Compiled deer havest data 2014 and 2015 YTD
- Thread starter Lundy
- Start date
- 1,312
- 141
Youth and either sex tags sales have remained pretty flat.
It is the antlerless tags that have experienced the big drop = bowhunters buying less
- 39,188
- 274
So basically the ODNR has decimated the deer population across the state reducing the harvest by 26% since 2007 to save big insurance companies 316.2 million dollars in claims for Deer vehicle accidents.
Total DVAs avoided 2008-2014 = 51,646
Average cost of a DVA per the National Highway Administration. (property, bodily, and death) $6,126 per claim
Total cost avoidance by big insurance in Ohio. 316.2 million.
Let me ask you this. Have you seen your rates reduced as a result?
At the end of the day, no matter how you slice it. The ODOW sold out hunters to increase the profits of big insurance, and we the consumer didn't get so much as a reach around. Not only will you not see a reduced rate. You are going to end up paying more for tags and licenses to make up for the revenue lost to the DNR from plummeting tag sales. In the end the only person getting screwed will be the hunters and business supporting the hunting industry. Think of the lost income to butchers, taxidermists or other hunting related sales. The very Department of Wildlife we trusted to do right by hunters has screwed us, all in the name of raising insurance company profits, everyone else be dammed. They claim they work for the betterment of all and try to maintain a "balance", however hunters are the only ones getting screwed here.
Total DVAs avoided 2008-2014 = 51,646
Average cost of a DVA per the National Highway Administration. (property, bodily, and death) $6,126 per claim
Total cost avoidance by big insurance in Ohio. 316.2 million.
Let me ask you this. Have you seen your rates reduced as a result?
At the end of the day, no matter how you slice it. The ODOW sold out hunters to increase the profits of big insurance, and we the consumer didn't get so much as a reach around. Not only will you not see a reduced rate. You are going to end up paying more for tags and licenses to make up for the revenue lost to the DNR from plummeting tag sales. In the end the only person getting screwed will be the hunters and business supporting the hunting industry. Think of the lost income to butchers, taxidermists or other hunting related sales. The very Department of Wildlife we trusted to do right by hunters has screwed us, all in the name of raising insurance company profits, everyone else be dammed. They claim they work for the betterment of all and try to maintain a "balance", however hunters are the only ones getting screwed here.
How about a honest debate on why bow hunting is harvesting more deer the last 3 years than firearms?
- 39,188
- 274
To be honest. When I started to notice the deer population on the lease in Vinton county decline the guys that only gun hunted immediately blamed the Bowhunters for "killing all the deer before gun season". As a result many of them went and got crossbows. I would venture to say a lot of it has to do with just that. The population is lower and guys just aren't getting it done in gun season like they used to. In order to extend their opportunities they're participating during bow season. The only effort required for a gun hunter to start bowhunting is a crossbow package from the local Wally World and a bucket to sit on. It's an easy transition. Combine that with the previous availability of reduced priced tags only available during archery season that expired before gun season and it may have enticed some gun hunters to start archery hunting.
That and the popularity of these pro hunters on TV has every swinging dick thinking they're going to be the next bone collector.
CritterGitterToo
Junior Member
Many hunters practice restraint now. It's obvious that there is a need. In 2000 through 2007, it wasn't so obvious. Lots of wackin and stackin took place in those years. I think Brock and I were the only voice against it until about 2007, 2008 or so. Then, others caught on and said, "hey, where did all the deer go?"
Um, yeah, it had been happening for awhile.
Um, yeah, it had been happening for awhile.
- 1,312
- 141
Data reports to ODNR reflects that 75% of all hunters participating in the gun season also hunt during the archery season.
Many hunting the gun season may have already used their either sex (buck) tag during the archery season.
For a large part it is the same hunters hunting both seasons, where they (successful hunters) elect to kill their deer, archery or gun skews the numbers somewhat. It is always basically the same hunters that are successful (33% success rate) anyway no matter the season.
The ratio of successful crossbow hunter harvest to long bows continues to increase ( along with crossbow hunters I would guess) lending some credence that buying a new bucket to sit on while crossbow hunting is at least somewhat effective
I wish that was the case but I feel the majority of deer hunters are still in the 'brown is down mode'. Also I will say TOO forums members are a cut above the rest.
