BigJ71

So if the herd does not have enough older bucks, it's not a healthy herd? Is there a study that proves this. I'm not saying it's not true, I'm just saying I have never heard ofthat before. I believe there are plenty of older bucks in a healthy herd, maybe not as many as some hunters would like, but a healthy herd is a healthy herd none the less.

If only the older bucks "come into their own" and form a pecking order etc....and the herd is not healthy without them....why are you killing them? According to that way of thinking you would think that the older bucks would be "off limits" after all they are the only ones who know how to breed. You can't do that just like you can't just only kill the younger ones either.

I don't believe I read anywhere (becides pro QDM articles) where it was stated that a large number of older bucks was needed to keep the herd healthy.I know I have NEVER heard a pro QDM person say to kill a 1 1/2 year old buck,unless of course they didn't think it would grow to be a P&Y, after all their motto is "Let them go so they can grow"

I think if the herd is healthy....it's healthy. It could be healthy with 80% 1 1/2 to 2 1/2 year old bucks or just as healthy with a higher % of older bucks, as long as the doe ratio is ok and the deer are in good contition.

It's the hunters who want bigger bucks so badly they are willing to hide behind QDM to tip the odds in their favor if they happen to live in an area of a lower percentage of older and yes bigger antlered bucks.

Like I said before if that's what you want that's fine but leave QDM out of it and call it what it is QAM

BigJ71

That's ok but what you are praticing is QAM and not necessarily QDM. Keeping the herd healthy does not always equate to bigger bucks. This is my whole point. I do not believe you MUST have a large number of older bigger bucks to have a healthy herd. Would I and most of us like all them P&Ybucks running around? Hell yes, but not to the point where I amwilling to tip the odds. Others can do it that's cool but again don't call it QDM.

This is not about if I agree or disagree with trying to grow bigger bucks, that's a discussion for another time. I am asking why is it being done in the name of QDM?

BigJ71

Great question!

There are alot of reasons why bucks don't grow to be old huge P&Y monsters. The herds haven't suffered up till now without them...why should more be "produced" in the name of QDM?

I don't want to take that any further because it starts to get into QDM vs QAM and that's not where I want to go.

wolfen68

The absolute #1 reason bucks don't grow to be old huge PY monsters is because they are shot when they still have spots or racks no longer than the longest hair in the crack of my arse! And so with your overwhelming depth of knowledge in the area of whitetail biology you have come to the conclusion that herds haven't "suffered" until now??? Could you back that up with some facts please? Sure...deer have survived and populations have thrived but in most locations across the country those populations are weak, out-of-balance, over-populated, and at risk. To understand QDM one must understand it as a whole and I'm not going to sit here and type out the entire QDM philosophy...go to their website and educate yourself and get it straight from the horse's mouth!

http://www.qdma.com/

west_hunter21

Here's my take on this debate:

It's very true that QDM is more about managing and maintaining a healthy herd, and most hunters view that as having mature deer, and harvesting them when they reach their full potential while maintaining a steady buck:doe ratio. I think that the bigger bucks are just an added benefit of practicing QDM. By passing up the younger 2 1/2 and sometimes 3 1/2 year old bucks, you are giving yourself a shot at a larger 4 1/2 or 5 1/2 year old mature buck--which would have a larger rack in nearly every case. Does this necessarily mean you are managing "antlers" instead of "deer"? Sure, I can see where you can make your case; but I can also see where a hunter that truly practices QDM can attribute a large buck to their willingness to not harvest young deer in general--beit buck or doe.

Again, "QAM" is--in my opinion--just part of the routine for those hunters that will allow an animal to reach its full potential by practicing QDM...but, that is just my opinion on the this

BigJ71

I disagree with that. There are so manny factors you can't possibly equate it to one thing

I agree and I believe QDM works, I never said it didn't. What I was trying to say was I don't think you need to "boost" the amount of trophy bucks to get the herds backhealthy. What I meant about not suffering till now was the herds that ARE healthy aren't suffering because they don't have 90% P&Y bucks running around!

Well I went there and this quote below is straight from "the horses mouth"

QDM web site:
Funny, it didn't say it was necessary for a healthy herd. A prime example of QAM hiding behind QDM

Sorry about your a$$ hair problem, I hear there are doctors for that.

BigJ71

I don't think anyone here will say that they don't like the thought of P&Y bucks on their property, I sure do. And I also don't think you will get an argument from anyone here when it comes to helping keep the herds healthy.I am also aware that in the process of maintaining a healthy herdmore P&Y bucks willnaturallycome from that and that's ok. Where I question is, why is it in a healthy herd people are STILL saying "Let it go so it can grow" and justifying it by saying they are practicing QDM?

shed33

http://www.whitetailstewards.com/articlesonsite/deerpopulationmanage/deermanagementstrategies.htm


I found this article comparing and contrasting QDM, TroDM and TraDM,

HAZCON7

I think you hit the nail on the head right there BigJ!!!

Good article Shed!

BigJ71

Shed33,

I appreciate the link and in theoryI agree.Like I said I have no problem with QDM. It'sthe QAM hiding behind the QMD moniker that is what I'm talking about.

I think the article is slightly skewed to the authors definition of QDM. By saying that the traditional method of deer management is:

This is not true. I believe most (if not all) states have far more does killed than bucks. But he would like to have everyone believe that all the bucks in the forest are getting killed and the does aren't. You see this way he doesn't have to answer questions like "If the doe to buck ratio is fine, and the herd is healthy, does it matter what the ages of the bucks are?"

To further look into this you only need to see who wrote the article