close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

slamming the odnr

Discussion in 'Ohio Whitetail Deer Hunting' started by george tinkham, Jan 1, 2003.

  1. The odnr is the sole reason we have animals to hunt today.Even now they are the #1 fighter against animal rights advocates that keeps our privlege and" right" to hunt.The message that we send to nonhunters thru the odnr is.We are the stewards of the wildlife and we are the ones that foot nearly all the bill for hunted and non hunted wildlife and habitat that is aquired.Complainers are saying they pay to much should realize that more money equals more wildlife and this means we need hunting to manage it.C OMPLAINERS who are constantly claiming the odnr uses false claims on statistics are adding fuel that the antis can use against tha odnr.Our groups that are pro hunting use the odnrs statistics.Hunters started the odnr and other state agencies in the mid to late 1800s the 1st being maine.The reason was because the game was decemated.In Indianna there was zero white tails,but look at it today.Ohio had barely any game because of unregulated hunting.I think we've came a long way since the odnr was formed by hunters.We have always accepted the fact that we have paid the way and personally I am proud to purchase a lic. and tags each season weather I fill a tag or not.Thats but a small price to preserve our wildlife and hunting.
     
  2. Well said George!
     

  3. Yes I agree, and I always buy my license and tags as well, knowing i will be a responsible hunter and set good standards when in the field.
     
  4. I don't believe that over hunting in the 1800's had much to do with the fact that there were few deer in the area ... The major factor in the exploding deer populations is not only a more deer friendly habitat, but agriculture .. Farmers that have worked the land have provided more food supplies for deer and other animals to thrive in .. Forest have been cleared to make way for grain fields and grass land. Aside from the buffalo .. which its populations weren't destroyed by SPORTSMAN .. they were slaughtered because they ate too much grass and cattle ranchers didn't like that. Saying that populations of game animals has been harmed by hunting is a misrepresentation of the facts ... In most game animals as a whole have benifited population wise by hunters. Ohio and Indiana didn't have a strong population of deer prior to the introduction of farming not odnr. They do a good job and I am not knocking them, they are part of the puzzle and every decision they make is always right...

    Sportsman get a bad rap when you talk animal numbers .. people think that because you kill some that it has an adverse effect on populatiion that is not the case lets look at some examples

    Bufflao .. rail road people paid high dollars to get rid of bufflaos the railroad had trouble with damage to their trains because they would run in to herds and get caught up under the train .. they made a special tool for the front of the trains to push the dead animals to the side of the track instead of under the train .. you now know it as a Cattle Catcher
    Passenger Pidgeon .. Extinct .. because it was deemed a nuisance. not because of sportsman but because of polititans
    Wolf ... Killed to many cattle, sheep ext. Politics ... not spotsman
    Big Cats .. Same problem as the wolf, plus add the fear that most people have of the big cats
    Grizzly Bear .. Again Fear and loss of livestock

    The fact is, when sportsman become involved animals get more attention and their numbers start to increase

    All animals listed about with the sad exception of the passenger pidgoen are being reintroduced into some of the same areas they were evicted from Yes are license money goes to support good causes and they are needed to preserve our sport. Lets not let others take the credit for what we help to support every time we step in to the field or a sporting goods shop. Keep in mind that the ODNR wouldn't exist if sportsman didn't stand up and demand better habitats and stronger populations of animals
     
  5. madcatter you had 2 important things wrong unless history is wrong.it was not sportsmen that decimated the buffalo.in fact the term sportsmen arrived along with Teddy Roosevelt and when hunters started buying licenses.The herds were brought to near extinction in about every state because of unregulated hunting.there was no laws.People like "buffalo bill" shot the buffalo for money,deer was being shot every day for food,not sport and bears and wolves being exterminated for bounty.Well maybe one thing wrong as I'm sure the destruction of habitat probably lended a hand too.BUT one thing for sure it wasn't sportsmen that were involved.Sportsmen have given us the quanity and quality of wildlife we have today and our public lands.Teddy Roosevelt is probably our first sportsman and had a lot to do with our wildlife resources.
     
  6. sorry madcatter,just reread your post and realized you put "weren't sportsmen."I thought you said" were sportsmen."but all the sources I have read concerning this points to unregulated hunting and that is why odnr were formed ,by sportsmen, to bring wildlife back from near extiiction.Yes I agree getting rid of the habitat was part of the problem and the odnrs recognized this also by starting the national forest and public land purchases with sportsmen/hunters money to preserve the habitat that was left.
     
  7. You guys are crazy

    I’m sorry if I don’t trust Bureaucracy running the ODNR. They do some great things like add new wildlife areas and open Sunday hunting. But they also have HUGE flaws like bad poaching problems and the disappearing wild upland game bird population that go ignored.

