# Up to date deer harvest numbers



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

This is the data for deer harvest that is through the gun season. No way to accurately assign archery numbers as of yet. I will be able to do that at the end of this week when the report comes out.


----------



## treytd32 (Jun 12, 2009)

I expected more but I guess it about evens out comparing old bonus with the mz added in.


----------



## 2048 (Jul 15, 2012)

WOW!! I guess the numbers don't lie. It's my belief that this new check in system is absolutely a joke (permitted poaching). Without deer being physically checked by a human being, the numbers will always be lower every year. At least there are 81K honest hunters out there.


----------



## GasFish26 (Aug 15, 2012)

2048 said:


> WOW!! I guess the numbers don't lie. It's my belief that this new check in system is absolutely a joke (permitted poaching). Without deer being physically checked by a human being, the numbers will always be lower every year. At least there are 81K honest hunters out there.



Have you ever checked deer in another state.

That's kinda a joke too


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## wildman (Sep 3, 2008)

2048 said:


> WOW!! I guess the numbers don't lie. It's my belief that this new check in system is absolutely a joke (permitted poaching). Without deer being physically checked by a human being, the numbers will always be lower every year. At least there are 81K honest hunters out there.




I have been saying this for the last couple of years only to be told I was crazy... #'s don't lie. Did anyone ever think that the lower #'s could be deer not being checked in by more than it was with the old check in system. really there are more deer being killed just not recorded. sorry I'm just being crazy. 

I see deer on every hunting trip but a few early season.


----------



## carp (Oct 31, 2011)

A poacher would never check in a deer via the old check station system anyway!

Also, why wouldnt a hunter use this new updated system? It's quick , fast, effiecient!

You cant take a deer to be processed without checking it in via computer/cell phone.

Bottom line, hunter numbers are way down, and deer numbers are down!

The state wanted deer numbers reduced, and they have succeeded!


----------



## wildman (Sep 3, 2008)

Here is a post from 2012 and the Quote is from 2011... And you can read my prediction for 2013... 


Quote:


Originally Posted by wildman View Post 

*Yes, the new system has a lot to do with it... Last year we went back and forth on this. I said that I predict the #'s will be down due to the check in sysyem, and what happened they are down.... Just like the spring turkey #'s which is when the system started..The same guy's disagreeing with me then are disagreeing now... 

As for deer #'s; I hunted 6 day's the last 2 week's and saw an avg of 10 deer a sitting. day's of 20 an evening and morning were regular. This was at 3 diff property's and county's.
I know that with the high # of tag's issued and heavy hunted areas there are pocket's in Ohio that do have low #'s. That is do to the high # of tag's.. If the tag's stay high expect small public tracks/parks to really suffer...

Maybe it was the corn. last year it was the acorn's the turkeys it was the weather... alway's an excuse...
* 
This post was from last year. and the year before I posted lower #'s partly/mostly due to the new check in system. And again with the perfect hunting weather our #'s will be down again for 2012.. I again wish that we would do away with the new check-in system!!!!! 2013 deer #'s will be even lower, if that is possible. 



Funny how I have been able to keep predicting the lower #'s each year.. since the introduction of the tela-check system....


----------



## GasFish26 (Aug 15, 2012)

Sorry but you can't say it's just telechecks fault

I blame it on bucky25


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## wildman (Sep 3, 2008)

LOL...

I really do..


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Wildman,

You need to get over yourself a little bit here.

There is zero evidence that the published reduced harvest is a result of not reporting deer kills due to the new checking system.

You would also like to have us believe that the widespread complaints about a reduced deer population and sightings just happen to coincide with the new checking system also. Is there a correlation between the two? Did the new checking system cause a reduction of deer sightings and deer car accidents and farmer damage complaints also? I'm guessing if you have a car deer accident you just don't report it now that we have a new check system?

