Ohio Sportsman - Your Ohio Hunting and Fishing Resource banner

Hunter Density Map.

11K views 22 replies 10 participants last post by  Deehntr56 
#1 ·
I am not one for crowds. I tend to like hunting alone and quietly sit in my stand and enjoy whatever comes my way while hunting. It seems that when I am hunting in this manner, I am more relaxed and enjoy taking everything in that nature has to offer.

Sometimes while in my stand, I routinely have other wildlife make an appearance- which could be a Mountain Lion in the Big Horns that showed up one day in Wyoming, to a hawk that made a surprise visit one time sitting in my tree stand thinking the hair sticking out from under my hat may have been a squirrel or some other creature as he swooped down to make it his prey and swooping away a second before contact and landing in a branch an arm's length away, eyeing me as he determines that his dinner this evening was really something else. After realizing the new addition to my shorts in my coveralls wasn't a chemical heat pack-We enjoyed each other's company for several seconds as each of us eyed each other thinking who was more surprised with this recent event.

Hunting in un-crowded conditions has always been one of my preferences, due to the fact I can hunt a species one on one without disturbance from anyone. No Deer drives, no others leaving their scent or disturbing the area and changing game patterns-with game not being spooked as well as on alert most of the time- just good old fashioned hunting with minimal impact from others, thus allowing Deer and other Big Game to stay on their current undisturbed patterns.

Don't get me wrong, I also enjoy hunting with others and groups every now and then and enjoy the companionship with friends as well. I am tending to do that more as I am getting older and enjoy that aspect more so now, then when I was younger.

Hunter pressure plays a role in allowing Big Game to reach the older age structure that is needed for optimum growth. We all know that age, genetics, and nutrition are key ingredients in allowing Whitetail Bucks, Mule Deer, Elk and any Big game species that we hunt the time and resources to grow to their potential. Hunting pressure is one area that plays into this formula.

With that being said- here is a Hunter Density Map of the US and how the hunters impact hunting by state and region. One of the reasons I have enjoyed hunting out West and in Canada is due to Low Hunter Densities. Less pressure and less run in's with other hunters benefit both wildlife and the hunting experience. Last September I hunted Kansas in September during the early Muzzleloader Season, and was surprised that I did not see another hunter all week and only heard two shots the entire week, one was mine. Not uncommon from what they told me, and very similar to other states that I have hunted out West.

I thought I would share with everyone.

One additional variable that carries tremendous weight, but is often overlooked, is the amount of hunting pressure in a given area.

There are many ways to move bucks into older age classes, and one that works well for some states is having light hunter densities.
 
See less See more
1
  • Like
Reactions: Sgt Fury
#8 ·
Thats a great map to put in the back of my mind. Thanks for putting that up here :thumbs_up:
No problem-

Wish we could get one of these for our state of Ohio
Or even see the difference in the counties that would be cool

Great post

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
I agree, it would really help to show the areas of high concentration of hunters and where the most pressure is. We can make some conclusions based on harvest results, but it would only be part of the picture. More detailed data would be needed to understand the real situation and be accurate with the results.

As far as I am concerned, opening day of trout season in Penn is almost more dangerous than buck season. Take a 20' wide creek stocked with trout and its shoulder to shoulder both sides with guys heaving 3 ounce spoons.
I have seen it, and it's "real" interesting to say the least!;)
 
#9 ·
No problem-

I agree, it would really help to show the areas of high concentration of hunters and where the most pressure is. We can make some conclusions based on harvest results, but it would only be part of the picture. More detailed data would be needed to understand the real situation and be accurate with the results.

I have seen it, and it's "real" interesting to say the least!;)
Would u say deer harvest represents hunter numbers or deer population.
From me experience I saw more deer while hunting cochocton county in highschool and college than Ross county . Ross didn't seem to see as many deer and lower harvest count . ... I realize the the land I hunt in Ross is not the best but I was wondering u thoughts

Sent from my HTC PH39100 using Ohub Campfire mobile app
 
#11 ·
The Michigan numbers seem off to me, well at least I'd figure them to be higher than what it states.

Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
 
#12 ·
Would u say deer harvest represents hunter numbers or deer population.
From me experience I saw more deer while hunting cochocton county in highschool and college than Ross county . Ross didn't seem to see as many deer and lower harvest count . ... I realize the the land I hunt in Ross is not the best but I was wondering u thoughts

Sent from my HTC PH39100 using Ohub Campfire mobile app
A little of both-Ross county harvest numbers are normally less then half of Coshocton county, most likely explaining why you see less deer. If you look at the harvest data over the last several years for those two counties, it may answer some of your questions. If you have a selected amount of deer in a selected area, and the access along with hunters and available tags to harvest them, then the harvest number represents a percentage of the deer population in that area(There are other factors that could refute this-or support it based on who you talk to). Additional information would be needed, IMO to determine the total deer population in that selected area.

Actual Counts(Aerials, Surveys etc.) are more preferred in several Big Game states for Population numbers. Many Biologists believe actual counts are more accurate. It is usually the basis for tag allocation in the coming season in many states.
 
#14 · (Edited by Moderator)
Hunter Density played into this determination-

Kentucky touted as No. 1 state for trophy bucks by Outdoor Life magazine

Published: May 23, 2013
By Greg Kocher - gkocher1@herald-leader.com

Kentucky is known for horses, but now a national magazine has named the Bluegrass State as the top destination for trophy-quality white-tailed deer.

In its June/July issue, Outdoor Life has named Kentucky the No. 1 trophy buck state in the country. The rest of the Top 10 were, in order, Kansas, Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, Mississippi, Nebraska, Ohio and Oklahoma.

The magazine used a number of criteria, including the number of record-book entries from each state, hunter density per state, the cost of guided hunts offered to non-resident hunters, and the state's "hunter friendliness" in terms of laws and regulations.

The Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources isn't surprised by the ranking, spokesman Mark Marraccini said.

"We've known for quite some time that we have one of the best trophy white-tailed deer herds in the country," Marraccini said. "We know we have a quality herd. We have trophy white-tails probably in every county in the state."

Management of the herd has led to better-quality deer available for hunting.

"Years ago, hunters were allowed to take two bucks per year," Marraccini said. "That changed when the department decided to manage for a trophy system. We allow hunters to take one buck per year. Basically that protects your younger deer coming on."

The deer population has grown over the last 60 years.

"Around 1950, Kentucky had 1,000 deer in the whole state, and most of them were in Western Kentucky. It's about 900,000 now statewide," Marraccini said.

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2013/05/23/2651531/kentucky-touted-as-no-1-state.html#storylink=cpy
http://www.kentucky.com/2013/05/23/2651531/kentucky-touted-as-no-1-state.html
 
#15 · (Edited by Moderator)
Good info here by State-

Some interesting items to note-License sales and hunters per square mile.

Hunting License sales PA is down 11%, and were up 11%-they all are coming here!:p Delaware and Maryland are down 45% in license sales-wow! New York is up 45%!

In reality Michigan, WV area also down. But Ohio has quite a few hunters per square mile at 12.3 and one of the highest states per square mile. Out West is at 1.2 hunters per square mile and Alaska is at 0.2!!! Talk about room to roam!!!


Total Hunters by State Where Hunting Took Place, 2001 to 2011
(Population 16 Years Old and Older)
State -2001 -2006 2011 2006-11 % Change '11 Hunters/Square Mile

Illinois -310,000 -316,000 -512,000 62% 8.8
Indiana 290,000 272,000 392,000 44% 10.8
Iowa 243,000 251,000 253,000 1% 4.5
Kansas 291,000 271,000 283,000 4% 3.4
Kentucky 323,000 291,000 347,000 19% 8.6
Michigan 754,000 753,000 (529,000) 648,000 -14% 6.7
Minnesota 597,000 535,000 477,000 -11% 5.5
Missouri 489,000 608,000 576,000 -5% 8.3
Nebraska 173,000 118,000 128,000 8% 1.7
North Dakota 139,000 128,000 82,000 -36% 1.2
Ohio 490,000 500,000 553,000 11% 12.3
South Dakota 209,000 171,000 270,000 58% 3.5
Wisconsin 660,000 697,000 895,000 28% 13.7
Midwest Total 4,968,000 4,911,000 5,297,000 8% 6.1

