# Mike Tonkovich - ODNR Deer



## The Outdoor Connection (Jan 21, 2012)

Tonk will be on with us again tomorrow (Thurs 12/11) 7-8pm. I'll say one thing for Mike he is one of the most approachable scientists you'll ever encounter. He's a hunter too and he'll take the time to listen to you and explain in great detail the factors that go into decisions. He'll even cut-up and makes jokes to kids all the while nurturing them. We could do a lot worse for a top state biologist, you don't realize how good we got it! Stream the show here > http://www.wone.com/onair/outdoor-connection-418/


----------



## I Fish (Sep 24, 2008)

Along witht he questions by fastwater over in the extended gun season thread, could you also ask what the estimated coyote population is, and what impact do they have on the herd. I travel and hunt a fair sized area, and by my estimation, the deer herd is down 75% from what it was 3 years ago, while coyote sightings have tripled, or more. Do they expect the coyote population to continue to increase? What do they consider the "acceptable" population size? What plan do they have to control coyote population if and when they cross the acceptable number? What impact will it have on the deer herd 3 to 5 years from now?

Also, I've been led to believe ODNR personnel watch this and other forums. Why won't they respond to forums such as this? They could reach thousands of sports men and women, but they won't. What's the reason? Mr. Tonkovich, or his PR person, could be answering these questions right here on OGF, but they won't. Every so often, some one has questions regarding law interpretation, and they won't even help then, even after it's known they have been made aware of the threads in question. Why not?


----------



## fastwater (Apr 1, 2014)

> Orig. posted by *I Fish*:
> 
> ... could you also ask what the estimated coyote population is, and what impact do they have on the herd. I travel and hunt a fair sized area, and by my estimation, the deer herd is down 75% from what it was 3 years ago, while coyote sightings have tripled, or more. Do they expect the coyote population to continue to increase? What do they consider the "acceptable" population size? What plan do they have to control coyote population if and when they cross the acceptable number? What impact will it have on the deer herd 3 to 5 years from now?


Very good questions indeed *I Fish*. 

I've killed five yotes in the yard in the last 4yrs. Between the neighbor and I we have killed 17(not counting the 5 in the yard) in the last 2yrs hunting them. Saw one Wed. of shotgun season that was coming straight for me but when he got in range he was right in line with my neighbor that has 75acres of prime hunting land but thinks he has to hunt right on the property line. Usually facing my direction.  Yote froze up, spun and ran. Must of winded me. Think he was headed for either a small, dead, half eaten buck that someone had arrowed that was laying about 40yds from me or what was left of the gut pile I had left Monday(opening day).

Seems between the neighbor and I, we just can't keep ahead of them just hunting them. Neither of us have the time nor knowledge to trap. 




We both turkey hunt as well and have seen far, far less turkey around here in the last 4-5yrs.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Where I hunt is over run with turkeys, 3 different groups of 36-44 and then the various tom groups. See them all multiple times per day during the deer gun season


----------



## fastwater (Apr 1, 2014)

> Orig. posted by *Lundy*:
> 
> Where I hunt is over run with turkeys, 3 different groups of 36-44 and then the various tom groups. See them all multiple times per day during the deer gun season


Do you see many yotes in that area?

We used to have a wonderful turkey population here as well. Fourteen yrs ago we had the leech bed updated. They finished in late fall so we planted winter wheat to hold the ground for the winter. That following late Spring/early summer we had 40 some turkey in the yard where the winter wheat was at. Mostly hens with their poult's. 
Had a huge wild cherry tree in the yard and used to watch flocks of 30-40 turkey come up in the yard getting the cherries when they fell.

Doesn't happen anymore. Just don't see them here in the yard nor while hunting nearly like we used to. 

Never used to see nearly the yotes we used to see either. But in all fairness, had to declare war on the ***** around here as well as this place is overrun with them. They are hard on the turkey pop. as well.

Analyzing the situation, IMO, our very noticeable diminished turkey pop. almost has to be contributed to the yotes,***** and such since the food and water source, nesting and roosting areas etc. have not changed. In fact, food source has improved with food plots.

