ODNR Ready for hunter's complaints
- Thread starter reo
- Start date
Fullbore
Senior Member
I have seen more bucks on stand this year than any other, but far less does! As far as more bigger bucks? I can't say yes, but I did have two shooters in bow range in 3 days on stand. Where I've noticed a huge decrease in big bucks, small bucks and does is driving all over our state in general. The days of going on deer patrol is a thing of the past.
Milo
Tatonka guide.
- 8,184
- 157
Exactly.. I think gern and I can both agree that his county shoul in no way he a 4 deer county. Maybe we as hunters but up with too much BS from our DNR. They need to me held accountable for producing these number. I wonder what would happens to gerns county when the hunter flip the switch and start whacking and stacking
There are guys in my county that have that mentality...we killed over 1100 deer this year...we only used to kill 400 to 500 deer. The only thing we have going is that our total county population is pretty low, so the overall number of hunters is lower than higher populated areas. No more cover than we have, it wouldn't take long to wipe the deer out completely....which is what almost happened in the mid 90s. There are pockets of higher concentrated deer groups just like everywhere else, and areas that are limited to hunting. The deer around here will stand out in the middle of open sections of ground with no woods around for miles and they feel safe...and for the most part they are. That is how a lot of deer survive here.
Milo
Tatonka guide.
- 8,184
- 157
thats more than double than you killed in 2013... That is a huge jump and that doeant concern you? I'm going to throw out there that we probably have 10 times the amount of unhuntable land than you do and our herd is taking a real hit due to these policies. By statistical average only 3 percent or so of your hunters take more than 2 deer.. So did you guy get a huge influx of new hunters or what?
I think we have killed over 1000 for a few years in a row now...all seasons combined. No influx of hunters that I am aware of, just a lot more available tags that should not be available IMO.
Milo
Tatonka guide.
- 8,184
- 157
Agreed... So why are we bitching at each other again? Your staring into my (and others) mirror gern.. This is what we have been trying to tell you what is going to happen and the very reason your comments come across as course. I will agree with the DNR that there was a time we had too many deer here.. But for what ever reason I sure saw a lot of big ones then also..
Milo
Tatonka guide.
- 8,184
- 157
http://www.deercrash.org/states/ohio.htm
Here some more random information
Let's suppose the herd estimate is accurate for the year 2000. This is the year they did the farmer attitude survey..
475k population and per the farmer survey they want 4-14% fewer deer.. That puts the population goal at 410k. Just a couple years ago they said we had 700k. So one should be able to come to the conclusion that they want to reduce the herd in half.. Knowing that there is a issue with distribution of herds, that puts a hell of a lot of wood lots devoid of deer... Heck maybe even your woodlots. Above I stated that there were too many deer where I'm at. I did my part.. Maybe too well... But also not realizing how deep they really wanted to cut things. I also know for a fact that our carrying capacity is much more than what they want. Use the link above to see how the deer herd population has little effect on actual deer crashes.
Here some more random information
Let's suppose the herd estimate is accurate for the year 2000. This is the year they did the farmer attitude survey..
475k population and per the farmer survey they want 4-14% fewer deer.. That puts the population goal at 410k. Just a couple years ago they said we had 700k. So one should be able to come to the conclusion that they want to reduce the herd in half.. Knowing that there is a issue with distribution of herds, that puts a hell of a lot of wood lots devoid of deer... Heck maybe even your woodlots. Above I stated that there were too many deer where I'm at. I did my part.. Maybe too well... But also not realizing how deep they really wanted to cut things. I also know for a fact that our carrying capacity is much more than what they want. Use the link above to see how the deer herd population has little effect on actual deer crashes.
Good discussion! But, there is always a but you know. It's NOT going to solve the problem, if there is a problem, and I think there IS! The Division, Insurance Companies, Farm Bureau, and Orchard growers WILL dictate deer harvest policy for Ohio unless/until Hunters can come together! JMHO
In my little slice of hunting prop of 70 acres with 3-4 cams running all year I only saw or caught on film 3 bucks that were bonafide mature shooters and 2 didn't show up till late December and I was blessed to be in the right place to kill the biggest of the 3 on November the 5th. He didn't show up till that "day". I got skunked 14 hunts in a row prior to the 4th of November when I saw 8-9 bucks in a frenzied type rutting action that started at 10am that day and lasted till 3 pm or so. I still didn't see the doe that brought them all in but evidently she was near by!
