# 8 pointer or more



## Jx38 (Oct 17, 2004)

It's nice to see the passions that we all have for a sport we all enjoy!

*swamper* - as i stated in my initial post i have no problem w/begginer hunters shooting smaller deer. anything to get them pumped to enjoy God's gifts he gave us in the outdoors. I will probably be more excited when my children shoot a deer then they will be - wether it be a bambi to godzilla. However i would educate them in QDM. and in time i would hope they would practice it,

quote "I will be proud as hell, and not frustrated, the day my young ones are with me in the woods and they take doe, spike, fork, or a ten pointer. "

not one time did i say i would be frustrated w/ my children for anything

leave the smaller animals for the begginers/children.  an experienced hunter should be educated in everything from camo to QDM.

*kidd - *rarely do any of us have to shoot a deer to survive the winter. it has become a sport and eating venison is only a bonus.

conclusion- no one can deny they would rather shoot a 12 pointer rather than a spike!!!

its become a sport - and like any sport a home run is better than a base hit, a dunk is better that a free throw, a touchdown is better that a field goal!!!!

Mi hunters - it is at our fingertips, its your choice wether you want to make Mi a better place to hunt whitetails


----------



## Jx38 (Oct 17, 2004)

Letmgro said:


> Yes, and I'm proud of my dad for teaching me the proper respect for the great outdoors.
> 
> ..and I'm proud of him for listening to me regarding proper deer management, and wholehartedly accepting the reasons why I let little bucks walk. We have an excellent family hunting heritage, that I hope someday I can pass onto a child.


i to am proud of my father for showing me the ropes.

unfortunatly he does not listen to me on QDM. He still rarely shoots does and fills his tags, and his wifes tags with any buck that gives him a shot - old school- 
good luck hunting


----------



## Jacob Huffman (Sep 13, 2004)

All I can say is that I pay my fee for a hunting license and use it the way I should.If I see a buck that is of legal size I will harvest it.If I see a doe and have a permit I will haevest it.I do not hunt for horns and never intend to.If you feel you have to spend your money out of state instead of helping Michigans economy thats your business.As you say you cant eat the horns then why pay thousands of dollars to hunt them,sounds pretty dumb to me.


----------



## Ken (Dec 6, 2000)

I take the exact opposite approach even though many people deny it and say it doesn't work that way- I think it is better to shoot the smaller, inferior antlered bucks at 1 1/2 years old. In a good area, all 1.5 year old deer should be at least good 6 points, with many 8 and even a rare 10 point (not heavy antlers, but decent racks). So, I say it is better to shoot the spikes, forks, and mutant screwed up racks, and if you are going to let one walk, let the 6 or 8 point 1.5 year old deer walk. Another reason is- hopefully they won't have bred does yet, and spread the crappy antler genetics to the next generation. In southern Michigan the 4 point on one side rule does absolutely nothing to protect 1.5 year old deer or to better the chances of bigger antlers next year. 
Call game ranches and see what bucks they cull at 1.5 years old- it sure isn't the ones with 4 on a side.


----------



## Jx38 (Oct 17, 2004)

*jacob hoffman*
quote "If you feel you have to spend your money out of state instead of helping Michigans economy thats your business.As you say you cant eat the horns then why pay thousands of dollars to hunt them,sounds pretty dumb to me."

do you have any idea the revenues that are brought in by out of state hunters in other states compaired to ours. 
ECONOMY?
hunters are paying farmers thousands of dollars to hunt on their land - farmers are the backbone of the economy- without them we don't eat! how many farmers struggle trying to make ends meet. I grew up on a pig farm. If someone came along from another state and offered my father all that $$$$
it would of helped our family and so forth, starting the "trickle down effect"

and before you come back w/ "well, then we will lose our land to the high $ hunter from florida" all I can say is how many Illinios and Iowa hunters leave there state because of no place to hunt?

to you'r comment on "can't eat the horns" I stated that you might as well shoot ones worth mounting.

what's worse - shooting every buck you see or being more selective w/your hunts. Its up to us what we do with the horns. i'd rather shoot something I can hang on the wall. You wouldn't? if not, then that's your game. so before you state someone as being dumb, maybe you should become more educated in what you feel so passionate about.


