Welcome to TheOhioOutdoors
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Login or sign up today!
Login / Join

Gun week total is down 8%

M

mrex

*Supporting member*
439
79
Jackalope said:
Let me ask you Mike...

What is you opinion as to why harvest numbers in VC are down 50% of what they were 4 years ago?
Click to expand...

I don't have all the historical VC data in front of me, however, just comparing last year, the opening day gun kill in VC was up about 14% this year. I don't recall any rain the first 3 days of gun season last year out at my place and I know the guys I let hunt killed deer all 3 days. This year, they watched TV in the cabin on Tuesday.

I do know that VC has always been a deer hunting anomaly when compared with the rest of SE Ohio. Back in the 80's when single antlerless tags were first sold over the counter in D4, a hunter still had to aply for a lottery tag in Vinton County.

I hired the recently retired VC wildlife officer to build a pond for me a couple years ago. While he was out here digging, I asked him why the VC deer numbers always seem to lag behind the neighboring counties with similar habitat. He answered, "those hillbillies shoot animals when their guns are loaded."
 
M

mrex

*Supporting member*
439
79
huntn2 said:
Mike,

Do you think the increase in archery harvest is directly correlated to any increase in number of hunters hitting the woods with a bow in their hands?
I would be interested in seeing/understanding if the number of hunters hitting the woods with a bow has increased across the 11 years that the harvest continues to rise. My guess is that a direct correlation exists between the number of hunters hunting with archery equipment and the record archery harvest numbers...but, that is just MY guess. I don't have numbers to back that theory.
Click to expand...


Without a doubt. Especially the non residents. The gun pressure out here on my ridge is a fraction of what it was 20 years ago while the bow hunting pressure has increased dramatically.
 
Beentown

Beentown

Dignitary Member
Supporting Member
15,740
154
Sunbury, OH
I think we are fooling ourselves if we don't believe that both the Ag and Insurance industries are not putting a lot of pressure on the ODNR to drastically reduce the herd.

Where is the turning point on number of dead deerz and a declining population? I do not see where a smaller deer herd helps anything except for the above mentioned industries. It is not like our deer our hurting for food/habitat. The more deer we have the more permits sold. Sure we have a huntable and above average deer population but I believe it is in decline (outside of urban areas). Why not back off the available harvest for each county and bring us back to where we were? Heck I would be for smaller zones and expanding the harvest numbers in certain Urban areas (where most of the vehicle damage is done).

The biggest thing the State could do to help (urban populations) would be to help open up these "urban" areas and make them more accessable.

If the logic is that the more deer killed each year directly correlates with the number in the rural woods then we are in for some disappointing hunting in the future. Heck I am already disappointed and it hardly has anything to do with deer densities.

Sorry this is a bit scatter brained but it is what it is...really tired.

Beentown
 
Ohiosam

Ohiosam

*Supporting Member*
11,990
205
Mahoning Co.
Beentown said:
I think we are fooling ourselves if we don't believe that both the Ag and Insurance industries are not putting a lot of pressure on the ODNR to drastically reduce the herd.
Click to expand...

Of course they are because they are the ones bearing the expense of the larger herd.

One option would be for the ODNR to compensate farmers and car owners for the damage the the State's wildlife does. But I hate to think what hunting licenses would cost.
 
Beentown

Beentown

Dignitary Member
Supporting Member
15,740
154
Sunbury, OH
No, we are bearing the expense with our payments to said insurance companies. It isn't like they are absorbing the cost.

Beentown
 
M

mrex

*Supporting member*
439
79
Beentown said:
I think we are fooling ourselves if we don't believe that both the Ag and Insurance industries are not putting a lot of pressure on the ODNR to drastically reduce the herd.
Where is the turning point on number of dead deerz and a declining population? I do not see where a smaller deer herd helps anything except for the above mentioned industries. It is not like our deer our hurting for food/habitat. The more deer we have the more permits sold. Sure we have a huntable and above average deer population but I believe it is in decline (outside of urban areas). Why not back off the available harvest for each county and bring us back to where we were? Heck I would be for smaller zones and expanding the harvest numbers in certain Urban areas (where most of the vehicle damage is done).

The biggest thing the State could do to help (urban populations) would be to help open up these "urban" areas and make them more accessable.

If the logic is that the more deer killed each year directly correlates with the number in the rural woods then we are in for some disappointing hunting in the future. Heck I am already disappointed and it hardly has anything to do with deer densities.

Sorry this is a bit scatter brained but it is what it is...really tired.

Beentown
Click to expand...

They may be putting on pressure but I know for a FACT it isn't influencing what the DNR is doing. Mike Tonkovich is one of my best friends. We banter back and forth about this shit a couple times a week. Everything, I and I mean EVERYTHING he recomends to the wildlife council is based on data, science and what he believes is best for the future of deer hunting in Ohio...period.
 
Last edited:
Jackalope

Jackalope

Dignitary Member
Staff member
39,120
274
mrex said:
I don't have all the historical VC data in front of me, however, just comparing last year, the opening day gun kill in VC was up about 14% this year. I don't recall any rain the first 3 days of gun season last year out at my place and I know the guys I let hunt killed deer all 3 days. This year, they watched TV in the cabin on Tuesday.