    I do mind when sportsmen revenue from license and tags is given to state assembly as blank check and then they nerve to cut ODNR Budget. I’m sorry but Ohio sportsmen are getting screwed.

    While the ODNR started out with good intentions its turned into a $$$$$$ Monster.
    Is it really about wildlife managment anymore or $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ ?

    George I think you are making a huge mistake by turning a blind eye and ignoring the many problems this state has and ODNR refusal to recognize there many problems.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 1, 2003
  8. Sorry to disagree but ... The killing of animal because it is in the way of railroad progress and leaving millions of dead carcass laying in the field in NOT hunting by any defination that I have ever heard of .. It is extermination .... These people were killers for money. As for people killing animals for food there is no evidence to support any claim that that alone is a major cause. More often than not it is the destruction of habitat .. due to the arrival of mass populations of humans and a very fragile population of game .. You must have read my post wrong or I miss typed it .... because I was saying that sportsmen had almost no impact on the loss of buffalo or anyother game animal... As for Teddy being the first sportsman ... There have been sportsman since the cave man days, he might have coined the term and did a lot of things for conservation be he was far from the first sportsman of the world .. The native american people hunted this land for thousands of years without a major loss of game. I just feel that using the term over hunting is detremental to all hunters and adds fuel to the fire that hunters are to blame for low game numbers ... Are you aware that in the 5 years between 92 and 97 that almost a million acres of farmland was lost to development in Ohio alone ... Add to this another 10,000 farms that no longer farm their land. Sooner or later its going to be time for our game animals to foot the bill for this .. The population is going to peak very soon ... from there it has no other place to go but to decline ... I don't want hunters to take the blame .. We are losing millions of acres of land to development, farms are shutting down, hunters are crowded into a smaller and smaller area every year.... If we are going to point fingers then we need to be informed on just exactly what is going on. Hunters are by nature conservationalists .. they know if you kill them all this year there will be none next year ... developers and politicians don't look beyond their own bottom line... To me the bottom line is .. Land is disappearing, cities are getting bigger. habitat is getting smaller for animals and I don't want to see hunters footing the bill. The thread is about the ODNR ... Is the ODNR a good thing ... of course it is. They are the major string that binds sportsmen. What caught my attention was I felt you put way too much blame on hunters for no whitetail deer in the early 1900s .. It is true there were no laws or regulations ... It is also true that there were no laws or regulations on development .. pollution. .. logging .. causing a loss of precious habitat. All of which played a major part in the decline of populations. Hunting alone did not have the adverse effect on populations as the Liberal media would like us to believe. Without sportsman ... there would be no one to care what happened to the deer, the bear, the wolf, the many species of fish.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 1, 2003
  9. Aimrite...they protect our hunting privleges and rights to hunt.You best be careful what you say because the antis are liking what you say.They would love it if you broadcast this to the general nonhunting public.here is a quote word for word"Anti hunting groups have attempted to intiate the myth that wildlife management is not scientific.Not only is it incorrect,in the United States the science of wildlife management is huge and especially well done.Fortunately,and not surprisingly,the general public has not bought into the myth,and and they have great trust inwildlife management."quoted from "KNOW HUNTING"chapter 5 3rd para. pg. 99 ...as I said we must be careful with what we say.The antis might be running the odnr in the future. t hink about it.
     
  10. Madcatter,I agree but it was due to professional hunters and non professional hunters also.It was largely due to unregulated hunting no matter how they did hunted..If you have not read these books I'd urge you and other fishermen and hunters to read them...In Defense of hunting(very good chapter on unregulated hunting in the late 1800s and early 1900s)...Blood Ties...God Guns& Rock'n;Roll...and last but not least...Know Hunting.Never the less ,my whole point is when regulated hunting started it benifited wildlife and habitat being purchsed and set aside for the wildlife.
     
  11. George

    George,right or wrong IMO its the truth and you cant hide long from the truth.

    Our $$$$$$$$$ revenue saving our butts.
     
  12. AIMRITE.I don't know what you are talking about.Do you want to dismantle the odnr.
     
  13. Yes we as hunter's support them and the Division of Wildlife with our license fees. I like it that way. It is the politicians who are most dangerous to the purpose of the DNR and it's workings. So we must be vocal in what our thoughts are to both the DNR and politicians. Contact the politicians and also attend the Open Houses held each spring at each district office. They allow you to put in your thoughts about the regs then on paper. They then collect them and see what the sportsman like and want.
    Send your voice to where it matters.;)
     
  14. I realize what you are saying, I agree 100 percent that regulating hunting and fishing helps ... My point is that no matter how you cut it .. wolves, bears, buffalos big cats ... These animals were not hunted by sportsman or for people looking for a meal .. They were exterminated because of a personal interest by railroads, goverment and cattle farmers .. they hired professionals to come in and eradicate this animals because of the harm the indivduals felt they were doing to their buisness. And to this day if you have an animal that is a nuisanse the hunting laws we abide by do not apply. I have seen time and time again people use these examples as a means to attack hunting. I contend that these animals were not hunted in the sense of the sport that we are trying to defend. I personally would like to see more land bought by the ODNR, turned into both hunting and non hunting protected areas. If these farmers are being forced to sell their land because they can no longer afford them then the state should buy the land and preserve it. I am not against progress but I feel something has to give, once our land has been gobbled up by developers it is too late .... we need to act now.

