Has QDM been good for deer hunting? A different perspective!

Discuss deer hunting tactics, Deer behavior. Post your Hunting Stories, Pictures, and Questions/Answers.
  • Advertisement

HB Store


raisins
Posts: 355
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2019 1:23 pm
Status: Offline

Re: Has QDM been good for deer hunting? A different perspective!

Unread postby raisins » Wed Feb 26, 2020 1:19 am

Lu Rome wrote:
raisins wrote:
Lu Rome wrote:
stash59 wrote:We like to think that by leaving the immature bucks live, we are only allowing the older bucks to breed, and thus always passing down only the best genes. But if this is the case. Where did all of the exceptional genes we now see present in today's bucks come from? Wouldn't they have been lost/washed out, because for decades deer hunters were killing most of the bucks before they reached maturity. So I ask does it make a difference to the health of the herd. Even to the gene pool. If a buck passes down his genes when he's 1.5YO or 6.5YO?

You can't impact genetics in a wild situation. Not in the slightest. Half the genes are from mom and half are from dad and dad's half are the same no matter his age. And despite what we think, the most successful bucks only breed a few does per year and those young bucks (1-2) get roughly a quarter of the does themselves.


Correct that bucks don't get "big buck" genes simply from age.

The potential is there from birth in their DNA.

However, selectively removing from the gene pool bucks that have bad genetics (if that can be reliably determined) can certainly modify things. And only going after bucks with "big buck" genetics will tend to make the inferior bucks more likely to breed than they would under normal situations. Thankfully, by the time a buck is old enough to express his superior antler genetics, then he has already bred several times as a younger buck.

You need to read what they did on the Comanche Ranch: https://www.qdma.com/qdm-works-culling-doesnt/

I wish they would publish the final findings of that study so I could link that instead of a QDMA article.

You can impact the "standing crop" of buck by removing the lower potential ones, but you aren't impacting the genetics of the herd overall. Quit culling (removing the lower producing bucks) and you'll be right where you were previous to culling.


This might be the case for practical reasons, but it doesn't mesh with the principles of genetics and the long standing practice of artificial selection by humans to impact the genetic diversity of a species.

By definition, if you are able to remove certain genes at a higher rate, then you will make them less common within a population. I don't see anyway around that statement.


User avatar
Lu Rome
Posts: 164
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2016 4:30 pm
Location: Nebraska
Status: Offline

Re: Has QDM been good for deer hunting? A different perspective!

Unread postby Lu Rome » Wed Feb 26, 2020 2:55 am

raisins wrote:
This might be the case for practical reasons, but it doesn't mesh with the principles of genetics and the long standing practice of artificial selection by humans to impact the genetic diversity of a species.

By definition, if you are able to remove certain genes at a higher rate, then you will make them less common within a population. I don't see anyway around that statement.


In a domestic situation where you can control what buck breeds what doe, yes. However, in the wild we have no control over half of that situation because you can't manage antler potential of does (and it's questionable at best if you can in bucks). In the Comanche ranch study they took artificial selection to an extreme and still a wild situation and saw no effect. They couldn't cull enough bucks to alter genetic frequencies. When it comes to antlers there's far more to it than genetic potential. The nutrition of the mother and grandmother play into expression of those genetics (look up maternal effect from MSU and South Dakota State and epigenetics). Similarly, when people say that one area has such and such better genetics, that same research has shown that not to be true. Wild whitetail genetics are wild whitetail genetics. Research out of the University of Nebraska-Kearney is showing that bucks born in years of drought, like 2012, will be behind in antler growth the rest of their life. The buck that produced the most big buck offspring in the Comanche study was a measly 123" deer at 6 years old, so we can't even predict antler production in a buck's offspring. Most of this has to do with the fact that there's really no such thing as a "dominant buck" in whitetail breeding ecology. Most bucks breed 1-3 does a year. Additionally, research has shown that 25% of twins have separate fathers. Breeding in whitetails is very diverse and spread out among a large contingent of the male population. It's nothing like a domestic situation where a few males breed the entire herd.

What I'm saying is that we can't "artificially select" enough to impact the overall genetics of a wild herd and real world research has shown that to be true every time they've looked, it's too complex to be influenced by simply removing dink bucks.
“Curiosity never killed the cat. The cat died from stupidity, or maybe an overdose of mice.” -The Old Man
User avatar
Sailfish_WC
500 Club
Posts: 2364
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2018 4:39 am
Status: Offline

Re: Has QDM been good for deer hunting? A different perspective!

