Numbers.. Ohio's 2011-12 White-tailed Deer Season -8%

[Schu72]

Mrex- You certainly don't have to admit all your opinions publicly, but I will express my opinion.



I can't say I agree with this being ridiculous. These were all excuses listed by the ODNR to explain why the harvests have been down. The excuses were not limited to the ones listed either. As a hunter, it is a bit frustrating to have the finger pointed at us for being the reason the numbers are down. Is this some of the "honey" you were referring to? To me this did not attract flys, but rather seemed to have stirred up a hornets nest.

I am concerned. I am not as fired up as some of the others. However, I have always hunted in counties with low deer harvests anyway. Why am I concerned then? Umm. . . how about the increased bag limits. Has me scared to death we are going to turn into another Fayette county. Outside of one property we have managed for deer, I am not seeing the deer. This concerns me. Because of this, I feel EPE made a great question. What methods do you recommend? What would be effective in getting the attention of the decision makers?

Good post Phil. My feelings closely resemble your post. I do feel the ODNR has created its own PR problems with some of the statements they have released. They have lost credibility with many hunters and are feeling the backlash. They need to become more transparent with thier management plan.

 

[Jackalope]

The method to the madness seems to be working fine to me.. Last year, the year before, and for the past 4 years hunters have always taken blame, or it was weather, or it was acorns, or we failed to adapt to changing food, or we were just trophy hunting, or we and on and on... It was just last year where Tonk himself said in a press release "I haven't heard boo about lower deer numbers". When I know for a fact I and others had sent him emails and talked to him about it just the year before. I don't know Rex, does that sound like a guy paying attention? It was just this year where I decided to really focus the effort at the man at the top of the page. By doing so I have seen more movement and response from the dnr on this subject in the last two months than I have in the past 4 years. We were pushed to this level to finally see some action. So pardon me when I say "can you hear me now?"

You ask what I want, then ask if we want bigger deer or more deer, as if the two cant both exist at the same time. Did we not have big deer 5 years ago when the doe population was higher? If anything fewer does will lead to fewer bucks, so your question makes no sense. What I want to see is a turn around from the dnrs slash and burn the doe population mentality. When I see a turn around in that thinking, and a willingness to increase the population, then and only then will I slack off.. Until then I'm not going anywhere and I'm going to get as loud as I need to be. I'm done "asking" and playing nice to be ignored in the order we were received. I'm not the only one seeing this trend. People everywhere are. There is a petition on os right now by some hunters who are fed up. I don't knows them. They don't even know my site exists so I doubt I have tainted their opinion of their local deer population. Nope. They see it and they're pissed off too.. I'm not the only one mike there are hunters all over this state who feel the same way.. I'm just going to be the guy who tries to organize that voice.. I don't have to play nice with Tonk.. I am done asking quietly for a change in mentality. He will listen or he can expect this to get a shitload bigger. The best thing he can do is get out Infront of this and start showing some flexibility and willingness to not only stop the population reductions but rebound our huntable population. It's hard to go after someone who is showing a public willingness to fix it. It's very easy when he ignores it, blames hunters, and refuses to admitt it.

 

[Milo]

its interesting that Mrex brings to light that hunters (depending on attitude) are seen as an enemy and not an Ally. That tells me a lot about this situation. there are people here WILLING and ABLE TO HELP if asked to do so in a cooperative effort to get a better snapshot of the places they hunt and those who also hunt that area. believe it or not 5 years ago I thought there were way to many deer for the landscape I hunt. We just want some of our deer back.

 

[Jackalope]

its interesting that Mrex brings to light that hunters (depending on attitude) are seen as an enemy and not an Ally. That tells me a lot about this situation. there are people here WILLING and ABLE TO HELP if asked to do so in a cooperative effort to get a better snapshot of the places they hunt and those who also hunt that area. believe it or not 5 years ago I thought there were way to many deer for the landscape I hunt. We just want some of our deer back.

