# Deer Harvest data today in the Cols Dispatch



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Deer Harvest Continues Recent Drops
Numbers could suggest that herd shrinking in Ohio

By Dave Golowenski
For The Columbus Dispatch Sunday December 9, 2012 7:46 AM

Because all deer hunting is local  that is, restricted to what wanders into an individuals vision and field of fire  400,000 hunters produce about that many opinions in terms of what went down during the states weeklong gun season that ended last Sunday.

One assessment that counts rather a lot is that of biologist Mike Tonkovich, the Ohio Division of Wildlifes point man for deer management. Here it is:

Im pretty pleased with the way the season turned out, he said. I thought wed be (down) 5 percent to 10 percent from last year.

The count was 86,964, a drop of about 3.7 percent from the 90,282 deer checked in 2011. The 2012 results, moreover, continued a decline from peak harvest years. In 2010, hunters checked more than 105,000 whitetails during deer gun week, meaning this years decline in harvest follows a 14 percent tumble.

Over a two-year span, then, the gun-week totals fell about 17.2 percent.

Last years weak showing likely resulted from a lot of standing corn late and some lousy weather, particularly on opening day of the gun season, Tonkovich said. Hunters took 23,600 on a rainy Monday in 2011. The count climbed considerably, to 29,297, on Nov. 26, the 2012 opener.

Given strong archery results thus far, the 2012-13 deer season might produce a harvest down only slightly from a year ago, when hunters reported killing about 219,700 whitetails.

Were about 1 percent down from last year from the opening day of the bow season through the last day of the (weeklong) gun season, Tonkovich said. If we have favorable (weather) conditions during the next two gun seasons, we are likely to end up around or slightly down from last years harvest.

A two-day statewide gun season is set for Dec.&#8201;15-16, and the popular muzzleloader season will run four days, Jan.&#8201;5-8, 2013.

Still, last years count totaled about 41,600 fewer deer, a decline of about 15.9&#8201;percent, compared with the 261,000 taken during the 2009-10 season.

So, after years of liberal regulations designed to knock down numbers, are fewer deer roaming the Ohio landscape? Maybe so.

The number of deer hunters hasnt dropped precipitously, although the sale of resident tags fell about 8&#8201;percent between 2000 and 2011. That drop to an extent has been offset by a 152 percent increase of nonresident tags during the same period.

About one in nine or 10 of our deer hunters is now coming from out of state, Tonkovich said.  We went from about 15,000 nonresident licenses in 2000 to about 38,000 in 2011.

While the number of resident vs. nonresident hunters is not quite a wash, the biggest factor in declining deer harvests appears to be fewer deer, a situation not welcome to every hunter but certainly OK with many of the states farmers and tree growers.

Both agricultural groups, their members having suffered losses caused by feeding deer, have called for herd shrinkage. The Ohio Farm Bureau several years ago publicly declared that deer numbers statewide should be around 250,000, around half the current estimated population.

The liberal granting of nuisance permits, which allow landowners to kill offending deer, has helped alleviate some of the local deer damage problems.

Tonkovich, moreover, suggested that the states deer regulations for 2013-14 could be in for their first major overhaul in a number of years. The aim, after years of liberal limits have brought deer numbers to what are considered target levels in many counties, would be to maintain the population.

You might not see a Zone&#8201;C anymore, just (zones) A and B, he said.

Zone C, which covers much of southern, southeastern and eastern Ohio, has the most liberal bag limits. While bag limits could become stricter overall, deer numbers can be managed with the availability  or nonavailability  of antlerless permits, Tonkovich said.

[email protected]


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

I think I like most of what I read, not sure until the proposed changes are announced.


----------



## Mushijobah (May 4, 2004)

Likewise. SE Ohio needs a break.


----------



## mpd5094 (Jun 20, 2005)

Lundy said:


> I think I like most of what I read, not sure until the proposed changes are announced.


Agree 100%!!!


----------



## crappiedude (Mar 12, 2006)

Mushijobah said:


> Likewise. SE Ohio needs a break.


All of zone C needs a break


----------



## davycrockett (Apr 9, 2005)

I'm in Putnam county but hunt in Allen both in zone B. I, along with other hunters in my area have seen less deer the last several seasons. The dnr can blame it on weather, too much corn, etc. bottom line is there are less deer. The Putnam county Sherrifs office reported substantially lower deer/car accidents last year than the previous year. That should raise concern. Since Putnam co went to zone B I've argued as to why. If you aren't familiar with the county most of it is flat as a pancake with agriculture on most of it. Woods are few and far between and it's a rarity if you can find any type of fence row. The cover is not here to hold a lot of deer. Where I hunt in Allen there are fewer deer despite having adequate cover. My trail cam pics have dwindled over the last 2 years as well. I don't see the dnr backing off the limits anytime soon though. Sadly there is too much money involved.