FWIW, have killed many yotes skirting these food plots looking for an easy meal. Other then something such as a fresh gut pile or similar bait, the food plots have proven to be the next best area to set up and hunt the yotes. Especially early morning.


----------



## davycrockett (Apr 9, 2005)

What plan do they have to control coyote population if and when they cross the acceptable number? 

I'd be shocked if they announce a "plan" seeing how there is an open season on them already. As far as a bounty as some hunters have talked about, it will never happen. Who would pay out the bounties? Certainly not the state whom is already broke. Its kinda a broken record but no amount of hunting is going to kill enough yotes but it cant hurt. Trapping and especially snaring is far more efficient at controlling yotes. Instead of bitching guys need to get out of their lazyboys in January and get out and nab some fur.If every deer hunter could whack one coyote a season we would get somewhere.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Bunches of yotes and ***** and still a expanding turkey population.


----------



## fastwater (Apr 1, 2014)

> Orig. posted by *daveycrockett:
> 
> ...Trapping and especially snaring is far more efficient at controlling yotes. Instead of bitching guys need to get out of their lazyboys in January and get out and nab some fur.If every deer hunter could whack one coyote a season we would get somewhere. *


Agree!



> Orig. posted by *Lundy:
> 
> Bunches of yotes and ***** and still a expanding turkey population.[/B*


*]

Give it some time Lundy.

Bound to happen that if (especially) your yote pop. steadily increases the number of other wildlife will decrease. Naturally the yotes are there for the food and with them having 2-4 pups a year with no natural predators...it's just a matter of time.*


----------



## I Fish (Sep 24, 2008)

davycrockett said:


> What plan do they have to control coyote population if and when they cross the acceptable number?
> 
> I'd be shocked if they announce a "plan" seeing how there is an open season on them already. As far as a bounty as some hunters have talked about, it will never happen. Who would pay out the bounties? Certainly not the state whom is already broke. Its kinda a broken record but no amount of hunting is going to kill enough yotes but it cant hurt. Trapping and especially snaring is far more efficient at controlling yotes. Instead of bitching guys need to get out of their lazyboys in January and get out and nab some fur.If every deer hunter could whack one coyote a season we would get somewhere.


Well you're right, except most guys don't have time, and, trapping is another expense. By the time you take off work, buy the supplies, spend your time getting permission, etc. Not many guys have the time or money. Besides, how many non resident tag holders are going to do this?




Lundy said:


> Bunches of yotes and ***** and still a expanding turkey population.


Yea, plenty of squirrels too. I guess if deer could fly or climb trees????

Not trying to offend, but that radio program was a serious puff piece. I especially liked Tonovich's claim about the 2% of ground being leased. He actually made that claimed while setting in a parking lot in Athens? He should have left that lot and came to my house. I can get on Google Earth and show him way more than 2%. If it ain't leased, you cannot get permission, either because the owners (many of which are non resident owners) hunt it themselves, or, the owners are anti hunting. At least he admitted his numbers may not be accurate. 

There is no money in Coyotes, therefore, the state will do nothing about them. I'd bet if people were willing to buy a $24 tag to kill a coyote, they would do something. 

Is there anyway to get a transcript of that broadcast? I'd love for my Dad to read it.


----------



## beetlebailey (May 26, 2009)

just went out yote huntn 2 days ago with my youngest cuz behind his house! we put out the call, 20min later we had 4 come over the hill to the call... lol we got 3 yotes, wounded the 4th... all with our 835s 3.5"!!! hes hooked for sure!!!!


----------



## Mushijobah (May 4, 2004)

Lundy said:


> Where I hunt is over run with turkeys, 3 different groups of 36-44 and then the various tom groups. See them all multiple times per day during the deer gun season


Need some help this spring??


----------



## bobk (Apr 30, 2004)

beetlebailey said:


> just went out yote huntn 2 days ago with my youngest cuz behind his house! we put out the call, 20min later we had 4 come over the hill to the call... lol we got 3 yotes, wounded the 4th... all with our 835s 3.5"!!! hes hooked for sure!!!!


