# Ohio proposes new limits on deer hunting Statewide bag limit would be cut in half



## fishwendel2 (Nov 19, 2007)

Lots of proposed changes....

New hunting regulations proposed by the Ohio Department of Natural resources would cut in half the total number of deer a hunter could kill in Ohio in the 2013-14 season -- from 18 to nine.

The proposed rules also would add a two-day antlerless-only muzzleloader season in October, extend the hunting hours by 30 minutes each day for all deer firearms season and move from a regional approach to local bag limits to a limit for each county. The bag limits would be two, three or four per county, depending on the county.

The proposal would eliminate both the current bonus gun weekend in December and the early muzzleloader season at three public hunting areas: Salt Fork Wildlife Area, Shawnee State Forest and Wildcat Hollow.

The changes were proposed Wednesday to the Ohio Wildlife Council by ODNR Wildlife Division biologists and administrators. ODNR said it will take public comment on the proposal at www.wildohio.com and during open house forums statewide on March 2. The Wildlife Council will vote on the proposal at its April 17 meeting.

Hunters bagged fewer deer during Ohio's 2012-13 hunting seasons for all weapons, the Ohio Department of Natural Resources said today. The total was 218,910 deer, compared to 219,748 during the 2011-2012 season.

More than 500,000 hunters participated in the hunt that stretched from Sept. 29 through Sunday, when archery season ended, ODNR Director James Zehringer said in a release.

Here are the proposed deer bag limits by county for the 2013-14 season:

Proposed deer bag limits, from the following counties combined:

One either-sex permit, one antlerless permit (eight counties): Darke, Erie, Fayette, Hancock, Madison, Ottawa, Sandusky and Wood.

Two either-sex permits, one antlerless permit (23 counties): Auglaize, Butler, Champaign, Clark, Gallia, Harrison, Henry, Hocking, Jackson, Jefferson, Lawrence, Logan, Meigs, Mercer, Miami, Monroe, Montgomery, Perry, Preble, Ross, Shelby, Van Wert and Washington.

Three either-sex permits, one antlerless permit (57 counties): Adams, Allen, Ashland, Ashtabula, Athens, Belmont, Brown, Carroll, Clermont, Clinton, Columbiana, Coshocton, Crawford, Cuyahoga, Defiance, Delaware, Fairfield, Franklin, Fulton, Geauga, Greene, Guernsey, Hamilton, Hardin, Highland, Holmes, Huron, Knox, Lake, Licking, Lorain, Lucas, Mahoning, Marion, Medina, Morgan, Morrow, Muskingum, Noble, Paulding, Pickaway, Pike, Portage, Putnam, Richland, Scioto, Seneca, Stark, Summit, Trumbull, Tuscarawas, Union, Vinton, Warren, Wayne, Williams and Wyandot.

Proposed seasons for 2013-2014:

 Deer archery: Sept. 28, 2013 - Feb. 2, 2014.

 Deer antlerless muzzleloader: Oct. 12-13, 2013.

 Youth deer gun: Nov. 16-17, 2013.

 Deer gun: Dec. 2-8, 2013.

 Deer muzzleloader: Jan. 4-7, 2014.

The start of fall turkey-hunting season is proposed to be moved to the Monday following the antlerless deer muzzleloader season (Oct. 14 - Dec. 1). Butler, Delaware, Fairfield, Franklin, Hamilton, Huron, Seneca and Warren counties are proposed to be added to the existing list of counties open for fall turkey hunting, which would bring the total to 56 counties.

Deer and fall wild turkey permits would go on sale June 1, instead of March 1.


----------



## fish4wall (Apr 14, 2004)

did i miss something??? 18????


----------



## fish4wall (Apr 14, 2004)

Urban Deer Units and Ohio Division of Wildlife Controlled Hunts will have a combined six-deer (6) bag limit Sept. 29, 2012 through Feb. 3, 2012. These bag limits will not count toward the deer bag limits in Zones A, B, or C. 
i didnt know this... but 18 deer is a bit too much...i think 9 is also....


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

fish4wall said:


> did i miss something??? 18????


That has been the case for the last several years. The number is arrived at based on the fact that you can (as of this past season) take the bag limit from each zone. Way back you could not take separate zone limits. So you could take 6 in zone C (3 regular + 3 antlerless), 4 in Zone B (2 + 2) and 2 in Zone A (1 + 1). That adds up to 12 but you could also take up to 6 from urban permits.


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

fish4wall said:


> Urban Deer Units and Ohio Division of Wildlife Controlled Hunts will have a combined six-deer (6) bag limit Sept. 29, 2012 through Feb. 3, 2012. These bag limits will not count toward the deer bag limits in Zones A, B, or C.
> i didnt know this... but 18 deer is a bit too much...i think 9 is also....


I agree that 18 is way excessive but I am pretty sure that very very few folks ever reach that number.


----------



## fish4wall (Apr 14, 2004)

yea i dont think anyone has done the 18...but i didnt know you could "tag out" in each zone....i think 6 deer limit is good...that would give you 3 either sex tags and 3 urban/antlerless tags. the extra gun weekend being gone is good just because i'm a bow hunter also..lol just as the woods settle down every gun hunter in the state is back out shooting up the woods...(even me....lol)


----------



## village idiot (Nov 11, 2009)

I Still dont understand why they dont start the gun season on the saturday following thanksgiving.....this would allow even the working class to get in on opening day also. Yes i take a vacation day so i can participate but it would be nice to start on the saturday so everyone could participate that wanted to without needing the bosses permission.


----------



## fish4wall (Apr 14, 2004)

the odnr and our bosses are in cahoots!!! lol


----------



## Timjim (May 15, 2011)

village idiot said:


> I Still dont understand why they dont start the gun season on the saturday following thanksgiving.....this would allow even the working class to get in on opening day also. Yes i take a vacation day so i can participate but it would be nice to start on the saturday so everyone could participate that wanted to without needing the bosses permission.


Safety reasons. Can you imagine all the people that would be out ,especially on public land, if the first day of gun season was on Sat. You better have on a bullet proof vest and sit with your back to a big tree.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Way too many family gatherings, plans, travel on that weekend to introduce deer gun season.

This is the same reason that HUNTERS did not like the MZ season between Christmas and New years. Too many family conflicts.


----------



## Mushijobah (May 4, 2004)

I like the sound of the new plan.

