Down

[bowhunter1023]

Hell of a good point Brock.....there are guys here that I know that are shooting does and then just donating them to hunters feeding hungry programs, and then they are the same guys complaining about the lack of deer sightings.

I did the same until the 2009 season rolled around. At that point, we started to approach things with a different view and it has not seemed to help. Are my neighbors to blame? I'm sure they are not helping me, but at the same time, the DNR is enabling the blood thirst...

 

[Gern186]

While it is true I am providing them with food and cover, I am just a small fraction of what is available in the immediate area. We have never held a lot of deer and even in the prime of that farm, we were holding what I felt was a small percentage of the local herd. (For me, the local herd encompasses about a 1,500 acre area that I am able to keep generally close tabs on.) Since we bought the farm here is what has happened harvest wise...

We killed zero deer in 2005. In 2006, there were 5 deer killed with two being button bucks and one being a wounded buck that would have died within a day or two of when we killed him (just two does). That same here, I watched 12 does and one buck in a late season group, leaving me with hope that things were just fine for coming years. In 2007, I killed 3 does and my buddy killed one. After a solid year of reducing number, I felt it was now time to be cautious with our doe harvests. In 2008, I killed one yearling doe and Matt killed one mature doe. In 2009, we killed one doe and one buck. Last season, we killed a button buck that was wounded; a mercy kill. In the span from 2009 to current, my doe numbers/sightings have continued to decline despite my efforts to give them food, security, and safety.

Jesse,

I think it could be a fair assumption that a lot of your deer are getting shot under the cover of darkness.

 

[brock ratcliff]

I did the same until the 2009 season rolled around. At that point, we started to approach things with a different view and it has not seemed to help. Are my neighbors to blame? I'm sure they are not helping me, but at the same time, the DNR is enabling the blood thirst...

Enabling? More like encouraging.

 

[jagermeister]

While it is true I am providing them with food and cover, I am just a small fraction of what is available in the immediate area. We have never held a lot of deer and even in the prime of that farm, we were holding what I felt was a small percentage of the local herd. (For me, the local herd encompasses about a 1,500 acre area that I am able to keep generally close tabs on.) Since we bought the farm here is what has happened harvest wise...

We killed zero deer in 2005. In 2006, there were 5 deer killed with two being button bucks and one being a wounded buck that would have died within a day or two of when we killed him (just two does). That same here, I watched 12 does and one buck in a late season group, leaving me with hope that things were just fine for coming years. In 2007, I killed 3 does and my buddy killed one. After a solid year of reducing number, I felt it was now time to be cautious with our doe harvests. In 2008, I killed one yearling doe and Matt killed one mature doe. In 2009, we killed one doe and one buck. Last season, we killed a button buck that was wounded; a mercy kill. In the span from 2009 to current, my doe numbers/sightings have continued to decline despite my efforts to give them food, security, and safety.

See, this is exactly what I'm talking about. This makes absolutely no sense to me at all. You're doing everything right... extensive management and limiting anterless harvest... yet the deer population is still seemingly declining where you hunt. I understand the properties you hunt are only a small piece of the puzzle, but I've seen deer pile up to seek refuge on much smaller properties than the ones you're hunting. Add to the fact that hardly any hunters in Ohio are killing more than one deer in a season. It just doesn't add up for me. Everyone is saying that they're not seeing deer and hence not killing deer... So if you're not killing them, who is? Where are they going then?

 

[Gern186]

Zombies are gettin them!

I hear stories all the time about some of the stuff that goes on down in the hills and hollers from guys up here that have relatives down there. It sounds to me like they shoot deer year round down there or whenever they want some fresh meat. I know a guy that is a salesman here at work that is from Washington county and he has told me many stories like this....

 

[jagermeister]

Zombies are gettin them!

I hear stories all the time about some of the stuff that goes on down in the hills and hollers from guys up here that have relatives down there. It sounds to me like they shoot deer year round down there or whenever they want some fresh meat. I know a guy that is a salesman here at work that is from Washington county and he has told me many stories like this....

