Quality deer management coming to Michigan, aiming to improve the herd

[Bob S]

ARTICLE (http://detnews.com/article/20091008/SPORTS07/910080436/1136/SPORTS07/Quality-deer-management-coming-to-Michigan--aiming-to-improve-the-herd)

Thursday, October 8, 2009

Dave Spratt / Special to The Detroit News

If you're a Michigan deer hunter, you've most likely heard of Quality Deer Management (QDM) or the Quality Deer Management Association (QDMA).

If you haven't, you might want to crawl out from under your rock and get caught up. Because QDM, a sometimes misunderstood practice for shaping deer herds, is about to enter Michigan's official lexicon.

Michigan will soon sign a memorandum of understanding with the QDMA. It's not much more than an agreement to agree. But it's an official recognition that our herd is way out of whack, that past deer-management practices need changing, that Michigan game officials want a healthier, smaller and better-balanced deer herd, and that the state is willing to work with QDMA to achieve those things.

"It focuses on the things that we share in common," said John Niewoonder, Michigan's acting Big Game Specialist. "Things like using sound science to manage the appropriate harvest of antlerless deer. It certainly doesn't go down the road of antler-point restrictions or any of that stuff that (QDMA) sometimes are associated with."

To understand what QDM is, it's important to understand what it is not. It is not Monster Buck Management, even though the end result is that bigger bucks walk the landscape. In its simplest form, QDM means shooting plenty of does and not shooting yearling bucks -- so they live to grow older. When properly applied, QDM results in a smaller deer population that has plenty to eat and behaves more naturally. It does have the fawns. Dominant bucks sire them. They're born at the right time of year.

The guy in the deer blind may see fewer deer overall, but he's also a lot more likely to see the wall-hanger buck of his dreams.

Russ Mason, the chief of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Division, is in Ontonagon today to explain to the Natural Resources Commission -- which sets game policies -- why QDM is right for Michigan.

"Whether it's habitat management, balancing herds with the available habitat, reducing the number of does in a herd to synchronize the rut and promoting other things that are favorable," Mason said. "Yeah, we believe in all those things."

Mason, who has been Michigan's wildlife chief for a little over a year, said he sees the QDMA's role as educating Michigan hunters on the value of QDM so they ultimately join the fold by choice. In other words, don't expect mandatory QDM-based rules any time soon. Mason said states that tried to force-feed QDM to hunters have had little success.

"We could go down the QDM path, and it's entirely possible that we will," he said. "I would prefer it be hunters choosing this path if they want to. Our strongest suit is when we're not regulators. And I'm not sure mandating things is where people want to go."

Quality Deer Management has steadily gained traction among Michigan hunters and landowners over the past few years. The QDMA has a state chapter with 17 different branches across Michigan and hundreds of small QDM co-ops where neighbors pool their land together, set mutually agreeable rules and follow them.

"That definitely is occurring in many places throughout the state, where deer management co-ops are forming," Niewoonder said. "There are many of them. Some are small and some are quite large. It's a grassroots deal where neighbors are talking to neighbors. It definitely is a growing thing at a grass-roots level."

Michigan already has taken some steps toward QDM practices, including allowing more than 20 deer-management units to try various antler-point restrictions on an experimental basis earlier this decade. Leaders of the Leelanau County QDM unit, one of five remaining, are so pleased with the result they want to expand into Benzie and Grand Traverse counties. A moratorium on adding QDM units ended in April 2008, and Mason said some members of the NRC seem amenable to expanding QDM areas.

That's not all. Last year, Michigan started an early antlerless season that began in September 2008 and continued this year, and the antler-restriction option that started for Upper Peninsula deer hunters last year. In the U.P., hunters can choose a single tag for any buck, or two tags for bucks with more antler points. That allows QDM supporters and opponents a chance to hunt deer the way they please.

"It's pretty neat how they have that where you have a one-buck tag or a two-buck tag," said Kip Adams, the QDMA's director of education and outreach for the northern United States. "I think that's a pretty unique way to please both ends of the hunters and to protect the young deer and have a better deer herd."

According to QDMA, Michigan hunters typically rank right at the top of all 50 states for the number of yearling bucks killed. In 2005, the last year for which there are national statistics, Michigan hunters killed the second-highest number of bucks, 63 percent of which were yearlings.

That's the exact practice QDM principles oppose. And more recently, Michigan hunters seem to be hearing the message. Last year, Michigan's antlerless harvest went up 12 percent, at the same time its buck harvest went down 7 percent.

But there's still one very important reality facing Michigan's game managers. The shoot-a-buck, pass-on-a-doe mentality that grew Michigan's deer herd for so many years is deeply ingrained in many Michigan hunters. Mason knows that isn't going away soon, but he figures you might as well start somewhere.

"To use too broad a sociological brush, we spent 120 years telling people they shouldn't shoot does," he said. "Now we tell people, 'Wait a minute. If you see a doe, shoot it, and if it has a fawn, shoot that too.' It's going to be a gradual thing, an erosion of the former truth for the present truth. But I'm pleased to see the doe harvest is going up, if for no other reason than they taste better."

Dave Spratt is a freelance writer and editor of http://www.greatnorthernoutdoors.net. You can reach him at dspratt@greatnorthernoutdoors.net.

[venado]

an erosion of the former truth for the present truth


Thanks for the post and congratulations for the interest that Michigan is showing in supporting basic QDM policies.

[GF.]

That's one of the smartest approaches to getting the principles in place that I've ever seen or heard.:cool:

The idea of 1 tag - any buck vs. 2 tags for bucks with point minimums is really interesting, but I'd still rather see 1 buck with a minimum and earn your second.... But point minimums aren't really that useful, when you get right down to it.

I still don't see where some folks miss the logic behind holding out for 2.5 yrs and up. Let a 1.5 go and shoot him next year or so down the road.... :D

Maybe if we could just get some peer pressure rolling against shooting 1.5s....basically make guys feel like they have something to apologize for when they shoot one, same as we used to feel about 'doe-shooters'....as if shooting a 1.5 is basically an admission that you're just not much of a hunter and you had to take one of the easy ones....

And somebody who fills multiple tags on 1.5s? No-talent game-hogging.... :mad::mad::mad:

:D

[Laturkeyhtr]

Hey Bob, that seems like it is defnitely a step in the right direction. Education is always a plus when it comes to dealing with hunters. Many of them soon learn that their hunting is only going to improve.

Do keep us posted as things progress.

[Sabre]

Maybe if we could just get some peer pressure rolling against shooting 1.5s....basically make guys feel like they have something to apologize for when they shoot one, same as we used to feel about 'doe-shooters'....as if shooting a 1.5 is basically an admission that you're just not much of a hunter and you had to take one of the easy ones:D

You'll never make me feel guilty about killng year and a half bucks. I'm hunting for meat and the fun of the hunt and I don't give a damn about horns anymore. I've already got a roomfull of racks from 2.5 and 3.5 year old bucks and I don't have anything left to prove nor any use for more dust collectors. I killed my "trophy bucks" under conditions of intense hunting pressure {buck harvest of near 90% 1.5 year olds} in places where the QDM whiners said they didn't exist and have not the slightest sypathy nor desire to make things any easier on the lazy, pitiful bastards by passing up good meat so they can feel like mighty hunters a year or two later.

[southtexas]

Sabre:

Here is one thing that you said a few months back that we can all agree on:

"I may come off as overbearing or self righteous..."

[Renegade]

What I don't understand is when people say they are meat hunters and not concerned with antlers, then why must they shoot yearling buck when there's plenty of doe to be taken, and also more opportunity to do so. I don't get that. Venison is venison, there's no difference between male or female venison. I'm a meat hunter as well but I'll target the biggest doe unless there happens to be a decent legal buck that presents itself.


"in places where the QDM whiners said they didn't exist and have not the slightest sypathy nor desire to make things any easier on the lazy, pitiful bastards by passing up good meat so they can feel like mighty hunters a year or two later."
Not sure what a QDM whiner is, as I've never heard of one, but just how is it that a guy who patiently waits for an older buck is "lazy, pitiful" or a "bastard"; and how is it you would make things "easier" for them?

[Sabre]

Not sure what a QDM whiner is, as I've never heard of one, but just how is it that a guy who patiently waits for an older buck is "lazy, pitiful" or a "bastard"; and how is it you would make things "easier" for them?

The QDM whiners are pitiful and lazy because they'd rather whine that there aren't any "good bucks" out there and pass laws forbidding others from shooting young bucks than learn how to hunt and work their butts off for their trophies like those of us who did it repeatedly without any antler restrictions. They're bastards because they seek to pass laws restricting the freedom of choice of their fellow hunters and hence force their values onto others in order to get more of what "they" want/value. As to shooting does for meat, I'm perfectly willing to do that every season {and do} but doe tags are limited here and you can't count on getting one every year. Furthermore, one deer only lasts me about a month so even in the years when I get one or two doe tags I still want to fill my buck tag for the extra meat. I don't appreciate others trying to tell me their stupid wall decorations {antlers, which they could get without AR's if they werent such lazy and incompetent hunters} are more valuable than my groceries.:mad:

[GF.]

