation, very poor sex ratio, very poor structure of the male population by classes of age : all are short or long term potential dangers for your deer ( disease, absent natural mating competition between males ). 

IF I am not mistaken : 

- I came to think your legal gun hunting period is much too short : as a result most gun hunters hurry to shoot the first deer they see, either for meat or for a supposed "trophy" (as that of a yearling ...), outside of any global herd management concern.
To manage means a minimum possibility to choose what to kill, this requires time : the shorter the legal period, the more it necessarily goes against a sound management.
Once the process is started, things can only get worse and worse. 

- What is hunting about : it is to search, pursue and capture a wild animal.
Once the capture has been accomplished, the hunt is over, so is the pleasure of the hunt. 
This looks to me as an also very good reason to prolong the legal hunting period, at least for any one who disserve to be called a HUNTER. 

- As you have mostly more than plenty deer to kill, I came to think many of those who go to capture deer are not really motivated hunters ... unless they hunt under the too high pressure of a too short legal hunting season.

- I also came to think a longer legal hunting season would minimize the hunting pressure on public land and favour a better distribution of deer between public and private lands, fact which would also go in the right direction.

To end with : 
As long as male fawn has not reached his full body growth, very logically he devotes all the foods he eats to survive and grow up : antler are only secondary sex characteristics, as such, they will only developp for good when full bone growth has been achieved ( body weight, that is to say bone + muscles will go on increasing until the side effects of old age will come up ).

Jack.


----------



## Benelli (Nov 8, 2001)

B&N,

Heres a quote from you:

 Is what you described "detrimental" to the herd-absolutely not, is it necessary? (and this is where we differ)-absolutely not. 

Simple question.why do you think it is not necessary to harvest an adequate number of doe (more in my case), pass on small bucks, work on habitat, etc in order to work toward a healthier deer herd? This is where we differ in our philosophies, correct?


----------



## bwiltse (Jan 18, 2000)

For those interested in a nice overview of deer management strategies (traditional, quality and trophy) and differences go to
http://members.tripod.com/~mmbqdm/Miscellaneous/traditionalversus.html


----------



## Huntnut (Jan 21, 2000)

Geez B&N,

We went over all this 3 years ago, 2 years ago, and again last year.

Are you bored today? Why arent you out huntin? It's deer season, you should be passin doe's and killin forks right now!

We have wasted significant bandwidth explaining this to you in time past.

All I will say is this, you are free to hunt and manage anyway that is legal. 

QDM proponents are free to hunt and manage anyway that is legal.

Why do you feel it's necessary to jump on fellow hunters and start arguements?

You said yourself, in your opinion, QDM is not detrimental to the herd...so why do you care what I do on my property???

With all of the ill's deer hunting faces today...you can't find something more worthwhile to do?

That was an awful vile post designed to do nothing but slam your fellow hunters. 

I'm not going to rehash everything you have read here in the past. You want to talk management strategies, fine. But you have been here long enough to know exactly how everyone feels already. You have asked the exact same questions too many times in the past.

Stating anyone who practices QDM is akin to fenced in game ranch trophy hunters is a good way for me to dismiss your opinions outright.

Go attack PETA, your attacks on your allies here show your true colors.


----------



## Benelli (Nov 8, 2001)

I didnt mean to start a pissing match here, perhaps my wording / choice of words as a trophy hunter led to that. I havent been involved in many of the historical discussions either, pardon my redundancy.

In reference to Letmgros initial post, I think everyone, whether they believe in QDM or not, wants to harvest a buck of a lifetime, a real trophy someday.

I have data to suggest in my area they do not exist.

Think about it, I had referenced one mature buck (5 y.o.) harvested in the last 26 years at our place.

Based on the number of hunters and number of days spent each year during rifle season only, I figure thats nearly 1,400 hunter days afield. Almost 4 years! Even if all the guys in our camp were totally inept when it comes to deer hunting (which isnt the case, except for maybe) you would figure that at least someone would get lucky during that amount of time and harvest a mature buck. 

Mature bucks just do not exist in the area as a results of traditional management practices. That is certainly not how nature intended the age structure of a wild population to manifest itself.

Id like to see that trend change over the next 26 years in response to a change in management practice as well as philosophy.

Time will tell, Im trying to do my part.