I do know that VC has always been a deer hunting anomaly when compared with the rest of SE Ohio. Back in the 80's when single antlerless tags were first sold over the counter in D4, a hunter still had to aply for a lottery tag in Vinton County.

I hired the recently retired VC wildlife officer to build a pond for me a couple years ago. While he was out here digging, I asked him why the VC deer numbers always seem to lag behind the neighboring counties with similar habitat. He answered, "those hillbillies shoot animals when their guns are loaded."
Click to expand...


Maybe the sun always shines at Mrexeys... As for the rest last gun Season..



Rain.JPG
 
M

mrex

*Supporting member*
439
79
Jackalope

Jackalope

Dignitary Member
Staff member
39,120
274
Beentown said:
I think we are fooling ourselves if we don't believe that both the Ag and Insurance industries are not putting a lot of pressure on the ODNR to drastically reduce the herd.

Where is the turning point on number of dead deerz and a declining population? I do not see where a smaller deer herd helps anything except for the above mentioned industries. It is not like our deer our hurting for food/habitat. The more deer we have the more permits sold. Sure we have a huntable and above average deer population but I believe it is in decline (outside of urban areas). Why not back off the available harvest for each county and bring us back to where we were? Heck I would be for smaller zones and expanding the harvest numbers in certain Urban areas (where most of the vehicle damage is done).

The biggest thing the State could do to help (urban populations) would be to help open up these "urban" areas and make them more accessable.

If the logic is that the more deer killed each year directly correlates with the number in the rural woods then we are in for some disappointing hunting in the future. Heck I am already disappointed and it hardly has anything to do with deer densities.

Sorry this is a bit scatter brained but it is what it is...really tired.

Beentown
Click to expand...

The DNR answered that in their "Management Philosophy in Rex's link
Farmer attitude surveys are used to establish and update population goals for most counties. We believe these goals represent a reasonable compromise between interests with opposing opinions on appropriate deer population levels.
Click to expand...


Aren't you glad they give 2 shits about your opinion... You know.. The guy who pays the bills... Rather they ask farmers... HAHAHAHAH.. Purdue university recently had a crop damage survey in Indiana.. You know what animal farmers blamed most for damage to their fields.. Turkeys... HA.. The study found that it was because turkeys were seen more often in the fields than other animals and where therefor blamed more. Second was Deer... But they found that Coons do 10x more damage to corn and Groundhogs do 5x more damage to beans than deer. Basically the deer are getting a bad wrap by the farmers... You think State wildlife biologist would know this and not use farmer "Attitude Surveys" to screw with our hunting..
 
Jackalope

Jackalope

Dignitary Member
Staff member
39,120
274
mrex said:
Albany/Athens is a lot closer to McArthur and it it doesn't look like the 2nd day of gun season last year compares much to this year. http://www.almanac.com/weather/history/OH/McArthur/2009-12-01

Actually Joe, it is sunny out her most of the time. We don't struggle to kill deer or turkeys...and we don't make excuses for our inadequacies.
Click to expand...

Hey Mike.... Fuck You! Nobody is making "excuses" for not killing deer... For your information i have made the decision to not kill does on this property anymore until it recovers and am trying to convince the others to do the same. I'll sit here and debate this with you all night.. You want to start getting smart and making jabs its not going to be pretty...... You can't kill what isn't there. The deer aren't there like they have been in the past... The numbers don't lie... There are less deer in more counties year after year... PERIOD.. The numbers are declining in huntable areas..
 
M

mrex

*Supporting member*
439
79
Jackalope said:
Hey Mike.... Fuck You! Nobody is making "excuses" for not killing deer... I'll sit here and debate this with you all night.. You want to start getting smart and making jabs its not going to be pretty...... You can't kill what isn't there. The deer aren't there like they have been in the past... The numbers don't lie... There are less deer in more counties year after year... PERIOD.. The numbers are declining in huntable areas..
Click to expand...

 
Jackalope

Jackalope

Dignitary Member
Staff member
39,120
274
mrex said:
You're right, but if you read some of the shit he's given me over the years you would say...long over do.
Click to expand...

Mike, if this forum was ran on the basis of other sites, and things in the past.. I would have banned you when the other one did, like they told me i should.. I can't recall every phrase of our conversations, but i do not believe i have ever attacked you personally in an open internet forum.. On a private forum with 15 members yes. And as it turned out i was right..... But not openly in debate.
 
huntn2

huntn2

Senior Member
6,097
171
Hudson, OH
According to the DNR reports, the number of hunters taking the woods has increased (400,000 back in 2007-2008 for gun and now 420,000 in 2009-2010 for gun). So as the number of hunters taking the woods increases, one would assume the total harvest numbers will continue to increase or at minimum remain flat. Therefore, looking simply at total harvest numbers remaining flat or increasing without factoring in number of hunters would be a pretty piss poor way of justifying the status of the deer heard.

As bow hunting continues to grow in popularity we will see the archery kill numbers rise. This is due to not only the sheer number of hunters in the woods, but because those hunters have 4 months to be out there as apposed to 9 days of gun hunting. Therefore, logic tells us that simply looking at total kills with no regard to these other factors could be missleading.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.