Connecticut 45,000 38,000 50,000 32% 9.0
Delaware 16,000 42,000 23,000 -45% 11.8
Maine 164,000 175,000 181,000 3% 5.1
Maryland 145,000 161,000 88,000 -45% 8.9
Massachusetts 66,000 73,000 56,000 -23% 5.3
New Hampshire 78,000 61,000 56,000 -8% 6.0
New Jersey 135,000 89,000 94,000 6% 10.8
New York 714,000 566,000 823,000 45% 15.1
Pennsylvania 1,000,000 1,044,000 (775,000) 933,000 -11% 20.3
Rhode Island 9,000 14,000 20,000 43% 16.5
Vermont 100,000 73,000 90,000 23% 9.4
Virginia 355,000 413,000 432,000 5% 10.9
West Virginia 284,000 269,000 247,000 -8% 10.3
Northeast Total 3,111,000 3,018,000 2,935,000 -3% 11.4

Alabama 423,000 391,000 535,000 37% 10.4
Arkansas 431,000 354,000 363,000 3% 6.9
Florida 226,000 236,000 242,000 3% 4.7
Georgia 417,000 481,000 392,000 -19% 6.8
Louisiana 333,000 270,000 277,000 3% 6.7
Mississippi 357,000 304,000 483,000 59% 10.2
North Carolina 295,000 304,000 335,000 10% 6.9
Oklahoma 261,000 251,000 244,000 -3% 3.5
South Carolina 265,000 208,000 254,000 22% 8.4
Tennessee 359,000 329,000 375,000 14% 8.9
Texas 1,201,000 1,101,000 1,147,000 4% 4.4
Southeast Total 4,568,000 4,229,000 4,647,000 10% 6.2

3-Region Total 12,647,000 12,158,000 12,879,000 6% 6.9
Arizona 148,000 159,000 269,000 69% 2.4
California 274,000 281,000 394,000 40% 2.4
Colorado 281,000 259,000 259,000 0% 2.5
Idaho 197,000 187,000 246,000 32% 2.9
Montana 229,000 197,000 150,000 -24% 1.0
Nevada 47,000 63,000 43,000 -32% 0.4
New Mexico 130,000 99,000 69,000 -30% 0.6
Oregon 248,000 237,000 196,000 -17% 2.0
Utah 198,000 166,000 193,000 16% 2.3
Washington 227,000 182,000 219,000 20% 3.1
Wyoming 133,000 102,000 140,000 37% 1.4
Alaska 93,000 71,000 125,000 76% 0.2
Hawaii 17,000 18,000 23,000 28% 2.1
West Total 2,222,000 2,021,000 2,326,000 17% 1.2

U.S. Total* 13,034,000 12,510,000 13,674,000 9% 3.7
 
#16 ·
Good link for additional info- I was using this the past month and forgot to add for reference. Some States are updating or haven't updated and not available, so check back later.

Short cuts to Deer Density and Harvest info by State-Could be helpful in this thread as well.

Good link for additional info- I was using this the past month and forgot to add for reference. Some States are updating and not available, so check back later.

Short cuts to Deer Density and Harvest info by State-

http://www.guideddeerhunts.biz/harvest.shtml
 
#17 ·
This additional map shows the Bow Hunter, Hunter density by state-

It's interesting to see this on a map, since it can easily show the amount of hunter pressure that each state has. Note Out West once again with very little pressure in many states. PA, Maryland and Ohio lead the country in Bow Hunters per square mile.

 
#20 · (Edited by Moderator)
Good info here by State-

Some interesting items to note-License sales and hunters per square mile.

Hunting License sales PA is down 11%, and were up 11%-they all are coming here!:p Delaware and Maryland are down 45% in license sales-wow! New York is up 45%!

In reality Michigan, WV area also down. But Ohio has quite a few hunters per square mile at 12.3 and one of the highest states per square mile. Out West is at 1.2 hunters per square mile and Alaska is at 0.2!!! Talk about room to roam!!!


