Down

[bowhunter1023]

I just don't understand how you come up with these examples and completely fail to consider reproduction. You act like the remaining "un-dead" deer population is just a static number that will never increase, but instead just decrease year after year. Deer are extremely adaptable and successful at reproducing... Hence the population boom since they were nearly extinct in Ohio in the early 1900s. What I'm saying is I don't think a decrease in the population can be solely attributed to hunting and extra tags and extra time in the woods. If the population is falling off a cliff as fast as everyone here thinks it is, there HAS to be other causes. That is, unless the estimated statewide population is WAY off... But until someone proves that to me I'm not going to believe that it is. You know a population of 750,000 is only an average of 28 deer per 1000 acres in Ohio? IMO, that's not a very far-fetched density.

Brock and I are touching on that now. My cameras show less fawns from less does than the averages from 2006-2007. I have WAY more coyotes on cam this year than ever before. We did have nothing bow twin fawn throwing does and now, down to one doe that threw twins this summer. With there simply being less deer who for whatever reason are now having less fawns, it could mean reproduction is actually could be a static number. Add in what has to be a higher fawn mortality rates given more predators and less targets, it is more than just the neighborhood who pounding the deer herd...

 

[Beentown]

IMHO it isn't a buck issue at all. At least for my areas. It is does. There are only a couple on cam or seen first hand at each area.

I miss going to the woods in anticipation of encounters. Now I just HOPE to see deer.

 

[bowhunter1023]

I miss going to the woods in anticipation of encounters. Now I just HOPE to see deer.

Amen brother. Amen... :smiley_clap:

 

[jagermeister]

Brock and I are touching on that now. My cameras show less fawns from less does than the averages from 2006-2007. I have WAY more coyotes on cam this year than ever before. We did have nothing bow twin fawn throwing does and now, down to one doe that threw twins this summer. With there simply being less deer who for whatever reason are now having less fawns, it could mean reproduction is actually could be a static number. Add in what has to be a higher fawn mortality rates given more predators and less targets, it is more than just the neighborhood who pounding the deer herd...

So if natural predation could be playing such a huge role here, why is everyone so quick to jump on the DOW and insist that they're intentionally screwing us? Predator/prey relationships are not something that can be realized instantaneously... especially when human hunters are added to the equation. Everyone assumes that the sky is falling and wants action taken NOW! It doesn't work that way.

 

[brock ratcliff]

I think my frustration stems from hearing about the herd GROWING when my own observations tell me otherwise. I'd just like to see that the ODOW is taking notice of the same thing I am...cause I am relatively certain I am not wrong.

 

[Gern186]

In a way, so I am Mike. I don't have the 1970's frame of reference that Chad brings up in these discussions. I've heard all the stories and understand it was a different time, but I didn't live it. What I have lived, was the climb from 1990 to the peak (which I view as 2005-2007 based on total sightings and encounters with shooters) to the recent decline beginning in 2009 for my county. I miss the "good old days" when I would hit the treestand knowing I would see deer, rarely getting skunked. It was a pleasure to simply watch deer and that is something I experienced very little this season. I don't have to kill a lot of deer to be happy with my experience in the woods. I simply want to go hunting and see deer 9 out of 10 times. It is the way things used to be in the mid-2000's in my area and that is the kind of hunting I grew to love. Call it selfish, lazy, whatever you will, but it's what I enjoyed...

1970's......come on man I'm not that old! I started hunting in the late 80's and the deer population in my area was slowly gaining hold. In 1993 the DNR implemented a 2 deer kill in my county for about 3 years in a row.....2 deer! Well, after 3 years of guys killing all the does we had virtually no deer left.....at all. Local guys were tired of seeing no deer and started taking it easy on the antlerless deer for a few years. Then around the year 2000 we started to increase the local population and it has increased every year up until about last year when they put us into Zone B-4 deer county. Now we are slowly but surely headed back to the populations of the late 90's......it is a cycle.

 

[brock ratcliff]

1970's......come on man I'm not that old! I started hunting in the late 80's and the deer population in my area was slowly gaining hold. In 1993 the DNR implemented a 2 deer kill in my county for about 3 years in a row.....2 deer! Well, after 3 years of guys killing all the does we had virtually no deer left.....at all. Local guys were tired of seeing no deer and started taking it easy on the antlerless deer for a few years. Then around the year 2000 we started to increase the local population and it has increased every year up until about last year when they put us into Zone B-4 deer county. Now we are slowly but surely headed back to the populations of the late 90's......it is a cycle.

