Deer density vs Quality Deer Management?

[BLACKJACK]

Any thoughts that all the focus on QDM – “shoot more does”, “balance the herd” – treating does like vermin, is what got us into the lack of deer problem?? Dead does in the freezer don’t produce fawns!! I’m not talking about the northern third of Minnesota; I’m talking about the parts of the state where winter mortality is not an issue.

Not a peep from the QDM advocates now.

[Jameson]

Always thought it was "shoot the right amount of does" and "balance the herd via APR's" for QDM. We have been shooting too many does, so it isn't QDM, thus why the QDMA folks don't have much to say.

(I'm not a member of QDMA due to their APR stance, but always thought their "shoot the right amount of does" and "good habitat" stuff was good stuff.)

[jentz]

I hunt near blackjack, NE Kandiyohi county.I can say for sure when doe permits drop the DNR heard way to many complaints!!The local hunters were irked. 8 years ago we saw 2 winter heards one of 20-22 the other was 22-24.Saw both different groups out the roof window,so I know I'm right! This year we had a total of 8 the ole girl said one morn there were 9.Look at the population drop in just that short time.Yet the permits keep comming.year after year the permit numbers didnt drop.Since the one year they dropped them fairly heavily,that was the year of complaints lots of locals said I'm contacting the DNR they cant drop the permits I'll quit hunting!

The DNR gave them what they wanted >Kill every deer you could see!!

[SmellEsox]

DNR wants nothing to do with QDMA. They just want all the deer dead. They couldn't care less about the age structure of bucks. They manage to get as few complaints as possible from farmers, orchard owners, public safety people, foresters etc. They don't care about a bunch of whiney hunters.

[Wanderer]

They don't care about a bunch of whiney hunters.

I'm not convinced that's still the case. Hunters have begun to find their voice lately and the DNR is publicly asking for input now whereas years ago we seemed to be just sideshow income. The "rational" public is now asking for environmental protections and projects not just the radicals. They know our money matters.

The pendulum swung over the past couple years and the over-done shoot down the herd management strategy ran smack into consecutive good 'ol MN winters. Yes, it's going to be a while before numbers are good again but be honest, if there were twice as many deer in many areas of MN heading into this winter, we'd be seeing at least twice as many dead ones in the woods now. We were gonna lose a ton anyway.

We're a much more educated group of deer hunters and managers now than we were in the past. We'll get it turned around in less time than it would've taken 40-50 years ago.

Ebb and flow. Welcome to the ebb.

[nonteepical]

If it wasn't for the few who know what QDM is, the rest of the state wouldn't know there is deer mis management in Minnesota. When the DNR says "heres x amount of doe tags have at it" uninformed/misinformed hunters try to fill as many tags as they can, thats not QDM. Deer densities at 1/4 of the carrying capacity (set by DNR) in most of the state isn't QDM.

Untill the deer densities are changed to a higher number get used to not seeing deer because if we have the winter kill most think we are going to have and they cut back on antlerless tags, when the herd rebounds to the low density they want (80% fo the state is at goal right now,so what you were seeing last season is where the DNR wants it) here come the liberal tags again.

To answer OP, if hunters were into QDM we wouldn't have the problem we have today of "no deer". QDM is taking an ADEQUATE number of does.

[SmellEsox]

I'm not convinced that's still the case. Hunters have begun to find their voice lately and the DNR is publicly asking for input now whereas years ago we seemed to be just sideshow income. The "rational" public is now asking for environmental protections and projects not just the radicals. They know our money matters.

The pendulum swung over the past couple years and the over-done shoot down the herd management strategy ran smack into consecutive good 'ol MN winters. Yes, it's going to be a while before numbers are good again but be honest, if there were twice as many deer in many areas of MN heading into this winter, we'd be seeing at least twice as many dead ones in the woods now. We were gonna lose a ton anyway.

We're a much more educated group of deer hunters and managers now than we were in the past. We'll get it turned around in less time than it would've taken 40-50 years ago.

Ebb and flow. Welcome to the ebb.

Maybe. I hope they are hearing, not just listening. And as far as deer survival, I'm not sure I agree with the statement that we would have lost twice as many deer. Under the last several years management, most of the deer left after season are fawns which are the least able to survive difficult winters. Had we not shot so many does every year, we'd have deer out there more capable of surviving tough winters.

[mntatonka]

Maybe. I hope they are hearing, not just listening. And as far as deer survival, I'm not sure I agree with the statement that we would have lost twice as many deer. Under the last several years management, most of the deer left after season are fawns which are the least able to survive difficult winters. Had we not shot so many does every year, we'd have deer out there more capable of surviving tough winters.

you do realize that there were less does harvested in the firearms season in the last couple of years than there had been since 1999 right? Yes, there were more permits offered over the last 2 years than there were in 2011, but there were also nearly twice as many lottery areas than 2011.

