Mike Tonkovich

[RedCloud]

Here is what I got out of it. The DOW would like to see harvest numbers back in the 170-180k range and they almost have that since last year was around 229k killed. I also heard the statement saying "most hunters aren't smart enough to understand what is happening". I also think DOW likes it that way so they can continue moving ahead with little flak and people standing in the way. That also works with the OFB. The DOW plays good politics and just tells each group what they want to hear and they just keep trucking along. Take this year for example: Lower bag limits, pleases the masses of hunters because they do not know hunters only take 1.3 deer per year anyway. They only know their county has been moved back on the amount of deer that can be harvested. Smoke. The OFB is told, look, we gave them more tags to use and did this early muzzy season to help lower the population by giving the hunters a better means of accomplishing that during the early season when deer are more visible and by taking out the does before they can bread lowers the amount of deer for the following year. Smoke.

I also heard Mike T say he would like to in the future get each county and have enough information to maybe divide the county and say this half can harvest X and this part of the county can harvest X. He talked about Highland county and said the north part and south part had different goals. One half had good deer numbers where the other half did not.

I did not get to ask how they figure out what each counties goals are and how they came up with the numbers for that county. Is it calculated by the available cover,crops,towns,square miles, or what? The other thing I don't understand is, if the DOW doesn't have the resources to count live deer and know how many deer are in a given county let alone the state then how can they have a harvest goal at all for that county?

I also believe Mike T said the only way to change the NR tag price is to have a bill introduced and we have to contact our reps to get this started. The DOW can only push for it once it is introduced as a bill?

I will try and remember more of the convo as we go along here but the bottom line I got was to manage your own chunk of land and get your neighbors to help because you need at least 2k acres to make any kind of difference in your local heard.

 

[hickslawns]

Great of you to bring this up Brock. Sounds like you were pretty open minded and in this thread specifically, you have been very passive in my opinion. Read "not attacking" the man. Wish I was there to listen and offer my opinion on my local areas as well.

 

[brock ratcliff]

I think one thing I said a long time ago that really ticked off Mrex was that Tonk was either lying, incompetent, or getting poor data. From our conversation, I don't believe he is lying. I don't think he is incompetent. I think he is getting poor data, and has no intention of working on getting better information. How a manager does not know what is going on in one of his 88 areas of responsibility confuses me, and honestly I say that based solely on the look of his face when I told him we are down to killing 50% of what we did nearly 20 yrs ago, as if he were surprised. When I said I didn't think he ever looked too hard at any area outside of Athens (years ago), I may have been more accurate than I thought. If I drove down Scatter Ridge every day (or any similar road) on my route to work, I may be inclined to believe all was well throughout the State. He briefly mentioned his predecessor during our chat. I honestly don't even know who that was, but I had faith in them back in the day. When we had our first 2 tag season in Fayette, the next year or so it was reduced back to one... I really felt like whomever made those decisions really had their finger on the pulse of the herd. What changed? Mike T took over in 95, our first 2 tag was in 94... It doesn't mean I think he's in someone's pocket, or he is a no-good SOB, but I sure don't have the faith in the DOW's wisdom that I once did, whether I was wrong to trust them back then or not. Heck, when I was a kid, I thought Doctors were next to God, when they said something, I took it as Gospel. Now, I am personal friends with my family doc, and I question everything she suggest! I have no doubt he has a lot of people and agendas to juggle, but jeez man regarding the Farm Bureau, tell 'em to stick it in the tail...the DOW has already given them all the tools they need to wipe out every deer on their farm if they please! The whole dang thing makes my head spin, really. I was a little stunned to hear him say, "It's in your hands"...

I'm gonna have to email him again, and see if I can get some more concise answers from him.

I will say for those of you wondering how this conversation would go this time vs last, he did look a bit more frustrated. Not because he was "attacked", but I don't think he knew how he wanted to address the questions he was given. I view that as a good thing, because those are the types of things that leave you wondering how to remedy a problem, perceived or real. For a man used to answering questions publicly, some of the answers were certainly not as well prepared as he would have liked. Haha... Bet he was thinking, "Crap, that's the answer I give the Farm Bureau!" hehe. It was all fun and I'd love to have more time with him to talk deer.