All joking aside, this is what I'm getting at. I think there is more involved that's not being accounted for... whether intentionally or not. Poaching, natural predation... something.

 

[bowhunter1023]

Everyone is saying that they're not seeing deer and hence not killing deer... So if you're not killing them, who is? Where are they going then?

I believe poaching and coyotes are without a doubt two major issues right now. Coyotes are killing a lot of our deer and you'll hear that from a decent portion of the population down here. As for the poaching, I have no sort of hard evidence it is happening. However, I can think of 3-4 people in the neighborhood that I would not put it past and since there are some great places to spotlight in this area, I have no doubts it is contributing to the decline in our numbers...

 

[brock ratcliff]

I am really starting to believe it is not such a factor as the number of tags issued, but the amount of "lethal" time available. Let me explain; Obviously we have more days than ever with shotguns...9 vs 6 formerly...the three extra days are on the weekend whereas there was only one weekend day years ago. The success rate goes up tremendously due to that I assume. The improvements in muzzleloaders have greatly increased not only participation, but success rates as well. The very same in equipment improvements and participation can be said for archery seasons. Not many folks are killing multiple deer, but such a higher percentage of hunters are killin A deer. When the success rate goes up from 20 % to 50% on a single deer harvest, that is huge. Roughly 450,000 hunters kill rate of 20% is 90K deer. Give them more time with more effective weapons, that same group with only a single tag and 50% success will kill 225K deer. This only occurred to me the other day when I looked at the Fayette County gun kill numbers. There was only a slight decrease (114 last year to 104 this year) even though the tag numbers were greatly reduced. I think whining about liberal bag limits may be a waste of time, reducing time in the field would have the greatest impact.

 

[brock ratcliff]

I believe poaching and coyotes are without a doubt two major issues right now. Coyotes are killing a lot of our deer and you'll hear that from a decent portion of the population down here. As for the poaching, I have no sort of hard evidence it is happening. However, I can think of 3-4 people in the neighborhood that I would not put it past and since there are some great places to spotlight in this area, I have no doubts it is contributing to the decline in our numbers...

Spotlighting has been a tradition in the hills of Ohio since the first two cell light was invented....

 

[bowhunter1023]

I am really starting to believe it is not such a factor as the number of tags issued, but the amount of "lethal" time available. Let me explain; Obviously we have more days than ever with shotguns...9 vs 6 formerly...the three extra days are on the weekend whereas there was only one weekend day years ago. The success rate goes up tremendously due to that I assume. The improvements in muzzleloaders have greatly increased not only participation, but success rates as well. The very same in equipment improvements and participation can be said for archery seasons. Not many folks are killing multiple deer, but such a higher percentage of hunters are killin A deer. When the success rate goes up from 20 % to 50% on a single deer harvest, that is huge. Roughly 450,000 hunters kill rate of 20% is 90K deer. Give them more time with more effective weapons, that same group with only a single tag and 50% success will kill 225K deer. This only occurred to me the other day when I looked at the Fayette County gun kill numbers. There was only a slight decrease (114 last year to 104 this year) even though the tag numbers were greatly reduced. I think whining about liberal bag limits may be a waste of time, reducing time in the field would have the greatest impact.

I'm agree with this 100%. I believe the DNR has been ignoring obvious intangibles while adding seasons in addition to tags. I can live with the tags if the days afield are cut. Right now, I'd like to see the bonus weekend eliminated and muzzleloader shortened to two days. And this is coming from someone that loves muzzleloader season and where it sits right now!!!