It is pretty obvious even to me that there are less deer in the state than there were a few year ago. No data exists anywhere in any form to show anything to the contrary


----------



## bobk (Apr 30, 2004)

Oh boy, blaming the check in system again. There is no reason why people would not use a system that is much easier than hauling the deer to a check station. Here is a better reason why numbers are down. It's real numbers too, not a guess or a prediction.http://ohiodnr.com/wildlife/dow/regulations/PDF/LicenseSales.pdf


----------



## wildman (Sep 3, 2008)

What I am saying is that poaching has become much more prevalent. Deer are getting killed and not getting checked in on a higher scale than ever before due to the ease of it or thought of it being easy or the more tempting part of it due to not wanting to purchase a 24 dollar tag. the non-checked in deer is skewing the numbers which is recording less killed which in turn reducing the deer population= less deer sightings. That is what I am saying... 

Adding the popularity of bow hunting which irrefutably adds many more mortally wounded deer which could help add to the low #'s harvested and sightings.

I know I am not the only one that knows of or hears the above happening I hear about it and witness it a lot more than I would like to see or hear. 

Of course there are a few other reasons (fawn mortality due to coyotes) but the above is a main part of it.


----------



## wildman (Sep 3, 2008)

Gee, BOB your records are resident licenses.. Here are the total for the state. for 2012..
http://www.ohiodnr.com/wildlife/dow/regulations/PDF/pub062-2012.pdf

2002
http://www.ohiodnr.com/wildlife/dow/regulations/PDF/pub062-2002.pdf

2002 total 392,065 2012 total license sales 424,904

More total licenses sold in 2012 than 2002 so I just don't get your point..

More deer recorded killed in 2002. and a steady decline since 2010


----------



## Bubbagon (Mar 8, 2010)

Lundy,
I think the relationship between deer/car crashes and herd size is misleading.

Below are the deer/car crash statistics from Ohio since 2002, the same time frame that your harvest numbers run.
You'll notice there is no correlation. Harvest numbers go up and down, but the deer/car crashes have been dwindling steadily since 2002.

So what's the reason they are dropping? Maybe driver awareness, I don't know. 
But the national average is in line with Ohio; steadily dropping 3-7% each year for the last 15 years.

http://www.ohioinsurance.org/pdf/deer_collisions_county.pdf
https://www.ohioinsurance.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/DeerChart07-09.pdf
https://www.ohioinsurance.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/DeerChart08-10.pdf
https://www.ohioinsurance.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/DeerChart09-11.pdf


----------



## MassillonBuckeye (May 3, 2010)

Maybe all the deer are finally paying attention to all the deer crossing signs.. ?


----------



## hopintocash2 (Aug 14, 2011)

MassillonBuckeye said:


> Maybe all the deer are finally paying attention to all the deer crossing signs.. ?


lol. yeah that's it.


----------



## AEFISHING (Apr 25, 2004)

Good info. Lundy. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## buckeyebowman (Feb 24, 2012)

Lundy said:


> Wildman,
> 
> You need to get over yourself a little bit here.
> 
> ...


As usual, an astute and logical post from Lundy. Remember people, hunters are not the only folk that the ODNR has to answer to. One group is farmers who, where deer numbers are high, are having crops ravaged. And, yes, I have seen it. Try a 500 yard long corn field with the bottom 100 yards lost to deer depredation! Can your business survive a 20% loss in gross product? Another group is insurance companies who get sick and tired of shelling out money for car/deer collisions in a state that has let the deer herd get out of hand! 



wildman said:


> What I am saying is that poaching has become much more prevalent.
> 
> Deer are getting killed and not getting checked in on a higher scale than ever before due to the ease of it or thought of it being easy or the more tempting part of it due to not wanting to purchase a 24 dollar tag. the non-checked in deer is skewing the numbers which is recording less killed which in turn reducing the deer population= less deer sightings. That is what I am saying...
> 
> ...


Holy crap! This second post is filled with more disinformation than a communique from Kim Jong Il! OK! You say that poaching has become much more prevalent. I'd appreciate some data please, not just hearsay! I can fully understand some reasons for poaching, a poor economy in one's particular area, the desire to feed one's family, etc. However, I've noticed that a poaching attitude tends to run hand in hand with a generally "lawless" attitude. For instance, I know some guys who poach like crazy! They ride around, in the middle of the night, on ATV's, with the latest generation night vision scopes on their guns, and have countless Booners and, maybe, world records, stashed in their attics! 

