Sportsmen of Michigan Blog

It is no secret that there is a ground swell of Michigan hunters that feel changes to current deer management is necessary. One of the most successful means of which positive change is created is through the formation of Quality Deer Management Cooperatives. Participating in a QDM co-op for the past two and a half years has been a real eye opener for me of what deer management can be in Michigan.

Positive changes to my hunting experiences and hunting areas within our cooperative have come in many different forms. Through proper management of doe populations, herd dynamics are changing dramatically. My logs from October first, through November seventh, show that the sex ratio of deer that I have observed from my stand locations is incredibly close to one to one and slightly leans toward more buck sightings.  What is more impressive is this sex ratio is being observed in a high hunter density area in southern Michigan. It is important to note that the observation data is prior to the gun opener. Will it change as gun season progresses? More than likely, but this is a solid accomplishment for a relatively new co-op.

What is also very encouraging is that the age class of bucks in the area is increasing and the amount of buck sightings above one and a half years old has increased significantly. When the sex ratio is close to being balanced the rut becomes much more intense and the amount of chasing that I have witnessed, so far this season, is far beyond what I had ever seen in my thirty plus years of hunting. Are you like many Michigan hunters that think that calling and rattling just don’t seem to work? If so, I urge you to try them at the right time of the season in area that has a near balanced sex ratio and that has at least a few bucks that are older than one and a half years. Don’t throw out your collection of calls just yet, you may be pleasantly surprised.

Many times we have heard of, or read about, bath-tub sized scrapes but I had never actually seen one until this season. Within view from my favorite stand is a scrape easily the size of the hood on my full size pick-up. Multiple bucks check this scrape often. There are also rubs to match the large scrape on trees that are six to eight inches in diameter. Having spent countless hours perched above scrapes without much success I now realize what a productive, well used scrape looks like that actually deserves a stand nearby.

To say that I have been re-energized by my hunting experiences this year would be an understatement. Much more intense rutting activity, deer responding to calls, large rubs and scrapes, closely balanced sex ratios, increased buck age classes and many different buck sightings all create very exciting hunting experiences.

So are QDM cooperatives an affective means of deer management? My answer based on experience would be, yes, absolutely!

Without question, hunter education is an absolute key part of the deer management cycle. The Michigan Department of Natural Resources and Environment in conjunction with the Natural Resource Commission can continually alter and adjust regulations but only when Sportsmen decide to become conservationists will we have well managed deer herds in Michigan. Herds that have healthy sex ratios, improved age structures and that are sized correctly for the habitat in which they live.

Deer managers face many challenges such as over population, under population, disease, winter kill, skewed Buck / Doe ratios, habitat destruction, late fawning and shrinking body weights just to name a few. Is deer management complicated? Absolutely! But, as hunters we owe it to the White-tailed Deer that they are managed responsibly with their health, herd dynamics and habitat in mind.

There is a vast difference between what our resource professional’s game management roles are and what hunter’s game management roles are. Through a process that involves extensive scientific research the DNRE recommends and regulates. In contrast, hunters carry out the most decisive and definitive role in the management cycle, which is the harvest of game. For this reason alone it only makes sense that hunter education arguably continues to be the most important aspect of game management.

The DNRE combines extensive training and experience with scientific research in their decision making process. Conversely, hunters often make choices that are less than optimum for what is most important, herd health and solid conservation for future generations of both deer and sportsmen.

Consider this. As hunters our equipment as well as our abilities has changed immensely over the years. Muzzleloaders, rifles and shotguns shoot further with increased accuracy. Longbows and recurves have mostly been replaced by much faster and flatter shooting compounds and crossbows. We have scents, decoys, calls, improved clothing and camouflage, range finders, much improved optics and so on. All of these things have made it much easier to fill our tags. As hunters we have become much more efficient and it is more important than ever that continued conservation education becomes or stays part of our hunting experience.

As the Michigan deer seasons close in, the self appointed deer specialists begin debating what is wrong with Michigan’s deer hunting regulators and their regulations. You may be wondering, what is a self appointed deer specialist? Maybe you have heard them; they get up on their soap boxes to deliver their message to anyone that will listen about how terrible of a job our DNRE does managing wildlife. Sadly, they are most often hunters that only spend a few weekends in the woods each year and after only a few attempts, were unsuccessful at harvesting “the buck of a lifetime”. Maybe, not even successful at filling a doe tag. They become disgusted with hunting in Michigan and especially the DNRE. Soon they head down the conspiracy theory road to nowhere.

To quote a few of these self appointed deer specialists. “Our DNRE is terrible!”, “They don’t have a clue on what the deer population really is!”, “Why can’t Michigan be like Illinois, Iowa, Ohio, Wisconsin etc. etc.”, “The doe to buck ratio where I hunt must be at least 40 to1!”, “They gave out way too many doe permits again in this area!”, “We should have a mandatory phone-in check system!”, “The DNRE is made of a bunch of politicians that have their own agenda!”, “What are they trying to do, eradicate the herd by allowing five doe tags?”, “Minimum Antler Restrictions, are they crazy?”, “Baiting ban, ridiculous!”, “Michigan does not have the soil to produce big bucks!” On and on they go. It happens every year, but, never are there facts or science to back up what these deer specialists spin. There is one thing they seem to know for sure, it is clearly the DNRE’s fault no matter what the problem may be.

What I find to be very troublesome about their blame game is that many times there are complaints about an overpopulated deer herd or about an areas lopsided sex ratio, many of these “specialists” end the season with an unfilled, first of several available, doe tag in their pocket. Many of these same hunters have already filled their combo tags with a pair of one and a half year old bucks. Some have even filled their combo tags, their wife’s combo tags and maybe even their neighbor’s combo tags. They can be heard bragging to their buddies about how many bucks they have taken. These guys in particular are not hunters just as they are not deer specialists and they have no regard for conservation, the law, and the DNRE or fellow sportsmen for that matter.

The same people that complain about habitat loss, crop damage, sex ratios are often the same that refuse to harvest female deer. Individuals that complain that the DNRE does not have a good handle on deer population or harvest numbers are the same that drive straight past deer check stations each season without stopping and or do not follow harvest regulations. Hunters that complain that there are not many big bucks in an area are often the individuals that shoot the first deer they see with visible antlers. The scenarios are endless and still the DNRE takes the blame from them for poor management.

It is time to stop blaming the DNRE and take a serious look in the mirror at the most important link in the deer management chain, yes you! The DNRE cannot alone manage deer. They can only guide hunters to manage and to blame them is silly at best. Hunters  perform the last and most important management action, plain and simple. One thing that is for sure, a hunter’s decision at the point of harvest is only as good as their individual conservation education level. The DNRE can only attempt to keep us within their regulations and urge us to make good management decisions. We have no business blaming the DNRE when we choose to not utilize the tools they provide us. We must harvest our natural resources with only one thing in mind; do what is best for conservation. Also, we must make the decision to harvest using only conservation practices that have been obtained through good, sound science.

Next time a deer is in your sites make sure you have thought about why you are about to pull that trigger and be sure you pull it only at the right time at the right deer for the right reasons.