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

We have had plenty of discussion lately on this and while I feel that in my area the numbers are low I have to say that from a state perspective I don't really have a problem with anything Tonkovich said. It would seem that the limits in place have seemed to stabilize the harvest for the most part over the last few years. There has been a slight decline in the last 2-3 years which could possibly be addressed with the antlerless tag allocation. In my personal situation I don't feel that any small change to the bag limits will have all that much effect. I just don't believe that I have many hunters around me that are maxing out their 6 deer limits as it is...or even coming close for that matter.

If the regulations stayed unchanged for next year I am okay with that. Anything more I would be opposed to though. I am hopeful that they do give close analysis to the nuisance permits annually to determine whether they are still necessary or not. I do see how that could allow overharvest in certain areas if left unchecked. Being that Knox county has the largest permit allocation it probably affects my surrounding area more than it does most people.


----------



## the czar (Aug 14, 2008)

As of the last update on the dnr site we've killed more bucks then does. This use to be at least 2 doe per buck in years past and the dnr claims that the state averages 3 to 4 does per buck. I think the data shows the population is way lower than they think and the buck doe ratio is likely closer to 2:1. 

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

the czar said:


> As of the last update on the dnr site we've killed more bucks then does. This use to be at least 2 doe per buck in years past and the dnr claims that the state averages 3 to 4 does per buck. I think the data shows the population is way lower than they think and the buck doe ratio is likely closer to 2:1.
> 
> Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine




ODNR data posted up to today, but not all of the gun season from both years in included yet. It looks like it will be a similar ratio both years. It is hard to compare partial year harvests especially when some of the big segments of harvest have not been reported yet.

2012 - 1.52 antlerless havest per antlered deer

2011 - 1.36 antlered harvest per antlered deer


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

Lundy said:


> ODNR data posted up to today, but not all of the gun season from both years in included yet. It looks like it will be a similar ratio both years. It is hard to compare partial year harvests especially when some of the big segments of harvest have not been reported yet.
> 
> 2012 - 1.52 antlerless havest per antlered deer
> 
> 2011 - 1.36 antlered harvest per antlered deer


Your antlered to antlerless numbers are correct but the figure that The Czar was pointing out is also correct. That same ratio when counting the button bucks as males is .95. I don't know yet how that relates to prior years but I would have expected that to be a higher doe number in the ratio, especially with the use of the antlerless tags from the early season. I did look at Knox county for 2010 season and the ratio was 1.21 doe to buck (buttons counted as bucks) so that ratio has seemed to shrink some. That may suggest that the antlerless tags have made a difference in the ratio.

I agree that it is difficult to make a full assessment of the year-to-year numbers until the season is complete due to dates not lining up. Also, you really don't know how much impact late season may have and how many guys are still trying to fill a freezer, etc. One thing though that is a bit deceiving is that they are comparing this year to last year which was really down a good bit from the year before. I believe last year's total was an 8% drop from the year before and almost a 16% drop from the 2009-10 year. The county by county is where it catches my eye the most. Knox county dropped 41.9% from 2008-09 to 2011-12! It is still a pretty big number being killed in my county which bodes well but I don't like that the number has dropped radically each year. I would really like to see it start to level off.


----------



## r9ptbuck (Sep 22, 2006)

I am in favor of a two deer limit in the current Zone C. One doe and one buck. We need a break...the herd is way down in Carroll, and seems to be down on our other farm in Tusc. We are doen for the year. At least for deer.


----------



## crittergitter (Jun 9, 2005)

http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/portals/9/pdf/deer harvest/deer121212.pdf

Interesting. We went from up 45% to down .44% year to date.


----------



## bobk (Apr 30, 2004)

crittergitter said:


> http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/portals/9/pdf/deer harvest/deer121212.pdf
> 
> Interesting. We went from up 45% to down .44% year to date.


Yup, quite a drop for sure.
Lundy, I think all the gun season numbers are in now.


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

crittergitter said:


> http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/portals/9/pdf/deer harvest/deer121212.pdf
> 
> Interesting. We went from up 45% to down .44% year to date.


There was clearly not a clean overlay of each year's slug week in that comparison that showed last week. One of my earlier posts illustrated some of the inconsistencies in the numbers. I have not looked closely at this one but I suspect that it is a much better comparison since we are well beyond the slug week for each year. Even if we don't have exactly the same hunting days displayed there will be minimal difference from deer harvested in the few days of archery during this time.


----------