I cut ties with them years ago because of their methods, but, their spiel was "The State's not gonna tell me when or where I can take a deer, yada, yada, yada!" The leader of the pack was a bona fide millionaire, and none of the other guys was exactly hurting for cash! They did it simply, at least for themselves, for the thrill of it! 

Second of all, it's no easier to "poach" a deer now than it has been in the past. Face it! If you can process your own deer, there is no such thing as a bag limit, or a closed season, for that fact! 

And the idea that bowhunting adds so many wounded, but unrecovered, deer to the mortality tables is an absolute fiction!! I've been bowhunting since the early '70's! While I recognize that there may be the same percentage of "slob" hunters in the bowhunting ranks as there are among any other style of hunting, I can only speak for myself and the guys I know. I'm extremely "picky" about any shot I execute with a bow. I shoot a "vertical" bow, by the way. I'm well aware of the "humpties" that show up in the shop a week before season, trying to find out why they can't hit what they're aiming at! They are no different from the guys who can't hit anything with their shotguns or ML's. I find that most of these guys don't see any deer at all. As poor as their bow skills are, that's usually how poor their deer hunting skills are! 

I can say, with confidence, that every deer that I have shot at with a bow I have recovered! It's been my experience that a deer, well shot with a bow, is a quicker recovery than one shot with a firearm!


----------



## crittergitter (Jun 9, 2005)

Bubbagon said:


> Lundy,
> I think the relationship between deer/car crashes and herd size is misleading.
> 
> Below are the deer/car crash statistics from Ohio since 2002, the same time frame that your harvest numbers run.
> ...


You're not factoring in the increased opportunity. They added youth gun weekend, then higher bag limits, then bonus doe tags on the cheap, then bonus gun weekend. The annual harvest kept going up because the opportunity increased. Meanwhile deer/car Collins went down as a result of less deer running across the road. Bubba this argument has raged on for multiple years on multiple forums. Ohio's deer herd is dwindling. Is the sky falling? No, but it would be if it weren't for so many "no hunting" private lands and controlled harvest leased land.


----------



## Bubbagon (Mar 8, 2010)

crittergitter said:


> Y... if it weren't for so many "no hunting" private lands and controlled harvest leased land.


There certainly seems to be a common thread in all these discussions; and that's a disdain from public land guys for private land.
I can see that loud and clear.


----------



## crittergitter (Jun 9, 2005)

Bubbagon said:


> There certainly seems to be a common thread in all these discussions; and that's a disdain from public land guys for private land.
> I can see that loud and clear.


I think you missed my point. I don't have disdain for private land hunters which is why i didn't post in that thread.


----------



## Gills63 (Mar 29, 2012)

In fact I believe his post is stating the opposite. That no hunting areas are a safe haven for deer.

Sent from my XT907 using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## bobk (Apr 30, 2004)

wildman said:


> Gee, BOB your records are resident licenses.. Here are the total for the state. for 2012..
> http://www.ohiodnr.com/wildlife/dow/regulations/PDF/pub062-2012.pdf
> 
> 2002
> ...


I thought the chart I posted was quite clear. There has been a pretty steady decline in hunters for many years thus less deer killed. I would give this more credit than the new check in system for the lower numbers. Looks like 55,189 less license sold in 2012 than 2002 to me?

There is just no reason not to pick up the phone or get online to check in a deer. The guys that poached before the new system will still do it.


----------



## Rabbeye (Oct 28, 2013)

The actual number of deer killed is much higher than the official numbers indicate due to the fact deer don't have to be physically checked in. Here is how it's done: buy a tag and make 3 or 4 copies, shoot a deer and fill out tag as would if you would check it in, once you get it home process it and throw away the tag, better yet burn it. You only need to check it in if a creek dick stops you. Then you can go shoot another deer and do the same process over and over. Last deer you plan to kill, tag it in that way you can account for hair, blood, meat, ect. If a guy kills 3 or 4 deer a year you save a few bucks. Technically you never shoot over your limit, just didn't buy all the tags. If everyone was honest the thought of doing this has crossed many minds. Don't be naive to think this isn't occurring at a high rate. With this happening and the overall deer numbers declining, they are being over harvested in many areas of the state. We many soon be back to the early 80s with deer hunting. Buying a license online is a great convenience, however it is best to physically have to check in deer and turkeys to reduce the temptation to cheat the system. Guys that are outright poachers they are going to do it no matter, some essentially honest guys will cheat the system because it is way too easy to do so.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Rabbeye,

I know of no one doing what you suggest, haven't heard talk of anyone doing what you suggest.

