Do You Think the QDM Bubble has Burst?

[ShoulderNuke!]

Actualy it is not my opinion at all and you should know that if read Deer and deerhunting regularly . What I wrote was simply the condesed version of the information that has been published here and in other forms as well.

Yes all things should be taken with a grain of salt however these studies are easily atained and my 35 years pluss of adult age deer hunting lends a great degree of creedance to what I wrote that was studied by the like of Charlie A ,Ozoga,and many others in the feild of hunting also my short stent a Purdue in animal husbandry did not hurt any either .

But your concern is noted. However I will not stop posting what contributors to this very websites publications have writen/studied over the years . That would not be prudent just because someone here or elsewhere dissagreed with it now would it?!.

[Goose]

ORIGINAL: ShoulderNuke!

Well actually the fact is that a herd s natural state is not 1-1 it is actually 1-2 or 1-3 if on a natural unmanipulated by hunters state. Also in recent deer studies that were published recently in D&DH .It was stated that bucks will not cover more than 5 - 7 does a year in even unbalanced herds due to the does timeing and multiple comeing into heat at the same time . So in fact it is likely that even the most prolific breeding buck will not cover but just a hand full of doe yearly .

So in fact I am saying due to very vigorus and a 1-1 ratio that the bucks that so many covert will actually have it much worse because of compition and fighting than a say 1-2 or 1-3 ratio herd . since more bucks will be busy with other does being in heat and overlaping other doe estrouse cycles.

So yes that is indeed what i a saying infact.

Not to get into a argument over it or quote studies but research has shown that the most natural known herd was 1 to 1.

From a professional wildlife manager and research scientist:

"What a "natural" deer herd looks like is well known to the research community and has been for many years. There are two primary sources for information on natural deer herds. The first is the bioarcheological studies of American Indian "middens" ? or trash heaps. The American Indians were large consumers of whitetailed deer, for food, clothing and tool making. Unused parts of their harvested deer were thrown in these trash heaps. The largest and hardest part of a deer that will survive time is the pelvic girdle bone structure. The sex and age of a deer can be fairly accurately determined from the pelvic girdle. Examination of these left-over pelvic girdles provides an accurate picture of the sex and age distribution of the deer the Indians were harvesting. After collecting and categorizing over 10,000 pelvic girdles, it was found that the deer herds were very sexually balanced, with an adult sex ratio of approximately 1 male for every female. It was also found that there was a pyramid age structure for both sexes (when graphed on a vertical age/sex scale). In essence, the largest age class were fawns, the second largest age class were immature adults, the third largest mature adults, and the smallest group old-aged deer."

[Woods Walker]

That's all well and good Goose, but all that study shows is what that particular group of native Americans chose to/could kill. It may or may not have any relationship to the herd sex ratio at that time.

For instance, you have to ask yourself WHY did those people hunt in the first place? I think I'm safe in assuming that it was NOT for "putting the smackdown on that bad boy" or to "just be out in the woods and away from the daily grind", quite the opposite in fact, as the woods to them WERE the "daily grind". They hunted for ONE reason, and ONE reason only....SURVIVAL. When someone's in that mode, they're goal is simple.....kill your game in the most efficient way possible, with the least amount of effort on the hunter's part. Kind of like many hunter's today, although the reasons are different. Native Americans were not rushing to get back to camp to play on the Gameboys. In that light, the deer they killed would have been based on two things.....how easy they were to kill, and how good they were to eat, and maybe transport.

I mean, if 300 years from now some archeologist of that age does a study of deer hunting videos and TV shows from this era, his only conclusion will be that, based on his "data", we had a deer sex ratio of about 10 bucks to 1 doe, and most of those bucks were "Booners"! That same researcher might also conclude that based of the frequency of similar "arch shaped" ruins of structures in every town he unearthed, that Ronald McDonald was a god of some sort to us! [:D]

I'm not saying what the "natural" sex ratio is or is not, I just don't put a whole lot of credence in that study as far as what the actual deer herd ratios were.

