Article: Deer Vehicle accidents the past 8 years.. Shocking

[JD Boyd]

that would be ok but that's you. I think you're forgetting the other 99.99 percent of hunters that want to hunt deer, see deer, and kill deer. And will kill a nice buck if they get the opportunity.

I have 9 other hunting friends I talk to on a regular basis that think the same as I do. But again that's a drop in the bucket...

 

[huntn2]

Mike, JD and Zach, If everyone were willing to pass on deer (working to get their buck and letting the doe go as stated above) these threads wouldn't exist...

You are correct; I put a lot of thought into this. Each hour I sit in stand I am trying to stay positive and figure out how to get "my" buck (and my standards are a fraction of yours). I haven't shot a deer in OH in the 4 years I have hunted OH because I am still waiting for the buck that makes me happy (2.5 year old or better). Perhaps I just suck that bad at deer hunting. I think about the deer I do not see. I sit here on a computer looking at auditor websites and areal maps to target new properties and to try to see something different on an existing property that leads me to find the deer. I think about it on my 1 hour drive each way to the only property I have permission to hunt. I think about it riding around town when I see endless deer including B&C bucks that cannot be touched legally. It takes no time for me to take this data, convert it to Excel or Access, query and summarize it every way possible.

This is not a post/thread to whine piss and moan. Rather than simply complain, I for one am trying to use available data to better understand what may be reality. I am looking to put a sound rational summary together to have the necessary conversations in hopes of either shedding light on a potential issue or learning what I do not know currently.

Let me ask you guys this. What do you suggest we do? Mike, am I wrong to run simulation to model "what-if" scenarios? You yourself shared that the herd is estimated based off harvest numbers only. Why should I not look to simulate what the herd could be based off not only harvest numbers, but other inputs as well? Should I not do that because I am not an employee of the ODNR?

I have always lived by the motto "if you don't like something change it. If you don't change it, shut the fugg up and don't complain about it." I don't like going sit after sit without seeing a deer. Therefore I am in a phase of trying to understand more in order to futher adapt and change on a persoanl level, but to also see if there isn't something bigger here.

I get the sense from some of you guys that we are "wrong" for trying to understand the "story" that the numbers tell...

 

[mrex]

How can I be wrong mike? I'm not talking specific numbers with you. I am simply stating that when they do lower the limits we need to make sure it's a lowering designed to grow the population not maintain the shitty population they created. Are you saying that's impossible? Are you saying that once they achieve this lower population goal that any lowering of the limits will spur rapid population growth. And it's impossible to maintain the low population they create once all is said and done?

I know I'm using "fuzzy math." I'm merely pointing out that the herd can rebound quickly under the right conditions. I TOTALLY understand what you're saying...do you understand what I'm saying? I've been down this road before with the same people you continue to publicly crucify. Put yourself in Mike Tonkovich's shoes and then stare real hard at the graph I just posted...where does it end? I know you feel that we hunters are getting the short end of the stick and in some instances, you are correct...especially the guys hunting public land...and all the other poor souls who don't have the resources to gain access to prime ground like I do...someday when other hunters stop cherry picking my spots I'll tell you how funny that statement is. I have said for years that more permits isn't the answer! You can kill every deer off of the WNF and it doesn't mean beans to all the deer inside the outer belt of I 270. There are no easy answers

This is reality, you can organize every hunter in Ohio to write to the Governor and it won't change the fact that farmers and motorists interest will have the greatest influence over what the ceiling should be. And be careful what you ask for...if politicians take over the ODNR, we're really F'd! The insurance lobby caries a much larger stick than the BBBC or League of Dumbassville.

 

[mrex]

Mike, JD and Zach, If everyone were willing to pass on deer (working to get their buck and letting the doe go as stated above) these threads wouldn't exist...