Don't forget the part of the regulation that requires you to keep the deer check in number with the deer meat until it is all consumed.

You seem to have the method to try and cheat the system figured out pretty well.

And no, it has never crossed my mind to cheat.


----------



## wildman (Sep 3, 2008)

Maybe Lundy you need to get out a little more the stuff happens more than you would think.. Archery shoot's, deer camp on public, anything.. That's where I hear what I hear. Maybe hunt more than one place or even hunt with different hunters. They all have there story's. I don't live in a little box's I get out meet new people and hunt different place's. Nor do I peach a peach I just act like a normal guy (which I am) and I hear stories.. I am not saying that you don't do any of the above But I feel if you did you may hear some of the stories or see some of the things that I and other see. We are not just making this stuff up. Do you really think we are on this site to argue? No just to share our thoughts and experience's, The same thoughts and experience's that you are saying doesn't happen, which for myself is frustrating........

Your post is resident licenses sold not total........ My #'s are total and 2012 had more licenses sold... click on my attachment's and add 2002 total licenses sold they are less than 2012..


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Wildman, Just because you believe the world to be flat does not make it so.


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

Wildman, if you think there are so many violators of the system you need to get on the phone and start making some calls to the proper authorities. All we ever hear is that guys are poachers. I am not denying the fact that there are some out there. There always have been and there always will be. A new system didn't create a new breed of poachers. It sounds like you know with concrete evidence that some guys are poaching. Make the call and get on with it! This new system does not eliminate the burden of proof of a legal permit being used.

Bobk,
You mentioned a reason for the low numbers as being due to less hunters. That could indeed result in lower numbers harvested but the flip side to that is there should be a lot more deer in the field due to less being killed. That is not the case. 

The ODNR put out an article about the harvest total and the year to year comparison. They stated that the current number of 162,720 is about 5% lower than last year's 171,867 but the part of that which is not stated yet is that last year's numbers got another 14,365 two weeks later with the bonus gun weekend. That is more than 8% of the total from last year which means that when looking at the year to year comparison after the week which would have been the bonus gun weekend you will then be seeing the drop be more in the area of 13%.

http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/Home/New...n-75-000-Deer-during-Weeklong-Gun-Season.aspx

I think that part of the reason we are experiencing lower densities in areas is that we are still killing the deer at a rate above the breaking point for the herd to hold its numbers. Their mortality rates are not solely determined by the hunters. There are road kills, coyotes, and disease to deal with as well. If the ODNR is estimating the herd numbers at higher than its actual amount then the harvest numbers that they are seeing may suggest to them that we are making less of a dent in the population than we actually are. This swing all seemed to have happened right around the time that we went to the very liberal bag limits. The numbers skyrocketed for 2-3 years as a result of killing a large number of additional antlerless deer, or "breeders". As a result of that massive harvest the herd is at a lower number and cannot withstand the numbers that we have been harvesting, even the numbers from just prior to the boom. So what we are getting is a steady thinning of the herd year after year. I would personally like to see the bag limits lowered some at this point to level out the growth rate to steady but this is where the main point of differing views comes in to play. The ODNR still wants a thinner herd than this so I really don't see them reducing the limits at this point. Let's just say it would really surprise me if they did. Going from 6 to 4 in our zone this year was nothing more than smoking mirrors since less than 1% of the harvest was from those 5th and 6th deer. I think going down to 3 will make a difference. Maybe not enough to level it out but at least an improvement.


----------



## Lewis (Apr 5, 2004)

2013 harvest should have been up if the population was there.
We had beautiful weather with light winds, no precipitation and a good coating of snow on the ground for many.


