What would be your plan?
- Thread starter Lundy
- Start date
The master baiter comment again...lol... Every piece of ground I hunt has other hunters on it. I thought I had one piece of ground all to myself and that wasn't the case. The owners b.i.l hunted it with three other buddies all week. They killed 0 deer...
Take it how you want. You've hunted that type of habitat and I'm sure some of the same pieces for decades, so I'd expect you'd have some great knowledge to go on regardless of bait and cameras. Add in cameras and bait, you've got some great intel. All I was saying is that having access to 300 bushels of free corn sure can't hurt things when it comes to seeing deer. To say otherwise would be crazy.
CritterGitterToo
Junior Member
- 1,312
- 141
I still just don't understand all of the statements about the ODNR lying or misleading hunters, it just didn't happen that way.
They clearly expressed from the beginning their belief that there were too many deer, they openly described a population reduction plan with bunches of extra reduced cost tags and increased opportunity. Hunters scarfed them up and killed extra deer, including hunters here on TOO. As yearly harvests began to decrease they again clearly stated and defined that they were not yet at the reduction goal levels and hunters continued to kill the deer assisting the ODNR is accomplishing their openly stated plan. The last two years the population goals have been either met or have moved close enough through previous years harvest that the reduction plan has been eased off on through adjusting management zones and tag availability.
I don't see where the ODNR lied about anything, they said they were out to reduce the herd, told hunters that they were to be the tool to achieve the reduction goal and hunters obliged.
Maybe some of you didn't hear them, or listen to them, or understand them, or even care at that time because there were plenty of deer then, when they said they were out to reduce the population, but they never hid the intent of the plan or misrepresented it.
You could argue all day about why they developed the population reduction plan or if you agree with it, but it certainly is not accurate to say they lied to hunters about the intent and goal of the plan
They clearly expressed from the beginning their belief that there were too many deer, they openly described a population reduction plan with bunches of extra reduced cost tags and increased opportunity. Hunters scarfed them up and killed extra deer, including hunters here on TOO. As yearly harvests began to decrease they again clearly stated and defined that they were not yet at the reduction goal levels and hunters continued to kill the deer assisting the ODNR is accomplishing their openly stated plan. The last two years the population goals have been either met or have moved close enough through previous years harvest that the reduction plan has been eased off on through adjusting management zones and tag availability.
I don't see where the ODNR lied about anything, they said they were out to reduce the herd, told hunters that they were to be the tool to achieve the reduction goal and hunters obliged.
Maybe some of you didn't hear them, or listen to them, or understand them, or even care at that time because there were plenty of deer then, when they said they were out to reduce the population, but they never hid the intent of the plan or misrepresented it.
You could argue all day about why they developed the population reduction plan or if you agree with it, but it certainly is not accurate to say they lied to hunters about the intent and goal of the plan
Last edited:
I take it how it sounded to me. I simply stated my opinion about deer numbers and I should of just kept them to myself...
buckstar25
Junior Member
Lundy, why did they let it go for so long. As our managing resource why did they let it go after record kills? Why wouldn't they, then, understand their goals would be achieved? If they had hard data, meaning check stations, biologists working with the heavy populated counties do you think the management plan could have gone differently? So now what are they doing? Do you think Ohio's deer herd can be sustained where its at? Hell no, it will rebound, the cycle will start again, and again, aaaaaaand again. When a biologist openly admits the herd can be easily manipulated, that should have been the red flag, I know for me it was.
They used the overwhelming majority of "weekend warriors" who could give 2 shits less, hell, the majority of them just knew there were endless tags and that meant more kills for them. For that, I do place blame on the ODNR.
They used the overwhelming majority of "weekend warriors" who could give 2 shits less, hell, the majority of them just knew there were endless tags and that meant more kills for them. For that, I do place blame on the ODNR.
For me, it's more deceit than a lie. We were lead to believe (at least IMO) that we needed to reduce numbers for herd health. However I believe the real reason we were turned loose was to appease special interests. I certainly believed the pitch that from a biological/herd management standpoint, we needed less deer. Who needed less deer was Nationwide and the OFB.
buckstar25
Junior Member
Kim, what I'm referring to when I say they misled the hunting community is when for 4 straight years they said we had 750K deer just prior to them coming out and saying their estimations were probably wrong. Several of us voiced our opinion on this and other forums before those 4 years.
You are very correct in that the ODNR clearly said their mission was clear and they were trying to reduce the deer population. I have no problem with that but to inflate their population estimation giving the majority of hunters the false pretense that they can kill multiple deer every year and life is good! Am I not mistaken that they even came out and said hunters aren't killing enough deer cuz they're getting lazy and not hunting acorns or some shit! The reason hunters weren't killing as much deer as years before was because there weren't the number of deer they said there was to begin with!!! Lol
We can discuss this till the cows come home and there are many opinions on this subject but I will stand by my opinion that both the hunters and the ODNR are to blame but the latter could have done a better job in reducing the limits in areas that were hit much worse.
