I completely understand what you are saying jlccoffee, but I think the scenario you describe is more about different herd composition and hunting goals than differences over the definition of "healthy."

And by the way, I actually agree that either scenario you describe above may be perfectly valid, depending on what the hunters/managers want from their hunting experience. "Healthy" deer populations CAN fit across a fairly wide latitude. In fact, that consideration may back up your point even further. Perhaps it would be better to define "biologically sound management" as management that avoids "unhealthy" situations.

I agree but you end up with the same problem at the bottom end of the "healthy" spectrum. What is "unhealthy". I think we all have an idea of the extreme of unhealthy with the deer starving to death, but there is no clear dividing line of when we reach "healthy". Again it is a subjective measure.

The emphasis that deer hunting is for the "health" of the deer may prove to be dangerous for our sport. What about one day when someone finds a way to control deer populations without sport hunting that results in "healthier" deer? Are all those who say that the "health" of the herd is most important thing going to then lay down their guns and bows?

We already have a peer reviewed article suggesting that if we are truly interested in the "health" of the herd we should not shoot the deer with the largest antlers. Ditchkoff et al state that "Our observations provide support for the hypothesis that antler development in white-tailed deer is an honest signal of quality." in the paper MAJOR-HISTOCOMPATIBILITY-COMPLEX-ASSOCIATED VARIATION IN SECONDARY SEXUAL TRAITS OF WHITE-TAILED DEER(ODOCOILEUS VIRGINIANUS): EVIDENCE FOR GOOD-GENES ADVERTISEMENT.

The paper can be seen here: https://fp.auburn.edu/sfws/ditchkoff/PDF%20publications/2001%20-%20Evolution.pdf

The paper suggests that larger antlers advertise good genetics. If we want to improve the "health" of the herd, why do we try to shoot the deer advertising they are carrying the best genes.

That's kindof where the whole "health" argument starts to fall apart.

Any number of health parameters can be used to "qualify" a local deer population as healthy or less healthy, including reproductive success numbers, body weights by age-class, and lactation rates of adult females. In addition, habitat indicators can be developed which assess a deer population's impact on its environment, such as the percent of primary, secondary, and tertiary food sources displaying browse pressure. However, all of those indicators and numeric values are still arbitrary numbers. Good arguments can be made for any of them, but they are still just numbers based on educated guesses and opinions.

And this is one of the reasons I'm not quite as worried about the coyote/bobcat problem as other managers. So predators are controlling local deer populations. And this is a problem how? Isn't that what we as one of those predatory species wanted--controlled deer populations? Isn't that why we suggested shooting does in the first place, to reduce overpopulation? Yes, the impact of other predatory species reduces our harvest requirements and opportunities, but so be it.

Although I for one have no problem stating that our management of the whitetailed deer species is not just to produce the healthiest population possible. We manage whitetailed deer to provide recreational hunting opportunities within the framework of a viable and reproductively successful population over the long term.

Coffee, I read your BS-propaganda that you're noxiously spewing and it makes me question the fact that you really must think hunters are stupid?

I.E. Some hunters (it's obvious which hunters you're referring to) hunt for "ONLY" for reasons of the health of the herd? That's a crock of BS hogwash! I know NOT one single hunter that hunts for the sake of the herd. Such a BS statement by you!

Or... insinuating this falsehood: "Does and habitat should not be "too healthy" as that may cause does to throw triplets...". Which you erroneously attribute and attempt a BS correlation like, "We all know that triplets cause undue stress on the does (like you give a chit about deer stress)." Yeah, right Coffee..... "let us NOT make our habitat or deer herd "TOO healthy" as that's bad for the deer herd, specifically, the does!" That's BS and LAUGHABLY that you think people can't see through this?!?!

Oh, and of course Coffee.... The QDMA website is SO FULL of suggestions about shooting "the biggest antlered bucks you see" and, the QDMA stresses that... "It's ALL about antlers".

The QDMA NEVER stresses those two things. "It's about antlers." ??? See, I know you don't believe that The QDMA believes that "it's all about antlers". The QDMA has never stressed huge antlers! NEVER!!!! QDMA is about having a balanced sex ratio with properly balanced age groups so don't try to unethically attribute that BS to the QDMA.