----------



## Jx38 (Oct 17, 2004)

Ken said:


> I take the exact opposite approach even though many people deny it and say it doesn't work that way- I think it is better to shoot the smaller, inferior antlered bucks at 1 1/2 years old. In a good area, all 1.5 year old deer should be at least good 6 points, with many 8 and even a rare 10 point (not heavy antlers, but decent racks). So, I say it is better to shoot the spikes, forks, and mutant screwed up racks, and if you are going to let one walk, let the 6 or 8 point 1.5 year old deer walk. Another reason is- hopefully they won't have bred does yet, and spread the crappy antler genetics to the next generation. In southern Michigan the 4 point on one side rule does absolutely nothing to protect 1.5 year old deer or to better the chances of bigger antlers next year.
> Call game ranches and see what bucks they cull at 1.5 years old- it sure isn't the ones with 4 on a side.


a SPIKE has the capability to be an eight point.

SCENERIO
two 1 1/2 yr old bucks born on the same land, one 6 and one spike. it has nothing to w/ one being inferior. the spike was most likely a later born fawn than the 6. therefore it utilizes it's resources for his body to grow instead of his antlers.


----------



## Jacob Huffman (Sep 13, 2004)

Jx38 first of all I did not say you were dumb.All I said was it sounded dumb to pay thousands of dollars to get a "trophy" for the wall.Maybe If I was rich I would get into it but unfortunatly I dont have the recources to do it.Guess Im just a poor working man with a family to support.Second I do not know how much money other sportsman from other states bring to another state and could really care less.Once again I siad if you feel you need to take your money out of state thats your business.I have been hunting for 20 years now on private land and have been in the same 1/2 mile all 20 years.I have only seen 2 "trophy" bucks.It has nothing to do with me shooting the first legal buck I see.If you cant get everyone within shooting range to do the same it wont ever change.20 years and only 2 "trophy" bucks,you bet I will shoot the first legal buck I see.I have spent thousands of dollars over my 20 years of hunting here in Michigan and feel perfectly fine taking a legal buck of any size.


----------



## Jx38 (Oct 17, 2004)

Jacob Huffman said:


> Jx38 first of all I did not say you were dumb.All I said was it sounded dumb to pay thousands of dollars to get a "trophy" for the wall.Maybe If I was rich I would get into it but unfortunatly I dont have the recources to do it.Guess Im just a poor working man with a family to support.Second I do not know how much money other sportsman from other states bring to another state and could really care less.Once again I siad if you feel you need to take your money out of state thats your business.I have been hunting for 20 years now on private land and have been in the same 1/2 mile all 20 years.I have only seen 2 "trophy" bucks.It has nothing to do with me shooting the first legal buck I see.If you cant get everyone within shooting range to do the same it wont ever change.20 years and only 2 "trophy" bucks,you bet I will shoot the first legal buck I see.I have spent thousands of dollars over my 20 years of hunting here in Michigan and feel perfectly fine taking a legal buck of any size.


you have pretty much summed it up in your 2nd sentence.. it is dumb to go to another state and spend thousand of dollors to shoot "trophy's" especially since we should be able to do in Mi. We can, but as a group we have made it very difficult. that is my reason for being so frustrated w/ the way alot of Mi hunters look at hunting. thank you


----------



## Jacob Huffman (Sep 13, 2004)

Where does MI. stand in the entrys for record book bucks?Not sure on my facts.Can anyone tell us which states rank highest and why? Do they have a State regulated QDM program or do the landowners enforce it themselves? I guess the bottom line for me is that I just love to deer hunt and getting anything for the table is a bonus,whether it has horns or not.I would hate for kids growing up trying to get into the sport to have to wait for a "trophy" to shoot.But maybe If the DNR started to make it mandatory it would be easier.As far as I see it if you want to wait on a trophy have at it,but dont come down on someone that just wants to shoot meat.