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## village idiot (Nov 11, 2009)

*Way too many family gatherings, plans, travel on that weekend to introduce deer gun season.

This is the same reason that HUNTERS did not like the MZ season between Christmas and New years. Too many family conflicts.*

Im not buying the whole family time theory.

Thanksgiving is on Thursday every year....That gives the hunter plenty of time to spend with the family and still get into the woods on Saturday.

The real shame is that they now open stores for Christmas Shopping on Thanksgiving day. Thats screwed up.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

village idiot said:


> *Way too many family gatherings, plans, travel on that weekend to introduce deer gun season.
> 
> This is the same reason that HUNTERS did not like the MZ season between Christmas and New years. Too many family conflicts.*
> 
> ...


You don't have to buy it, I'm just telling you why it is the way it is.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Mushijobah said:


> I like the sound of the new plan.
> 
> posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


No harvest reduction in these new proposals, in fact a more agressive doe and population reduction plan wrapped up in a new prettier package.


----------



## buckeyebowman (Feb 24, 2012)

Lundy said:


> No harvest reduction in these new proposals, in fact a more agressive doe and population reduction plan wrapped up in a new prettier package.


Errrrhhh, I don't about that. If you look at the way they've set this up, it looks like they're trying to steady the harvest and make a money grab at the same time. No matter which group of counties you look at (since we're not going to have zones A, B, and C anymore), whether the group of 8, 23, or 57 counties, they will all have available a single antlerless deer permit and either 1, 2, or 3 either sex permits which are the more expensive permit. Providing that permit prices stay the same my guess is that the ODNR is banking on hunters going back to the more "old style" hunting method where they use their antlerless permit to fill the freezer, and then use their either sex permit to hunt for their buck. If they want to shoot more doe, they'll have to pay the higher price.

Of course I'm making the assumption, always dangerous, that Ohio will remain a one antlered deer per hunter per year state. Plus, the bonus gun weekend is gone, as is the early MZ at Salt Fork, Shawnee and Wildcat. The urban zone antlerless tags will still be available, but urban zone hunting is self limiting. 

Looks to me like they're trying to realize the same amount of tag money while selling fewer tags.


----------



## boss302 (Jun 24, 2005)

I visit my parents place thanksgiving weekend every year. I'm glad it isn't gun season yet...can let the kids and dogs run and explore the woods and wherever else on the property without concern....just my 2 cents

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## treytd32 (Jun 12, 2009)

I'd love to have fall turkey here in Butler. Sucks going out and seeing a bunch when you know you can't hunt them. Not sure how I feel about the rest. Traveling around that much to get 18 deer seems a little excessive.


----------



## Mushijobah (May 4, 2004)

Lundy said:


> No harvest reduction in these new proposals, in fact a more agressive doe and population reduction plan wrapped up in a new prettier package.


The county based approach will be beneficial hopefully. Harvest reduction has been happening either way unfortunately. I don't see DNR going soft on the deer population anytime soon...


----------



## FISNFOOL (May 12, 2009)

The States Explanation of the changes.


----------



## ezbite (May 25, 2006)

I too like the new proposal.


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

I agree with Kim that there is nothing in this proposal that suggests a reduction in targeted harvest. They can paint that any way they want with those new limits but when you take the numbers from the 2011-12 season and overlay those new limits the maximum that the harvest is reduced is only around 2,000 deer, which is less than 1% of the total harvest. And that is assuming that everyone is reduced to no more than 4 deer total which is still not the case with the multiple zone zone allotment. I really don't see the new limits changing the harvest numbers much, if any. I would say that at most the DOW may be making an effort to start leveling off the harvest at where it is now although I think it will take a couple of more years of sustained harvests at the current number to ensure that they are not exceeding the allowable harvest to maintain this current density. 


Overall I would say that I am somewhat pleased to see those numbers proposed simply because it suggests that at least someone is recognizing that the herd has been reduced some. I do wish it would have been slightly more of a reduction though. I am curious as to how the impact would be of an early muzzleloader season along with the removal of the bonus season. The bonus weekend has resulted in 17,172 in 2011-12 and 21,376 in 2010-11. The antlerless deer taken in those seasons was 11,909 and 15,573. The fact that the late season ML harvests were very close to those of the bonus weekend suggest to me that the ML hunters are quite capable of surpassing those numbers from the bonus weekend by a good bit, especially when you consider that their late season ML harvest is accomplished with a somewhat depleted herd due to being at the end of the harvest period. Because of that I could see that October ML number getting rather large.


----------



## ironman172 (Apr 12, 2009)

met my limit in Hocking county this past season....2 is enough.....glad I got those


----------



## bobk (Apr 30, 2004)

ironman172 said:


> met my limit in Hocking county this past season....2 is enough.....glad I got those


Bill, thought it was 3 in Hocking County.


----------



## treytd32 (Jun 12, 2009)

Those are scary numbers during an overcast day. What exactly does it mean to cover a victim while swinging on game? Is this refering to the idiots who shoot across the field at you while hunting pheasant? I've gotten a lead shower twice in the last 10 years and I wasn't stationary or in camo.


----------



## crittergitter (Jun 9, 2005)

More of the same with a touch of clever ODNR spin thrown in. I'll be going to the March Open House. I'll voice my opinion and make my voice heard. Then, I'll make up my own mind if I even want to participate anymore.


----------



## Mad-Eye Moody (May 27, 2008)

I liked the fall muzzleloader until I realized it will be on what has been opening weekend of duck season. I guess I will likely have a tough decision to make, presuming they don't shift the duck season.

This will be a harvest reduction for those who only have one place to hunt, depending on the county. Last year I could kill six deer in tuscararaus county, this year will be four. It's not a problem for me. Four is three more than I managed to kill this year in Ohio.


----------



## bad luck (Apr 9, 2009)

Wonder if you have to get a separate license for each county?


----------



## Mad-Eye Moody (May 27, 2008)

No, licenses will be statewide.


----------



## buckeyebowman (Feb 24, 2012)

treytd32 said:


> Those are scary numbers during an overcast day. What exactly does it mean to cover a victim while swinging on game? Is this refering to the idiots who shoot across the field at you while hunting pheasant? I've gotten a lead shower twice in the last 10 years and I wasn't stationary or in camo.


You got it! These are people who are unaware of others around them, and when a game animal moves, that is all they see! Had it happen to me as well, except once was with a rifled slug!