If the cycle holds, whether it's a natural cycle due to weather/disease/predators or due to hunter mindset, the harvest (and thus the population) will likely drop for one more year, then rebound and increase for a 7-10 years before dropping back down again.

[BLACKJACK]

To answer OP, if hunters were into QDM we wouldn't have the problem we have today of "no deer". QDM is taking an ADEQUATE number of does.

Your tagline of your posts -- 'save a big buck,don't kill a little buck' -- gets right to the point I was trying to make in the original post. I intentionally didn't mention the DNR because I didn't want this to become a DNR bashing post and also because I don't think its all the DNR's fault.

Even if antler point restrictions aren't mandated like in the SE, the whole idea of 'save a small buck, shoot a doe' has an affect on the local deer populations. Twenty years ago 'brown its down' was prevalent. Now LOTS more people are passing on the small bucks and shooting does. Every adult doe that is shot means two less fawns in the spring. Multiply that by the number of hunters in your party and over a number of years and the deer population will go down.

Hunters and their attitudes are part of the problem.

[SmellEsox]

you do realize that there were less does harvested in the firearms season in the last couple of years than there had been since 1999 right? Yes, there were more permits offered over the last 2 years than there were in 2011, but there were also nearly twice as many lottery areas than 2011.

If the cycle holds, whether it's a natural cycle due to weather/disease/predators or due to hunter mindset, the harvest (and thus the population) will likely drop for one more year, then rebound and increase for a 7-10 years before dropping back down again.

Maybe near you. In my area of central MN, there has been no letup on doe harvest. If there were fewer does harvested it was because there were fewer out there to harvest, not because DNR backed off permits.

[Bear55]

If the cycle holds, whether it's a natural cycle due to weather/disease/predators or due to hunter mindset, the harvest (and thus the population) will likely drop for one more year, then rebound and increase for a 7-10 years before dropping back down again.

Yep they will come back, we have been a lotto area since 2008. Things were just starting to get good again in 2012 but between last spring and this past nasty winter we've had a major setback. Some patience is needed.

[mntatonka]

Maybe near you. In my area of central MN, there has been no letup on doe harvest. If there were fewer does harvested it was because there were fewer out there to harvest, not because DNR backed off permits.

I was talking overall. I just took the state numbers.

[SmellEsox]

I was talking overall. I just took the state numbers.

Just remember, wasn't there the second most licenses sold ever last fall? So there was definitely not a lack of pressure exerted on the herd.

[PurpleFloyd]

Your tagline of your posts -- 'save a big buck,don't kill a little buck' -- gets right to the point I was trying to make in the original post. I intentionally didn't mention the DNR because I didn't want this to become a DNR bashing post and also because I don't think its all the DNR's fault.

Even if antler point restrictions aren't mandated like in the SE, the whole idea of 'save a small buck, shoot a doe' has an affect on the local deer populations. Twenty years ago 'brown its down' was prevalent. Now LOTS more people are passing on the small bucks and shooting does. Every adult doe that is shot means two less fawns in the spring. Multiply that by the number of hunters in your party and over a number of years and the deer population will go down.

Hunters and their attitudes are part of the problem.

+1

[DaveT]

Your tagline of your posts -- 'save a big buck,don't kill a little buck' -- gets right to the point I was trying to make in the original post. I intentionally didn't mention the DNR because I didn't want this to become a DNR bashing post and also because I don't think its all the DNR's fault.

Even if antler point restrictions aren't mandated like in the SE, the whole idea of 'save a small buck, shoot a doe' has an affect on the local deer populations. Twenty years ago 'brown its down' was prevalent. Now LOTS more people are passing on the small bucks and shooting does. Every adult doe that is shot means two less fawns in the spring. Multiply that by the number of hunters in your party and over a number of years and the deer population will go down.

Hunters and their attitudes are part of the problem.

Bolded statement is absolutely correct. Unfortunately, most deer hunters in this state think about deer for one week a year, while they're hunting them. They trust that the DNR is managing the herd and wouldn't sell them tags if it was going to hurt the population. More than likely, most don't care either way, they just want to shoot some deer and go back to the football/hockey season.

Through trail cams QDMJoe knows he has 10 adult does and approximately 7 doe fawns. QDMJoe knows he can shoot any combination of 7 does and doe fawns and maintain his herd at the same level while also promoting his bucks to an older year class. QDMJoe knows that some of these deer may die of natural causes or get hit by a car so he limits himself and his family to 4. Unfortunately, QDMJoe has 6 properties that border his land and each of those properties fills up with orange every November. They all know QDMJoe has food plots so they pile up right on the property line, pockets full of bonus doe tags the DNR sold them. When the season ends QDMJoe checks his cameras and he has one doe left and she has a broken leg. QDMJoe logs into his favorite outdoor forum and learns it is his fault there aren't any deer left in the state. QDMJoe is disappointed.