----------



## just tryin to fish (May 31, 2004)

"to you'r comment on "can't eat the horns" I stated that you might as well shoot ones worth mounting."
what's worse - shooting every buck you see or being more selective w/your hunts. Its up to us what we do with the horns. i'd rather shoot something I can hang on the wall. You wouldn't? if not, then that's your game. so before you state someone as being dumb, maybe you should become more educated in what you feel so passionate about.[/QUOTE]





The thing is i agree with pass on small for big where it applies. for people that have the time to get out every day to hunt because of really good jobs,inheritanceand so forth. thats one thing but for alot of people they might only be able to get out only one weekend in a month. now if you were in that position would you pass up on a small buck. thats meat in the frezzer and about $100 or more that that family doesn't spend on buying meat in the store.and for people with no jobs a 400-600 dollar paycheck doesn't cut it for a family. so when you start preaching about let em go just think about what others have.


----------



## Jx38 (Oct 17, 2004)

*just tryin to fish*
i am a sole provider for my family. my wife drives a 1992 Mit. Galaint, I drive a 1998 ranger. I don't know where you think i have any more than any of you, I just a guy who loves to hunt. and is pasionate about my beliefs. I've gone else where and spent the money to hunt whitetails. untill Mi changes or I can no longer afford it i will continue. . 

soon I will not be able to come up with the cash to do what I do know. My children are growing and there is another one on the way.

frustrated? yes, because soon I might not be able to afford it, . I have 80 acres in newaygo co. I should be able to shoot nice bucks there, but it is so hard when my neighbor and all his buddy's shoot everything in range>

fortunatly i get to hunt more than just weekend. actually this bow season I have only been out 7 days. I did shoot a nice doe last sunday night. 

if i was only a weekender, yes i would pass up on a small buck. I can usually fill a doe tag with ease. if not w/ a bow, a gun defenatly..and if i was for some reason unable to fill a doe tag, i know enough people that would be glad to give me enough venison

i am hardly preaching. i am only trying to get some input. i just don't understand why people have to shoot a small buck. does are plentiful in our state, bucks , especially mature bucks are way low compaired to what it should be for a healthy herd.
*jacob H*
. i quess to answer your question ,i really can't w/out doing some research .

one thing i can tell you is Pennsylvania used to be the worst for QDM in the nation w/ Mi a close second. Mi is now the worst. Penn. is now one of the premeir whitetail states. the DNR stepped in put down doe and buck reg.. most people were not to happy w/ the DNR. that was a few years ago. Penn. state whitetail hunters have changed their tune since.


----------



## Trippin' Dipsies (May 7, 2003)

JX38...just as some of these other replies stated, if the MDNR doesn't change the laws then the hunters won't change. If there weren't limits on game...most would be extinct. *I'm totally with you on this whole subject.* 

For the past four years my buddies and I having been going to the same spot out West bowhunting (not on a ranch). In those States that properly manage their herd you experience things that most hunters in Michigan never will. Right under your treestand you can witness bucks sparing, making rubs & scrapes, see does play & dodge with a rutting buck, etc... There's just something very gratifying about watching decent bucks walk right under you and you choose to pass because you know there will be bigger ones.

What is there around 750K deer gun hunters in Michigan? That's one of the problems. Second, a good number of those 750K are not hunters; they're simply a guy with a license & gun looking for excuse to get away from their wife for the w/e.

So after reading these other replies, I guess guys like you, my friends, and I are trophy hunters while most prefer to meat hunt. That's fine...to each their own. Until guys experience what we see in other States, they'll never understand.


----------



## Whit1 (Apr 27, 2001)

Okay guys n' gals cool your jets in this thread. 

Some comments are being taken FAR too personally by a couple of members in here and the posts are beginning to deteriorate into, "Who do you think you are? You can't say that to me!" I'll show you!" When this happens the whole thread goes downhill fast and it gets closed. The site owner, administrators, and moderators will NOT condone insulting, uncivil commentary in these forums. 

