Ohio Sportsman - Your Ohio Hunting and Fishing Resource banner

What Changes would you like to see deer Season in 2016?

7K views 78 replies 25 participants last post by  BeechNut 
#1 ·
HAPPY NEW YEAR FOLKS!

I would like to see the Rifles upgraded to at least the 30-30 Win this year...It has the the same range as the ones they have currently listed if not less than many on the list, and is a great deer rifle.

Would like to expanding the Smoke pole season from 3 days at least to 5.....Not sure why the OHDNR are so tight on "primitive weapon" seasons.....The bag limits still apply.

Would like to see open carry or concealed carry for protection in any season with out a permission slip.

Would like to see Grandchildren can hunt on their grandparents land without a license when they are over 18....This is still immediate family and should not need to pay to hunt on the families farms or land....

Would make it where landowners can use a computer to check in a deer and or do away with this so called $5.50 "convenient" fee to call to check in a deer....... We already pay these public employees or in some cases, a computer call in receptionist....This is ridiculous.

That my wish list I think of off handed...What is yours?
 
See less See more
#3 ·
I think to a point a ccw needs to be required to carry so the person has at least somewhat knowledge of the law and when and how they can use it.

bag limits down, I like the 30-30 idea, no more phone check in, maybe 1 deer allowed with each weapon. WA limited.
 
#6 ·
Good topic.

Archery opens the first Sat. of Oct. and ends the last Sat of Jan. (enough of this Sept. and Feb. craziness!)
Dump the 2nd gun season
Late muzzy 3 day season starting 1st Sat. of Jan. (I'd love to ban all inline muzzleloaders but I know that will never happen!)
1 Buck and 1 Doe max in SE Ohio
A complete restructure of the controlled hunts application process (this could be a separate Thread in itself!)
;)
 
#9 ·
Good topic.

Archery opens the first Sat. of Oct. and ends the last Sat of Jan. (enough of this Sept. and Feb. craziness!)
Dump the 2nd gun season
Late muzzy 3 day season starting 1st Sat. of Jan. (I'd love to ban all inline muzzleloaders but I know that will never happen!)
1 Buck and 1 Doe max in SE Ohio
A complete restructure of the controlled hunts application process (this could be a separate Thread in itself!)
;)
all that is is 2 weeks off and probably wont make much of a difference. agreed get rid of 2nd gun. 9k deer were killed in 2 days and that's what was check or not lost.
 
#8 ·
I want to see ODNR approve the .338 Lapua Mag. with an X-S1 computerized shooting system for all huntable mammals, not just hogs and dogs.

I would like to see ODNR stop regulating deer hunting on private property.

I would like to see ODNR set the public land deer season for the entire month of November in 5-day increments: only legal, stringed weapons on days 1-5, 11-15 and 21-25; all legal weapons allowed on the remaining days.

I would like to see no infringements on open or concealed carry anywhere or anytime.

I would like to see no license or permit required for anyone with the land owner's permission to hunt any animal on private land.

I would like to see ODNR abolish captive cervid operations.

I would like see a frog fly, just once.
 
#10 ·
I want to see ODNR approve the .338 Lapua Mag. with an X-S1 computerized shooting system for all huntable mammals, not just hogs and dogs.

I would like to see ODNR stop regulating deer hunting on private property.

I would like to see ODNR set the public land deer season for the entire month of November in 5-day increments: only legal, stringed weapons on days 1-5, 11-15 and 21-25; all legal weapons allowed on the remaining days.

I would like to see no infringements on open or concealed carry anywhere or anytime.

I would like to see no license or permit required for anyone with the land owner's permission to hunt any animal on private land.

I would like to see ODNR abolish captive cervid operations.

