23-24 Proposed Deer season changes
- Thread starter Hedgelj
- Start date
Trucks have been improved for the benefit of all… public safety, economy, stability, etc etc.
Same as deer.
I started bow hunting in 1976 killed my first deer with a bow in 78
In the 70’s to have a deer in bow range was an occasion
Has the deer population been higher than it is now absolutely
But I think we still have it pretty good here in Ohio
I do wish they would lower the bag limits not raise them
I think that for totally selfish reasons I like to watch deer
I am more concerned with the decline in the turkey population than the deer population
Not to mention pheasant, quail, grouse and rabbits
Just an old man’s thoughts
In the 70’s to have a deer in bow range was an occasion
Has the deer population been higher than it is now absolutely
But I think we still have it pretty good here in Ohio
I do wish they would lower the bag limits not raise them
I think that for totally selfish reasons I like to watch deer
I am more concerned with the decline in the turkey population than the deer population
Not to mention pheasant, quail, grouse and rabbits
Just an old man’s thoughts
I think it’s also worth pointing out, that we have actual documentation of over 10 years worth of this “mismanagement” war drum beating, just on this forum alone. Are we worse off today, like those conversations 10 years ago predicted?
If the state was trying to ruin your deer hunting, don’t you think they would’ve done it by now?
We have plenty of shortcomings when it comes to wildlife and habitat management in Ohio, and in all of the Midwest, frankly. The deer program is probably the very least of those shortcomings.
If the state was trying to ruin your deer hunting, don’t you think they would’ve done it by now?
We have plenty of shortcomings when it comes to wildlife and habitat management in Ohio, and in all of the Midwest, frankly. The deer program is probably the very least of those shortcomings.
- 6,363
- 136
Deer hunting is always on the back burner for 99% of hunters... Yeh, they love it but just are not passionate enough to promote changes and have better things to do....
Ponder this: The Ohio DNR sent out emails to every hunter in their data base last week that they were having an emergency meeting TOMORROW AT 7 PM to hear public opinion on deer season regulations.... How many would attend?????
Ponder this: The Ohio DNR sent out emails to every hunter in their data base last week that they were having an emergency meeting TOMORROW AT 7 PM to hear public opinion on deer season regulations.... How many would attend?????
I've been playing devils advocate mostly. If I was to form a group myself and have a push it would not just be for deer. Habitat improvement would be my driving force. With that everything else would improve. Most of our public lands habitat sucks. Most of private land habitat sucks.
agreed there are many species in Ohio that are NOT being managed for.....I started bow hunting in 1976 killed my first deer with a bow in 78
In the 70’s to have a deer in bow range was an occasion
Has the deer population been higher than it is now absolutely
But I think we still have it pretty good here in Ohio
I do wish they would lower the bag limits not raise them
I think that for totally selfish reasons I like to watch deer
I am more concerned with the decline in the turkey population than the deer population
Not to mention pheasant, quail, grouse and rabbits
Just an old man’s thoughts
When was the last time any of you heard a grouse drumming or saw one? it's been over a decade for me and that's sad because my kids won't know that sounds in the woods
- 39,121
- 274
Precisely. Open houses are a waste of time and designed to divide and give the appearance they're listening.
Hold a meeting at the state fairgrounds. Put the head of the DOW, ODNR and others up on the stage and hand out a microphone to the crowd in attendance. I bet a shit ton of people show up to give them the business. They'll never do it because they know what will happen, and they can't pretend to have never heard it. Instead they'll hide behind little open houses with a bunch of nobody non-decision makers.
How about getting some of the big money groups involved... NWTF, Whitetails Unlimited, etc.?
Do like the the increase in my areas, got more people that want me to hunt than I can get
tags for.
Do like the the increase in my areas, got more people that want me to hunt than I can get
tags for.
- 39,121
- 274
Yes. And No. But the No has nothing to do with the ODNRs intent and everything to do with their inability. It has gone just like Tonk predicted. When I asked him around 2011 at strouds how deep they intended to cut. He wouldn't give me a straight answer, so I asked him about how close they were to their reduction goal and he said 50%..