Boy, if I didn't think it'd fire up a serious pissing contest, I might even guess that you're already feeling some pressure to pass on those 1.5s......:rolleyes:

But again, Sabre... This isn't about wanting easier hunting for bigger bucks, it's about wanting to get the herd in balance and the population in check.

And BTW.... This isn't to suggest that you need anything even resembling my 'permission' to do a blessed thing, but under any system that I, personally, would endorse, you would still have the legal option of shooting whatever buck you choose and you'd probably have the option of filling more doe tags than you currently do. There'd be no hit in the grocery budget if'n I were King for a Day because I'm the sort of guy who heads out with good intentions and normally ends up shooting whatever deer he gets a crack at as the season is winding down. JMO, but as 'excuses' for shooting yearling bucks go, 'my freezer is empty and we need the meat' is about as good as it gets....

But hey, look... If you're gonna leave those antlers in the woods anyway - and you have any kind of choice - why not leave 'em walking around with a young buck underneath?:cool:

[Sabre]

Boy, if I didn't think it'd fire up a serious pissing contest, I might even guess that you're already feeling some pressure to pass on those 1.5s......:rolleyes: Not in the least GF. In fact I've killed 1.5 year old bucks for the last 2 seasons and make no apologies for it. That's not saying I went out intentionally looking to kill a young buck but they happened to be the first legal bucks I saw and I needed the meat so I dropped 'em.


But again, Sabre... This isn't about wanting easier hunting for bigger bucks, it's about wanting to get the herd in balance and the population in check. Horse puckey ! You can balance the herd and/or reduce the population by issuing more doe tags/killing more does and/or limiting the amount of buck tags. Antler restrictions are not needed to accomplish these things at all and exist solely to produce more "older bucks" meaning MORE and BIGGER ANTLERS for the lazy incompetent fools that can't kill a decent buck otherwise. Try to varnish antler restrictions over with any bogus "management" name you want {QDM} but this is the BOTTOM LINE that makes them so popular with the vast majority of hunters and they don't care about anything else.


And BTW.... This isn't to suggest that you need anything even resembling my 'permission' to do a blessed thing, but under any system that I, personally, would endorse, you would still have the legal option of shooting whatever buck you choose and you'd probably have the option of filling more doe tags than you currently do. Ain't happenin' here GF. Our herd is in balance with the habitat and they're NOT going to be increasing the doe tags hereabouts anytime soon.

[pepaw]

Sabre,

If you are such a experienced and succesful hunter, is it still fun to hunt & kill yearling bucks? My excitement over killing an 18 month old buck is long gone. I hunt mature bucks and kill does. I figure mature bucks are less than 3% of the population where I hunt. And the challenge of finding one in the daylight makes hunting fun and challenging, even though this is my 46th of hunting.

Pleease don't call me lazy or a pitiful bastard. I would rather hunt all year and not squeeze the trigger than eliminate a immature, small buck from the herd just because I "needed" the meat.

pepaw

[Sabre]

Sabre,

If you are such a experienced and succesful hunter, is it still fun to hunt & kill yearling bucks? My excitement over killing an 18 month old buck is long gone. I hunt mature bucks and kill does. I figure mature bucks are less than 3% of the population where I hunt. And the challenge of finding one in the daylight makes hunting fun and challenging, even though this is my 46th of hunting.

Pleease don't call me lazy or a pitiful bastard. I would rather hunt all year and not squeeze the trigger than eliminate a immature, small buck from the herd just because I "needed" the meat.

pepaw

Why yes, as a matter of fact I do still get enjoyment out of shooting a young buck or even a doe pepaw. Just the same as I still enjoy shooting rabbits, squirrels and pheasants. Hunting and KILLING GAME of any sort is still enjoyable to me and I don't feel the need to be overly "challenged" to find pleasure in the hunt. I don't have the slightest interest in "hunting all year without pulling the trigger" for anything. I'm out there to kill something and wouldn't bother going at all if my kills were so few and far between.

[southtexas]

Why yes, as a matter of fact I do still get enjoyment out of shooting a young buck or even a doe pepaw. Just the same as I still enjoy shooting rabbits, squirrels and pheasants. Hunting and KILLING GAME of any sort is still enjoyable to me and I don't feel the need to be overly "challenged" to find pleasure in the hunt. I don't have the slightest interest in "hunting all year without pulling the trigger" for anything. I'm out there to kill something and wouldn't bother going at all if my kills were so few and far between.


..and furthermore, anyone who feels different than me is a lazy, pitiful, bastard.:rolleyes:

[GF.]

Just fer grins, there, Sabre.... I'm not advocating antler restrictions (ARs); I'm advocating Voluntary Restraint - call it VR - when it comes to shooting 1.5's because it's the right thing to do in any high-population area.

Maybe your area's not as high population as the ones that I'm thinking of, but if the concept of VR doesn't catch on pretty broadly (as has the catch&release 'ethic' among bass & trout fishermen), then it's not liable to do much good, so I'm liable to preach the word farther and wider than not.....

And call me crazy, but I'd swear that the steaks that came off last year's 2.5 or 3.5 YO buck are about 30% larger than the same cuts off of the bucks (and does, of course) that I've shot over the past ten years or so. :eek:

So given my druthers, yeah, I'd sooner shoot older deer, given the option - if for no other reason than a greater meat yield. Are you trying to tell me that it would be 'bad' for you if a larger % of the annual crop of 1.5s made it through 'til next year and if that were to happen several years in a row?

Unless the deer where you live are uncommonly stupid, I suppose the hunting would get to be a bit tougher as the herd aged and gained experience avoiding knuckleheads like me, but that shouldn't affect anybody with your experience and knowledge of your area.... so maybe I'm a little confused as to how this would detract at all from your enjoyment of the hunt every year.....:confused:

[pepaw]

I am just too spoiled here in TX I think. I spend a lot of time preparing for my hunts and just any deer with a rifle is not much of a trick.
I tried the bow, but managed to lose a buck with a shot that barely missed vitals and backbone. One mature buck is too valuable to "my" herd to lose so I went back to rifles.
But I don't go hunting to kill something. I hunt for a lot of reasons. I also spend all year trying to improve conditions in my hunting areas however I can afford.
The meat is a small portion of my enjoyment. If I shot a deer for meat, my season would be over in a day. That would stink!

Have a good one guys.

pepaw

[Sabre]

Maybe your area's not as high population as the ones that I'm thinking of, but if the concept of VR doesn't catch on pretty broadly (as has the catch&release 'ethic' among bass & trout fishermen), then it's not liable to do much good, so I'm liable to preach the word farther and wider than not..... A deer study was just completed in the immediate area I hunt this past summer and they pegged the deer population at 15 psm with a doe to buck ratio of 6-1. Given that it's mountainous and heavily forrested around here and the figures point to there being about 1 antlered buck for every 300 wooded acres, I promise you none of these guys would see enough buck in a season to get bored shooting anything less than a "fully mature" specimen. Furthermore, it is estimated that roughly 60% of our pre-season antlered buck crop are 1.5 year olds so that narrows it down to about one buck of 2.5 years or older per square mile. Care to guess how bored pepaw might get or how long he might be going between kills while holding out for a "mature" buck ?;)


And call me crazy, but I'd swear that the steaks that came off last year's 2.5 or 3.5 YO buck are about 30% larger than the same cuts off of the bucks (and does, of course) that I've shot over the past ten years or so. :eek Yep, and they're about 30% harder to drag back to the truck too. Which is a consideration when you shoot one on the other side of the mountain from where you're parked and there's no way to get within a half mile of it with a 4X4 or ATV. Try dragging a few 180 pound 3.5 year olds UP a steep mountainside and you'll start to see the beauty of those 120 lb yearlings.


So given my druthers, yeah, I'd sooner shoot older deer, given the option - if for no other reason than a greater meat yield. I've shot a good many 2.5 and 3.5 year old bucks in my lifetime. In my experience the 2.5's are pretty good eating but the smelly old rutted up 3.5's are best made into sausage and/or fed to the dogs.

[pepaw]

Time spent outdoors is never wasted or boring with good hunting partners, a proper set of binocs and a good attitude.


Official Old F__t

pepaw

[GF.]

Yep, and they're about 30% harder to drag back to the truck too. Which is a consideration when you shoot one on the other side of the mountain from where you're parked and there's no way to get within a half mile of it with a 4X4 or ATV. Try dragging a few 180 pound 3.5 year olds UP a steep mountainside and you'll start to see the beauty of those 120 lb yearlings.



Dooooooooood........ That's what pack frames are for. Try hauling out an Elk 3 or 4 miles at 1,000 feet of vertical per mile, and you'll never complain about no piddly, stinkin' 180-pound whitey again! Hell, you bone it out and you're down to a single trip...... :D

Anyway.... It sounds to me as if maybe you have more of an issue there with herd balance than population size, but that's the beauty of Voluntary Restraint on the 1.5s..... You're free to pop a lighter animal if you've decided that the bigger ones are too much work to haul out from where you find them, but the guys who want to see some 'bigger' bucks in the woods ought to hold themselves accountable for passing up the 'smaller' ones, don't you think?

I'm just really tired of the guys who brag themselves up - even if only to themselves - for having shot more than one buck a year when they've passed up does to do it. And when those bucks are mostly 1.5s.....

