Re: Potential 3 point Rule -- United Hunters of Florida (UHF)

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

07/15/25 12:51:30am [ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4], 5 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 04/25/07 6:02:18pm
Author: AlanK (Confused)
Subject: Re: Potential 3 point Rule
In reply to: Casey 's message, "Potential 3 point Rule" on 04/16/07 4:41:20pm

Folks,

After reading all of the posts on this subject, I decided to do a little reading. I went to good ol' GOOGLE and did a search for Deer Management. I found a site called Quality Deer Management Association.

I read the summary on "What is QDM" and a couple of things jumped out at me:

1. This approach typically involves the protection of young bucks (yearlings and some 2.5 year-olds) combined with an adequate harvest of female deer to maintain a healthy population in balance with existing habitat conditions and landowner desires.

2. A successful QDM program requires an increased knowledge of deer biology and active participation in management.

My thoughts on each:
1. Both male and female deer MUST be included in the plan to maintain BALANCE. To me, the FWC, for whatever reason, has always been protective of the DOE but then let you kill pretty much any BUCK you want...I remember a 3 inch rule not too many years ago. My point is that you MUST manage all aspects of the WMA (animals and habitat) before you will see any progress. Deer restrictions alone will not accomplish what they say they are trying to do.

2. Deer biology....wow...what makes the WMA's that where chosen special? Do they all have the same habitat? Do they all have the same Buck/Doe ratio? Did they throw darts at the map and say...this one looks good????

What I'm getting at is the "one size fits all" attitude that the FWC seems to have. I don't buy it. Can they provide the numbers for these areas? How may young deer are there? How many old deer are there? What's the birth rate? What's the death rate? In my line of work we call it a "Business Plan"...define what the current situation is, define what your ultimate goal is and develop a plan on how to get there...I don't see how they can honestly say that setting a 3 horn limit will produce the same result at all of these WMAs.

Until they come up with a comprehensive plan that includes all aspects of a QDM project (including food plots and population balance) and is tailored for each specific WMA then I don't see the point. The current restrictions will accomplish the same result. The old "...we don't have enough money to do this or that" doesn't cut it...if you can't do it right, why do it at all? Pick fewer sites and do them right!

Just my thoughts...I'm not a trophy hunter. I hunt mainly for the joy of being in the woods and secondly, for the meat. I only hunt WMAs and I usually take 2 or 3 deer a year. That's more than plenty of meat for me for the year. I have several mature bucks (with very big horns) in my WMA (and several mature doe too) that I will never kill. In my mind, they are populating the area...but that's just me.

-AlanK

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: Potential 3 point Rule -- Jim ((Excellent Points made by all)), 04/26/07 11:23:20am
Re: Potential 3 point Rule -- Wayne Davis, 04/26/07 11:33:58am
- Re: Potential 3 point Rule -- Jim, 04/27/07 2:06:01pm
  - Re: Potential 3 point Rule -- Markm, 05/ 1/07 1:00:01pm