2018-2019 Deer Season Harvest Numbers. (-7.6% Decline)

[Jackalope]

COLUMBUS, OH – Hunters checked 172,040 white-tailed deer throughout Ohio’s 2018-2019 deer season, according to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR). Last year, 186,247 deer were checked during the 2017-2018 season.

The ODNR Division of Wildlife remains committed to properly managing Ohio’s deer populations. The goal of Ohio’s Deer Management Program is to provide a deer population that maximizes recreational opportunities, while minimizing conflicts with landowners and motorists.

Deer hunting regulations over the past four seasons have been designed to allow for moderate herd growth throughout most of the state. Herd growth is achieved by reducing harvest and protecting female deer.

Editor’s Note: A list of all white-tailed deer checked by hunters during the 2018-2019 deer season is shown below. The first number following the county’s name shows the harvest number for the 2018-2019 season, and the 2017-2018 season number is in parentheses. Harvest numbers below are raw data and subject to change.

Adams: 2,944 (3,231); Allen: 878 (979); Ashland: 2,953 (3,254); Ashtabula: 4,884 (5,076); Athens: 3,442 (3,732); Auglaize: 824 (848); Belmont: 2,615 (2,931); Brown: 2,267 (2,521); Butler: 1,270 (1,401); Carroll: 3,465 (3,935); Champaign: 1,112 (1,197); Clark: 744 (685); Clermont: 2,294 (2,471); Clinton: 702 (810); Columbiana: 2,787 (3,257); Coshocton: 6,040 (6,559); Crawford: 1,122 (1,222); Cuyahoga: 929 (1,033); Darke: 687 (731); Defiance: 1,587 (1,600); Delaware: 1,406 (1,574).

Erie: 1,017 (1,119); Fairfield: 1,793 (1,969); Fayette: 288 (353); Franklin: 733 (788); Fulton: 706 (745); Gallia: 2,487 (2,599); Geauga: 1,849 (1,818); Greene: 804 (778); Guernsey: 4,288 (4,753); Hamilton: 1,536 (1,639); Hancock: 1,142 (1,228); Hardin: 1,160 (1,253); Harrison: 3,198 (3,674); Henry: 675 (733); Highland: 2,275 (2,668); Hocking: 2,794 (3,321); Holmes: 3,916 (4,108); Huron: 2,100 (2,377); Jackson: 2,838 (2,984); Jefferson: 1,678 (1,903); Knox: 4,257 (4,658).

Lake: 799 (883); Lawrence: 1,802 (1,784); Licking: 4,573 (5,009); Logan: 1,943 (2,055); Lorain: 2,073 (2,255); Lucas: 721 (748); Madison: 480 (511); Mahoning: 1,897 (2,032); Marion: 787 (893); Medina: 2,081 (2,012); Meigs: 3,072 (3,115); Mercer: 673 (677); Miami: 735 (787); Monroe: 2,276 (2,618); Montgomery: 699 (704); Morgan: 2,923 (3,278); Morrow: 1,476 (1,544); Muskingum: 4,646 (5,274); Noble: 2,902 (3,036); Ottawa: 474 (482).

Paulding: 965 (1,022); Perry: 2,436 (2,769); Pickaway: 727 (822); Pike: 1,870 (1,934); Portage: 2,289 (2,289); Preble: 973 (969); Putnam: 695 (781); Richland: 3,254 (3,505); Ross: 2,749 (3,053); Sandusky: 829 (904); Scioto: 2,155 (2,326); Seneca: 1,770 (1,895); Shelby: 895 (983); Stark: 2,779 (2,880); Summit: 1,464 (1,474); Trumbull: 3,448 (3,640); Tuscarawas: 5,221 (5,722); Union: 921 (939); Van Wert: 492 (499); Vinton: 2,379 (2,802); Warren: 1,125 (1,186); Washington: 3,097 (3,327); Wayne: 2,081 (2,226); Williams: 1,555 (1,598); Wood: 905 (931); Wyandot: 1,448 (1,559). Total: 172,040 (186,247).

 

[Jackalope]

I like how they threw in this line of bullshit "Deer hunting regulations over the past four seasons have been designed to allow for moderate herd growth throughout most of the state. Herd growth is achieved by reducing harvest and protecting female deer."

But if you think back to our conversations with Tonk when they started the herd decimation they based their herd estimations slowly on season harvest numbers. More deer killed meant the population was growing, less deer killed means it was shrinking. So how is it now that less deer killed means they are somehow achieving "moderate herd growth".. More laughable lies and disinformation from the DOW.

 

[giles]

How many tags were sold from last season to this season?

 

[brock ratcliff]

Joe, we’ve been on the same page for years but I disagree with your statement regarding the DOWs comment. Killing less deer is the only way the herd can rebound. They are issuing less tags and preserving a few does on public lands. Gotta give a little due credit when it’s due.

 

[cspot]

Joe, we’ve been on the same page for years but I disagree with your statement regarding the DOWs comment. Killing less deer is the only way the herd can rebound. They are issuing less tags and preserving a few does on public lands. Gotta give a little due credit when it’s due.

This year the weather was absolutely horrible on the major harvest days in gun season, so I wouldn't base a lower kill on a shrinking herd necessarily. You have to go by a few year average.

Not been hunting in Ohio for that long so I don't know the history and won't comment on it. However I do give them alot of credit for trying to manage public land differently.

 

[Jackalope]

Joe, we’ve been on the same page for years but I disagree with your statement regarding the DOWs comment. Killing less deer is the only way the herd can rebound. They are issuing less tags and preserving a few does on public lands. Gotta give a little due credit when it’s due.