 

[Schu72]

I am really starting to believe it is not such a factor as the number of tags issued, but the amount of "lethal" time available. Let me explain; Obviously we have more days than ever with shotguns...9 vs 6 formerly...the three extra days are on the weekend whereas there was only one weekend day years ago. The success rate goes up tremendously due to that I assume. The improvements in muzzleloaders have greatly increased not only participation, but success rates as well. The very same in equipment improvements and participation can be said for archery seasons. Not many folks are killing multiple deer, but such a higher percentage of hunters are killin A deer. When the success rate goes up from 20 % to 50% on a single deer harvest, that is huge. Roughly 450,000 hunters kill rate of 20% is 90K deer. Give them more time with more effective weapons, that same group with only a single tag and 50% success will kill 225K deer. This only occurred to me the other day when I looked at the Fayette County gun kill numbers. There was only a slight decrease (114 last year to 104 this year) even though the tag numbers were greatly reduced. I think whining about liberal bag limits may be a waste of time, reducing time in the field would have the greatest impact.

Unfortunately they are not looking at limiting opportunities, but extending them even furher with an early antlerless muzzy season. Just what we need.:smiley_blackeye:

 

[brock ratcliff]

Exactly. From my perspective, I can't help but think Tonk either is way off base on his estimate of the herd, or actually wants to take it back to what it was in the 70's. We had deer then too, you just didn't see them very often in the majority of the State. Maybe that is the goal.

 

[Lundy]

I am really starting to believe it is not such a factor as the number of tags issued, but the amount of "lethal" time available. Let me explain; Obviously we have more days than ever with shotguns...9 vs 6 formerly...the three extra days are on the weekend whereas there was only one weekend day years ago. The success rate goes up tremendously due to that I assume. The improvements in muzzleloaders have greatly increased not only participation, but success rates as well. The very same in equipment improvements and participation can be said for archery seasons. Not many folks are killing multiple deer, but such a higher percentage of hunters are killin A deer. When the success rate goes up from 20 % to 50% on a single deer harvest, that is huge. Roughly 450,000 hunters kill rate of 20% is 90K deer. Give them more time with more effective weapons, that same group with only a single tag and 50% success will kill 225K deer. This only occurred to me the other day when I looked at the Fayette County gun kill numbers. There was only a slight decrease (114 last year to 104 this year) even though the tag numbers were greatly reduced. I think whining about liberal bag limits may be a waste of time, reducing time in the field would have the greatest impact.

How does that explain a nearly flat harvest from 2006 ( high deer sightings for everyone) to 2010 ( sightings were down)

If the same general number of deer are being killed every year, why has the herd reduced?

Total kill
2006 - 237,316
2007 - 232,854
2008 - 252,017
2009 - 261, 260
2010 - 239,475

To listen to many here you would believe that the deer herd totals are way below what they were in 2006 and 2007, even 2008, yet there is no harvest data showing 400,000 deer killed in a single year. Where did the deer go? They weren't reduced through reported harvests

 

[brock ratcliff]

If there are ten deer in a woodlot, you can kill four of them. If there are five deer in a woodlot, you can still kill four of them. It's not the number killed, but the number that survived that will dictate what is seen the following year.

 

[Milo]

Great point brock

 

[brock ratcliff]

Mike Rex is good friends with Tonk. He told Mike T my concerns a year or two ago, and Mike T actually called me to discuss them. That impressed me. The only time I felt like I may have made a point he had not already considered was when I gave him that exact scenerio. His response was " Wouldn't we eventually see a down turn in the harvest numbers?" ... Yes, we are now and it isn't the acorns, inclement weather, or standing corn.

 

[Dannmann801]

I think the greatest mis-justice of the liberal bag limits over the last few years is that people have naturally de-valued a doe. Over the last decade, the non-sense thinking of taking a doe to "help the herd" does not apply to Ohio. When you see the Drury's or Jay Greggory in Iowa saying that, and shooting a few does...its just a different world. I was on Jay's Iowa farm in Sept. They have more deer than most of us can imagine. They actually need to shoot a good number of them because that area is infested with them...they are running around like rats in a grain bin! The DOW pushing that line of thinking in such a heavily populated and hunted state like Ohio was very effective - it reduced the herd size dramatically (at least in the areas I am familiar). I understand that was their goal. What I find concerning is the fact they still claim the herd to be growing. Each year they estimate a higher population. That causes me to loose all faith in their methods because it does not correlate to what I see.