----------



## Huntnut (Jan 21, 2000)

Benelli,

My post wasnt directed at you my freind.

It was directed at Beer & Nuts who has already asked these same questions, and has made these same comments for years now.

He has been answered, in detail, every year.

He knows exactly what we're going to say, because we have beat this dead horse too many times. 

I question what his motivations are.


----------



## just ducky (Aug 23, 2002)

Huntnut,
Only one thing I disagree with you about this time. You said:
"All I will say is this, you are free to hunt and manage anyway that is legal."

I have absolutely no problem with the principles of QDM if that is your cup of tea. However, my problem is that where I hunt (Montcalm County) the QDM supporters are trying to FORCE me to shoot 4 points or more on a side, so I AM NOT "free to hunt and manage anyway that is legal". I've already bored everyone on the other thread specific to the Montcalm County proposal to tears with my position, so I'll spare it here. But what I fundamentally object to is being forced to think in someone else's manner.

Hopefully all hunters can coexist and neither side is forced into someone else's beliefs.


----------



## Huntnut (Jan 21, 2000)

JD,

I dont like forcing Antler restrictions on anybody either...and I don't support them.

See, I actually agree with B&N on that point.

There are a million ways to say you dont agree with QDM. 

Labeling QDM'ers as trophy hunters, is the same old attacking line that has been said a bazillion times before and has 0 educational value.

Voluntary QDM on private property is the choice of many many hunters.

What I truly want is hunters to stop trying to belittle each other. 

I dont care what B&N does on his property. It's none of my dang business.

I hope he has an excellent season, and harvests the deer that makes him happy. 

That is what hunting is about.


----------



## beer and nuts (Jan 2, 2001)

wow wow wow Huntnut, I think you need to go back over what the thread was about and then re-read my statements, no where did I belittle anybody or "jump on anybody" in MY explanation of comparing QDM vs TQM management strategies. Nowhere am I asking the "same questions". Matter of fact I think a few of the QDM supporters actually came along the same lines and said that yes QDM is trophy hunting because its a by-product of the stategy. Its amazing totally amazing to me some of your statement to me---talk about calling the kettle black!?!?

No where am I TRYing to seperate us hunters, I just trying to get a few facts straightend out. Your crazy to think QDM is not about producing trophy animals, geez read what QDM plans tell you to shoot and not to shoot(shoot only mature 4.5 year old bucks and pass on smaller bucks-thats not trophy hunting????). I know its hard to admit when all along QDM has always tried to seperate itself from ranch style managing.

If you don't care how I hunt on my property than fine get off the QDM bandwagon of forcing others to harvest what YOU feel is the best form of hunting.

Benelli now to your last question. I do feel its somewhat neccessary to harvest does, in certain areas its needed badly in others maybe limited. I do believe some have gone overboard in there QDM belief of "keep harvesting does" it will all pay off in the end preaching, but I can't go anyfurther in discussing this because I don't know their hunting area, I just think some are too extreme. Its not neccessary to pass on every small buck because I don't agree with this strategy. That is a trophy management strategy that I DO NOT AGREE WITH. Is habitat improvement neccessary-no, I have not had habitat improvement in my area where I hunt but yet there still is plenty of deer around. If you want more deer or bigger horns than yes habitat improvement might be the way to increase deer numbers and horn size-neccessary, absolutely not.


----------



## Huntnut (Jan 21, 2000)

"Majority of QDM backers are looking at one thing and thats bigger racks. They will lead you on about ratios, healthier herds, etc but its just a cover it all comes back to "let the little ones grow so we can maybe shoot a trophy".
Beer&Nuts 11/23/2001

That thread, a year ago, was 8 pages long. Why dont you just go back and read the answers to your repeated current questions? 

If you feel QDM = trophy management, fine...you are entitled to your opinion.

But what do you hope to gain by demanding that others "just admit it?".

Admit what? That deer hunters like to shoot big bucks?? (is this new???)

You're lookin for a fight.....or you're looking for someone to agree with you to satisfy your own discontent.

There are many reasons to practice QDM....trophy bucks may be one of them.

So what?

There are many other reasons as well. Whether you believe it or not, is up to you. I could care less whether or not you would "just admit" that there are other reasons.

I would never demand that you "just admit" that you agree with me. Whats the point other than starting an arguement?

