What would be your plan?

[MK111]

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.

Move over as I'm watching to.

Besides I've eat coyote meat before and it had no bad taste. Would eat it again if done up right.

 

[hickslawns]

Move over as I'm watching to.

Besides I've eat coyote meat before and it had no bad taste. Would eat it again if done up right.

Plenty of room to pull up a chair Frank. Lol

Watching Joe and Lundy is entertaining. Can get heated, but they are both gentlemen about it and move on.

I've seen Joe debate with tenacity over something he isn't very passionate about simply because he enjoys the debate. In this case, I believe he is passionate and Lundy I am not sure. Don't know Lundy outside of the forum. Is he poking Joe or is he standing his ground based on his beliefs? I dunno but I will enjoy the banter either way.

 

[huntn2]

Ric and Joe nailed it. It wasn't a matter of not being forthcoming with a reduction in mind. It was how steep, it was the herd population baseline where 0 clarity was provided (enter deception).

There were repeated requests to have the herd size calculations and the reduction plan by County/Zone publicized. When challenged on these 2 facts, there was never a straight, fact based analysis provided in print for all to see and digest.

The conclusion of the actions over the years and verbal conversations that many on here partook in with Tonk that vetted the heart of this discussion is where the understanding of deception originates.

 

[Beentown]

The conclusion of the actions over the years and verbal conversations that many on here partook in with Tonk that vetted the heart of this discussion is where the understanding of deception originates.

Tonk, "Hunters are too dumb...."

 

["J"]

Tonk, "Hunters are too dumb...."

And squirrels are too blame as well....

And there were plenty enough around too take in Tonks subtle little bomb that he dropped.......

 

[Lundy]

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.

.

LOL, of course they exposed the extent of the desired reduction and how they planned to achieve it. All anyone had to do was listen, it was expressed far and wide for numerous years to anyone that would listen. Again don't have to like the plan or the results we have been given but it wasn't hidden, to say otherwise now is in fact the lie.

Here is but one example in 2010, or read any yearly harvest summary on the ODNR website or search the numerous interview articles written the last 7-8 years

From a 2010 interview

http://www.gameandfishmag.com/hunti...unting_ohios_2010_deer_outlook_part_1_102610/

“The buck harvest for the last four or five years, particularly since we added the antlerless permits, has been fairly stable at 88,000 to 93,000 bucks harvested across all seasons statewide, whereas the antlerless harvest has been going up. So we’re making progress at putting more pressure on the antlerless segment of the population, which is a good thing, but has yet to reap any significant dividends. Not until I see that buck harvest start to do a 7 to 10 percent drop am I going to believe we’ve turned the corner."

“The last thing we want to do is get hunters comfortable with seeing 25 deer every time they go hunting because we’ve got to get the population down,” said Tonkovich. “If you look at the harvest numbers over the past few years I still think the deer heard is tending upward. I’d eventually like to see the deer herd 25 percent lower then what it is now.”

Read more: http://www.gameandfishmag.com/hunti...010_deer_outlook_part_1_102610/#ixzz3uITuNMgu

 

[CritterGitterToo]

LOL, of course they exposed the extent of the desired reduction and how they planned to achieve it. All anyone had to do was listen, it was expressed far and wide for numerous years to anyone that would listen. Again don't have to like the plan or the results we have been given but it wasn't hidden, to say otherwise now is in fact the lie.

Here is but one example in 2010, or read any yearly harvest summary on the ODNR website or search the numerous interview articles written the last 7-8 years

From a 2010 interview

http://www.gameandfishmag.com/hunti...unting_ohios_2010_deer_outlook_part_1_102610/

“The buck harvest for the last four or five years, particularly since we added the antlerless permits, has been fairly stable at 88,000 to 93,000 bucks harvested across all seasons statewide, whereas the antlerless harvest has been going up. So we’re making progress at putting more pressure on the antlerless segment of the population, which is a good thing, but has yet to reap any significant dividends. Not until I see that buck harvest start to do a 7 to 10 percent drop am I going to believe we’ve turned the corner."

