Quality Deer Management Association

[Gregoire1960]

Looks like you buy into the myth completely.

Please explain how a population with a 50/50 split of the gender at birth ends up losing 75% of its males in your estimation... the strongest, fastest and most cautious of the whitetails?

Answer, it doesn't.

Looks like some folks here probably believe in a whole bunch of myths.

http://www.realtree.com/brow-tines-a...unters-believe

Seriously? How does it change? Because the vast majority of yearling and 1.5 yr old bucks are killed by guys that either don't care or somehow think it better to shoot a spike buck than a mature doe. Did you even read the link you used? It states that 1:5 ratios exist and 3:1 is more realistic. Seems like some folks here probably don't read what they link to.

[Oddmott]

Seriously? How does it change? Because the vast majority of yearling and 1.5 yr old bucks are killed by guys that either don't care or somehow think it better to shoot a spike buck than a mature doe. Did you even read the link you used? It states that 1:5 ratios exist and 3:1 is more realistic. Seems like some folks here probably don't read what they link to.

It says 1:5 is virtually an impossibility to reach or exceed. That 1:3 is only likely in the worst of situations. And keep in mind this is based on data from the states where hunting pressure is FAR heavier than our herds experience in Canada.

When accusing someone of not reading something, please be sure your own comprehension is above par.

Sorry, when the hunter success rate is somewhere between 20-35% each year... no... we're NOT killing the majority of bucks. This is going by the MNR estimated average for the past 15 years.

[Gregoire1960]

Do the math...... 3:1 means that 50% of the bucks have been shot if they start out 50/50. 5:1 means 2/3 have been shot. Actually it could be even higher as that doesn't factor in the number of does shot. How exactly does success rate equate to the majority of bucks being shot?

[trimmer21]

Seriously? How does it change? Because the vast majority of yearling and 1.5 yr old bucks are killed by guys that either don't care or somehow think it better to shoot a spike buck than a mature doe. Did you even read the link you used? It states that 1:5 ratios exist and 3:1 is more realistic. Seems like some folks here probably don't read what they link to.

Speaking of believing myths,we really need to take the referenced websites with a huge grain of salt.Most of them are very self-serving and selective when it comes to citing "facts" and "stats".

[Gregoire1960]

Let's not split hairs here....attracting deer to your property with food is 'baiting'...regardless of it's in the form of a bag corn from the feed store or a planted 'living' food plot.

Hunters have long figured out that hunting over a farmers cash crop yielded better success, modifying the concept with specialized seed mixes to crow feed in the corner of your property with the intent to develop deer with better health..ie bigger racks is still 'unnatural'.

If you were doing it so you could watch deer out your window grazing in you back 40 it would be one thing, but when the goal it to develop wall trophies it's another.

I plant NOT to attract deer, but to help the current population. You dump bait to kill deer. I plant clover / soybeans / brassicas to supply year round nutrition. There are big differences. Your bait doesn't help the deer, rabbit, grouse, etc. populations at all in any meaningful way.

[MikePal]

I plant NOT to attract deer, but to help the current population. You dump bait to kill deer. I plant clover / soybeans / brassicas to supply year round nutrition.

What a bunch of hooey...I think your in denial of your real motives, 99% of guys who buy into the QDMA mantra are planting food plots to feed/attract deer to their hunting areas. Then restricting the taking young Bucks for only ONE reason...to have a better opportunity to harvest a Mature Buck. Period.

All that talk of the nutritional benefit for the whole herd is nonsense. Deer in the wild don't need 'your' help to be nutritionally healthy, they just move to areas where they can find the food they need. If where you hunt isn't one of them, then you attempt to keep them there with food plots. It's self servings, not in the best interest of the herd.

[Gilroy]

I plant NOT to attract deer, but to help the current population. You dump bait to kill deer. I plant clover / soybeans / brassicas to supply year round nutrition. There are big differences. Your bait doesn't help the deer, rabbit, grouse, etc. populations at all in any meaningful way.

If you put in a food plot I think you attract deer AND help the current population, there is no guarantee what shows up at your plot is something you want to harvest or legally can harvest.But the plot gives high nutrition food,minimizes their movements to get to it and so forth.

I also don,t see any problems with bait be it corn or apples,your still providing an added food source and might not harvest a deer.