Am I supposed to read your post, and suddenly come to the realization that everything I believe in is wrong? And then just "admit" that I'm a trophy hunter?? ROFL

You gotta do a bit more than just demand that I agree with you.

You said:
"If you don't care how I hunt on my property than fine get off the QDM bandwagon of forcing others to harvest what YOU feel is the best form of hunting."

Beer, I am not a member of the QDMA, nor have I participated in any activity that would FORCE YOU to do anything.

Just because I believe in QDM management, does not mean I support forcing it on anyone.

I already gave this thread too much time.

Beer, I just want you to have a good deer season. I hope you harvest whatever your definition of a trophy is.

I wish you luck...I really do.

Hunt


----------



## Benelli (Nov 8, 2001)

B&N,

Thanks for your response to my question.

A few points Id like to clarify from my end. My statement I am a Trophy Hunter was done parenthetically (often denotes sarcasm from me).

I dont think QDM is trophy hunting and certainly not parallel to game ranches. There are too many variables beyond my control to guarantee that I take a big buck (predators, winter conditions, availability of tags, production of mast from year to year, neighboring properties, etc.). Chances of harvesting a big trophy buck may be better, but thats not what Im about. I cannot speak for others.

I do like what QDMA supports as far as balancing the population and age structure of the deer with available habitat in terms of the overall health of the deer. Thats what Id like to accomplish through my QDM efforts to combat the negative effects of large scale feeding and imbalanced harvest of deer through the years.

You indicate that you have plenty of deer in your area with no habitat improvement (BTW, habitat improvement does not necessarily = food plots in my and many situations). I also do not view habitat improvement as a means to increase deer numbers or antler size. I view the improvements necessary to sustain a balanced population through time (habitat does change through time) and keeping the population in check with that habitat.quite simple. 

I suppose Im looking forward to the future of the deer in my hunting areas and in MI as a whole. Not November 15, 2002, lets try 2025 as a measuring stick, do you think that a status quo approach will really benefit the deer in the next 5 to 10 to 20 years? 

Q does not = Quantity and QDM also does not = antler point restriction (as it is usually advertised) in my opinion. The antler point side of things is just the easiest way to protect young bucks in an effort to balance age structure. From what I understand, you have heard all of this before, pardon the redundancy.

On another note.I was making the perfect stalk with the bow on a group of doe over the weekend feeding in a stand of oaks. Closed the gap of 200+ to within almost 40 yards undetected. I needed to close the gap a bit more as they were quartering away, took a few steps and jumped a doe that was bedded just off to my left (north) less than 10yds away. She must have been watching elsewhere too intently and I was watching the distant deer too intently. Anyway, she jumped up, blew, bolted and the whole game was over. I must admit, however, that experience was one of the more memorable and enjoyable hunts in a long time, and better than any hunt I would have on a ranch even though no antlers were involved!! All of those doe certainly were trophies.

To each their own, and I do again wish you luck this fall.


----------



## just ducky (Aug 23, 2002)

As I've told K.L. Cool and the NRC in my objections to the Montcalm County proposal, achieving better balance of bucks to does in the deer herd is a great idea. But the proposal for Montcalm County of a minimum 4 points on a side for any buck is not the answer. I hunt a large tract of property in Montcalm, surrounded by other large farms. 20 to 30 years ago, we would commonly see 30 to 50 does a day in gun season, and MAYBE if you were lucky one or two bucks all season. However, due largely in our opinion to the amount of antlerless deer taken in the last 10 to 15 years, we now see only 10 to 15 does a day, but quite often see 2 or 3 bucks a day as well. We have seen a drastic improvement in the ratio in our portion of Montcalm County. And as I have said in other posts, we have practiced "any" legal buck shooting throughout this time. While some may argue that letting smaller bucks go will achieve better sized bucks, I would argue that shooting the antlerless deer, as the DNR has wanted hunters to do for the past couple of decades, accomplishes what we all should want.....a healthy ratio of bucks to does, and a generally healthy herd. Personal real life experience shows that this does work.


----------



## Huntnut (Jan 21, 2000)

JD,

Wow, I must say, that was truly an excellent post.

THAT is what I enjoy reading here.

I gotta say, I agree with you totally. 
At one point in time, when introduced to QDM, I did believe in AR's. I even promoted them here.

Due to perfectly reasoned opposition such as yours on this site, I changed my opinion on AR's.

