Buck Shaming

[IkemanTx]

Suburban areas are great places for deer. Lots that are 2 acres with pine tree blocks, gardens, flower beds, shrubs, and bird feeders. We have deer in and moving through our yard everyday. When I back out of the garage in the morning, there are usually deer in the apple trees 30'-40' away who do not move and just watch me drive away.

They also show how important age is. In our state, the county with the most P&Y book bucks is a suburban county where there is essentially no firearm hunting permitted. It is over populated and I was one of the founders of a suburban archery group that connected property owners with deer damage to experienced bowhunters for population reduction. There is no intentional habitat improvement, food plots, or any other QDM. The only thing is that bucks live longer than other places in the state because there is essentially no firearm hunting and it is hard to kill mature bucks with a bow.

Thanks,

Jack

There are two lottery draw hunts near me that are very similar to this.

The first is an army corps of engineers property on the back of an urban lake. Only the flood plane is huntable, so some years there is zero hunting. Every other year, there are never more than 250 hunting permits issued regardless. And that includes small game, waterfowl, and whitetail hunters all in the same pool. There’s always a few Pope and young’s killed in there, and some of the surrounding neighborhoods watch bucks die of old age with astounding racks.

The second is a National Wildlife Refuge for waterfowl. They do 3 separate 3-day whitetail hunts a year, and only 1/3 of the property is hunted per year on a rotational basis. There are ALWAYS a couple booners walking that place, and most of the bucks killed during the draw hunts are pope and young.

Both of these properties are in counties that produce 120” bucks on the top end of harvest size. The properties themselves are the anomalies, and I am thoroughly convinced it is age. We have absolutely zero row crop production in either area, zero food plots, zero supplemental feed, and our yearly stress period is far and away summer here (right during antler development, of course). If a small percentage of bucks can consistently boomer size (or close) in these conditions just by getting old.... then age is the magic sauce.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Baker]

I tend to agree. While there is some obvious logic to culling deer in that age class that you feel are "inferior", I can't find any science to back this up. Second, that seems to be where I draw the line between QDM and trophy management. Just to be clear for folks, I would define QDM as managing to maximize the health of the local deer herd. I would define trophy management as managing for trophy class bucks. You need to do QDM to be successful at TM, but you don't need to do TM to be successful at QDM.

My old boss had an expression I liked, "Polishing a Turd". In science, one might view it as reporting precision that exceeds statistical significance. My personal opinion is that the strategy you describe for selective buck harvest does no harm at all, but I can find no scientific basis to say it has the intended impact. I'm certainly not opposed to it. Whether effective or not, I see the intent as Trophy Management. I'm also not saying there is anything wrong with trophy management, it is just not my objective.

I also tend to agree that deer herds are quite plastic. The idea of "natural" is very squishy. I'm looking to manage in a way that my herd numbers stay in relative balance with the habitat and to increase the BCC in such a way that if I stop, they revert to a lower BCC slowly enough that deer populations can adapt over time rather than crash. I'm looking to have healthy individuals in my herd. My recruitment goals include hunters as well as deer. I want to balance recreational opportunities as well.

I learned a hard lesson in that respect. While some of the owners of our property were very knowledgeable and onboard with QDM, I think others liked the sound of things, but did not have a full understanding as to what all was involved and how many year of commitment and resources it would take. They tended to be overoptimistic as pushed by the industry. One became a great friend. He was older and in poor health. He had both knees replaced and did not get around well. I built box blinds with his access in mind. He was retired and an avid, but not effective hunter. I could hear the frustration in his voice as he would have young racked deer in range. I told him to shoot whatever makes him happy. He is an owner and should be able to enjoy the place. However, because of our harvest guidelines (not hard requirements), he still felt obligated to let those deer walk. His odds of ever harvesting a great buck were small. Unfortunately, he passed on without harvesting a good buck, not because he didn't want to, but because he did not want to let the other owners down.

I agree, that once you let enough bucks survive to maturity and harvest enough does to keep the population in balance, the habitat end of the equation is where we can do the most good.

Thanks,

Jack

I really like the term 'squishy' that you use. Seems many things deer, deer hunting and so many of the definitions within are pretty darn...squishy!

Quality deer management---Very squishy. What's quality to one might be described as " polishing a turd" to justify behavior by another { I like that phrase to }
Trophy deer and management---Super squishy! What one might call trophy deer management another might say it simply creating a healthy deer herd. And obviously whats a trophy to one might not be a trophy to another.
Healthy ...deer and deer herd. Easy enough to describe a healthy deer. But healthy deer herd, well that squishy indeed. Where one might say they are managing to create a healthy deer herd, another might say its just putting " makeup on a melanoma". A rationalization to justify behavior or strategy.
Cull or management deer--Good lord, about as squishy as you can get. Many people like to shoot bucks . What one might call cull or management another might simply say its a buck available for harvest. Good luck.
Natural--About as squishy as pointing out that cheetos are made from ' natural ' ingredients . One might say that ' natural' reflects a deer herd unmolested by hunters whereas another might say natural is best we can do with our circumstances.
Buck carrying capacity---undefinably squishy. How many bucks can small acreage truly carry when most bucks ingress egress the property regularly and are anything but year round permanent residence.

