Trophy Deer Management
Wisconsin
I own a smaller parcel of hunting land in central Wisconsin. 15+ years we and many of our neighbors have been passing up deer 2.5 years or younger. We have been very happy with the results. There is a push in the neighborhood (2,000 or so acres) to up the minimum to 170". There would be options for first time hunters and kids.
Has anyone ever heard of such a thing or been part of such a program? How is it/did it work? Can it even work in theory? Can it work in practice?
I have never heard of such high minimums. I think it would work if everyone is truly on board, but really there are not many that will pass a 150-169 inch deer. Honestly, i couldn't. I would guess any buck shot below the minimum would go unreported. A 170 inch deer is rare, very rare. Even on some of the most highly managed properties they are very rare.
A few things -
QDM is not the same as Trophy Deer Management - this is TDM.
Please keep it civil, I'm looking for your thoughts and your experiences.
Please don't ramble on how big deer racks are killing our sport. Let's move passed that and stick to my issue/questions.
Thanks.
170 is an unrealistic Tdm goal IMO. 150 sb the goal. 1) how many can truly score on the hoof inside of 1 minute? 2) Tdm is typically a no doe harvest,strict rules on day lite land use situation. Doe harvest would have to be done post gun season in dec. if needed. Most bucks will never break 150 ever. The goal should really be taking mature bucks regardless of score. You will be frustrated with guys not being able to score live bucks and 170 bucks are a every 5 year freak in the best areas. Good luck.
That seems like a very aggressive goal! Does your area have the ability to produce such bucks? Do you have history with deer that large? I have family that owns land in the "shawano, waupaca co. buck belt" They have practiced QDMA for about 8 yrs now and only shoot 5.5+ bucks, they kill some nice bucks but I believe the largest was a 178" 6.5yr old. They have shot numerous 160 class deer including a 13pt with 21" spread and double drop tines that was 168" which would be off limits in your senerio and I don't know how the heck you would pass up a deer like that.
I have land in Waushara co. and locally we are lucky to get 140" on a 5.5yr old buck. I have a 4.5 yr running around this year with a 115" rack....we have ag land, plenty of browse, and I do a few acres of food plots also so the habitat is good, just don't get them growing large racks. I have a doe ratio issue that I am trying to address along with neighbor cooperation to deal with.
Also in your senerio bucks that are not capable of growing 170 class antlers are just free to breed and then grow old and die? That would be counter productive to what your trying to accomplish. I would increase your age target to 4.5 set a 140 min if you want. Create better habitat, harvest doe, oh crap I am going on a QDMA rant! OUT!
Lots of bucks never see 170 no matter how long they live. I think that would take the fun out of it for me and would never agree to that myself.
I cant see the day where I wouldn't shoot a 140, but years ago I thought that about a 120.
For me its about fun and time in the woods with family and friends with a realistic chance of a nice buck.
My standards change thru the season, this week I have passed several 120-125~ deer and was tempted but vacation just started. Have plans for Michigan by the 14th so the 120s are in trouble by Nov. Late season could be smaller yet depending on whats in freezer and what property Im on that day.
I think you'd need loads of trail cameras and lots of communication amongst all the neighbors to share all the pics. Maybe a Sharepoint or Shutterfly site. You would need to find deer on your cameras and track them from 1.5 until mature and then decide if any one them should be shot because they won't reach the potential. With your TDM concept, it would be more important to get inferior genes out of the pool and hence "cull" or "management" kills (man I hate both those terms) would come into play. What you are proposing is how much of Texas is run on the those large ranches. With 5000 acres, you are right in line there too.
Lots of coordination would be needed across multiple owners with strict guidelines (doe management, feeding, etc) and results management.
I find the overall structure of this to not be realistic or achievable for a multitude of reasons. First, and foremost, most wild deer will never be 170" deer. The area of central Wisconsin has some pockets, but without mineral feeding year 'round the land just cannot produce this kind of deer. Next, I don't know of any blocks of 5,000 acres in central Wisconsin where outside influence wouldn't pick through these deer over time. -Remember, there's a lot of money and time everyone would need to invest by means of taxes, and simply withdrawing from the trigger. However, one "bad" can ruin a lot. "Bad" being someone who wouldn't abide by those rules--I would be "bad" if I owned property next to it as well as I would be shooting 5.5 y/o deer less than 170".