You are very correct in that the ODNR clearly said their mission was clear and they were trying to reduce the deer population. I have no problem with that but to inflate their population estimation giving the majority of hunters the false pretense that they can kill multiple deer every year and life is good! Am I not mistaken that they even came out and said hunters aren't killing enough deer cuz they're getting lazy and not hunting acorns or some shit! The reason hunters weren't killing as much deer as years before was because there weren't the number of deer they said there was to begin with!!! Lol
We can discuss this till the cows come home and there are many opinions on this subject but I will stand by my opinion that both the hunters and the ODNR are to blame but the latter could have done a better job in reducing the limits in areas that were hit much worse.
Last edited:
Do you think lowering herd numbers had anything to do with the increase in large deer sightings or just a coincidence that there appears to be a larger number of large deer sightings and large deer harvests this year?
Are you serious? I have friends and family members that take the deer I've killed. Since I don't like deer meat means I shouldn't be able to hunt them? Guess I better quit hunting coyotes then too... Wow... Just because I don't lay all the blame on the Dow for the decline of deer in parts of the state gives a reason for guys to start questioning me over my tactics now... I don't need this crap
My personal opinion mirrors what you stated early in the year, it was just set up to be an exception year for big bucks. Beatty killed his when numbers were high, Jerman did the same. Ohio has always produced tremendous deer. I believe some of what we have seen this year is cyclical and relates to very specific circumstances outside of herd size. All that said, some biologists might say it's due to lower numbers and it does make sense. I don't think any of it is mutually exclusive, so all the factors we pointed to early in connection with lower numbers could very well explain the exceptional year Ohio has had in regards to big bucks. Or it could be a fluke and 2016 might be one of the worst in recent memory.
I counted res/non res vehicles the first and second week of November. I did this four times on two different Ohio wildlife areas. Total vehicles 72. 54 put of 72 were out of state vehicles. Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, north and South Carolina, Florida , Tennessee, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois and Mississippi.......
I won't disagree with this, BUT. . . Either they lied about herd totals, or they simply had a terrible method of figuring how many were in the herd. That is the part which bothers me.
I haven't seen a ton of deer. NEVER have since I started. It is NW Ohio. I hunted Vinton/Hocking counties a few years ago. Saw more deer that week than I could see in a season up here. Point being, some of this is a matter of perspective.
I DO eat deer. I choose to eat deer because I feel it is healthier for my family than store bought meat. I selectively harvest does on properties where I see plenty of them. Unfortunately, every year I feel like there are less of these type of properties available.
Dick- I readily admit deer meat is mighty expensive. We cant put a price on our kids' health. I am not sure I like what I see in the stores. Could I afford it? Yes. Is deer meat expensive when you add up tags, licenses, tree stands, clothes, boots, cameras. . . YES! But think of the money we are saving by going to the woods instead of the bars? If I didn't have the woods, I would be spending money on counseling to deal with the idiots in the is world. haha Point being: It isn't all about the meat. It is my get away and while this may not save me money, it clears my mind, brings me closer to God, and gives me a place to unwind. I could argue it keeps me young, helps keep my senses honed and fine tuned, and puts me in a relaxed mindset which is an overall health improvement. Some of what I personally gain from deer hunting cannot be quantified on a calculator. I type this because I respect your input and your opinion. I wanted you to get a chuckle about saving money on counseling, but wanted you to think about it from another perspective. I didn't want you to think we were all out to attack you. Contrarily, I don't think anyone is out to attack you. Nothing wrong with different opinions around here.
- 39,188
- 274
Go search around and show me where the DNR said they wanted to reduce the deer harvests by 40% and decimate the deer population across the state. Sure they said it was over populated and wanted to reduce it. But never once did they expose to the public the extent to which they wanted to go. If they had they surely would have had a huge PR issue. Instead they chose to keep their true intentions a secret. They misled and purposefully left out extremely important details to keep their plan going without having blowback from hunters. That's a lie no matter how you slice the pie. A lie through omission is still a lie.
If I come and tell you I want to increase your property tax. Taxes have been too low for years. I get you to go along with it. I get you to vote for an increase. But I never tell you a percent. Then after it passes I slam you with a 40% increase. That's deceitful at best. Odds are you would flip your shit. But if I told you upfront my true intentions you never would have voted it in. I tricked you through deceit. Also called lying. They used the fact that most hunters trusted them to actually screw them.
Now that is a good point too. Yep. I'm sitting the fence again. Feel like a cat watching a ping pong match and clapping for each well played hit. Lol. I'm out.