The whole concept of growing Trophy Bucks is wrong and goes against nature.A trophy buck from what I have READ is actually handicapped in dense bush by the big rack itself.The bigger bucks if they do engage in combat are likely to lock horns and die.
All the reading I have done indicated Trophy Bucks are actually rare in nature and abnormal.To create Trophy Bucks these conditions
must exist;

They must have access to great nutrition.
They must live a stress free life,not harassed by anything.
They must not engage in combat, so give the rut a pass.

If you think these conditions are outlandish research where most trophy bucks are taken.They are not taken in places generally where those conditions are absent.Your average big woods bucks I would say tend to be smaller 8 pointer. They simply cannot spare the nutrients to grow big racks.

Also there is no evidence to support the idea that the genes of a Trophy animal can be passed along to any off spring where it will have massive antlers.

[Gregoire1960]

Gilroy,

I agree for the most part with what you say. The main point of difference I have would be with what is critical to grow a big buck ...... it's time. If you shoot a spike or a 1.5 yr old he'll NEVER get to be a big "trophy" deer no matter what genetics, nutrition or whatever.

Mike,

If you want to put nothing back in and only take from the resource that's your prerogative. Don't make up things to feel better about it just because others want something different. The one "trophy" deer that was shot on my property was taken in 2005, before I could afford to spend the time and money to really promote the QDMA goals. I don't shoot "trophy" deer, I prefer a 2.5 yr old buck as it provides lots of meat or a large doe if the MNR deems me worthy & my camera census shows we have lots of does around. Don't believe me? I'll show you lots of photos of my "trophies".

If a monster came by would I shoot it? Almost certainly, but the odds are slim, mostly because many of the surrounding hunters think like you. This is something that I have learned to accept.

[Gilroy]

'I agree for the most part with what you say. The main point of difference I have would be with what is critical to grow a big buck ...... it's time. If you shoot a spike or a 1.5 yr old he'll NEVER get to be a big "trophy" deer no matter what genetics, nutrition or whatever'

Well of course I agree you need time for that 1.5yr old to grow up.BUT without the conditions I mentioned he probably still will not turn out to be a Trophy animal because they are not the norm.

A doe will take a buck on the longest run of its life and hence test its fitness to mate with.A large rack actually handicaps the Trophy animal.A buck in "normal conditions" after the stress and chasing of the rut,after using valuable nutrients healing from wounds inflicted and then getting through a tough winter simply cannot afford the nutrients left to go towards large antler growth.

I saw some beautiful bucks here on the forum from a recent hunt and they were all big bodies animals with very decent racks.But I will bet dollars to donuts they were taken in heavily farmed southern Ontario where the optimal conditions existed for their growth.

[MikePal]

mostly because many of the surrounding hunters think like you. This is something that I have learned to accept.

There it is..that nasty little rub....the bane of those who preach QDMA..darn neighbours who don't participate in the philosophy. ..LOL..

That comment alone Gregoire is how I know your not being honest about your motives....

"Make things up"..do tell me what I have said that wasn't factual ?

All I've attempted to do is dispel the propaganda that the QDMA folk feed to the public. I had a food plot for a few years..but I was never disingenuous about with the reason I had it...it was for late season 'living' bait to attract deer to my property. No sanctimonious clap trap about providing year round nutrition to the herd. My neighbours 50 acres of corn/soya feilds 400 yds away did that nicely.

As a hunter, I accept that my role is to cull deer in the effort to control the population of deer in my MWU as part of the MNR's responsibility to maintain deer at population at levels that are sustainable to the herd, to keep them healthy....that is how I give back.

NOT shooting deer, spike or 4 points, you become part of the problem. Avoiding them for some testosterone driven desire to shot a mature buck is counter productive to the prime reason we're out there hunting.

Most Camps have the right idea, "if it's brown it down"...put a dent in the population, all deer are fair game, fill the pole, put meat in everyone's freezer. If you pass on a small buck flushed by the doggers, waiting for a mature buck, you'll likely get to your butt reamed and rightfully so.

"Think like me" ??? ..how do you know how I think ?

I have a man cave wall full of mature racks that I have shot and take pride in, they are trophies that represent time well spent honing my craft. I just don't target them, they are shot by happenstance, right place at the right time...luck, a hunters best friend !!