----------



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

I have voicing my desire for county level management. After reviewing this proposal it is clear ODNR has attempted to mask their true goals while making it appear they are responsive to hunter concern.

There is no county level management at all. We simply have 3 zones grouped by county rather than nearly striaght lines across the state. FAR CRY from county level management that has been in place for years in other states.

And the 2 day state wide doe only season will simply result in more does killed.....furthering the reduction plan. 

Really no change from the past in the overall strategy by ODNR....clearly still want to reduce the statewide herd. Weak attempt of county level management and a poor idea on a state wide doe only early season IMO.

Come on ODNR...step up to the plate and quit trying to pull wool over our eyes with your weak ploys. I've long thought postively about ODNR even with Tonk in there and still am....but IMO this is a very weak plan with no change in strategy.


----------



## JimmyZ (May 18, 2004)

Mad-Eye Moody said:


> I liked the fall muzzleloader until I realized it will be on what has been opening weekend of duck season. I guess I will likely have a tough decision to make, presuming they don't shift the duck season.
> 
> This will be a harvest reduction for those who only have one place to hunt, depending on the county. Last year I could kill six deer in tuscararaus county, this year will be four. It's not a problem for me. Four is three more than I managed to kill this year in Ohio.


That was my first thought as well. Duck opener would coincide with the muzzleloader season. Stupid. 

Also what is the point of making it doe only? If we could shoot either, I think I would like it better. 

I will miss the bonus gun weekend. Like another said, I'm a working joe and can't take time off after thanksgiving,so I'm always screwed gun season. I get to hunt Saturday and Sunday only. So I like the bonus weekend cause I can get in the woods and have deer that haven't been ran wild for the last 5 days. I don't deer hunt very much, (but i buy my tags)and have been lucky the last 3 years taking 1 deer each year. 2 of those deer were on the Saturday of the bonus weekend. 

Sorry, I'm just not a big fan of this.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

If you treat the new system like the old labeled zones then I think it is easier to see what happened. 

The old zone A was 1 antlerless and 1 either sex.
The new zone A is 1 antlerless and 1 either sex. No change.

The old zone B was 2 antlerless and 2 either sex.
The new zone B is 1 antlerless and 2 either sex. Lost 1 antlerless tag.

The old zone C was 3 antlerless and 3 either sex.
The new zone C is 1 antlerless and 3 either sex. Lost 2 antlerless tags.

Using the old zone map I put the corresponding letters into the zones that changed using the old colors. If a letter wasn't added to the county then no zone changes occurred.

What you will notice is most of the state is now the new zone C. Two new A type zones were added and zone B reduced but also scattered.


----------



## buckeyebowman (Feb 24, 2012)

buckeye dan said:


> If you treat the new system like the old labeled zones then I think it is easier to see what happened.
> 
> The old zone A was 1 antlerless and 1 either sex.
> The new zone A is 1 antlerless and 1 either sex. No change.
> ...


Way to do the work bd! This kind of crystallizes my thoughts. The bag limits have been reduced. There is an opinion out there, expressed on this and other threads covering this subject, that these new bag limits won't matter since the old bag limits didn't matter. In other words, almost no one was filling their bag limits under the old system. OK, then where are all the deer? I've hunted some spots in Ohio where there was a definite reduction in deer sightings, although not in deer sign, which seems strange, and other places where there are as many or more deer than there used to be. Maybe this will even things out a bit. Who knows until you try it?


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Buckeyebowman,

It is not an opinion expressed by many that the new limits will have limit impact on harvest, it is the factual historical data from the ODNR themselves that says that the new limits will have little impact on the harvest.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

Lundy said:


> Buckeyebowman,
> 
> It is not an opinion expressed by many that the new limits will have limit impact on harvest, it is the factual historical data from the ODNR themselves that says that the new limits will have little impact on the harvest.


That is pretty much true looking at the new map. Any county that was zone B and has become the new zone C, you can still only harvest 4 deer. There is no change except the cost for the 4th tag.

The real problem areas that were the old zone A and/or have become the new zone A should improve or stabilize.

The counties that were zone C but have been down graded to B? Who knows? At least 6 deer is not an option now. The same applies for anything that was the old zone C. Two less deer possible.

Ohio hunters self regulate for the most part. If I keep seeing the same few deer over and over again I am most likely going to cherry pick based on very specific needs or take my freezer deer from somewhere else.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

I only base it from the historical harvest data supplied by the ODNR on how many hunters kill 1 deer, 2 deer, 3 deer, 4 deer, 5 deer, 6 deer or more.

The vast majority of hunters that kill a deer kill one deer per year. Very few hunters kill more than 2 deer per year no matter what the state limit is. Even far fewer kill more than 3, and a very, very, very small number kill more than 4.

So if there is a reduction in bag limit from 6 to 4 it makes no real statistical difference in the total harvest.

The new proposal will most likely be approved and it will be what it will be and we all do what we always do and enjoy hunting. However when I see some say that the ODNR has taken steps to reduce harvest I can not agree based upon historical harvest data.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

Lundy said:


> I only base it from the historical harvest data supplied by the ODNR on how many hunters kill 1 deer, 2 deer, 3 deer, 4 deer, 5 deer, 6 deer or more.
> 
> The vast majority of hunters that kill a deer kill one deer per year. Very few hunters kill more than 2 deer per year no matter what the state limit is. Even far fewer kill more than 3, and a very, very, very small number kill more than 4.
> 
> ...


I understand now. Do I think a blanket statement like "The ODNR has taken steps to reduce harvest" works here? No I don't. Not in the larger scheme of things. I do think they are getting us used to the idea of some of those extra deer costing more and limiting the total legal number for those of us who pack freezers each year.


----------



## tadluvadd (Feb 19, 2012)

JimmyZ said:


> That was my first thought as well. Duck opener would coincide with the muzzleloader season. Stupid.
> 
> Also what is the point of making it doe only? If we could shoot either, I think I would like it better.
> 
> ...


I read odnr goal is to try to balance buck to doe ratio.and if thats the goal,the reverse would happen if bucks were allowed to be taken during the fall muzzy hunt. on top of that,its right during the time when bucks are becoming more vunerable.good choice for does only for the fall hunt in my view. also my 2 cents is the last few yrs havent been bad,but id like the chance to hunt with primitive firearm without freezing out in a few hrs.more then a few states have a fall primitive weapons season.