Good job on the yotes. Was that during the day?


----------



## beetlebailey (May 26, 2009)

5 pm!! theres a den behind his house..


----------



## Fish-N-Fool (Apr 12, 2004)

If 4 coyotes came together it had to have been a mating pair and two young.
They run the young off by now usually although sometimes they will tolorate a female sticking around until next year.

A good trapper can and will make a difference. Hunting is simply for sport and fur it has zero impact on OH coyote populations.


----------



## Kenlow1 (Jul 14, 2012)

Beetle Bailey- your screen name has now been changed to "THE EXTERMINATOR"! GOOD JOB ON THE YOTES! Never seen 4 together yet.


----------



## beetlebailey (May 26, 2009)

old deer carcass wired to a tree we hunted over close to there den... sat in an old shed with the caller going! both had 835s 3.5" heavy shot turkey loads...20 yrd shots, gave em lead poison!!lol


----------



## hopin to cash (Sep 14, 2010)

"At least he admitted his numbers may not be accurate"... this man and the ODNR gets paid lots of money to make sure we have dedicated commitment to the outdoorsmen, farmers, land owners and citizens of this state. How do you make a statement that says my numbers may not be accurate?

They better get accurate damn quick...!!!


----------



## I Fish (Sep 24, 2008)

hopin to cash said:


> "At least he admitted his numbers may not be accurate"... this man and the ODNR gets paid lots of money to make sure we have dedicated commitment to the outdoorsmen, farmers, land owners and citizens of this state. How do you make a statement that says my numbers may not be accurate?
> 
> They better get accurate damn quick...!!!


I agree. I'm starting to think it's become more about out of state income, and less about we citizens and the good stewardship of our wildlife. I think there's way more money being made on the out of state licenses, and don't forget the residuals of new, out of state landowners, paying top dollar and above for acreage, lodging, property tax, guides etc. than ever before. I think ODNR is trying to keep from knocking over the apple cart, so to speak. That's why their speeches seem to contradict reality and their own seasons and bag limits.

I liked his claim that the reason they don't have more gun seasons was because that led to less kill during actual gun season. They cut our opportunity by abolishing the Dec. "bonus" either sex weekend, and replaced it with an Oct ML and doe only. How did that expand my opportunity?

I'm looking forward to seeing the BIG GRAND OPENING of gun season in the future, lol. 

Also, I'm a hunter, not a tool. I'm tired of hearing DNR refer to hunters, gun hunters in particular, as a tool in "their" tool box. We buy them with our licenses, tags, and fees, therefore, they are our tools, not the other way around. Tools should be put to good use, but, I question if that is the case.


----------



## hopintocash2 (Aug 14, 2011)

just to clarify, i'm hopintocash2, my brother is hopin to cash. 
how long has the tonk been in control? there was a time when ohio was getting national attention as a great deer state, and people where coming here from out of state to hunt our deer, good for the economy. i used to see out of state tags alot, not so much anymore. there once was a time....WHEN I WAS PROUD OF OHIO FOR THERE DEER MANAGEMENT..........

i haven't taken a deer this year, and not sure if i will. if i do, IT WILL NOT BE A DOE.


----------



## fastwater (Apr 1, 2014)

Was not able to tune in and listen to "The Outdoor Connection" with Mike Tonkovich last Thurs. evening. Wife and grandson had different plans for me in the way of going to G-sons school play.

Is there a place I can go on the net and listen to last Thurs. program?

Really wanted to hear some of the response's Mike had in regards to ODNR's long range, projected total deer figure they are trying to accomplish along with some of the other questions that were raised.


----------



## I Fish (Sep 24, 2008)

fastwater said:


> Really wanted to hear some of the response's Mike had in regards to ODNR's long range, projected total deer figure they are trying to accomplish along with some of the other questions that were raised.


He assured us the DNR is nearing their goals for a "targeted" size. Also, the future of the herd is unbelievably bright, when you step back and see the big picture


----------



## fastwater (Apr 1, 2014)

Thanks *I Fish*.

Did he give the 'targeted' number?