You are correct; I put a lot of thought into this. Each hour I sit in stand I am trying to stay positive and figure out how to get "my" buck (and my standards are a fraction of yours). I haven't shot a deer in OH in the 4 years I have hunted OH because I am still waiting for the buck that makes me happy (2.5 year old or better). Perhaps I just suck that bad at deer hunting. I think about the deer I do not see. I sit here on a computer looking at auditor websites and areal maps to target new properties and to try to see something different on an existing property that leads me to find the deer. I think about it on my 1 hour drive each way to the only property I have permission to hunt. I think about it riding around town when I see endless deer including B&C bucks that cannot be touched legally. It takes no time for me to take this data, convert it to Excel or Access, query and summarize it every way possible.

This is not a post/thread to whine piss and moan. Rather than simply complain, I for one am trying to use available data to better understand what may be reality. I am looking to put a sound rational summary together to have the necessary conversations in hopes of either shedding light on a potential issue or learning what I do not know currently.

Let me ask you guys this. What do you suggest we do? Mike, am I wrong to run simulation to model "what-if" scenarios? You yourself shared that the herd is estimated based off harvest numbers only. Why should I not look to simulate what the herd could be based off not only harvest numbers, but other inputs as well? Should I not do that because I am not an employee of the ODNR?

I have always lived by the motto "if you don't like something change it. If you don't change it, shut the fugg up and don't complain about it." I don't like going sit after sit without seeing a deer. Therefore I am in a phase of trying to understand more in order to futher adapt and change on a persoanl level, but to also see if there isn't something bigger here.

I get the sense from some of you guys that we are "wrong" for trying to understand the "story" that the numbers tell...

I don't think your wrong at all Ryan. It's just a very complex equation with a lot of unknown variables.

 

[huntn2]

I don't think your wrong at all Ryan. It's just a very complex equation with a lot of unknown variables.

100% agree...if it were an easy equation and if herd population estimation were easy as well, we again wouldn't be having these threads...well except to discuss the insurance and farmer influence/stronghold!!! lol

 

[mrex]

100% agree...if it were an easy equation and if herd population estimation were easy as well, we again wouldn't be having these threads...well except to discuss the insurance and farmer influence/stronghold!!! lol

FYI, Tonk told me yesterday that the state will no longer publicly issue a population estimate...there's just no way of knowing, (with the resources available), and with any kind of accuracy, how many deer are out there. I'm confident that if the harvest #'s continue to drop to the point where there is a quantifiable drop in license sales, that the DOW will pull back the reigns similar to what they did in the mid 90's. IMO, the recovery wont be as quick or dramatic due to the exploding coyote population and to some extent, habitat erosion...many of the top deer counties in Ohio don't have the ideal habitat they once had.

 

[Jackalope]

FYI, Tonk told me yesterday that the state will no longer publicly issue a population estimate...there's just no way of knowing, (with the resources available), and with any kind of accuracy, how many deer are out there. I'm confident that if the harvest #'s continue to drop to the point where there is a quantifiable drop in license sales, that the DOW will pull back the reigns similar to what they did in the mid 90's. IMO, the recovery wont be as quick or dramatic due to the exploding coyote population and to some extent, habitat erosion...many of the top deer counties in Ohio don't have the ideal habitat they once had.

Ha. Nice to see someone else finally agrees it's a bs number... But hey. It sounded good to throw around while it lasted right. "no-longer publicly issue a population estimate" That's ok. Nothing a FOIA request won't obtain.

And you're right mike insurance lobbyist do have deeper pockets and influence... But there are how many hunters in this state that have insurance? I'm sure those companies will love to be the name associated with who pressured the odnr into screwing up the deer population. And I'm sure the guy sitting in his stand for three days not seeing deer would love to find out he's paying that company. My bet is they'll want no association with this at all when the ahit flies come spring..

 

[hickslawns]

I don't think most hunters are going to care Joe. All insurance companies are probably members of these associations. Is every hunter going to boycott insurance all together?

 

[Jackalope]

I don't think most hunters are going to care Joe. All insurance companies are probably members of these associations. Is every hunter going to boycott insurance all together?