Mrex, are you friends with the Turkey Program Director?

 

[hickslawns]

So Brock's opinion is Mike T is not lying. My perception of this conversation tells me he does have some concern for the hunters OR a lot of concern for good PR for the Department. Having missed it two years in a row, I will say it shows some fortitude for him to show up and have these discussions. It does show some compassion. I have no doubt he is intelligent. Mike Rex stated he has a PhD, so he must have some book smarts to him. Unfortunately, book smarts and a grasp on how to juggle things aren't the same. Sort of like public speaking or common sense, either you have it or you don't. While I am not calling him an idiot (never met the guy), there are some educated idiots out there. Sounds to me like he is trying to appease many and failing on both ends. The hunters are upset, and he says the farmers are as well. No doubt a tough position to hold. I give him this for sure. BUT. . . .he is at least listening. If he is truly compassionate towards the hunters, then maybe the 2 visits at Strouds will sink in and he can use his education and position to come up with a solution.

Or maybe nothing will change, hunters will lose interest, revenue will dip, further funds for data gathering will be suspended, the deer will naturally rebound a little, and he will look like he knew what he was doing all along. lol

 

[woodyw333]

I was there but didnt go over there untill the very end, then hear about it around the fire that night. Reguarding the farmers it is my opinion that if they do not allow hunting on their property then they get NO depervation tags. If they do allow hunting then they only get a few. As far as the NR hunters go, I believe they need to raise the rates quite a bit. Example is I hunt mainly in Ky, It cost me $205 a year for license, and 3 tags (one buck and 2 doe). Now I pay that for myself and my G/F. Next year its going up an additional $100! Yup that would cost me $305 per person to hunt in Ky.. As it stands right now its what $125 total for a NR to hunt Ohio? Way too low IMHO.

 

[dante322]

It cost me $205 a year for license, and 3 tags (one buck and 2 doe). Now I pay that for myself and my G/F. Next year its going up an additional $100! Yup that would cost me $305 per person to hunt in Ky.. As it stands right now its what $125 total for a NR to hunt Ohio? Way too low IMHO.

ohio is known as the cheap state to hunt.I feel, if you want to come to Ohio to hunt, you should be charged whatever your state charges non resident hunters. If you are in a state that has a lottery for nonresidents, then you will have to put your name in a hat here as well.

 

[CritterGitterToo]

If the goal is reduce the herd and they know residents are becoming less interested in doing so they are never going to raise non-resident license or tags. Without non-residents the DOW wouldn't come close to their harvest goal. So they certainly won't support anything that makes their goal tougher. I appreciate you guys sharing these insights for those of us who couldn't be there.

 

[Fullbore]

In a nut shell.... Mike T, has to make FB and Insurance Co. happy and the deer hunters happy. It is quite obvious, whose getting their way!

 

[motorbreaker]

I was there but didnt go over there untill the very end, then hear about it around the fire that night. Reguarding the farmers it is my opinion that if they do not allow hunting on their property then they get NO depervation tags. If they do allow hunting then they only get a few. As far as the NR hunters go, I believe they need to raise the rates quite a bit. Example is I hunt mainly in Ky, It cost me $205 a year for license, and 3 tags (one buck and 2 doe). Now I pay that for myself and my G/F. Next year its going up an additional $100! Yup that would cost me $305 per person to hunt in Ky.. As it stands right now its what $125 total for a NR to hunt Ohio? Way too low IMHO.

Its $125.00 plus $25.00 per tag.

 

[Hortontoter]

I also heard Mike T say he would like to in the future get each county and have enough information to maybe divide the county and say this half can harvest X and this part of the county can harvest X. He talked about Highland county and said the north part and south part had different goals. One half had good deer numbers where the other half did not.

I will try and remember more of the convo as we go along here but the bottom line I got was to manage your own chunk of land and get your neighbors to help because you need at least 2k acres to make any kind of difference in your local heard.

RedCloud brought up two interesting topics.

I have never spoke with Tonk and really feel no need to. I agree with some of his thoughts though. Lets be realistic to begin with. Take the dividing the state into 176 sections (each county into two segments). Lets say some segments had earn a buck, some bucks only, some antlerless only, some closed entirely and some either sex. Lets use segment limits from 0 to 3 deer in a given segment. Sounds great and IF implemented has possibilities to manage the herd.