Or what percentage of the current herd is in city parks and no hunting areas? 

Or, if when ODNR is taking the yearly tally from the insurance industry of deer related auto claims, are the claims the city park and no hunting area deer are causing figured in the equation to come up with ODNR's 'target' number?


----------



## buckeyebowman (Feb 24, 2012)

hopin to cash said:


> "At least he admitted his numbers may not be accurate"... this man and the ODNR gets paid lots of money to make sure we have dedicated commitment to the outdoorsmen, farmers, land owners and citizens of this state. How do you make a statement that says my numbers may not be accurate?
> 
> They better get accurate damn quick...!!!





I Fish said:


> I agree. I'm starting to think it's become more about out of state income, and less about we citizens and the good stewardship of our wildlife. I think there's way more money being made on the out of state licenses, and don't forget the residuals of new, out of state landowners, paying top dollar and above for acreage, lodging, property tax, guides etc. than ever before. I think ODNR is trying to keep from knocking over the apple cart, so to speak. That's why their speeches seem to contradict reality and their own seasons and bag limits.
> 
> I liked his claim that the reason they don't have more gun seasons was because that led to less kill during actual gun season. They cut our opportunity by abolishing the Dec. "bonus" either sex weekend, and replaced it with an Oct ML and doe only. How did that expand my opportunity?
> 
> ...


I remember that part of the interview, and Tonkovich's confusion over some of the data provided by their questionnaires and interviews. If the response to the first question generated a small positive response one would expect that the follow up, the "on the other hand" question, would generate a larger positive response. That was not the case. Tonkovich attributed at least part of that to people with an "it's none of the governments damn business" attitude. I suppose that's partly true, but it also makes me wonder. If you feed the decision makers false data, then don't bitch at them when they make wrong decisions.

The more telling part, for me, was when Tonkovich talked about the number of crossbow hunters. From 11,000 at the beginning to 110,000 now is a 1,000% increase! Think that might be having some effect? When crossbows were legalized there were a bunch of people out there predicting doom for the deer herd. I poo-poohed their fears at the time, but now I wonder. I believe it was Lundy, quite some time ago, who claimed that if you really wanted to know what happened to Ohio's deer herd, check the archery harvest!


----------



## I Fish (Sep 24, 2008)

fastwater said:


> Did he give the 'targeted' number?
> 
> Or what percentage of the current herd is in city parks and no hunting areas?
> 
> Or, if when ODNR is taking the yearly tally from the insurance industry of deer related auto claims, are the claims the city park and no hunting area deer are causing figured in the equation to come up with ODNR's 'target' number?


No to all the above. Like I said, it was just a puff piece. The interview was so important to him, he freely admitted he was on a cell phone while setting in a parking lot. A bunch of feel good words, just enough numbers and stats to make you think he knows what he's talking about. Damn, did we elect him? lol

Buckeybowman, I partly agree about the crossbows. Using the theory given in the interview, they should shorten bow season to increase the kill during ML season, or, shorten gun season to increase bow kills, etc. It makes no sense. They even said that since the second week of gun season we had back in the 90's was a bust, as in, nobody hunted it. So, my question is why did they do away with it? If it's true that a second week of gun season shows little kill, why not let us have a month? At the same time, saying they are trying to increase gun hunting opportunities. You see, irrational thinking, flawed logic, or spin?


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

One of the projects I have tried to stay married to over the years is urban archery population control hunts.

There are several towns, cities, villages around the state of Ohio that have these programs. I do what I can to promote and help draft and develop these programs myself. I live in the middle of 3 of these programs. Newark, Heath and Granville.

So for you folks crying foul on Archery and Crossbows keep in mind that those numbers that we see in the archery harvest totals (because over the counter tags are used in these hunts) are skewed by these programs where the only weapon that can be used, is archery equipment.

The three towns I mentioned are responsible for 150-200 deer approximately each year as a conservative estimate. That is just 3 small urban developments in one county marking up archery harvests in areas where you can only use archery equipment. They are taking about 50 deer per year in Gahanna as well. The Newark, Heath, Licking County Port Authority has an independent program also.