Took Karissa out hunting for a total of 7-8 hours over 3 hunts during the rut shortly after my buck being tagged and we got skunked all 3 hunts. School,work and other obligations limited our time drastically but that's life I guess. I only have a few does I've caught on camera all year long that if feel are residents of the farm I hunt. That point along with having the influx of a couple other hunters moving in on me are probably the reason I had such a lackluster season as far of deer sights early on, don't know?!?
I do know that my cameras don't lie and they are placed in high traffic areas with scent cautious intent and the numbers compared what I used to get are just a fraction of the numbers I got 5-6 years ago. I rarely see deer on my travels in my home range anymore but have noticed just a few here lately feeding in at fields in the late afternoons with plenty of daylight left. I can't even remember the last time I saw even a decent buck from the road in my travels. Last November during the rut was probably it. That's pretty telling considering my head is always on a swivel while driving, just ask my wife! Lol
IMO, at one time Ohio was a great place to see 140" plus deer from the tree or the road but they're much harder to come by nowadays! If you have an area that produces and holds several in that range do what you can to keep it! I know I'm going to try but if it's going to cost me a small fortune I'm in trouble! Lol
EHD has also been a villain in all this hoopla along with over kill. It seldom gets mentioned...just saying!
Took Karissa out hunting for a total of 7-8 hours over 3 hunts during the rut shortly after my buck being tagged and we got skunked all 3 hunts. School,work and other obligations limited our time drastically but that's life I guess. I only have a few does I've caught on camera all year long that if feel are residents of the farm I hunt. That point along with having the influx of a couple other hunters moving in on me are probably the reason I had such a lackluster season as far of deer sights early on, don't know?!?
I do know that my cameras don't lie and they are placed in high traffic areas with scent cautious intent and the numbers compared what I used to get are just a fraction of the numbers I got 5-6 years ago. I rarely see deer on my travels in my home range anymore but have noticed just a few here lately feeding in at fields in the late afternoons with plenty of daylight left. I can't even remember the last time I saw even a decent buck from the road in my travels. Last November during the rut was probably it. That's pretty telling considering my head is always on a swivel while driving, just ask my wife! Lol
IMO, at one time Ohio was a great place to see 140" plus deer from the tree or the road but they're much harder to come by nowadays! If you have an area that produces and holds several in that range do what you can to keep it! I know I'm going to try but if it's going to cost me a small fortune I'm in trouble! Lol
EHD has also been a villain in all this hoopla along with over kill. It seldom gets mentioned...just saying!
- 24,840
- 247
You fellas are still enjoying the killing off phase up there. It won't last forever, if our history is any indicator. The highest harvest Fayette ever recorded was in 1995... 600 deer total. Back then, there were deer seemingly everywhere a fella wanted to hunt. That perception was formed because there were deer in every bit of available cover, there is very little good whitetail habitat in Fayette Co. Tonkovich allowed, promoted actually, the killing of does. I did my part too as I trusted the ODOW at that time. What I didn't understand was just how "throw it on the wall and see what sticks" their method was.
The fact of the matter is we killed less deer, he would add a season, add Sunday hunting, add available tags, until our county hit the bottom of the barrel. He gave the impression of pulling back the reigns a bit a few years ago by moving Fayette from a 4 deer county to 2. And he did that because of an extremely squeaky wheel (me), and the fact their own numbers proved me right without any shadow of doubt. I told him without any reservations that similar counties (Darke, Mercer, etc), would follow Fayette's example, simply because of the habitat similarities. I told him that the year he raised your bag limits. Incidentally, the reduction in Fayette's tags will have little effect on the herd due to us still having the same opportunity to hunt... we have just as many days as any other county in the state.
For a little more perspective, with all the added seasons, extra tags, etc., we are killing roughly 50% the number of deer we did in 1995.