I would like see a frog fly, just once.
Then we might as well be able to go spotlight and shoot deer too If you take away the license and permit fees for folks hunting private land then the folks who hunt public land will pay dearly

I do agree that folks should be allowed to conceal carry or open carry as long as that weapon is not being used to harvest

As for the frog flying...Have you ever seen a bird catch one then fly off with it and it gets away from about 20 ft up they don't fly very well
 
#11 ·
New chief of the wildlife division is in place- hope he gets everyone in the division involved in the field so they know what is going on, and hopefully he can build the trust back with the hunters and outdoorsman-he has his hands full.
 
#12 ·
I like what laws we have in place.. Just bring back the old check in system.

I would like the law to change where hunters with written permission from the owner can call LEO's on tresspassers/problems. Many land owners dont want the hassle so I rarely bother them with these issues. Expecaly the ones that live out of state or across the state.

For personal reasons I would like to be able to kill a second buck. Tag could be $100 I would pay it.. Stipulation would be: .. only in urban areas. I hunt both. I know I know most don't like it.. I get it also.

I would love more than anything to see a section where when you buy your license the hunters could donate $5.00/$10.00 for the sole purpose to acquire new state and federal land.. Then have the state and feds can match moneys earned. I know of programs where the state pays 75% of property price. So I know its do able. This would add more property slowly but steadily. 350,000 lic. Sold * $5= $1.75 million *St*Fed=$3.5 a year maybe not all would donate but every little bit would help. Then advertise the purchased property. I am never for bigger gov. But in this case adding a few park guys when land is acquired.would be good
 
#17 ·
I'd like to see a regulation on outfitters.

I'd also like to pay off my truck this year and start putting that money towards buying more property. I heard they quit making it and I'd like to have enough for my friends and family to have a place to hunt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BeechNut
#18 ·
I'd like to see a regulation on outfitters.

I'd also like to pay off my truck this year and start putting that money towards buying more property. I heard they quit making it and I'd like to have enough for my friends and family to have a place to hunt.
Property is my goal too, but that's more of a 2017 goal as Im most likely moving again. Anyway bud, you know you're welcome to hunt family land with me anytime.

I'm hoping my squirrel dog is ready for some serious treeing action next year.
 
#23 ·
I would like the old tag system back i miss the metal tag i would like to have a week of buck only the beginning of September make it a special tag that is only good for that week and it counts toward your limit if you kill one your buck tag would be filled for the year even landowners would have to buy the tag not a license just to tag that would give us a shot at a velvet buck
 
#26 ·
public land sectors draw per sector one deer per person their.landowner tags made and color coded so people can't use them in another county. Have seen Amish do this before and not be on their property. Everywhere a deer is killed on private land address must be givin to help see where deer are being inhalated also help with investigations and show a model around your area not just the county. Do away with the second gun season open up bow second Saturday of October close it January first for doe. Buck only after that. A point restriction for adults 8 or better. Go back to metal tag system.Move muzzle loader back to how it use to be dec 28 th. I am against carrying a ccw ( if your hunting you already have a weapon)Finally see an announcement from the odnr the changes have been made.
 
#27 ·
Blackcat if the regs get dropped on private land then the hunters that hunt public would cry that they are regulated,and we all know you can't have laws for some and not the others.Well only in the GOV.Some Private land owners would wipe the herd out that is on/around their property.Now forcing more hunter into the regulated land (public ) now we have more whiners.A land owner has the option to regulate the herd on their property now,if the DOW says a hunter can take 1 antlered deer and 3 antlerless the land owner has the right to take all 4 or 1 for that matter.A farmer can get damage control permits to take more if they want.Thinning the herd or letting them grow it is the land owners/hunters choice.Just remember laws are like locks they keep an honest man honest
 
#30 ·
Blackcat if the regs get dropped on private land then the hunters that hunt public would cry that they are regulated,and we all know you can't have laws for some and not the others.Well only in the GOV.
Like you say, we already have a plethora of different rules and regs that apply differently, both objectively and subjectively, to different people, many of which are only applicable on public property. (And the government employee reference was not lost on me; so true.)