Now lets get back to reality. The night before gun season hunter X gets his shotgun from the corner of his closet, wipes off the dust and goes hunting in the morning. He is oblivious of the regulations in the section he is going to hunt. His thought is the same as last season "if its brown its down". I say this because it is the way it really is. How many of us asked how many bucks would be killed last weekend, most of us. This is because we know that the "casual" hunter is our worst enemy (IMO). Those of us on this forum are such a tiny segment of the hunting public.

I believe the 1.3 deer harvest number will go down over the years due to telecheck cheaters. So the DOW will see the need to have more deer harvested than in the past. Like someone posted, the harvest numbers set the regs, not the living deer. And IMO the buck harvest numbers will drop dramatically, while they will actually rise, but won't be reported.

I believe those of us on this forum could commit to never shoot another doe for the rest of our life and it would have little impact on the herd numbers. We are far to outnumbered by the "casual" hunter with the "if its brown its down" mentality.

As far as an individual, or a group of individuals, having access to manage 2000 acres in Ohio, is almost nonexistent. This isn't Texas.

 

[bowhunter1023]

- We don't matter (no voice)
- We are the problem (not filling out the surveys)
- Nothing is going to change until many drop out of pursuing deer
- They are not interested in an actual deer count
- We are screwed for at least the next ten years
- Brock was spot on with the Predator/Prey analysis. Cheaper and easier.

I like Charles' take on things as well as any of the others...

One thing I will say is that I was not happy that The Mikes dove headlong in to this discussion without making an attempt to include everyone, including Joe who was 5-10 minutes late to the discussion. I felt that was a bit underhanded and that the discussion should have taken place around the fire with all present who wished to be present. A few guys had no clue The Mikes were even there until the discussion for all intents and purposes was over. Outside of that, I left feeling the same as I always have. Mike T has a tough job and for a variety if reasons, hunters are about 3rd or 4th on the "give a fuck" list for the DNR...

 

[Jackalope]

I also heard Mike T say he would like to in the future get each county and have enough information to maybe divide the county and say this half can harvest X and this part of the county can harvest X. He talked about Highland county and said the north part and south part had different goals. One half had good deer numbers where the other half did not.

I will try and remember more of the convo as we go along here but the bottom line I got was to manage your own chunk of land and get your neighbors to help because you need at least 2k acres to make any kind of difference in your local heard.

RedCloud brought up two interesting topics.

I have never spoke with Tonk and really feel no need to. I agree with some of his thoughts though. Lets be realistic to begin with. Take the dividing the state into 176 sections (each county into two segments). Lets say some segments had earn a buck, some bucks only, some antlerless only, some closed entirely and some either sex. Lets use segment limits from 0 to 3 deer in a given segment. Sounds great and IF implemented has possibilities to manage the herd.

Now lets get back to reality. The night before gun season hunter X gets his shotgun from the corner of his closet, wipes off the dust and goes hunting in the morning. He is oblivious of the regulations in the section he is going to hunt. His thought is the same as last season "if its brown its down". I say this because it is the way it really is. How many of us asked how many bucks would be killed last weekend, most of us. This is because we know that the "casual" hunter is our worst enemy (IMO). Those of us on this forum are such a tiny segment of the hunting public.

I believe the 1.3 deer harvest number will go down over the years due to telecheck cheaters. So the DOW will see the need to have more deer harvested than in the past. Like someone posted, the harvest numbers set the regs, not the living deer. And IMO the buck harvest numbers will drop dramatically, while they will actually rise, but won't be reported.

I believe those of us on this forum could commit to never shoot another doe for the rest of our life and it would have little impact on the herd numbers. We are far to outnumbered by the "casual" hunter with the "if its brown its down" mentality.

As far as an individual, or a group of individuals, having access to manage 2000 acres in Ohio, is almost nonexistent. This isn't Texas.

Casual hunters claiming ignorance of the law is a very easy problem to fix. Bust. Dey. Ass.