Where you are, any buck is hard to find, unless you just happen to know what you're doing; there may be 1 buck/300 acres, but chances are he's using less than 30 of them, right?

But in areas where the herds are big and a guy can make a lot of dumb mistakes and still kill those basket-racked 1.5s because they're even dumber and they're ramped up on testosterone to where whatever caution they might have had is long gone.... It's like those hunters are the neighborhood bullies, you know? And game hogs, besides....:rolleyes:

There's nothing at all dishonorable about taking a buck when it's not particularly easy to do and you want/need the meat it will provide. Up in MN, we almost invariably shot the first legal deer we saw, because those were often the only deer we'd see in a season. But killing multiple bucks 'for meat' when does & tags are plentiful is sheer bullschitt.

JMfreakin'O

[Renegade]

The QDM whiners are pitiful and lazy because they'd rather whine that there aren't any "good bucks" out there and pass laws forbidding others from shooting young bucks than learn how to hunt and work their butts off for their trophies like those of us who did it repeatedly without any antler restrictions.
Interesting. In my experience while discussing deer management issues on various boards, it's usually the QDM advocate being accused of calling the opposition lazy because we promote going deeper into the woods or elsewhere besides the same old stump you've sat on for a decade or more, or following the food sources.

But QDM advocates aren't promoting these practices to create trophies, okay, some large landowners or guiding operations are, but for the average Joe, at least in PA with our statewide form of QDM, it's about the deer herds health and having a proper age class makeup to promote a better breeding ecology where the older class bucks do the brunt of the breeding while the yun'uns concentrate on nutritional body growth and don't waste their stored energy reserves for the winter months.


They're bastards because they seek to pass laws restricting the freedom of choice of their fellow hunters and hence force their values onto others in order to get more of what "they" want/value.
Those "bastards" are the same ones you most likely have to thank for your having a state game / wildlife agency/dept. I know PA's conservation minded hunters were the ones to get the agency started back in 1895 and implemented these "value laws" or we wouldn't have the game we have today.
You have regulations restricting every other species of game, why the opposition to deer? I'm guessing you don't mind these "freedom of choice" restrictions when they align with your personal wants / values. Don't worry, your not alone, but why should your desires trump someone elses?


Furthermore, one deer only lasts me about a month so even in the years when I get one or two doe tags I still want to fill my buck tag for the extra meat. I don't appreciate others trying to tell me their stupid wall decorations are more valuable than my groceries.
So what your saying is that unless there are regulations that will allow you to get 12 deer (any gender) which will provide you with full time groceries, you won't be happy?:rolleyes:


A deer study was just completed in the immediate area I hunt this past summer and they pegged the deer population at 15 psm with a doe to buck ratio of 6-1.
Can you point me to that study? You don't indicate whether that 15 psm is a pre-season or post season density. And there are several "ratios" there could be, but that must include fawns of females only to be that skewed, which is definitely not a pre-season ratio.

[Sabre]

Dooooooooood........ That's what pack frames are for. Try hauling out an Elk 3 or 4 miles at 1,000 feet of vertical per mile, and you'll never complain about no piddly, stinkin' 180-pound whitey again! Hell, you bone it out and you're down to a single trip...... :D Truthfully I've been thinking of giving a pack frame a try for the past several years now but haven't gotten around to it yet.


Anyway.... It sounds to me as if maybe you have more of an issue there with herd balance than population size, but that's the beauty of Voluntary Restraint on the 1.5s..... You're free to pop a lighter animal if you've decided that the bigger ones are too much work to haul out from where you find them, but the guys who want to see some 'bigger' bucks in the woods ought to hold themselves accountable for passing up the 'smaller' ones, don't you think? Agreed. One of the biggest problems we have in this area is that there are so many dedicated buck hunters that hunt all 3 seasons {archery, firearms, muzzleloader} and will happily kill 3 bucks a year if they get the chance. The best thing DEC could do for our herd balance is to implement an either/or restriction and limit these multi-season hunters to one buck a year.



But in areas where the herds are big and a guy can make a lot of dumb mistakes and still kill those basket-racked 1.5s because they're even dumber and they're ramped up on testosterone to where whatever caution they might have had is long gone.... It's like those hunters are the neighborhood bullies, you know? And game hogs, besides....:rolleyes: Yep.


There's nothing at all dishonorable about taking a buck when it's not particularly easy to do and you want/need the meat it will provide. Up in MN, we almost invariably shot the first legal deer we saw, because those were often the only deer we'd see in a season. But killing multiple bucks 'for meat' when does & tags are plentiful is sheer bullschitt. Agreed.

[Sabre]

Interesting. In my experience while discussing deer management issues on various boards, it's usually the QDM advocate being accused of calling the opposition lazy because we promote going deeper into the woods or elsewhere besides the same old stump you've sat on for a decade or more, or following the food sources.
Nope, it's the QDM guys who are lazy because they don't want to go looking all over hell's half acre for a nice buck but instead want regulations implemented that will allow them to sit on their fat, dead asses and shoot a nice buck out of the stand at the edge of the field behind the house every year.

But QDM advocates aren't promoting these practices to create trophies, okay, some large landowners or guiding operations are, but for the average Joe, at least in PA with our statewide form of QDM, it's about the deer herds health and having a proper age class makeup to promote a better breeding ecology where the older class bucks do the brunt of the breeding while the yun'uns concentrate on nutritional body growth and don't waste their stored energy reserves for the winter months.
Preach whatever you want but I ain't buyin' it.


Those "bastards" are the same ones you most likely have to thank for your having a state game / wildlife agency/dept. Wrong again. The bastards that started the state wildlife agencies are long since dead. These current QDM advocates are just wannabe's in so many ways.



So what your saying is that unless there are regulations that will allow you to get 12 deer (any gender) which will provide you with full time groceries, you won't be happy?:rolleyes: No but if I can get two good eaters in a year instead of one I will and who the hell are you to tell me what buck I should shoot ?:rolleyes:



Can you point me to that study? You don't indicate whether that 15 psm is a pre-season or post season density. And there are several "ratios" there could be, but that must include fawns of females only to be that skewed, which is definitely not a pre-season ratio.

No I can't and at this point I probably wouldn't if I could. The 15 psm is a pre season density and the 6-1 ratio is antlerless does/fawns vs antlered bucks.

[GF.]

One of the biggest problems we have in this area is that there are so many dedicated buck hunters that hunt all 3 seasons {archery, firearms, muzzleloader} and will happily kill 3 bucks a year if they get the chance. The best thing DEC could do for our herd balance is to implement an either/or restriction and limit these multi-season hunters to one buck a year.



Testify!

Personally, I'd like to see either-or regs (and much stricter definitions of 'archery' and 'muzzleloading' equipment) in states with populations that are in line with the carrying capacity of the land, and possibly a choose-your-weapon - in advance- policy for the annual buck tag in those states with a surplus of animals.

The only problem is that the latter would probably cut too deeply into the harvest total, so I guess there'd have to be an earn-a-buck program in place. I still wouldn't want to see guys taking more than one buck a year if it could be avoided, but at least if they're shooting as many does as bucks, there'd be some population control coming in ....

How about this - I buy my '1' buck tag for the year for rifle season, because that's my best chance to fill the tag..... but then by taking two does with a bow, I earn the option of filling my 1/year buck limit in archery season or rifle :D

[Sabre]

Time spent outdoors is never wasted or boring with good hunting partners, a proper set of binocs and a good attitude.


Official Old F__t

pepaw

I don't need a hunting partner or a good set of binocs to have a good time. Just give me lots of game and plenty of shells and I'm all set.:D

[Sabre]

How about this - I buy my '1' buck tag for the year for rifle season, because that's my best chance to fill the tag..... but then by taking two does with a bow, I earn the option of filling my 1/year buck limit in archery season or rifle :D

That'd be fine with me.;)

[GF.]

You know, if I didn't know any better.... I'd almost think that you and the QDM guys want the same thing, really, you're just real cynical about why they want it :D

[Laturkeyhtr]

You know, if I didn't know any better.... I'd almost think that you and the QDM guys want the same thing, really, you're just real cynical about why they want it :D


I know one thing, Sabre likes to simply disagree with the majority or the sake of an argument.

Besides, when has anyone ever thought that 2.5 or 3.5 yr olds were trophies? Much less when was any buck taken not good tablefare? I have never taken a buck that was bad eating and yes I have taken a few older than 3.5. The neck and rib meat makes great sausage and the rest of it makes good bacon burger and steaks.

[Sabre]

Besides, when has anyone ever thought that 2.5 or 3.5 yr olds were trophies? .

Who would think 2.5 and 3.5 year olds were trophies ? Only about 99.9% of the hunters in all of NY state that's who. Man you southerners surely are spoiled.:eek: I don't know what the figures run now but back in the 70's, 80's and 90's our annual buck harvest consisted of roughly 88% 1.5 year olds, 10% 2.5 year olds and 2% 3.5 and older. since our overall hunter success rate on bucks was usually 15% or less, you can figure only 15 out of every 100 hunters got a buck of any kind in any given year, hence only about 1.5 out of every 100 hunters {10 percent of the 15% of successful hunters} was fortunate enough to get a 2.5 year old. Wouldn't that make them hard enough to obtain to qualify for at least a minimal trophy status in most anyones book ?