We saw the same thing. Implementing the 2 tag season for just a year knocked the numbers back a lot!

 

[Stump]

1970's......come on man I'm not that old! I started hunting in the late 80's and the deer population in my area was slowly gaining hold. In 1993 the DNR implemented a 2 deer kill in my county for about 3 years in a row.....2 deer! Well, after 3 years of guys killing all the does we had virtually no deer left.....at all. Local guys were tired of seeing no deer and started taking it easy on the antlerless deer for a few years. Then around the year 2000 we started to increase the local population and it has increased every year up until about last year when they put us into Zone B-4 deer county. Now we are slowly but surely headed back to the populations of the late 90's......it is a cycle.

I am :smiley_depressive:...saw a deer in Montgomery county in '70 ...it was like a bigfoot sighting

 

[bowhunter1023]

......it is a cycle.

But why does it have to be that way? Why can't the great minds at the DNR, with all their degrees in wildlife biology, come up with a management strategy that balances a herd in such a manner that we have years like 2007 or 2008? I believe the honest answer is because hunter satisfaction is of little concern to them when it comes to making management decisions.

 

[brock ratcliff]

I am :smiley_depressive:...saw a deer in Montgomery county in '70 ...it was like a bigfoot sighting

Thats the point, Stump! Is that the kind of population we are trying to get back to? When I was a kid, RT 23 was a traffic jam the Sunday before gun season. Why? Because all the deer hunting took place in SE Ohio...there wasn't a huntable population throughout the majority of the State!

 

[Lundy]

Brock,

If you and others are seeing less fawn recruitement, and I am also by the way, that has nothing to do with harvest numbers.

The decline, at whatever extent it exists, can not be attributed to harvest unless the average yearly recruitement has been deminished. The harvest has not changed overall in this state for the last 5 years yet the population seems to be decreasing.

Why is it decreasing, we are not killing more deer.

Is it a ratio of buck to does shift, fawn predation or mortailty?

I see a lot of coyotes on the cameras and while hunting, numbers I would have never imagined seeing just 5-6 years ago

 

[Kaiser878]

Could this have anything to do with the 4-5 you killed last year between you, your buddies, and your dad? And others killed off through normal loss to other hunters. I remember there was a period there where you we're killing a bunch of bucks... I can tell you that If the other 8 people who hunt where I do killed the bucks I have seen this year next year would suck. But as it stands now. They look to have a good shot at making it.

THere were 4 killed. All 4 on different properties. THe distance between the two furthest properties was probably 10-12 miles. Two of the bucks were killed within a half mile of one another. One of the properties I didnt even run a cam on.

 

[Gern186]

But why does it have to be that way? Why can't the great minds at the DNR, with all their degrees in wildlife biology, come up with a management strategy that balances a herd in such a manner that we have years like 2007 or 2008? I believe the honest answer is because hunter satisfaction is of little concern to them when it comes to making management decisions.

Because there are so many variables. Why can't the stock market continue to climb every year and earn us all 15%?? Bad weather, hunter numbers, predation, road kills, acorn production, standing corn, the new tagging system, etc etc. There are so many reasons that we can't put the blame on 1 or 2 things.....but now that you mention it, I have to believe coyotes are really hurting your fawn production. If your not gettting fawn pictures on your cameras, then they just aren't there....and coyotes have to be the main reason.

 

[rgecko23]

Can anyone show me how many tags were purchased in certain zones last year or this year?

 

[bowhunter1023]

Because there are so many variables. Why can't the stock market continue to climb every year and earn us all 15%?? Bad weather, hunter numbers, predation, road kills, acorn production, standing corn, the new tagging system, etc etc. There are so many reasons that we can't put the blame on 1 or 2 things.....but now that you mention it, I have to believe coyotes are really hurting your fawn production. If your not gettting fawn pictures on your cameras, then they just aren't there....and coyotes have to be the main reason.

I agree that the coyotes are hurting me. They have been for the past few years and it is really showing up with the numbers I compiled this year. I also agree we cannot blame any one thing or person for what is going on right now. This is exactly why I want to see things managed more on a county level with our local GW being the point man. I do not believe a statewide management philosophy best suits our state as a whole, or on a county wide basis. Even within our county, there are micro-habitats that have distinct advantages. I can take you to one 2,000 acre area that is producing 200" deer on an annual basis. But even those guys were complaining about things this year. Arming the GW's with the resources and direction to micro-manage the herds within their jurisdictions, is a great way to address our current day issues without having to find the "one size fits all" cure...