The reason for their casual passiveness to the regs is a failure of law enforcement. If laws are enforced they are followed, if the law isn't enforced it's ignored. A few years of heavy enforcement is all it will take to change the casual hunters passive attitude of the law.

 

[Hortontoter]

You may be right, Joe. But with one WO per county, do you see it happening any time soon. I don't, because I'm realistic. The masses rule and we are the minority, by a large margin.

 

[bowhunter1023]

Our game warden doesn't even call people back about deer being poached and plenty of evidence to prove it. So I don't see them actually working to enforce laws any time soon...

 

[Jackalope]

You may be right, Joe. But with one WO per county, do you see it happening any time soon. I don't, because I'm realistic. The masses rule and we are the minority, by a large margin.

It's very doable. Even with one per county. Word travels when tickets start flying. If the vast majority of hunters do not know their County game warden's name something's wrong. The biggest deterrent to breaking the law is fear of getting caught. Your County game warden's reputation should be that of a guy who would give his mama ticket. Sadly from what I hear most of the reputations are they're wardens who never return phone calls or get out of their truck.

 

[mrex]

I like Charles' take on things as well as any of the others...

One thing I will say is that I was not happy that The Mikes dove headlong in to this discussion without making an attempt to include everyone, including Joe who was 5-10 minutes late to the discussion. I felt that was a bit underhanded and that the discussion should have taken place around the fire with all present who wished to be present. A few guys had no clue The Mikes were even there until the discussion for all intents and purposes was over. Outside of that, I left feeling the same as I always have. Mike T has a tough job and for a variety if reasons, hunters are about 3rd or 4th on the "give a fuck" list for the DNR...

What in the hell are you talking about? Underhanded? What did you want me to do, make a public service anouncement? When the Mikes got there, they emidiatley gravitated to the largest crowd which was huddled around the meat processors. We were there for almost 3 hours. If someone didn't get a chance to speak their mind or ask a question it can be no fault but their own.

My opinion on the conversation....

I agree with some of everyones opinion. Analyzing the discussion is like a post presidential debate, the reupublicans heard one message and the democrats heard another. And that's because their minds where made up before the debate.

My objective for bringing Mike down was to help some of you understand what a difficult position he's in and I think that was accomplished. I also wanted some of you to meet the man in person, which in theory, should make the personal attacks less frequent this winter when the debate heats up again. Mike and I talked for another 1/2 hour after we left the camp and he was very complimentary of the group and the passion expressed in the conversation.

 

[bowhunter1023]

Underhanded may not have been the best adjective, but I was at a loss for a better word. I just envisioned the whole thing one way and it did not really live up to that. I felt an "urgency" to get down to business without the main antagonist present. Maybe I'm just crazy...

It was still a worthwhile discussion and I'm glad it took place. Hopefully Mike will come back next fall and maybe have a beer or two and enjoy himself a little more...

 

[gavennn]

I also heard Mike T say he would like to in the future get each county and have enough information to maybe divide the county and say this half can harvest X and this part of the county can harvest X. He talked about Highland county and said the north part and south part had different goals. One half had good deer numbers where the other half did not.

I will try and remember more of the convo as we go along here but the bottom line I got was to manage your own chunk of land and get your neighbors to help because you need at least 2k acres to make any kind of difference in your local heard.

RedCloud brought up two interesting topics.

I have never spoke with Tonk and really feel no need to. I agree with some of his thoughts though. Lets be realistic to begin with. Take the dividing the state into 176 sections (each county into two segments). Lets say some segments had earn a buck, some bucks only, some antlerless only, some closed entirely and some either sex. Lets use segment limits from 0 to 3 deer in a given segment. Sounds great and IF implemented has possibilities to manage the herd.

Now lets get back to reality. The night before gun season hunter X gets his shotgun from the corner of his closet, wipes off the dust and goes hunting in the morning. He is oblivious of the regulations in the section he is going to hunt. His thought is the same as last season "if its brown its down". I say this because it is the way it really is. How many of us asked how many bucks would be killed last weekend, most of us. This is because we know that the "casual" hunter is our worst enemy (IMO). Those of us on this forum are such a tiny segment of the hunting public.

