# Truly a concern of QDM



## Pinefarm (Sep 19, 2000)

Jeff, it wasn't my idea, it was T-S's idea. And I mean only if a guy wants to fill his tag with a buck less than 3". How many times have to seen a buck and you weren't sure if it was 3" and legal to shoot? At least around here in the past, they were common. If someone has a 2.5" spike buck standing 50 yards from them on Nov 15, they should be allowed to shoot it and put their buc tag on it. Just a thought for chewing anyhow.


----------



## boehr (Jan 31, 2000)

The world must be coming to an end because I'm even enjoying and agreeing for the most part, with the last 10 posts immediately before this one. This is how the discussions, education and friendly converstaions should be all the time to begin to promote ideas!


----------



## Jeff Sturgis (Mar 28, 2002)

I had a kid out this year that helps me considerably on the property and he made an honest mistake on a very small spike...really felt bad for him because he was extremely excited about harvesting a good doe and when we got to him you could see the excitement sink from his face when we found it was a spike with a 3/4" antler on one side, and 2" on the other. We had named that spike the "dummy" buck and had all talked about making sure we didn't shoot him before the hunt and wouldn't you know 2 days later he shot him with a bow....I congratulated him, took pictures, ate the tenderloins that night but he's been helping me for 5 years and that was not what he wanted to take.

He was 25 yards from the buck, missed him the first time, and then the buck came back for another arrow. He had 8X binos in his pocket, but didn't want to make the noise to take them out....Oh well, live and learn....so far I've see 4 other spikes and 4 bucks 4-6 points, for a total of around 8 yearlings still around. 

Bad thing was our doe permits were gone in less than 2 hours up here-he didn't get one, and my friend won't be able to shoot a doe on the property now.....just another buck with 4 points on a side or more.

They can be hard to see even close up especially for the inexperienced.....


----------



## Pinefarm (Sep 19, 2000)

Boehr, you may be in a better mood because you now have your bike as your new picture.  
All of us here go back and forth on gene's, what buck breeds, etc, etc. Here's a question that cuts to the chase. If any common buck in the Baldwin/Big Rapids was allowed to live to 3.5 years old, by hunters passing on them at 1.5 and 2.5, do we agree that that buck would probably have a rack that scored at least 120-125? I know there's exceptions, but I mean the average buck that was a 1.5 year old fork, maybe a 2.5 year old basket 7 or 8pt and a larger 3.5 8pt? That's kinda what I want to know. My entire point is that I'm working on the assumption that that would be that case. (I know, I know about "assuming") :lol: But I mean on average. Anyone's take is welcome. If it wasn't the case, then I don't see much point in passing small bucks. IMHO But if it was the case, then who wouldn't like to see more of that, as long as the herd was brought more into balance and the doe numbers were reduced?


----------



## Ferg (Dec 17, 2002)

:lol: 

I think your right on point Bob, that would be the natural progression as they aged up into their 3rd and 4th years - 

Pass on him again and see what happens: :yikes: 


ferg....<<<<anyone


----------



## Swamp Ghost (Feb 5, 2003)

> The main problem with antler restriction laws in Michigan today is the criminalization of shooting sublegal bucks. If someone makes a mistake and shoots a sublegal buck, they have just committed a misdemeanor punishable by huge fines, possible jail time and loss of hunting privileges. Most people that make such a mistake just leave them lay out in the woods wasting a valuable natural rescue.


Maybe for a repeat offenders, DMU 118 has had a low incidence of infractions.


----------



## Happy Hunter (Apr 14, 2004)

[email protected] said:


> Boehr, you may be in a better mood because you now I know there's exceptions, but I mean the average buck that was a 1.5 year old fork, maybe a 2.5 year old basket 7 or 8pt and a larger 3.5 8pt? That's kinda what I want to know. My entire point is that I'm working on the assumption that that would be that case. (I know, I know about "assuming") :lol: But I mean on average. Anyone's take is welcome. If it wasn't the case, then I don't see much point in passing small bucks. IMHO But if it was the case, then who wouldn't like to see more of that, as long as the herd was brought more into balance and the doe numbers were reduced?