“The last thing we want to do is get hunters comfortable with seeing 25 deer every time they go hunting because we’ve got to get the population down,” said Tonkovich. “If you look at the harvest numbers over the past few years I still think the deer heard is tending upward. I’d eventually like to see the deer herd 25 percent lower then what it is now.”

Read more: http://www.gameandfishmag.com/hunti...010_deer_outlook_part_1_102610/#ixzz3uITuNMgu

For me, it started when he kept publishing that we have 750k deer in the state. I think that was in the annual report from 1999 - 2009 or so. If not in the actual report, it was in the newspaper articles published before and after gun season. Meanwhile, I was in the woods, going where are all the deer? That was deceit! We may have had a peak near 700-750k at some point, but to state that as the population year after year after record harvests was starting to sound a little "off."

Also, the quotes you just posted. First of all, who was seeing 25 deer every sit? Him and his neighbor? Maybe THEY needed to shoot some does and leave the rest of the state alone. Secondly, 25% of that is 6 less deer. So, you see, hunters could read that and say, "Ok, i can get on board with going from seeing 25 deer to seeing 19."

However, that's not what the result was and most of the members here believe that was never the intent. That is deceit, pure plain and simple. Many got to speak with Tonk first hand. They got to hear it first hand why Tonk mislead hunters. "They're stupid." I wasn't there, but I trust the information second hand was presented accurately.

 

[Lundy]

Don't know Lundy outside of the forum. Is he poking Joe or is he standing his ground based on his beliefs?

I'm not poking Joe or anyone else personally, just taking exception to some statements made by some, not the person themselves.

I still believe it is possible to have discussions with differing views without throwing a temper tantrum.

What part of the message that the Farm Bureau wants 250,000 deer statewide, the herd is estimated at north of 700,000 and the population needs to be reduced by 25%, did hunters not understand? I just can't understand how anyone can be surprised by the results of an announced and implemented plan.

Lets see, 2006, first year for the extra 2 day gun season and increased opportunity the total harvest was 237,316, in 2014 the total harvest was 177,987, lets do the math, hmmm, a 25% reduction in harvest, imagine that. I am not implying that population totals and harvest numbers perfectly align but the harvest trends are certainly used as an indicator of population including here on TOO, reduced harvest, reduced vehicle deer accidents, have been used to demonstrate a reduced population here many, many times.

ALSO, no minds will be changed here, we will end up just agreeing to disagree I'm sure

 

[Lundy]

They got to hear it first hand why Tonk mislead hunters. "They're stupid." I wasn't there, but I trust the information second hand was presented accurately.

How could anyone disagree with that statement as a whole? While I don't like the term "stupid" I would agree that the vast majority are largely uniformed and ignorant of wildlife and fisheries management practices and goals.

 

[Jackalope]

How could anyone disagree with that statement as a whole? While I don't like the term "stupid" I would agree that the vast majority are largely uniformed and ignorant of wildlife and fisheries management practices and goals.

That's not what Tonk was saying at all. It was in response to a statement he made where I basically said he was full of it. He tried to give the line "we're listening to you guys and reduced the antlerless tags in an effort to pull back the reins". I told him not to act like he's doing us a favor. Reducing tags doesn't help a thing as less that 5% of hunters kill more than 2 deer. Plus, when the population is as you say 750k and say it's 600k now, less tags is the same thing as it requires less tags to maintain the reduction". He hen told me I was right and slightly bragging told us just the previous week he had to explain that to some pissed off mega farmers who were mad about the tag reduction that it really didn't matter or slow their reduction plans. His eyes got big and he realized he just proved he was lying about the "we're listening to you guys". I called him out on it again and said you just proved to me you're lying to hunters and he said "yeah, joe, hunters aren't as smart as you guys" I responded. So you're saying they're easy to mislead because they're dumb". Short pause. "Yeah".