I don't disagree with that at all brock. I'm disagreeing with the context in which it was used. For years Tonk claimed that if the harvest was up it meant there were more deer and more needed to be killed, and if the harvest was down then they knew the population was shrinking. This is how he "managed" the reduction. Now the DOW is claiming exactly the opposite in that since there were less killed the population is somehow being allowed to grow.

Do I see some progress being made with lowering tags and restricting public land harvest. Absolutly! But you were also standing right there when Tonk confirmed that lowering a county bag limit does little to regrow the population. This is because its not the guys that shoot 2 or more that leads to a reduction, its the number of guys that shoot 1. Let's also not forget that in order to continue to reduce a deer population, that is half of what it once was, you only need to kill half of what you once did. Less tags being sold and or less deer being killed doesn't correlate to more deer, it just means that it takes less to either continue the reduction or maintain current levels. A "less tags" strategy only makes sense if the total number of tags that can be used in a given area is limited, thus limiting oportunity, not total number of deer per person.

I do however agree that the public land steps are designed to regrow the population. This is due to the limiting of opportunity. You can only kill 1 deer on public land in the entire state and only bucks after gun season. That's a heck of a limit on opportunity. They cut way too deep on public land and all but annihilated deer in a lot of areas so now they're making an effort to regrow it.

If the DOW is attempting to "allow for moderate heard growth statewide" then they have shown us exactly how that is accomplished by their public land tactic of reducing opportunity. Lowering bag limits is nothing more than a hollow gesture that tonk himself admitted to.

My issue with the statement being BS was the context in which it was used to spin a reduced harvest like they're trying to grow the numbers. And I base that on historical statements from them as well as their own example of limiting opportunity to actually regrow a population.

 

[MoonLab]

I hadnt seen much deer at all for 2 months because of shitty weather. Warm, cold,warm, and cool .....first time in a long time of not being able to kill a deer.

 

[hickslawns]

Expected. The EHD last year had to have reduced numbers available to harvest. Lowered tags had to have helped.

 

[cotty16]

I just finished my emailed survey from Clint McCoy at the ODNR. At the very end you could enter a comment. I said my piece. I wish they put three year numbers on their totals. If I remember right, Jefferson was down about 600 deer last year and another couple hundred this year.

I run cameras all year and the pics were miserable. Even this time of year when they "herd" up... my biggest herd was 4 deer. That's insane! Not long ago it would be 12 or more herded up. I can't speak for every county, but Jefferson is still licking its wounds from the EHD outbreak. Combine that with an already declining herd from the last decade and we are in trouble here. This was by far my worst year of hinting in regard to sightings. Those of you who know me well enough know that I have never quit on a season before, but I did this year. It became just a waste of time. My two sons, who also have girls on their minds, didn't even hunt last year or this year because of lack of sightings. They went out a few times each year, but figured it was a waste of time. I can't blame them.

What used to be fun when you at least seen deer has become a real task to stay interested in. Something needs done to get the herd back up.

 

[bigten05]

only the next couple of years will tell if anything changes. im lucky enough to have a few spots that still have good doe numbers. if i loose those spots id struggle to put meat in the freezer i could still do it but it would require alot more work. im gonna say around me with all the amish that hunt the public land on kokosing wildlife area, with the new regs there is gonna be more leasing and land getting locked up. but then again i could see alot of people that dont have the money or private land to hunt will give up if they cant fill the freezer on public anymore.

 

[Schu72]

It sucks to hear how some of you are struggling with your local deer populations. I had one of the funnest seasons of my life. My son and I both took nice bucks and I was able to take a huge doe on the muzzy opener. This may have been the first time ever that I didn't get skunked a single time all season. The harvest number in Belmont are in significant decline, but I'm not seeing any decline in numbers. I hunted two different properties in Belmont county, harvesting one deer on each. My sightings from the stand were up and during my travels there, I saw deer everywhere. I'm not sure what to make of it, but I'm thankful for the opportunities the last few seasons.

As a side note, I did take my son on a controlled youth hunt at Mosquito and we saw over 20 deer there in a one day hunt. We both took Toms in the spring, his first. We were truly blessed this year. The only negative was the beating my wallet took at the taxi shop.

 

[Boone]

We deer hunt spots in four different counties and the populations there are moving in different directions.

We don't control much area, but have no harvested does in areas where EHD hit us five years ago and we are finally seeing a rebound in numbers. I feel your pain Cotty. It was a ghost town for the first couple of years. I wish the Division was more responsive in confirmed, known situations.

I think the weather had more of an effect on harvest this year statewide than the regulations. I like the direction they have taken on public land. It's a start. With all of the deer not harvested, next year should see a pretty good rebound.

 

[Buckmaster]

My Jeffco report....7 miles south of Cottyville. We saw a smaller herd size mostly made up of younger does with a few 2.5 year old bucks thrown in the mix. From my group only one shooter buck was seen and missed around late October. My camp typically takes about 10 per year on average. In 2017 we took 3 and in 2018 zero post EHD outbreak. Our count remains at 193 over 19 years. May hit the 200 mark by 2020. I had expected to get skunked a lot this year but surprisingly did not. I had a few enjoyable hunts but spent a lot of my time hunting elsewhere. One deer sighting now makes a good hunt. Back in the glory days it was 10+ per hunt. I was successful taking deer this year in Portage Co and in Elk Co., PA.

 

[giles]

I find myself hunting harder and harder every year around the house. 5 years ago you could see deer on every sit, this year in 5-6 sits I seen 1 deer.