While that is in fact the normal progression , the problem is it is very difficult to get sigificant numbers of buck into the 3.5 age class in a heavily hunted herd ,on land open to the public. To accomplish that feat most areas need a 4 pt. one side restriction and that means saving 80% of the 1.5's and 50% of the 2.5's. It also means that in a stable herd you have to remove an additional doe for every additional buck saved ,which will mean lower buck harvests in the future. IT also means more buck will be lost to non-hunting mortality which also contributes to lower buck harvests. So the question then becomes , is it worth reducing the buck harvest by up to 50% in order to increase the harvest of 3.5 buck.

I often wonder why the hunters in WMU 118 didn't vote overwhelmingly to continue AR if it was as successful as Ed said it was?


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

Happy Hunter said:


> I often wonder why the hunters in WMU 118 didn't vote overwhelmingly to continue AR if it was as successful as Ed said it was?


If the winner of the upcomming presidental election were to get 58 percent of the vote, it would be considered an landslide.


----------



## Pinefarm (Sep 19, 2000)

Happy Hunter said:


> So the question then becomes , is it worth reducing the buck harvest by up to 50% in order to increase the harvest of 3.5 buck.
> 
> I often wonder why the hunters in WMU 118 didn't vote overwhelmingly to continue AR if it was as successful as Ed said it was?


For buck harvest and 3.5 year olds, at least for me, that answer is Yes! I just want to see a larger antlered buck in my area. For killing, I can fill my freezer with doe meat. I heard a rumor that doe's taste just like bucks. :lol: And if I kill a decent buck every couple 3-4 years, but see several every Fall, that would be cool.


For hunters voting, they did vote overwhelmingly for it. In any election, anything over 54-55% is considered a landslide. Most AR area's in Michigan were at that landslide level or better. It was the impossible level of 67% approval that made sure they would not pass. We can't get 67% of the population to agree that cutting taxes is a good thing, let alone something as serious as new buck regs for Michigan deer hunters!  :lol:


----------



## boehr (Jan 31, 2000)

Here we go again on the percentages, majorities etc., again. Not all hunters get to vote in that either. Do only 2500 something hunt in DMU 118? Everyone knew before hand the number that was needed. If a number representing a landslide is for it they can still do it voluntary and still make a big difference if that is what they really want. So lets get off that kick for a change.  :gaga:


----------



## Happy Hunter (Apr 14, 2004)

[email protected] said:


> : And if I kill a decent buck every couple 3-4 years, but see several every Fall, that would be cool.
> 
> 
> For hunters voting, they did vote overwhelmingly for it. In any election, anything over 54-55% is considered a landslide. Most AR area's in Michigan were at that landslide level or better. It was the impossible level of 67% approval that made sure they would not pass. We can't get 67% of the population to agree that cutting taxes is a good thing, let alone something as serious as new buck regs for Michigan deer hunters!  :lol:


 What makes you believe that you will even come close to harvesting a 3.5 buck every 3 to 4 years ? You may be able to do that if you hunt a lease with a very limited number of hunters , but for the average hunters it will be more like onece every 10-15 years. IN PA the chance of harvesting any buck dropped from 1 buck every 5 years to one buck every 7 years.

My quuestion is why didn't the number of hunters that approved of continuing AR in WMU 118 increase significantly over the original vote for the demonstration. AS I recall the original vote was 57% and the vote to extend it was still only 57% . That tells me the hunters that actually hunted in WMU 118 weren't as impressed with the results as Ed was.


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

Happy Hunter said:


> What makes you believe that you will even come close to harvesting a 3.5 buck every 3 to 4 years ? You may be able to do that if you hunt a lease with a very limited number of hunters , but for the average hunters it will be more like onece every 10-15 years.