He then said that he doesn't think they'll ever achieve it because hunters will quit hunting. They'll get tired of not seeing deer, quit, and the population will rebound and there isn't much they'll be able to do because hunters are the tool to accomplish their goal. Great management strategy BTW, make people not want to hunt.
So anyway, we went from a season harvest total of about 261k deer killed in 2007 with no bonus gun and no rifles. To a low of about 160k killed 4-5 years ago. Deer permit sales fell from over 580k a year in 2007 to around 410k last year which has caused big issues with the DOW budget, and the primary reason they raised tag and license costs. But that's another topic. This year is the first year in over a decade where harvest has gone back over 200k. Days per successful harvest had dropped, and the success rate per hunter is rising. None of that is because of the ODNR. It's despite the ODNR. People stopped hunting just like Tonk predicted, and the deer population is rising as a result. Additionally, people seem to be more wise to the trick and realize they were lied too and shouldn't kill a bunch of does just because the ODNR will sell them a tag. So yes, if they could have done it, they would have done it. The rebound were seeing is despite them, not because of them and Tonk was right about that.
I would argue that the decrease in hunters and permit sales is not because of a decreasing deer population. If it Is, and I’m wrong, by your logic we will see an increase in hunters in the years to come, as the population trends upward. I doubt that will happen. Hunters are losing access. Young hunters are more distracted than they’ve ever been in history. The entire social dynamic is changing. It won’t matter what was done in 2007, or 2017, or wherever. Eventually we’re going to lose so much access and so many hunters that we can’t stop population growth. Hopefully we don’t see that in any of our lifetimes.Yes. And No. But the No has nothing to do with the ODNRs intent and everything to do with their inability. It has gone just like Tonk predicted. When I asked him around 2011 at strouds how deep they intended to cut. He wouldn't give me a straight answer, so I asked him about how close they were to their reduction goal and he said 50%..
He then said that he doesn't think they'll ever achieve it because hunters will quit hunting. They'll get tired of not seeing deer, quit, and the population will rebound and there isn't much they'll be able to do because hunters are the tool to accomplish their goal. Great management strategy BTW, make people not want to hunt.
So anyway, we went from a season harvest total of about 261k deer killed in 2007 with no bonus gun and no rifles. To a low of about 160k killed 4-5 years ago. Deer permit sales fell from over 580k a year in 2007 to around 410k last year which has caused big issues with the DOW budget, and the primary reason they raised tag and license costs. But that's another topic. This year is the first year in over a decade where harvest has gone back over 200k. Days per successful harvest had dropped, and the success rate per hunter is rising. None of that is because of the ODNR. It's despite the ODNR. People stopped hunting just like Tonk predicted, and the deer population is rising as a result. Additionally, people seem to be more wise to the trick and realize they were lied too and shouldn't kill a bunch of does just because the ODNR will sell them a tag. So yes, if they could have done it, they would have done it. The rebound were seeing is despite them, not because of them and Tonk was right about that.
- 39,121
- 274
I won't argue that loss of access is a factor that threatens the future of hunting. And it likely played a factor in the decline of hunters also. But if you're a guy that only had 5 acres to hunt and over the years you go from seeing plenty of deer to not seeing anything you're likely going to quit. I was on a lease in Vinton that si could sit in a stand in this hollow and see 10-15 deer pet sit. Three years into their reduction effort of allowing cheap doe tags and bonus gun I could hunt that same lease an maybe see a deer every couple of days. So I dropped the lease. Population plays a huge role in retention, even if all you had to hunt was a tiny parcel.
With the loss of access, people moved to public land. Even without the loss of access, the public was the only spot many people had to hunt. Their reduction effort decimated large areas of public land that became pretty much not worth hunting due to the lack of deer except for the hardcore guys who hunt hard and deep. Let's fave it though most people aren't that guy. Luckily we've seen them pull back the reins the last couple of years by only allowing a single doe harvest, bucks only after gun season etc. Unfortunately the damage to the population and the people that hunted it was already done. Lots of people just quit. As the harvest and population numbers increase we should see people get back in to hunting.