----------



## SB2 (Jun 9, 2009)

Most update to date deer Kill numbers:

http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=cCmEUCi9YDg=&tabid=24154


----------



## lotaluck (Dec 17, 2009)

So I think everyone agrees that the heard number is down. The question is whether or not it is at a healthy number. Do we want a heard so large that seeing deer in the woods and an opportunity to harvest one is as simple as sitting in The woods for a couple hours? 

My buddies and I who have all hunted together for many seasons all noticed we had to put in more hours to fill the freezer this year. We had to go deeper and work much harder than the years in the past but it was a good year. On our last drag out of the woods my buddy was out of breath and really questioning if it was worth it. I told him if it was easy everyone would do it.


----------



## wildman (Sep 3, 2008)

Lewis... you would of thought so..

bkr43050, I have called on a certain guy 3 times with nothing getting done and once on another... Those were the ones that I had seen with my one eye. I am not shy when it comes to that but you just have to make sure you have pretty good proof or nothing will happen... I call on people that effect my hunting by illegal means.... The rest is up to others to handle.. I am not the poacher police just a poacher hater...

Also, the reduction from 6 to 4 was a good thing... But something that effects me is the urban hunting.. The ODNR also did away with the urban tag where you could shoot an additional 6.. I could shoot 12 deer in that area imagine if just a few (3 or 4) guys shot 9 a piece off of one property.. That's doing some damage. The urban tag IMO hammered the herd in one area that I hunted.. I am very glad that it is no more. 

I also think that there are just areas that can handle more deer than others as we all know.. I don't often compliment the ODNR since the implement of the new check-in system but the new county by county zones is IMO a plus.. We as hunters are always going to butt heads with the odnr.... They want less deer and we will usually want more deer.. As the years go on it will only get worse..


Lundy I expect better commits than that from you... Insinuating Rabbeye has it figured out as if he is out cheating the system is wrong.... MREX has a thread on poaching on OS.com He has detailed some technics, I didn't see any post Insinuating he was doing it... The only point we are trying to make is poaching happens more than most would like to think... I really am done with the poaching topic..


----------



## wildman (Sep 3, 2008)

lotaluck said:


> So I think everyone agrees that the heard number is down. The question is whether or not it is at a healthy number. Do we want a heard so large that seeing deer in the woods and an opportunity to harvest one is as simple as sitting in The woods for a couple hours?
> 
> My buddies and I who have all hunted together for many seasons all noticed we had to put in more hours to fill the freezer this year. We had to go deeper and work much harder than the years in the past but it was a good year. On our last drag out of the woods my buddy was out of breath and really questioning if it was worth it. I told him if it was easy everyone would do it.


Two very good points..

I have read that the avg antler is small now than it was 20 years ago due to the massive size of the herd.. Less deer healthier herd.. It's kind of Like a pay lake to just an avg lake.. mass fish in a paylake =unhealthy avg lake =several very healthy fish...

As a kid it was hard to kill a deer which is why I love hunting so much... The urban area I mention below was so easy that I just didn't kill there it was to easy.. Of course there is IMO a fine line between to hard and to easy..


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

If you look at the weekly comparisons for the deer kill just published which includes the gun the 7 day gun season for both there has been a year to date reduction in the gun kill harvest of a little over 8,000 deer combined between the gun season, youth and early MZ. Next week that number will increase to over 22,000 less deer total killed by gun once the 14,365 kill form the "bonus" season is added in.

The archery harvest at this time last year was very close to 75,500, this year it is 75,900 range.

Shouldn't bowhunters play a role and have a vested interest in harvest reduction that so many believe is needed?


----------



## ostbucks98 (Apr 14, 2004)

yes,1 hunter 1 tag.

Sent from my ZTE-Z990G using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## MassillonBuckeye (May 3, 2010)

I know for a fact a coworker hunted gun season in vinton county. They have a large group and do drives. He told me something about them taking 3-4 deer an putting them on their parents residence tag or something like that instated of tagging them with their own tags? I didn't ask him to elaborate. I could I suppose. Whatever they did, didn't seem right to me.