[Sabre]

You know, if I didn't know any better.... I'd almost think that you and the QDM guys want the same thing, really, you're just real cynical about why they want it :D

Not cynical at all, realistic and honest. I've been to the meetings here in NY and listened to them whine like a bunch of little babies.:rolleyes: My attitude is that if they can't kill good bucks now without AR's {and a 3.5 year old is a darn nice buck here} then they don't deserve any because they're lousy and/or lazy hunters. Trophies of any kind SHOULD be hard to obtain and only obtainable by the skilled and ambitious. If you make them easy to get by just any lazy, incompetent duffer then they mean nothing. I look at AR's and QDM in general like the equivalent of the "no kid left behind" school programs only for hunters.

[GF.]

I can almost half-way buy in to what you're saying, but I look at it this way... Surviving his first rut has got to teach a youngster an awful lot in the way of survival skills... So much though that I've got to believe that a lot of bucks that make it past two and a half probably die of old age or automobiles.

So maybe there are some guys who think that ARs are a free ticket to wall-hanger buckdom, but those guys are gonna be sorely disappointed. Maybe that's why all the kvetching & moaning down in PA. Some folks didn't realize that older bucks are just plain harder to hunt, so now that they can't find 'em as easily as they used to find those rock-stupid 1.5s, they think there just aren't any out there.

Not such a problem if you know what you're doin', but a goob like me might be SOL :D

[Sabre]

So maybe there are some guys who think that ARs are a free ticket to wall-hanger buckdom, but those guys are gonna be sorely disappointed. Maybe that's why all the kvetching & moaning down in PA. Some folks didn't realize that older bucks are just plain harder to hunt, so now that they can't find 'em as easily as they used to find those rock-stupid 1.5s, they think there just aren't any out there.

Not such a problem if you know what you're doin', but a goob like me might be SOL :D

Those Pa bucks must be smarter than ours. Honestly, I've never found 2.5's or even 3.5's to be stunningly brilliant or hard to take. Any duffer who can shoot straight can take one from a well placed stand. If someone wants a challenge they need to ditch the stand, get on the ground with 'em and still hunt/stalk to within close range.

[Renegade]

"Nope, it's the QDM guys who are lazy because they don't want to go looking all over hell's half acre for a nice buck but instead want regulations implemented that will allow them to sit on their fat, dead asses and shoot a nice buck out of the stand at the edge of the field behind the house every year."
I suspect once you realize your 180 degrees wrong on that and realize that QDM promotes getting away from the old tradition of sitting in the same old spot year after year and finding the spots with deer which are "beyond the crowds", you'll change your tune.


"Wrong again. The bastards that started the state wildlife agencies are long since dead. These current QDM advocates are just wannabe's in so many ways."
Well yeah... of course their dead. That's not the point. If it weren't for these forward thinking types that create these restrictions and laws, you wouldn't have much game to hunt. You already live by restrictions to your own "freedom of choice", and you are okay with them. Your only opposed to QDM because you personally don't agree. You haven't cornered the market on good hunting abilities!


"who the hell are you to tell me what buck I should shoot ?"
Who the hell are you to tell the rest of the states hunters that you should be entitled to as many deer as you need for groceries? those aren't your deer there for your personal meat locker.


"No I can't and at this point I probably wouldn't if I could. The 15 psm is a pre season density and the 6-1 ratio is antlerless does/fawns vs antlered bucks."
Could it be that you read it wrong, cause I don't know why you'd be opposed to sharing? I can't seem to find it on the NYDEC website. A density of 15dpsm pre-season isn't that many. We used to have densities in the 30's and 40's pre-season prior to the reduction. Now the post season goals, provided the habitat can sustain them, are anywhere from 5-17dpsm depending on the unit. http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/lib/pgc/reports/2003_wildlife/21001-02z.pdf page 8.
And that ratio sucks. A properly managed herd should have around a 1:2 buck to doe breeding ratio. You probably have a lot of barren fawn running around, which keeps your herd size down and in turn your density.


But your not alone in opposing antler restrictions in NY state. About a third of hunters do, at least in 2006 & 07.
Would hunters support an experimental regulation to protect most yearling bucks from harvest?

* Central and Western New York hunters: 57% support, 30% oppose, 13% no opinion
* Northern New York hunters: 52% support, 34% oppose, 14% no opinion
* Southeastern New York hunters: 63% support, 26% oppose, 11% no opinion

Here's the survey for 2008 that shows why support for AR didn't quite get the supermajority they set as the tipping point.
http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/arcatskill09.pdf

[Sabre]

I suspect once you realize your 180 degrees wrong on that and realize that QDM promotes getting away from the old tradition of sitting in the same old spot year after year and finding the spots with deer which are "beyond the crowds", you'll change your tune. Wrong again Renegade. I did hunt all over half of NY state for my bucks over the past 30 odd years. I took good bucks {by NY standards} regularly from the early 80's up till my last one in 2005 and hunted new territory almost every season just to stave off boredom. I still have several well proven old stand sites where a buck kill on opening morning is as close to guaranteed as you're ever gonna get. I don't hunt them anymore and haven't in years because they're farther away than I wish to drive these days and there's no fun/sport in killing deer from them for me anymore. Besides all that, it was YOU I heard bitching that you never saw any bucks at your hunting camp until Pa implemented it's AR program so what the hell is wrong with your hunting skills and why don't you practice what you preach ?



Who the hell are you to tell the rest of the states hunters that you should be entitled to as many deer as you need for groceries? those aren't your deer there for your personal meat locker. You're mistaken again there bud. I'm not trying to tell any of the states hunters HOW MANY deer I should be able to shoot in a year. The cry baby AR loonies are trying to tell me WHICH buck I can or can't shoot.


Could it be that you read it wrong, cause I don't know why you'd be opposed to sharing? I can't seem to find it on the NYDEC website. A density of 15dpsm pre-season isn't that many. We used to have densities in the 30's and 40's pre-season prior to the reduction. Now the post season goals, provided the habitat can sustain them, are anywhere from 5-17dpsm depending on the unit. No I didn't read it wrong because I didn't read it at all. It was read to me over the phone just recently and I remember exactly what was said. It might surprise you to find out there are areas in NY that have deer densities of over 50 psm {primarily in Western NY and suburban areas} but that there are also VAST areas where the deer population is WELL UNDER 5 psm. Keep doing your little internet research project and I'm sure sooner or later you'll be able to find that information. Too bad you don't put as much effort into building your hunting skills. If you did you wouldn't need an antler restriction program to help you see and maybe even kill some nice bucks.

And that ratio sucks.A properly managed herd should have around a 1:2 buck to doe breeding ratio. Depends on what you're managing for.
You probably have a lot of barren fawn running around, which keeps your herd size down and in turn your density. No we don't and our density is right where it should be given what the habitat can support.



But your not alone in opposing antler restrictions in NY state. About a third of hunters do, at least in 2006 & 07.
[COLOR="SeaGreen"]Would hunters support an experimental regulation to protect most yearling bucks from harvest?

* Central and Western New York hunters: 57% support, 30% oppose, 13% no opinion
* Northern New York hunters: 52% support, 34% oppose, 14% no opinion
* Southeastern New York hunters: 63% support, 26% oppose, 11% no opinion There have always been good snake oil salesmen around and the boisterous QDM advocates are some of the best.

[southtexas]

Sabre said::

"The best thing DEC could do for our herd balance is to implement an either/or restriction and limit these multi-season hunters to one buck a year."


So doesn't that statement make you one of these?:


"They're bastards because they seek to pass laws restricting the freedom of choice of their fellow hunters and hence force their values onto others in order to get more of what "they" want/value."

[Sabre]

Sabre said::

"The best thing DEC could do for our herd balance is to implement an either/or restriction and limit these multi-season hunters to one buck a year."


So doesn't that statement make you one of these?:


"They're bastards because they seek to pass laws restricting the freedom of choice of their fellow hunters and hence force their values onto others in order to get more of what "they" want/value."
No because I'm not pushing for such a restriction and don't intend to. The truth is, I'm perfectly happy with our deer hunting the way it is and why wouldn't I be ? I've managed virtually a 100% success rate since the mid 70's in a state where overall hunter success runs under 25% annually and have taken some darn nice bucks along the way.

[Sabre]

DEC's official postion on antler restrictions......"The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation supports voluntary antler restriction programs but DOES NOT SEE A CRITICAL BIOLOGICAL NEED OR COMPELLING MANAGEMENT ADVANTAGE TO MANDATE ANTLER RESTRICTIONS."

[postoak]

No because I'm not pushing for such a restriction and don't intend to. The truth is, I'm perfectly happy with our deer hunting the way it is and why wouldn't I be ? I've managed virtually a 100% success rate since the mid 70's in a state where overall hunter success runs under 25% annually and have taken some darn nice bucks along the way.

I'm on the same page as you, Sabre, plus congratulations on such a high success rate.

[Laturkeyhtr]

Sabre, I knew you were easy to get a rise out of especially when I stated what I did about "trophies". We all know that a trophy is in the eye of the beholder, but from the true sense a trophy buck in terms of deer management is 5.5 or greater. Maybe just a play on words to you, but not in the strictest sense.

