A summary of the summary's

[Lundy]

Pretty cool to read 11 years of ODNR deer harvest summary statements summarized.

2002-2003
Hunters harvested 133,391 deer during this
year’s week-long gun season, exceeding last year’s
harvest by nearly 33%. Archers reported
harvesting 48,904 deer during this year’s 4-month
archery season. Both the crossbow
(28,352) and vertical bow (20,552) harvests broke
records set last season. Crossbow and vertical bow
hunters harvested nearly 18% more deer than last
year.

2003-2004
Hunters harvested 116,236 deer during this
year’s week-long gun season, nearly 13% less
than last year. Archers reported harvesting a record
50,564 deer during this year’s 4-month archery
season. Once again, both the crossbow
(29,397) and vertical bow (21,167) harvests broke
records set last season. Crossbow and vertical bow
hunters harvested nearly 22% more deer than last
year.

2004-2005
Hunters harvested 123,041 deer during this
year’s week-long gun season, nearly 6% more
than last year. Archers reported harvesting
60,626 deer this year, nearly 20% more than
last season (Table 1). This year marks the 5th
consecutive record harvest for both crossbow
(35,729) and vertical bow (24,897) archers

2005-2006

Hunters harvested 116,517 deer during the
statewide gun season, 5.3% less than last year.
Archers reported harvesting 60,090 deer this
year, just 526 fewer deer than last season (Table
1). Once again, the vertical bow harvest (26,432)
set a record, making the 2005-06 season the 6th
consecutive record season.

2006-2007

Hunters harvested 112,260 deer during
the statewide gun season, 3.7% less than last
year. The addition of the 2-day bonus gun
season in mid-December may have contributed
some to the observed decline in the gun
harvest by shifting hunting pressure.
Archers reported harvesting
a record 67,912 deer this year, 13.3% more
than last season (Table 1). This year’s vertical
bow harvest (29,423) represents the 7th
consecutive record harvest.

2007-2008

Hunters harvested 103,134 deer during
the traditional statewide gun season, 8.1%
less than last year. Weather undoubtedly
influenced this year’s gun harvest. Heavy
rains led to a record 51% drop in the opening
day harvest. The 2-day bonus gun season in
mid-December may have contributed some
to the decline as well by shifting hunting
pressure. Archers reportedharvesting 78,639
deer this year, 15.8% more than last season

2008-2009

Hunters harvested117,487 deer during the
traditional statewide gunseason, 14% more than
last year. Archers reported harvesting85,856 deer
this year, 9% more than last season. This year’s vertical
bow harvest of 39,376 deer represents a 8.3% increase
over last season. For the 9th consecutive year, vertical bow
hunters have set harvest records.

2009-2010

Hunters harvested 114,075 deer during the traditional
statewide gun season, 3% fewer than last year. Archers
report¬ed harvesting 91,546 deer this year, 7% more than
last season. This year’s archery harvest marks the 11th
consecutive year that the statewide archery harvest has
increased. Archers now account for 35% of the entire harvest.

2010-2011

Hunters harvested 105,781 deer during the traditional
statewide gun season, 7% fewer than last year.
The Bonus Gun harvest was up nearly 7% this year,
and the only season to post an increase in 2010-11.
Hunters harvested 21,376 deer during the 2-day
mid-December season. Archers reported harvesting
85,012 deer this year, 7% fewer than last year.

2011-2012

Hunters harvested 90,828 deer during the traditional
statewide gun season, 14% fewer than last year .
The Bonus Gun harvest was down 20% this year.
Hunters harvested 17,172 deer dur¬ing the two-day
mid-December season. Archers reported harvesting
82,732 deer this year, 3% fewer than last season. Archers
accounted for 38% of the entire harvest. By comparison,
just a decade ago the archery harvest accounted for just
over 22% of the annual harvest

2012-2013

Hunters harvested 86,963 deer during the traditional
statewide gun season, 4% fewer than last year. The bonus
gun harvest was down 16% this year. This follows a 20%
decline last year. Hunters harvested 14,365 deer dur¬ing
the two-day mid-December season. Archers reported harvesting
84,643 deer this year, 2% more than last season. Archers
accounted for nearly 39% of the entire deer harvest

 

[Lundy]

And since I don't have anything else to do tonight I looked at the numbers a little closer

Where have all of the deer gone?

