2Dogs, you're right. To think of QDMA (I use QDMA and not QDM because The QDM"A" is "well-defined" in its mission statement, goals and standards) simply as a one dimensional philosophy would be incorrect. QDMA is NOT: "Kill all the does you see!" "It's all about the antlers!" "Never shoot an immature buck!". It's NOT those things.

QDMA is more than killing animals. It is ALSO about habitat mgmt and the many things you can do to improve the habitat. It's about research and education pertaining to the whitetail deer, its environment and all that encompasses a deer's existence and implementing those findings for the betterment of all.

I've hunted both managed and non-managed land and I won't ever go back to non-management.

There's a lot to be said for discipline and wildlife and land improvement and the understanding that it's not all about killing or bragging. It's about education, understanding and protecting a resource. And, it's about being able to take ridicule for standing up for what's best.

The State of Alabama requires little investment and time for the enjoyment we experience. Sadly, there must be laws on the books that protects, at a minimal, our renewable and exhaustible resources from those that selfishly would take advantage.

We also have constitutions that limit those laws to keep some from turning our state into a nanny state for their own selfish reasons.

I, me, ain't relying on QDMA staff to provide answers to find out IF it works. I'm relying on my own 40 years of managing properties. QDMAs ideas do work. Now some of those properties were trophy managed, some QDMA style managed, some shoot what ya want. All worked depending on yer goals and dedication to the tasks at hand for each style of management.

yer just picking a fight Eddie......

So taking data for my 1000 acres for 10 years before QDMA/QDM, then for 10 years after implementation of QDM that clearly shows an improvement in QUALITY is not good enough. Hmmmmmm.... maybe I'm all wrong.

BTW, I was practicing QDM before there was a QDMA or a staff, been rodeoin' a long time.

49er, being in the medical field, I am well aware of "studies". You seem to discount all whitetail studies! The same methodology that the medical community uses in its studies is absolutely no different than what whitetail biologists and universities use.

The methodology of studies, whether nuclear, medical or whitetail is the very strict, stringent collection, organization, analysis, interpretation, and presentation of data and you seem to discount them all because they MAY suggest that you need to practice selective harvest and/or discipline in what you kill.

Every state has to manage its wildlife on what the best available data is RIGHT NOW and the State of AL would like to implement an even better method of data collection to make better decisions in the future and you're attempting to shoot that down too.

OK... I'm cracking myself up as I just asked myself: "Why are you arguing with 49er?" And then it hit me... maybe there's a young hunter out there trying to decipher all this information and he or she will see that the biologistS, conservationists (which hunters are), land manages, etc... are headed in the same direction. It's may not always be perfect direction but it's the best we have to go on. Keep researching!

Why do you continue to make up stuff that no one has said? In fact, I have never seen 49er say that there did not need to be selective harvest or discipline. In fact, I have seen several times where he has talked about participating in the deer management program and following the advice of the biologists for the property he was hunting.

Why would you make up something like that?

Eddie, with all due respect, I am not going to argue with you on a forum about the QDMA or any QDM program.

No, I have no controlled study of QDM vs. traditional deer management, and no one else does either. It is impossible to perform the study you would like to see because QDM allows managers to determine their objectives. Since the objectives are so broad under QDM, and each manager/cooperative determines what benefits they would like to see come forth from their specific program, ALL results would be different.

QDM is a very simple concept that you are trying to twist into something it is not. It is taking very basic deer biology and management concepts and applying them to the degree that you want to. There are even some QDM programs that allow you to shoot any buck you want.....imagine that?!

Although I'm not aware of any scientific research that addresses your exact questions, there is a LOT of supporting data to suggests the following:

1. Healthy deer produce healthier offspring.
2. Quality habitat results in better offspring survival.
3. Near equal sex ratios and healthy deer from quality habitat have a tighter breeding season.
4. Tighter breeding season reduces stress.
5. Reduced stress results in healthier deer.

It's like a food web. They all tie back somehow.

That is ALL I'm posting. I work and have 2 kids. I can't get on here and debate stuff all day.