So, just between Gahana and the programs running in Licking county right next door, the archery stats are being salted by roughly 300 deer per year.

Now here is the real question...How many of the deer reflected in the archery harvest stats are being killed in these archery only zones? I expect that number to be a couple thousand easily. Basically, what I presented is an area of about a 50 mile radius.

The moral of this story is we need to look at the entire picture, have a complete understanding of things beyond our own special interests and our specks on the map. Especially so, before we start blaming a particular hunting implement or condemn the management practices of the DNR. Infighting is the begin of our demise.

Now, with that said, If you live in an urban environment where you believe a deer overpopulation problem exists, send me a PM with the contact information for the "Safety Director" in your area. I'll do my best to salt the archery harvest stats some more.


----------



## fastwater (Apr 1, 2014)

> Orig. posted by *buckeye dan*:
> 
> The moral of this story is we need to look at the entire picture, have a complete understanding of things beyond our own special interests and our specks on the map. Especially so, before we start blaming a particular hunting implement or condemn the management practices of the DNR. Infighting is the begin of our demise.


Can't agree with you more *buckeye dan*.

But, with respect, I have to add that knowing the politics that is played in all government agencies(worked in govn't for 33yrs) coupled with also knowing the tremendous political/lobbying clout of big insurance companies ... then not getting straight forward answers to simple questions from DNR, does not bode well with many and is surely a recipe for 'infighting' and lack of trust among the ranks. 
Especially since ODNR is claiming a current deer herd of 700,000-750,000 deer and fewer deer(and sign) are being seen. Not just in a few small isolated areas but in large rural areas in many counties.

In defense of ODNR, they(along with park personnel) do go into some of these 'no hunting' zones such as parks etc with sharpshooters(at night) to try and keep deer numbers down. But this is a continuous yearly project that costs $ annually. Problem is, like with all other government agencies, budgets are not expanding as fast as the issue's that need attention and there's usually not enough money to go around. 
The other alternative ODNR once tried many years ago was to capture the deer out of the parks and relocate them. This proved to be a huge disaster with the death of over half the deer be relocated. 

Another alternative would be to do what *buckeye dan* helps organize and let bow hunters go into the these areas. The only problem with that is many of these areas have houses around them which presents liability issues.

*buckeye dan*
There is a large area in the southeast side of Cols. that stretch's from 104 to 270. Forget the name of the park there but they have sharp shot thousands of deer out of that massive herd in the last 6-7yrs. and AFAIK, still do this every year. This would be a prime area to have a controlled bow hunt and let hunters take advantage of putting some venison in their freezer. But again, this would cost additional $'s out of an already strained ODNR budget having to have personnel manning the hunt.
FWIW, I've personally seen some of the deer that have been culled out of that herd and have seen some of the mammoth bucks running in that area. I'd say guys would not only use their regular permit to hunt that area but would be willing to pay an additional fee to help cover expenses for a chance at some of the monsters I've seen there. Truly some bucks of a lifetime running there.


----------



## buckeyebowman (Feb 24, 2012)

Solon, in NE OH, is another suburb that hires sharpshooter outfits to come in and thin the herd, at taxpayer expense, rather than let licensed bowhunters do it for them. I fully support efforts that enable sportsmen and women to access these unique opportunities. I used to think that the ODNR would have to administer such a program, but why? Most of these places have a parks department w/supervisor/administrator. I'm sure that action by a city council, or township trustees would be necessary. If a program is implemented, let normal hunting regs apply. No need for ODNR personnel to be on hand. One thing they might do is add a section to the check in procedure that would document if a deer was taken in an urban population control hunt. Maybe they could include a proviso that this deer would not count toward your limit, but I don't see that as absolutely necessary. I'd be fine using my tags for an urban deer. Venison is venison, I don't care where it comes from.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

Don't get me started on Solon and I am quite familiar with the company they use, their methods and their cost. They were poised to be considered for a small village called Ottawa Hills, OH.