Please don't say, "But he said it first!". I taught 6th-8th graders for 31 years and that's what kids say. We are, for the most part, adults in here. Let's behave like it.


----------



## skulldugary (Apr 12, 2003)

Judging by the posts and previous threads on this subject,I think that voluntary QDM has a long row to hoe.Until it becomes mandatory and law I don't think much will change.To those that practice QDM remember that it's better to teach than preach.It seems like everytime I get involved in this subject things go south pretty quick,so I'll bow out of posting here again but will continue to read...........Gary


----------



## Randy Kidd (Apr 21, 2001)

I love the way the word "proper" is thrown around, It confirms the way a lot of us feel about the "my way or the highway" attitude that many QDM proponents exhibit when they are confronted with someone who does not chant that particular mantra, really condecending. If it is legal, then it is "proper", You guys can hunt the way you want, as long as it is legal I got no problems with it, So why do you have a problem with the way I hunt?


----------



## Joe Archer (Mar 29, 2000)

If it is about racks, MI may not be in line with some states. If it is about economics and deer numbers, doesn't Michigan sell more licenses and harvest more raw numbers of deer than the states you mention? <----<<<


----------



## omega58 (Sep 3, 2003)

I'm all about QDM, but maybe this thread belongs in the TDM forum. . . seems like the arguments going on here are way off base with QDM, just my opinion. 

I figure instead of complaining, just do more to your habitat you have. . . it's working for us. . . takes years, but it is worth it.


----------



## n.pike (Aug 23, 2002)

Ken said:


> I take the exact opposite approach even though many people deny it and say it doesn't work that way- I think it is better to shoot the smaller, inferior antlered bucks at 1 1/2 years old. In a good area, all 1.5 year old deer should be at least good 6 points, with many 8 and even a rare 10 point (not heavy antlers, but decent racks). So, I say it is better to shoot the spikes, forks, and mutant screwed up racks, and if you are going to let one walk, let the 6 or 8 point 1.5 year old deer walk. Another reason is- hopefully they won't have bred does yet, and spread the crappy antler genetics to the next generation. In southern Michigan the 4 point on one side rule does absolutely nothing to protect 1.5 year old deer or to better the chances of bigger antlers next year.
> Call game ranches and see what bucks they cull at 1.5 years old- it sure isn't the ones with 4 on a side.


That makes sense to me. Its like culling the bluegills out of your pond to produce better, non-stunted fish. I think Ken is on to something here.


----------



## omega58 (Sep 3, 2003)

n.pike said:


> That makes sense to me. Its like culling the bluegills out of your pond to produce better, non-stunted fish. I think Ken is on to something here.


The culling of 1 1/2 year olds has been proven wrong. . . I am not trying to argue, but the rack of a 1 1/2 year old has more to do with when they were born and nutrition than genetics. A spike has just as much chance of being a trophy as does a 1 1/2 year old 8 point.


----------



## aborgman (Sep 8, 2004)

This all comes down to how you believe the deer herd should be managed - 

Should the herd be managed to maximize hunting opportunities?
Should the herd be managed to maximize health of the herd?

-- 
Aaron


----------



## Letmgro (Mar 17, 2002)

BSK-Man I love QDM, sliced bread an ignore lists! :lol:


----------



## Happy Hunter (Apr 14, 2004)

If you have the facts at hand to support your position ,you don't need ignore lists. You can take the opportunity to discredit your oponents postion while promoting your own. Many QDM supporters only want to hear the good news and can't stand reading any of the negative aspects of AR and mandatory QDM.


----------



## Duck Down (Mar 20, 2004)

I hunt because I love seeing the sun rise in the morning, the sun on my face in the blind. Spending time with friends and family. watching my dogs work, seeing the deer in the woods. I dont eat the horns, I like them, but cant eat them..Bottom line I LIKE MEAT... BACK STRAPS AND BACON : :corkysm55


----------



## Happy Hunter (Apr 14, 2004)

For your reading pleasure.