----------



## JimmyZ (May 18, 2004)

Gotcha. That makes sense then.


----------



## I Fish (Sep 24, 2008)

I agree, they are attempting to cut the harvest. If the "early is better" theory is true, then why not move the traditional gun season back by 2 days, as was mentioned earlier, despite family functions. The fact is, a lot of people go to their families houses for the holidays, but end up staying all weekend, because that's also where they deer hunt come Monday. Not to mention all the people that, otherwise don't get to hunt because of work. I thought, originally, that was who the extra 2 day hunt was for. If the state thinks Thanksgiving is all about family, why don't they make it Thanksgiving Thursday and Friday? I think it's more to do with DNR employee's family, and little to do with yours or mine.

Remember, earlier is better, so why do away with the 2 day gun season? Wouldn't it be better if the 15,000 or so deer killed that weekend were taken, instead of living through to the traditional Muzzleloader season, where severe weather can have such an affect on harvest, not to mention there are far fewer bow hunters out, also due to weather. If earlier is better, why not make a week of ML season in November? Make it the same week as youth season, but as an adult, you would have to use a ML? 

Also, not making much sense to me is the new "early" muzzleloader season. OK, maybe somebody just forgot to check, but as it ends up on the traditional opening day of duck season is just coincidence. What's not coincidence is the doe only. If none of this is about protecting the DNR's income, and only about the deer herd, and it's well being, why then don't they make it an "earn-a-buck" program, where in you first have to tag a doe before you can tag a buck? That would do more to get it at 1 to 1. Maaybe it has to do with the fact the state makes more money selling non-resident licenses, and as far as I know, most non-residents bow hunt? I know a few that do, but I know for a fact many, if not most, bow hunters won't even consider blowing a good stand by shooting a doe, until they've tagged their buck. They want the does there to hopefully bring in a buck. Spook the does, and the buck has no reason to come, other than fake calls/scents/blind luck (I know. There's more to it than that, but you get the point.) If the state is truly concerned with reducing the deer herd, why not have the early ML and keep the 2 day hunt? If they are not going to let bucks be shot during the early ML season, as that might upset the balance, why not make it does only for all of October bow season? Because hunter "participation" would suffer, and too, license sales.

The only thing I see that made sense is the 1/2 hour after sunset. I've been complaining about that for a while now. As I see it, the rest is just a back door way of reducing the mostly unnattainable bag limits, while keeping the revenue and the propganda up. I think most will agree, we don't have the deer numbers like we used to, regardless of what DNR says. I think they are afraid to tell the truth, as non-resident sales may suffer. This little plan should keep revenue up. 

Now, if they'd just legalize straight walled cartridges.


----------



## vc1111 (Apr 13, 2004)

It seems like semantics comes into play here. While the total harvest may not be affected, the harvest in certain areas certainly will be. 

I hope they reduce it further so that, for example, no more than three deer can be taken statewide in any combination while still maintaining the one buck rule.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

The early muzzle loading season might accomplish a number of things.

Thin the does pre rut with a more effective tool than archery tackle. That could in theory increase competition and might result in the offspring being from the more dominant bucks which might make better racks and healthier deer. Another byproduct of that would be the dominant bucks aren't wasting a lot of their breeding energy on some does that will later be killed during regular gun season. Some still will of course but their eligible bachelorette pool will be smaller. That could also insure more does are bred and balance the buck to doe ratio. 

Archers undoubtedly spend the most time in the woods but they also are typically hunting racks and don't want to disturb their bait, meaning the does. A 2 day muzzle loading meat hunter not allowed to shoot antlers will have no problem dispatching a doe. By singling out that one category of weapon they limit the number of hunters in the short term. Not all hunters have a muzzle loader and not all muzzle loader hunters have a desire to shoot does. Also it's only 2 days.

I think it's pretty clever what they did but I have no data to support my assumptions or if that will even work.


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

buckeye dan said:


> The early muzzle loading season might accomplish a number of things.
> 
> Thin the does pre rut with a more effective tool than archery tackle. That could in theory increase competition and might result in the offspring being from the more dominant bucks which might make better racks and healthier deer. Another byproduct of that would be the dominant bucks aren't wasting a lot of their breeding energy on some does that will later be killed during regular gun season. Some still will of course but their eligible bachelorette pool will be smaller. That could also insure more does are bred and balance the buck to doe ratio.
> 
> ...


There are an awful lot of "mights" and "maybes" in that statement.

I can sort of buy their story that it will change the rut activity somewhat since the ratio will be changed but I don't buy any of the theories connecting that to fertility, healthier herd, etc. I think pretty much all of the does get bred as it is. And our winters are typically not so severe that there is any sort of significant yearling mortality due to late birth. The dominant bucks make for bigger racks theory I think is very much unsupported as well. If the food source is there the quality bucks will exist...and they do now. We are seeing record size (or close) bucks frequently so how much more can that improve? I think the bottom line from the DOW's perspective is that the early muzzleloader season will result in a bigger harvest than the bonus weekend. I believe that is their primary motive. The late-winter muzzleloader season already yields numbers nearly the same as those of the bonus weekend. I am sure putting a season in mild late fall weather prior to the sluggers getting after them will yield a significantly higher number. Only time will tell because it seems to be a strong likelihood that we will have the seasons as they are proposed.


----------



## reo (May 22, 2004)

I Fish said:


> *I agree, they are attempting to cut the harvest.* If the "early is better" theory is true, then why not move the traditional gun season back by 2 days, as was mentioned earlier, despite family functions. The fact is, a lot of people go to their families houses for the holidays, but end up staying all weekend, because that's also where they deer hunt come Monday. Not to mention all the people that, otherwise don't get to hunt because of work. I thought, originally, that was who the extra 2 day hunt was for. If the state thinks Thanksgiving is all about family, why don't they make it Thanksgiving Thursday and Friday? I think it's more to do with DNR employee's family, and little to do with yours or mine.


How are they trying to "cut the harvest"? I do not see that and they (ODNR) are not claiming that as agoal.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

bkr43050 said:


> The late-winter muzzleloader season already yields numbers nearly the same as those of the bonus weekend.


The late season MZ season has typically yields a higher harvest that the 2 day gun season.