Now about that lazy part, I think you need to try some of this "QDM stuff". Some of these hunters practicing QDM are doing much more than simply letting bucks go then shooting them later at 2.5 or 3.5 as you suggest. Which bt when you are putting pressure on the does aren't as stupid and easy as you might think. Back to the "lazy hunters", many of them are working there tails off trying to improve their properties. This includes not only clearing land for food plots, but also consider the ones that try to learn about the practice of QDM. Not to mention the hunters that get out there and talk their neighbors into forming cooperatives. Just imagine how much work goes into by some when they run up on a hunter such as yourself that is opposed to doing things to improve things where they hunt. :D


Wouldn't that make them hard enough to obtain to qualify for at least a minimal trophy status in most anyones book ?

So my response to that is why not do all you can do to make them much easier to obtain which in turns create more in those older age class that are truly trophies. They offer the sort of hunt that some of us such as myself and Pepaw enjoy managing for and hunting.

[Laturkeyhtr]

There have always been good snake oil salesmen around and the boisterous QDM advocates are some of the best.

And they have many very satisfied customers. :D Just look at how QDMA has grown. I can remember when the membership was less than 5k now it is around 50k and still growing with many new branches popping up everywhere.

[Sabre]

Sabre, I knew you were easy to get a rise out of especially when I stated what I did about "trophies". We all know that a trophy is in the eye of the beholder, but from the true sense a trophy buck in terms of deer management is 5.5 or greater. Maybe just a play on words to you, but not in the strictest sense. In the strictest sense what makes a buck a "trophy" has nothing to do with how old it is or how big it's antlers are but rather how rare it is and how hard to obtain. That's the thing all of you QDM advocates have totally lost sight of and fail to understand.


Now about that lazy part, I think you need to try some of this "QDM stuff". Some of these hunters practicing QDM are doing much more than simply letting bucks go then shooting them later at 2.5 or 3.5 as you suggest. Which bt when you are putting pressure on the does aren't as stupid and easy as you might think. Back to the "lazy hunters", many of them are working there tails off trying to improve their properties. This includes not only clearing land for food plots, but also consider the ones that try to learn about the practice of QDM. Not to mention the hunters that get out there and talk their neighbors into forming cooperatives. Just imagine how much work goes into by some when they run up on a hunter such as yourself that is opposed to doing things to improve things where they hunt. :D
They may be "ambitious" farmers but they're not "ambitious" hunters. If they were they'd know there are already good bucks running around out there every season and would work hard at improving their hunting skills and go after them. Instead they concentrate their efforts on "raising" more so it's easier to get one and I have no respect for that methodology at all. You want to impress me with your hunting abilities then go find where a big buck lives and take him from the ground at close range after a careful, well planned stalk.{that's how I've killed most of my bucks btw} Plugging one from a stand overlooking a food plot after you've done everything you could to make sure there'd be plenty of "older age class" bucks around just ain't cuttin' it with me.

[Sabre]

And they have many very satisfied customers. :D Just look at how QDMA has grown. I can remember when the membership was less than 5k now it is around 50k and still growing with many new branches popping up everywhere.

And mushrooms pop up out of sh*tpiles by the hundreds overnight too.:rolleyes:

[Sabre]

I'm on the same page as you, Sabre, plus congratulations on such a high success rate.

Thank's postoak !;) and good luck to you this season:)

[southtexas]

. You want to impress me with your hunting abilities then go find where a big buck lives and take him from the ground at close range after a careful, well planned stalk.{that's how I've killed most of my bucks btw} .

Now why would I care about impressing you with my hunting ability? You seem quite impressed with yourself, without my or anyone else's help.

I don't doubt that you are a "good hunter", according to your own personal criteria, so what?. And why do you have the need to try to impress the rest of us?

If I want to hunt with a tooth pick in a loincloth, why would you care,or why would I care what you think of my technique. We are doing it for personal enjoyment....it's not a contest, right?

[Renegade]

If I want to hunt with a tooth pick in a loincloth, why would you care,or why would I care what you think of my technique.:D:D
toothpick and a loincloth! Now that's funny right there I don't care who you are! :D:D Yes I think 'ol Sabre is more concerned about impressing some internet strangers with his hunting prowess than talking objectively about the topic at hand.


"Besides all that, it was YOU I heard bitching that you never saw any bucks at your hunting camp until Pa implemented it's AR program so what the hell is wrong with your hunting skills and why don't you practice what you preach ?"
That wasn't just me. That's a pretty common opinion from around the state and the details of the harvest illustrated that well. Nothing wrong with my hunting skills of which you know zero about. Maybe I'm not the nations number one hunter, but you seem to have that slot already filled.


"I'm not trying to tell any of the states hunters HOW MANY deer I should be able to shoot in a year. The cry baby AR loonies are trying to tell me WHICH buck I can or can't shoot."Then why would you make these statements? It would seem you whining because your tags are limited and limiting you from shooting another spike has elevated that whining.

"Furthermore, one deer only lasts me about a month so even in the years when I get one or two doe tags I still want to fill my buck tag for the extra meat. I don't appreciate others trying to tell me their stupid wall decorations {antlers, which they could get without AR's if they werent such lazy and incompetent hunters} are more valuable than my groceries."
or:
"but they happened to be the first legal bucks I saw and I needed the meat so I dropped 'em."
If those so-called bastards hadn't implemented some regulations that limited what you could harvest (male or female), it sounds as though you'd be shooting as many as you could.


"No I didn't read it wrong because I didn't read it at all. It was read to me over the phone just recently and I remember exactly what was said."
And yet you can't even tell us the title of this "so-called" report. So we must assume it is subject to interpretation, and also that the context may be totally different. I'm not the one who claimed this report exists so why would I research for something that may not exist.


DEC's official postion on antler restrictions......"The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation supports voluntary antler restriction programs but DOES NOT SEE A CRITICAL BIOLOGICAL NEED OR COMPELLING MANAGEMENT ADVANTAGE TO MANDATE ANTLER RESTRICTIONS."
That's not saying that QDM wouldn't improve things and obviously DEC feels it would or they wouldn't have pushed for it. The problem is they let it up to the hunters to decide and said we want at least 67% of hunters to support it and no more that 20% can be strongly opposed to it. Had they simply wanted a majority for support they'd have gotten it in all areas.


"In the strictest sense what makes a buck a "trophy" has nothing to do with how old it is or how big it's antlers are but rather how rare it is and how hard to obtain. That's the thing all of you QDM advocates have totally lost sight of and fail to understand."
Yeah, I can't tell you how many times I've heard about or read about "how that elusive but rare spike evaded hunters yet another season". And I missed the columns in the record book that listed it's "chase difficulty"; or the entry criteria where it must have taken at least 100 hours to obtain in order to qualify. Instead they use some silly qualifications like antler details!
(please read the last para. with sarcasm)

Look, the bottom line is this. QDM works and has countless examples of it, many right in your own state of NY. Your personal objection to it makes it no less effective. No ones saying it should be used everywhere and is an end all problem solving answer. The definition of QDM allows for it's tailoring based on the landowners goals. If your area is bad, QDM will help fix it. If your area is already okay, that's fine, good for you, but QDM could improve it even more. To steal a saying, QDM will make an area "the best it can be" based on a goal. Even if it makes the majority, happy except for you.

[Sabre]

That wasn't just me. That's a pretty common opinion from around the state and the details of the harvest illustrated that well. Nothing wrong with my hunting skills of which you know zero about. Maybe I'm not the nations number one hunter, but you seem to have that slot already filled. So my question remains. If you weren't/aren't seeing any bucks in your area why didn't/don't you put up or shut up ? In other words why didn't you follow your own/the QDM associations advice and hunt them where they are instead of expecting them to be brought to you ?


Then why would you make these statements? It would seem you whining because your tags are limited and limiting you from shooting another spike has elevated that whining. Wow you really do suffer from some form of mental retardation.:eek: I never complained about the total number of deer I'm legally allowed to take, only that some jerkwater like yourself thinks they aught to decide for me how old/how many points the buck I take must have.


And yet you can't even tell us the title of this "so-called" report. So we must assume it is subject to interpretation, and also that the context may be totally different. I'm not the one who claimed this report exists so why would I research for something that may not exist. Don't know the title of it,never did and don't care.



That's not saying that QDM wouldn't improve things and obviously DEC feels it would or they wouldn't have pushed for it. The problem is they let it up to the hunters to decide and said we want at least 67% of hunters to support it and no more that 20% can be strongly opposed to it. Had they simply wanted a majority for support they'd have gotten it in all areas. Actually, DEC doesn't push for it, never has, and means exactly what they say when they state they can see no compelling biological need or management advantage to it. It is and always has been a group of QDM affiliated nuts who call themselves central NY whitetails unlimited or some such hoo-ha that is behind the push for AR'S.



Yeah, I can't tell you how many times I've heard about or read about "how that elusive but rare spike evaded hunters yet another season". And I missed the columns in the record book that listed it's "chase difficulty"; or the entry criteria where it must have taken at least 100 hours to obtain in order to qualify. Instead they use some silly qualifications like antler details! Sounds like an outright admission that it's all about bigger antlers from your typical boisterous QDM advocate/ trophy hunter wannabe to me.:rolleyes:

[Sabre]

Now why would I care about impressing you with my hunting ability? You seem quite impressed with yourself, without my or anyone else's help.