----------



## ostbucks98 (Apr 14, 2004)

no it isnt right or legal unless the person was in fact on their parents land. most will tell you to call game warden but being a co-worker that might not be the best choice for you. calling in poachers if you dont know them is easy to do. 

Sent from my ZTE-Z990G using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## ostbucks98 (Apr 14, 2004)

and tell them to stop coming to vinton county darn it!! 

Sent from my ZTE-Z990G using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

MassillonBuckeye said:


> I know for a fact a coworker hunted gun season in vinton county. They have a large group and do drives. He told me something about them taking 3-4 deer an putting them on their parents residence tag or something like that instated of tagging them with their own tags? I didn't ask him to elaborate. I could I suppose. Whatever they did, didn't seem right to me.


What they did may have indeed been illegal but it those deer would still have been in the harvest total, just under the wrong person's name.


----------



## hopin to cash (Sep 14, 2010)

Bubbagon said:


> There certainly seems to be a common thread in all these discussions; and that's a disdain from public land guys for private land.
> I can see that loud and clear.


I agree but my own experience and other land owners around me are see a reduced number of deer. It's interesting that some mention they are seeing a trend of mature does and small bucks. We too see the same trend. 

We stayed in Coshocton county last year with a group of hunters from New York that had come to Ohio to hunt a land lease program. They were only aloud to shoot mature bucks above 120 I believe or pay a penalty. Nobody in that group shot a deer the week of gun. I kinda thought they were being duked out of money since they claimed this was not high fence operation. My point is this "if they were not being duked and the guides actually had something going in previous years it did not seem as though there deer herd was thriving now even on Private controlled land"


----------



## ostbucks98 (Apr 14, 2004)

ratio's dont have any affect on maturity.

Sent from my ZTE-Z990G using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

There are not large bucks behind every tree in Ohio contrary to popular belief

The herd could be doing just fine and still may not have any large numbers of 120+ deer on the property. If bucks are shot at 120 they never become a 140 or 160.

You can have a big population and let all of the 110's walk and you absolutely do not guarantee bucks larger than 120 on the property the next year unless you have a big fence. 

Bucks move, change home areas, get killed on the road, killed by neighbors, what ever. You can not effectively stockpile mature bucks. Two mature bucks aren't going to tolerate each other very well, they will find their own range to be the dominate buck.

I have been selective harvesting the same fairly large property for over 25 years. It is a fact that if we don't shoot a borderline buck one year that he will be bigger next year, no doubt. What you can not know is if he will still be alive and on the property and if you will ever see him again. Every year we have multiple, 120ish bucks alive and well at the end of the hunting seasons and think that the following year could be really good for mature bucks. More times than not it doesn't happen, many to most are never seen again. We run between 7-9 trail cams and have a pretty good idea of what is what.

Some seem to believe that if you get a piece of private property to hunt that a mature buck harvest is a given. It is not that simple, not by a long shot. Please consider that only around 1/3 or Ohio deer hunters kill a deer in any given year, any deer, not just big bucks and most hunters hunt private land. TV show hunting is not quite the same as real hunting, private or public.


----------



## Snook (Aug 19, 2008)

I've been letting those younger bucks live year after year. Some that I've probably should of shot. Nevertheless, I'll be darned if they ever get bigger for me the following year

If Ohio went to a tag that could not be copied and the dates had to be cut out of the tag (like states out west) It would curtail the "one tag is good for multiple deer" issue.


----------



## Bonemann (Jan 28, 2008)

I think that if someone would lie,cheat or steal then that's what they will do.

And the people that don't lie,cheat or steal won't. 

Just because it's easy to do, it won't change a person's morals.

I know it's just my opinion but I still believe it.


----------



## lotaluck (Dec 17, 2009)

Lundy said:


> . TV show hunting is not quite the same as real hunting, private or public.


BINGO we have a winner!! The new shows out now have done alot of good stuff for the sport but also give false expectations of what to expect. I think some of us that has been at this for a while understand that there is alot of work to be successfull at this. Whats nice is the hard word usually weeds out the folks that are out for simple success. Some years are better than others and the heard will allways fluctuate. 
The deer are there not at the numbers there once were but I assure everyone of you if you put in the work you will see that we have a great opportunity.


