Deer Gun Harvest Totals Decline

[Bigslam51]

I dunno . Lots of people have realized ya can't kill every deer ya see and there still be deer . Alot of people are just shooting one or two does now and then passing does up , even tho they could buy more tags and keep killing deer .

X2.

 

[Hortontoter]

I've been trying hard to stay on the sidelines on this forum. My ideas always clash with the majority, which doesn't surprise me.

IF one agrees that it is the job of the ODNR, not the hunter, to regulate the herd. Then why do the ones that believe this whine the most. We all as hunters have the choice to kill or not kill every deer that offers us the opportunity. IMO it is all about the math. The longer we kill does the less deer that will exist. IT IS THAT SIMPLE.

The idea brought up a while back about an Ohio Deer Hunters Coalition, or whatever the term is, IMO will never work. Many times I've seen it said "we are not the average deer hunter", an I agree wholeheartedly. But, lets be honest, this small group of "better than average" hunters can't agree on much. So how in the world would anyone surmise that the rest of the states hunters are going to ban together as one united front.

I'll stand behind what I believe to be factual, but argued by many. The hunter has the final say how many deer live or how many die.

 

[Boarhead]

Great post Dick!

 

[Jackalope]

I've been trying hard to stay on the sidelines on this forum. My ideas always clash with the majority, which doesn't surprise me.

IF one agrees that it is the job of the ODNR, not the hunter, to regulate the herd. Then why do the ones that believe this whine the most. We all as hunters have the choice to kill or not kill every deer that offers us the opportunity. IMO it is all about the math. The longer we kill does the less deer that will exist. IT IS THAT SIMPLE.

The idea brought up a while back about an Ohio Deer Hunters Coalition, or whatever the term is, IMO will never work. Many times I've seen it said "we are not the average deer hunter", an I agree wholeheartedly. But, lets be honest, this small group of "better than average" hunters can't agree on much. So how in the world would anyone surmise that the rest of the states hunters are going to ban together as one united front.

I'll stand behind what I believe to be factual, but argued by many. The hunter has the final say how many deer live or how many die.

I see what your saying but I also find it pretty pessimistic. The hunter is the tool the DNR uses to manage the herd. Just like a rabbit dog is a tool a hunter uses to chase him a rabbit, the dog doesn't stop if there's 80% less rabbits. He's going to do his job and chase a rabbit to it's death. He's going to go out and beat the bush nonstop until he finds one. When he finds that rabbit he's going to do his job regardless of what the population is. This is because the dog doesn't understand, he can't see the bigger picture, he's trusting his master to do what's right. To expect that dog to show restraint, let some rabbits walk, or stop chasing so many rabbits is impossible in his current uninformed state. Just like that dog, a deer hunters role is to kill deer, We are a tool to the DNR. It's the DNRs role to put guidelines around the hunters that speeds up or slows our killing. The goal of the organisation will be to educate, inform, and assist hunters in understanding the bigger picture of what's happening. If that can be achieved it will only benefit us as hunters and the deer population by proxy. The DNR was able to complete their agenda largely because hunters were uninformed and unorganized. That needs to change. And while many people may disagree on what needs to change, the vast majority agree something needs to change. Someone needs to present the data and help facilitate collaboration for a unified direction. The more people involved the better. Some will disagree, and we hope they do as the voice of reason is always welcomed and better helps to guide movement.

 

[Hortontoter]

You should be happy Joe, the DNR has done their job very well. But, yet you whine constantly.

And just for the record, I can't quite think of my brain and that of a dog as equal. Maybe you can, but not I. Enough said.

 

[giles]

I think the difference being the traveling deer hunter. He's not local, he doesn't know what the local herd looks like. He shows up and kills a couple of doe. The doe the locals have been letting walk by. He says everything is fine, he gets his deer every year. The local guy says we haven't killed a doe in 5 years! I'm not talking about just NR's here either. LOT'S and LOT'S of people hunt away from home. Myself included.

 

[Jackalope]

You should be happy Joe, the DNR has done their job very well. But, yet you whine constantly.

And just for the record, I can't quite think of my brain and that of a dog as equal. Maybe you can, but not I. Enough said.

Are you implying that hunters should be happy the DNR has done a job of decimating the deer population to shore up the profits of special interest insurance companies? And because they did that for them hunters should not complain about it?