I don't doubt that you are a "good hunter", according to your own personal criteria, so what?. And why do you have the need to try to impress the rest of us?

If I want to hunt with a tooth pick in a loincloth, why would you care,or why would I care what you think of my technique. We are doing it for personal enjoyment....it's not a contest, right?

Like most of your recent posts, this one isn't worth a reply.

[southtexas]

Like most of your recent posts, this one isn't worth a reply.

'bout what I expected you to say.

[Renegade]

Well I guess we can assume since you've turned to the name calling, that any logical or factual replies have been exhausted and your running on shallow opinions in your "it's about me, me,me" bubble.


"If you weren't/aren't seeing any bucks in your area why didn't/don't you put up or shut up ? In other words why didn't you follow your own/the QDM associations advice and hunt them where they are instead of expecting them to be brought to you ?"
Please try to follow along if your going to comment on my previous statements. I never said I hunted out of that camp and until 3 years ago, never did. And how do you know what advice I follow. Seems to me that without any substantive reply you just want to start throwing out baseless remarks. That's usually how the anti-management crowd is when refuted.


"Wow you really do suffer from some form of mental retardation."
Yes, actually I have since I was a child and giving me a short bus to ride didn't help. Most people stopped making fun of me when we grew up, but when I chose you as someone on my level to debate I knew I had taken a chance at regressing to those grade school years.
But hey, thanks for making fun of me and all my retarded friends across the nation. We appreciate your compassion.
Oh and what's a "jerkwater"? I think it's a compliment because my momma always said "life is like a box of Jack Link's jerky".


"Don't know the title of it,never did and don't care."
Then we'll just chalk that up to a figment of your imagination. That ratio was way outta whack anyways. Pa's was around 1:2.24 before it was fixed via QDM.


"Actually, DEC doesn't push for it, never has, and means exactly what they say when they state they can see no compelling biological need or management advantage to it."
I believe you skipped a sentence.
Are Antler Restrictions Being Considered for Other Portions of New York?

DEC supports voluntary antler restriction programs. However, DEC does not see a critical biological need or compelling management advantage to mandate such restrictions.

Who made the proposals for the two different areas to have AR's?...... DEC


"Sounds like an outright admission that it's all about bigger antlers from your typical boisterous QDM advocate/ trophy hunter wannabe to me."
A record book being about bigger antlers??? No... say it ain't so! Whoda thunk it?

[Sabre]

Well I guess we can assume since you've turned to the name calling, that any logical or factual replies have been exhausted and your running on shallow opinions in your "it's about me, me,me" bubble. Or you could much more correctly assume that you're beginning to piss me off.:mad: Again you have things bass-ackwards there boy, It's the QDM/AR crowd who are all about ME,ME, ME ! You're the ones who are taking FREEDOM of choice from your fellow citizens/hunters, not me. I couldn't care less what buck you choose to shoot. Now who is it that's all about ME, ME, ME again there Sparky ?



Please try to follow along if your going to comment on my previous statements. I never said I hunted out of that camp and until 3 years ago, never did. And how do you know what advice I follow. Seems to me that without any substantive reply you just want to start throwing out baseless remarks. That's usually how the anti-management crowd is when refuted.
And you think you're "getting the point" of this whole argument ?:rolleyes:


Yes, actually I have since I was a child and giving me a short bus to ride didn't help. Most people stopped making fun of me when we grew up, but when I chose you as someone on my level to debate I knew I had taken a chance at regressing to those grade school years.
But hey, thanks for making fun of me and all my retarded friends across the nation. We appreciate your compassion. No wonder I feel like I've been trying to teach a pig to sing !

[Renegade]

"Or you could much more correctly assume that you're beginning to piss me off"
You INcorrectly assume that I care whether your pissed off or been pissed on.


"Again you have things bass-ackwards there boy, It's the QDM/AR crowd who are all about ME,ME, ME ! "Please step outside your bubble and make an effort to understand what your talking about. QDM proponents put the resource first (that's the deer) whereas your only concerned about what you can personally shoot. If you can't see that basic principle your in need of some eye wear.


"No wonder I feel like I've been trying to teach a pig to sing !"
I didn't mean to strain you. You should probably stick to simple things within your abilities that are possible. You'll be a much happier person.

[Sabre]

Really Renegade, I was done with you the minute you admitted your fanatical advocacy for AR'S and QDM was all about bigger antlers. You lost the whole argument right there, I won, end of story. I've consistently been able to expose every ardent AR advocate and the QDM movement in general for the selfish frauds they are and you're certainly no different. The truth is, and always has been that it's all about antlers and the raising/production of more "trophies" for the lazy, incompetent, selfish members of the "no hunter left behind" club. You and the entire QDM movement are nothing but a big fraud that cloak yourselves behind the lie that "it's best for the deer" when you really couldn't care less. You all should go earn your trophies the old fashioned, honorable way through hard work and skill at your craft and quit expecting meat hunters who don't give a rats ass about your pitiful trophy rooms to provide you with a target rich environment at their expense. I honestly don't care whether you or any of your cohorts ever shoots a "trophy buck" in your entire lives if it costs just one meat hunter a sigle meal of venison. You make me sick !

[Renegade]

There you go again trying to put words in someone elses mouth as a sad attempt to make your point. I never said QDM was about big antlers, I said that's what record books were about. Please try to follow along better.
It's a shame you have to take the cop-out of "I know it all and no matter how much you show me I'm wrong my mind is set". But if you want to choose to stay within the safety of your own little bubble, who are we to deny you. Some just aren't capable of thinking outside of their box.

This debate isn't about winning or losing, if it was you would have lost even before making up claims of non-existent reports. But I tire of your attitude that your right and the rest of the world is wrong. I've seen your type before and most take that same cop-out rather than be objective or try to learn something new. So I guess we'll agree to disagree.

QDM is here to stay and growing every year. If you choose to keep your head in the sand... so be it.

[Sabre]

This debate isn't about winning or losing, if it was you would have lost even before making up claims of non-existent reports. But I tire of your attitude that your right and the rest of the world is wrong. I've seen your type before and most take that same cop-out rather than be objective or try to learn something new. So I guess we'll agree to disagree.

QDM is here to stay and growing every year. If you choose to keep your head in the sand... so be it.
There were no claims of non existent reports. The fact that you have the audacity to call someone a liar when you haven't a clue if you're right or not speaks volumes as to your non-existent character. QDM probably is here to stay but THE FACT that the proposed expansion of AR's into more DMU's has been defeated for the past 3 years running in NY proves that not everyone is easily duped by your kind of self serving little retard trophy hunter wannabe. Oh yes, and just WHY do you suppose DEC has adopted such a stance as to require such a high percentage of hunter approval and low percentage of strong objection before the AR area is expaded dumb ass ? Perhaps because they mean exactly what they say, word for word, when they claim they can see no compelling need or management advantage ? Well DUH ! Perhaps it is YOU who needs to pull his head out of his rectum ! I know for a FACT that there are more within DEC who are opposed to mandating AR's than are in favor. I also know for a FACT that AR's Aren't even being considered in my area. Why ? Because the local sportsmans federations have already mobilized in overwhelming opposition and submitted a resolution to that effect with DEC.

[GF.]

Seriously.... Let's talk about something people don't disagree so vehemently about.

I dunno. Abortion or capital punishment or something kinda 'light'....:rolleyes:

What's such a bad deal about combining a voluntary restraint (VR) ethic towards the 1.5s with a one buck/year, 'choose your weapon' policy, regardless of how many different seasons you hunt?

The total buck kill will go down, at least a bit. The average age of the bucks taken should go up as the VR ethic catches on. Meat hunters will be required to shift their efforts towards doe tags, so the herd will have to shrink down to an ecologically desirable level.

After all, maintaining an overpopulation of deer is just a no-child-left-behind program for meat hunters in the same way that ARs serve the horn hunters.... so that ought to prevent any complaints going back & forth on that score.

Ought to... but won't.....:rolleyes:

[Sabre]

[QUOTE] Meat hunters will be required to shift their efforts towards doe tags, so the herd will have to shrink down to an ecologically desirable level

The thing is, that only works out for the guys after meat in areas where deer are in fact "overabundant" and anyone can shoot does. As I've said before, large portions of New York are not overpopulated with deer and no doe permits are issued in those areas. Of the remaining 75 DMU's where permits are available, 11 have a "medium probability" of being selected for a permit {between 1/3 and 2/3 rds of applicants will receive a permit}, 7 have a "low probabilty" {less than 1/3 of applicants will receive a permit} and 12 are "PP REQUIRED" which means only applicants with preference points have any chance of receiving a permit.

[GF.]

I don't see any problem. Unless you're suggesting that it's a good idea to allow 'meat' hunters to tag three bucks a year :confused:

And that's obviously a bad idea - regardless of the age of the bucks in question - because we have examples from all over the country of what happens when you overharvest the buck population...

Besides - let's say that 1/4 of the annual buck kill is by guys taking a 2nd or 3rd deer in a single year. So one year of 1-buck regulation should cut the buck kill by 25%, which will immediately increase the herd size as well as improve the sex ratio. Better sex ratio means more does get bred the first time around and fewer go barren; the duration of the rut period shrinks; fawn drop is better synchronized; fewer fawns are lost to bears & coyotes; next thing you know, the population is up and management shifts towards doe permits.