The 1000ac we lease in Monroe co has been under a 6 pt management rule for 18 years but the members were shooting any buck with 6 pts or more. Past pics and racks left at the camp showed many bucks shot had good potential. Last year, our first year on the property we saw and let lots of nice young bucks walk. If at wait to see how they progressed this year. We took 5 bucks of our place, two 9 pts,one 8 pt and 2 spikes(kids first deer). We also took 11 does. Several other nice bucks were seen and not shot. I think we may have a good thing goin if we ca. Get some age on them.

Jlccoffee, yep, that's a ringing endorsement 49er had for Alabama's... what? Director of Deer Studies? I think that's Chris' title.

If Chris Cook supports any kind of QDM, to 49er, it's political!!

Yes, it works and QDMA's validity was further supported here by more than just me and with some valid reasons.

OK, done!

There you go again. I didn't say he endorsed Chris Cook so what does that have to do with anything?

What I said is the you made up something he never said. Your reply is to totally change the subject?

He never said that there should be no discipline in harvest. You simply made it up.

I dont think russims had any idea he would start all this with his initail post. Hopefully everyone agrees that we all want what is best for the AL deer herd. Great thread great info.

Bibb county a mature 5 point is the exception and if you understood what i posted you would under stand that and not asked such a question.

There is a significant part of your problem. You don't understand QDM (which I have been practicing since before it was called QDM and before there was a QDMA). The whole concept DOES encompass habitat, timber, fire, predation, etc. I know these are heresy to you, to think of planting trees, cutting trees, "gardening" as you call it and burning, etc, but quality habitat makes quality wildlife (like God and nature intended - didn't we get saddled with the responsibility "And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth"). I would say the 1,000 acre "managed" tract would support so much more wildlife and healthy critters it would be shameful to the other 1,000 BTW, good post Dogs!

I'm doin my part - how about you?

^^^

I dont have time to read all of these posts. We have covered this in various ways many times before in different posts. It will work fairly well if you have a ton of land to manage. If you have small tracts you are wasting your time unless all the other land owners/leasee's do the same. You can let em walk and plan to likely see em again on 2000 ac or more. On 100ac or less what you let walk today will likely be killed tommorrow. As far as managing deer if your land/habitat allows it yes it works.

goobler,



You misconstrue what I say about as bad as Bucksnot!!!

Nothing you posted refutes my assertion that qdm is a set of theories that have not been proven by controlled scientific experiments to work as claimed. You people have plenty of personal opinions, but no real proof to back them up.

I lease land, so my part is to honor the landowner's wishes not to mess with his trees. Habitat manipulation opportunities are also limited by gas and mining operations.

I enjoy hunting much better than practicing horticulture anyhow so it works out pretty good.

Gobbler, it is an honor bestowed on me, sir, to even be mentioned in the same sentence with you, even though it was the pronoun, "YOU", meaning you Gobbler. Oh, and even though 49er can't spell our names correctly.

I am admirer of your work and philosophies Gobbler. Salute!

BTW, 49er, Ronald Reagan was a QDMA member according to a study I read. So was John Wayne!

A scientific study, no doubt?

Matt,

1. Healthy deer produce healthier offspring.

** But does destruction of social groups during population manipulation have a detrimental effect that offsets other benefits?


2. Quality habitat results in better offspring survival.

** Maybe not. If social groups are disrupted, then survival rates my not be increased.


3. Near equal sex ratios and healthy deer from quality habitat have a tighter breeding season.

** Killing only mature bucks before and during the breeding period likely disrupts the buck hierarchy by taking the more dominant bucks out. That leaves bucks that nature eliminated from breeding to re-establish that hierarchy and breed when they may not have bred otherwise. Not necessaarily healthier, IMO.

4. Tighter breeding season reduces stress.

** See 3. Maybe not. With fewer mature bucks left, younger deer are left to duke it out and do the breeding.


5. Reduced stress results in healthier deer.

** But does it really reduce stress if established social groups are disrupted by it?

49er, go the QDMA web site, general forum and ask your questions. It's obvious we simpletons can't answer them to your satisfaction.