 

[Jackalope]

I think the difference being the traveling deer hunter. He's not local, he doesn't know what the local herd looks like. He shows up and kills a couple of doe. The doe the locals have been letting walk by. He says everything is fine, he gets his deer every year. The local guy says we haven't killed a doe in 5 years! I'm not talking about just NR's here either. LOT'S and LOT'S of people hunt away from home. Myself included.

It's locals also. I saw a guy on FB complaining about hunting for 4 days during gun season and not seeing a single deer in a place that he used to shoot a couple every year... I asked him a question. "If you saw a deer on that 4th evening, would you have shot it" His answer was "absolutely!"

And there in lies the problem with the fairy-tale logic of expecting hunters to show restraint and let one walk without seeing the bigger picture. Maybe through education and information on the bigger picture we can win some of them over. You'll never get all of them to participate as greed is a part of human nature; but for every hunter we can win over is another doe left to breed.

 

[OO2]

I like what you are saying HortonToter. Sure you could blame the ODNR for mismanaging the deer herd and allowing too many deer to be harvested. Last I checked we, the hunters, have complete control over the amount of deer that we shoot. Just because the law allows you to shoot that many doesn't mean you have to shoot them. But yet, people go out and shoot doe after doe after doe and then all in the same breath go on and complain about how their herd size is down. Seems like complete ignorance to me to go shoot as many doe as you want just because you are allowed too.

Hunters should have plenty of restraint to allow deer to pass without shooting them. If not they need to grow the hell up.

 

[Hortontoter]

Are you implying that hunters should be happy the DNR has done a job of decimating the deer population to shore up the profits of special interest insurance companies? And because they did that for them hunters should not complain about it?

What I said is that you and others say it is the ODNR's job to regulate the deer herd. THEY DID THAT, get it through your thick head. HUNTERS decimated the herd just the way the ODNR planned. If the ODNR did the job they are paid to do why whine, it doesn't change anything. This is another senseless discussion, that no one will win anyways.

 

[hickslawns]

I've been trying hard to stay on the sidelines on this forum. My ideas always clash with the majority, which doesn't surprise me.

IF one agrees that it is the job of the ODNR, not the hunter, to regulate the herd. Then why do the ones that believe this whine the most. We all as hunters have the choice to kill or not kill every deer that offers us the opportunity. IMO it is all about the math. The longer we kill does the less deer that will exist. IT IS THAT SIMPLE.

The idea brought up a while back about an Ohio Deer Hunters Coalition, or whatever the term is, IMO will never work. Many times I've seen it said "we are not the average deer hunter", an I agree wholeheartedly. But, lets be honest, this small group of "better than average" hunters can't agree on much. So how in the world would anyone surmise that the rest of the states hunters are going to ban together as one united front.

I'll stand behind what I believe to be factual, but argued by many. The hunter has the final say how many deer live or how many die.

I'm glad you posted Dick. We do not all have to agree. You can have an opinion differing from 80% of the forum. You show up at a TOO outing and you will be welcomed. We will be very happy to see you and talk to you. Some like to argue. Without differing opinions, we have nothing to argue about. (Not saying I disagree with you. I agree with most of what you said.) More importantly, without differing opinions, we don't hear things we could be overlooking. There may be variables or factors we didn't consider until we heard them. Keep posting my friend.

Me personally? I have a different outlook. When I started it was in the high tag limit/reduce the doe population time period or mentality. I am goal oriented. I set goals to fill all my tags. That has changed in the last 3-4yrs. Now I hold off on does until I see a property with a healthy population of them. Then I try to pick out a medium to large sized doe to tag. After that it is buck hunting time. If I am not seeing does, I am willing to shoot a button buck for the freezer. My point being: My outlook and tag filling process has changed. I had my eyes opened up. We need to continue educating those who don't hunt as frequently, don't read on social media/TOO, and haven't considered what many on TOO have argued into the ground. There needs to be a change in the mindset of the hunters. I feel QDMA should be held somewhat responsible. I feel they need to assist in helping to change the mind set. ON that same page, I openly admit there are areas which need doe reduction. The post from IowaBuckeye with all those deer is proof there "can be" areas which need to be thinned out. I do believe this is the exception to the rule though. I do not believe there are many places left like this in Ohio. Not in my area anyway.

 

[Jackalope]

What I said is that you and others say it is the ODNR's job to regulate the deer herd. THEY DID THAT, get it through your thick head. HUNTERS decimated the herd just the way the ODNR planned. If the ODNR did the job they are paid to do why whine, it doesn't change anything. This is another senseless discussion, that no one will win anyways.

