Interesting logic

[bowhunter1023]

So this is pretty interesting. What really IS the metric for ranking where we're at with deer hunting quality? Is it the number of 170+ inch book entries, or is it the number of 140+ inch book entries? If it's 170+, then why? And if that relative number is declining, say compared to 10-20 years ago, then what is causing the decline? Is it baiting, crossbows, non-resident hunters, cost of tags, or a deer population that's too high, or a combination of these? After all that, is it simply a debate and criticism that's based on one hunting cohort's perspective (those who consider "quality" as a reflection of the number of Booner entries)? What if another cohort's perspective is that Ohio is current at its peak for deer hunting quality? Who do we cater to?

All valid questions worth consideration, which is why I say it's a "complex onion". There really is no right answer to who we cater to. I tend to favor residents in my line of reasoning, which directly conflicts with several guys on here who I respect. My opinion, admittedly, is ripe with bias because it's based on my "cohort's perspective". That said, I do believe it's a whole host of factors and there's no silver bullet, but I love this particular debate because it always draws out some great perspectives. And we typically keep it civil

I believe they just raised NR fees significantly, so wasn't that done to help limit NR hunters?

I'm not sure if they ever justified the increase per se, but there had to be an awareness (and presumably an understanding) that it would deter some folks. Mathematically, they could stand to lose a certain percentage of hunters to reduce competition without sacrificing revenue. It'll be interesting to see if that's the case or not.

 

[Jackalope]

Ohio is a great state with lots of trophy deer. And lots of trophy deer are killed.

With that said.

Ohio is also a state with a shitload of hunters sitting in every 1 acre brush pile they can find to hunt. Permission on private land is extremely hard to come by unless it's family, and if you do find it, you can guarantee you're not alone.

There is also far too little public land, 95.8% of ohio is private. The public land that is available does not hold the quality of deer that Whitetail Magazine plasters on the cover.

I would venture to say that a very large number of Ohio trophy deer that get killed comes from smaller urban or semi-urban properties. These are not properties that out of state Bob is going to be able to hunt. These are properties that Aunt sally owns and lets her nephew hunt, and he gets lucky and kills a big one. Or 3 acre properties that Bill owns and has a feeder 100 yards behind his daughters playhouse. Most of Ohio falls in this category due to population density, especially above 71.

Compare this to other states on the list like wisconsin with 17% public land and 5x fewer people than Ohio. Kentucky with 11% public land and 3x fewer people. Kansas is only 2% public land, but they have a massive private to public walk-in access program where landowners give open walk-in public access to 1.5 million acres throughout the state.

I say all of that to say. Ohio has some great deer, this is mainly due to their massive urban and semi-urban footprint. Unfortunately for the destination hunter Ohio has a massive access problem. While a lot of fantastic deer are killed, there are also a lot of hunters who are hunting small parcels surrounded by parcels that dont allow hunting, this IMO makes the numbers look skewed, especially to an out of state guy who assumes Ohio is all rural fields like out west. Unless you have deep pockets to lease, or a family connections with property in Ohio, it is not the destination state to hunt for a trophy Whitetail, regardless of what the trophy Whitetail potential numbers say. Having potential is great, having deer is great, none of that matters if a guy can't actually hunt them and without available access, it's largely worthless to a destination hunter. This problem only gets worse as leasing gets worse in the buckeye state, further pushing the resident guys to hunt ever smaller and crowded parcels.

 

[cspot]

All valid questions worth consideration, which is why I say it's a "complex onion". There really is no right answer to who we cater to. I tend to favor residents in my line of reasoning, which directly conflicts with several guys on here who I respect. My opinion, admittedly, is ripe with bias because it's based on my "cohort's perspective". That said, I do believe it's a whole host of factors and there's no silver bullet, but I love this particular debate because it always draws out some great perspectives. And we typically keep it civil



I'm not sure if they ever justified the increase per se, but there had to be an awareness (and presumably an understanding) that it would deter some folks. Mathematically, they could stand to lose a certain percentage of hunters to reduce competition without sacrificing revenue. It'll be interesting to see if that's the case or not.

Not sure if that really works all that well. Typically spending another couple of hundred bucks for someone who is paying for a lease, bait, food plots etc is not likely to deter them from hunting out of state. The people it will deter is likely some residents who had to move out of state for work and come back once or twice a year to hunt with family.

I will also add from hunting in multiple states. Everyone tends to see their view from their small slice that they hunt. The factors affecting those properties can vary widely which like you said makes them "ripe with bias". For example if you own property surrounded by leased ground by NR.

 

[cspot]

Ohio is a great state with lots of trophy deer. And lots of trophy deer are killed.

With that said.

Ohio is also a state with a shitload of hunters sitting in every 1 acre brush pile they can find to hunt. Permission on private land is extremely had to come by unless it's family, and if you do find it, you can guarantee you're not alone.

There is also far too little public land, 95.8% of ohio is private. The public land that is available does not hold the quality of deer that Whitetail Magazine plasters on the cover.