Nope.. That would be impossible.. But business aren't like celebrities. Not all publicity is good publicity. I'm not talking about associations, i'm talking lobbyst.. I'm not going to show my hand before it's delivered certified mail to the ODNR this spring.. Lets just say by the time this gets rolling I wouldn't want my business name associated.

Here is the statement I keep going back too...

"FYI, Tonk told me yesterday that the state will no longer publicly issue a population estimate...there's just no way of knowing, (with the resources available), and with any kind of accuracy, how many deer are out there."""

I find it funny how all of a sudden this is a bad number supported by bad data; (basically what he's saying) of which the word "estimate" can no longer appease it's margin of error.... Yet for YEARS.. It was a great number to throw around in every news release and interview they could..




DOW Chief David Graham. September 18th 2009
"With a deer herd estimated at 750,000 animals, Graham would like to see Ohio's population drop to about 550,000 deer."


Mike Tonkovich December 2nd 2010
The statewide deer population was estimated to be 750,000 in early October.



Mike Tonkovich November 10, 2011
"The deer population at the beginning of archery season stood at about 750,000, roughly the same as it was at the start of last year's bowhunting season."


Mike Tonkovich Sept 29, 2011
"As it stands, the deer herd is estimated, minimally, at 750,000, a number that, were it any larger, would probably require new measures. Under the current goals, the herd would be closer to 500,000 instead of 750,000."




Sources
http://www.toledoblade.com/StevePoll...t-110-000.html
[FONT=&quot]http://outdoornews.com/ohio/news/art...cc4c002e0.html
[/FONT] http://outdoornews.com/ohio/news/art...tml?mode=print
http://outdoornews.com/ohio/news/art...cc4c03286.html

 

[Jackalope]

Doesn't upset me any. Good post.

The thing that gets my goat are the guys who sit there and say they see plenty of bucks, but very few does.....
Ok, then why haven't you filled your buck tag yet? Are you only out there to pass up bucks and shoot does? I doubt it.

Here is another possibility... This time straight from the horses mouth.. A comment he made in 2009 about "Ohio's 2009 Deer Outlook"


MT
""“Our buck harvest remains relatively stable, while our antlerless harvest has consistently gone up. The first year, 84,000 reduced price antlerless permits were sold. The second year, 121,000 permits were sold. So clearly it’s been effective.”""

http://www.gameandfishmag.com/2010/10/05/hunting_whitetail-deer-hunting_oh_1009_01/2/

 

[brock ratcliff]

I just love the fact he's admitting there is no good way to know when the goal has been reached. How do you mold a plan when you admittedly don't know what you have?

 

[Jackalope]

I just love the fact he's admitting there is no good way to know when the goal has been reached. How do you mold a plan when you admittedly don't know what you have?

Here is something I found from 2005..

Inventorying Deer
Because of the secretiveness and mobility of the white-tailed
deer, harvests and reported deer-vehicle accidents (DVAs) are
used in place of actual counts to monitor herd size. To be valid
measures of relative herd size, these indicators are “adjusted”
to eliminate inherent biases. For example, since we manipulate
the antlerless harvest to affect population size, we use only the
antlered buck harvest to monitor population size. Similarly,
we adjust reported DVAs to reflect changes in traffic volume.
Where available, aerial counts, deer observation data, and crop
damage complaints are also used to assess herd size.

At the time tonk made this statement in 2005 DVA's had been decreasing across the state since 2004.. And they have decreased EVERY year since... Yet he has since increased tags by 100% AND added an bonus gun season a few years later.. And is not contemplating a early muzzleloader season.. Why is he going against his numbers???


Then in the very next paragraph contradicts himself saying the first step in his management plan is to estimate the size of the deer population...

The Division’s goal is to maintain deer populations at a
level providing maximum recreational opportunity including
hunting, viewing, and photographing, while at the same time
minimizing conflicts with agriculture, motor travel, and other
areas of human endeavor. In other words, have enough deer to
hunt and enjoy, but not so many that they cause undue human hardship. This goal, which has received broad public support,
involves three steps. First, an estimate of the size of the herd is
needed. Second, we must evaluate public attitudes toward deer
and relate these opinions to our estimates of herd size. Finally,
herd size is adjusted via regulated harvest to reflect constituent
input. This process is completed for each county.