I was looking at total herd benefit, and never realized the cost was so high for many hunters.

I understand this now....and grew from it.

Ok, so AR's are out. How to do it then?

I believe, the first significant step to QDM is herd balance as well.
Achieve this, before limiting hunter choice. Just doing this will fix many problems and hold great rewards for everyone.

I don't believe a statewide doe cull is necessary, but a doe cull in high density DMU's, winter die off areas, and disease combat zones is prudent and worth encouraging. 

I could go on and on with this, but I have in the past.

A doe cull will increase your buck population, will increase rutting activity, will increase competition, increase herd health, and on and on and on...LOL. All of this is QDM.

AR's are used to grow a few bucks larger, and force people to shoot more doe.
A Doe cull can, on the otherhand, be used to grow more bucks, which encourages more people to harvest doe.

I gotta see the DNR or the QDMA invest serious resources towards encouraging doe harvest before I support AR's again.

They both say they want to lower the doe herd, but I havent seen the energy devoted to this goal that I have seen devoted to antler restrictions.

At least accomplish a female harvest that exceeds the male harvest before pushing antler restrictions.

I think it's a possible solution, that's voluntary, and sound.

Good post!

Hunt


----------



## jamie7117 (Aug 15, 2001)

personally, i don't think there is much more you can do, at this point, to increase the doe harvest. how many more tags can you issue? how many more times can people be told to harvest more doe? the DNR and other groups have been encouraging increased doe harvest since the mid-80's.

it is obvious, for the most part, that these plea's have fallen on deaf ears, look at the 2001 harvest survey:

only 380,803 of the 801,436 deer hunters purchased an antlerless license. (48%)

in 1999 there were 702, 027 anlerless licenses purchased, in 2000 - 602,950, in 2001 - 540,252. (10.4% drop from last year)

in 2000 - 255,790 antlerless harvest, in 2001- 228,435 antlerless harvest (10.7% drop from last year)

the deer population gets bigger and people buy fewer licenses and shoot fewer antlerless deer.

any suggestions? anyone?


----------



## Robert W. McCoy Jr (Jan 18, 2002)

I am always hunting for that trophy Ihave shot alot of deer along the way and made some mistakes.
But I have evoulved from shooting the first decent deer I see to being able to pass because I know I'll see more deer the next day.
I think I'm just starting to figure the deer in my area out I'm getting closer and closer to those big buck's.
I have no problem with shooting does and have done it all my life but know I'm starting to get where I just don't wan't to mess the area up by shooting one. I let alot of deer go this weekend but I learned something every night. It's just starting to click. 
I don't think there is anything wrong with what your doing.
I think deer hunting is a personnal thing and each of us should hunt how they wan't.. As long as you stay inside the bag limits.


----------



## beer and nuts (Jan 2, 2001)

Benelli,

I believe any variables in ones hunt does not have anything to do with the strategies when comparing QDM and TDM. I do understand what your talking about with the variables of the hunt but what I'm trying to do is compare QDM vs TDM and I have taken one example and showed how one ranch manages for TDM and how it really is no different than what QDM is trying to do. Why would anyone think that these ranches are not trying to produce a healthy herd, a healthy ratio, a healthy age balance, its the same thing as QDM just in an enclosure. Actually the ranch I have mentioned has an enclosure of over 2500 acres or more, they had this one monster buck that the guides never saw(except before their hunting season) for two years before it finally stepped out right at dark last year for a hunter, it was the first time any guide had seen him during hunting season.

I am looking into the future of our deer herd, some cry that the sky is falling and others have a realistic approach, such as justducky who used a prime example that there has been a drastic improvement in his ratio of deer and AR's is not needed. I am looking to the future of our herd, but going by way of these QDM proposals of AR's is what I strongly disagree with.

Benelli what I cannot quite understand is you comment:"I also do not view habitat improvement as a means to increase deer numbers or antler size. I view the improvements necessary to sustain a balanced population through time (habitat does change through time) and keeping the population in check with that habitat.quite simple"

1. So from what I read, there is no reason to go ahead with habitat improvement until a balanced population is in check with the present habitat?Because wouldn't you be defeating the purpose by creating a good/better habitat at the same time trying to balance the herd that existed with the hold habitat? To me and most, habitat improvement usually produces more deer, at least that is what I have come to see whether its a large planted rye/clover field or a clearcut. Obvioulsy, we are talking a large scale improvements, not a 1/4 acre food plot. I guess I have always viewed habitat improvement(lets go with food plots, cause that is what majority view as habitat improvements) as the way to increase deer numbers and a food source for growing larger antlers.