Some Private land owners would wipe the herd out that is on/around their property.Now forcing more hunter into the regulated land (public ) now we have more whiners.
Deer on land that is owned by someone who wants to "wipe the herd out" are probably inaccessible to hunters already, so there is not likely much if any "forcing" of more hunters onto public land.

I'm not the first to say this: Nature gives all living things but three options: Adapt, migrate or die. When a given landowner wants to "wipe the herd out," those deer on his land will adapt (most likely), migrate (by definition only temporary) or die (some usually do.) The results of any or all of these options will not likely cause any "forcing" of more hunters onto public land. Indeed, if there is accessible hunting land nearby, its herd just may incorporate those that migrate.

I agree, we do have whiners. Furthermore, a true whiner will accept no solution.

A land owner has the option to regulate the herd on their property now,if the DOW says a hunter can take 1 antlered deer and 3 antlerless the land owner has the right to take all 4 or 1 for that matter.A farmer can get damage control permits to take more if they want.Thinning the herd or letting them grow it is the land owners/hunters choice.Just remember laws are like locks they keep an honest man honest
I thought laws were like sausages.

Back on point, and you make a good one:

You are correct in that a private landowner can unofficially set bag limits at or below those of the state. My first counterpoint, perhaps the only one given my present state of mind, is to ask: Which privately owned land mass could affect the carrying capacity of its surrounding habitat? I suggest, not one. Perhaps collectively there are/could be some, but not individually.

You are also correct in that a private landowner can both unofficially set season dates within those of the state, and designate which weapons can be used among those approved by the state. Again I ask: What impact would it have on the "big picture" were a landowner to allow hunting on other dates or with other weapons?

(OK, now I have to climb on a rickety chair to change the battery in our smoke detectors. This is a test. Were it an actual emergency, you would be directed to tune into…Do any of you have a headache like this one? Drinking rum before noon does not a pirate make.)
 
#32 ·
My head hurts reading that...Blackcat, are you kinda referring to this like the damage permits? They are basically aloud to do anything they want to kill said animals and have a permit to do so. These permits are currently given out by "the man", are you suggesting "what difference would it make" if landowners could do this on their own?
 
#33 ·
My head hurts reading that...Blackcat,
Your head hurts? What about mine? I've got to stop typing so loudly.

I would like to see landowners control the hunting on their own property. I would like landowners to be able to set the season dates, bag limits, weapons used, etc., without any controls by the state; no license, no permits, nothing. There would surely be a hassle with migratory birds, but I could make exceptions for that.
 
#34 ·
No offence but that's silly. To many idiots out there. To many idiots would over do everything. Like it or not the state and the laws help maintain a certain order. My god if the fear of a gw wasn't there some of the poachers would run rampid.

I like personal freedom but I also understand that law and order needs to be there. You just can't sit around and sing greatful dead songs and think everybodys going just get along and do the right thing...
 
#38 ·
No offence but that's silly.
None taken, and I suppose it may appear at first glance to be such a different approach that it comes across as "silly." But, is it really?

To many idiots out there. To many idiots would over do everything.
I understand what you're saying and, regrettably, agree with you. Some landowners would extirpate all the deer on their land, if given the opportunity. Then it would be over for a while on their place.

Like it or not the state and the laws help maintain a certain order. My god if the fear of a gw wasn't there some of the poachers would run rampid.
Poachers will poach, period. You can't fix stupid, as Ron White would say. Poachers are not hunters; they are criminals. Wildlife officers can still enforce poaching laws on public lands and roads. On private properties, I think the county sheriff or municipal police should be involved.

I like personal freedom but I also understand that law and order needs to be there. You just can't sit around and sing greatful dead songs and think everybodys going just get along and do the right thing...
Law and order are both still "there." It's a little less control from the state and a little more from the landowner.

I "can't sit around and sing greatful dead songs" because whenever their music was playing, I wasn't conscious enough to understand the words. I liked the music, though.

Everybody doesn't' "get along and do the right thing" now. Have you read the first several pages of this thread? And for the most part, those contributors are the good guys!