Not saying it is entirely impossible, just highly impossible and impractical. Keep us posted on this one.
"we and many of our neighbors have been passing up deer 2.5 years or younger"
What was the average size that you have been shooting the last 15 years? Have any gone 170?
Agree with many responses so far and believe that's something each "trophy hunter" can decide on his or her own. If something like this does go through, I'll bet it'll divide more hunters in that 5,000 acres than it'll bring together for a wide variety of reasons, including deer that are shot and deer that aren't. You can't just stockpile giant bucks. Some will get hit by cars, some poached, some die of wounds/old age and a few will get locked with other monsters (the end result which is often death by hunter or death by exhaustion/lack of water/drowning, etc.). Let 'em go, let 'em grow, sure, but it's a mistake if not taken when they're in their prime, no matter what size the rack is.
Just to be clear, I'm not proposing this. I haven't been approach yet but will be. A small land owner neighbor that lives in the area heard about it. It seems to have been proposed by several of the largest land owners.
The average deer shot off my land is less than 125. I haven't aged all of them, but my guess is that some of those have been 2.5 year olds. The biggest deer off my land was a 135 inch 10 that made PandY, the other biggest one was shot with gun that was about 130.
Only 1 170" that I know of for sure has taken in this area. I don't hear of all or most of the big ones taken so I would guess more have.
The biggest one I've ever had on trail cam was an exceptional non typical that I believe scored almost if not over 200.
Thanks for your points, all are valid and I can't really say I disagree with any of them.
Well on a positive note at least your neighbors are not hanging several yearling bucks on their meat poles... want to trade? ;)
Tried it once years ago . Didn't work . November is dead on .
I would not do it. These larger land owners are trying to get everyone in that area to buy into it and yet they will be the only ones that benefit of taking a 170 class deer. You said it yourself that the largest you have taken off your parcel was a 135 so you have to improve that score by 35 points to even think of harvesting a deer. It's not all about the horn but about getting out, having a good time, seeing some deer and taking a respectable 125-135 class deer once in a while.
I think you have to look at age class as a tool for your area. Most hunters start out shooting 1 1/2 year olds until they get an inch for something bigger. It's natural to start passing them and wait on 2 1/2 year olds and so on.
A 3 1/2 year-old buck is a nice buck anywhere in the state and could be your goal if you choose so. A trophy is in the eye of the beholder. You will know when shooting a 2 1/2 year old isn't the thrill you were seeking on your hunt.
Good luck!
If they are talking about and want to implement it, your friendships are pretty much over after that. Either you will shoot one too small and they will be pi$$ed or you and other land owners will go too long without filling a tag that the enjoyment will be gone and you or they will start to despise whoever wanted to start it in the first place. If you don't join their "co-op" they will be mad and accuse you of shooting all the "small" bucks. It's a no win, unless you really don't care if you shoot another buck in your hunting years. Age is the only true way to do it, if you want to, then after that there needs to be culling. If you cull, you need enough hunters out there to cull all that need to be culled. If not, it is a waste of time. Once the "inferior" bucks are all culled, you need to watch, somehow, which does are producing "large" buck fawns and "small" buck fawns. Then you need to cull those does producing "inferior" bucks, basically impossible to do with a wild herd.
A question back to you, How do these landowners plan to keep these "superior" buck fawns on this 6000 acres and "inferior" buck fawns off as they start to mature and move to new areas? What is the shape of the 6000 acres, is it longer and narrow or a square? 6000 acres is only 9 square miles, if it is a square it is only 1.5 miles to any side from the middle, if it is anything other than square the distance gets less to a side, the last I read, a mature buck will easily travel that in a day during the rut. The only owner to truly benefit from a strong TDM with, extreme culling, is the owner in the very middle of the 6000 acres. Without culling, the genetics have a better chance of dropping in quality than rising due to the fact that the "superior" deer are the ones being shot and "inferior" bucks will only die of old age, breeding as long as they can.