I believe more bucks are being passed on versus ten years ago, due to more people looking to kill big bucks, but I disagree that the majority are in are ,"brown is down" mode. I believe anyone who has spent the last ten years in the woods realizes the decline in population. The problem comes from new, uneducated hunters, and the guys who only hunt gun season, IMO. There are too many relying on the DNR to tell us how many deer we should kill, and because of this, the people that don't know any better kill what they are told they can kill rather than what's best for their local herd. The DNR is just a puppet, someone else is pulling the strings. It seems pretty clear to me who it is, but apparently enough can't see it.
As hunters, we need to take it upon ourselves to get the word out and try to get more people to understand that just because the state says you can kill six deer doesn't mean you should.
Bigcountry40
Member
- 4,792
- 137
Let me throw another variable in this discussion about the future of the deer population. It has been discussed to death that private land leases are becoming more expensive and that the state of Ohio is losing public hunting opportunities to private buyers, leases, etc. What happens when some of these hunters are priced out of hunting or state land hunting becomes to unbearable/frustrating? Will the hunter population drop, private land owners/leasers only kill so many and does the deer population then rebound? Or am I completely in right field with this thinking, Dale Earnhart Jr. just bought 800 acres in Coshocton if that 800 acres only has 5 deer taken off of it, where as it used to have 35 deer taken off it, population will flurish quckly (I would think).
bthompson1004
Member
- 25,275
- 261
I certainly do not see the numbers of hunters during shotgun week that I once did. Then again, I do not hunt the same areas I used to either. I think the basic gun hunting methods have changed over the years. You see the advice, "Sit still, let the others push the deer". Well, I think most everyone is sitting and very few are pushing. It can make a slow gun season, if you aren't willing or able to sneak around.
- 1,312
- 141
It's like bowhunting with a gun,it for sure will be slow hunting, patience grasshopper
I wouldn't want to do it any other way. Not interested in pushing and don't have any use for pushers for how I want to hunt during the gun seasons. There is little doubt that we could kill a couple our target bucks by doing some drives on the property, just not interested.I'm sure it varies by available property, hunting pressure, control of property, time available to hunt, etc, etc, and how people enjoy hunting deer, I know not everybody has the luxury to have enough property and time to hunt the way I like to hunt. I just personally enjoy seeing deer that are moving primarily on their own and not running by in large groups with their tongues hanging out, like I had happen last Saturday early afternoon. By the way what makes some of these guys believe they are going to hit the deer on shot 4 or 5 when they couldn't hit the deer with shots 1 through 3?
To each their own
Last edited:
no reason to debate that issue. the harvest data tells the tale. the reason for this is the compound crossbow and the willingness of the masses to use them. we aren't better deer hunters today than 20 years ago, there just have been ass loads more people hunting all time high numbers of deer during archery season, most of them carrying compound crossbows. some(many, most?) of them no longer gun hunting if successful in the early archer season.
We had this discussion over the weekend in a group text and I blame it on the C's.
Cameras: Everyone has at least one. People have more intel to go off of and it makes them more efficient than they may be otherwise.
Compounds: They are more effective and efficient. Ranges are longer. It's easier to kill with a compound today than with a Bear Whitetail.
Crossbows: Let's be honest, they make it pretty easy to get in the woods and kill deer.
Corn: More people bait than don't. Not everyone hunts over it, but almost everyone uses it to get pics and/or manipulate movement.
Competition: Everyone is a bowhunter now. Everyone wants to be the next Boner Collector. It's a status symbol to be a bowhunter now.
Cameras: Everyone has at least one. People have more intel to go off of and it makes them more efficient than they may be otherwise.
Compounds: They are more effective and efficient. Ranges are longer. It's easier to kill with a compound today than with a Bear Whitetail.
Crossbows: Let's be honest, they make it pretty easy to get in the woods and kill deer.
Corn: More people bait than don't. Not everyone hunts over it, but almost everyone uses it to get pics and/or manipulate movement.
Competition: Everyone is a bowhunter now. Everyone wants to be the next Boner Collector. It's a status symbol to be a bowhunter now.