I agree. I am more than willing to expend all of this time and energy into a productive and cooperative effort. More than willing to help figure out what the problem is if its truly unknown. I would much rather put all of this drive into moving forward and finding a solution... But until I see that same willingness publicly from our officials to fix this, that's impossible. Until that time I will continue to go after the one thing I can see that's slowing down that process. Right now that's the attitude and philosophy of the man at the top of the totem pole. I don't expect overnight changes. I don't expect this to get better next year. If it started today I think it will realistically be five years before we can see the population recovered. The damage is done. The job now is changing the philosophy and practices that got us here in the first place so that we can see a recovery. That is unless recovery is not their goal, if not, don't expect me to sit on the sidelines and be quiet.

 

[Mountaineer]

Goto to any park that prohibits hunting. There you will find an abundance of deer and the largest bucks Ohio produces. So..to say too many deer produce small inferior bucks is questionable. Maybe the odnr needs to take some advice from the park service. Now ,, they really know how to grow big bucks.

 

[Milo]

I agree. I am more than willing to expend all of this time and energy into a productive and cooperative effort. More than willing to help figure out what the problem is if its truly unknown. I would much rather put all of this drive into moving forward and finding a solution... But until I see that same willingness publicly from our officials to fix this, that's impossible. Until that time I will continue to go after the one thing I can see that's slowing down that process. Right now that's the attitude and philosophy of the man at the top of the totem pole. I don't expect overnight changes. I don't expect this to get better next year. If it started today I think it will realistically be five years before we can see the population recovered. The damage is done. The job now is changing the philosophy and practices that got us here in the first place so that we can see a recovery. That is unless recovery is not their goal, if not, don't expect me to sit on the sidelines and be quiet.

if one guy can get fayette county changed back imagine what a whole group of sportsman can do overall for ohio. ....

 

[LonewolfNopack]

I agree with Mrex that when we make public approach to Tonk or any other DOW employee, we should do it in a respectful manner. This is the only way anyone is going to take us serious. There is no room for personal slander. Attack the problem, not the person. At the same time though we should be firm and direct in what we have to say, and how we feel. Anyone that is a higher up in a agency that is funded by the public should be able to take some heat. Especially when that person is intentionally ignoring a problem that they allowed to happen. When people get ignored, they tend to get a tad bit angry. Tonk should have grown several layers of skin by now. We are all adults, this isn't preschool. I think anyone on this site or anyone else that is concerned would be more than willing to work with Tonk to try to come up with a solution to the problems that have been created. We can not do that though until he admits that there is a problem, and he opens his mind up to suggestions.

 

[Jackalope]

I agree with Mrex that when we make public approach to Tonk or any other DOW employee, we should do it in a respectful manner. This is the only way anyone is going to take us serious. There is no room for personal slander. Attack the problem, not the person. At the same time though we should be firm and direct in what we have to say, and how we feel. Anyone that is a higher up in a agency that is funded by the public should be able to take some heat. Especially when that person is intentionally ignoring a problem that they allowed to happen. When people get ignored, they tend to get a tad bit angry. Tonk should have grown several layers of skin by now. We are all adults, this isn't preschool. I think anyone on this site or anyone else that is concerned would be more than willing to work with Tonk to try to come up with a solution to the problems that have been created. We can not do that though until he admits that there is a problem, and he opens his mind up to suggestions.

Being rude and illogical without supporting data is the wrong approach. If people go to a town hall and boo or scream you suck then that's wrong... But having a logical, data backed argument and being affirmative and steadfast while demanding to be heard is not disrespectful or personal. That's simply demanding answers instead of begging for them and being ignored.. They took polite, respectful and nice play off the table when they not only ignore people, but BLAME hunters.... You demand attention by bringing data, surveys, and public opinion. The last of which is the most important. If they ignore you, then you have to show that you're damn serious and demand that attention..

I'm not attacking the person but rather the position and agenda of the person in that position... There is a name behind that position.. And if you don't want your name associated with it. Then maybe you're in the wrong position and need to take a job of lesser responsibility and public exposure.. It's a hazard of the fuggin job.. It is the responsibility of that position to make balanced recommendations for all parties concerned. It is my feeling that one party in particular (hunters) have been ignored, while other parties like Farm Bureau and insurance companies have had a drastic influence in getting their way. They are being listened to, hunters are suffering the consequences. I don't care if his name is Tonk, Steve, or Fiddy Cent, if I don't agree with his position and philosophy I'm going to go after that position and name at the top of the page with data, surveys, and public opinion until he either makes a change, or someone higher makes a change in staffing.

