- 25,176
- 261
I agree, Ric! What's funny is that it actually worked! The encouraging thing is that it seems, at least online and with many that I speak with, that most folks aren't saying we have TOO many deer these days.
Ohio deer population
- Thread starter Steelheadtracker
- Start date
Of course. That's simple mathematics. Shoot less and more will survive. Especially with does. Many of them right now are carrying another deer with them since they've been bred. Killing a doe is not just as simple as one less deer.
You are right Ric and the facts are their are fewer deer today than years past and most hunters are going to have to spend more time in the stands to connect.
I believe this will be the norm for years to come and no matter how much we bitch the dnr could care less about what we say or think until it hits their pocketbook.
I know guys that have hunted hard this year and have seen just a few deer and this was during the rut.
They could go back to two tags which they will never do and it would still take years to rebound which they don't want it to do.
I believe this will be the norm for years to come and no matter how much we bitch the dnr could care less about what we say or think until it hits their pocketbook.
I know guys that have hunted hard this year and have seen just a few deer and this was during the rut.
They could go back to two tags which they will never do and it would still take years to rebound which they don't want it to do.
ajupsman
*Supporting Member*
Do you guys think they will at least get rid of the antlerless only muzzleloader weekend in October? Seems to me that would help a little.
Nope as I don't see it going away.
It's doing exactly what they want. That is dead and dead does so the does can't breed is even better. How many does taken during early ML season about 6500?
I believe they figure something like 1.7 fawns per doe each year. So that's like 10,880 less fawn in 2016 plus the 6500 does so you have 17,380 less deer in 2016.
That amount starts squaring itself out in future years.
It's doing exactly what they want. That is dead and dead does so the does can't breed is even better. How many does taken during early ML season about 6500?
I believe they figure something like 1.7 fawns per doe each year. So that's like 10,880 less fawn in 2016 plus the 6500 does so you have 17,380 less deer in 2016.
That amount starts squaring itself out in future years.
Last edited:
Strother23
Member
ajupsman
*Supporting Member*
- 39,125
- 274
We're to the point in most areas where the problem isn't the number of deer killed by A hunter. It's more the number of hunters that killed A deer.
Let's do a simple example to show you what I mean. Say there are 100,000 deer and 10,000 hunters. They're allowed three tags. Let's say they fill all 3 and kill 30,000 deer. Leaving 70,000.
Now let's assume those 70,000 turn to 90,000 by next season. You've decreased the population by 10,000 deer in a year. If you leave the tags as is you can expect the same results next season.
Say they leave it the same for 5 years and the opening day population is only 50k. A reduction of 50%. Now you cut the tags to 1.
The hunters kill 10k leaving 40k deer. If 70k deer can make 20k by next season. Then 40k can only make about 8k. So the next season after reducing the tags to 1 from 3 you'll only have 48k deer to start the season. You cut the tags yet you still reduces the population that year by 4%.
Now the DNR will tell you they cut the tags because they're listening to hunters. That it's time to pull back the reins. That's a load of shit and a bald faced lie. About 10 of us heard Tonk say it was a BS line with his own mouth. He was telling us about how much crap he gets from "farmers". He said a small group of wealthy farmers got mad two years ago when he cut tags in a county. He then went on to tell us that he had to explain to them that tags doesn't matter and they did that just to make hunters think they were listening.
We're to the point that in order for the population to rise again we have to reduce opportunity or tags below the number of available hunters. Remember. The problem is no longer the number of deer killed by A hunter. It's the number if hunters that killed A deer.
You can do this in a couple of ways. Reduce the tags to only 7k available and have a lottery draw amongst the 10k hunters. Or reduce or remove seasons in hopes that only 7k of the 10k are successful. Things like shortening archery season, eliminate early and late muzz etc. this is exactly the opposite of what the DNR did to lower the population. add seasons and increase tags.
However I will tell you what our head deer program person Tonk at the DNR thinks will happen. People will quit hunting. 3k of the 10k hunters will take up fishing or golf and just quit. He thinks so many people will quit that they'll never be able to reach their actual lower population goal. You can ask the other guys there that night. He said that. Now ain't that some bullshit. A DNR That actually plans on screwing up the deer so bad it makes people quit hunting.
I remember both of those comments coming out of his mouth along with "Joe, not every hunter out there is as educated as you or some of the members of your site. Most hunters are uneducated and will continue to do what they are doing because they don't know any better"
Think about this for a minutes fellas. The number of members on this forum are only about 1% or less of the total licensed hunters in the state. So, if everybody here was on the same page you can see how big of a hill we would have to climb to get enough people to be heard.
I'm good with that. I can't really do much bow hunting after gun season anyway. The deer are all run off after gun season so there is little reason for me to go out and sit in the snow and freeze my ass off. So as far as I'm concerned you can take December and January out.
Last edited:
Milo
Tatonka guide.
- 8,188
- 171
It's not ODNRs job to reduce seasons, remember... We're just supposed to quit on our own
That's up to you but I know your not going to. Hell, I know you have shot big ol bucks early season and still go out there and sit in the stand to freeze lol. Your just an odd duck JD lol. I just know that all my deer get run off during gun season because people show up that have no idea how the deer use the property and the morons walk right through the bedding area before first light on the way to their spots. Then they wonder why there are no deer to shoot at. Fuggin idiots.
- 39,125
- 274
You poke fun. But The sad fact is they've reduced it so low in a lot of places they would have to do something drastic like that to even begin a recovery of the population. The reality is the ODNR plans on hunters quitting in droves to hold it low and keep it from nosediving to eradication. And we know what that means. Plan on license and tag fee increases to hold their rebound steady. Both of these items were discussed in length with Tonk at strouds. Was enough to make anyone standing there shake their head in disbelief.
- 39,125
- 274
Yep. I remember that too. It was in response to my question of. "what are you going to do when people wake up and realize the DNR doesn't have the hunters interest at heart"
Lundy
Member
- 1,312
- 141
I wasn't only poking fun I was also being serious.
75% of all successful hunters, all methods, only kill one deer now. There is only one segment of the hunting society that continues to show an increase in harvest during dwindling populations, archery. That is partially due to higher participation and longer opportunity. If you reduce archery opportunity it would reduce harvest.
Any reduction in opportunity with intent to reduce harvest needs to be directed towards archery season. The most recent reduction, 2 day bonus gun, has proven that reduced opportunity does result in reduced harvest.
75% of all successful hunters, all methods, only kill one deer now. There is only one segment of the hunting society that continues to show an increase in harvest during dwindling populations, archery. That is partially due to higher participation and longer opportunity. If you reduce archery opportunity it would reduce harvest.
Any reduction in opportunity with intent to reduce harvest needs to be directed towards archery season. The most recent reduction, 2 day bonus gun, has proven that reduced opportunity does result in reduced harvest.
I liked Greg's idea the other night. Organize a massive amount of hunters and boycott the 2015-2016 season. Cause a 50% or better reduction in license and tag revenue. Impossible feat, but it would be satisfying to throw a giant middle finger to the DNR.
I have to say that I agree, but chopping two months off of the season won't do a damn thing, though. How many of us routinely kill deer with a bow and arrow in December or January?
Best way to reduce archery season harvest is to remove the compound crossbow from archery season except for people who have a legitimate physical limitation. Long, liberal archery seasons were established because the legal equipment kept harvest numbers very low, almost insignificant, until 20 years ago. never mind how increasing the number of participants in archery season by 500% has diminished the quality of the archery hunting experience for all of us to some extent.