Deer harvest trend continues down
- Thread starter Lundy
- Start date
Ohiosam
*Supporting Member*
How much ya wanna bet that they do away with the doe only smoke pole season and bring back bonus gun next year? Its hard telling though, 5,600 does killed does some damage to the herd.
Last edited:
What can I say I haven't said before? :smiley_blackeye:
To me the most surprising thing is how fast the destruction has taken place. Its startling...
To me the most surprising thing is how fast the destruction has taken place. Its startling...
CritterGitterToo
Junior Member
I don't think they'll drop it after only one year. I think they'll keep it, but it won't be doe only. They'll expect that to drive up participation.
- 25,263
- 261
There are a lot of factors the COULD lead to lower harvest. The most obvious, less deer. Secondly, many people have seen deer numbers lowered and decided NOT to shoot does, at least not as many. Third, the lack of check in stations. I'm hesitant to point to that. Before we switched to this system, I had already suffered through the down-turn in herd size in my area. I knew, and stated many times on these forums that it would take longer to notice in higher-density counties, but figured when it was evident in the rest of the state that the new system would get some of the blame. However, it is a real factor IMO. There are a lot of folks that do not play by the rules when the rules are made too easy to break.
Lundy, good information you've compiled there. Thanks for posting!
Lundy, good information you've compiled there. Thanks for posting!
When I was critical of the new checking system, I made the low hanging fruit comparison. I believe that many people are not bothering to check in deer and many are purchasing one tag, photocopying it, then using the same tag multiple times. The presence of law enforcement in our county is a joke and there is NO fear of getting caught breaking game laws in this county...
- 25,263
- 261
I agree, Jesse. Here's the thing, I blame the DOW to a degree for the way some view deer these days, particularly does. The trendy thought has been to "take a doe", it "helps" the herd. The DOW has pushed this concept. When I started hunting, you had to have a permit, issued by a drawing to shoot a doe. Now, they are viewed as a pest. The DOW has stressed killing does, to the point I don't think hunters view them in the same light they once did. "It's just a doe"....tired of hearing it. I am willing to bet many feel there is no need to buy another 24 dollar tag to go shoot "just a doe"...heck, the DOW doesn't even give you the dang tag anymore!!!! Buying a tag, that I have to use my paper to print? That's a good sale on the DOW's part, but it sure as heck is a good way to tempt with "low fruit". I print 3 copies at the time of purchase, simply because I tear stuff up pretty quick. If I were worried about 24 bucks, that low fruit would look pretty good to me I suppose.
Hortontoter
Senior Member
Interesting that the archery kills rose from 2011-12.
My thought is that the weather the first two days of gun season were ideal, at least here in eastern Ohio. Somthing is amiss for sure. We would of had a record kill if the deer numbers were up and all killed were legally checked in.
My thought is that the weather the first two days of gun season were ideal, at least here in eastern Ohio. Somthing is amiss for sure. We would of had a record kill if the deer numbers were up and all killed were legally checked in.
I really don't think the telecheck is as big of a problem as you all are thinking. Many other (if not most other) states have a telecheck system and some of the ODNR officials I've spoken with said it was to get us caught up with other states that they initiated it along with the monetary savings. Also, those who are going to break laws and poach are going to to it with the old system, the new system or any system.
If other states can have telecheck and it works without substantially changing the dynamics of wildlife management then why can Ohio not? Are we that much more likely to break the law? That argument sounds very similar to the "blood in the streets" arguments many people made about Ohio getting CHLs even though many other states already had them.
If other states can have telecheck and it works without substantially changing the dynamics of wildlife management then why can Ohio not? Are we that much more likely to break the law? That argument sounds very similar to the "blood in the streets" arguments many people made about Ohio getting CHLs even though many other states already had them.
All that being said I had very different hunting experiences this year in comparison to other years. I deer hunt in two primary locations, the first being private farmland in Ashland county and the other being the Egypt Valley Wildlife area and surrounding public land.
1.) Private land hunting was similar to other years and even better with numbers of deer seen even with large tracts of corn still standing. However we are actively trying to manage this property to have some good bucks.
2.) Public land I hunted at the end of the season and tracts of land where we would drive and get 3-10 deer off of in years past we only got 1 or two each time all week. I dunno if this was because of the additional pressure the public land got this year in comparison to years past or if its b/c the numbers were down or if it was b/c one of the members or our group was having a hard time walking and we stayed a lot closer to the roads than normal.
Regardless, I think that the density of deer in some areas of the state is definitely down.
1.) Private land hunting was similar to other years and even better with numbers of deer seen even with large tracts of corn still standing. However we are actively trying to manage this property to have some good bucks.
