QDM Splinter Group?

[JPH]

All revolutionary movements begin to create splinter groups once the become main stream, so I suppose this is overdue. You know what I mean, people within the movement begin to think that it has somehow drifted from the original intent and becomes too soft or too hard in one area or another? Well I have been a member of the Quality Deer Management movement for six years, and I am ready to be labeled as a "Breakaway Dissident".

I began to call myself a QDMer is 2003, when I bought a little piece of hunting ground. At the height of my QDMness I was a dues paying member of the QDMA and an active poster both on their forum and on this one, where I was a vocal QDM defender. My approach has always been low key, but I had high hopes that by being a hard core QDM man, I could inspire everyone in North-Missouri and Southern-Iowa to follow suit.

Well six years later, I find myself more than a little disillusioned by my QDM brethren. For one thing, antlers have become way too important. Yes, they talk a good "age over antlers" game, but for too many that is just a slogan. Secondly, they seem to be way too worried about what the hunters across the fence are doing. You want to make hunting/wildlife better? Do it yourself! If the next guy follows the laws and respects your boundary, then leave him the heck alone. If he wants to know how you do things, he'll ask. Thirdly, they seem to think that habitat improvement is locked in a bag of seed mix. Baloney! I have no issue with food plots but wildlife habitat has many dimensions. We should learn about as many of them as we can and work on many fronts to create good conditions.

Hey, I still welcome the cornerstones of QDM. I just think that the movement is loosing its way in a maze of antlers, arrogance and hybrid clover. I move to redirect the movement! Here are the 10 commandments of the new movement listed in order of importance (yes, they are the basically the same as QDM but with an adjusted emphasis):
1) We must focus first on the importance and glory of all God's creation. Conservation efforts must be about the entire eco-system and not just deer.
2) The movement must be biased on respect for game laws and all those who follow them! Poachers are the enemy, not hunters who shoot legal bucks that we would pass on!
3) We must always strive for a deeper understanding of nature and how the whitetail deer fits into it.
4) We must share what we learn with others. This must not be done in a judgmental or condescending manner.
5) We must make a good faith effort to positively impact the habitat in which we hunt, for the benefit of the herd and all wildlife.
6) We must encourage young and inexperienced hunters to kill the first legal deer that offers a good shot. We must celebrate this event with them. We must mean in.
7) We must make a good faith effort to kill an appropriate number of does. When we fill our freezers, we must share the meat.
8) Experienced hunters must make an effort to pass on yearling bucks, unless special circumstances exist. Any restrictions beyond 1.5 years are strictly up to the individual hunter. We must celebrate this event with them. We must mean it.
9) We must constantly re-evaluate the impact of what we are doing and change it as we see the need.
10) We must have fun. We must mean it.

Okay, so two questions. Who wants in and what do we call it?

[ranwin33]

ORIGINAL: JPH

All revolutionary movements begin to create splinter groups once the become main stream, so I suppose this is overdue. You know what I mean, people within the movement begin to think that it has somehow drifted from the original intent and becomes too soft or too hard in one area or another? Well I have been a member of the Quality Deer Management movement for six years, and I am ready to be labeled as a "Breakaway Dissident".

I began to call myself a QDMer is 2003, when I bought a little piece of hunting ground. At the height of my QDMness I was a dues paying member of the QDMA and an active poster both on their forum and on this one, where I was a vocal QDM defender. My approach has always been low key, but I had high hopes that by being a hard core QDM man, I could inspire everyone in North-Missouri and Southern-Iowa to follow suit.

Well six years later, I find myself more than a little disillusioned by my QDM brethren. For one thing, antlers have become way too important. Yes, they talk a good "age over antlers" game, but for too many that is just a slogan. Secondly, they seem to be way too worried about what the hunters across the fence are doing. You want to make hunting/wildlife better? Do it yourself! If the next guy follows the laws and respects your boundary, then leave him the heck alone. If he wants to know how you do things, he'll ask. Thirdly, they seem to think that habitat improvement is locked in a bag of seed mix. Baloney! I have no issue with food plots but wildlife habitat has many dimensions. We should learn about as many of them as we can and work on many fronts to create good conditions.

Hey, I still welcome the cornerstones of QDM. I just think that the movement is loosing its way in a maze of antlers, arrogance and hybrid clover. I move to redirect the movement! Here are the 10 commandments of the new movement listed in order of importance (yes, they are the basically the same as QDM but with an adjusted emphasis):
1) We must focus first on the importance and glory of all God's creation. Conservation efforts must be about the entire eco-system and not just deer.
2) The movement must be biased on respect for game laws and all those who follow them! Poachers are the enemy, not hunters who shoot legal bucks that we would pass on!
3) We must always strive for a deeper understanding of nature and how the whitetail deer fits into it.
4) We must share what we learn with others. This must not be done in a judgmental or condescending manner.
5) We must make a good faith effort to positively impact the habitat in which we hunt, for the benefit of the herd and all wildlife.
6) We must encourage young and inexperienced hunters to kill the first legal deer that offers a good shot. We must celebrate this event with them. We must mean in.
7) We must make a good faith effort to kill an appropriate number of does. When we fill our freezers, we must share the meat.
8) Experienced hunters must make an effort to pass on yearling bucks, unless special circumstances exist. Any restrictions beyond 1.5 years are strictly up to the individual hunter. We must celebrate this event with them. We must mean it.
9) We must constantly re-evaluate the impact of what we are doing and change it as we see the need.
10) We must have fun. We must mean it.