The key is not how many you kill, it's how many you leave for seed... and the DOW does NOT look at those numbers. If they do not take a more conservative approach in the next couple of years, your area will likely become a virtual wasteland as mine has. You cannot imagine how bad my hunting area became, it was painful to sit for days, not seeing a deer, remembering how good it once was. Three years ago, things improved tremendously for me, on that isolated piece I hunt most, but the majority of the county has not. I hope it doesn't get that bad for you, and if it does not go that far, it will be because people with foresight spoke up. If it does, you will know why someone like me, or any number of others, does not have much faith in the ODOW.
And as Kaiser eluded to in an earlier post, it is easy to say, "I don't need to see a bunch of deer, just the one I'm hunting".... as a person who USED to think that way, I will tell you, sit for a week without seeing a deer and see if your perspective changes... I've been there, done it.
The fact of the matter is we killed less deer, he would add a season, add Sunday hunting, add available tags, until our county hit the bottom of the barrel. He gave the impression of pulling back the reigns a bit a few years ago by moving Fayette from a 4 deer county to 2. And he did that because of an extremely squeaky wheel (me), and the fact their own numbers proved me right without any shadow of doubt. I told him without any reservations that similar counties (Darke, Mercer, etc), would follow Fayette's example, simply because of the habitat similarities. I told him that the year he raised your bag limits. Incidentally, the reduction in Fayette's tags will have little effect on the herd due to us still having the same opportunity to hunt... we have just as many days as any other county in the state.
For a little more perspective, with all the added seasons, extra tags, etc., we are killing roughly 50% the number of deer we did in 1995.
The key is not how many you kill, it's how many you leave for seed... and the DOW does NOT look at those numbers. If they do not take a more conservative approach in the next couple of years, your area will likely become a virtual wasteland as mine has. You cannot imagine how bad my hunting area became, it was painful to sit for days, not seeing a deer, remembering how good it once was. Three years ago, things improved tremendously for me, on that isolated piece I hunt most, but the majority of the county has not. I hope it doesn't get that bad for you, and if it does not go that far, it will be because people with foresight spoke up. If it does, you will know why someone like me, or any number of others, does not have much faith in the ODOW.
And as Kaiser eluded to in an earlier post, it is easy to say, "I don't need to see a bunch of deer, just the one I'm hunting".... as a person who USED to think that way, I will tell you, sit for a week without seeing a deer and see if your perspective changes... I've been there, done it.
Big_Holla
Senior Member
The thing about farmers is they always blame the deer, no matter how many there really are. That's my experience from Michigan to Ohio and every farmer I have come in contact with. Very rarely will they look at the coon or more importantly their equipment as to the reasons of their low yields. Perfect example can be found on our fields after the corn was cut. Cobs upon cobs full of corn could be found every few steps, not to mention the amount of spillage. Last year when they cut beans it was crazy the amount of beans were left in the field, plants pushed over or just spilled. First thing we are told is we need to take care of the deer better. WTF, yet we struggle to get deer on cams all year and even see when we hunt.
I brought up EHD cause it seems to really hit the mature bucks especially! I noticed I had plenty of 2.5-3.5 year old up and comers this year than usual which is nice!
Milo
Tatonka guide.
- 8,184
- 157
One thing I have noticed about deer season is that once it ends, most of us take stands down and move into something else like turkey or gardening.. But in reality there is a ton of stuff that goes on OdNR wise that virtually no hunter even pays attention to. A lot of decisions are made under our noses and without our input. I was in ODNRs site today and the amount of information is getting way better but we never break that information down and process it. Lots in there.
lung buster
Senior Member
Been running cams all year as most have and my buck to doe ratio is unbelievable! Probably 3 to 1 according to cams and I have seen that "shift" over the last couple of seasons. It used to be the other way,1 buck to 3+ doe. Cams don't lie! Crazy thing is we have at least 5 different spikes running around here. Never seen so many spikes and fork horns as I have this season! I have also had picks of 2 of the biggest deer that I ever have this season along with 4-5, 2.5-3.5 yr Olds that my kids would have been tickled to get a shot at and Andrew finally did. Plenty of bucks and no doe in these parts!
huntn2
Senior Member
So it sounds like most are seeing bucks...perhaps young ones, but no shortage of bucks sightings from what I am reading. Unfortunately, it reads as though many are no longer seeing doe or capturing doe in numbers on camera. IMO, there in lies the problem as the effects will be noticeable in a year or two. With all the wonderful bucks being the product of a doe, without doe, we don't have fawns being born in numbers to continue to replenish those bucks we all enjoy perusing.