IMO 170 is unrealistic. You may want to look at who is proposing this. They have been practicing TDM expecting better results on their property only to find out that the deer are not leaving other properties. It would be kind of backward logic but maybe they see upping the ante as a way to improve their buck numbers even though the TDM for the rest of you has been successful. Unfortunately, it is not always going to be equal for everyone.
I edited my original post, maybe 2,000 acres not 5,000. No sure where that number came from.
Ruger, please go into more detail. When? Where? What happened? I'm really interested in your first hand experience.
All, Thanks for posting! Any others?
Google comet creek whitetail hunting thats 5,000 acres under tdm in shawano county 140? Sure consiistent 170 plus? Nope buffalo county would be tag soup most uears on 170 stuff
My family has 700 acres borders another 500 that has no hunting pressure or use at all. Our neighbor we border south and west has 2800 acres. We have owned ours for 25 years now. We have gone through many phases efforts and unrealistic attempts. 170" even on our combine lands and efforts has happened 1 time in the last 10 years. several 160's, and many 130-150's. Try to only harvest mature deer. Manage does. Food plots, mineral, managed logging, water holes, etc. We have put in the time, labor and effort. Enjoy your land shoot some nice deer and the occasional giant. Live in the 130-150 get the 160 plus on occasion.
We have a neighbor that says he wants everyone to pass anything that's under 170. We just say ok and smile because we know that's not realistic. We are careful what we shoot but anything over 140 is in trouble. I believe anything over 150 is a buck of a lifetime for most.
There are deer that have been scored (green, and by "generous" scorers, too) that were put in that 160-180 range. Most are lucky to hit 140-150 when officially scored.
I know there are some guys that never get a deer officially scored, and sometimes it's for the reasons above (they like generous, gross, green scores), but overall, I'd say the majority of "Booners" get scored each year.
Now consider this: In 2013, there were only two bow bucks in the whole state that topped 170 — Bayfield and Langlade counties (Barron and Crawford had a pair less than two inches off). There were a few Booner bow non-typicals (Waukesha, Price and Columbia), as well as two gun non-typical Booners (Dodge and Crawford). Only three gun bucks topped 170 (Vernon, Pepin and Sauk counties).
On another note, when more giants go in the books next year, I hope we don't have guys saying it's "illegal" crossbow kills going in. Bow giants have topped gun bucks quite often in one or more categories in the past decade. Granted, some could be illegal kills (gun, crossbow, night, fenced, etc.), but more likely, they're legit. If you want someone making up smack about you, just shoot a giant!
Run, Neighbors like that are hard to deal with as they are clueless. Some times trying to educate them leads to problems. You have to decide how to proceed.
Screwball, Right on! 170 plus is so uncommon, it is freakish. Watching today's outdoor shows would make it seem different.
If your area is into TDM, then I can understand a 135" minimum. That pretty much allows each buck a free pass until he is 4 years old.
But 170" minimum, to me is just way too high and unrealistic. I would guess it would result in only 1 successful hunter per year at most with all the hunters going home empty. Not sure if I could enjoy hunting there, if I knew that my chances of being "allowed" to pull the trigger were so slim.
I hunt over 700 acres of continous private land. surrounded by big woods and farm fields on all borders. My group has unofficially tried to let little bucks grow (all but 2-3 of the 16-20 guys in the group will pass up yearling and other bucks below 100 inches) We have been doing this since around 2000, and in that time we have managed to harvest 1-2 bucks of 100-115" each year, and another 1-2 116-125" each year. We have also only harvest 6 bucks over 130" in that time, with the largest being a 144" 8 pointer.
My point being, it is HARD to grow a buck to 170" when it is a free range buck. Could be many, many years of frustration and disappointment in your future.
Thanks for the info guys. Screwball, can you add some details on your experience?
Other comments, experiences, ideas, etc. are welcome as well.
