# DEER HUNTING



## one3 (Dec 1, 2015)

I have been hearing and reading about how OHIO manages deer. what does every one think about lowering the bag limit and extending the gun season to two weeks?


----------



## fastwater (Apr 1, 2014)

In agreement for lowering the bag limit but not extending gun season. 
Seems doing both would be kinda an oxymoron when it comes to not further reducing the deer herd.

Of course, unless the bag limit was reduced maybe to one doe only 1st week of gun...Buck only(minimum set antler length) 2nd week. And of course, only one buck(minimum set antler length) total for the year and only one doe total for the year.


----------



## chatterbox (Jan 7, 2013)

In some areas, it makes no difference what the season or bag limit is, the heard is decimated. Hunt one week and see no deer or hunt two weeks and see no deer, for what?


----------



## sherman51 (Apr 12, 2011)

fastwater said:


> In agreement for lowering the bag limit but not extending gun season.
> Seems doing both would be kinda an oxymoron when it comes to not further reducing the deer herd.
> 
> Of course, unless the bag limit was reduced maybe to one doe only 1st week of gun...Buck only(minimum set antler length) 2nd week. And of course, only one buck(minimum set antler length) total for the year and only one doe total for the year.


that's great in theory but its not going to happen. I think Indiana has made some type of ruling on taking bucks. but there is no limit on how many does you can take. each county has a quota and you can take the quota in one county then move to another county. some counties have quotas as high as 8 does and others is lower.

they also made it a poachers dream come true. you can take a deer in your favorite county then check it in by phone or computer from another county. then keep hunting in the county your getting the deer from.
sherman


----------



## fastwater (Apr 1, 2014)

sherman51 said:


> that's great in theory but its not going to happen. I think Indiana has made some type of ruling on taking bucks. but there is no limit on how many does you can take. each county has a quota and you can take the quota in one county then move to another county. some counties have quotas as high as 8 does and others is lower.
> 
> they also made it a poachers dream come true. you can take a deer in your favorite county then check it in by phone or computer from another county. then keep hunting in the county your getting the deer from.
> sherman


We have about the same here as far as bagging does. Obviously Killing does is the fastest way of reducing the herd. Only allowed one buck per year with no antler restrictions.

See your point in the 'call in' check in system and the poachers. But don't you think these same poachers were poaching just the same prior to whatever changes in law is made? Most criminals really don't pay much attention to the law. They're going to break the law anyway. Seems their line of thought or worries(if you will) is more geared to what kind of punishment theyre gonna get if busted rather than breaking the law. IMO, they ought to double the penalties for poaching with mandatory jail time and make the sentences stick to the T.

My neighbor knows a guy that's poached practically all his life. He got busted and ended up being fined $250 + court cost, his hunting privilege's suspended for a year and lost a 22 rifle. He got his truck back. Which apparently was the only thing he really cared about. Neighbors son saw this guy and guy was laughing about his sentence making the statement ' he figures he's still ahead of the game cause he's killed a lot more deer than $250 worth'.

Too, the way things stand currently, does it really matter what kind of poaching laws we have when we have a ridiculous one GW per county? And he/she is on a regular9-5 shift. That's laughable and kinda leaves the poaching game virtually wide open.
In short, it doesn't really matter what laws are made about anything if there's not enough manpower to enforce them and the Judge doesn't sentence according to the punishments set forth for the crime.


----------



## Gills63 (Mar 29, 2012)

Setting a size limit on antler size would never work. It's too hard to judge, it's not like fish where you can measure them and throw the shorts back. Unless you mean like what we have now.


----------



## fastwater (Apr 1, 2014)

Gills63 said:


> Setting a size limit on antler size would never work. It's too hard to judge, it's not like fish where you can measure them and throw the shorts back. Unless you mean like what we have now.


You may be right as far as judging antler length. 
Maybe an antler point limit like three on a side. Could add in the length part a minimum overall main beam length of say 10- 12". If you shoot a buck of lesser number of points or main beam length, you have just used your buck and doe tag for the year and are done deer hunting for that year.


----------



## Gills63 (Mar 29, 2012)

I would prefer the state not manage for bucks. The current regs for bucks is perfect. Does are the baby makers and impact our herd. I honestly couldn't care less about antlers and my hunting experience should not be effected because other people think antlers size is relevant.


----------



## jmciw17 (Sep 4, 2007)

Regulations need to be set by counties.Heavily hunted rural counties need to be cut back on limits . Urban zones are the only over populated areas in the state where extra doe should be harvested.


----------



## fastwater (Apr 1, 2014)

Gills63 said:


> I would prefer the state not manage for bucks. The current regs for bucks is perfect. Does are the baby makers and impact our herd. I honestly couldn't care less about antlers and my hunting experience should not be effected because other people think antlers size is relevant.