I stepped in and presented the safety director with a complete and compressive management plan which included archery hunting. It went to the town council and step one (removing the hunting ban from the town charter) was complete.

All of a sudden a bunch of anti hunting bambi lover organizations showed up and started circulating a petition to cancel the hunt via a ballot initiative. The people of the village voted and the ballot initiative passed keeping it illegal to hunt. SO now they are literally stuck with the deer and no one can touch them.

@fastwater
I do not believe you could get over the first hurdle with the city of Columbus. If it were possible, they wouldn't be using snipers to exterminate the deer now. To the best of my knowledge a hunting solution is always the first recommendation from the DNR. When that is refused, they move on to the next option.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

I would think that the reason many of these parks and villages elect to use a sharpshooting company versus hunting is pretty obvious.

You know what you are going to get when you hire the company to do the job, they have a single point of contact, can set tight regulations regarding times, locations and infringement on the home owners or park visitors.

Turn the task over to many individual hunters and there will be more problems and conflict, not to mention hunters blood trailing bambi through 3 backyards and finally gutting it out in someone's flower garden. Hunters are hunters worst enemy.


----------



## fastwater (Apr 1, 2014)

> Orig posted by *buckeye dan*:
> I do not believe you could get over the first hurdle with the city of Columbus. If it were possible, they wouldn't be using snipers to exterminate the deer now


.

Once again, you are correct. Especially with the Mayor Cols. has had the last 14 or so years. His beliefs on individuals owning firearms as well as hunting is no secret. 



> Orig. posted by *Lundy*:
> 
> Turn the task over to many individual hunters and there will be more problems and conflict, not to mention hunters blood trailing bambi through 3 backyards and finally gutting it out in someone's flower garden. *Hunters are hunters worst enemy. *


Sadly, we have proven time and time again that we are our own worst enemy.


So all this brings us back around to the same big issue's....and I use Cols as just one example cause I'm most familiar with Cols. but I'm sure Cleveland, Cinn. and other cities have the same issue's as Cols. Too, we need to remember that the City of Cols. has annexed miles and miles of land that are now considered 'suburban' areas that are infested with deer. Naturally, now this property being in the city limits equals no hunting. Have many friends that live in these areas that see deer daily in their yards as well as in the neighborhoods.

Again, including these 'park' or restricted hunting area deer, along with the many accidents caused by them into the equation to set a 'state' target goal for deer population is, IMO, a screwed up way to do things since the deer that are going to be killed to reach the 'state quota' are going to come from rural areas legal to hunt. 

Too, what percentage of the total state deer herd is actually in these areas?

What percentage of the deer accidents are from these areas versus not from theses areas?

Stands to reason that these places are busting at the seams or the state/municipalities wouldn't be paying sharpshooters to remove them.

IMO (which means as much as what is paid for it ), you simply cannot keep trying to reach a reduced total state deer herd population by instilling too liberal bag limits for hunting zones while at the same time including deer in cities and no hunting zones, and the accidents caused by them into the equation. Again, the deer population in the rural areas is going to suffer the blunt of the burden which I feel is and has been happening for several years.

We're going to keep this trend up and Ohio will not be the target of many out of state hunters that come here putting $ into our economy. 
As I wrote in another post, I know of two separate groups of out of state fella's that have, and are in the process of doing just that. Their reason is obvious...chance of better success rate elsewhere. These fella's have been leasing land and coming here for many years. While they won't bankrupt ODNR or the state, between them, there goes better then $1000 just in lic. Not counting the rest of their expense's while here.
Sadly, if things keep going at the rate they are, we can only expect many more will follow suit relieving an already financially strapped ODNR worse off.

Lastly, I talked to two guys (different places) that have processed deer for many years. Business is nothing like it used to be according to them. And when asked about the amount of out of state hunters they see in their clientele, both stated the number has decreased.


----------



## Fish-N-Fool (Apr 12, 2004)

Might not be legal, but the herd inside Columbus is certainly hunted.
Areas where deer are present are hunted..some hard. There is a Columbus City park with woods (not too far from OSU campus) that is 100% off limit to hunting.......yet it is littered with tree stands and hunters during the season. Heck they yelled at me for trying to fish the area in Oct...sheesh!