The last 3 year average for the MZ was 19,858, the last 3 year average for the 2 day gun was 17,705. This past season the MZ harvest was 21,555 and the 2 day 14,567.

The ODNR stated one of the reasons for the elimination of the 2 day was the declining harvest from the 20,000 - 23,000 early years harvest with this season. 

The new replacement season is to increase interest and overall harvest, especially a targeted harvest of the baby makers.

The ODNR is still very much on the population reduction model. They have not stated otherwise anywhere at anytime. There is a target statewide population and county by county target populations. They have not achieved those reduced population targets yet. They are closer in some areas than in others but will readily admit that the continued plan is further reduction of the population. Antler size, buck to doe ratio, overall health are all of the buzzwords and justifications for the continued reduction. They are not hiding their intent. Ask them at any of the open houses coming up and they will tell you the reduced population goals have not been met yet.

What they have done with these new proposals ( extremely smart) is put forth some illusions that many have swallowed completely, they have been gut hooked they took it so deep. 

The real final answer will come next year after the completion of the early doe, and regular gun season. This year the regular gun and 2 day combined for 101,531 deer. We will need to compare the harvest total for the 2 day doe and the regular gun season next year to see what harvest comparisons look like. Even if the harvest were to stay flat it would be an increase of around 5,000 more does harvested with the new seasons versus the old seasons. The ODNR would like that a lot!


----------



## Bassnpro1 (Apr 6, 2004)

A wet fall will make half the state extremely hard to hunt if 80% of the corn is still standing. The deer killed numbers have been steadily climbing in the west/northwest corn belt, while the hills population has been declining. The result has been a total population decline less than what some hunters who hunt the hill counties are experiencing. It wasn't too long ago that it was rare to see a deer in the corn belt.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## reo (May 22, 2004)

lundy said:


> the late season mz season has typically yields a higher harvest that the 2 day gun season.
> 
> The last 3 year average for the mz was 19,858, the last 3 year average for the 2 day gun was 17,705. This past season the mz harvest was 21,555 and the 2 day 14,567.
> 
> ...


NAILED IT!!!! Anyone who cannot buy what you are saying is simply ignoring the facts. Or is among the gut hooked, LOL.


----------



## Snook (Aug 19, 2008)

Curious whether they will allow you to harvest multiple does during the early MZL or limit it to one doe? Shooting a bunch before the regular firearms season would play into the state's reasoning for the season. However, there's gonna be a few hunters that will really dislike the regular firearms season when they see even less deer! Public hunting and heavily hunted area's will be the area's that will suffer most. The state needs to seriously consider different regulations on public area's IMOP...


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Snook said:


> Curious whether they will allow you to harvest multiple does during the early MZL or limit it to one doe? QUOTE]
> 
> Shoot all you want up to legal limit


----------



## I Fish (Sep 24, 2008)

reo said:


> How are they trying to "cut the harvest"? I do not see that and they (ODNR) are not claiming that as agoal.


Well, they cut the limit, didn't they? Look at the maps to see the counties in the old zone C that used to be allowed 6, but now only 4. Some counties in Zone B went from 4 to 3. No counties had an increase, only reduction. Instead of increasing gun hunting opportunities, they are limiting them. 

Up to and including 2011, you were allowed to use the antlerless permits through the end of gun season in zone C, but, that changed for 2012, where in the tags expired at the end of legal shooting hour on the day before gun season. So, in 2011, gun hunters were allowed to kill 6, and, I personally killed 5. In 2012, gun hunters were only allowed 3. Tell me who you think is more likely to kill does, bow or gun hunters. Furthermore, if they are "reducing the herd", why did the antlerless permits expire at all, and, why are they doing away with them? Why weren't they valid until the end of bow season, helping to insure hunters got the limit of 6? The "earlier is better" bull is just that, bull. If that's so, then this year is better than next year, meaning that this years herd would have been better if more had been taken last year? So it should go from this year to next, and so on. 

This from the explanation:
_Justification for reduction in bag limits: Less than 1% of successful hunters kill more than 4 deer._
If that's true, and they are thinning the herd, why take the opportunity from that elite 1%?

I don't understand why, if they want to have an early doe only ML season, fine. Is there a law that says they can only have so many days of gun season? I don't know of one, so why are they eliminating the 2 day season? Hey, Woodcock hunting has very little participation, so why don't they eliminate it? Why don't they just eliminate all the lesser participated in seasons? If 14,000 deer got killed during the 2 day hunt, somebody was hunting. Let's use the DNR's numbers. There was approximated to be 420,000 hunters during the week gun season. As of Dec 4, there were 171,237 deer killed (this includes bow kills, but we'll pretend it doesn't). So, that's 2.45 hunters per deer killed. If the 2 day season had similar participation/results, 14,000 times 2.45, approximately 34,000 people hunted the 2 day season. IMO, that's somebody. Almost 400 people in each county. So, in the name of "herd reduction", they are going to take the chance that people will be more likely to particicipate in the early doe only season, than they were in the 2 day hunt? Why not keep them both?

If, on Lake Erie, they lowered the limit from 6 to 4, and from 4 to 2 in the spring, I think everybody would agree that, by lowering the limits, they want fewer fish taken. What's the difference? Just because they didn't say that is the intention, what on earth else could it be?


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

I Fish said:


> If, on Lake Erie, they lowered the limit from 6 to 4, and from 4 to 2 in the spring, I think everybody would agree that, by lowering the limits, they want fewer fish taken. What's the difference? Just because they didn't say that is the intention, what on earth else could it be?


Apples and oranges and EASY to see the difference IF you knows the deer harvest numbers per participant and the catch rates (limits) on Erie


----------



## I Fish (Sep 24, 2008)

Lundy said:


> Apples and oranges and EASY to see the difference IF you knows the deer harvest numbers per participant and the catch rates (limits) on Erie


Somebody must know, or else they wouldn't be able to derive from the TAC down to arrive at the limits. How else would they? Just a guess, but maybe TAC divided by total estimated participants, divided by estimated days? Since walleye don't get tagged in, they do surveys to give a better guess, but, I'd bet the 2 formulas are similar. They've got a real close comparison for deer, as nearly everybody has to buy a tag, then fill it, so, they know about how many hunters there are, and, they know about how many deer get killed.