Bet if we looked harder we could find more examples. But I think the only value to most of the acronyms is to rationalize and justify rather than offer any real value. I see value in simplifying things. For most with smaller properties I believe optimum value is realized with a focus on habitat and nutrition. Then harvest whatever bucks ring your bell. If its a new hunter killing his first buck...and I bet he/she views that as a trophy.Celebrate that If its a seasoned hunter killing an outstanding 3 year old he is proud of, bet its considered a trophy. Celebrate that .If the scale or circumstances allow the opportunity to actually manage a herd of deer then the options broaden. More can be done if the manager so desires.

We don't remove any bucks thinking it makes other bucks better. We remove them because hunters want to shoot bucks. We have more bucks 4 yrs old and older which allows them to more fully develop whatever antlers they are capable of. Thats the pool we choose from for harvest. The intended impact is best realized when my buddies wife killed her first buck last year....a 120" 8 pt. She was so excited she could hardly speak. No shaming therein you can bet a new hunter just joined the ranks.


Lastly and I'll shut up, research has dispelled the myth that a buck fawn orphaned will not disperse. I used to believe that but research has shown that is not the case. Bucks disperse whether orphaned or not with the distance being a function of personality and habitat . Enough for now.

 

[yoderjac]

I really like the term 'squishy' that you use. Seems many things deer, deer hunting and so many of the definitions within are pretty darn...squishy!

Quality deer management---Very squishy. What's quality to one might be described as " polishing a turd" to justify behavior by another { I like that phrase to }
Trophy deer and management---Super squishy! What one might call trophy deer management another might say it simply creating a healthy deer herd. And obviously whats a trophy to one might not be a trophy to another.
Healthy ...deer and deer herd. Easy enough to describe a healthy deer. But healthy deer herd, well that squishy indeed. Where one might say they are managing to create a healthy deer herd, another might say its just putting " makeup on a melanoma". A rationalization to justify behavior or strategy.
Cull or management deer--Good lord, about as squishy as you can get. Many people like to shoot bucks . What one might call cull or management another might simply say its a buck available for harvest. Good luck.
Natural--About as squishy as pointing out that cheetos are made from ' natural ' ingredients . One might say that ' natural' reflects a deer herd unmolested by hunters whereas another might say natural is best we can do with our circumstances.
Buck carrying capacity---undefinably squishy. How many bucks can small acreage truly carry when most bucks ingress egress the property regularly and are anything but year round permanent residence.

Bet if we looked harder we could find more examples. But I think the only value to most of the acronyms is to rationalize and justify rather than offer any real value. I see value in simplifying things. For most with smaller properties I believe optimum value is realized with a focus on habitat and nutrition. Then harvest whatever bucks ring your bell. If its a new hunter killing his first buck...and I bet he/she views that as a trophy.Celebrate that If its a seasoned hunter killing an outstanding 3 year old he is proud of, bet its considered a trophy. Celebrate that .If the scale or circumstances allow the opportunity to actually manage a herd of deer then the options broaden. More can be done if the manager so desires.

We don't remove any bucks thinking it makes other bucks better. We remove them because hunters want to shoot bucks. We have more bucks 4 yrs old and older which allows them to more fully develop whatever antlers they are capable of. Thats the pool we choose from for harvest. The intended impact is best realized when my buddies wife killed her first buck last year....a 120" 8 pt. She was so excited she could hardly speak. No shaming therein you can bet a new hunter just joined the ranks.


Lastly and I'll shut up, research has dispelled the myth that a buck fawn orphaned will not disperse. I used to believe that but research has shown that is not the case. Bucks disperse whether orphaned or not with the distance being a function of personality and habitat . Enough for now.

Yep. I see a bit of a brighter line between QDM and TM but we pretty much agree on the rest. To me QDM is focused on health of the herd and it is a precursor to TM. You can't manage for Trophy size deer if you don't have a healthy herd to start with. To me, when the primary focus becomes maximizing antler size, we are stepping into TM. I don't say this is a bad thing, just that it goes beyond QDM.

And let me be the first to say QDM is only one aspect of our property management. We balance it with timber value, recreational value, and introducing new hunters to the sport.

Can you point me to the research on orphan dispersal? I have not seen that yet. Not sure how I missed it. I thought I had seen some radio collar studies years ago that supported it. Maybe I'm confusing something...

Thanks,

Jack