----------



## ostbucks98 (Apr 14, 2004)

And the railroad tracks all thru columbus have stands on them.


----------



## hopintocash2 (Aug 14, 2011)

fastwater said:


> .
> 
> 
> 
> IMO (which means as much as what is paid for it ), you simply cannot keep trying to reach a reduced total state deer herd population by instilling too liberal bag limits for hunting zones while at the same time including deer in cities and no hunting zones, and the accidents caused by them into the equation. Again, the deer population in the rural areas is going to suffer the blunt of the burden which I feel is and has been happening for several years.


the email i sent him a couple of years ago was exactly about this. i felt the liberal seasons and bag limits was a smoke in mirrors ploy to make insurance companies happy. it doesn't matter how many deer i shoot at west branch, it's not going to help the solon population. and i agree, the huntable areas, especially public hunting areas have taken a mighty hit by this.


----------



## tagalong09 (Jul 25, 2012)

I would like to see how many nuisance permits per county and to what farmers. I think this is a very relevant question and also just what do they do with the.one farmer in my are[HURON OH] uses the permits and then last winter allowed a 2nd crop of soy beans to go to waste all winter. I used to see 4 or 5 deer each nite when I bow hunted and now I am lucky to see that many a season.


----------



## MassillonBuckeye (May 3, 2010)

buckeye dan said:


> One of the projects I have tried to stay married to over the years is urban archery population control hunts.
> 
> There are several towns, cities, villages around the state of Ohio that have these programs. I do what I can to promote and help draft and develop these programs myself. I live in the middle of 3 of these programs. Newark, Heath and Granville.
> 
> ...


A buddy and I have been hunting one of these areas the past 2 years. Archery only. Pretty much hunting in peoples back yards. I've seen quite a few deer but haven't had a shot as of yet. My buddy finally took a buck a few weeks ago. I think quite a few were taken out of there last year. Not sure about this year. Sightings are down for me so I'm guessing they are only going to have it open another year or two but who knows. Just because I'm not seeing them doesn't mean they aren't there. Contrary to popular belief.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

Lundy said:


> I would think that the reason many of these parks and villages elect to use a sharpshooting company versus hunting is pretty obvious.
> 
> You know what you are going to get when you hire the company to do the job, they have a single point of contact, can set tight regulations regarding times, locations and infringement on the home owners or park visitors.
> 
> Turn the task over to many individual hunters and there will be more problems and conflict, not to mention hunters blood trailing bambi through 3 backyards and finally gutting it out in someone's flower garden. Hunters are hunters worst enemy.


Actually, I can address every single one of your concerns. Everything in your second paragraph can be parameters that are established prior to the hunt. 

All of the programs I am familiar with require that the entire deer be removed from the hunting zones prior to field dressing them. As for trailing deer, several of the programs require that you be escorted by a police officer if a deer leaves a hunter's assigned area. The officers will then help you obtain permission to retrieve in order to make it all legal like.

I can basically lay out a hunting program that will replicate anything that the extermination company is doing. If nuisance permits are being used, the DNR sets the parameters for how those are used based on the specific needs of whatever the village agrees to. If regular over the counter tags are being used then the laws and regulations are the same for hunters in the program as they are for hunters anywhere else in the state but with the provisions the village agrees to.

So the difference is, the village pays a company to hunt for them under their conditions and the conditions of the tags used. 
OR
The the village allows you and I to hunt for them under the same conditions and the conditions of the tags used. I can go one better and recruit local, resident hunters for free instead of using a bunch of expensive "professional" hunters from Connecticut and get the same exact results for an extended period of time. As opposed to a one time fee that makes the problem go away for 3-5 years for about $500 per doe.


----------



## fastwater (Apr 1, 2014)

Does anybody know where the meat goes from the deer shot by these sharpshooter outfits? Hopefully it is processed and used.

When they were culling deer from the herd in the area mentioned earlier in Cols. from 104 to 270, I heard estimates from a couple very reliable sources that they were taking from 75-100 deer a night when they started the process. 