----------



## Snook (Aug 19, 2008)

Lundy said:


> Snook said:
> 
> 
> > Curious whether they will allow you to harvest multiple does during the early MZL or limit it to one doe? QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## buckeyebowman (Feb 24, 2012)

buckeye dan said:


> The early muzzle loading season might accomplish a number of things.
> 
> Thin the does pre rut with a more effective tool than archery tackle. That could in theory increase competition and might result in the offspring being from the more dominant bucks which might make better racks and healthier deer. Another byproduct of that would be the dominant bucks aren't wasting a lot of their breeding energy on some does that will later be killed during regular gun season. Some still will of course but their eligible bachelorette pool will be smaller. That could also insure more does are bred and balance the buck to doe ratio.
> 
> ...


The statement I have highlighted makes me wonder if you bowhunt at all. I do, and know quite a few others who do. For us the early season is about filling the freezer with a fat, tasty doe. Yes, we try to spend as much time in the woods as possible, but few of us have the time to pattern a buck to a fare thee well and kill him in the first week of the season. We like to fill the freezer early and look to the colder weather of late October/early November, and the pre-rut to really see bucks on the move. There's an old saying in bowhunting during the rut, hunt where the does are and you will find the bucks. Well, the fewer does there are out there, the fewer targets the bucks have to hone in on.

As bkr43050 replied to your OP, there's a lot of "mights" and "maybes" here, but unless you're "The Amazing Kreskin" there will have to be, since none of us can see the future. I think it all depends on conditions. Someone else mentioned about how much corn might be standing at the time this doe MZ season is supposed to be. Last year it was standing on the farm that I hunt. There's also a lot of tree canopy still up as well as brushy cover still leafed out. These are going to be limiting factors for the total harvest. I'm all in favor of the state trying to balance the herd as far as buck to doe ratio is concerned, but who knows if this method will succeed? Ohio has gained a reputation as a trophy buck state since the herd came back, and I'm certain that the ODNR wants to maintain and enhance that reputation, since it brings out of state dollars here. 

I guess we'll just have to wait and see.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

buckeyebowman said:


> The statement I have highlighted makes me wonder if you bowhunt at all. I do, and know quite a few others who do. For us the early season is about filling the freezer with a fat, tasty doe. Yes, we try to spend as much time in the woods as possible, but few of us have the time to pattern a buck to a fare thee well and kill him in the first week of the season. We like to fill the freezer early and look to the colder weather of late October/early November, and the pre-rut to really see bucks on the move. There's an old saying in bowhunting during the rut, hunt where the does are and you will find the bucks. Well, the fewer does there are out there, the fewer targets the bucks have to hone in on.
> 
> As bkr43050 replied to your OP, there's a lot of "mights" and "maybes" here, but unless you're "The Amazing Kreskin" there will have to be, since none of us can see the future. I think it all depends on conditions. Someone else mentioned about how much corn might be standing at the time this doe MZ season is supposed to be. Last year it was standing on the farm that I hunt. There's also a lot of tree canopy still up as well as brushy cover still leafed out. These are going to be limiting factors for the total harvest. I'm all in favor of the state trying to balance the herd as far as buck to doe ratio is concerned, but who knows if this method will succeed? Ohio has gained a reputation as a trophy buck state since the herd came back, and I'm certain that the ODNR wants to maintain and enhance that reputation, since it brings out of state dollars here.
> 
> I guess we'll just have to wait and see.


My statement is not all inclusive for every hunter and hunting technique. I hunt archery season mainly as an R&D/opportunity endeavor. By the time gun season rolls around, I can usually and reliably kill the does I want for meat. I'd rather not disturb them pre rut with a bow unless something highly desirable presents itself.

Every category of weapons has it's share of meat hunters. No problem there. Those folks that use the pre rut archery season for pursuit of something special probably fall into my category of hunting style however. About 90% of my friends do. Antlers mean nothing to me unless it pushes the 180 envelope. 

I plot, run feeders, mineral stations, trail cams, all on private property so meat comes pretty easy for me. I am spending the remainder of my days on this earth trying to beat my avatar. 178 3/8ths is a tall order 21 years later. I spend enough time in the woods during archery season that the does know me and I know them. I actually name them sometimes. My circumstances do not require me to shoot meat with an arrow. I use that time for getting acquainted if you know what I mean.


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

buckeye dan said:


> My statement is not all inclusive for every hunter and hunting technique. I hunt archery season mainly as an R&D/opportunity endeavor. By the time gun season rolls around, I can usually and reliably kill the does I want for meat. I'd rather not disturb them pre rut with a bow unless something highly desirable presents itself.
> 
> Every category of weapons has it's share of meat hunters. No problem there. Those folks that use the pre rut archery season for pursuit of something special probably fall into my category of hunting style however. About 90% of my friends do. Antlers mean nothing to me unless it pushes the 180 envelope.
> 
> I plot, run feeders, mineral stations, trail cams, all on private property so meat comes pretty easy for me. I am spending the remainder of my days on this earth trying to beat my avatar. 178 3/8ths is a tall order 21 years later. I spend enough time in the woods during archery season that the does know me and I know them. I actually name them sometimes. My circumstances do not require me to shoot meat with an arrow. I use that time for getting acquainted if you know what I mean.


If you look at the year-to-date season total last year up through November 6th the antlerless harvest was 62.5% of the total at that point. I couldn't find this season's totals at this point but based on last year's season overall totals there were 62.8% antlerless deer harvested. So my take from that is that archery hunters are not much different in their goals as a whole compared to the gun hunters. The archers seem to do a pretty good job of targeting the does. I know in my area the herd seems considerably thinned before any of the gun seasons so it seems to be effective.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

There is no doubt the DNR has encouraged doe harvest. I'd be willing to bet the economy and hard times has helped that number along too.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

I Fish said:


> Somebody must know,


There are a lot of people that know


----------



## I Fish (Sep 24, 2008)

Lundy said:


> There are a lot of people that know


Oh yes. And they are watching. Some of them think they know what's going to happen next, some think it's only a guess, at best. Then, there are the smart ones. They make it happen, or so they think, and so, obviously, they know, but, then again, sometimes it's a total suprise to most, meaning a few knew, but, didn't think they knew, and, are totally mortified by their new, unfortunate knowledge. 