I was looking at the harvest numbers and trying to see anything that might provide some insight to the population reduction.

I took the gun seasons harvests of 2002, 2003 and 2004, they equal 372,668 , and divided by the 3 years to establish some average harvest for 9- 10 years ago and it comes in at around 124,000 per year for the gun season. If I apply that average to the remaining years 2005 through 2012 those 8 years would equal a total harvest of 992,000 deer during the gun seasons. The actual number however is 899,000 deer killed during the gun season for those 8 years including the 2 day bonus gun seasons. This equates to a net reduction of 93,000 deer killed had the average yearly deer gun season harvest remained constant.

By contrast it you take the same look at the archery harvest it looks quite a bit different. The total season harvest combined for 202, 2003, 2004 was 160,094 deer. For an average of 53,354 per year. If that same average had be maintained for the years 2005 through 2012 the total archery harvest for those years would have totaled around 427,000 deer. The actual total archery harvest for 2005 through 2012 was nearly 637,000 deer resulting in an over average net increase of 210,000 deer harvest by archery over the same time period as I examined the gun harvest numbers.

So a 93,000 reduction in total harvest of yearly average for the last 8 years for gun season yet a 210,000 harvest increase over yearly average with archery for that same period.

I’m guessing some might now understand why when I hear people saying that the opportunity allotment to hunt with a gun needs to be reduced in the interest of reducing the harvest and growing the population why I say WTF are you talking about!

 

[MK111]

Interest and that puts into a different light.

 

[Hunter II]

"The addition of the 2-day bonus gun
season in mid-December may have contributed
some to the observed decline in the gun
harvest by shifting hunting pressure."

I have never heard anyone say they were skipping regular gun season and were going to wait to hunt during the bonus season. Do people really do this or is it an attempt to dissuade the notion the herd and/or participation was lower?

 

[Lundy]

"The addition of the 2-day bonus gun
season in mid-December may have contributed
some to the observed decline in the gun
harvest by shifting hunting pressure."

I have never heard anyone say they were skipping regular gun season and were going to wait to hunt during the bonus season. Do people really do this or is it an attempt to dissuade the notion the herd and/or participation was lower?

I don't think anyone skips hunting the gun season in favor of the 2 day but I do know many in the past that didn't shoot a doe for meat during the gun season knowing they would do so during the 2 day so yes it could shift harvest even if it doesn't shift participation.

 

[brock ratcliff]

I think there is no doubt gun season pressure has changed over the years. It's far less intense. Having four full weekend days to hunt vs one as it was prior to 2002, means less people are willing to burn a weeks vacation to gun hunt. I like it from the perspective that the pressure is not nearly as intense. In the early 90's I went to TN for rifle season. There were very few hunters out. I thought it was weird. Their season was three weeks long. A strange concept to me at the time. Certainly spreads the pressure.

 

[brock ratcliff]

Bow hunting has gone the other direction. It's now hard to find a woods without treestands scattered all over.

 

[MK111]

Bow hunting has gone the other direction. It's now hard to find a woods without treestands scattered all over.

But I was gun hunting out of tree stands 30 yrs before I started bow hunting.

 

[Bigcountry40]

I would like to see public land kill #s v. private land kills over the past 11 years.

 

[CritterGitterToo]

I would imagine a big part of the shift was initially a result of $15 antlerless tags available for archery season. I would imagine a spike in crossbow sales would correlate.

 

[Lundy]

I would like to see public land kill #s v. private land kills over the past 11 years.

I'm sure they have that data but I don't see it published anywhere.

Couple of interesting bits of information for the 2014-2015 summary

Non-resident hunters accounted for 11% of the deer permits issued and 8% and 12% of the total and buck harvests, respectively, in the 2014-15 season. Eighteen percent of the non-resident harvest (2,659 deer) was taken on public land, which is more than twice the rate of the resident public land harvest (8%).More than half (62%) of the non-resident harvest occurred during archery season

Landowners reported harvesting 47,477 deer, accounting for 27% of the total harvest

While public land only accounts for roughly 4% of the total land area in the state, resident and non-resident hunters reported harvesting 16,059 deer, just over 9% of the season total, on public land. Antlered bucks accounted for 37% of the public land harvest, nearly equal to the proportion of antlered bucks in the private land harvest (38%).