This is a good post.
And there are probably areas where the herd is growing - urban areas. Which draw attention.

 

[Dannmann801]

Exactly. From my perspective, I can't help but think Tonk either is way off base on his estimate of the herd, or actually wants to take it back to what it was in the 70's. We had deer then too, you just didn't see them very often in the majority of the State. Maybe that is the goal.

Somebody needs to define the goal, and the reasons.
That goal don't work for me.

 

[Kaiser878]

I already have written Tonk on more than one occasion. I also did his "survey".


Show me where I am actually whining and bitching.



Show me where I have ever said this.
M


Yes, you don't know so be quiet about it. Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt...



Your right again but it has nothing to do with deer numbers being down.

Kaiser you are so stuck on yourself you can't even read or comprehend what someone else is saying. Hell, you don't care enough to listen to what people have to say. Your "me" complex shines through pretty stong and everyone sees it. You kill big deer :smiley_clap: My largest doesn't compare to yours. You feel better? I could give a shit. I am not a braggart. I am not a whiner. Many here know me and they know this. Ha, wish this was an actual camp fire. Prick..

I have plenty of bucks on property. The does are just gone. I was actually going to type out what I have said at least a dozen times but not going to. You probably won't read it anyway. Since this last part isn't about you.

First off..I don't have a me complex. I have made an open invite to several people.from this forum to come hunt. Stuck on myself I am not. You show me a post where I have bragged about any of my deer and how great I am and ill admit I'm wrong.

Prick? Ya I can be. And sitting around a campfire would change none of my words. Ill tell it to you in person just as I would over a computer. I'mnot shy nor am intimidated by u or anyone on here. Id be glad to have this conversation one on one in person. I've never met you. You have never met me. Nor do I care if I ever do. You withhold nothing of any importance or.value to me. Your just the typical internet hunter.

I don't want praise for my deer. I don't kill deer for other people. Just me. I have a personal goal every year. Shooting button bucks and young deer isnt one of them. I wasn't even going to post my.buck on here until there were several requests. This internet site and all the others could close up and my desire o hunt deer wouldn't dwindle a bit.

 

[Kaiser878]

I shot a big one this year.. And i will tell you right now it was 95% Property..... Period.... I find it amazing how I can hunt Vinton county for 5 years like a crackhead spending hundreds and hundreds of hours on a stand and never even tag a P&Y deer.... Yet I spend 129 hours on a stand in Champagne county and have a deer in the 130's, 140's and 150's all in bow range and end up shooting one that was in the 160's.... I passed on deer you yourself said you would have shot.. property. property, property.... Period. Just like you, there are other people hunting these properties... The don't shoot big ones, same as the people that hunt yours.. Sure I hunt smarter then them.. But that's them..... You, Me, JD, Gern, or any of the others that have tagged a big one this year, aren't better hunters than a single person here... We just hunt better properties, that doesn't make you or us some super smart Mr. Whitetail. You can't kill what's not there, doesn't make the person who hunts there any less smarter than you........ . I guarantee you that if you took one guy from here and put them on your property 99% of the guys on this board would drag a big one out... Don't believe that? I'm living proof of it! JD took me out of Vinton and put me on one of his so/so properties.. 130, 140, and one 150 in bow range before the rut! Take it from a guy who's hunted both ends of the spectrum bud... I ain't shit, You ain't shit, Jd ain't shit, Gern ain't shit..... What we ARE is lucky to hunt property that IS the shit...

I've opened the invitation to u, jesse, Ryan and a couple others. You make it sound like every property I.hunt is loaded with 140+ deer. Do u have a clue how many properties I hunt? Ill tell u this. I had not one shooter on cam until the deer showed up I killed. Still dint have any deer showing up over 140. Ill extend my offer. Ill let you or anyone else come hunt my "honey holes" and if u kill a 140+ ill pay for u to have it mounted. I guarantee u and jd both had more 140+ deer on cam on one property this year than I have had in the last 2 years combined.