"Sex Ratios Another reason that hunters demand APRs is to seek to correct what they perceive as grossly distorted buck:doe ratios, like 1:7, 1:12, or worse. Wisconsin hunters should know that prehunt adult sex ratios range from 1.5 does/buck in the southern farmland to about 2 does/buck in our northern forest. Reasons for not believing this is that roadside observations often show adult sex ratios nearer 3:1. Add in the fawns and there may be more than 6 deer seen for every antlered buck. What is seen is not what is there for a variety of reasons. Also, unhunted natural sex ratios were also female biased and best guesses put them at about 1.3-1.4 does/buck. I have yet to see a biology-based reason why a sex ratio of 2:1 is damaging or undesirable. A factor often overlooked by those that think they want an unnatural 1:1 sex ratio is that total harvest of both bucks and does would be reduced. One does not merely stockpile bucks. If you seek a 1:1 sex ratio and shoot adequate numbers of does to maintain a population at an established density goal, you reduce the proportion of the herd that is productive does. Thus, fewer fawns will be born into the population and total harvest of both bucks and does could be reduced by as much as 30%. Age Structure of Bucks Where mortality (death rate) of bucks is 60% and spread equally across all age classes, the age structure will be 60, 24,10, 6 (yearlings, 2.5, 3.5, and 4+). This is fairly typical in much of Wisconsin. Some APR advocates believe that protecting yearlings will result in 60% more bucks and an age structure like 60, 60, 24,16. However as mentioned above, the reduction of females necessary to accommodate more bucks will reduce the number of male fawns added each year. Fewer does in the population mean fewer buck fawns. Therefore, saving yearlings is not simple addition. Another factor missing in this assumption is that harvest mortality is only a portion of total mortality. In northern units it is common for more than ¼ of deaths to be from causes other than legal harvest (roadkills, winter, poaching, etc.). Thus, there is leakage from each age class even in the absence of legal shooting. And, mortality rates seem to increase in the older age classes. Even if bucks got smarter with age (as many hunters believe), prime age bucks are more vulnerable to other mortality  even guns as their antlers are attractions. Discuss this with a friend while having a cool one. Conclusion In Wisconsin, it is not uncommon for 15-20% of the bucks to reach age 3 and older in many areas. Sex ratios are not grossly distorted as some claim. And, Wisconsin continues to be one of the top trophy-producing states (twice as many Pope & Young as Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Texas combined and ranked 3rd nationally for Boone & Crocket entries). Though seemingly popular among some hunters, most biologists are not enthusiastic about mandatory antler restrictions. If one is primarily concerned that deer be given the opportunity to manifest their full genetic potential, one should seek first to maintain deer populations well below maximum carrying capacity. "


----------



## johnhunter (Jun 17, 2000)

My gosh, it's a Keith McCaffrey cut 'n paste! 



Happy Hunter said:


> If one is primarily concerned that deer be given the opportunity to manifest their full genetic potential, one should seek first to maintain deer populations well below maximum carrying capacity. "



Getting deer numbers to a level where herd health is optimized is likely an even tougher sell (to hunters, anyway) than APR's. Already, Michigan has either the 2nd or 3rd largest deer herd of any state, depending on who's estimate is best. Yet a substantial proportion of Michigan deer hunters perenially whine that there aren't enough of 'em. :gaga: 

Here's some key differences of Wisconsin v. Michigan; a nine day long gun season, beginning after the peak breeding date; and Wisconsin hunters have been taking more does than bucks for the last several years now. Michiganders still harvest roughly 65% bucks, when adjusting for buttons in the antlerless harvest. If we were to adopt the same harvest practices and firearms season dates in Michigan as Wisconsin, I'm sure we'd see a healthier herd with a balanced doe:buck ratio and some age structure to our buck population. But APR's, as controversial as they are, are measurably more saleable to our hunters.


----------