Unread postby Sailfish_WC » Wed Feb 26, 2020 3:11 am

Lu Rome wrote:You can't impact genetics in a wild situation. Not in the slightest. Half the genes are from mom and half are from dad and dad's half are the same no matter his age. And despite what we think, the most successful bucks only breed a few does per year and those young bucks (1-2) get roughly a quarter of the does themselves.



Yep I read a study that the bulk of all the breeding was done by ‘immature’ bucks
Sailfish_WC <-- Deer watcher
raisins
Posts: 355
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2019 1:23 pm
Status: Offline

Re: Has QDM been good for deer hunting? A different perspective!

Unread postby raisins » Wed Feb 26, 2020 3:19 am

Lu Rome wrote:
raisins wrote:
This might be the case for practical reasons, but it doesn't mesh with the principles of genetics and the long standing practice of artificial selection by humans to impact the genetic diversity of a species.

By definition, if you are able to remove certain genes at a higher rate, then you will make them less common within a population. I don't see anyway around that statement.


In a domestic situation where you can control what buck breeds what doe, yes. However, in the wild we have no control over half of that situation because you can't manage antler potential of does (and it's questionable at best if you can in bucks). In the Comanche ranch study they took artificial selection to an extreme and still a wild situation and saw no effect. They couldn't cull enough bucks to alter genetic frequencies. When it comes to antlers there's far more to it than genetic potential. The nutrition of the mother and grandmother play into expression of those genetics (look up maternal effect from MSU and South Dakota State and epigenetics). Similarly, when people say that one area has such and such better genetics, that same research has shown that not to be true. Wild whitetail genetics are wild whitetail genetics. Research out of the University of Nebraska-Kearney is showing that bucks born in years of drought, like 2012, will be behind in antler growth the rest of their life. The buck that produced the most big buck offspring in the Comanche study was a measly 123" deer at 6 years old, so we can't even predict antler production in a buck's offspring. Most of this has to do with the fact that there's really no such thing as a "dominant buck" in whitetail breeding ecology. Most bucks breed 1-3 does a year. Additionally, research has shown that 25% of twins have separate fathers. Breeding in whitetails is very diverse and spread out among a large contingent of the male population. It's nothing like a domestic situation where a few males breed the entire herd.

What I'm saying is that we can't "artificially select" enough to impact the overall genetics of a wild herd and real world research has shown that to be true every time they've looked, it's too complex to be influenced by simply removing dink bucks.


Interesting info. Thanks.

It seems there might be a small effect but it is swamped by other factors. In that case, you wouldn't see noticeable change over the time scale of a research study.

Of course, over the course of millions of years, a very small selective pressure can have effects as witnessed in the fossil record (I realize now I might not be in the majority in believing in evolution by natural selection).

So, I'd take a middle position that "current research does not show a noticeable effect over the shorter time scales which humans are interested in manipulating deer genetics".
User avatar
stash59
Moderator
Posts: 10077
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2014 8:22 am
Location: S Central Wi.
Status: Offline

Re: Has QDM been good for deer hunting? A different perspective!

Unread postby stash59 » Wed Feb 26, 2020 3:24 am

Sailfish_WC wrote:
Lu Rome wrote:You can't impact genetics in a wild situation. Not in the slightest. Half the genes are from mom and half are from dad and dad's half are the same no matter his age. And despite what we think, the most successful bucks only breed a few does per year and those young bucks (1-2) get roughly a quarter of the does themselves.



Yep I read a study that the bulk of all the breeding was done by ‘immature’ bucks


Some common sense also applies here. If a mature buck locks down with a doe for 3 days. If no other bucks are breeding the other does. Wouldn't the bell curve for spring births be more spread out. We'd be seeing much larger numbers of fawns being born in July and August. Especially in areas with medium deer densities and poorer buck to doe ratios. Increase the densities and many does would even go unbred for the year!
Happiness is a large gutpile!!!!!!!
User avatar
Lu Rome
Posts: 164
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2016 4:30 pm
Location: Nebraska
Status: Offline

Re: Has QDM been good for deer hunting? A different perspective!

Unread postby Lu Rome » Wed Feb 26, 2020 5:41 am

stash59 wrote:
Sailfish_WC wrote:
Lu Rome wrote:You can't impact genetics in a wild situation. Not in the slightest. Half the genes are from mom and half are from dad and dad's half are the same no matter his age. And despite what we think, the most successful bucks only breed a few does per year and those young bucks (1-2) get roughly a quarter of the does themselves.