Not to be argumentative ... but those that do consider antler size relevant would strongly disagree with your stance and have just as much right in wanting antler restrictions as you not wanting them.

FWIW, according to ODNR, they are supposedly already managing for bucks. They have used the excuse(among many) for the high bag limits to reduce the deer herd because over the years trophy bucks are getting fewer and more far between. Claiming there have been a steady decline in P&Y entrees over the years. Apparently, since ODNR has stated this, they are concerned about antler size as well. 
If for no other reason than bigger antlered bucks in the state, they = more desire for most to want to hunt those big bucks, which ='s more revenue from deer hunting.


----------



## Gills63 (Mar 29, 2012)

yeah, no point in arguing it's just a difference of opinions/ philosophies. My point is I want the state to set regulations based on providing hunting opportunities for everyone. If people want to let young/ small bucks walk, that should be a choice not a law.


----------



## hopintocash2 (Aug 14, 2011)

I feel our current buck to doe ratio is off, I would like to see an increase to 2 buck tags and one doe. But of course I'm looking at this from a hunters stand point. The state is not doing the same.  I make this point only by what I see, not by some sort of higher education decision.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

I hope we never see regulations for antler restrictions


----------



## Snook (Aug 19, 2008)

Like the one buck per year. Shoot what makes you happy but one and done. Doe's...I think their shooting too many in some areas but if your on private ground you can control that by NOT shooting. BUT I would really like to see them manage PUBLIC land differently. Reduced bag limits.


----------



## jray (Jan 20, 2006)

I agree with fastwater on this one. The small management districts they are trying to implement will help the urban and rural issues and areas where the herd is lower. But that all isn't even worth the paper the regs are printed on with one gw per county. There's no earthly way one guy can enforce all that. As for public land I would like to see a public land permit. Money goes straight to habitat. What could 10 bucks from everyone who hunts public ground do for habitat.


----------



## supercanoe (Jun 12, 2006)

hopintocash2 said:


> I feel our current buck to doe ratio is off, I would like to see an increase to 2 buck tags and one doe. But of course I'm looking at this from a hunters stand point. The state is not doing the same.  I make this point only by what I see, not by some sort of higher education decision.


Your not a biologist?


----------



## Misdirection (Jul 16, 2012)

Lundy said:


> I hope we never see regulations for antler restrictions


They are a pain over here in PA.


----------



## hopintocash2 (Aug 14, 2011)

supercanoe said:


> Your not a biologist?


Nope. Machinist.


----------



## Shad Rap (Nov 10, 2010)

Misdirection said:


> They are a pain over here in PA.


I've heard from a few people that hunt PA say thats the best thing they ever did.


----------



## hopin to cash (Sep 14, 2010)

supercanoe said:


> Your not a biologist?


I'm not a veterinarian either but I know horses ass when I see one!!!


----------



## Misdirection (Jul 16, 2012)

Shad Rap said:


> I've heard from a few people that hunt PA say thats the best thing they ever did.


If they made it equal thru out the state, maybe. But we also get alot of large spikes in the breeding population.


----------



## hopintocash2 (Aug 14, 2011)

hopin to cash said:


> I'm not a veterinarian either but I know horses ass when I see one!!!


Are you sure it wasn't bobkaa


----------



## hopin to cash (Sep 14, 2010)

Oh no... I take no responsibility for cash2 post today way to much crown I suspect


----------



## MassillonBuckeye (May 3, 2010)

Nothing like a deer regs thread to get the ole Cash boys posting up some opinions!

I like how for each point someone thought was a good or great idea, someone else pans as terrible. How do you make everyone happy? Answer: you don't.

One wants antler regs, one hopes it never comes. 1 says antler regs are a real PITA, another says he's heard they are the best thing ever. Gotta love it!


----------



## hopintocash2 (Aug 14, 2011)

hopin to cash said:


> Oh no... I take no responsibility for cash2 post today way to much crown I suspect


Nope, scotch. But the deer hunting is getting better.


----------



## hopintocash2 (Aug 14, 2011)

MassillonBuckeye said:


> Nothing like a deer regs thread to get the ole Cash boys posting up some opinions!
> 
> I like how for each point someone thought was a good or great idea, someone else pans as terrible. How do you make everyone happy? Answer: you don't.
> 
> One wants antler regs, one hopes it never comes. 1 says antler regs are a real PITA, another says he's heard they are the best thing ever. Gotta love it!


It's all good, if we all felt the same, things would be boring. All in fun. Fact is we just love to deer hunt. And deer hunters are known as the most arrogant hunters of all.


----------