Nothing to complain about in this part of the state, bag limit wise or seasons dates in my lifetime of hunting except the reduction plan which i feel will happen again in the next few seasons. Cwd is more the threat than trigger happy hunters in my mind. Still would like a saturday after thanksgiving opener just for more days of family fun.
Agreed on the CWD. The EHD sucks but can expect a rebound. CWD they are literally trying to eradicate those local herds.
at1010
*Supporting Member*
- 5,262
- 159
Do we blame the ODNR for the Turkey decline and grouse decline?
At the end of the day most hunters don’t want more deer they want quality deer and Ohio has that.
if you want a different perspective read the point of view in Michigan where the deer hunters hate their buck quality, 2 buck system and over abundance of does. The debates there are unbelievably in-depth and hunters are frustrated with seeing 60 does but not a buck over 2.
Now in Michigan they can shoot a ton of does but they actually shoot bucks at almost 2X the rate. Ohio is almost 1-1 at harvest. This is a cultural thing - not a dnr issue.
Just like in all things in life - I don’t think I need the govt. to tell me what’s happening. We have degraded habitat, and a culture in Ohio that enjoys shooting does.
if we want to change it we don’t need ODNR to change permits - just get as many hunters to agree it’s a major issue and don’t shoot does.
The problem is - most are not seeing this as an issue. I don’t think for a second it cause they look at the ODNR as the ultimate guidance as to what needs killed. They buy a tag and shoot the first doe they see.
At the end of the day most hunters don’t want more deer they want quality deer and Ohio has that.
if you want a different perspective read the point of view in Michigan where the deer hunters hate their buck quality, 2 buck system and over abundance of does. The debates there are unbelievably in-depth and hunters are frustrated with seeing 60 does but not a buck over 2.
Now in Michigan they can shoot a ton of does but they actually shoot bucks at almost 2X the rate. Ohio is almost 1-1 at harvest. This is a cultural thing - not a dnr issue.
Just like in all things in life - I don’t think I need the govt. to tell me what’s happening. We have degraded habitat, and a culture in Ohio that enjoys shooting does.
if we want to change it we don’t need ODNR to change permits - just get as many hunters to agree it’s a major issue and don’t shoot does.
The problem is - most are not seeing this as an issue. I don’t think for a second it cause they look at the ODNR as the ultimate guidance as to what needs killed. They buy a tag and shoot the first doe they see.
Last edited:
Yes I do blame the ODNR for that also. They should be the hunter's voice and ensure a quality experience.
I disagree, there are a lot of hunter's that will shoot as many as the state allows.
My brother uses venison as a majority of the protein he feeds his family each year. We hunt hard to give him as many deer as he feels he needs. The numbers at EVWA have been down tremendously from the early 2000s. We've had good success in the farm since the 2010s and in trying to improve the habitat to hold the deer numbers so we can continue. But overall we also know that if we want the numbers to rebound we take a year or two off from dropping 25+ a year.
at1010
*Supporting Member*
- 5,262
- 159
Well Turkey and grouse numbers are declining across the animals range - so it’s now not just Ohio. Extremely tight correlation to habitat degradation.
Look at the statistics - most hunters don’t fill more than one tag. The number of hunters that “fill all their tags” are the anomalies.
Also - this would be an argument for the ODNR as they created a county by county tag system vs. the old zones (which would lend itself to over harvest in smaller subsets of the state).
Also we harvest does just under bucks (darn close) - so if that many hunters were “shooting all they could” our doe harvest would be far greater than our 1 buck rule - creating a far greater ratio of does to bucks killed.
I have friends who hunt EV and they have said the exact opposite. Since the county by county changes they feel numbers are up and they’ve harvested does again. I believe Belmont county is a one doe and one buck or two doe county.
Again - why this is so difficult. Same public land - two highly variable opinions.
Anyone that isn't for the reductions of tags and believes most hunters only kill one deer, are not anywhere around an Amish community.