As for your other posts. I'll show you how he was lying when I get a moment to sit down and write it. I think what you're missing is. You're trying to prove he wasn't lying. But I and a couple others standing there that night heard him say it from his own mouth.

 

[Bigslam51]

So he mentioned a lottery system for public land 5 years ago? What happened to that?

 

[Hortontoter]

Is that a typing error Joe, or do we need number check on the site. Seems it was less than 5% of hunters kill more than 1 deer posted recently.

As far as hunters being dumb, some are, but IMO most are not. Even the dumb ones are smart enough to avoid checking deer with the TeleCheck system though. I believe TeleCheck was part of the plan to reduce the herd. I believe it will also continue to make estimating the herd size difficult as we go forward.

I will agree with one statement made in this discussion. Hunters will never unite for a common cause. Most of us on this site are quite dedicated and we still have very different opinions as to how to handle the situation we are in.

I started a thread a while back asking if passing on does was in vain. After this discussion I'm convinced I'm definitely in a big boat with only one oar.

 

[finelyshedded]

The ODNR would never give out less than accurate info or misinform the hunting community! They say based on their findings baiting is not beneficial in harvesting deer.....:smiley_crocodile:

That's a good one!!!!! rotflmao

 

[Jackalope]

So he mentioned a lottery system for public land 5 years ago? What happened to that?

He mentioned it as an option to reduce the over harvest on public land. They were looking at lots of things and that was an option. Reduced season, limited tags, muzzy only etc were all options.

 

[Bigslam51]

The ODNR would never give out less than accurate info or misinform the hunting community! They say based on their findings baiting is not beneficial in harvesting deer.....:smiley_crocodile:

That's a good one!!!!! rotflmao

Lol

 

[ajupsman]

Is that a typing error Joe, or do we need number check on the site. Seems it was less than 5% of hunters kill more than 1 deer posted recently.

As far as hunters being dumb, some are, but IMO most are not. Even the dumb ones are smart enough to avoid checking deer with the TeleCheck system though. I believe TeleCheck was part of the plan to reduce the herd. I believe it will also continue to make estimating the herd size difficult as we go forward.

I will agree with one statement made in this discussion. Hunters will never unite for a common cause. Most of us on this site are quite dedicated and we still have very different opinions as to how to handle the situation we are in.

I started a thread a while back asking if passing on does was in vain. After this discussion I'm convinced I'm definitely in a big boat with only one oar.

I only hunt your state a week or two a year but I would imagine the Telecheck system has really helped screw things up. We still have the check-in stations here and I think it's important. I know it requires more effort from hunters and officials but that effort will give you honest numbers to work with. Here's an article I read recently about why getting rid of check-in stations is a bad idea for any state.

http://www.deeranddeerhunting.com/b...utm_content=804274_DDH151204&utm_medium=email

 

[bowhunter1023]

I only hunt your state a week or two a year but I would imagine the Telecheck system has really helped screw things up. We still have the check-in stations here and I think it's important. I know it requires more effort from hunters and officials but that effort will give you honest numbers to work with. Here's an article I read recently about why getting rid of check-in stations is a bad idea for any state.

http://www.deeranddeerhunting.com/b...utm_content=804274_DDH151204&utm_medium=email

I agree with this 100% as does nearly everyone I have talked to about the issue. People who think otherwise are nuts.

 

[Boarhead]

The ODNR would never give out less than accurate info or misinform the hunting community! They say based on their findings baiting is not beneficial in harvesting deer.....:smiley_crocodile:

That's a good one!!!!! rotflmao

Yep,lol

 

[Lundy]

The ODNR would never give out less than accurate info or misinform the hunting community! They say based on their findings baiting is not beneficial in harvesting deer.....:smiley_crocodile:

That's a good one!!!!! rotflmao

That would be bad findings, misleading or a lie

 

[oakswamper]

I've just skimmed this thread and didn't see a mention of a survey being mailed to anyone. I got one in the mail today and there were some different questions than what I've seen in the online survey I've done in the past few years.