[B. Amish]

Orange hunters line up to shoot qdmajoe's deer out of spite cause qdmajoe is obnoxious.

[DaveT]

Orange hunters line up to shoot qdmajoe's deer out of spite cause qdmajoe is obnoxious.

What's obnoxious is trying to blame QDM for the low deer numbers. Shoot a doe instead of a little buck is a far cry from shoot every single effing doe you see. QDMJoe is just a mythical obnoxious representation of what happens to most guys who try it in MN. Works great in Kansas, though. Of course my neighbors down there obviously don't know how obnoxious I am yet.

[BLACKJACK]

What's obnoxious is trying to blame QDM for the low deer numbers. Shoot a doe instead of a little buck is a far cry from shoot every single effing doe you see.

Not totally blaming QDM but QDM has put the emphasis on shooting does, when your average one week a year hunter is out in the deer stand hes going to shoot does (instead of a small buck) because thats what hes hearing, shoot up the does, save the bucks.

Let me expand on you obnoxious QDM guy example Take a mythical group of eight hunters in the central part of the state. Twenty years ago they'd hunt hard for a few days during the gun season, shoot four small bucks, a doe, and a fawn. Every few years one of the bucks would be a big one. Nowadays their emphasis is on shooting big bucks. They hunt longer, harder, archery, gun, muzzleloader, at the end of the season they’ve shot one nice buck and four does – and complain because they’re not seeing any deer. They’ve passed on some small bucks and shot every doe they had the opportunity on – because that’s what ‘they’re supposed to do’.

Do the numbers, every year less fawns are getting put on the ground, it has to have an effect on the local deer population. I find myself doing it, and I’m not a ‘it has to be big antlers before I shoot it guy’, during late bow season I had a group of does, fawns, and a medium buck come by me, I passed on the bigger bodied buck and shot a doe.

Blame the DNR if you want but this idea of making does into vermin and shoot’em up is also partially to blame. In the areas I hunt the number of doe permits hasn’t changed much but hunter attitudes has changed, more of those doe permits are being filled.

[SmellEsox]

Not totally blaming QDM but QDM has put the emphasis on shooting does, when your average one week a year hunter is out in the deer stand hes going to shoot does (instead of a small buck) because thats what hes hearing, shoot up the does, save the bucks.

Let me expand on you obnoxious QDM guy example Take a mythical group of eight hunters in the central part of the state. Twenty years ago they'd hunt hard for a few days during the gun season, shoot four small bucks, a doe, and a fawn. Every few years one of the bucks would be a big one. Nowadays their emphasis is on shooting big bucks. They hunt longer, harder, archery, gun, muzzleloader, at the end of the season they’ve shot one nice buck and four does – and complain because they’re not seeing any deer. They’ve passed on some small bucks and shot every doe they had the opportunity on – because that’s what ‘they’re supposed to do’.

Do the numbers, every year less fawns are getting put on the ground, it has to have an effect on the local deer population. I find myself doing it, and I’m not a ‘it has to be big antlers before I shoot it guy’, during late bow season I had a group of does, fawns, and a medium buck come by me, I passed on the bigger bodied buck and shot a doe.

Blame the DNR if you want but this idea of making does into vermin and shoot’em up is also partially to blame. In the areas I hunt the number of doe permits hasn’t changed much but hunter attitudes has changed, more of those doe permits are being filled.

Gotta agree with you, but I'd love to see some age data on the bucks in the harvest. I still think there is a high percentage of yearling bucks in the harvest. In fact, as deer numbers have declined, hunters may actually be less inclined to pass a small buck because it might be the only deer they get a shot at.

As far as doe harvest, I agree. Everyone has put emphasis on doe harvest in the last 15 years or so. So like you said, everyone is shooting does so there are fewer dropping fawns. AND, with more antlerless permits, more fawns are getting shot too. Plus you have muzzy guys shooting them late season because that is mostly what is left after bow and firearms seasons. Now we've had two tough winters in a row taking a toll on fawns. The next two seasons will be very interesting for sure. Fewer 1 1/2 year old deer to shoot the next two seasons. If we don't back off antlerless harvest, it will be pretty tough hunting for quite awhile.

[PurpleFloyd]

QDMJoe should first understand they aren't "His" deer and that the deer are a public resource even if many make their home on private property. That being said he at least is working on the habitat and if the state would focus more on habitat we would have a lot more and bigger deer running around even without the fancy names and organizations but that is expensive and it's hard to tell a farmer they can't clear a grove to make more black dirt when that is what they make their living off of and it is hard to tell a land owner not to harvest trees if they provide the income for his land or to build a housing development in an area that is good wildlife habitat.

