The evening of January 21st

[brock ratcliff]

, I read it! I didn't even have to read it out loud. He's right, I'm not happy! I am however glad he reduced the bag limit for Fayette. Just going through the numbers for the last ten years or so (just for Fayette, of course). In 2002, there were 295 deer tagged. Sunday hunting added a lot of real days afield for most, and the kill jumped to 496 in 03. 04 and 05 375, 369 respectively. Added the bonus gun weekend in 06, that raised it up to 390. Then in 07 implemented antlerless tags (total limit of four deer), killed 388. 277 in 08, good year in 09 -447! Then in 10, 333. So, it seems over a 9 year period, we have added 18 days or so to archery season, 3 weekend days to shotgun, 4 times as many tags (for a time) and harvested about the same number of deer in '10 as we did in 02. The real difference being the percentage of the herd killed...not many left to watch.

With the significant boost shown by simply adding Sunday hunting, I think it indicates how much of an impact weekend days of opportunity have. Funny, my FIL told me when Sunday hunting was implemeted that it would lead to a huge decline in deer numbers. I didn't agree. I was wrong it appears.

 

[Jackalope]

Please pay special attention to the last paragraph...maybe read it out loud a couple times.

http://ohiodnr.com/tabid/9565/Default.aspx

Did you read the actual farm survey? Make sure you read this paragraph, maybe say it out loud a few times. Then come back and tell me we haven't had a drastic reduction in deer.

"" Forty-nine percent of respondents reported some type of wildlife damage in 1999, much lower than the 82% of respondents that reported experiencing wildlife damage in the 1995 survey. "

So between 95 and 99 he managed to kill enough deer to reduce crop damage 33%, and since then he has done nothing but increase the kills by adding more tags and a bonus gun season.

I'm glad he put so much weight on farmer surveys to decide how many deer need killing. I wonder when the last survey he did asking hunters if they thought there were too may or too few deer and actually took it into consideration. Yeah. Really looks like he's trying to make everyone happy there. Lol... Don't worry tonkers. I'll be compiling that survey data for you. AND making sure they know who's to blame and who to call when they want to voice their disgust.

 

[Jackalope]

So what are you gonna propose to the odnr as to what changes you want to see? Maybe you have mentioned it and I missed it some how... I stopped in at the elevator today and from what I was told the farm bureau wants more done about the deer population. With crop prices increasing, rent on land going up to $350 per acre in some areas of the state ( Pitsticks just rented land west of urbana at that price and a farm right in front of this house I'm living in went for $315) and the cost to get it growing they want the deer herd cut in half. I hope this is not true but we all know the farm bureau has quite a bit of push as to what decisions the odnr make...

It's not my job or position to recommend how they accomplish it. That's what we pay them to do. My guess would be reversing what they've done to decrease it. I am simply going to direct an organized voice of Ohio hunters voicing their displeasure. He can choose to ignore them or heed them. If he ignores them I'm sure it will only serve to piss them off even more and cause it to grow. At the very least it will remove his "we try to make everyone happy" excuse... and make obvious what it really is. "we pander to and jack off insurance companies."

 

[Jackalope]

Please pay special attention to the last paragraph...maybe read it out loud a couple times.

http://ohiodnr.com/tabid/9565/Default.aspx

Hey Mike... In the link you posted earlier Tonk Said the following..

"""
Who decides what the target goal should be?
Ohio's farmers have the most to lose from deer, because deer can destroy crops. So we conduct periodic surveys of farmers to establish deer management goals. Contrary to popular opinion, the opinions of farmers are very similar to those of the general public, including groups such as hunters. Therefore, we believe this to be a balanced approach to setting deer management goals.
We acquire the necessary data through periodic surveys of Ohio's farmers, usually through telephone interviews. Our most recent questionnaire was designed to provide information on farmer demographics, perceptions of deer abundance and wildlife damage, preferences for future deer populations and attitudes about deer and deer hunting. The survey results have been summarized."""

The survey results of these farmers said this...

Forty-nine percent of respondents reported some type of wildlife damage in 1999, much
lower than the 82% of respondents that reported experiencing wildlife damage in the
1995 survey. In all types of agricultural production, damage was most often reported as
light to moderate. White-tailed deer were perceived as causing most damage, except for
vegetable crops in which other wildlife species were implicated.

Then the farmers went on to say...

""Respondents desired an average
decrease of 9% in the deer population."

From a purdue University study on Animal damage to crops. They also found that Deer we're often blamed by the farmers..

However the 2 year long study forund this to NOT be true.