If a property is managed under QDM, with optimal habitate, you should be able to harvest get a crack at least one an adult buck every year. When I first bought my land in the U.P. there were lots of deer, but there were 10 does for every buck. The previous property owners and the neighbors took every legal buck they saw. The first year I bought my land, my one neighbor with 240 acres took 13 bucks off his land alone, not one of them close to being a good buck. For the first three years I owned my land, I only took one good buck and sightings of adult bucks were rare. Then we got together and formed a QDM cooperative where most of my neighbors and I passed on the small bucks. A couple years later mandatory QDM regulations were implemented. Because of two hard winters, it took a couple years for our restraint to pay off, but starting in 2001, it started paying huge dividends. In four seasons I took not one, but five big bucks. I also passed up or filmed many more large bucks that I could have easily shot. Sightings of adult bucks have also become commom all over my area. QDM works, there's no denying it. Anybody that doubts it has just not commited themselves to QDM principles and given it a chance. We went shinning deer last week around the Cornell area and the number and size of the bucks we saw were astounding. We saw a few bucks that aproached Boone and Crocket size. Locals are buzzing about the hunting possibilites for the upcomming firearm deer in our area and rightfully they should.


----------



## Bob S (Mar 8, 2000)

[email protected] said:


> Here's a question that cuts to the chase. If any common buck in the Baldwin/Big Rapids was allowed to live to 3.5 years old, by hunters passing on them at 1.5 and 2.5, do we agree that that buck would probably have a rack that scored at least 120-125? I know there's exceptions, but I mean the average buck that was a 1.5 year old fork, maybe a 2.5 year old basket 7 or 8pt and a larger 3.5 8pt? That's kinda what I want to know.


Bob, I don`t know what the habitat or deer density is like in your area compared to where I am in eastern Missaukee county. I also don`t know the age of the buck. But, there was a 140 class buck taken about 2 miles southwest of my place last year. Northern Michigan bucks can get pretty impressive when(*IF*) they get some age on them.


----------



## Happy Hunter (Apr 14, 2004)

"If a property is managed under QDM, with optimal habitate, you should be able to harvest get a crack at least one an adult buck every year."

If you have 500 acres and only one hunter that statement may be true , but if you have 500 acres and 50 hunters that statement would not be true.
Please note I said it was possible on a lease with a limited number of hunters , but that it would not happen on heavily hunted land open to the public...


QDM is great for managing the herds on hunting clubs ,leases and coops , but it doesn't work when implemented statewide where you have 1M hunters with a wide range of goals.


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

Happy Hunter said:


> If you have 500 acres and only one hunter that statement may be true , but if you have 500 acres and 50 hunters that statement would not be true.


That's a good point. If property is presured too heavily, your chances at mature bucks will nose dive. I keep the hunting preasure light on my U.P. property beause that is the only way to get consistant sightings of big bucks. Keep in mind though that I do aproximatly half my hunting in the U.P. on public/CFR lands. The hunting preasure on those public lands is typically less than on my own property. I have to do considerable scouting and work though to find and hunt those spots and the locations change every year with changes in habitate and hunting presure trends. Because my spots are typically way off the beaten path, I am extreely choosy about what deer i will shot at such spots. I have taken two good deer on public land in the past 10 years, but I have passed up several good bucks that 99% of hunters would have shot in a heartbeat. Qaulity hunting oportunites abound for anybody willing to (buy/lease/seek permission) on private property and for those willing to put forth the effort on public lands. Hunters that pack themselves into heavily hunted areas are rarely going to experiece qaulity hunts for mature bucks. John Eberhart has never leased property in his life. He gets all his trophy bucks by nocking on doors for permision or on public land. Still, he has recorded more bow-killed bucks in CBM than any other hunter.


----------



## Belbriette (Aug 12, 2000)

Very good posts above.

Trophymania is a plague ALL OVER the world. 
Concerning LARGE trophies, it was totally justified thousands of years ago. 
For very many reasons, it totally ceased to be so, and even more so for insignificant ones.
The "modern" hunter should be much more concerned about the herd well beeing (best appropriatness density / carrying capacity, best sex ratio, best bucks population age structure) hence long term wildlife Conservation, than about "taking" any buck who has not reached full maturity, one or two year before ... except those whose antler are below average in the DMU, IF the the carrying capacity /density, sex ratio, male population stucture by classes of age are what is best for the herd.


----------