Look - I understand the need to get a deer in the freezer as well as anybody. But those deer are a resource to be managed for the equal benefit of all of the stakeholders in both the deer and their habitat. They're not a government-run subsidy program designed to put meat on the table, and as we all know only too well, venison is actually pretty damn expensive on a cost per pound basis. Especially if you put any dollar value whatsoever on the time spent chasing them.

[Sabre]

I don't see any problem. Unless you're suggesting that it's a good idea to allow 'meat' hunters to tag three bucks a year :confused:

And that's obviously a bad idea - regardless of the age of the bucks in question - because we have examples from all over the country of what happens when you overharvest the buck population...

Besides - let's say that 1/4 of the annual buck kill is by guys taking a 2nd or 3rd deer in a single year. So one year of 1-buck regulation should cut the buck kill by 25%, which will immediately increase the herd size as well as improve the sex ratio. Better sex ratio means more does get bred the first time around and fewer go barren; the duration of the rut period shrinks; fawn drop is better synchronized; fewer fawns are lost to bears & coyotes; next thing you know, the population is up and management shifts towards doe permits.

Look - I understand the need to get a deer in the freezer as well as anybody. But those deer are a resource to be managed for the equal benefit of all of the stakeholders in both the deer and their habitat. They're not a government-run subsidy program designed to put meat on the table, and as we all know only too well, venison is actually pretty damn expensive on a cost per pound basis. Especially if you put any dollar value whatsoever on the time spent chasing them.

All I'm saying is you can't have hunters shifting their efforts towards does in areas where it's illegal to kill does and/or in areas where so few doe tags are issued that a large percentage of hunters who want a doe tag can't get one. And no, venison IS NOT EXPENSIVE MEAT. Not if you live where you can walk out your door and go hunting with no land access or lease fee's it's not. There are still alot of us hillbillies out here in the sticks who depend on a freezer full of game meat to help get us through the lean winter months.

[GF.]

All I'm saying is you can't have hunters shifting their efforts towards does in areas where it's illegal to kill does and/or in areas where so few doe tags are issued that a large percentage of hunters who want a doe tag can't get one...... There are still alot of us hillbillies out here in the sticks who depend on a freezer full of game meat to help get us through the lean winter months.

You're not gonna like this, I know....but I've never let that stop me before ;)

It is not the state's responsibility to keep your freezer full at the expense of the overall health of the herd. If the herd can't support the current level of buck harvest without getting into a harmfully skewed sex ratio, then too many tags are being issued for those areas and - to hell with ARs - it is high time to go to a lottery system.

You 'Hillbillies' who can walk out your door to hunt for free have no greater claim to a deer or to X number of deer/season than some trophy hunter who drives out from the city in a Bugatti with a butler tagging along in a Super-Duty to haul the carcasses back to the estate. If you have greater skills than he does, fine. If you live your life in such a way that you have more opportunity to hunt than he does, that's to your advantage as well. But you paid the exact same money for the tag, which makes you equal stakeholders in the herd, and the deer managers' FIRST responsibility to neither one of you humans, but to the health of the herd. If the only way to produce the desired quantity of big antlers is to allow the population to exceed what the land can support, then to hell with the horn hunters. If the only way to meet the demand for meat is to kill 95% of each year's buck crop at the age of 1.5 and let the sex ratio go to ****, the rut to stretch on for 3 months or more, and the number of barren does to double, then it's pretty clear that too many bucks are being killed and that, too, has got to stop.

If the hillbillies really can't make it through the winter without destroying the health of the herd, then there is public assistance for that. But if they don't qualify for publicly-subsidized cheese, what entitles them to publicly-subsidized venison?

[Sabre]

You're not gonna like this, I know....but I've never let that stop me before ;)
And you ain't gonna like my response but you don't know WTF you're talking about.

It is not the state's responsibility to keep your freezer full at the expense of the overall health of the herd. If the herd can't support the current level of buck harvest without getting into a harmfully skewed sex ratio, then too many tags are being issued for those areas and - to hell with ARs - it is high time to go to a lottery system.According to DEC our herd is quite healthy in most area's of the state where it is within carrying capacity. Where it's not within carrying capacity it's mainly due to limited hunter access because of suburban sprawl and/or too much posted, private land.


You 'Hillbillies' who can walk out your door to hunt for free have no greater claim to a deer or to X number of deer/season than some trophy hunter who drives out from the city in a Bugatti with a butler tagging along in a Super-Duty to haul the carcasses back to the estate. If you have greater skills than he does, fine. If you live your life in such a way that you have more opportunity to hunt than he does, that's to your advantage as well. But you paid the exact same money for the tag, which makes you equal stakeholders in the herd, It ain't the rich city slickers crops and fruit tree's those deer are eating or his land they're living on all year now is it ? Paying the same amount for a tag hardly makes his investment "equal".
If the only way to produce the desired quantity of big antlers is to allow the population to exceed what the land can support, then to hell with the horn hunters. If the only way to meet the demand for meat is to kill 95% of each year's buck crop at the age of 1.5 and let the sex ratio go to ****, the rut to stretch on for 3 months or more, and the number of barren does to double, then it's pretty clear that too many bucks are being killed and that, too, has got to stop. Studies have shown 96% of our does are successfully bred each year. In the area's where the deer population is low it is due to poor habitat {mature forest wilderness} and severe winter die offs. The deer population will remain low in those areas no matter how the herd is managed.


If the hillbillies really can't make it through the winter without destroying the health of the herd, then there is public assistance for that. But if they don't qualify for publicly-subsidized cheese, what entitles them to publicly-subsidized venison? Proves you know nothing of hillbillies. These are proud people who would rather starve than take a handout from anybody. Meat hunters aren't destroying the health of the herd. Our herd grew tremendously throughout the 50's, 60's and 70's when everyone I knew was a meat hunter and well before todays "trophy hunter" mindset and QDM advocates were ever heard of around here. Would I personally starve without game meat to eat ? Probably not but it very likely would mean I'd have to give up some luxuries like buying Christmas presents for my kids, Satellite TV and my internet connection.

[Sabre]

If the hillbillies really can't make it through the winter without destroying the health of the herd, then there is public assistance for that. But if they don't qualify for publicly-subsidized cheese, what entitles them to publicly-subsidized venison?

Oh yeah and another thing about this "public subsidising" of us "hillbillies" as it relates to those "city slickers". You have it completely backwards as to just who is subsidising who in this state. After all, those city jackasses get the very water they drink from hillbilly land and it costs us a fortune. That's right, the entire NY city water supply comes from reservoirs in rural upstate NY. The city paid for the land that the reservoirs are actually on many years ago but it still costs every hillbilly landowner in the entire area a fortune to have those reservoirs here today. Why ? Because of all the regulations the city slapped on land use in the NYC watershed area. For instance, now that huge deposits of natural gas have been discovered all over upstate NY the gas companies are leasing drilling rights for 3,000 to as much as 5,000 dollars per acre. BUUUUUT, you guessed it. If you own land in the "city watershed" area {which is huge and rich in gas deposits} you can't sell the drilling rights and the city ain't gonna compensate you one thin dime for that lost income. So excuse me if I don't cry any rivers for any of those city hunters who'd like to kill a trophy buck up here but just can't seem to get it done. I don't have any interest in helping him out with that at all. Us hillbillies have already "subsidised" those city slickers more than enough through outrageous taxes and land use regulations that cost us a fortune and benefit us not one tiny bit.

[GF.]

It ain't the rich city slickers crops and fruit tree's those deer are eating or his land they're living on all year now is it ? Paying the same amount for a tag hardly makes his investment "equal".

That may be your take on the ‘moral’ position, but if you’re both citizens of this country, then, seeing as the deer are a public resource, his share is exactly the same as yours. If you don’t want to feed the deer for him, then fence the mothers out. Hey, you’re not required to feed the wildlife. That seems a pretty fair trade-off for the ability to hunt those same ‘public’ deer on your private land and refuse access to whomever you choose.

Besides, if you’re benefiting from any public services which are funded by state or federal tax dollars, then chance are real good that he’s ‘investing’ a hell of a lot more in those things that benefit you than you ever dreamed of putting into anything that might benefit him.


Proves you know nothing of hillbillies. These are proud people who would rather starve than take a handout from anybody.

Hate to break it to you; not only do I know that, but I knew you were going to say that. I also know that more than a few of the ‘Proud’ individuals will say screw tightening the budget to buy more food and they will poach whatever they think they need, rather than take a ‘handout’ (for which they may or may not actually qualify based on financial need). Because I guess stealing is more honorable and noble than accepting any form of ‘charity’…:rolleyes:

But guess what? The deer managers aren’t responsible for the Hillbillies’ choice of whether or not to take a government benefit (paid for by… Oh, yeah, that guy in the Bugatti :rolleyes: ), or their choice to blow the grocery budget on beer & cigarettes & girlie magazines or whatever their personal vice might be. Nope. Deer managers are responsible for the health of the herd, and they are equally responsible for meeting the needs & desires of meat hunters and horn hunters alike.