This year, 228,530 resident adults purchased at least one either-sex or antlerless-only permit and 69,020 harvested at least one deer, for a 30% hunter success rate. Hunter success rates differed markedly on public and private land. Twenty-eight percent of private land hunters were successful, as compared to only 13% of public land hunters.

During the 2014-15 season, 82% of hunters bowhunted, while 29%, 69% and 33% reported hunting in the antlerless muzzleloader, gun, and muzzleloader seasons, respectively (Figure 6). The gun and archery season success rates were nearly identical, with almost one in five hunters reporting a deer harvest (Table 6)

As reported in the 2012-13 deer hunter effort and harvest survey, only 5% of Ohio’s resident hunters hunted public land exclusively, down from 8% in 2001. Those hunting mostly public land was unchanged (5%), while hunters who reported spending half their time afield on public land dropped from 11% to 6%. The greatest shift occurred among that group of hunters that reported spending all of their time on private land. In 2001-02, just over half of Ohio’s resident hunters reported hunting private land exclusively (Fig. 5). Last year, 68% of the hunters reported hunting private land exclusively.

 

[reo]

From the 2014-2015 summery:
"In 2001, half of Ohio’s resident hunters spent some time on public land. In 2012, less than one-third of those contacted indicated that they had spent some time on public lands. However, over the same time period, complaints of crowded conditions on our public lands have escalated. Part of the reason for the discrepancy may be due to hunters that are not represented in our annual deer hunter surveys – non-residents. Though non-resident license sales were down 4% this year from the peak in 2012, there were still 37,807 hunting licenses sold, a 177% increase since 2001. Given this sharp increase in the number of non-resident hunting licenses, coupled with the fact that non-residents accounted for 20% or more of the public land harvest in eight of the top 10 public land counties (Table 7), the reason for increased crowding complaints becomes clearer."

From 2001 to 2014 there has been a 177% increase in non-resident licenses.....

 

[Jackalope]

From the 2014-2015 summery:
"In 2001, half of Ohio’s resident hunters spent some time on public land. In 2012, less than one-third of those contacted indicated that they had spent some time on public lands. However, over the same time period, complaints of crowded conditions on our public lands have escalated. Part of the reason for the discrepancy may be due to hunters that are not represented in our annual deer hunter surveys – non-residents. Though non-resident license sales were down 4% this year from the peak in 2012, there were still 37,807 hunting licenses sold, a 177% increase since 2001. Given this sharp increase in the number of non-resident hunting licenses, coupled with the fact that non-residents accounted for 20% or more of the public land harvest in eight of the top 10 public land counties (Table 7), the reason for increased crowding complaints becomes clearer."

From 2001 to 2014 there has been a 177% increase in non-resident licenses.....

That's what happens you you slap those Columbus city deer getting killed on magazines and NR hear "ohio is overpopulated with deer". The fact of the matter is ohio can get a lot shittier before they're even half as shitty as the states most of the NR hunters come from. In most cases a 120 inch buck in their state is a buck of a lifetime.

I'm going to start looking for places to live in KY. Talk about an up and coming deer state. Couple that with the DNRs willingness to reintroduce elk and they seem like a DNR who cares about their hunters. That and land is cheap and not based on a way overinflated CAUV like most areas in ohio. 8-12 grand per acre for tillable dirt around here, it's ridiculous.

 

[Beentown]

That's what happens you you slap those Columbus city deer getting killed on magazines and NR hear "ohio is overpopulated with deer". The fact of the matter is ohio can get a lot shittier before they're even half as shitty as the states most of the NR hunters come from. In most cases a 120 inch buck in their state is a buck of a lifetime.

I'm going to start looking for places to live in KY. Talk about an up and coming deer state. Couple that with the DNRs willingness to reintroduce elk and they seem like a DNR who cares about their hunters. That and land is cheap and not based on a way overinflated CAUV like most areas in ohio. 8-12 grand per acre for tillable dirt around here, it's ridiculous.