I have one farm that has a good number of deer on it, but I believe it is only due to no hunting allowed on the 260 acre farm that borders to the south. I took one doe off that farm and so did another guy. Just the other night I glassed a cut corn field right beside this farm and counted 9 antler less deer. Most of stark county is hurting but not this property. I spent most of my season switching in between stands on this farm because my other spots weren't showing much on camera. I also drive home at 1am every night through farm country and have counted 4 deer in the 4 months I've been on afternoons.
- 38,859
- 260
It baffles me that after years and years of this discussion on this forum there are still people who don't get it.
Gern I seem to remember telling you years ago that if you were not seeing it in your area you eventually would. In my opinion you're just now starting to go through the beginning phases of a reduced deer population.
Think back to 2008-9 when I first noticed the reduction in Vinton County, what was the number one thing I said. I said "it's almost like the aliens took all of our does, but it's strange because our buck population seems to be doing ok. We seem to have more bucks and better quality." However that was very short-lived. And today I understand that's the first sign to a population decline.
Here is why this happens. Prior to the reduction doe and buck numbers are high. Hunters begin to kill the hell out of the does. However the limit for bucks is still one per year. This means that in a given area experiencing a population declined due to overharvesting you will initially notice a drastic decline in does, but not bucks. With the high buck population and lower doe population you will begin to see more bucks searching harder for does. However this phase is very short lived. The reason this exists is because initially you still have your original high buck population, but now a reduced doe population. In a year or two the buck population will naturally follow the doe population. Every buck fell out of a does vagina. If you have half the dose that you used to, common sense will tell you there are half the bucks being born. As the doe numbers continue to decline in your area you will begin to see less and less bucks. However the decline in your buck population will always lag behind the decline in your doe population by a year or two. This is because the effort for reduction has been concentrated heavily on does. As the does go so will the bucks. Initially there is a period where the doe population is impacted, yet the buck population has not shown impact as of yet. It is during the small window that you will notice more bucks and less does.
I went through this process in Vinton County six years ago and I'm starting to experience it in Champaign County just this year. It's the same process, just some areas took longer to to be impacted than others.
Gern I seem to remember telling you years ago that if you were not seeing it in your area you eventually would. In my opinion you're just now starting to go through the beginning phases of a reduced deer population.
Think back to 2008-9 when I first noticed the reduction in Vinton County, what was the number one thing I said. I said "it's almost like the aliens took all of our does, but it's strange because our buck population seems to be doing ok. We seem to have more bucks and better quality." However that was very short-lived. And today I understand that's the first sign to a population decline.
Here is why this happens. Prior to the reduction doe and buck numbers are high. Hunters begin to kill the hell out of the does. However the limit for bucks is still one per year. This means that in a given area experiencing a population declined due to overharvesting you will initially notice a drastic decline in does, but not bucks. With the high buck population and lower doe population you will begin to see more bucks searching harder for does. However this phase is very short lived. The reason this exists is because initially you still have your original high buck population, but now a reduced doe population. In a year or two the buck population will naturally follow the doe population. Every buck fell out of a does vagina. If you have half the dose that you used to, common sense will tell you there are half the bucks being born. As the doe numbers continue to decline in your area you will begin to see less and less bucks. However the decline in your buck population will always lag behind the decline in your doe population by a year or two. This is because the effort for reduction has been concentrated heavily on does. As the does go so will the bucks. Initially there is a period where the doe population is impacted, yet the buck population has not shown impact as of yet. It is during the small window that you will notice more bucks and less does.
I went through this process in Vinton County six years ago and I'm starting to experience it in Champaign County just this year. It's the same process, just some areas took longer to to be impacted than others.
Another reason for the doe decline being first like Joe mentioned is that people are not selective on which doe they shoot. There is no rack to evaluate. First one they see they shoot.