No matter how many times we go around this, it keeps coming back to exactly ONE THING. You believe that what YOU want out of hunting is the only acceptable choice. Your needs and desires are somehow of greater moral stature than those of anyone who wants something different from what you, personally, have decided is best for... You. Personally.

And of course your desires carry more weight, because anyone who wants different is a lazy, no-good, selfish, greedy MFB who only cares about himself.:rolleyes:

[Sabre]

That may be your take on the ‘moral’ position, but if you’re both citizens of this country, then, seeing as the deer are a public resource, his share is exactly the same as yours. If you don’t want to feed the deer for him, then fence the mothers out. Hey, you’re not required to feed the wildlife. Any idea what it might cost to put deer proof fence around 100 acres of corn ? Enough to put another hillbilly farmer out of business maybe ? But hell, what city guy's gonna give a **** about that. After all, food comes from the shelves of the local grocery and those damned hillbilly farmers just stink up the whole area around their summer vacation home.:rolleyes:


Besides, if you’re benefiting from any public services which are funded by state or federal tax dollars Like what GF ? State highway system ? I put 6,000 miles a year on my truck and 95% of them are back and forth to work on TOWN AND COUNTY roads for which I pay TOWN AND COUNTY TAXES. I'm thinkin' some guy with a Bugatti is likely getting alot more use out of the state highway system.
then chances are real good that he’s ‘investing’ a hell of a lot more in those things that benefit you than you ever dreamed of putting into anything that might benefit him. I already told you that we pay outrageous taxes upstate for the priveledge of having that stinking, cesspool attached to our Southern border. All that money sure as hell ain't comin' "back home" to roost so who's subsidising who again ?




Hate to break it to you; not only do I know that, but I knew you were going to say that. I also know that more than a few of the ‘Proud’ individuals will say screw tightening the budget to buy more food and they will poach whatever they think they need, rather than take a ‘handout’ (for which they may or may not actually qualify based on financial need). Because I guess stealing is more honorable and noble than accepting any form of ‘charity’…:rolleyes: Hate to break it to you but the "budget" is about as tight as it can get for alot of these hillbillies up here, even though luxuries like beer and girlie magazines are a pipe dream and things like a phone and TV would be nice. And contrary to your personal beliefs and vast knowledge, most try real hard not to break the law.




No matter how many times we go around this, it keeps coming back to exactly ONE THING. You believe that what YOU want out of hunting is the only acceptable choice. Your needs and desires are somehow of greater moral stature than those of anyone who wants something different from what you, personally, have decided is best for... You. Personally.
No I believe there are plenty of nice bucks roaming around the area already {I've seen two this summer that would go 125 ish and one that would go into the 140's B&C easily} and if the AR proponents aren't getting any it's nobody's fault but their own.:rolleyes:

[Waidmann]

I've never posted on this forum before, because, QDM is a relatively new thing to Michigan. However, since we are talking about my home state, I'd like to weigh in on this.

Last year on my 80 acres, we took:

Mature doe (unknown, lost) Archery 10 Oct, Friend
Doe fawn (50 pounds), Archery, 25 Oct, Son
Yearling buck (110 lbs), Archery, 7 Nov, Friend
Yearling buck (105 lbs) Archery, 10 Nov, Friend
Mature doe (105 lbs), Shotgun, 16 Nov, cousin
Doe fawn (50 lbs), Shotgun, 22 Nov, Friend
Yearling doe (85 lbs), Shotgun, 30 Dec, 1625 hrs, me
Doe fawn (50 lbs), Shotgun, 30 Dec, 1645 hrs, Son
Doe fawn (60 lbs), Shotgun, 30 Dec, 1700 hrs, Brother

We took a total of nine deer off that land, only two of them were bucks, and both of them were yearlings. I bribed a couple of friends to help me rebuild my Mobile Home in exchange for hunting, so I really can't complain that they each took a yearling buck. One of the friends also took three does as well. All in all, I can't complain, or feel guilty about the mix of deer taken. I'm particularly pleased that we took the four female fawns and no button bucks, although I'm pretty sure that was more good luck than good hunting.

When I hunt in November, the party is my Uncle (lives in FL and drives up for the hunt, age 72), one cousin from Iowa, one cousin from FL, and assorted family that live in Michigan. The out-of-state hunters can shoot whatever they want. They're paying enough for licenses.

What I'd like to take this year is a mix of does, bucks and fawns again. We've already taken one female fawn during the archery season, and I'd like to take a couple more. I think the herd will benefit from leaving the mature does, and taking the fawns.

The whole idea is interesting, and I'll contribute to the extent I can. Like I said, my Uncle and cousins can shoot whatever they see, but I and those that live around here, are encouraged to take large bucks, or else bucks. So far we haven't had to make any choices. I've seen a couple big 8-points, but nobody has actually had a shot at a yearling.

Waidmann

[Laturkeyhtr]

Waidmann, first let me give you a cordial welcome and hope you find things here that will help you learn more about QDM.

We do discuss a lot about PA, but you should still be able to glean something that will help you out.

IF you have any specific questions, feel free to pose them. Everyone here at least has an opinion. ;)

Congrats on your harvest and when you take a good buck, be sure to share a pix with us.

[GF.]

What I'd like to take this year is a mix of does, bucks and fawns again. We've already taken one female fawn during the archery season, and I'd like to take a couple more. I think the herd will benefit from leaving the mature does, and taking the fawns.



Depends on the objective...

If you are limited by the number of tags you can fill and want to thin them out, shoot does and let winter kill the fawns for you. 1 less big doe now = likely 3 less deer in the spring.

If you want to increase the herd on the property, shoot fawns. Statistically (especially in the north), shooting a fawn now only costs you half a deer come spring.

Net is that you can argue that shooting mature does is 6X as effective in trimming the herd.

A button may grow up on your place, but there's little chance he'll grow old there, as long as his dam is around to run him off at 1.5 YO. Guys in surrounding areas will have better chances if you pass the buttons, of course, but on your property there's virtually zero net reduction in the herd if you shoot them.

And who knows - if you let those 8-points walk long enough to fill out a bit, they could end up looking like this :D

[TJF]

Depends on the objective...

If you are limited by the number of tags you can fill and want to thin them out, shoot does and let winter kill the fawns for you. 1 less big doe now = likely 3 less deer in the spring.

If you want to increase the herd on the property, shoot fawns. Statistically (especially in the north), shooting a fawn now only costs you half a deer come spring.

Net is that you can argue that shooting mature does is 6X as effective in trimming the herd.

A button may grow up on your place, but there's little chance he'll grow old there, as long as his dam is around to run him off at 1.5 YO. Guys in surrounding areas will have better chances if you pass the buttons, of course, but on your property there's virtually zero net reduction in the herd if you shoot them.

And who knows - if you let those 8-points walk long enough to fill out a bit, they could end up looking like this :D

That buck might be a bad example... seeing he was poached for his big rack. Bet it wasn't for the meat.

In some respects I side with Sabre. Most hunters want it easier. There always has been good/trophy bucks out here. You just had to hunt for them. Since more bucks have gotten older and bigger racked here over the last 20 years... you see more poaching... more land being posted with fewer getting to hunt it... more illegal roadhunting... more baiting with people trying to hoard the deer on there land so no one else can shoot " their " bucks. The state banned baiting on Public Land because of the bickering and people claiming spots.

We don't have ARs and if we did I think it would just make things worse. We have a healthy deer population. We had easy access but not anymore. We were able to get the job done the state needed us to do so they could manage the deer population. Hell we had a 70% success rate for rifle season. It didn't get any better then that !!!! Not sure what the success rate is now in the last couple years but I have a feeling it isn't 70%.

The state does a good job of managing. We don't need city folk which only show up to hunt the 2.5 week rifle season out of the whole year... force ARs or TDM eeeerrrrrr QDM on us to make their hunting easier cause the deer hunting was tough this year. They didn't see any big racked bucks the weekend they were here. Heaven forbid !! :rolleyes: And they usually are the ones shooting 1.5 year old bucks because the hunting was tough and they aren't going to waste a buck tag !! Whining hypocites comes to mind !!

I don't see any locals wanting ARs or TDM. Most are happy just killing deer and don't need it easier.

If that is being selfish well so be it. I'll take a healthy deer population... easy access over some wannabe's desire to blunder on a trophy buck the two days he is here. I'll take a peaceful hunt over listening to vehicle after vehicle of road hunters driving around all day on the distant roads. Less poaching would be a good thing too !! I know I am selfish. LOL The state is doing a good job... leave it alone and learn how to hunt.

Tim

[GF.]

That buck might be a bad example... seeing he was poached for his big rack. Bet it wasn't for the meat.

That buck is a perfectly fine example of what can happen when you let 'em grow. Unfortunately, there is also a poster-child effect there in re the evils of antler envy and bone obsession.



If that is being selfish well so be it. I'll take a healthy deer population... easy access over some wannabe's desire to blunder on a trophy buck the two days he is here. I'll take a peaceful hunt over listening to vehicle after vehicle of road hunters driving around all day on the distant roads. Less poaching would be a good thing too !! I know I am selfish. LOL The state is doing a good job... leave it alone and learn how to hunt.



I'm with you, man; only trouble is that when so few people are willing to do the right thing because it's Right, you eventually have to force them to do it, if only because it's Legal. :(