Yep I read a study that the bulk of all the breeding was done by ‘immature’ bucks


Some common sense also applies here. If a mature buck locks down with a doe for 3 days. If no other bucks are breeding the other does. Wouldn't the bell curve for spring births be more spread out. We'd be seeing much larger numbers of fawns being born in July and August. Especially in areas with medium deer densities and poorer buck to doe ratios. Increase the densities and many does would even go unbred for the year!


Studies vary and that's going to depend on the makeup of the buck age structure of the overall herd, what I've seen has been around 25% of breeding is done by 1 and 2 year old deer.

I'm not a big believer in the full lockdown thing. I do think bucks will push does into areas where they can separate her from competitors, but I don't think they can possibly do that for a full 72 hours consistently. If 25% of litters have separate fathers, that tells me that does are moving and breeding with multiple bucks. It's likely that the does with litters sired by one male were still bred by multiple bucks. Deer aren't monogamous and it's so competitive and chaotic it's unlikely that any one buck would or could monopolize any herd or a single doe. But yes, everyone is participating in the rut.

Val Geist's book "Whitetail Tracks" describes the courtship ritual between a buck and a doe of one of a doe trying to essentially lose all the bucks she encounters and the one that's standing there when she's ready is the one that she'll stand for. His reasoning for this is that it sorts out the bucks and guarantees that the buck she breeds with is the one that's the most athletic and adept and eluding predators ensuring that those survival traits are passed on to her offspring. Does (likely) don't select based on antlers, she might learn things about health, resource use, etc from them, but they aren't a primary trait, she doesn't care if her fawns have big antlers, she cares if they can run. We see this play out when bucks are chasing does. She's testing him. Whether Dr Geist is correct in his hypothesis is yet to be seen, but that makes a lot of sense to me. I know this has gone a bit sideways from the OP, but this is fascinating stuff.
“Curiosity never killed the cat. The cat died from stupidity, or maybe an overdose of mice.” -The Old Man
raisins
Posts: 355
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2019 1:23 pm
Status: Offline

Re: Has QDM been good for deer hunting? A different perspective!

Unread postby raisins » Wed Feb 26, 2020 5:47 am

Lu Rome wrote:
stash59 wrote:
Sailfish_WC wrote:
Lu Rome wrote:You can't impact genetics in a wild situation. Not in the slightest. Half the genes are from mom and half are from dad and dad's half are the same no matter his age. And despite what we think, the most successful bucks only breed a few does per year and those young bucks (1-2) get roughly a quarter of the does themselves.



Yep I read a study that the bulk of all the breeding was done by ‘immature’ bucks


Some common sense also applies here. If a mature buck locks down with a doe for 3 days. If no other bucks are breeding the other does. Wouldn't the bell curve for spring births be more spread out. We'd be seeing much larger numbers of fawns being born in July and August. Especially in areas with medium deer densities and poorer buck to doe ratios. Increase the densities and many does would even go unbred for the year!


Studies vary and that's going to depend on the makeup of the buck age structure of the overall herd, what I've seen has been around 25% of breeding is done by 1 and 2 year old deer.

I'm not a big believer in the full lockdown thing. I do think bucks will push does into areas where they can separate her from competitors, but I don't think they can possibly do that for a full 72 hours consistently. If 25% of litters have separate fathers, that tells me that does are moving and breeding with multiple bucks. It's likely that the does with litters sired by one male were still bred by multiple bucks. Deer aren't monogamous and it's so competitive and chaotic it's unlikely that any one buck would or could monopolize any herd or a single doe. But yes, everyone is participating in the rut.

Val Geist's book "Whitetail Tracks" describes the courtship ritual between a buck and a doe of one of a doe trying to essentially lose all the bucks she encounters and the one that's standing there when she's ready is the one that she'll stand for. His reasoning for this is that it sorts out the bucks and guarantees that the buck she breeds with is the one that's the most athletic and adept and eluding predators ensuring that those survival traits are passed on to her offspring. Does (likely) don't select based on antlers, she might learn things about health, resource use, etc from them, but they aren't a primary trait, she doesn't care if her fawns have big antlers, she cares if they can run. We see this play out when bucks are chasing does. She's testing him. Whether Dr Geist is correct in his hypothesis is yet to be seen, but that makes a lot of sense to me. I know this has gone a bit sideways from the OP, but this is fascinating stuff.


I'm assuming you believe in at least evolution by natural selection to some degree (perhaps just microevolutino within species without the ability to cause speciation).

If antlers are evolved traits where the initial antlers would be smaller structures, then how do you account for the existence of larger antlers now if larger antlers do not make breeding more likely (and hence passing along bigger antler genes)?