I don't care who you drag up to spout your propaganda to attempt prove your misguided points....

I.E. You have two 4 yr old bucks killed (I mean they are HUNTED DOWN and KILLED for the joy of hunting... not "for the betterment of the herd" BS like you attempt to portray QDM hunters!) from the same property the same day... They both have the SAME body fat percentage. They both weigh the exact same. They both have the same number of points - 10 point. But one buck scores 145 B&C and the other scores 120 B&C. Remember, both bucks' body weight and body fat percentage are the same. Are you going to tell me that the 145" buck is MORE healthy than the 120" buck? BS!!!!!!! IMO, they are both equally healthy. I didn't read Dr. D's article but that's my opinion. And you're trying to use Dr. D's article against QDM/QDMA that manage trying to guilt us into thinking that we shouldn't shoot the best bucks? Let me tell you something... we are shooting mature bucks and if that 145" buck steps out, I AM shooting his @$$!!! And, the next day, if the 120" 4 yr old buck steps out, I AM shooting his @$$ TOOOO!!!!!!!! I'm a hunter!!! Oh, and you know what Coffee?!?!!? It is possible that the 120" buck whips the @$$ of the 140" buck. The 120" buck hasn't a clue that is rack is 20" smaller than the 140"!! As far as the 140" buck goes... he hasn't a clue that he sports a larger rack! Each buck has his own personality and that 120" buck may have the attitude and fighting ability of Mike Tyson. So the dominant buck has more to do with maturity and attitude and I'd throw weight in there as well. Anyway...

Make no mistake about it!!! I love to hunt and I love shooting deer. Burning powder or releasing 100 grains of Griz Trick broadhead. But just because I CONSIDER the health of my deer herd, I am wrong? And a hypocrite? KMA and let's call a spade a spade!

I'm not telling you what to do on your property. I don't give a damn what you do as long as you stay within the laws of the state you're hunting in.

You need to go to work for the obama administration as they need your BS spin right now!

Now you have changed your postion again.

First you keep saying to listen to biologists and the research, but when I post a peer reviewed article by Dr. Ditchkoff you won't even take the time to read it. This isn't the first time I have posted it either. You don't even read it and yet feel qualified to call Dr. Ditchkoff's work BS.

Secondly, maybe you should pay more attention to BSK if you want to listen to biologists. I know you are having a hard time understanding what I am saying but BSK gets it. Maybe you could ask him to explain it to you. He might be able to do a better job of helping you get it.

From BSK: "I completely understand what you are saying jlccoffee, but I think the scenario you describe is more about different herd composition and hunting goals than differences over the definition of "healthy."

And by the way, I actually agree that either scenario you describe above may be perfectly valid, depending on what the hunters/managers want from their hunting experience. "Healthy" deer populations CAN fit across a fairly wide latitude. In fact, that consideration may back up your point even further. Perhaps it would be better to define "biologically sound management" as management that avoids "unhealthy" situations."

Third, where did anyone ever say the does were "too healthy"? Again you have completely made up something that no one said and even went ahead and put it in quotations. Then you rant and argue about the statement that no one has said other than you. I don't think anyone has mentioned anything about deer being "too healthy" other than you. Why do you continue to make things up that way?

very entertaining thread.

Common sense tells me qdm will work. And sure the information is free, but managing a deer herd can get expensive, if you ask me. Especially planting plots.

On a side note, ive only been hunting hard a few years now, and do not practice qdm, i only have a couple hundred acres, and there is one doe i know for sure threw triplets at my place, seen em all in the back yard in febuary, the spots was even gone on the little ones.

All im gonna do is a little trigger control, until i can afford to manage my herd better, i got scrub bucks everywere. And i honestly beliece there is more bucks runnin around than does at my place.

Now let the good times keep rollin

Coffee:

I didn't have time to comprehensively read the entire study but in assimilating the data, I took note of this sentence in the study:

Whereas degree of antler development represents a male’s
ability to allocate energy and nutrients to antler growth during
the previous year, other morphological measures (e.g., body
mass, skull length) are more representative of an individual’s
condition over the course of their life.

So this backs up my claim about body mass as an important factor to health.