    It has also been mentioned by Aimrite that we are getting screwed by the ODNR .. well to some extent I think we can all agree that there is a waste of money ... but when you look at the alternative ... which is losing our rights and our lands money doesn't become an issue. We need to act on are dwindling resourses and argue about it later, the more time spent in court or debate about what percentage goes where .. the less land there is to buy and the more rights we are going to lose. If anyone wants a shocker .. just check out how fast ohio and other states are losing their woodlands. Take a look at how fast rain forests are disappearing ... I don't want to sound like an enviromentalist here, but whats going on just isn't right and it can't last there is only so much land to provide habitat for all of us to live in. I would like to end by saying that all hunters are for the most part conservationists and enviromentalists and each time you walk into a sporting goods store, each time you walk into the woods you are an ambassador for all hunters and fishermen how you act or how someone else acts reflects on all of us as a whole. We are being judged in the court room of public opinion, the media is against us, the liberals are agaist us and just one bad deed or decision brought to light on TV will erase countless thousands of unreported good deeds.....
     
  15. Good Discussion

    Always good to see a lively discussion.

    Although some valid points are being made, to make the blanket statement that the ODNR is basicly a money hungry monster are unjustified.

    The fees from hunting and fishing licenses, special hunting permits(deer & turkey), fur taker permits, along with any fines that are accrued do to violations of laws that are related to the issuance of such permits and licenses, are paid into the state treasury to the credit of the wildlife fund, which shall be exclusively for the use of the department of natural resources in the education of hunters and trappers, for the purchase, management, preservation, propagation, protection, and stocking of wild birds and wild quadrupeds, for establishing and purchasing or otherwise acquiring title to lands for game preservation, propagation, and protection, and for public hunting grounds under rules to be adopted by the chief of the division of wildlife. The chief may employ on such lands one or more game management agents and wildlife officers at such salary and with such duties as the chief prescribes for improving habitat for wild birds and wild quadrupeds and for all phases of game management, propagation, and protection, including the necessary biological investigations, for printing summarized game laws and the division of wildlife lawbook, and for printing such educational leaflets, pamphlets, and books and promoting such educational, survey, and research activities pertaining to the management, preservation, propagation, and protection of wild animals as are approved by the chief and as provided in this chapter and Chapter 1531. of the Revised Code.

    The department shall not spend more than thirty-five per cent of this fund for administration and enforcement.

    The projected amounts for this fund in fiscal year 2002 were $46,177,752. For fiscal year 2003 $48,713,747.

    If you take the amount for 2003 and multiply it by the 35% you end up with $17,049,811 that the state may use for Administration and enforcement. This leaves $31,663,936 That may be used for everything else within the department of Wildlife.

    Of the total of $48,713,747, Only $738,750 comes from the Ohio General Revenue Fund. This means $47,974,997 has come from the sportsmen of Ohio!!! That roughly translates into
    98.5% of the Division of Wildlife's budget.

    We, the hunters and fishermen of Ohio, support the Wildlife Division. If anyone doesn't agree with how they are spending our money, they need to take it upon themselves to find out why! Attend the District meetings and ask questions. If you just want to sit back and bitch and not make the effort, Then you are no better than the slob hunters, whom you claim, that want to take the easy way out.

    Aimrite;
    If you have any actual proof of this happening, please enlighten me. I've never heard any charges of this nature.

    MadCatter;
    Very well stated!!

    George, I Agree.

    Good Luck and Safe Hunting,
    Craig
     
  16. I think I will stop reading this thread, you guys are changing the way I feel about the ODNR:(
     
  17. I'm not going to get into all the political crap, but I believe that everyone should have to pay for a license. I don't care if you're old, young, handicap or in the military. Well, maybe the under 16 group is okay......how about under 10? If you're 65 or older and retired then you're probably out there using the resourses more than the rest of us.

    I think everyone over the age of 10 should have to pay for a license, tag, permit......whatever.
     
  18. Money and politics aside, the ODNR has done an outstanding job overall for Ohio wildlife and natural resources. We must take care not to trip and fall on the double edged sword we have in Columbus.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
piedmont report , theyre slamming the slabs Cold Water Species Fishing Mar 22, 2009
Newsweek slamming hunting Sound Off Jan 9, 2009