I believe the 1.3 deer harvest number will go down over the years due to telecheck cheaters. So the DOW will see the need to have more deer harvested than in the past. Like someone posted, the harvest numbers set the regs, not the living deer. And IMO the buck harvest numbers will drop dramatically, while they will actually rise, but won't be reported.

I believe those of us on this forum could commit to never shoot another doe for the rest of our life and it would have little impact on the herd numbers. We are far to outnumbered by the "casual" hunter with the "if its brown its down" mentality.

As far as an individual, or a group of individuals, having access to manage 2000 acres in Ohio, is almost nonexistent. This isn't Texas.

I personally think This is a pretty good understanding of the ohio hunting population. You couple this mentality with self checking, and biologist struggling to keep everyone happy, you have a recipe for disaster.

Everytime I go out hunting, i hear gun shots in the farms around us.then shortly after the shots youll hear the quads start up. More than few times we have investigated only to find barn doors hastily being closed as we approached. My concern has always been the deer being killed that arent being reported. They are killed by people who drag them to the barn, cut them up themselves and stick them in the freezer. These people arent influencing the harvest numbers, but they are having an effect on the herd. Luckily we hunt licking county that seems to have plenty of deer for right now.

I hear stories like Brocks and it scares the beejezus out of me that it could go bad just as quickly. LIke Mike T said. I control what I can.

 

[huntn2]

What in the hell are you talking about? Underhanded? What did you want me to do, make a public service anouncement? When the Mikes got there, they emidiatley gravitated to the largest crowd which was huddled around the meat processors. We were there for almost 3 hours. If someone didn't get a chance to speak their mind or ask a question it can be no fault but their own.

My opinion on the conversation....

I agree with some of everyones opinion. Analyzing the discussion is like a post presidential debate, the reupublicans heard one message and the democrats heard another. And that's because their minds where made up before the debate.

My objective for bringing Mike down was to help some of you understand what a difficult position he's in and I think that was accomplished. I also wanted some of you to meet the man in person, which in theory, should make the personal attacks less frequent this winter when the debate heats up again. Mike and I talked for another 1/2 hour after we left the camp and he was very complimentary of the group and the passion expressed in the conversation.

Mike,

The above bold is what I felt expectations were.

I was unfortunately not able to attend this year, but felt it was really the same/similar objective to last years TOO weekend. From an outsider looking in at what has been docummented regarding the discussion, I feel Mike was trying to tip his hat in certain areas that he agrees with much of what we say or type. I believe there is probably more alignment then what most of us feel or believe becasue at the end of the day, Mike is toeing a line. That is his choice as we all choose our employers, but the harsh reality is, he is trying to satisfy various parties with drastically different interests.

My take on our struggle (perceived or not) is that we have data that leads us to a conclusion. As a result, we are looking for action to reverse what we interpret from the numbers. Reading between the lines from these posts, posts over the years and last years conversation at Strouds, Mike is pulling the strings where he can to manipulate all impacted parties as best he can to try and balance them all and keep them all somewhat happy. The reduction in tags to lead the hunters to believe steps are being taken all the while introducing an early muzzy doe only for the other interest groups is what leads me to this conclusion. I get this...

What I still struggle with is the overall harvest direction. To desire another 30% reduction in kills doesn't make sense to me. Then again, I am not the biologist. I am just one who enjoys seeing deer rather than being skuncked and getting a few opportunities to harvest one periodically. To still be based on farmer surveys from over a decade ago and to only manage by kill rate rather than incorporating additional available information is where I struggle. I guess with Ohio being 95% or so privately owned, from what some have written, Mike showed his cards that we need to take it upon ourselves to not only do what we feel is "right" but to work to influence the masses to follow a similar approach.

 

[Diane]

Luckily we hunt licking county that seems to have plenty of deer for right now.

I don't believe that's necessarily true. I live in Licking county. Moved here in January '96 and was amazed at the herds of deer I saw, just crossing my road. I swear, you could easily slow down and wait for groups of 15 or more to cross (during the winter months).

Now, I'm lucky to slow down for one, possibly two, if and when you even see any. Thing is, I live by Longaberger's golf course and supposedly there is no hunting allowed, so the herds shouldn't be as dwindled as they are.