Maybe the Indians were practicing QDM? [:D]

[msbadger]

 Now see that's where I can't process how these scientist correlate their data...They hypothesize based on what they examined in discarded bones a 1:1 deer ratio...Did they have any data on what tribes this was from ...where or how many across the country these "heaps" came from? Many of the Native Americans were nomadic...Did they account for the use of bone in medicine...ceremonies....eaten buy their own canine....The reasoning they may have had in taking what ever sex of animal they took...for they were much more in tune to their surroundings than any white man that came to this country....    

[Woods Walker]

Good points badgie!

[ShoulderNuke!]

Good points in all the posts .However the post above were dealing with a human hunted herd . Despite the good intent a natural herd density is one that is not human hunted and modern studies show that bucks die and fall out of the herd at a much higher level due to conflict and natural predation due to inquistive natur of young bucks and combat injuries incured durring the annual rutting period .

So in fact this is a case once agin of putting humans that are driven by some other motive than just killing to survive .The anciant humans used pieces of diffrent sexes in as stated medicein ,religous ritual ,and sexual fertility rites . So in fact according to what tribe or human group was in what area will detrmin what sex and type of animal was taken and for what reason.

But in the case of scientific modern herd dynamics we must talk about a deer herd unhunted or unhinderd by humans.

[JPH]

ShoulderNuke!, just so we are clear, I am not disputing the "facts" re. sex ratios. I have seen studies that go both ways on the topic because an untouched herd is not a realistic scenario. Our deer do deal with humans in terms of vehicles, fences and other indiscriminate, man-made killers. Yes, a bucks natural instincts do place them at a higher risk, thus leaving us with unbalanced herds at the start of hunting season. I accept the same theory that you do here.

What I dispute is the notion that we should further aggravate an already unbalanced herd by continuing to prey on yearling bucks.

I re-read the post where you said, "[color="#ff0000"]So in fact I am saying due to very vigorus and a 1-1 ratio that the bucks that so many covert will actually have it much worse because of compition and fighting than a say 1-2 or 1-3 ratio herd . since more bucks will be busy with other does being in heat and overlaping other doe estrouse cycles[/color]." And I can't seem to understand your logic. I do not remember reading anything in D&DH that encouraged hunters to create more unbalanced herds for the sake of herd health.   

[Everyday Hunter]

ORIGINAL: JPH

What I dispute is the notion that we should further aggravate an already unbalanced herd by continuing to prey on yearling bucks.

Good point. It seems to me that the buck:doe ratio can never really be 1:1 if buck mortality is higher due to the higher risks that are inherent in being a buck. So, a "natural" (unhunted by man) herd might be 1:1½, or 1:2, or 1:2½ or even more unbalanced.

It also seems to me that we need to understand that, in terms of sex ratios, equal doesn't necessarily mean balanced and unequal doesn't necessarily mean unbalanced. If a sex ratio is unequal in a healthy herd, that doesn't mean a herd will remain healthy if the influence of hunters makes it 1:3, 1:4, or whatever. No one I know has suggested the point at which a herd is unbalanced.

The terms "equal" and "unequal" are not interchangeable with "balanced" and "unbalanced" because they don't mean the same thing. A herd with an equal sex ratio of 1:1 might actually be unbalanced with respect to the animals' needs, while an unequal ratio of 1:2 might be in balance with the animals' needs.

Deer in an uncontrolled wild environment can never maintain an exact sex ratio from year to year or from one location to another, so there should actually be a range within which the sex ratio is balanced. Maybe it's from 1:1½ to 1:3 or 1:4, or 1:5. But as that ratio grows the question is this: when does it become a problem? Certainly 1:10 or 1:15 would be bad. At what point is the sex ratio so out-of-whack (now there's a "scientifical" term for you) as to become a problem? And shouldn't hunting be managed to keep the ratio within that range, whatever it might be?

Still thinking,
Steve

[ShoulderNuke!]

