approved 11 out of the 14 times it was voted on but in the end it failed. “The public was divided on the issue, though more appeared in favor then those against. Most of the opposition revolved around the fact that people didn’t want the government telling them how they had to manage their land. In addition, some merchants wanted to be reimbursed if the movement caused lost revenues. There was also a very vocal group of local hunters who didn’t want to see any change from the way things had been done in the past.” Said Nate Tripp, who was a deer biologist who was involved in the project.Another major problem is caused by people called “advantage takers.” These are people that will set up hunting stands along the property lines of hunters that practice Quality Deer Management. These people realize that they will have a better chance to take the bucks – mostly yearlings and 2 year old bucks – that Quality Deer Management landowners want to protect. The rise of land prices also contributes to the problems facing Quality Deer Management. Sometimes you’ll get landowners that have practiced Quality Deer Management for many years, then sell small parts of their land for much more then its worth. People will see the advertisement in the paper and see that its been under Quality Deer Management for so long; they’ll buy the land, and overhunt it for a couple of years and then sell it again. The price that hunting land sells for has gone up so much that it is now more expensive to buy hunting land then farm land. Despite land prices, small parcels of land, low doe harvest, and opposing public opinion, I think the benefits of Quality Deer Management far outweigh the drawbacks. Before my hunting group began practicing Quality Deer Management, my hunting partners followed the old saying “If its brown, its down.” Even though I haven’t fully broken them of that habit, they...