So it looks like he said 1. Estimate the population size... 2. Get public attitude opinions towards deer.. Then the final step. Kill Deer.


Questions

If there is no way of knowing accurately how many deer are out there with the resources available, are we now saying bad data has been used in the first step of his management plan for the past 7 years? Considering this has been the first step in managing the population since at least 2005 yet now in 2012 it's bad data all of a sudden. And he went against the DVA numbers increasing seasons and tags and harvest numbers.



How is he going to accomplish what he said was the FIRST step in maintaining deer populations to provide "maximum recreational opportunity" if a population estimate is no longer done? Will he use the other one.. DVA numbers.. Yeah.. Those are down massively all over the state since 2004... And he has already show to be disregarding them by adding seasons and doubling tags.

BTW.. He estimated the population size in 2005 at 650,000 in this publication.

https://www.ohiodnr.com/Portals/9/pdf/WildOhioFALL2005.pdf





I think our tags and licenses should be printed on the back of this...

 

[brock ratcliff]

Interesting. Again it seems to prove they throw crap on the wall and wait to see what sticks.

 

[brock ratcliff]

You know, it would just seem to make more sense to be conservative if you know you are trying to predict the impossible (herd size). Then again, I can see where a guy would think he is on the right track if Athens county is the where he observes the most, and it would stand to reason that is the case since he lives there. Mike says there are still tons of deer there, as does Coon and Cream. I would guess he is like many others, since he still sees deer, he can't imagine they are gone in areas....kinda like some of the members here that haven't had the joy of hunting where the deer are few.

 

[mrex]

 

[brock ratcliff]

Very hard to understand...so forgive me for not understanding how the number grew from 0 in 1900 to 30,000 in 2005?

Our states deer population tanked a lot worse than this in the mid 90's. And hunters screamed a lot louder than this and the state backed off. And then the herd grew and grew and grew...

Only based on personal observation of course, but this area had a lot more deer in 95 than we do now. I don't believe the herd has increased, just the percentage of deer killed. I've mentioned the deer drive I participated in back then. Most of those guys do not even hunt deer today due to lack of deer! Adding weekend days with firearms, the advancements in muzzleloaders and archery gear, screws the numbers. Essentially, by comaparing 95 to 11, you are comparing apples and oranges. I don't for a minute believe the shown increase in harvest demonstrates an increase in population.

 

[Jackalope]

Only based on personal observation of course, but this area had a lot more deer in 95 than we do now. I don't believe the herd has increased, just the percentage of deer killed. I've mentioned the deer drive I participated in back then. Most of those guys do not even hunt deer today due to lack of deer! Adding weekend days with firearms, the advancements in muzzleloaders and archery gear, screws the numbers. Essentially, by comaparing 95 to 11, you are comparing apples and oranges. I don't for a minute believe the shown increase in harvest demonstrates an increase in population.

Funny how they always fail to understand that you can kill more deer and have less deer. However this is unsustainable, as we are seeing now with dropping harvest numbers, unless you increase opportunity. Like a whole new gun season, cheap tags, etc... And now to boost the numbers yet again, he's thinking about an early Muzzy season...

Here is an Idea Mrex.. Lets legalize rifles and make rifle season all of November... RECORD HARVEST BABY! Fuck yeah... Shit must be good... :smiley_depressive: And then the next year, lets add all of December so we have another record harvest! BACK to BACK... Sure would make you're graph look good. :smiley_depressive:

 

[brock ratcliff]

It does seem a difficult point to make.

 

[mrex]

It does seem a difficult point to make.

Which point?

 

[brock ratcliff]

Which point?

That increased days afield (particularly weekends with guns) make it likely to kill more deer even with less available.