ORIGINAL: JPH

ShoulderNuke!, just so we are clear, I am not disputing the "facts" re. sex ratios. I have seen studies that go both ways on the topic because an untouched herd is not a realistic scenario. Our deer do deal with humans in terms of vehicles, fences and other indiscriminate, man-made killers. Yes, a bucks natural instincts do place them at a higher risk, thus leaving us with unbalanced herds at the start of hunting season. I accept the same theory that you do here.

What I dispute is the notion that we should further aggravate an already unbalanced herd by continuing to prey on yearling bucks.

I re-read the post where you said, "[color="#ff0000"]So in fact I am saying due to very vigorous and a 1-1 ratio that the bucks that so many covert will actually have it much worse because of competition and fighting than a say 1-2 or 1-3 ratio herd . since more bucks will be busy with other does being in heat and overlap other doe estrous cycles[/color]." And I can't seem to understand your logic. I do not remember reading anything in D&DH that encouraged hunters to create more unbalanced herds for the sake of herd health.   

OH I see your point however unless you hunt a high fence not a single hunter or free range property can ever attain that magical 1-1 ratio that many perceive to want. Also I did not say that the articles said to create an unbalanced herd they did however say in more than one article over the years that a one to one ratio was not ideal for bucks due top the combative nature and mortality and broken antlers that were left from such intense battles . Also that they "Bucks" are and in fact that in some articles it has been stated that a one to one herd although the goal of some is not attainable on normal free range conditions . So in fact by the findings of those who studied this it indeed actually better physical for the bucks to have a slightly higher sex ratio than 1-1 .And in closing yes for hunters who want hard fighting action of several bucks on one doe 1-1 would be great from that aspect but for the health of the bucks involved it would not be the best course .As I understand it by reading actual QDM how to books and its primes QDM is about the overall health of the total deer herd in comparison to it available habitat . I.E keeping them all health and well feed not just praying on one age class or sex . So in fact all TRUE QDM programs are built around a single deer herd in its location and not one program is exact like the next . So in fact taking of 1.5 year old bucks or button bucks is just as important as taking of a 8.5 year old herd doe or a 6.5 year old booner buck . So in fact we get what we are dealt for our area and the simple fact that most properties that are hunted are less than 50 acres make true QDM impossible without 100% participation and agreeace of all hunters and landowners for many miles in all direction.Am I an anti QDM hunter no I tried for 10 years on our farm with no real results other than young bucks getting a pass and does getting killed with exactly the same size I had from the first day with little or no change in over all numbers from one year to the next. So in fact with the off the farm pressure and the noncooperation of the vast number of unconcerned hunters I stopped preaching and openly practicing QDM and simply layed off the doe herd and suddenly gained many more bucks than I had in years over the next few years so in fact the massive indiscriminate shooting of doe numbers was in fact exactly what I should not of done considering that at that point my doe numbers declining to or below the levels of the other properties around me thus the bucks on my land left for greener pastures every rut season. Now over the last 10 years fallowing my QDM stint and attempt to get a 1-1 ratio my buck numbers have never been higher and they stay on the farm covering all the does that now freely roam the farm undisturbed .And The big mature bucks continue to fall since I give a pass to the young bucks under 3.5 years old.

As I have always said too each his own and we should all hunt in the exact way that we eant as it is afterall supposed to be a fun hobby for us to do and satisfie our selves with.

[msbadger]

[quote][/quote]I stopped preaching and openly practicing QDM and simply layed off the doe herd and suddenly gained many more bucks than I had in years over the next few years so in fact the massive indiscriminate shooting of doe numbers was in fact exactly what I should not of done considering that at that point my doe numbers declining to or below the levels of the other properties around me thus the bucks on my land left for greener pastures every rut season. Now over the last 10 years fallowing my QDM stint and attempt to get a 1-1 ratio my buck numbers have never been higher and they stay on the farm covering all the does that now freely roam the farm undisturbed .And The big mature bucks continue to fall since I give a pass to the young bucks under 3.5 years old.

Oh my gosh finally some one who has seen what I've been saying for the past 2 yrs...Thank You[:)]