----------



## buckeyebowman (Feb 24, 2012)

crittergitter said:


> I think you missed my point. I don't have disdain for private land hunters which is why i didn't post in that thread.


I think the disdain is for those who lease private land, not those who got permission the old fashioned way, by asking for it! There are more than enough stories about guys who had permission to hunt a property for years, being aced out of it by an outfit coming in and waving a lot of money around.



Gills63 said:


> In fact I believe his post is stating the opposite. That no hunting areas are a safe haven for deer.
> 
> Sent from my XT907 using Ohub Campfire mobile app


Ain't no doubt at all about that! I used to run a sales route in the eastern suburbs of Cleveland. If that was your only experience, you'd think Ohio had about a million and a half deer! Try driving Brainard Rd. or Lander Rd. northbound from Miles Rd. to Chagrin Blvd. any afternoon you care to name. There are deer everywhere! I think this was one of the situations that the Urban Deer Zones were designed to deal with, but there was no hunter access! 



Lundy said:


> If you look at the weekly comparisons for the deer kill just published which includes the gun the 7 day gun season for both there has been a year to date reduction in the gun kill harvest of a little over 8,000 deer combined between the gun season, youth and early MZ. Next week that number will increase to over 22,000 less deer total killed by gun once the 14,365 kill form the "bonus" season is added in.
> 
> The archery harvest at this time last year was very close to 75,500, this year it is 75,900 range.
> 
> Shouldn't bowhunters play a role and have a vested interest in harvest reduction that so many believe is needed?


OK, a 400 deer increase statewide so far. That's about 4.5 deer per county. 



hopin to cash said:


> I agree but my own experience and other land owners around me are see a reduced number of deer. It's interesting that some mention they are seeing a trend of mature does and small bucks. We too see the same trend.
> 
> 
> We stayed in Coshocton county last year with a group of hunters from New York that had come to Ohio to hunt a land lease program. They were only aloud to shoot mature bucks above 120 I believe or pay a penalty. Nobody in that group shot a deer the week of gun. I kinda thought they were being duked out of money since they claimed this was not high fence operation. My point is this "if they were not being duked and the guides actually had something going in previous years it did not seem as though there deer herd was thriving now even on Private controlled land"


I think that's because guys are whacking any decent buck that happens by, a byproduct of some of the unreality hunting shows on TV, and also, because quite a few guys are still infected with "oldthink". "Old think" basically states that one never shoots does, or, "the goose that lays the golden egg"! This, of course, ignores the biological reality that a male of some sort, must be involved in procreation. Case in point. My friend has hunted the farm behind him since he was a kid. He has not shot a doe in at least 10 years! He is infected with "oldthink". Thus, there are does and fawns galore, but, not so many bucks. The game cams only got one really decent 8 point on the card this year. I keep trying to convince him to shoot a doe once in a while. To get big bucks, you have to let the little bucks go. 

It's "oldthink" that led to the "Pennsylvania Syndrome" years ago. What's that? It's where you have a bazillion runty, little, greyhound sized doe running around, and hardly any bucks! Remember when, back in the day, deer season rolled around and everybody loaded up their vehicles and headed for the big woods of northern PA? Because that's where the deer were! I know that the Ohio DOW was concerned with the Pennsylvania Syndrome many years before the boom times of a few years ago. Of course, the Pennsylvania Syndrome was an issue of pure overpopulation! Then what happened? You saw PA basically mimic Ohio by issuing a ton of antlerless deer permits, and going to antler restrictions for bucks. However, it seems to be working. Some really nice bucks coming out of PA now. Seeing 100 deer a day? Not happening any more!


----------



## shanewolfe02 (Dec 7, 2012)

I do think less deer are being legally checked in with the new system and I also believe that this system has created a superhighway of easy ways to cheat the system. To have individuals visually look at your deer/turkey and inspect the wound site was a serious deterrent for those who had un-sportsman like tendencies. Also the old metal ring type tag made it darn easy to figure out who had tagged in a deer/turkey. Compounding this issue is the amount of revenue lost to small businesses that tagged in the animals. IMO this new system is lose- lose for everyone.