I think current studies are short term and so not seeing the effect of the process that actually created large antlers over the course of 100s of thousands of years.
User avatar
Lu Rome
Posts: 164
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2016 4:30 pm
Location: Nebraska
Status: Offline

Re: Has QDM been good for deer hunting? A different perspective!

Unread postby Lu Rome » Wed Feb 26, 2020 5:49 am

raisins wrote:
Interesting info. Thanks.

It seems there might be a small effect but it is swamped by other factors. In that case, you wouldn't see noticeable change over the time scale of a research study.

Of course, over the course of millions of years, a very small selective pressure can have effects as witnessed in the fossil record (I realize now I might not be in the majority in believing in evolution by natural selection).

So, I'd take a middle position that "current research does not show a noticeable effect over the shorter time scales which humans are interested in manipulating deer genetics".

Well, yeah if there were evolutionary pressures that selected for one size of antlers over another, you would see a change. But unless the survival factors that impact all whitetail survival (not just hunting pressure) change as well (resources and costs of antler size) that would benefit one size of antlers over another, we aren't going to see a change in antlers. And correct, it's not on a timeframe that anybody here will ever see, but that's not what we're talking about anyway. The 10 year timeframe is about what was shown to have an effect during the studies that showed the maternal effect, 2-4 generations.
“Curiosity never killed the cat. The cat died from stupidity, or maybe an overdose of mice.” -The Old Man
User avatar
Lu Rome
Posts: 164
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2016 4:30 pm
Location: Nebraska
Status: Offline

Re: Has QDM been good for deer hunting? A different perspective!

Unread postby Lu Rome » Wed Feb 26, 2020 6:11 am

raisins wrote:
I'm assuming you believe in at least evolution by natural selection to some degree (perhaps just microevolutino within species without the ability to cause speciation).

If antlers are evolved traits where the initial antlers would be smaller structures, then how do you account for the existence of larger antlers now if larger antlers do not make breeding more likely (and hence passing along bigger antler genes)?

I think current studies are short term and so not seeing the effect of the process that actually created large antlers over the course of 100s of thousands of years.

Bigger antlers are advantageous in breeding, but not in regard to the doe, they are better for fighting other males and are often correlated with larger body size.

All tools/weapons end up in a "sweet spot" where they are advantageous to the individual in resource allocation (in this case females and wrestling with other males in defense of her) and so costly that they decrease survival beyond what they gain in reproduction. Doug Emlen's book "Animal Weapons" is great. Or just listen to the Meateater podcast that they did with him, Episode 180 https://www.themeateater.com/listen/mea ... -and-claws . Bigger weapons are advantageous only to a certain extent.
“Curiosity never killed the cat. The cat died from stupidity, or maybe an overdose of mice.” -The Old Man
User avatar
Kraftd
500 Club
Posts: 2819
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 3:44 pm
Location: NE IL
Status: Offline

Re: Has QDM been good for deer hunting? A different perspective!

Unread postby Kraftd » Wed Feb 26, 2020 6:27 am

I think the whole direction this conversation headed is very interesting in relation to the question posed by Stash. People care a heck of a lot more about deer science, focused mostly on the preference for big antlers, now than they did 30, 50, 80 years ago.

I tend to think its good, but the focus on antlers over all else in the industry as a whole has assuredly had as many detrimental impacts as positive. Mostly focused on loss of ready access to hunting land and a subsequent degradation in public land quality due to the cost associated with the antler boom.

Overall I think QDM proper has done a tone to advance the science of whitetail deer, but portions of that have been corrupted and misused, as is usually the case...
raisins
Posts: 355
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2019 1:23 pm
Status: Offline

Re: Has QDM been good for deer hunting? A different perspective!

Unread postby raisins » Wed Feb 26, 2020 6:54 am

Kraftd wrote:I think the whole direction this conversation headed is very interesting in relation to the question posed by Stash. People care a heck of a lot more about deer science, focused mostly on the preference for big antlers, now than they did 30, 50, 80 years ago.

I tend to think its good, but the focus on antlers over all else in the industry as a whole has assuredly had as many detrimental impacts as positive. Mostly focused on loss of ready access to hunting land and a subsequent degradation in public land quality due to the cost associated with the antler boom.

Overall I think QDM proper has done a tone to advance the science of whitetail deer, but portions of that have been corrupted and misused, as is usually the case...


I'd say that improvements in conservation has made deer populations increase to the point where trophy hunting can even be a thing. 60 years ago people hardly saw deer. As it became easier to take just a deer, then people weren't satisfied with that level of difficulty.