----------



## Benelli (Nov 8, 2001)

B&N,

Yes QDM and TDM both strive to achieve healthier deer which, in the end, may produce bigger antlers. The big difference that I see is that on small properties, there are so many variables unrelated to hunting that one cannot control. For instance, when the snow files in my area, the deer are gone, I have no control on the habitat available in there yarding areas. We have an abundance of oak, so in good years of mast crops, great, in bad years a primary food source is gone that not even food plots will replace. In a ranch setting, you certainly have that control to supplement deer through feeding etc., to offset harsh winters or years of poor mast development.

We have seen big improvements just as JD described in response to deer harvest independent of APRs. Based on our records, we have seen improvements in doe to buck ratios and the size of some of the bucks over the past 7 years, we went from over 30:1 to around 5:1, primarily due to increased doe harvest in the area. We have generally protected small bucks in the past, the older hunters are stepping it up a bit more this year and we committed to at least 6 pt or better. Young hunters or first timers can take any buck they want, we do encourage them to protect the young ones though. 

With reference to habitat, what I was getting at was given a certain forest type, you can expect a certain carrying capacity, lets say 20 deer per square mile. If the deer numbers are not kept in check, you can anticipate less healthy deer due to competition for available browse, etc. which in turn is detrimental to the habitat. If you let the habitat change (e.g. mature) anticipate the carrying capacity to be reduced unless improvements are made to support that original 20 deer per square mile. Just a balancing act to maintain that ideal carrying capacity. I suppose if you start with a certain habitat and carrying capacity, and improvements are made which increase the carrying capacity, do not get complacent and let the populations get out of check. I view food plots only as a supplement to the natural food available that may be ready in the early spring or later in the fall when the natural browse is less favored, not necessarily a means to increase carrying capacity. 

I guess we are really on the same page with the exception of APRs. Are they necessary to achieve a balanced herd with respect to doe / buck ratios? No, as long as the doe harvest is adequate. Are they necessary to achieve a balanced population in terms of age structure, I strongly believe that they are and we are just voluntarily working to achieve that latter part of the balance.


----------



## beer and nuts (Jan 2, 2001)

Benelli, good talking with ya.

Still not a big fan of AR's and never will be, but agree with you on doe management. Still not sure on the habitat improvement and carrying capacity stuff, as I look at a little differently than you but pretty close. Voluntary is still the closest thing to an answer for everybody.


----------



## Benelli (Nov 8, 2001)

B&N,

Nice talking to you too.

Suppose we can agree to disagree on a few points and have the overall health of the deer herd in mind. Fact is, topics such as these are often very hard to generalize through these forumstoo many doe vs too few, my area vs your area, 3pt or 4pt, mandatory vs. voluntary, etc. Perhaps these topics are best discussed over a beer or something sometimes somewhere, saves on the typing and less room to read between the lines!


----------



## Letmgro (Mar 17, 2002)

Very good post Benelli! Also some very good discussion about QDM vs. TDM. 

Even though the end result of larger racked bucks happens with both management techniques, and lower doe: buck ratios are comparable, still both are vastly different.

In the free ranging deer herd of Michigan, we will NEVER see a 1:1 ratio which is so very important to producing trophies. Our habitat improvements will NEVER be equal to supplimentally feeding deer high protien diets. We will NEVER get enough voluntary restrictions in harvesting young bucks to have monarcs walking around everywhere. 

We're not trying to produce monster bucks!

For the zillionth time, large racks are just the result of managing our herd for quality, due mainly to better social structure.

Quantity just doesn't cut it anymore!


----------



## Guest (Oct 20, 2002)

I am a trophy hunter. My idea of trophy is a dead deer on the ground with my tag on it. I like doe's the best. But any deer that I take off my own property is a trophy to me. We harvest as many doe's as we can. We will not let buck only hunters on any of our property. They tend to kill only the best breeder bucks and let the rag horns walk. This dilutes the gene pool of all the high end potential bucks. Keep shooting the doe's.


----------