One question that I could never get an answer to was "what happened to the meat"?


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

buckeye dan said:


> Actually, I can address every single one of your concerns. Everything in your second paragraph can be parameters that are established prior to the hunt.
> 
> All of the programs I am familiar with require that the entire deer be removed from the hunting zones prior to field dressing them. As for trailing deer, several of the programs require that you be escorted by a police officer if a deer leaves a hunter's assigned area. The officers will then help you obtain permission to retrieve in order to make it all legal like.
> 
> ...


All sound reasoning, you convinced me.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

fastwater said:


> Does anybody know where the meat goes from the deer shot by these sharpshooter outfits? Hopefully it is processed and used.
> 
> When they were culling deer from the herd in the area mentioned earlier in Cols. from 104 to 270, I heard estimates from a couple very reliable sources that they were taking from 75-100 deer a night when they started the process.
> 
> One question that I could never get an answer to was "what happened to the meat"?


To the best of my knowledge in every instance where a professional extermination technique is used, the meat is butchered locally then donated to food pantries. This of course is at the expense of the city who hired the exterminators.

In the programs that use local hunters, the meat is either kept by the hunter or donated to a food program. Nothing goes to waste in either case.


----------



## fastwater (Apr 1, 2014)

> Orig. posted by *buckeye dan*:
> 
> To the best of my knowledge in every instance where a professional extermination technique is used, the meat is butchered locally then donated to food pantries. This of course is at the expense of the city who hired the exterminators.


That is great news that at least this meat is not going to waste. Too many people going hungry these days. Hope this is the scenario in all the cases.

I'm with *Lundy* as far as being convinced with *buckeye dan's* program. I just wished that 'the powers to be' in cities such as Cols. were as convinced. The park area I have repeatedly referred to from 104 south to 270 and from 33 West to Alum Creek Dr is a huge, slightly populated area that could be an excellent area for a program such as this to be implemented. Again, there is an enormous deer herd there.


----------



## reo (May 22, 2004)

hopin to cash said:


> "At least he admitted his numbers may not be accurate"... this man and the ODNR gets paid lots of money to make sure we have dedicated commitment to the outdoorsmen, farmers, land owners and citizens of this state. How do you make a statement that says my numbers may not be accurate?
> 
> *They better get accurate damn quick...!!*!


Or else??? LMAO

The man was appointed in 1996 and has done precisely what he was told to do. REDUCE THE HERD! Guess what they ain't done yet either. It WILL be reduced further. Nothing the state has said or done indicates otherwise. Have you heard otherwise? I have heard and read that "we are approaching target levels". That means they still have room for MORE reduction.


----------



## reo (May 22, 2004)

Worth a careful read:

http://www.whitetailproperties.com/blog/how-average-hunters-can-fix-the-deer-decline


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

fastwater said:


> That is great news that at least this meat is not going to waste. Too many people going hungry these days. Hope this is the scenario in all the cases.
> 
> I'm with *Lundy* as far as being convinced with *buckeye dan's* program. I just wished that 'the powers to be' in cities such as Cols. were as convinced. The park area I have repeatedly referred to from 104 south to 270 and from 33 West to Alum Creek Dr is a huge, slightly populated area that could be an excellent area for a program such as this to be implemented. Again, there is an enormous deer herd there.


Unfortunately I am preaching to the choir in here. It's an easy thing to convince a hunter but it is a giant endeavor to convince even a non hunter that has no emotional attachment to Bambi. Beyond that it is impossible to convince an anti hunter. It takes a catastrophic failure of epic proportions to turn them towards pro hunting solutions.

Even then, the immediate out of sight out of mind solution is the most desirable. Snipe them in the night or while I am at work and do it quickly seems to be the popular solution. Even if it is temporary and costs a lot of money.

An exterminator provides a valuable community service which can be sold to be convincingly acceptable. A hunter is a dumb ******* scourge to the animal kingdom that isn't even an option.


----------



## fastwater (Apr 1, 2014)

An excellent read indeed *reo*. Thanks for sharing it.


----------