Bowling Green, KY

That area is beautiful, cheap and decent employment.

http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/591-Benleo-Rd_Bowling-Green_KY_42101_M38379-44501

 

[giles]

My wife won't move again. We moved around in the military and made our last move to Ohio a few years ago. We might move around this area, but we are done starting over, so I gotta ride this out. Otherwise, I think I'd be looking into Minnesota. They seem to have their shit together!

 

[hickslawns]

Bowling Green, KY

That area is beautiful, cheap and decent employment.

http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/591-Benleo-Rd_Bowling-Green_KY_42101_M38379-44501

Yes. SW Kentucky seems to be where it is. Beautiful country. Close to Louisville, Nashville, and Indy. Good hunting. Rolling terrain. Take the kids to Mammoth Cave one summer. What more do you want? haha

 

[CritterGitterToo]

I'm partial to eastern Kentucky. The Grayson area is beautiful. Has good deer hunting and awesome turkey hunting!

 

[Bigcountry40]

I'm sure they have that data but I don't see it published anywhere.

Couple of interesting bits of information for the 2014-2015 summary

Non-resident hunters accounted for 11% of the deer permits issued and 8% and 12% of the total and buck harvests, respectively, in the 2014-15 season. Eighteen percent of the non-resident harvest (2,659 deer) was taken on public land, which is more than twice the rate of the resident public land harvest (8%).More than half (62%) of the non-resident harvest occurred during archery season

Landowners reported harvesting 47,477 deer, accounting for 27% of the total harvest

While public land only accounts for roughly 4% of the total land area in the state, resident and non-resident hunters reported harvesting 16,059 deer, just over 9% of the season total, on public land. Antlered bucks accounted for 37% of the public land harvest, nearly equal to the proportion of antlered bucks in the private land harvest (38%).

This year, 228,530 resident adults purchased at least one either-sex or antlerless-only permit and 69,020 harvested at least one deer, for a 30% hunter success rate. Hunter success rates differed markedly on public and private land. Twenty-eight percent of private land hunters were successful, as compared to only 13% of public land hunters.

During the 2014-15 season, 82% of hunters bowhunted, while 29%, 69% and 33% reported hunting in the antlerless muzzleloader, gun, and muzzleloader seasons, respectively (Figure 6). The gun and archery season success rates were nearly identical, with almost one in five hunters reporting a deer harvest (Table 6)

As reported in the 2012-13 deer hunter effort and harvest survey, only 5% of Ohio’s resident hunters hunted public land exclusively, down from 8% in 2001. Those hunting mostly public land was unchanged (5%), while hunters who reported spending half their time afield on public land dropped from 11% to 6%. The greatest shift occurred among that group of hunters that reported spending all of their time on private land. In 2001-02, just over half of Ohio’s resident hunters reported hunting private land exclusively (Fig. 5). Last year, 68% of the hunters reported hunting private land exclusively.

So why is ODNR considering restricting/regulating public land hunting more this up and coming year? Why give people who already have limited access to decent hunting land a bigger shaft? It sounds like the restriction should be imposed on private land more than public land. I hunt private land primarily by the way. I am making assumptions about regulations on public land that I believe are going to be imposed based on the survey they are sending out (see prior posts under this thread)

 

[MK111]

So why is ODNR considering restricting/regulating public land hunting more this up and coming year? Why give people who already have limited access to decent hunting land a bigger shaft? It sounds like the restriction should be imposed on private land more than public land. I hunt private land primarily by the way. I am making assumptions about regulations on public land that I believe are going to be imposed based on the survey they are sending out (see prior posts under this thread)

There you go and put restrictions on landowners to hunt on their own land. That won't go over well if at all. Private owned land is the largest amount of land in Ohio.
I also don't want to any type of free access placed on private land as that will only lead to major problems of abuse placed on the landowner from the majority of the hunting public.

 

[reo]

So why is ODNR considering restricting/regulating public land hunting more this up and coming year? Why give people who already have limited access to decent hunting land a bigger shaft? It sounds like the restriction should be imposed on private land more than public land. I hunt private land primarily by the way. I am making assumptions about regulations on public land that I believe are going to be imposed based on the survey they are sending out (see prior posts under this thread)

Perhaps the restricting/regulating will be on non-residents??