All bull crap aside, I do wonder how the DNR manages to juggle all the different interests. First, you've got to keep the deer herd healthy. Second, you've got to consider who pays the bills. Third, you've got Farm Bureau, and the auto insurers. Gotta be a tough game. It's really no wonder it doesn't make sense. Like an ice cream truck, with no ice cream, but that bell's still ringin, the cash register still works, all the kids are still running after it. Err, well, it's like it's government or something.


----------



## mcking (Jan 23, 2013)

I like the new proposal, except Harrison conty should be in zone 3 with its surrounding counties. or did i view something wrong?


----------



## reo (May 22, 2004)

I Fish said:


> *Well, they cut the limit, didn't they?* Look at the maps to see the counties in the old zone C that used to be allowed 6, but now only 4. Some counties in Zone B went from 4 to 3. No counties had an increase, only reduction. Instead of increasing gun hunting opportunities, they are limiting them.
> 
> Up to and including 2011, you were allowed to use the antlerless permits through the end of gun season in zone C, but, that changed for 2012, where in the tags expired at the end of legal shooting hour on the day before gun season. So, in 2011, gun hunters were allowed to kill 6, and, I personally killed 5. In 2012, gun hunters were only allowed 3. Tell me who you think is more likely to kill does, bow or gun hunters. Furthermore, if they are "reducing the herd", why did the antlerless permits expire at all, and, why are they doing away with them? Why weren't they valid until the end of bow season, helping to insure hunters got the limit of 6? The "earlier is better" bull is just that, bull. If that's so, then this year is better than next year, meaning that this years herd would have been better if more had been taken last year? So it should go from this year to next, and so on.
> 
> ...


Yeah, they cut the limit...Was it a meaningful cut? Will it do anything to reduce the havest? It seems to me that you answered these questions with: "Less than 1% of successful hunters kill more than 4 deer" So if the limit is 6 or 10 (or pick your own number) but next to no one takes that many and you cut it to 4, is there any meaningful reduction?

Again I do not see the state attempting to "cut" the harvest. Nor do I agree that their limit reduction is an attempt at harvest reduction as by your own statement it will have little to no effect. It sounds like a lot of hunters would like to see the herd size increase and many of them see the new regs as an attempt to do that, when in reality the facts show that the herd will be further decreased. Many are being "gut hooked"


----------



## I Fish (Sep 24, 2008)

So, when was the last time the DNR done something to lower their revenue? That must be why they lowered the limit. They were making too much money on un-filled tags, and, as opposed to lowering the price of the tags, they decided to just sell less of them. Now, from a government perspective, I guess that makes sense.

So, why is it they're axing the 2 day hunt in December? Oh, that's right. Only 14,000 deer got killed in those 2 days last year. They are taking 2 days you can gun hunt, and kill a buck, and replacing it with a 2 day ML season, which I might add not everybody that hunts has a ML, oh, and it's does only? 

My problem with all the changes is they are talking out of both sides of their mouths. Too me, the reasons don't fit the actions. I mean, are they just trying to make it harder to gun hunt? How many months is bow season? But gun hunters are losing 2 days out of 9? That's over a 20% loss of gun season. Ah, but again, they are adding 50% to ML season, except you can't kill a buck for 2 of the days. So, what's the goal? More deer killed, or less? More gun hunters, or less? They say they want more deer killed, but, they cut the tags, and shortened gun season. See why I say it don't add up?


----------



## reo (May 22, 2004)

I FISH, I was going to type lots of this out but I could not say it better than Lundy has below. It seems fairly obvious they don't care about more or less gun hunters or ease of this method or that method. They just want more deer killed and the population reduced and if the state's tactics are confusing enough or even misleading enough to squelch hunters compliants all the better.



Lundy said:


> The late season MZ season has typically yields a higher harvest that the 2 day gun season.
> 
> The last 3 year average for the MZ was 19,858, the last 3 year average for the 2 day gun was 17,705. This past season the MZ harvest was 21,555 and the 2 day 14,567.
> 
> ...


----------



## I Fish (Sep 24, 2008)

Hmm, turns out, some of this IS a gamble. So much for the all knowing DNR. It turns out, they don't have a crystal ball: _Last month, Division of Wildlife Chief Scott Zody characterized the potential loss of the extra gun weekend as a *&#8220;gamble&#8221;* that those deer would be picked up during the early muzzleloader season._ 

How you like knowing DNR is gambling with the deer herd? I'm telling you, things don't make sense. I guess there's some higher profile people against it too. I'm guessing the head of Whitetails Unlimited knows something, huh? Read the above, and all text here:
http://www.outdoornews.com/March-2013/Whitetails-leader-opposed-to-new-deer-regulations/


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

I Fish said:


> Division of Wildlife Chief Scott Zody characterized the potential loss of the extra gun weekend as a *gamble* that those deer would be picked up during the early muzzleloader season.[/I]


The elimination of the 2 day gun and the replacement with the 2 day muzzleloader DOE ONLY was never even one little bit about reducing the harvest.

ODNR is still on a herd reduction plan, they openly state this. The new season is hoped to at a minimum to maintain harvest numbers with a shift of many of those killed to does versus bucks. The real hope is that the early season not only shifts the kill to does but also increases the overall harvest also.

This early season proposal has been pushed by the Farm Bureau for years and years. It has long been listed in the Farm Bureau deer management plan proposals.

The ODNR has done a great job of slight of hand with this years proposals.


----------



## I Fish (Sep 24, 2008)

Lundy said:


> The ODNR has done a great job of slight of hand with this years proposals.


Please, explain.

It doesn't bother you that the DNR has potentially caved to special interest group, one that would profit from fewer deer, meaning fewer insurance claims? This whole thing stinks, and it bugs the crap outta me. It doesn't appear this is very scientific.


----------



## crittergitter (Jun 9, 2005)

I Fish said:


> Please, explain.
> 
> It doesn't bother you that the DNR has potentially caved to special interest group, one that would profit from fewer deer, meaning fewer insurance claims? This whole thing stinks, and it bugs the crap outta me. It doesn't appear this is very scientific.


You're forgetting the farmers themselves. Less deer overall, especially on public land means more competition for private land where there are deer. This drives up lease prices. Thus, makes even MORE money for Ohio farmers. 

Yay, for the farmers! Wooohoo!


----------



## "chillin" (Apr 20, 2012)

crittergitter said:


> You're forgetting the farmers themselves. Less deer overall, especially on public land means more competition for private land where there are deer. This drives up lease prices. Thus, makes even MORE money for Ohio farmers.
> 
> Yay, for the farmers! Wooohoo!