I'm not saying that antler development is not an indicator of health, as it is. I'm saying that in my harvest (killin' them!) objectives, mature bucks "are my target" and it is unlikely that I will pass on a 5 yr old 130" buck in hopes of shooting the 170" buck that I know is there. The best time to shoot a mature buck is when you see him.

Passing on a mature 130" and waiting on a mature 160 or 170", is Trophy Deer Mgmt. I am not against TDM... I just hunt in a hunting situation where true "TDM" cannot be stomached! IMO.

My point.... I support QDMA and its wide variation of its practices AND, its narrow but valid variation of its ethical standards required of its members.

I hate poachers.... and I believe that you should be able to practice whatever deer mgmt you'd like and of course, as I would not think otherwise, practice it within the state laws. And it's not up to me to enforce state law on your property or worry with it.

Go hunt... have fun! Be safe and God Bless.

Again, where did anyone disagree with that statement?

Coffee, here's what you said:

"We already have a peer reviewed article suggesting that if we are truly interested in the "health" of the herd we should not shoot the deer with the largest antlers."

So I state that health is about body mass and body fat (and antlers aren't the sole indicator), you attempt to label me as disagreeing with Dr. D.

Then, I go back and read the study and when I point out in the study, that body mass is a more important factor of health over a lifetime... you claim that you didn't disagree with me.

So you're saying that if I really cared about "herd health" I would not shoot the largest antlered buck? Coffee, how insane are you going to take it to prove that QDM doesn't work? Why are labeling me as "an antlers only" hunter. I know why... because you want to paint me as only interested in antlers only when I have insisted from day one that it's about maturity but hell yes, I'll tell ya, like anyone else on this site, I'd love to shoot a buck with massively huge antlers!!

You stress THE NEGATIVES of healthy habitat and a healthy doe by insinuating that by the doe having triplets like it's a bad thing?!?! Ohmygosh!!

Just admit it... QDM means at least some trigger restraint and discipline on your part so you attempt to discredit it. I'm a Christian but I'm not forcing you to be one but I'd take up for Christianity.

Do what you want to do on the property you have permission to hunt. I DON'T care. QDM and QDMA in whatever form, is a good thing. Don't like it... don't do it!

Coffee, you also said this:

The paper suggests that larger antlers advertise good genetics. If we want to improve the "health" of the herd, why do we try to shoot the deer advertising they are carrying the best genes.

I can't remember what it's called in the science of Basic Reasoning when you use an argument strategy like that... I.E. "X number of people drown each year so therefore, you should not go swimming if you want to live."

The answer... because QDMA is more interested in ethically hunting a healthy pop withOUT the main focus being antlers!! And as I pointed out to you, the study said:

Whereas degree of antler development represents a male’s
ability to allocate energy and nutrients to antler growth during
the previous year, other morphological measures (e.g., body
mass, skull length) are more representative of an individual’s
condition over the course of their life.

If I focus on health of herd and I achieve a desired average "body mass" within my herd, then antlers will take care of themselves and antlers will be a bi-product of achievements.

It's like being the best spouse you can be in a marriage. If you do that and not worry about your wife... and she does that and doesn't worry about you, then it's a great marriage with collateral benefits.

To you the Aldeer member, if you're reading this... Big sigh!!!! This has got to be somewhat comical to you, the passive reader!!! Two grown men arguing about deer?!?!? LOL!

I am sorry for my diatribes!! I can type with good speed and sometimes I just get too caught up in attempting to prove my points and I type away!

I really want this thread to go away and I apologize to you, the Aldeer member, for my rants at Coffee.

Bucktrot, I'm going to come find you and duct tape yer hands behind yer back.....

no need to apologize for ranting at coffee, he deserves it most of the time.

Troy, why are beating your head against this wall. Internet arguments just tire you and no one wins. You have your experience and we don't.

Where did I say I don't believe in QDM? In fact, I have said that I practice it. I don't use the QDM strategies on all the properties I hunt but on the vast majority.

Again...You are making stuff up and then arguing about it. Why do you do that?

We accept your admission that you were wrong.

Why thanks 49er. Yes, I was wrong.... I was wrong to even attempt to engage in this back-n-forth nonsense with you and Coffee!

BhamFred, you're 100% right!!!!!!!! No need to tie my hands and if I respond or post to this thread again, I will pay you $100!!

If I can just mash Submit now!