Our depredation surveys in corn fields yielded 24,623
depredation events in 2003 and 48,477 depredation
events in 2004. The average number of corn plants
damaged per field was 731 (SD = 1,440) and the
maximum number of plants damaged in a single field
was 8,357.
Raccoons were responsible for 87 percent of the
observed damage to corn, an amount more than eight
times greater than damage caused by deer. Small
mammals (e.g. eastern cottontail, fox squirrel, 13-lined
ground squirrel, and chipmunk), beaver (Castor
canadensis), birds, and other wildlife had little effect
on field corn yield in our study area (Figure 7). We
detected no damage to corn by wild turkey. Deer
damaged corn steadily from plant emergence through
harvest (October) (Figure 8). Conversely, raccoons
rarely damaged corn until the beginning of the corn
reproductive stages (early to mid-June); raccoons
subsequently caused substantial amounts of damage
until harvest (October) (Figure 8).

So my question is this... Why is the head Biologist to the DNR is using farmer surveys that are obviously wrong to set harvest and population limits.. When arguably the top University Agriculture program in the nation has shown the farmers opinion to be false. Is our head Biologist ignoring prominent University studies and opting instead to use the inaccurate opinions of 1,244 farmers to manage our deer populations?

 

[jagermeister]

I think we need to kill more raccoons...

 

[Jackalope]

I think we need to kill more raccoons...

If you were to look at the data from a 2 year study by a top Ag university you would be correct...

If you ignore that study and instead rely on the inaccurate opinions of 1,244 farmers, then you need to decimate deer populations..

 

[Gern186]

If the population of deer never got as high as what it has been in the past 5-8 years, would we be hearing the insurance companies and farmers complaining like they are today?

 

[Jackalope]

If the population of deer never got as high as what it has been in the past 5-8 years, would we be hearing the insurance companies and farmers complaining like they are today?

I bet so.. They will piss and moan until their risk liability is ZERO.

 

[finelyshedded]

I bet so.. They will piss and moan until their risk liability is ZERO.

I agree damn straight.

I agree with points made by both Joe and Mike. It would be interesting to hear the thoughts of insurance agents who are avid deer hunters on this subject. I know of several and I know there out there but would they be willing to be honest and bite that hand?

 

[brock ratcliff]

If the population of deer never got as high as what it has been in the past 5-8 years, would we be hearing the insurance companies and farmers complaining like they are today?

Joe nailed that one....

I still contend the population was much higher in the mid-90's. The numbers show that. We have the same DVAs as we did then with a huge increase in vehicle traffic volume.

 

[Buckslayer]

Imagine how upset the upland bird hunters are, I never see a pheasant, quail, or grouse anymore...at least you guys have places to hunt and see deer...look at what is going on at my hunting spot.

 

[Gern186]

What kind of trees are those? :smiley_bril:I have never seen anything in NW Ohio that looks that good!
That just looks like some good shooting lanes being cut.

 

[Jackalope]

Imagine how upset the upland bird hunters are, I never see a pheasant, quail, or grouse anymore...at least you guys have places to hunt and see deer...look at what is going on at my hunting spot.

Hey. Looks like mead land. Lmao.

 

[jagermeister]

Hey. Looks like mead land. Lmao.

Also looks like prime wildlife habitat in its infancy. I suspect that clearcut will only make your hunting better, Buckslayer.

 

[Milo]

looks like scrap wood getting the hell outta there..this state need less pine tree and more oak trees

 

[jagermeister]

looks like scrap wood getting the hell outta there..this state need less pine tree and more oak trees

Probably pulp wood would be my guess... Looks like they could afford to thin out the rest of them as well... fuggers look stunted as hell.

 

[Buckslayer]

Yeah, its a mead/scioto land company lease next to my farm. They are taking every single pine out....more than half of the trees on the place. I expect hunting to be better in a couple years, as for this year, not so much as they are going to be cutting into the summer. Lets just hope I can get a deer to walk by a place with a tree rather than spending time on the NO TRESPASSING private land right next door. Yep, thats right, my lease is butted up against a private archery club that will not allow anyone else to hunt...hopefully the thick nasty brush that will grow up where the pines were will be the prime bedding location and I can bust some venison on their way to feed. Sure is not fun having to take down all my stands though.

 

[Buckslayer]

Also looks like prime wildlife habitat in its infancy. I suspect that clearcut will only make your hunting better, Buckslayer.

Yeah, I certainly hope so. You will find out this late summer/fall. If I am on here nagging and complaining about not seeing and bucks on cam you will know why lol.

 

[epe]

Trust me, it is a much better feeling to take your stands down, then have someone take them all...