# Would you voluntarily practice QDM if asked?



## MGV (Jan 22, 2002)

What were they doing with the does on that property? If it is 3 points on a side. Land owners permits? If there is no doe permits for that area your herd could grow out of control until the state finds out. Your three point restriciton could hurt you. At that time your habitat will be trashed. Too many deer and no permits to harvest them.


----------



## jamie7117 (Aug 15, 2001)

MGV,
no arguement, just facts.

QDM is based on restraint in harvesting immature bucks and adequate doe harvest. anything else is not QDM.

by no means was the apple comment directed at you.


----------



## bwiltse (Jan 18, 2000)

MGV, I think any knowledgeable QDM supporter will agree with you that an adequate harvest of does is a most critical element of QDM.


----------



## MGV (Jan 22, 2002)

Jamie,
I feel that you ruined a good discussion that steve deleted. I understand that the comment was not at me but it was at the person that i was talking with.

Bwiltse,
How would the DNR be able to successfully manage the whole state of Michigan. They are the permit holders. If your area is overpopulated with does and immature bucks will they separately stop by and check your area? I don't think so. The way we hunt right now gets a good percentage of each groups. Overpopulation will destroy your land and tick off your local farmer.


----------



## jamie7117 (Aug 15, 2001)

ME! 

i guess you agree with SFK.

how many button bucks do you plan on tearing the tenderloins out of, only to leave the rest in the field to rot? how many "vermin" do you plan on killing? 

give me a break, i wish Steve would never have erased that thread. he did SFK a favor.

comments like SFK's have no place on this site, if your fine with them, that's your problem, but i will not let someone get away with making them.


----------



## jamie7117 (Aug 15, 2001)

> Overpopulation will destroy your land and tick off your local farmer.


i am sure they have been ticked off for 20 years.


----------



## MGV (Jan 22, 2002)

We agree on something and not the part of SFK. 

I will kill what is necessary to keep the population from destoying everything. When i mean everything that is the farmers crop and the insurence companies costs. So yes that is the northern counties and the southern counties. 

Yes i have screwed up and shot two button bucks in my day. If i shoot another i probaly will just chuckle at you. Thinking of the mad face you would pull when i type 3 button bucks i have killed. Control of the does will bring more button bucks down. I have learned a lot and hope that i have corrected myself from doing it again. I do not waste what i shoot. I even pick up roadkill deer. There are more than enough people that will take the meat if you can't eat it all.


----------



## Benelli (Nov 8, 2001)

Glad to see a relatively civil discussion started again. 

Keep in mind the original question was about VOLUNTARY QDM

MGV, It took me a while to call it QDM, even though I think we have been doing it for years.

Here are some stats from the TB zone, opening morning sightings of deer over the last 10 years at our camp

-2001 55 doe and 12 bucks (4.5 doe per buck) 
-2000 22 doe and 5 bucks (4.4 doe per buck) 
-1999 59 doe and 4 bucks (14.8 doe per buck) 
-1998 48 doe and 5 bucks (9.6 doe per buck) 
-1997 64 doe and 5 bucks (12.8 doe per buck) 
-1996 81 doe and 3 bucks (27 doe per buck) 
-1995 22 doe and 1 buck (22 doe per buck) 
-1994 58 doe and 1 buck (58 doe per buck) 
-1993 28 doe and 1 buck (28 doe per buck) 
-1992 58 doe and 2 bucks (29 doe per buck) 

Plenty of variables, but the trends in doe to buck ratios look great due to an increased doe harvest, primarily on neighboring properties. Im working toward doing a better job of doe harvest on our place. Over that same time frame we took only five bucks on opening day (avg = 7 pts). Deer in the area that I hunt were supported by huge year round feed stations on neighboring properties through the years. Now that the feed is gone, they seem to hang out at our place more because we have always had established food plots and maybe better habitat because of timber management through rotational cuttings, plantings, etc. 

This is all voluntary work, and my current efforts are geared toward maintaining and improving existing habitat, selective deer harvest (to keep that doe to buck ratio in check), and maybe get some of the neighbors to work toward habitat improvement now that they cannot feed and bait (legally anyway), and more selective deer harvest. 

Its all voluntary, looking forward to the 2002 season!


----------



## jamie7117 (Aug 15, 2001)

MGV,

mistakes happen. i myself have make the same mistake.

i wouldn't even call it a mistake. i simply did not take the time to make sure it was a doe and not a button buck, plain and simple.

i regret those desicions to this day. it doesn't matter what i think, you shouldn't concern yourself with it, you would be the last thing i think about during deer season.LOL

now if i am not 100% sure that it is a doe, i will not shoot. it is no big deal, because i now that eventually i will fill my antlerless tag/tags with a doe.