I didn't start this by being an asshole.. For years Brock and I and others have said we're killing too many deer. We discussed it, he talked to Tonk personally and got Fayette changed.. But we don't want the other counties to get that bad before action is taken on those also.. I and I believe Fred emailed Tonk about it 3 years ago and got the short form memo answer in return. These discussions have been out here for 4 years now, even before this sites existence, all 4 years they we're far more polite and civil than this towards the DOW.. NOT ONCE did he or anyone else from the DOW chime in and answer a single concern. They ignored it and continued their agenda.. Funny how in the past two months it has all of a sudden became an acknowledged concern at the DOW.. That acknowledgment wasn't achieved by playing nice and begging to be listened to.


And your last sentence is key. """I think anyone on this site or anyone else that is concerned would be more than willing to work with Tonk to try to come up with a solution to the problems that have been created.""""... You would be 1000% correct.. If I see a public acknowledgment made that we've cut too deep, and that an honest effort is being made to recover the population .. Well buddy lets do it.. I'm all for it.. I would dump 100% of my energy, effort and attention into helping anyway I can.. This doesn't have to be bad and ugly, It can be very positive.. But it is only going to get far worse until that time comes..

 

[Beentown]

HAHAHAHA Joe bought a new book!

http://www.amazon.com/Rules-Radicals-Saul-Alinsky/dp/0679721134/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1329840195&sr=8-1

 

[bowhunter1023]

I visited my taxidermist last night and his thought on the current status of our deer herd: "Horrible..." He also let me in on some candid talk from our GW, talk that makes me change my opinion of him, albeit only slightly. Seems not all the GWs are on board with the Telecheck and there is some finger pointing at the big boys in Columbus who only seem concerned about $. I found that information to be very enlightening...

 

[Jackalope]

HAHAHAHA Joe bought a new book!

http://www.amazon.com/Rules-Radical...1134/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1329840195&sr=8-1

Change is brought by those who organize and demand it.. Farm bureau understands this, Lobbyist understand this, Unions understand this, Political Action Groups understand this, from PETA to the NRA it's the same methods. You make change by being a force to be reckoned with.. Not by asking, begging, or being unorganized.. It is the unorganized, voiceless, biteless, ones who get crapped on.. Case in point hunters and Ohio's dwindling deer population.

 

[Beentown]

Change is brought by those who organize and demand it.. Farm bureau understands this, Lobbyist understand this, Unions understand this, Political Action Groups understand this, from PETA to the NRA it's the same methods. You make change by being a force to be reckoned with.. Not by asking, begging, or being unorganized.. It is the unorganized, voiceless, biteless, ones who get crapped on.. Case in point hunters and Ohio's dwindling deer population.

I get it. Just poking a bit of fun on this miserable day.

 

[brock ratcliff]

Being rude and illogical without supporting data is the wrong approach. If people go to a town hall and boo or scream you suck then that's wrong... But having a logical, data backed argument and being affirmative and steadfast while demanding to be heard is not disrespectful or personal. That's simply demanding answers instead of begging for them and being ignored.. They took polite, respectful and nice play off the table when they not only ignore people, but BLAME hunters.... You demand attention by bringing data, surveys, and public opinion. The last of which is the most important. If they ignore you, then you have to show that you're damn serious and demand that attention..

I'm not attacking the person but rather the position and agenda of the person in that position... There is a name behind that position.. And if you don't want your name associated with it. Then maybe you're in the wrong position and need to take a job of lesser responsibility and public exposure.. It's a hazard of the fuggin job.. It is the responsibility of that position to make balanced recommendations for all parties concerned. It is my feeling that one party in particular (hunters) have been ignored, while other parties like Farm Bureau and insurance companies have had a drastic influence in getting their way. They are being listened to, hunters are suffering the consequences. I don't care if his name is Tonk, Steve, or Fiddy Cent, if I don't agree with his position and philosophy I'm going to go after that position and name at the top of the page with data, surveys, and public opinion until he either makes a change, or someone higher makes a change in staffing.

