Ohio Sportsman - Your Ohio Hunting and Fishing Resource banner
21 - 40 of 79 Posts
I'd also like to...start putting that money towards buying more property. I heard they quit making it...
Maybe in Ohio, but not so in Hawaii. They've got great hunting over there. Get it while it's hot!

Eruptive activity continues at Kīlauea Volcano's summit and East Rift Zone...Scattered lava flow activity continues on the June 27th lava flow field within about 6 km (4 mi) northeast of Puʻu ʻŌʻō.

If they would stop regulating deer on private land There would be so many problems the whole deer herd in Ohio would suffer Thats my thoughts and that is why I said (Then we might as well be able to go spotlight and shoot deer too)
What sort of problems do you have in mind? Too many deer? Too few? Buck/doe ratio? Antler or steak size? Limited access for adults and kids? Leases? Trespassers? Wrong weapon use? CCW violations? We've got all that now.

I was envisioning scenarios that put the landowner in charge of his land.

Perhaps reimbursement of Pittman-Robertson funds would be affected as the program is currently set up.

And, perhaps harvest data collection (check in) would be affected, if it is indeed necessary.
 
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
 
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.
 
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
 
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.)
 
As I understand it a person can conceal carry while hunting, you are not aloud to use you're ccw weapon for hunting but protection.

I would like to see the 30-30 being on the approved list

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk
 
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?
 
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.
 
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...
 
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.
You have my attention...what would the minimum acres be? 1,000?
 
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.
 
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.
 
21 - 40 of 79 Posts
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