I would venture to say that a very large number of Ohio trophy deer that get killed comes from smaller urban or semi-urban properties. These are not properties that out of state Bob is going to be able to hunt. These are properties that Aunt sally owns and lets her nephew hunt, and he gets lucky and kills a big one. Or 3 acre properties where the resident bill owns and has a feeder 100 yards behind his daughters playhouse. Most of Ohio falls in this category due to population density, especially above 71.

Compare this to other states states on the list like wisconsin with 17% public land and 5x fewer people than Ohio. Kentucky with 11% public land and 3x fewer people. Kansas is only 2% public land, but they have a massive private to public walk-in access areas where landowners give open walk-in public access to 1.5 million acres throughout the state.

I say all of that to say. Ohio has some great deer, this is mainly due to their massive urban and semi-urban footprint. Unfortunately for the destination hunter Ohio has a massive access problem. While a lot of fantastic deer are killed, there are also a lot of hunters, hunting small parcels, making the numbers look skewed. Unless you have deep pockets to lease or family connections in Ohio, it is not the destination state to hunt for a trophy Whitetail regardless of trophy Whitetail potential numbers.

Yep. Very well said.

 

[hickslawns]

Not sure if that really works all that well. Typically spending another couple of hundred bucks for someone who is paying for a lease, bait, food plots etc is not likely to deter them from hunting out of state. The people it will deter is likely some residents who had to move out of state for work and come back once or twice a year to hunt with family.

I will also add from hunting in multiple states. Everyone tends to see their view from their small slice that they hunt. The factors affecting those properties can vary widely which like you said makes them "ripe with bias". For example if you own property surrounded by leased ground by NR.

It hurts guys like my cousin Bubba. Came up here one time to hunt. He scraped money together just to drive here and back and pay for a license and tag. Took several years to make it happen. Those guys it will hurt for sure. I sort of root those guys in. No offense to the guys who come here and spend lots of money. It does help our economy. Just an example of the NR hunters who it will hurt the most.

The bias is real from one side of the state to the other as well. I'm confident a hunter in VanWert would love to have the opportunities a hunter in SE Ohio has annually. (Excluding this year with the terrible EHD outbreak.)

 

[5Cent]

Trophy hunters

 

[bowhunter1023]

The factors affecting those properties can vary widely which like you said makes them "ripe with bias". For example if you own property surrounded by leased ground by NR.

Because I'm "that guy" in this particular example, I'll say this about my NR leasing neighbors: It's not about where you live, it's about your management ethic that matters to me and the best neighbors I've had, came from North Carolina. My actual resident neighbors are worse for my management goals than the NC boys were. Now the PA and FL guys, they're the type of guys I wouldn't miss if a lottery prevented them from hunting here.

To build on what's contributing to my perspective on things, I spend a decent amount of time on and around public land in SE Ohio. From my observations, 4 out of 5 people on public land this fall, were non-residents. With all the land access issues we have (to Joe's point), there's a discrepancy in public land access that's a key data point in my support for stiffer NR hunting regulations.

 

[giles]

I can get behind the support 110% about a lottery on public land for NR.

 

[Hedgelj]

My thoughts after reading through this. I'm with Jesse in the fact that I think the late 90s, early 2000s were prime time for Ohio deer hunting. It felt like (I was hunting primarily public land EVWA in Harrison and Belmont Counties with some splashes of private) that we could do drives and get deer moving most days. There were a few other groups hunting in the area and we would move the deer back and forth and even if we did similar drives every other day you'd see 5-20+ deer in a day. It was almost a rule that someone would get at least a solid mature 8point or bigger and normally someone would see a quality 10+ point at some point during the gun and muzzleloader seasons. Whether or not you got a shot at it was a whole 'nother story but they were seen and the quality (mass, tine length, maturity) of the bucks you'd see at the check in stations was nice.

Since then I've migrated to mainly private in Ashland county with occasional forays into my old public land areas. Those areas have very little to no deer sign anymore, even after 30+ minute walks deep into areas. The areas that used to have trails down to bare dirt all season long are now just hints at that level of usage.

But watching the deer harvested on here, yes there are a handful of very nice bucks every year. A lot of good success every year but I don't think we are the average hunters and woodsmen. I mean how many other groups can boast as many successful recurve shooters as we do?

But what counts as a quality herd? We all can agree that the words given out by Tonk don't meet that standard to many if any of us. What is the ODNR managing for? and for whom?

Baiting changes the game and I've played it some but didn't this year and I still got freezer meat, does that make me a better hunter? No I just know the deer patterns well.

Do I think NR hunters have it easier here than going elsewhere? Yes and I've always thought a fair way was whatever it costs me to hunt in your state should be your cost in mine, if it costs something to deer hunt in your state, make it the same to hunt mine.

I don't know how many NR are pushing out resident hunters but that's a problem IMO and perhaps a lottery is the fix, but that impacts the economy of small businesses in the hunting areas. Tough call.