Those farmers aren't making any money. Thats why they are bulldozing every fencerow in sight. 

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## crappiedude (Mar 12, 2006)

I Fish said:


> http://www.outdoornews.com/March-2013/Whitetails-leader-opposed-to-new-deer-regulations/


That guys an idiot....he's so full of crap I find it hard to believe that even got published. Whats worse is someone takes his OPINION as "fact".


----------



## crittergitter (Jun 9, 2005)

crappiedude said:


> That guys an idiot....he's so full of crap I find it hard to believe that even got published. Whats worse is someone takes his OPINION as "fact".


How so?

Why wouldn't they publish it? Should they consult you? What deer hunting organization asked you to represent them?

Facts are clear that MANY Ohio outdoorsmen dislike these proposed regulations. You aren't one of them. You've already made that clear. Yet, you seem to have a very REAL problem with anyone who does take issue with these new regulation proposals. I wonder why that is.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

I Fish,

I have been somewhat consistent and vocal with my opposition to the new proposed regulations from day 1. 

I have many contacts in the ODNR that I talk with on a somewhat regular basis. I have little doubt that the ODNR is still on a full speed ahead herd reduction plan.

What has been frustrating to me from the first day these new proposals were announced were how many immediately bought into what the ODNR was selling. This thread in fact has a title about the ODNR cutting limits in half. I tried to point out that what the ODNR has proposed is not what so many seem to think that it is. You challenged my belief pretty hard. Read back through this thread and you will see what I believe and why. I still believe the same, nothing has changed.

More and more will see as the time goes by what has been proposed and will most likely be adopted as the new law is not as pretty as the package it came wrapped in from the ODNR.


----------



## crappiedude (Mar 12, 2006)

*Putting hunters in the woods with guns in October changes the whole deer hunting game plan.
As soon as the first bullets go into the air, you can throw all of your preseason scouting out the window,&#8221; he said. &#8220;From that moment on, things have changed.&#8221;*

That simply is not true, not even close.
*
&#8220;A lot of people don&#8217;t own muzzleloaders,&#8221; he said. &#8220;They all have their shotguns. We encourage them to be proficient with their guns... You&#8217;re going to have less accurate shots with a muzzleloader because they&#8217;re not used to shooting them.&#8221;*

Again, not true. I would hate to be in front of Lundy with a muzzleloader. Every year the woods are full of "instant" bow hunters and "instant" gun hunters. I think the same people who prepare for other seasons, will prepare for this season. We already have a muzzleloader season so it's not like a whole new (ML) weapon being introduced.

*&#8220;We&#8217;re at a crossroads, hanging onto our traditions by a thread,&#8221; he said. &#8220;We shouldn&#8217;t have to be fighting our own state game agency.&#8221;*

and new traditions can be born. Traditions have been evolving over the last 50 years in Ohio. The world didn't come to an end at every change. This reminds me of the *recurve vs. compound *argument, the *selling of either sex and antlerless deer tags*, the introduction of *crossbow hunting*, the *late season ML hunt* brought a huge outcry because of the "slaughter" of pregnant does.
Every one of these items brought out cries from some hunters when they were 1st introduced. I really at this point fail to see the difference between the changes in front of us and the ones behind us.

*Facts are clear that MANY Ohio outdoorsmen dislike these proposed regulations. You aren't one of them* You've already made that clear.

That's not even true. 
1st I am a bowhunter and if were really, really, really up to me, they would get rid of gun season completely....all guns seasons but it's not up to me.
I own guns, I hunt with guns, I have my concealed carry permit so I'm not against guns. I just prefer bow hunting. Last year I hunted 2 mornings with a gun my partner killed a 9 point with his .44 mag and I killed a doe with a ML. We did bowhunt some during gun season. 
I'm really pretty indifferent to the new regulations one way or the other. Switch the seasons, keep them the same I don't really care. More than likely, I'll keep bow hunting anyway. I do have an old .45 cal cap & ball Ky Long Rifle I may use if the season changes.
The reason I said the guy was an idiot was because his reasons aren't valid. If he's an authority God help us. He sounds pretty ignorant to me. I actually have been following this thread and I feel both you and Lundy have better more informed comments than he has. 

As to why they don't consult me, I dunno (maybe God help us if they did) but before I made up a bunch of crap about traditions I would at least go back and see where everything in Ohio has failed. In truth it hasn't failed. Hunting has evolved over the years and so have the traditions.

PS-for as long as I remember my partner and I have only killed 4 or 5 deer off of the property we hunt. When limits went up, we stayed the same. We see plenty of deer.


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

I agree with Lundy that the ODNR has seemed to create a false perception that these new proposals will result in an increased deer herd by saving more deer from harvest. I had an e-mail correspondence with Mike Tonkovich himself earlier this year on the topic. In no way did he try to imply to me that they were seeking to grow the herd or even stay where they were, although I really think the new bag limit proposal misleads folks in that direction. He actually shared a chart with me for my county (Knox) that showed what their target goal was. The chart was based on the number of antlered deer harvested. The goal was less than half of what we have had in current years. To maintain a number at that rate would mean that the doe harvest would have to have to be way higher than it has been currently. The bag limits currently in place were not a limitation to attaining that goal mainly because nearly nobody was harvesting anywhere close to the limits in place. So by dropping the limits all they really accomplished was appeasing some of the hunters with the perception that they were protecting their herd when in actuality the harvest in Knox county will likely stay the same as it was...until the herd is further reduced to the point that the current numbers cannot be reached.


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

[quote="chillin";1590360]Those farmers aren't making any money. Thats why they are bulldozing every fencerow in sight. 

[/quote]
I think you are way off on this. If they were not making any money on the farming they would not be paying $150/acre to lease land now for crops. Nearly all farmers have increased that lease rate over that last few years to hold on to the land that have access to. The reason is that other farmers are trying to outbid them. If they were losing money they would not be that aggressive to pay more and get more land. The bulldozing of fencerows is simply because they can justify the money invested in removal costs because of return in crop revenue. The farmer doing my place dozed some fencerows as well...but he ended up paying me an additional acre of rental as a result. So even with that figured in he was willing to put in the cost to get that extra land available to him.

I am not faulting the farmer in this effort. I think many of us would do the same if we were given such a good business opportunity.


----------