2.) Public land I hunted at the end of the season and tracts of land where we would drive and get 3-10 deer off of in years past we only got 1 or two each time all week. I dunno if this was because of the additional pressure the public land got this year in comparison to years past or if its b/c the numbers were down or if it was b/c one of the members or our group was having a hard time walking and we stayed a lot closer to the roads than normal.
Regardless, I think that the density of deer in some areas of the state is definitely down.
For the public land problem, your group took 3-10 deer in years past. That's just one group, not including the hundreds of other groups and individuals that hunted there all year. It is pretty easy to guess why you are seeing less deer. Once you start killing over 30 percent of a local population of deer, it becomes additive mortality instead of compensatory mortality and you start decreasing the population for the next year. There are very few places that I know of that are NOT killing over 30 percent of the local deer every hunting season. Tonk knows this, that is why he is allowing it to happen. The goal is less deer and us idiot hunters are just a tool creating a statistic.
For the private, I think if someone has large tracts of private land that they and their hunting party have sole control over, and do not have neighbors on all sides of you that shoot as soon as they jump the property line, they will probably not notice any difference in the deer population at all from years past.
For the private, I think if someone has large tracts of private land that they and their hunting party have sole control over, and do not have neighbors on all sides of you that shoot as soon as they jump the property line, they will probably not notice any difference in the deer population at all from years past.
Last edited:
I won't blame the telecheck. Is it partially to blame? Sure. Quite possible. Is this a bad thing? Not in my mind. They are using deer harvest to determine the herd size. People don't check them in and the ODNR assumes there are less deer in the herd. They assume they are reaching their goals (which appears to be a correct assumption). On the flip side, despite the fact the ODNR is happy to see the herd decline, the hunters don't have the same number of deer to hunt. Overall, I still don't think the people avoiding the telecheck would have been checking them in anyhow. I simply think the numbers are down. I hunted hard this year. I saw deer. Unfortunately, I kept seeing the same deer over and over. It was often the same single doe or momma with 2 fawns in the same places. It wasn't like I had groups of 5-6-8 does at a time like I have in the past. To me, this means I get selective about which does and how many does to shoot. I live outside of Lima. I am not used to seeing deer like some of you guys anyway.
Thanks for the info Kim! The majority here pretty much predicted a very low number as we are the ones who are in the field and can tell by actual deer sightings,sign and trail cams that the herd numbers were lower in many areas of the state. Especially those areas where hunting access isn't a problem. The only individual here on TOO that had much higher expectations was our one and only JD with well over a million deer expected to be harvested during deer gun season...rotflmao
I love his sarcasm though! Hahaha
I love his sarcasm though! Hahaha
I to don't think the telecheck makes much difference. A cheat is just a cheat by any system. But I will say the telecheck and buy the tags on line makes the cheater a little easier. By printing up a temporary tag then going back home and telecheck the tag in some cheats just don't check it in and use the tag again. But the risk are high if caught. No thanks here.
I my area I haven't seen much drop in deer sights. I've owned my farm for 22 yrs. and I've never once seen more than 3 deer at one time. But this week I seen 3 bucks and a doe in my back yard. Does this mean anything I don't think so. Our harvest totals haven't dropped off much and our deer-car accidents have dropped.
So It does appear we have less deer in this area but probably not as much of a drop as other areas of the state.
IMHO. But what the hell does a country pumpkin know?
I my area I haven't seen much drop in deer sights. I've owned my farm for 22 yrs. and I've never once seen more than 3 deer at one time. But this week I seen 3 bucks and a doe in my back yard. Does this mean anything I don't think so. Our harvest totals haven't dropped off much and our deer-car accidents have dropped.
So It does appear we have less deer in this area but probably not as much of a drop as other areas of the state.
IMHO. But what the hell does a country pumpkin know?
Schu72
Well-Known Member
For all of those doubting the impact of telecheck, you don't think that as the risk of getting caught decreases, the willingness to participate in risky behavior increases? You all have a much more positive outlook on our society than I. There is no doubt in my mind that people who were not willing to drag their wife & kids to the check station are now willing to check a deer for them in over the phone. This is the most common scenario I hear about people tagging multiple bucks. Unfortunately I never have anything soilid to turn anyone in. Its usually 2nd or 3rd hand talk. The photocopying of the same tag has been discussed ad nauseam. No point in beating that dead horse.
huntn2
Senior Member
The practice of having someone else check in one would mean the harvest is counted (illegal, but the deer would be a statistic). I think the risk is folks simply not checking them in.