----------



## Bonemann (Jan 28, 2008)

shanewolfe02 said:


> I do think less deer are being legally checked in with the new system and I also believe that this system has created a superhighway of easy ways to cheat the system. To have individuals visually look at your deer/turkey and inspect the wound site was a serious deterrent for those who had un-sportsman like tendencies. Also the old metal ring type tag made it darn easy to figure out who had tagged in a deer/turkey. Compounding this issue is the amount of revenue lost to small businesses that tagged in the animals. IMO this new system is lose- lose for everyone.


I'm on the other side of the new check system and how it works. Many other states have had a system similar to the one we have now (the honor system).

Just because you left the keys in your car, it isn't going to make me steal it.

My butcher told me that the Game Warden stopped by his place 3 times during gun season. Checking tags and animals.

And as for the country stores (at least around here) they didn't like having to put extra people on to check in deer and they thought that they may be loosing business because their parking lots were jammed up with hunters wanting to check their deer (at the end of the day when people are coming home from work). It was even worse when someone brought in a big buck because so many folks would stop to look at it. My buddy says now when hunters stop it's to buy something.

There is no perfect system and bad people could always do bad things.


----------



## Snook (Aug 19, 2008)

I agree with Boneman that dishonest people will remain dishonest people. However, why make it easier for them? It's like the thugs that walk into a store and shoplift what they want. Walk right out the door only to hear the store staff say we can't do anything to em'.  Couple this with the fact that our wardens are already spread too thin. It certainly does not help the problem


----------



## wildman (Sep 3, 2008)

shanewolfe02 said:


> I do think less deer are being legally checked in with the new system and I also believe that this system has created a superhighway of easy ways to cheat the system. To have individuals visually look at your deer/turkey and inspect the wound site was a serious deterrent for those who had un-sportsman like tendencies. Also the old metal ring type tag made it darn easy to figure out who had tagged in a deer/turkey. Compounding this issue is the amount of revenue lost to small businesses that tagged in the animals. IMO this new system is lose- lose for everyone.


I agree with you 100% but you will not get any acceptance of that theory on this sight... Even thought there is a lot of truth to it.


----------



## Rabbeye (Oct 28, 2013)

The state knows that guys are not checking in all of the deer that they kill or bucks being checked as does. I wonder what number they used for this when calculating total deer kill? Be interesting to find out.


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

Rabbeye said:


> The state knows that guys are not checking in all of the deer that they kill or bucks being checked as does. I wonder what number they used for this when calculating total deer kill? Be interesting to find out.


Don't you think the state would love to have the revenue of a fine to someone for cheating the system? After all, they fund much of their operation from the policing. Your logic makes no sense to me.

What numbers would they use other than the numbers that came from deer tagged?

I have not bothered to look back because I think I already know the answer but I highly doubt that you would find any change in the ratio of deer tagged over the last few years that would suggest that guys are tagging bucks as does. The only change in the ratio that I recall is 5-6 years ago when the state made the strong urge to kill antlerless deer via antlerless tags. Besides even if some guys were tagging some does as bucks that would do nothing to reduce the herd faster. In fact if there were more does left behind then there would be more deer the following year after breeding. If someone were to try that stunt and have his deer at a taxidermist he would be at a risk of being caught since the officer can easily check the sex of the deer on the given tag number.


----------



## Bonemann (Jan 28, 2008)

Looking over the states numbers a total of 9 counties are actually up. The biggest increases are Mahoning +206,Trumbull and Erie both at +130.

The biggest losers out of the 79 counties that are down are Licking -1052,Coshocton -960 and Tuscarawas -880

Not sure what it all means but the numbers can be found here:

http://ohiodnr.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=Qt+yVL/rUxQ=&tabid=24154


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Bonemann said:


> Looking over the states numbers a total of 9 counties are actually up. The biggest increases are Mahoning +206,Trumbull and Erie both at +130.
> 
> The biggest losers out of the 79 counties that are down are Licking -1052,Coshocton -960 and Tuscarawas -880
> 
> ...


I guess that would indicate that the hunters in those 9 county's are more honest and use the new check system to check ALL of their deer, or at least some might say that


----------