Also, equipment has made it easier.

My boss was giving me a hard time because I don't just shoot does for meat, and he thought I was some sort of creep for not doing it just for meat. I explained to him that after many years hunting that if I simply shot the first does or small bucks I saw, then my season would be over in less than a week and I wouldn't get to hunt anymore that year. So, I target mature bucks (which for me around here means minimum 8 point with 14 inch outside spread).

As a WV public land hunter, I simply want a mature buck and not a doe or buck so young that he is easy to take. I want a long, challenging season.
User avatar
stash59
Moderator
Posts: 10077
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2014 8:22 am
Location: S Central Wi.
Status: Offline

Re: Has QDM been good for deer hunting? A different perspective!

Unread postby stash59 » Wed Feb 26, 2020 3:43 pm

Lu Rome wrote:
stash59 wrote:
Sailfish_WC wrote:
Lu Rome wrote:You can't impact genetics in a wild situation. Not in the slightest. Half the genes are from mom and half are from dad and dad's half are the same no matter his age. And despite what we think, the most successful bucks only breed a few does per year and those young bucks (1-2) get roughly a quarter of the does themselves.



Yep I read a study that the bulk of all the breeding was done by ‘immature’ bucks


Some common sense also applies here. If a mature buck locks down with a doe for 3 days. If no other bucks are breeding the other does. Wouldn't the bell curve for spring births be more spread out. We'd be seeing much larger numbers of fawns being born in July and August. Especially in areas with medium deer densities and poorer buck to doe ratios. Increase the densities and many does would even go unbred for the year!


Studies vary and that's going to depend on the makeup of the buck age structure of the overall herd, what I've seen has been around 25% of breeding is done by 1 and 2 year old deer.

I'm not a big believer in the full lockdown thing. I do think bucks will push does into areas where they can separate her from competitors, but I don't think they can possibly do that for a full 72 hours consistently. If 25% of litters have separate fathers, that tells me that does are moving and breeding with multiple bucks. It's likely that the does with litters sired by one male were still bred by multiple bucks. Deer aren't monogamous and it's so competitive and chaotic it's unlikely that any one buck would or could monopolize any herd or a single doe. But yes, everyone is participating in the rut.

Val Geist's book "Whitetail Tracks" describes the courtship ritual between a buck and a doe of one of a doe trying to essentially lose all the bucks she encounters and the one that's standing there when she's ready is the one that she'll stand for. His reasoning for this is that it sorts out the bucks and guarantees that the buck she breeds with is the one that's the most athletic and adept and eluding predators ensuring that those survival traits are passed on to her offspring. Does (likely) don't select based on antlers, she might learn things about health, resource use, etc from them, but they aren't a primary trait, she doesn't care if her fawns have big antlers, she cares if they can run. We see this play out when bucks are chasing does. She's testing him. Whether Dr Geist is correct in his hypothesis is yet to be seen, but that makes a lot of sense to me. I know this has gone a bit sideways from the OP, but this is fascinating stuff.


I didn't feel like typing alot so I greatly over simplified my point. Yeah I knew does often carry fawns from 2 sires. Can't remember if I actually saw the percentage though. And I agree, I don't buy into the 72 hour lockdown as the norm. It can happen but maybe at best, about the same as multiple sires.

Never heard/read that theory of Geist's. It does have some merit. And is kind of common sense. Thanx for sharing. Yes, it is interesting.
Happiness is a large gutpile!!!!!!!
User avatar
Lu Rome
Posts: 164
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2016 4:30 pm
Location: Nebraska
Status: Offline

Re: Has QDM been good for deer hunting? A different perspective!

Unread postby Lu Rome » Thu Feb 27, 2020 2:44 am

stash59 wrote:
I didn't feel like typing alot so I greatly over simplified my point. Yeah I knew does often carry fawns from 2 sires. Can't remember if I actually saw the percentage though. And I agree, I don't buy into the 72 hour lockdown as the norm. It can happen but maybe at best, about the same as multiple sires.

Never heard/read that theory of Geist's. It does have some merit. And is kind of common sense. Thanx for sharing. Yes, it is interesting.

Ya I got what you were saying, I just felt like explaining/sharing more. :lol: I get a kick out of these things.
“Curiosity never killed the cat. The cat died from stupidity, or maybe an overdose of mice.” -The Old Man


  • Advertisement

Return to “Deer Hunting”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Jackson Marsh, Jonny, Rib Splitter37 and 97 guests