I didn't start this by being an asshole.. For years Brock and I and others have said we're killing too many deer. We discussed it, he talked to Tonk personally and got Fayette changed.. But we don't want the other counties to get that bad before action is taken on those also.. I and I believe Fred emailed Tonk about it 3 years ago and got the short form memo answer in return. These discussions have been out here for 4 years now, even before this sites existence, all 4 years they we're far more polite and civil than this towards the DOW.. NOT ONCE did he or anyone else from the DOW chime in and answer a single concern. They ignored it and continued their agenda.. Funny how in the past two months it has all of a sudden became an acknowledged concern at the DOW.. That acknowledgment wasn't achieved by playing nice and begging to be listened to.


And your last sentence is key. """I think anyone on this site or anyone else that is concerned would be more than willing to work with Tonk to try to come up with a solution to the problems that have been created.""""... You would be 1000% correct.. If I see a public acknowledgment made that we've cut too deep, and that an honest effort is being made to recover the population .. Well buddy lets do it.. I'm all for it.. I would dump 100% of my energy, effort and attention into helping anyway I can.. This doesn't have to be bad and ugly, It can be very positive.. But it is only going to get far worse until that time comes..

Really pretty hard to argue with logic.

The thing is, I don't think Tonk is intentionally wrong in his thinking. I think there is a flawed factor in the equation the DOW is using. I do not know what the factor is (could be predation is a much larger factor than it has been in the past). Using a formula that incorporates a set percentage for recruitment would be easily altered and flawed when the "recruits" do not make it to maturity in numbers they did historically. Just an example, but something has fouled the guestimating process in my opinion. At any rate, I think the heat needs to be applied to stop going forward with business as usual. There is NOTHING wrong with saying "Whoa, whoa, whoa, something isn't right here"!

 

[LonewolfNopack]

Being rude and illogical without supporting data is the wrong approach. If people go to a town hall and boo or scream you suck then that's wrong... But having a logical, data backed argument and being affirmative and steadfast while demanding to be heard is not disrespectful or personal. That's simply demanding answers instead of begging for them and being ignored.. They took polite, respectful and nice play off the table when they not only ignore people, but BLAME hunters.... You demand attention by bringing data, surveys, and public opinion. The last of which is the most important. If they ignore you, then you have to show that you're damn serious and demand that attention..

I'm not attacking the person but rather the position and agenda of the person in that position... There is a name behind that position.. And if you don't want your name associated with it. Then maybe you're in the wrong position and need to take a job of lesser responsibility and public exposure.. It's a hazard of the fuggin job.. It is the responsibility of that position to make balanced recommendations for all parties concerned. It is my feeling that one party in particular (hunters) have been ignored, while other parties like Farm Bureau and insurance companies have had a drastic influence in getting their way. They are being listened to, hunters are suffering the consequences. I don't care if his name is Tonk, Steve, or Fiddy Cent, if I don't agree with his position and philosophy I'm going to go after that position and name at the top of the page with data, surveys, and public opinion until he either makes a change, or someone higher makes a change in staffing.

I didn't start this by being an asshole.. For years Brock and I and others have said we're killing too many deer. We discussed it, he talked to Tonk personally and got Fayette changed.. But we don't want the other counties to get that bad before action is taken on those also.. I and I believe Fred emailed Tonk about it 3 years ago and got the short form memo answer in return. These discussions have been out here for 4 years now, even before this sites existence, all 4 years they we're far more polite and civil than this towards the DOW.. NOT ONCE did he or anyone else from the DOW chime in and answer a single concern. They ignored it and continued their agenda.. Funny how in the past two months it has all of a sudden became an acknowledged concern at the DOW.. That acknowledgment wasn't achieved by playing nice and begging to be listened to.


And your last sentence is key. """I think anyone on this site or anyone else that is concerned would be more than willing to work with Tonk to try to come up with a solution to the problems that have been created.""""... You would be 1000% correct.. If I see a public acknowledgment made that we've cut too deep, and that an honest effort is being made to recover the population .. Well buddy lets do it.. I'm all for it.. I would dump 100% of my energy, effort and attention into helping anyway I can.. This doesn't have to be bad and ugly, It can be very positive.. But it is only going to get far worse until that time comes..

I believe that is what I just stated in my last post. We are on the same side of this argument, trust me. I think you read my post wrong.