It is the DNRs job to regulate the deer herd. And they regulated it To the benefit of insurance companies and to the detriment to hunters. The DNR used mostly uninformed hunters to decimate the population before the hunters even realized what they had done. And you don't think that constitutes grounds for hunters to complain about the Job the DNR has done?

You logic is that the ODOT could get rid of speed limits and everyone would self regulate and drive at a safe speeds. You obviously understand nothing about human nature. If hunters were capable of self regulation on a large scale there wouldn't even be a need for the DOW or even ODOT for that matter. The DOW could disappear and we would all self regulate our harvest and have a thriving population. Expecting people to do self regulate without educating them to the bigger picture is completely illogical. The hope is that we can educate people and hope they try to self preserve like hicks and many others have done.

 

[giles]

I'm glad you posted Dick. We do not all have to agree. You can have an opinion differing from 80% of the forum. You show up at a TOO outing and you will be welcomed. We will be very happy to see you and talk to you. Some like to argue. Without differing opinions, we have nothing to argue about. (Not saying I disagree with you. I agree with most of what you said.) More importantly, without differing opinions, we don't hear things we could be overlooking. There may be variables or factors we didn't consider until we heard them. Keep posting my friend.

Me personally? I have a different outlook. When I started it was in the high tag limit/reduce the doe population time period or mentality. I am goal oriented. I set goals to fill all my tags. That has changed in the last 3-4yrs. Now I hold off on does until I see a property with a healthy population of them. Then I try to pick out a medium to large sized doe to tag. After that it is buck hunting time. If I am not seeing does, I am willing to shoot a button buck for the freezer. My point being: My outlook and tag filling process has changed. I had my eyes opened up. We need to continue educating those who don't hunt as frequently, don't read on social media/TOO, and haven't considered what many on TOO have argued into the ground. There needs to be a change in the mindset of the hunters. I feel QDMA should be held somewhat responsible. I feel they need to assist in helping to change the mind set. ON that same page, I openly admit there are areas which need doe reduction. The post from IowaBuckeye with all those deer is proof there "can be" areas which need to be thinned out. I do believe this is the exception to the rule though. I do not believe there are many places left like this in Ohio. Not in my area anyway.

http://charliealsheimer.com/ca/articles/5stages.html

 

[5Cent]

I like what you are saying HortonToter. Sure you could blame the ODNR for mismanaging the deer herd and allowing too many deer to be harvested. Last I checked we, the hunters, have complete control over the amount of deer that we shoot. Just because the law allows you to shoot that many doesn't mean you have to shoot them. But yet, people go out and shoot doe after doe after doe and then all in the same breath go on and complain about how their herd size is down. Seems like complete ignorance to me to go shoot as many doe as you want just because you are allowed too.

Hunters should have plenty of restraint to allow deer to pass without shooting them. If not they need to grow the hell up.

I will never grow up, Im a toys r us kid.

I am happy to agree that you and I are hunting for different reasons, but i dont agree you or anyone else should be telling others what to do. My hard earned $ is supposed to be used by the ODNR to manage a healthy herd. If I can buy a tag and have the opportunity to fill the tag, I will.

 

[5Cent]

What I said is that you and others say it is the ODNR's job to regulate the deer herd. THEY DID THAT, get it through your thick head. HUNTERS decimated the herd just the way the ODNR planned. If the ODNR did the job they are paid to do why whine, it doesn't change anything. This is another senseless discussion, that no one will win anyways.

You are spot on Dick. You are calling the hypocrites out just not sure it should be done by name unless there is evidence of killing does and complaining to go that far. I salute the ODNR for reaching thier goal, now its time for hunters to voice their opinion that the goal does not align with hunters wants. There is no right or wrong, in my mind, on this topic. Until then, i have 2 unfilled tags and freezer space. The hunt continues...

 

[bowhunter1023]

I love being doubted. They said the same thing when we started TOO and look at us now. We'll save you a seat on the bandwagon Dick.

And it'll be the Ohio Whitetail Alliance FYI...

 

[giles]

OWA...that's gay. Ohio-Future Alliance Whitetails Keelers...O-FAWK

 

[OO2]

I'm just voicing my opinion on the matter. Certainly not telling people what to do. I respect what everyone is saying and I think their are a lot of good points being made.

 

[Dustinb80]

O-fawk!!!

 

[Schu72]

Didn't take long for this to get sideways.