 

[brock ratcliff]

Brock,

If you and others are seeing less fawn recruitement, and I am also by the way, that has nothing to do with harvest numbers.

The decline, at whatever extent it exists, can not be attributed to harvest unless the average yearly recruitement has been deminished. The harvest has not changed overall in this state for the last 5 years yet the population seems to be decreasing.

Why is it decreasing, we are not killing more deer.

Is it a ratio of buck to does shift, fawn predation or mortailty?

I see a lot of coyotes on the cameras and while hunting, numbers I would have never imagined seeing just 5-6 years ago

Nothing to do with harvest numbers? An increase in the number of "gun days", a growing population of active archery hunters, a higher success rate...these have all combined to make high harvest numbers...inflated numbers when trying to compare to seasons prior when we were limited to 6 days of shotgun hunting. Again, I'll make the point I attempted earlier. Lets say we have those ten deer in the woods. We kill 4 of them. Having a 1 to 1 ratio as I believe we do, we are left with three does to drop fawns. Those three does produce only two fawns (whereas it was common to expect at least two per doe in years prior we now have coyotes or whatever killing our fawns). Of the two fawns, one is a buck and one is a doe. We have a net loss of two deer from the original ten we had before season last year. Now we have a total of 8 deer in our woodlot. Season rolls around and our group of farmers decide to do a drive through our little woodlot, they want to fill 4 tags. Our 8 deer make a break for it...once again four are killed, this time only 4 make it out alive vs the 6 from the year before. Do you see my line of thinking on the matter? Is it right? I don't know. Is it possible? From what I'm seeing, I think it is.

 

[Gern186]

That's a great idea.....look how diverse the habitat is in this state....there are huge differences in some counties just over a few miles.

 

[bowhunter1023]

That's a great idea.....look how diverse the habitat is in this state....there are huge differences in some counties just over a few miles.

It is drastically different within Zone C for sure. My argument all along has been the DNR does not care what the general consensus among its actual constituents is and that we are killing TOO many deer in my area thanks to an overly generalized management plan. To address JB's question earlier about natural predation... I jump on the DOW because I feel it is their responsibility to make the proper calls on managing our deer herd and I do not believe that is happening. As Brock stated, show me how the herd is growing and I'll listen. I do not for one second believe the herd is growing here in Washington County and if we managed on a micro-level, that could be addressed. By trying to force the entire state in to a "one size fits all " management strategy that does not take in to consideration local conditions such as disease and natural predation, I believe we are being screwed by a DNR who taking the easiest route in appeasing the people that matter and sure it ain't the common sportsmen IMO...

 

["J"]

I am :smiley_depressive:...saw a deer in Montgomery county in '70 ...it was like a bigfoot sighting

Bingo..... doing a lot of reading on this... lived through the 70's no deer sightings that's why I rarely went deer hunting other then opening day to skip s hook.... got back into of in 89 and been hitting it ever since and have seen the highs and lows.... some areas where barren and others were booming.... northeast Ohio such led while southeast Ohio had the boon.... then slowly the northeast came up too speed and caught up somewhat... now we've gotten some areas they are very low populated and others that aren't and you'll have that with the way it is being managed currently.... we're trying to manage an entire state in large blocks and can't do it like this with the current numbers or pockets of deer that we currently have.... a different approach needs to be implemented with the high numbers in the urban zones and the low numbers in other parts of the state ... micro managing is from the looks of it the way to go...
I will add more to this since I'm on my phone at work and have fat fingers lol...

 

[Jackalope]

Because there are so many variables. Why can't the stock market continue to climb every year and earn us all 15%?? Bad weather, hunter numbers, predation, road kills, acorn production, standing corn, the new tagging system, etc etc. There are so many reasons that we can't put the blame on 1 or 2 things.....but now that you mention it, I have to believe coyotes are really hurting your fawn production. If your not gettting fawn pictures on your cameras, then they just aren't there....and coyotes have to be the main reason.

You're right... We can't blame just one thing. And there are other factors... However there's one thing that's absolutely in our control right now.. Tags! We have zero control over predation, roadkill, disease etc... Bit we can pull back tags or bonus gun... But nooooooooo. Now the powers that be want an early muzz season.