As far as this discussion happening 4 years ago on OS, I was one of the first to start it. I saw the problem before it even happened, and was called a whiner, bad hunter, etc... by many of the people who are now noticing the same problem. As soon as the bag limits were doubled in each county after the 2006 season, I threw up a red flag. I have been proactive in trying to get bag limits and seasons changed for the several years, including talking to Tonk personally. So believe you me when I say I know the problem. It delights me that so many others have noted it now as well. I just hope that we can unite and make it known in a mature and professional way.

 

[Jackalope]

Really pretty hard to argue with logic.

The thing is, I don't think Tonk is intentionally wrong in his thinking. I think there is a flawed factor in the equation the DOW is using. I do not know what the factor is (could be predation is a much larger factor than it has been in the past). Using a formula that incorporates a set percentage for recruitment would be easily altered and flawed when the "recruits" do not make it to maturity in numbers they did historically. Just an example, but something has fouled the guestimating process in my opinion. At any rate, I think the heat needs to be applied to stop going forward with business as usual. There is NOTHING wrong with saying "Whoa, whoa, whoa, something isn't right here"!

I agree, that could be a possibility... If I was to see an honest belief from Tonk that "oops, we cut too deep and we're missing something"... I would be the nicest guy in the world to Tonk, back him 100% and help pour through the numbers till my eyes bleed in a cooperative manner. But if I don't see that and continue to see business as usual reduce the herd, I'm going to keep pouring through the numbers till my eyes bleed to burn their ass.

 

[Jackalope]

I believe that is what I just stated in my last post. We are on the same side of this argument, trust me. I think you read my post wrong.

As far as this discussion happening 4 years ago on OS, I was one of the first to start it. I saw the problem before it even happened, and was called a whiner, bad hunter, etc... by many of the people who are now noticing the same problem. As soon as the bag limits were doubled in each county after the 2006 season, I threw up a red flag. I have been proactive in trying to get bag limits and seasons changed for the several years, including talking to Tonk personally. So believe you me when I say I know the problem. It delights me that so many others have noted it now as well. I just hope that we can unite and make it known in a mature and professional way.

I wasn't bitching at ya man. I know that.. Sometimes I quote peoples posts to agree then get all hyped up expanding on it that it seems like it was directed at them..

 

[brock ratcliff]

Anyone been reading up on Tennessee using thermal imaging?

Seems the real novelty of the system is that they are taking after-season surveys...they are measuring the "standing herd". What a novel idea, managing what is left vs what has already been killed! And they are being labeled as "light years ahead" of other states. Go figure.

 

[Jackalope]

I agree, that could be a possibility... If I was to see an honest belief from Tonk that "oops, we cut too deep and we're missing something"... I would be the nicest guy in the world to Tonk, back him 100% and help pour through the numbers till my eyes bleed in a cooperative manner. But if I don't see that and continue to see business as usual reduce the herd, I'm going to keep pouring through the numbers till my eyes bleed to burn their ass.

There is your olive branch Mrex.

 

[Huckleberry Finn]

Joe,

Last night I met the former Sec of Interior for the state of Colorado. This guy did some cool things in his administration, including de-listing animals in CO from the Endangered Species list - something that's virtually impossible. Not only did he quote Ghandi like you do, he made a lot of really good points about situations like this. His main point was that if you push for what is best for the species, no one can really argue with that, and they have to put their agendas aside. Now, if, the number that is best for the species is also best for hunters; then you'd have another focal point of contention - are these proposed herd numbers lower than what is best for the deer species?

 

[Jackalope]

Joe,

Last night I met the former Sec of Interior for the state of Colorado. This guy did some cool things in his administration, including de-listing animals in CO from the Endangered Species list - something that's virtually impossible. Not only did he quote Ghandi like you do, he made a lot of really good points about situations like this. His main point was that if you push for what is best for the species, no one can really argue with that, and they have to put their agendas aside. Now, if, the number that is best for the species is also best for hunters; then you'd have another focal point of contention - are these proposed herd numbers lower than what is best for the deer species?

That's an endangered species though. so a slightly different approach. We could have as few deer as we do bobcats and they wouldn't be in any harm of going away completely. But good point.