I also have seen people, several really, step up and do the right thing, with or without the state's control.

You have my attention...what would the minimum acres be? 1,000?
No minimum.
 
#39 ·
You asked........., I don't think the ODNR would like this as the population would grow too fast. Numbers would have to be adjusted to available deer populations in management zones, lower in some higher in others

3 separate licenses, Archery, Gun, Muzzle loader, $ 40-60 each, no hunting license. Youth deer hunting permit $15, good for any season

No more that one buck and one doe killed in any combination and no more that one deer per method.

Example;

Kill a doe during archery and you are done with archery harvest but could kill a buck during gun or muzzleloader but no more does in either season

Kill a buck during archery and you are done with archery harvest but could kill a doe during either gun or muzzleloader, but not both

You kill nothing during archery but kill a doe during gun, you are done gun hunting but could kill a buck during muzzleloader but not another doe.

You kill nothing during archery but kill a buck during gun, you are done gun hunting but could kill a doe during muzzleloader but not another buck.

You kill nothing during archery or gun you could kill either a buck or a doe during muzzle loader, but only one or the other, not both

I would also like to see outfitters licensed, no change to the legal calibers of PCR's, Deer drives of more than 5 participants illegal, public land harvest restrictions, more public land purchases, a REAL private land hunter access program. Landowners (27% of total harvest)required to purchase permits. Non resident fees raised. Increased Game wardens, stiffer penalties for game violations. car insurance premium reductions for deer hunters, mandatory bowhunter education class requirement. proficiency testing for gun and bow.

That is most of what I would like to see, never happen but I would still like to see it.
 
#41 · (Edited)
Deer drives are great!!! Part of tradition. And should never be illegal.

Lundy. I understand that you want the deer #'s higher but I have three property's that I hunt often. All have high #'s. Tuesday a friend had 15 doe's under his stand. I have recent story's on the other 2 like this one.. I dont have a low Deer problem. So why should I be included in this. 3 separate counties.

I have an idea. People that have low Deer #'s don't hunt nevxt year. Manage your land. Problem solved. As Blackcat's idea goes, no state control. It's all on you guys. Do what you think should be done on your property's to bring up your #'s.

Blackcat, your idea has a grown a little on me...
 
#43 ·
Blackcat, how does your private land idea work out for the majority of hunters who hunt 100 acres or less? Maybe I'm not thinking of it in the right way but it would seem that the guy hunting 40 acres next to the 300 acres of farm owned by a guy who wants all the deer dead is going to be in sorry shape. 100 acres or less is just a fraction of a deer's home range. No way can someone make that amount of acreage attractive enough so that a deer stays on the property. Do I need to think this through differently?
 
#47 ·
Once a landowner believes that they own and can fiddle unimpeded with the wildlife that uses their acreage....the wildlife begins to lose from the unpredictable nature of humans and choices.
But, the idea can work well for awhile in some scenarios with limits in place that aid the satisfaction along...ie Great Britain or patches of America.
It can also work well with the short span land ownership comparable to wildlife.
 
#48 ·
I would like to see us manage for better hunting for both quality and quantity on public land. Try buck only starting on Wednesday of gun season for the remainder of the season with a 4 pt one side restriction. We need to look at doing something for our public land. The experience of hunting a small private parcel doesn't compare to 1000s of acres of public to hunt and explore. When guys are camped out on their small parcels and choosing not to hunt the public there is reasons the state needs to consider. I just want to be able to take my kids camping somewhere they can hunt and explore and experience good hunting. The picking a new area and going part always was enjoyable for me. Public land access and wildlife management plays a huge part in hunter recruitment for the future. I guess my "deer camp" experiences came on public land, I don't see or hear of big deer camps on private land much anymore. At least I'm not invited lol big deer camps were responsible for a lot of new hunters. That was the tradition I experienced. One big camp I was invited to many years ago that occurred every year on a big state forest no longer goes due to hunting quality. That's what I don't want to continue to happen.
 
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