For many years farmers and land owners provided a great deal of hunting opportunities for free because their non productive land had little value and they had a different mindset than people do today.

[slimngrizzly]

QDM is not about shooting does... its about balancing. Its about MANAGING to create a HEALTHY, QUALITY herd of deer.

I guess im trying to say don't compare the concept of QDM to THE association, QDMA. Im sure the association has its flaws???

MNDNR is what this whole issue is about! I don't know how you can talk deer management and NOT mention them?! MN is still on the Traditional Deer Management plan. They manage 100% for QUANTITY and not for QUALITY... and personally I think they do a poor job of that. QDM and MNDNR, currently, have little in common.

Joe Public has little to none knowledge of deer, as DaveT stated. As long as DNR gives 2 tags or 5 tags, Joe Public is going to shoot those deer.

The DNR doesn't want to limit people. They don't want to say "no, you cant". They want to say "yes, if you pay, you can!". Well that is fine and dandy but it only works for so long. Eventually there nothing left, and in order to have a good resource they are going to have to limit people. Maybe everyone cant have a deer every year? Maybe there just isn't enough for everyone. Maybe the DNR just needs to sack up and say "It IS going to get better people, but you cant have your cake and eat it too!"

QDMJoe knows what to do... and he has the self-restraint to do it. Unfortunately hes outnumbered Joe Public, and right, wrong, or otherwise, DNR will make sure Joe Public gets to do what he wants. Perhaps the day will come where the animals mean more than the dollars... but I don't see it anytime soon.

[MahtowaDave]

QDM is not about shooting does... its about balancing. Its about MANAGING to create a HEALTHY QUALITY herd of deer.

MNDNR is what this whole issue is about! I don't know how you can talk deer management and NOT mention them?! MN is still on the Traditional Deer Management plan. They manage 100% for QUANTITY and not for QUALITY... and personally I think they do a poor job of that. QDM and MNDNR, currently, have little in common.

Joe Public has little to none knowledge of deer, as DaveT stated. As long as DNR gives 2 tags or 5 tags, Joe Public is going to shoot those deer.

The DNR doesn't want to limit people. They don't want to say "no, you cant". They want to say "yes, if you pay, you can!". Well that is fine and dandy but it only works for so long. Eventually there nothing left, and in order to have a good resource they are going to have to limit people. Maybe everyone cant have a deer every year? Maybe there just isn't enough for everyone. Maybe the DNR just needs to sack up and say "It IS going to get better people, but you cant have your cake and eat it too!"

QDMJoe knows what to do... and he has the self-restraint to do it. Unfortunately hes outnumbered Joe Public, and right, wrong, or otherwise, DNR will make sure Joe Public gets to do what he wants. Perhaps the day will come where the animals mean more than the dollars... but I don't see it anytime soon.

x1 Amen. There will be more collaboration in the woods this year amongst hunters than usual.

Our group will have a pact and stick to that pact in the name of deer. Neighbors will

will talk to neighbors and the result will be more restraint as to what gets taken and

what walks.

[BLACKJACK]

In fact, as deer numbers have declined, hunters may actually be less inclined to pass a small buck because it might be the only deer they get a shot at.

I think its always been that way in sparce deer areas like the south central and SW. I've hunted a lot of years in 283, lots of big black farmland, if you like venison in the freezer, you better not pass on that small buck because it might be the only deer you see.

[BLACKJACK]

They manage 100% for QUANTITY and not for QUALITY... and personally I think they do a poor job of that.

[Getanet]

I've sparred with many pro-APR guys on this site, but I understand APR is just one component of a QDM plan. I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with QDM and in fact has many benefits. If I owned hunting land I'm sure I would embrace many of its concepts.

I don't think dividing hunters into various "camps" at this point does anyone much good. QDMJoe and JoePublic will be in the same boat for the next few years dealing with a smaller herd state-wide. Might as well all row in one direction.

I would agree with the original premise though. The greater emphasis on "mature bucks" does seem to have changed the broader mindset of the hunting community. One of the main tenants of APR is to put more pressure on does. And you'll see it in almost every thread, "if you need meat just shoot a doe." Although I have no data, I'm fairly confident that many of the guys who hunt multiple seasons wait for the big buck, and shoot does for the table. In the past that pressure would have been a little more evenly dispersed among does and lesser bucks.

Also, in the past, not as many guys hunted multiple seasons, so if they didn't get one during the rifle/shot-gun season they went without that year. Now many guys have already spent hundreds of hours in the stand by the time the rifle season opens, and they spend hundreds more after it closes if they need to.