Total Hunters by State Where Hunting Took Place, 2001 to 2011
(Population 16 Years Old and Older)
State -2001 -2006 2011 2006-11 % Change '11 Hunters/Square Mile

Illinois -310,000 -316,000 -512,000 62% 8.8
Indiana 290,000 272,000 392,000 44% 10.8
Iowa 243,000 251,000 253,000 1% 4.5
Kansas 291,000 271,000 283,000 4% 3.4
Kentucky 323,000 291,000 347,000 19% 8.6
Michigan 754,000 753,000 (529,000) 648,000 -14% 6.7
Minnesota 597,000 535,000 477,000 -11% 5.5
Missouri 489,000 608,000 576,000 -5% 8.3
Nebraska 173,000 118,000 128,000 8% 1.7
North Dakota 139,000 128,000 82,000 -36% 1.2
Ohio 490,000 500,000 553,000 11% 12.3
South Dakota 209,000 171,000 270,000 58% 3.5
Wisconsin 660,000 697,000 895,000 28% 13.7
Midwest Total 4,968,000 4,911,000 5,297,000 8% 6.1

Connecticut 45,000 38,000 50,000 32% 9.0
Delaware 16,000 42,000 23,000 -45% 11.8
Maine 164,000 175,000 181,000 3% 5.1
Maryland 145,000 161,000 88,000 -45% 8.9
Massachusetts 66,000 73,000 56,000 -23% 5.3
New Hampshire 78,000 61,000 56,000 -8% 6.0
New Jersey 135,000 89,000 94,000 6% 10.8
New York 714,000 566,000 823,000 45% 15.1
Pennsylvania 1,000,000 1,044,000 (775,000) 933,000 -11% 20.3
Rhode Island 9,000 14,000 20,000 43% 16.5
Vermont 100,000 73,000 90,000 23% 9.4
Virginia 355,000 413,000 432,000 5% 10.9
West Virginia 284,000 269,000 247,000 -8% 10.3
Northeast Total 3,111,000 3,018,000 2,935,000 -3% 11.4

Alabama 423,000 391,000 535,000 37% 10.4
Arkansas 431,000 354,000 363,000 3% 6.9
Florida 226,000 236,000 242,000 3% 4.7
Georgia 417,000 481,000 392,000 -19% 6.8
Louisiana 333,000 270,000 277,000 3% 6.7
Mississippi 357,000 304,000 483,000 59% 10.2
North Carolina 295,000 304,000 335,000 10% 6.9
Oklahoma 261,000 251,000 244,000 -3% 3.5
South Carolina 265,000 208,000 254,000 22% 8.4
Tennessee 359,000 329,000 375,000 14% 8.9
Texas 1,201,000 1,101,000 1,147,000 4% 4.4
Southeast Total 4,568,000 4,229,000 4,647,000 10% 6.2

3-Region Total 12,647,000 12,158,000 12,879,000 6% 6.9
Arizona 148,000 159,000 269,000 69% 2.4
California 274,000 281,000 394,000 40% 2.4
Colorado 281,000 259,000 259,000 0% 2.5
Idaho 197,000 187,000 246,000 32% 2.9
Montana 229,000 197,000 150,000 -24% 1.0
Nevada 47,000 63,000 43,000 -32% 0.4
New Mexico 130,000 99,000 69,000 -30% 0.6
Oregon 248,000 237,000 196,000 -17% 2.0
Utah 198,000 166,000 193,000 16% 2.3
Washington 227,000 182,000 219,000 20% 3.1
Wyoming 133,000 102,000 140,000 37% 1.4
Alaska 93,000 71,000 125,000 76% 0.2
Hawaii 17,000 18,000 23,000 28% 2.1
West Total 2,222,000 2,021,000 2,326,000 17% 1.2

U.S. Total* 13,034,000 12,510,000 13,674,000 9% 3.7
Exactly why Ohio should raise Non-Res Hunting fees to put them above the other Trophy Whitetail states. This will make them a bit more attractive to those in our bordering states that are over-hunted and undermanaged:)
 
#21 ·
For those heading out of state in 2018, this density map will help in making those decisions. if you don't want crowds, it's pretty obvious where you can hunt with low hunter impact in the above maps. QDMA has not updated this since this initial one, but when the new one comes out I suspect many if not all of the uncrowded states will stay intact- except for a few Western States where hunting tag sales have increased in those areas the past several years.

But this is still a good tool for reference-
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top