Okay, so two questions. Who wants in and what do we call it?

OK, I've read this four times now and I can tell you've put a lot of thought into it, but I think it's already called QDM. 
 
Sorry JPH, but other than number 8 and failing to try to maintain an appropriate age structure within a herd, this is pretty much how I've always viewed QDM. 
 
But for the sake of renaming, let's take out the word quality, and change it to responsible.  So I'm voting for Responsible Land and Wildlife Management.  Sorry the initials don't make some meaningful acronym. [:)]
 
I look forward to seeing where this thread goes.

[Goose]

Great post JPH, I know you put a lot of thought into it and it shows.
You know how I feel about all of this and I agree with your thoughts, in fact, as of right now, I have nothing to add.
I like the good old term Conservation.

[smitty]

I'm in.  How about Quality Wildlife Management?  I do think that property management is huge.  Im lucky enough to have 40 ac. I live on to hunt.  It's considered a small parcel (which realistically it is) but I would like to see more articles about how to manage it.  I put in food plots and have a small sanctuary but beyond that not much.  I like the fact that you put fourth the idea that it is okay to shot a 1.5 year old buck for a young or new hunter, and mean it.  I think that a big problem is people with small parcels of land or state land hunters (which I also am) is the idea that "well if didnt shoot him someone else would."  Which may or may not be the case but if there was a movement that targeted small parcel and state land hunters it might have a bigger impact than we know.

[JPH]

Ranwin33, like I said it is not really different from QDM, it is a different emphasis. Secondly, in my opinion passing on yearling bucks will bring about a more balanced age structure. As I (and others) see it, letting them survive to 2.5 will give them the chance to survive past their natural stupidity, and nature and the mistakes we hunters make will take it from there.

Goose, nice name but not sexy enough.

[smitty]

 Responsible Land and Wildlife Management.  

I like this one too.

[ranwin33]

ORIGINAL: JPH

Ranwin33, like I said it is not really different from QDM, it is a different emphasis. Secondly, in my opinion passing on yearling bucks will bring about a more balanced age structure. As I (and others) see it, letting them survive to 2.5 will give them the chance to survive past their natural stupidity, and nature and the mistakes we hunters make will take it from there.

Goose, nice name but not sexy enough.

Call me stupid.  What is the different emphasis?
 
I agree an letting them survive to 2.5 will help, I'm just willing in most instances to give them a little extra help and let them walk another year beyond that.

[Goose]

OK here are some thoughts:
 
I want hunting to be fun, and by that I mean I don't want to look down upon somebody for shooting something that they are truly happy with, I would rather be able to share the joy with them.
 
I truly enjoy running a chainsaw, turning dirt, planting trees, the planning of it all, the research of it all, and then seeing the results of it. It truly brings me to a place I like being.
 
To me, a year and half here and there to a person who is happy with it, does not bother me one bit. I was there and enjoyed it as well, I look forward to enjoying it with you.
 
I think numbers 2 and 4 are the ones that cause the most problems or hard feelings. 
 

[ranwin33]

ORIGINAL: Goose

OK here are some thoughts:

I want hunting to be fun, and by that I mean I don't want to look down upon somebody for shooting something that they are truly happy with, I would rather be able to share the joy with them.

Absolutely!  But lets not confuse having standards that are different from somebody elses as looking down on them.  I think you can have different standards, but yet truly be happy for someone even if what they shot isn't something you'd shoot.  For example, my brother is going to shoot a 1.5 year old 8 point this year, I have not doubt about it, and when he does I'm going to be more excited about it than he is because it will be the first buck and the third deer he's taken on our property in seven years of hunting.  Because I've let four of these guys pass already this year, doesn't mean I'm not going to be thrilled for him. 
 

ORIGINAL: Goose
I truly enjoy running a chainsaw, turning dirt, planting trees, the planning of it all, the research of it all, and then seeing the results of it. It truly brings me to a place I like being.

In all honesty I could do this part of it and not even shoot a deer. 
 

ORIGINAL: Goose
To me, a year and half here and there to a person who is happy with it, does not bother me one bit. I was there and enjoyed it as well, I look forward to enjoying it with you.

I'd second this as well; if we're not managing thousand acre ranches somewhere then taking the ocassional 1.5 year old probably isn't going to make much difference in what we see.  But when all we shoot are the 1.5's then we will run into problems.  We can either police ourselves or the states will eventually do it for us as they get more and more into deer management.
 
Thanks for your thoughts on this Goose.

[Goose]

I am glad to see we are on the same page.