> Control of the does will bring more button bucks down.


button bucks have consistantly made up about 25% of the antlerless harvest, in QDM zone 118 (old 107), this level has dropped to 17%, lots of room for improvement. if people take the time to differenciate between a button and a doe, the button buck harvest could be rduced by 50-75%.

traditionally button bucks suffered tremendous winter-kill in some areas, i think this could be reduced emmensly with increased doe harvest. this would leave more food for not only button bucks but for the rest of the herd, leaving us with a MUCH HEALTHIER herd in the spring.with the increases in button buck survival and doe harvest we would be well on our way to a balanced herd.


----------



## Letmgro (Mar 17, 2002)

Benelli,

Outstanding record keeping!! You (and neighbors) have really brought the doe: buck ratio down in your area. You will definately start seeing changes in your deer herd such as: larger body weights due to more and abundant browse, healthier fawns and yearlings, reduced risk of spreading contagious disease, more intense rutting period, better chances of surviving a harsh winter, and hopefully...bigger bucks, just to name a few. (but of course bigger bucks isn't what QDM is about.) An overall healthier deer herd because it is within 60% of the carring capacity of the land... that is what it's all about!! Good job Benelli.


----------



## jamie7117 (Aug 15, 2001)

> (but of course bigger bucks isn't what QDM is about.)


the best indicator of a healthy, well balanced herd is an established population of large racked, big bodied breeding bucks.

there is nothing wrong with wanting big bucks, we should strive for it. a population of big bucks is the result of age, genetics, proper nutrition and adeguate doe harvest.

sure there is the occasional brusier taken every year, this is by no means an established population.


----------



## Letmgro (Mar 17, 2002)

jamie

I DO want bigger bucks, but that still isn't what QDM is about! Is there anyone on this forum that you're not critical of? and remember, no grenade tossing!


----------



## jamie7117 (Aug 15, 2001)

i don't think i am critical at all!LOL

just saying that big bucks are not a bad thing and we shouldn't be ashamed to say so.

QDM has many components to it's formula, an established population of mature bucks is a sure sign that each one of those components were plugged in.



> One of the major problems with the QDM movement is that it is often viewed as trophy management. Public reaction to the terms trophy hunting and trophy management is very negative. Most think that trophy hunters shoot animals only for their antlers leaving the rest of the animal to rot. Having been personally acquainted with more than 1,000 hunters I am not aware of anyone ever doing that. Of course, the fact that no ethical deer hunter would doesnt change the publics perception.
> 
> 
> The reasons for our fascination with large antlers are much more fundamental than simple self-aggrandizement but this eludes the general public. Each antler is a work of art, Gods art not mans. I am sure if the technology were available, we would find that each antler is as unique as a fingerprint or snowflake. Antlers, whether tiny spikes or a Boone and Crockett record are wondrous and fascinating things. Based on our knowledge of prehistoric man, the reverence for antlers is as old as our species. All you have to do is look at the records left by primitive humans on cave walls. Large antlers and horns were emphasized.
> ...


Dr. R. Larry Marchinton


----------



## MGV (Jan 22, 2002)

When you start managing the way you want to you are starting what i would consider a non fenced game farm. Your looking and treating them as a farm animal over a wild animal. Especially when you start to talk larger bodied and racked bucks.


----------



## bwiltse (Jan 18, 2000)

QDM is about managing in such a way as to have a more natural deer herd in balance with habitat, with more balanced sex ratios and a more even age distribution throughout all age classes (not anything like we have in the so called wild today and certainly not anything like game farms).


----------



## MGV (Jan 22, 2002)

bwiltse,
You still have that word "Management" in it. I still see that as the same as a deer farm. You manage for a better herd within fences. For better growth both in antler and body.


----------



## bwiltse (Jan 18, 2000)

MVG, you have to have some type of management. If we eliminate management in its entirety (regulations, habitat, etc), with everybody doing what they want to or don't want to do, you can be assured that the results will not be good.

What do you propose? (whatever you propose, I'll bet it involves some sort of management)


----------



## MGV (Jan 22, 2002)

Ok you are right we do have to manage it one way or another. If you read earlier in the post i said leave it as is. I feel that the DNR is doing a fine job.


----------



## jamie7117 (Aug 15, 2001)

> I feel that the DNR is doing a fine job


there are about 750,000 people that would disagree with you one way or another.

i say there is ALOT of room for improvement.

you contradict yourself



> I don't believe at this point that the herd is that bad. Good numbers.





> First off i have a hard time believing the DNR reports on percents and thier deer counts. The few people that go to the check stations are not a good way for them to do thier counts. Even thier fly overs and what ever other means of counting just is questionable.





> I feel that the DNR is doing a fine job.


which one is it? a fine job or you have a hard time believing them?

i don't think a deer herd that is not "that bad" is a ringing endorsement for the DNR or their management decisions.


----------



## MGV (Jan 22, 2002)

I think that you better look up top at the percentage just from this sight. There is a good percentage that will not participate. I think that you calling all 750,000 with you is very incorrect. It's a wonderful dream to think everyone is with your thoughts. I don't believe thier kill numbers. I think it is grossly overrated. There are not enough deer taken per year. And if you want to QDM it to death go for it. All you will get is a population that will be out of control. And habitate that will be destroyed.


----------

